The Right Opinion
Romney-Ryan Ticket Puts Entitlement Crisis at Center of Campaign
On the USS Wisconsin in Norfolk harbor, a coatless Mitt Romney named a tieless Paul Ryan as his vice presidential nominee.
Romney's choice was not much of a surprise after he told NBC's Chuck Todd on Thursday that he wanted someone with a "vision for the country, that adds something to the political discourse about the direction of the country. I mean, I happen to believe this is a defining election for America, that we're going to be voting for what kind of America we're going to have."
This arguably describes some of the others mentioned as possible nominees, but it clearly fits Ryan.
He doesn't fit some of the standard criteria for vice president. He hasn't won a statewide election, held an executive position or become well-known nationally or even in much of Wisconsin.
But more than anyone else, more even (as impolite as it is to say) than the putative presidential nominee, Ryan has set the course for the Republican Party for the past three years, both on policy and in politics. From his post as chairman of the House Budget Committee, he has made himself not just a plausible national nominee but a formidable one by advancing and arguing for major changes in entitlement policy.
He has argued consistently that entitlement programs -- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid -- are on an unsustainable trajectory. Left alone, they threaten to crowd out necessary government spending and throttle the private sector.
Few public policy experts, on the center-left as well as the right, disagree. But many politicians, certainly those in the Obama White House, shy away from confronting the entitlement crisis. Better to demagogue your way through one more election cycle and kick the can down the road.
What's astonishing is that Ryan has persuaded his fellow Republicans to follow his lead. Almost all House and Senate Republicans have voted for his budget resolutions. And they have included his proposal to change Medicare, for those currently younger than 55, from the current fee-for-service system to premium support, in which recipients would choose from an array of insurers, with subsidies to low earners.
Republicans rallied to the Ryan plan during the nomination contest. Newt Gingrich was lambasted for calling Ryan's budget right-wing social engineering, while Romney over time moved to embrace the basic elements of Ryan's budget and Medicare reforms.
Ryan campaigned enthusiastically for Romney in the Wisconsin primary, and there was clearly a rapport between these two number crunchers. Romney would defer to Ryan to answer and has made a point of staying in touch with him after clinching the nomination.
As a number cruncher, Romney surely recognizes that Ryan knows federal budget policy about as well as anyone. And the sometimes politically tone-deaf Romney must admire Ryan's ability, honed in hundreds of town meetings in his marginal congressional district, to explain his stances in a way that wins over ordinary voters.
Naturally, Democrats have attacked the Ryan plan as gutting Medicare and have produced an ad showing Ryan shoving a wheelchair-bound granny down a hill. They're licking their chops at the prospect of running a Mediscare campaign against the Romney-Ryan ticket.
But it's not clear that the Mediscare tactic will work when the issue gains great visibility, as it will from Ryan's selection.
For Ryan and Romney can make the point -- lost in the shuffle when this is a low-visibility issue -- that their plan would leave the current Medicare system in place for current recipients and those who are 55 or older. Those who have made plans based on the present program could continue to rely on it.
But they also can make the point that their reforms are necessary in order to make sure Medicare is sustainable in the long run. Polls show that many voters younger than 55 doubt that they ever will get the Medicare and Social Security benefits they've been promised.
One more thing about Ryan, I think, appealed to Romney. He already has shown he cannot be intimidated by the most eminent opponent. Watch the video of Ryan's five-minute evisceration of Obamacare at the president's Blair House meeting. You can tell that Obama didn't like it one bit.
He'd better get used to it. Obama's side is relying on trash-talking ads. Romney's selection of Ryan shows he wants a debate on whether America should follow Obama on the road to a European-style welfare state.
COPYRIGHT 2012 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

20 Comments
David in TN
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 6:15 AM
Mr. Barone, Please stop referring to Social Security as an entitlement. I personally paid for my Social Security and I doubt seriously that I will live long enough to recoup my investment. LBJ started the raid on the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for his "Great Society". Instead of bailing out banks and insurance companies to the tune of trillions, I want all the iou's in the SSTF replaced, along with the interest it would have accrued. If this was done, my personal income would increase 30%. This would give the economy a tremendous boost simply because people on SS spend their money on necessities. No; not an entitlement Mr. Barone.
Lee in Arkansas
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM
Unfortunately, Social Security is nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme. There is no "trust fund". The payments into SS have been going into the general fund for years. Since we as a people are living longer, most people draw out MUCH more than they have ever paid in. It is totally unsustainable in current form.
Do you know what eventually happens in a Ponzi Scheme?? Somebody finally gets screwed. Same thing will happen here eventually. It has to be changed.
JP in TN
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 9:21 AM
You were robbed, and you just watched while the politicians took the money and ran. My generation and my children's shouldn't have to pay for the fact that yours didn't hold politicians accountable for making Social Security insolvent.
David in TN
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 11:02 AM
JP, do you mean the way your generation is holding Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, et al, accountable for their stupidity? You had better believe more damage has been done to this nation in the last three and a half years than in my entire generation. You say I just watched as the pols took the money and ran. Wrong again , JP. I was just as vocal then as now and was a little constrained by the Army uniform I was wearing. And what, sir, have you done?
Robinius in Broomfield, Colorado
Tuesday, August 14, 2012 at 11:46 AM
JP, why are you criticizing my generation when you are "just watching," too?
Pepin the Short in G-Vegas
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 11:12 AM
The very minute it began to spend more money than it took in, the very minute you planned your life as if the government could be a source of your income, it became an entitlement.
And be cautious when bandying about your predictions for the economy. What you propose is the exact same argument used when they pass the latest and greatest stimulus bill.
Richard Wadd in Flagstaff
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 8:56 AM
Until Mitt Romney wakes up and realizes that what other people do in the privacy of their bedroom is nobody's business, there will be a great many republicans who won't vote for him.
Bruce R Pierce in Owensboro, Ky
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 9:46 AM
The problem is people are not keeping it in the privacy of their bedroom. If they did keep it there instead of putting it on the "National Stage" it would still be in the privacy of the bedroom and there would not be this distraction. So quit bring it up.
Bob Apjok in roanoke, va
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 10:20 AM
Social Security is indeed an entitlement. you are not paying into an account. you are being taxed to pay for someone today. that is the scheme set up by the government. it is no different than you being taxed to pay for anything else. there is no account set up into which you contributed.
Gregory in Yakima Wa.
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 10:21 AM
Mac keeps referring to sodomites as if sodomy is a bad thing. Most people practicing sodomy are heterosexual, but who cares other than Mac and a few others that keep bringing it up.
More people support gay rights including marriage 48% than disapprove 44%. 8 years ago those numbers were 30% for...60% opposed. The Supreme Court will rule eventually. Look for a pro-gay rights decision with John Roberts in the majority.
Bruce R Pierce in Owensboro, Ky
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 10:52 AM
Like I said people keep bringing it up, let’s keep it where it belongs.
wjm in Colorado
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Gregory, you queer, dream on you delusional fool. In my neck of the woods, Gay Marraige will NEVER happen or be recognized.
J. Skeffington in MA
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 3:06 PM
I don't care what you do in your bedroom. Why is it such a concern of yours what I do in mine? What business is it of yours? What consequence does it have on anyone? What if you do something I don't agree with? Would you stop simply because I find it objectionable? Pretty judgmental of you, isn't it?
Joe in SC
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 8:46 PM
"More people support gay rights including marriage 48% than disapprove 44%."
Not at the ballot box they don't. That score is still 32-0, against.
J Henry in USSA
Tuesday, August 14, 2012 at 2:29 PM
You know, I don't care if people play in poo, but I absolutely don't want to hear about it and no, I don't support poo-player marriage.
mimos in tampa
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 1:31 PM
The best romantic music of all time. Radio MUSICA PARA MIMOS (www.musicaparamimos.ya.st). Exclusively for romantics. Recommended to my dear readers. It's great!
Gaylord McDonald in Lauder, OH
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM
Getting back to the discussion about the social security, I would very much like to see how Barack will respond. As Mr. Bloomberg said this morning: "all the free cupcakes in the world aren't going to make anyone forget that what they need to retire with, is cold hard cash." While I am unsure as to which cupcakes he was referring to, I would tend to agree with the sentiment, as I don't see cupcakes as a salient currency now or ever, yet the volume of dollars in my wallet is always of utmost concern to me. Can anyone shed some light on the situation? Please let me know. I'm also curious about the cupcake analogy. Anyone care to explain? I'm not the smartest sandwich in the picnic, but I do do a lot to further my education regularly.
Gaylord McDonald in Lauder, OH
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM
And by the way, as long as this stock market keeps performing sub-par, I suspect all the people will continue to seek alternative ways of making money. I know that I, for one, have found a good way to make a living as a part-time catered event assistant. It so happens that I do manage to eek out a few dollars from time to time simply by handling out food at other people's affairs.
Douglas Busthanut in Lauder, OH
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM
This was never Romney's party, and without Karl Rove's shadowy money behind him, he would not have survived the primaries. So shape-shifting a figure was unlikely ever to inspire the front line troops in an election the Right sees as a showdown with the Anti-Christ at Armageddon. In this campaign, Romney is now the "the man who isn't there" -- the dispensable one.
CGreen in Dallas, Texas
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 3:52 PM
1) The RR ticket ought not let the Dems set the subject lines of the campaign. 2) If Republicans can't articulate their position on, not just Medicare, but their fiscal responsibility message, at a time when Democratic spending irresponsibility is at an all-time high, then get ready for "Amerikan" socialism's real redistribution of wealth. 3) There may never be a better time to debate governing philosophy, and it is time our Republican leaders (even our meek unelected talking heads) stop shying away from the debate. 4) Medicare is not an entitlement to most people. Working people have been paying taxes for decades so they will have healthcare when they are no longer working. It is different than welfare programs that prosper the mindset of entitlement - I don't work but you owe me wages, food, housing, etc.