.png)
Morgan Griffith Gaslights Constituents with Culture Wars Days Before Election
In his final E-Newsletter before the mid-term election, Griffith is banking that stories of democratic socialism overseas will make VA-9 residents forget about high prices, hospital closures, and inability to pay for food, diesel, healthcare, and mortgage payments.
Unfortunately for Morgan, who regularly brags about being a historian, this newsletter is full of inaccurate facts and avoids talking about economic issues impacting his constituents daily.
Griffith wastes no time, whistling to his base in the 1st 100 words:
“I advocate for the American way of life and the American Dream based on individualism, hard work and the ability to move up the social ladder.”
“I supported H. Con. Res. 58 to denounce the horrors of socialism and H. Res. 1490 to condemn socialism… nearly all Democrats opposed these resolutions… this difference…reflects the unfortunate reality that the popularity of socialism is growing in America.”
The self-proclaimed historian then launches into what he calls “tales of socialism…” which is where his letter really goes off the rails. Here are a few of the most important errors in his story.
Historical Error #1:
Griffith proclaims that the Labour Party in England after WWII won the parliamentary elections based on “promises of nationalizing sectors of its economy and raising taxes on the wealthy”, resulting in a sluggish economy, and an intense public uproar against the Labour Party over bread and flour rationing, which he then claims was ended after Winston Churchill was elected.
Bread rationing actually ended in July 1948 under Labour, and Churchill did not return to power until October 1951.
Historical Error #2:
The “France versus America” spending comparison.
Griffith states:
● French government spending equals 57% of GDP.
● U.S. government spending equals 23% of GDP.
The French figure is substantially accurate. The European Commission reported French public expenditure reached 57.2% of GDP that year; including general government spending, on the part of the national government, local government and social security.
BUT these are not equivalent measures.
The American figure Griffith uses includes federal spending alone. In 2025 the US Congressional Budget Office reported federal outlays of approximately 23.3% of GDP in 2025.
Griffith excludes state and local government spending which would bring the total comparison of US and French government spending much, much closer.
Historical Error #3:
Griffith states "France also spends more than any other European country on 'social protection.'"
However, the actual expenditures on social protection as a percentage of GDP by country in 2024 as reported by Eurostat, the official statistical office of the European Union, clearly shows Finland with the leading social protection expenditures of all the European countries.
Finland 32.5%
France 31.9%
Austria 31.8%
Although France is among Europe’s largest spending countries on social protection, Griffith’s statement that France is the leading spender once again is misleading his readers.
The larger question beyond the inaccuracies and grandstanding, what does this tell his VA-9 constituents about our US government, and Griffith’s performance?
Griffith argues that America needs a social safety net that preserves individual opportunity, hard work and economic independence. And that is certainly a legitimate political philosophy.
However it raises important questions about how Morgan Griffith applies that philosophy in his actual congressional decisions:
● What does Griffith consider an appropriate social safety net?
● What Federal social programs does Griffith believe should be protected?
● Which programs does he believe should be reduced?
● How do Griffith’s votes on Medicare, Medicaid, healthcare, education and labor affect the residents of VA-9?
● Most importantly, what evidence does he offer does he offer that his preferred policies improve economic opportunities for working families?
With 3 days to go before what could possibly be the most important election of our lives, these questions are especially relevant to Southwest Virginia, where healthcare access, employment, wages, education and economic opportunity are central public-policy concerns.
Unfortunately, Griffith’s last newsletter before this election is primarily an argument against socialism without any accounting for his own votes on social programs critical to his VA-9 constituents.
After 16 years of decline on Griffith’s watch, SWVA residents should examine very closely what Morgan Griffith says he stands for, and what he does for his constituents.
With VA-9 ranking in the lowest income congressional districts in the US (VA-9 ranked 365 of 435 districts in 2010, today VA-9 ranks 409th), how Morgan Griffith’s actual voting decisions have affected working families in VA-9 is the single most important question they can answer before casting their votes on Tuesday.
