ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Why Republicans Are Wrong - Ryan Budget Edition

Updated on April 12, 2013
House Budget Committee Chair Rep Paul Ryan
House Budget Committee Chair Rep Paul Ryan | Source

No politician in his (or her) right mind would come out and say that they hate poor people. Not in those exact words, at least.

It's not that any of them necessarily have a deep-seated disdain for the least amongst us, it's just that they have a very different way of "helping" those in need.

Source

House Budgetary Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) has released yet another Pathway to Prosperity.

Rep. Ryan has long been considered a very, very serious budgetary maven in the mainstream media - though Ryan Budget 3.0 may serve to throw that distinction into serious question.

For his part, Ryan has admitted that his new budget is more of a political document than an actual operating budget - and that his is an opening salvo in budget negotiations leading up to the Continuing Resolution.

Source
Jack Kemp
Jack Kemp | Source
Source
Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep Raul Grijalva
Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep Raul Grijalva | Source
Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep Keith Ellison
Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep Keith Ellison | Source

While this may be true of all budget plans in the abstract - once they are put into effect, budgets serve to enforce the moral priorities of those in charge of government.

And what priorities are laid out in Paul Ryan's House Budget?

Why, the real Americans of course - rich people!

Paul Ryan recycles the decades-old trope of trickle-down, supply-side Reaganomics - espousing the age-old myth of tax cuts paying for themselves in added growth - which Bush 41 famously slammed as "Voodoo Economics."

Chairman Ryan would slash government spending to the lowest levels since 1948. This while taking Ryan's Jack Kemp-inspired budgetary frustration out on Mitt Romney's 47%, those darned "takers" who only care about their "gifts" from government and refuse to take responsibility.

It seems as though Mr. Ryan is intent upon reliving the 2012 election in 2014 & 2016 - much to the delight of liberals.

Ryan's Path is to lavish an enormous giveaway to millionaires and billionaires by lowering their tax rates by as much as 14%.

He refuses to specify any tax loopholes (presumably the mortgage tax credit) he supposes would magically cover his $6 trillion handout to the wealthy.

The Ryan Budget would put an end to guaranteed Medicaid and otherwise devastate beneficiaries. By block-granting to states, conservative governors like Rick Perry will be able to use Medicare funds to balance their budgets instead of guaranteeing coverage to the people the moneys were meant to serve (6.3 million sans health insurance in Texas, including 1.2 million children).

Paul Ryan would voucher-ize the Medicare program, ending the Medicare was we know it. Ryan is banking on the elderly staying on board with the GOP while voting against the needs of the 55-and-under crowd - by waiting ten years until Ryan 3.0 turns Medicare into Voucher-care.

Ryan would raise retirement age to 70 for both Medicare and SSI. For some reason, Ryan seems to believe that pushing rising health care costs onto seniors is a valid solution to the problem of running federal deficits and accumulated national debt. While ignoring the fact that the life expectancy of the poor is not rising as the rate of the rest of the population.

Ryan 3.0 would repeal the benefits of ACA/Obamacare, while leaving in tact the revenues - perhaps the most preposterous & disingenuous policy prescription in memory.

Rep. Ryan's budget would restore all sequester cuts to defense, increase defense spending by $8b in 2013 alone, and erase $487b of planned defense cuts over ten years.

This while $4.6 trillion, or 59%, of cuts in Rep. Ryan's Ayn Rand Memorial Budget are taken out on the poor. WIC, SNAP, Medicare & Medicare, housing, education, infrastructure, R & D, Pell grants & Stafford loan rates - all to be gutted by Ryan the Marathon Man - in order to fund the largess of the wealthy.

In contrast, The Back to Work Budget balances in five years, treats investment income the same as wages, returns defense spending to 2006 levels, places 49% tax rate on billionaires, a 1% financial transaction tax for Wall Street traders, & a carbon tax, allows Medicare to negotiate wholesale prescription drug prices, adds a public option for health care, ends tax subsidies for private jet owners & entertainers, and ends tax subsidies for outsourcers. All the while investing in education, energy, infrastructure & jobs - while preserving Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

3/19/13

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Sooner28 4 years ago

      Ryan cares nothing for the poor. His budget is a clear description of the priorities of the Republican party; they just usually aren't as brazen as him.

      I thank God Romney did not win. He said Ryan's budget was a great idea, and that would have led to a decimation of social programs.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      I had a boss years ago who once said - "I'm going to help you find a better job, by giving you more time to look - you're fired."

      That is how Paul Ryan helps the poor and the working poor. He wants to empower them by taking away the things that would help them.

      Odd that he seems to think that the wealthy are motivated when we give them more, while the poor are motivated when we take more away from them.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      JON EWALL - Try to be more succinct, I'm not approving your latest novel on the bottom of my hub.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      We have a jobs crisis.

      The jobless couldn't care less about debt and deficits - and for good reason.

      Debt and deficits have little to do with the economy (tax certainty does). The EU has been ravaged by austerity, while Japan has debt equal to over 200% GDP.

      The US remains the cleanest shirt in the laundry basket with minimal interest and inflation rates (don't get me started on quantative easing).

      And our economy will always maintain growth so long as working people have enough disposable income to maintain (at least) the consumer's 70% GDP share of spending.

      Ryan's budget does not achieve balance. He would need to specify how he pays for the $6 trillion giveaway to the wealthy for balance to eventually be achieved in the future.

      Luckily, the Murray budget achieves balance in terms of revenues to cuts, but does not insist upon a balance in terms of immediate deficit. Murray would decrease deficit spending to 2.2% GDP in six years.

      The Back to Work Budget lowers deficit to 1.2% GDP, and unlike Ryan 3.0 actually specifies it's sources of revenues.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      Thank you for telling me you won't post my reply, it's the readers of your hub that will be denied another side of the budget discussions. ''Luckily, the Murray budget achieves balance in terms of revenues to cuts, ''

      For your information, I WATCHED the opening round of the Senate's budget committee meeting. The numbers don't add up. questions from committee members to the Senate team could not be answered, if they were, the numbers were contested. the link to the hearing was censored by??? Your comment contains prohibited links.WOW, THE MEETING LINK (1)

      good luck on future hubs!

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Sir, I was informing you that posting an entire novel overflowing with links within the comments of my hub is a non-starter.

      I only gave notice so that you could try again because I appreciate your dissent.

      I will gladly accept queries and challenges to the content of my hub.

      On that note, there are only three links, each of which is perfectly functional - not sure to what you are referring so let me know specifics...

      Why is it that you are attempting to tie me to the Murray budget? (She's only MY senator that I voted for)...

      My hub did not even mention the Murray budget - only Ryan 3.0 and the Back to Work Budget.

      I DID note in my comment that the Murray budget balances revenues with cuts - which makes it the ONLY budget with any claim to compromise.

      I simply prefer the plan for growth and priorities espoused in the Back to Work version - to either the extreme right-wing Ryan 3.0 budget, or the legitimate compromise of the Murray budget.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      3/21/13

      Giving notice was the right thing to do, I apologize for getting carried away. My intentions are not to challenge your writing but to add another perspective in the political world of today’s politics.'' there are only three links'' Be aware that some links are being censored. Thanks for the notice.

      ''the Murray budget balances revenues with cuts '' NOT TRUE The link that I wanted to send was censored.' 'Paul Ryan would voucher-ize the Medicare program, '' Medicare is WAISTING more than $8 billion THAT’S A VOUCHER TYPE SYSTEM ( LINK NOT WORKING) ‘’the legitimate compromise of the Murray budget.’’ what is the compromise?

      ‘’I simply prefer the plan for growth and priorities espoused in the Back to Work version’’

      THE PLAN? WHAT IS THE PLAN? The President talks about a plan, nothing is on paper or in writing. The President’s budget was due to Congress on Feb. 4, 2013, as of today the budget has yet to be delivered.

      To Congress. The process established by the constitution, President submits first, the House and the Senate attempt to accommodate the President’s budget in their negotiations. THE Senate and the President have not passed a budget in 4 years, sad to say. Pay Go law must be adhered to in taxation and new spending plans.Wake up America,

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/paygo_description/

      Barak Obama Campaign Promises

      .https://hubpages.com/politics/barakobamacampaignpr...

      2/25/13 Sequester - The Three Things you need to know

      http://www.gop.gov/sequester/

      President Obama Proposed the Sequester

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Medicare spending per capita grew only .4% in 2012 - the third straight year of slowed growth. The beneficiary pool and thus aggregate spending will rise with more boomers - but the costs are relatively steady compared to private insurance.

      Obama has released a budget every year and will this year as well - blame Harry Reid for not bringing them to the floor. We've gone to CRs. It's a joke.

      You are so upset about regular order - why is the 60 vote bar in the Senate suddenly an acceptable prerequisite? Why are 80% of judicial nominations still pending?

      And what does it matter if Obama's cabinet came up with the sequester? It passed through Congress with majority votes. Obama's mistake with the sequester was assuming that conservatives would accept tax cuts to stop cuts in defense.

      Now conservatives are whining about White House tours - while people lose their housing, food, military summer tuition...

      And these budget negotiations under duress of self-imposed crisis have been ongoing since 2011.

      The $2.4 trillion in deficit reduction so far has come from three-to-one spending cuts to revenue. With the $1.2 trillion stupid sequester, they're $3.6 trillion in to their march toward the $4.1 trillion goalpost.

      And I don't like Murray's budget. I didn't mention it in my hub. I don't feel the need to defend it.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      I have the President and Democrats talk about a $2.4 trillion deficit reduction.What is it and what cuts did they make to claim the deficits.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      "Since the start of fiscal year 2011, Congress and the president have cut about $1.5 trillion in programmatic spending, raised about $630 billion in new revenue, and generated about $300 billion in interest savings."

      Continuing Resolutions signed between 9/30/10 and 12/21/10 achieved $400 billion in deficit reduction through 2022. The Budget Control Act of 2011 had another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction. The American Tax Payer Relief Act, or "fiscal cliff deal", netted $750 billion in deficit reduction. Together that equals about $2.4 trillion.

      The sequester is another $1.2 trillion.

      That gives you $3.6 trillion in deficit reduction since FY 2011.

      This while the deficit has been shrunken every year under Obama, from $1.4 trillion in 2009 to $900 billion in 2013.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      Sounds good, check this link and explain the differences in what whoever is saying to the actual.USA Budget Deficit

      http://econintersect.com/b2evolution/blog1.php/201...

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      That is correct. The deficit was $1.4 trillion in 2009 & $1.3 trillion in 2010. There is no difference in what I said to what that article says, about what had already happened to that point in January 2011.

      As we can judge now, the article is simply incorrect in it's projections - off by 20% for 2011 alone.

      That should tell you all you need to know about the author...

      Plus, the article does not seem to mention BCA, & the American Taxpayer Relief Act happened in 2012.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      1.''The Budget Control Act of 2011 had another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction. ''.627 July 29, 2011 112th Congress

      BUDGET CONTROL ACT OF 2011

      http://www.gop.gov/bill/112/1/s627amendments

      2.''The American Tax Payer Relief Act, or "fiscal cliff deal", netted $750 billion in deficit reduction. ''

      FISCAL CLIFF bill increased taxes ($600 billion), did not have any spending cuts, a direct violation of PAY-GO LAW.

      Round 1 new taxes, round 2 spending cuts, all deficit neutral? Obama broken promises. President lied? PAY-GO LAW http://chicagoconsultant.com/page2.php?category=2&...

      All told, the fiscal cliff law designed to reduce the deficit, added $74 billion in spending through changes in the tax law.

      In addition Congress just added $70 billion worth of new loopholes.

      REALLY, ''the article is simply incorrect in it's projections - off by 20% for 2011 alone.''

      President Obama’s Fiscal Cliff Plan “Balance” not true

      http://www.speaker.gov/general/president-obama-s-f...

      The President’s plan demands more revenue than he claims And it cuts far less than he claims

      Thus the President’s offer of $1.3 trillion in revenue and $850 billion in spending cuts fails to meet the test of balance he himself has promised.

      https://hubpages.com/politics/CongressAvertsANatio...

      It is difficult for everyone to follow the Obama Administrations numbers. The are wrong 40% of the time.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Now you are just being completely disingenuous. The fiscal cliff deal ended some of the Bush tax cuts. Before that happened, projected deficit was higher, since we were spending more on those tax breaks. How is that confusing?

      And republicans decided to forgo a grand bargain and only accept the smallest deal possible with the fiscal cliff. There was no balance because republicans refused to negotiate. they knew they had the sequester and CR negotiation coming up, which they viewed as favorable.

      Also, I couldn't care less about pay go. That is a conservative meme that has no relevance with me.

      And you make a lot of assumptions and accusations about the president.

      The president doesn't fact check his own budget numbers.

      The CBO does, and therefore renders your argument moot.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      So be it, just another side of the story that is hard for you to comprehend.'' ended some of the Bush tax cuts'', wrong statement, not tax cuts, they are rates.Your comments are very interesting, your sources of information are way out on the facts. Can you list them so that we can be on the same page in the debate.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      You are a funny guy. Have you never heard the term "Bush tax cuts" before? Don't blame me for your problem with common vernacular.

      This is really not complicated at all - before the rates were returned to Clinton-era levels on wages above $400k, the deficit projection was higher. How is that confusing?

      You keep finding right wing propaganda sites that twist the numbers for consumption by the gullible. What is it that you require a link to? I'm going off of the Congressional Budget Office - these numbers are not in question by anyone on Capital Hill.

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      ''Also, I couldn't care less about pay go. That is a conservative meme that has no relevance with me.''

      PAY GO IS LAW, PASSED BY A SUPER MAJORITY DEMOCRAT CONGRESS, signed into law by a DEMOCRAT President. Super majority is a filibuster proof control, the Republicans just showed up for roll call.

      '' we are a nation of the rule of law'', apparently you and some Democrats ignor the law and obey the law when it's convenient for your pleasure.

      2/13/10 Pay Go Law

      The President lied? Just follow the LAW

      http://chicagoconsultant.com/page2.php?category=2&...

      ''You keep finding right wing propaganda sites '' tell me all about your LEFTWING SITES that keep you enlighten to WHAT IS TRUE or FALSE. Here's the link to c-span , Senate budget hearings.http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

      I'm been listening to the debate on the Senate budget for the last 4 hours. C-span, an uncut, un-doctored video account of the live debate.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Why do you keep changing the subject? I have said numerous times that I couldn't care less about the Murray Budget, I did not mention it even once in the hub - yet you keep going right back to that as though I should feel compelled to defend it. I don't.

      I DO NOT CARE about the Murray Budget. At all.

      You keep saying "The president always lies about the numbers".

      I am not using the president's numbers. I am using the CBO & CBPP numbers.

      You are using January 2011 PROJECTIONS (not the actual numbers) to prove your point, when those projections were wrong about 2011 alone by 20%.

      How am I supposed to take you seriously?

      http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3...

      http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements...

      http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ft...

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.8.E.../

      http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ft...

      http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/news...

      http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/02/were...

      http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/02/19/160915...

      http://www.drudge.com/news/164528/cap-deficit-redu...

    • JON EWALL profile image

      JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

      Justin Earick

      You did a magnificent job of digging up the links, I commend you for your efforts. A little propaganda and some very good information. Just remember that CBO gets information from the Obama administration to figure out the numbers. The Administration has a history of faulty numbers. It's a mystery how we can have all the listed deficit savings and still the deficits keep rising. It's a good thing that the Administration don't have to do a certified audit like private industries have to do to be legitimate.. Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts

      http://theintelhub.com/2012/09/02/audit-of-the-fed

      President Obama’s Fiscal Cliff Plan “Balance” not true

      http://www.speaker.gov/general/president-obama-s-f...

      Hoping that you are enjoying the discussion as much as I have!

      Box 1: All Figures Will Change When CBO Issues Its New Baseline

      Policymakers, of course, would have to decide how to achieve the $1.4 trillion in deficit savings —specifically, what changes to make in tax and spending policies in order to generate $1.2 trillion in policy savings (and the $200 billion in interest savings that would come with it). Even if

      Obama says he will cut deficits by $4 trillion 3/24/13 Obama has not presented his budget as yet, all talk

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      You are incorrect. The debt does keep rising - but the deficit continues to decline. There is no mystery behind this. The deficit has indeed decreased, but not to the point of operating with a budget surplus - as under Clinton.

      Debt and deficit are two entirely different things.

      Compounded yearly budget deficits equal the accumulated national debt figure.

      And once again, the CBO does not simply redistribute the numbers that Obama claims. The CONGRESSIONAL budget office runs the numbers themselves.

      And I don't know what the point of you link is...

      It's simply Boehner's claim about Obama's fiscal cliff negotiation, weeks before the actual deal came down.

      Conservatives chose to take the smallest deal possible on January 4th, which I agree was in no way balanced. And I have no problem with that. The BCA and ATPR were heavily weighed toward cuts prior to that.

      Once again, this is a series of negotiations going back to FY 2011.

    Click to Rate This Article