RSS Feed Menu
Amanda Terkel notes that while Paul Ryan’s “Roadmap” does not have a lot of support from the Republican leadership, that several candidates on the campaign trail are endorsing it:
There are, however, several top-tier candidates who are expressing support for Ryan’s budget plan:
– Martha Roby, AL-2: On June 4, Roby put out a statement criticizing Democrats for refusing to move forward with a budget proposal. “The American people deserve better. They deserve solutions,” said Roby. “Conservative leaders like Rep. Paul Ryan are offering real solutions to cut wasteful spending, such as canceling unspent TARP and stimulus funds, cutting non-defense spending back to 2008 levels, and reducing the government workforce. I endorse these solutions and other common sense approaches to start getting our fiscal house back in order.” Roby is one of the National Republican Campaign Committee’s “Young Guns,” the party’s top new prospects.
– Francisco Canseco, TX-23: In a video posted on July 13, Canesco told a questioner that he supports Ryan’s alternative budget proposal. Canseco is also one of the NRCC’s Young Guns.
– Andy Barr, KY-6: In a July 15 radio appearance on WVLK-AM 590, a caller asked Barr whether “we can count on you to support the Republican budget.” Barr responded, “Yeah. I mean, absolutely. I’m not in Congress now, of course, and I don’t have an opportunity to support a particular budget, but that’s certainly preferable — that budget, a leaner budget — is certainly preferable to the ones that have been offered by the President and the Speaker of the House.”
– Dan Lungren, CA-3: Lungren is already in Congress, but he hasn’t yet co-sponsored Ryan’s plan. On Aug. 11, Lungren told Ryan that the roadmap was “the best long-term look at trying to deal with our fiscal insanity right now that anybody has done.” He refused to say, however, whether he would officially sign on to the bill before the election.
Robert Hurt, running in Virginia’s 5th district and a “contender” in the Young Guns program, has said Ryan is “one of the first people” he would work with if elected to Congress. Ryan is also one of the co-founders of the Young Guns program.
Part of the reason these candidates may be supporting Ryan’s budget plan is that they have no other alternative. They are coming out against Democratic policies, but since the Republican leadership hasn’t put forward any blueprint, they are forced to endorse Ryan’s roadmap.
Former House majority leader Dick Armey last week chastised Republican leaders for distancing themselves from Ryan’s roadmap, saying the “fact that he has only 13 co-sponsors is a big reason why our folks are agitated against the Republicans as well as the Democrats.” He added that Ryan is “probably the most creative-thinking and most courageous guy in Washington.”
Click here to read more.
easton // Aug 30, 2010 at 1:57 pm
What a load of crap. Ryan has not even put up a bill, only a proposal. And Republicans calling on Democrats to act like Republicans is demented.
“Conservative leaders like Rep. Paul Ryan are offering real solutions to cut wasteful spending, such as canceling unspent TARP and stimulus funds, cutting non-defense spending back to 2008 levels, and reducing the government workforce. I endorse these solutions and other common sense approaches to start getting our fiscal house back in order.”
Common sense, how about brain dead? Banks aren’t loaning so hey, lets make it harder for them. The stimulus is working, we are paying virtually no interest on the borrowed money, so yeah, lets cancel the stimulus (but Republican stimuluses of tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts always work, except when they don’t which is most of the time)
And does he seriously propose to reduce Senior Citizens social security checks and cut back on Medicare payments to 2008 levels. How much do you want to bet he doesn’t mean for that to happen. And as to reducing the workforce, then Republican Congressmen can simply fire most of their staffs, when they do that, then get back to me.
Why oh why can’t Republicans come up with real solutions instead of meaningless soundbites. There are plenty out there. Raise the retirement age, close our bases in Japan and move them to Saipan and Guam, reform the tax structure (get rid of it and replace it all with the AMT for everyone) I don’t care, but stop with the pablum.
busboy33 // Aug 30, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Of course they are endorsing it.
Even though it is nothing more than a vague set of suggestions that acknowledge internally they can’t work “until a miracle occurs” . . . its the best proposal that the GOP has offered. In years.
Pretty damn sad, truth be told.
Fairy Hardcastle // Aug 30, 2010 at 7:12 pm
busboy33, where did Ryan say he was relying upon a “miracle?”
busboy33 // Aug 30, 2010 at 7:52 pm
@Fairy:
Ryan asked the CBC to score his plan with the assumption that all of the income lost by tax cuts would still be available. He offered no plan for accounting for that money.
Therefore his plan assumes a few trillion dollars just magically appear in the federal budget.
I’d call that a miracle. I’d also call it staggeringly poor planning . . . but that’s not what you asked.
mikewaz // Aug 30, 2010 at 8:14 pm
@Fairy:
As busboy33 already stated, the tax treatment of the Roadmap is rather risky at best considering he couldn’t get it scored.
Apart from that, the health care/Medicare reforms he proposes control the cost to government by not controlling the costs at all and shifting the onus of paying for it to the citizen. Just compare the numbers between the two budget scenarios. In the alternative case, Medicare and Medicaid spending add up to 18% of GDP. In the Roadmap, Medicare, Medicaid, and the health care tax credit add up to 4.9% of GDP, or over 13% of GDP less. Where is that 13% of GDP going to come from? Us. And we already pay about 10% of our GDP on private health insurance. Hope you enjoy paying a quarter of your paycheck for health coverage!
Fairy Hardcastle // Aug 30, 2010 at 8:43 pm
Busboy33, Ryan seems like an intelligent individual so what would be the purpose of proposing a plan with such a large assumption? Is he trying to start a good dialogue where one does not now exist?
mikewaz, I have not studied the plan so I cannot respond to you but my second hand understanding is that he is increasing the eligibility age and then providing vouchers beginning in 2021 or something like that. So to the extent that people are having to take care of their bills a couple years longer, yes that is a shift to the people. If the population is generally enjoying healthier longer lives is that necessarily a bad idea? It’s similar to moving the SS age a couple years to recognize the fact that people live longer and work later in life than before.
busboy33 // Aug 30, 2010 at 9:09 pm
@Fairy:
He may well be trying to start a dialog — that is certainly possible.
Further, there are aspects of what he has proposed that are certainly meritorious of discussion.
Regardless of that, what he’s submitted is being called, fairly or unfairly, a “proposed budget plan”. Under that name, it is an abysmal failure for a variety of reasons. A budget with missing parts isn’t a budget. That’s like saying “I’ve got an interior decorating plan for your house. The kitchen should be sea foam in color. Other than that . . . hell, who knows? Can I have the design contract?” Maybe the kitchen SHOULD be sea foam. But the potential merit of that one item does not a plan make, and presenting it as a “plan” is wildly optimistic at best or coldly manipulative at worst.
It reminds me of the GOP “HealthCare Reform Plan” they released in the spring. After much fanfare, they finally presented a pamphlet that basically said “do things better, cheaper and more gooder for everybody!” Well . . . yes. How?
Why present something like this as a “budget proposal”? Politics. Now the GOP can say “We’ve got a plan!”, when in reality they have (at best) the beginnings of a discussion that might possibly lead to some sort of plan in the future. That’s nothing. Heck, everybody has that. We do that all the time right here at FF. Think taxes should be cut? Then we’re having a discussion about ecconomic factors that could be theoretically changed in various ways that might affect a budget in the future. We are NOT putting forth a budget. Not even close.
But we’re not running for office. We’re not expected to actually put forth a budget. If the GOP IS elected into power . . . then they have to actually do things. And they need to convince people that they have thought about this. Like I said before, despite all of the failings in Ryan’s plan, at least he proposed SOMETHING, which is more than the rest of the entire GOP combined for the last few years.
Think about this article:
“In a video posted on July 13, Canesco told a questioner that he supports Ryan’s alternative budget proposal.”
He endorses a budget proposal that doesn’t account for the money?
“Lungren told Ryan that the roadmap was ‘the best long-term look at trying to deal with our fiscal insanity right now that anybody has done.’ He refused to say, however, whether he would officially sign on to the bill before the election.”
So its the best long-term plan . . . but I’m not saying I endorse it? To me, that reads “the GOP has the best ideas, but don’t hold me to that”.
The GOP is getting burned with the “Party of No” label, fairly(IMO) or unfairly. They need to present the image of a Party with an actual plan . . . but they don’t have one. So this is the beacon they will march behind, although they aren’t actually endorsing it. To me, that’s desperation — not on the part of Ryan, but on the part of the GOP. I disagree with Ryan, but I actually like him. At least he’s trying to do something.
From What I’ve Read… | The Peterson Post // Aug 31, 2010 at 11:50 am
[...] put into action unless there is enough support from other members. But it’s got potential. Here is the first link about candidates hitching their wagons to Ryan and his plan. Here is the second providing a bit more detail about his plan [...]