Options
Paul Ryan and the Perils of Realism
· Tuesday, August 3, 2010
We've gone as a nation, in less than two years, from Hope and Change to "hope we can change the stuff we hoped for." Still, a question -- one of pointed interest to Republicans -- looms: change to what? Meaning, what are you all going to do, assuming you take the House and/or the Senate, to fix the problems you identified as reasons for throwing out the Obamacrats? People who push themselves as political saviors, like the Democrats two years ago, come to think of it, eventually find they have to start saving. It can be messy.
A Washington Post story by Perry Bacon Jr. underscores the GOP challenge: to wit, "Rep. Ryan pushes budget reform, and his party winces."
Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin's First District, one of the smartest men in politics insofar as I can tell, goes around touting his brilliantly conceived free-market, limited-government approach called "Roadmap for America's Future" (www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/). Whose main defect appears to be that in facilitating economic recovery it would change the ways Americans interface with federal social programs and the tax system that supports them. The prospect of that seems to disturb colleagues; thus ... well, hear out Bacon: "[M]any Republican colleagues ... even as they praise Ryan for his doggedness, privately consider the Roadmap a path to electoral disaster."
In other words, do the right thing and the wrong things happen to you. Voters fume and rage. Some undertake to eject you from office, forcing you to resume the practice of estate law in Pascagoula or Pomona.
Not a few Republicans perforce wish Ryan would cool it with the reform stuff. First, beat the Democrats, then do the reform: That's the ticket. Sequentially, yes, that's the way it happens. But strange things tend to happen after victories. One is the choruses of adulation from people who see you as able to accommodate them, and would like to be accommodated in specified ways, some of which might address national problems, some of which undoubtedly wouldn't. Another thing that happens after victory is a surge in inner satisfaction -- in delight with prerogatives and power. From the top, the bottom below -- meaning ordinary life -- can look unimaginably alien. The desire is to stay in office by doing the things people like instead of the stuff they need.
What has Paul Ryan in mind that makes particular Republicans, as the Post headlines puts it, "wince"? Well, rationalizing the tax system -- abolishing capital gains taxes, compressing and lowering the rates, including the rates for "the wealthy." On Medicare, Ryan would let under-55s receive a Medicare payment they could use to buy Medicare-certified health plans. Social Security? He'd allow the same demographic to invest a third of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement plans.
And so on. The Roadmap is calibrated to whittle down, over time, the federal government's long-term commitment to programs it can no longer afford. Realism is the rock on which Ryan has sketched his plan: We can't do X, so we have to do Y. That's of course where the trouble starts. Realism gets your average politician in trouble. A certain kind of voter prefers fantasy. Better to spoon out fantasy in dollops of spun-sugar promises and let future Congresses figure out what comes next!
Or is it? No plan, however creative, however frank in its aspirations, is perfect through and through. Ryan's Roadmap -- whose assumptions are verified by the Congressional Budget Office -- can't possibly be ideal and untouchable. Which isn't quite the point. The point is the courage of the man in bringing forth so bold a measure. The point is, secondarily, the need for Republicans, if they really think themselves up to running the country, either to fall in line behind Ryan or show their own hands. So, the Roadmap won't get us there? Pray, and then show us a better, more plausible route. And show it without delay.
Ryan's unassailable, irrefutable point is that we can't go on as we're going; we don't have the money. Victorious Republicans, take heed.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.
Options
Subscribe
Accuracy in Media Editor Cliff Kincaid: "Mark Alexander is the recipient of the 2007 AIM Award for Grassroots Journalism. It is an honor to be associated with Mark and PatriotPost.US." It's Right. It's Free. Subscribe now!
The Right Opinion
- Peggy Noonan: Mitt Romney's Moment
- Argus Hamilton: From The Comedy Store
- Burt Prelutsky: Time to Start Playing Offense
- Rich Galen: Obama & Romney Tout Good News
- Edwin J. Feulner: 'Law of the Sea' Treaty: Sink It
- Arnold Ahlert: With Democrats, You're Either All In - or All Out
- Oliver North: Memorial Day 2012
- Ken Blackwell: Remarks on Religious Liberty
- L. Brent Bozell: Canada's 'Scientific' Museum of Smut
- Michelle Malkin: Obama's Land of the LOST
- Rebecca Hagelin: The 'Gay Marriage' Spin
- David Limbaugh: Obama and Leahy vs. Sir William Blackstone
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
- Heritage Foundation Insider
- Heritage Foundation Research
- American Enterprise Institute
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- The Cato Institute
- Hoover Institution
- National Rifle Association
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- The Heartland Institute
Our Mission
"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
























CharlieEcho
After the recent crisis's with regard to the finances of our nation, dare I say world, who among us would not welcome someone with foresight. Only those existing on the "services" provided by others would not welcome responsible change. We had better make the changes responsibly, and do it now before the irresponsible out number the responsible. We are very close.
Posted August 3, 2010 at 7:54:20 AM
Ruth Ann Wilson
Suggest to Rep. Ryan, that Social Security be made VOLUNTARY
1. Everyone gets a "Cash Settlement with interest" or they can " volunteer to save with the government"
2. Those who have already been "FORCED" to pay Social Security can have a CHOICE - "Cash settlement with interest" or "Stay on the check a month that they were "FORCED" to pay for."
This will "HONORABLY" settle this "FORCED" Social Security. And set Americans FREE from this "FORCED" system. They need to be "PAID BACK with INTEREST" This "VOLUNTARY PLAN" will be very popular, if that's what motivates politicians, but Best of all, it is RIGHT and HONORABLE, which appeals to the common, God-fearing Americans who were "FORCED".
For God & Country
The American
Posted August 3, 2010 at 10:57:19 AM
JTG
If some Republicans wince, so what? There is a path to be taken to remove the people from decades of liberal resditribution of wealth. It all starts with everybody paying a flat tax on their earnings. All other dominoes would soon fall in line.
Posted August 3, 2010 at 3:39:41 PM
Caseace
'lowering the rates on the wealthy' This is an issue that Republicans need to embrace head-on instead of avoiding eye contact with the class warfare Medusa that currently exists. With real unemployment well over 10% It's a simple story; If you are looking for a job, don't you hope that the rich guy has more money so that he can hire you to help him make even more money!
Posted August 3, 2010 at 4:18:38 PM
TJS
Paul Ryan's Roadmap website wore me out. I looked and read for about an hour, and have only the vaguest idea what we should do. We need a short, sweet list of topics and cuts. And a few principles.
1. No subsidies for anybody or any company.
2. Social security is a means-tested welfare program for poor people only. At least half of SS must go into private accounts for every worker under 50. Reduce benefits enough to fund private accounts, if necessary. Private accounts come first.
3. Wipe out at least half the federal departments. Agriculture, Education, Energy, EPA, Commerce, HUD, Labor to name some biggies. Data and reporting functions consolidated into an accounting department.
4. Flat tax on incomes. No tax on companies.
5. Sell half of federal land, only in the west - 2.5% per year. Sell enough of Alaska to make it 80% private.
6. Constitutional amendment to limit federal govt. to 15% of GDP. No borrowing except for declared war cost. Reduce size by additional 1% per decade to 10% by 2060.
7. Pay off existing debt minimum of 1% per year, or $100 billion, whichever is more.
8. Federal pay scales and benefits cannot exceed private sector national averages.
9. Break up federal departments and send them out into the states. Remove 80% of government functions from DC.
10. All pensions are set up as defined contribution private accounts.
That's a good start.
Posted August 3, 2010 at 7:41:05 PM
Kathleen
A contract with America that takes us back to sound constitutional principles shouldn't scare Republicans. Tell them to get out of Washington for the whole month of August, don't surround themselves with aides and other Pols and find out what their constituents really think is important.
Posted August 3, 2010 at 11:52:16 PM
James
We need to get the Dems out to stop the bleeding. The Republicans win by default, but they are not much better, and many are on the Big Govt bandwagon also they are politicians.
Reality is here, there is no more denying it. The NYT considers Obama's Presidency a success because of the Big Brother bills he has pushed through and the path to Marxism that has been laid out. No concern for the country economy, or the people, just political agendas and radical causes at any cost.
That's the reality, and the Republicans need to get on board and stop being so weaselly, if they get control of the House and the Senate, start ramming !
Posted August 9, 2010 at 10:47:53 PM
Mike McGinn
On February 3, 1913 the 16th Amendment to our Constitution was ratified ("The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration".) This was the BIRTH of our federal income taxation system...and the IRS.
In 1913 the individual income tax rate was set at 1% on incomes OVER $3,000 (or $66,115 today) and 6% on incomes OVER $500,000 ($11 million today).
In 2009 a person (married filing jointly, 2 kids, standard deductions) making $66,000 paid about $5,165 in taxes, or about 8% of their income. If they were making $11 million, they'd paid about $3.8 million in taxes, or about 35%.
Imagine that first person paying no taxes today and that second person paying only $110,000 in taxes. That's the way it would be if the law had never changed.
Do you think Americans in 1913 would have voted to approve the 16th Amendment if they were going to be taxed the way we are today? They never would have...but they let the camel get its nose under the tent. Isn't that how it always works with our government?
Posted August 11, 2010 at 12:46:15 PM
BT
Ryan's plan, although imperfect, is a world away from the current morass in which we have placed ourselves. Part of the solution: term limits - on all members of congress and the senate. Five terms for house members, two terms for senators, no serial service between houses.
As for this election; look closely at your congressman/woman and senators. Party affiliation doesn't seem to differentiate them for the most part. As for me - I'm throwing all the bastards out. If there is an incumbent label behind the candidate's name they are gone. If they were any good they may bet back in. My best sense is that most will stay gone and good riddance. Call it simple minded, call it what you will. Overall we have not been well served and it's time for a change.
Posted August 21, 2010 at 10:39:57 AM