Paul Ryan, squish?
By D.J. McGuire | Friday, April 8th, 2011 | Policy
Now that I have your attention . . .
Amidst the whirl and rush over the FY11 budget and Paul Ryan’s FY12-and-out proposal, the Republican Study Committee released its own fiscal plan for the country (NRO - The Corner). The RSC is one of the pre-Tea-Party era groups on the right-side of the House Republican Caucus.
Among other things, the RSC budget . . .
- Is the only one on offer that balances the budget within ten years (in this case, by 2020). Ryan’s budget plan balances somewhere in the 2030′s; the Simpson-Bowles budget claims to be balanced by 2035 (expect that it’s not, as I’ve explained earlier); the Democrats – including President Obama – have punted on this entirely
- Cuts discretionary spending and federal staffing deeper than Ryan’s plan
- Cuts the corporate tax rate to 25%
- Takes on farm subsidies and – here’s the kicker – Social Security. This is the first plan I have seen that does not have me getting a Social Security check in October 2037 (that’s a good thing; no serious plan should even think of sending me a check at 65).
Now, neither Ryan’s plan nor the RSC one has a chance in the Senate, but it will be a lot easier, I think, to sell a plan that balances the budget in nine years than, at the least, twenty.
Moreover, although it hasn’t been an issue yet, the RSC’s point man on this – New Jersey’s Scott Garrett – voted against both TARP and Medicare Part D; whereas Ryan voted for both.
So maybe the post title makes sense after all . . .
Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Former candidate for Board of Supervisors in Spotsylvania, current blogger, economics teacher, and long-rumored windbag. There are two causes closest to the heart: steering the country away from the social democratic nonsense that is sinking Europe, and convincing the rest of the "rightosphere" that the NBA really is a joy to watch.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
8 Responses to "Paul Ryan, squish?"
Other ways to balance the budget:
End the wars
Don’t pay for the world’s security, remove troops from South Korea, Germany, etc.
Wow, a 10 year projection.. If only I could project that far I would be a shark in the stock market. Any projection beyond a term in office is sci fi.
ToR- Have you missed the news that Merkel, as well as Sarkozy and Cameron have recently stated publicly that “diversity” doesn’t work. Unfortunately they found that out after appeasing, and being nice to the radical islamists that have overtaken their countries. Who do you think the islamists are after? They consider Israel the “little satan” but the US the “big satan.” Recently, a radical islamist killed two of our troops in Germany. One of those killed called home, a town not more than a few miles from me. He was an American, targeted in Germany, because he was an American satan.
Now, let me ask you something. Are our troops worth less than the islamic goal of killing every American, where ever they are, even in America? Do you really put a higher price on a dollar than you do our citizens? It seems that you have bought the Ron Paul sham story that we can protect America with just a few good submarines. I wonder if he would paint them yellow, and have unicorns dancing on them while they patrol.
Susan, if our troops weren’t in Germany or any other country they couldn’t be killed by foreigners. And there is a difference between protecting America and protecting the rest of the world. Should we pay for the protection of Europe against a Cold War threat and South Korea against North Korea? I would argue that we shouldn’t.
However, I will not respond to your illogical and inappropriate rant against diversity and Muslims. That is uncalled for and does not help you in your argument.
I mean Sandy
D.J.
I am looking for details for the current RSC plan and am failing. Rand Paul also has a plan that cuts deeply and quickly, which I believe is essential. I believe our time window for this action is short, measured in months perhaps but certainly not decades.
Have you got a link for the current RSC plan? Paul mentioned it during a recent interview.
Why does the red ink exist? Doesn’t Congress spends most of what it spends unconstitutionally?
Our Constitution provides Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court a charter, their reason for being. They have ignored that document and taken up a cause more holy to them, running our lives.
If we want to balance the budget, we must replace leaders who refuse to obey their oath of office. Unless we do that, no plan will balance the budget. Liars do not keep their word. They do not do what they say they will do.
any budget plan that leaves 100,000+ troops in Germany and 30,000+ in Japan/Korea should be rejected by all. agree with ToR above.
also agree with DJ that no budget should be sending SS checks to 65 year olds.
Leave your response