Before He Was “The Solution” He Was “Part of the Problem”
House Republicans today voted overwhelmingly in favor Paul Ryan’s deficit reduction plan. Ever since he released it, many in the conservative punditry world have been heaping praise on the Congressmen, calling him things like “bold” and “courageous”. Additionally, President Obama’s direct attack on his plan likewise bolstered his credibility among many fiscal conservatives and even libertarian groups like the CATO Institute. Indeed, it appears that Paul Ryan is becoming the new face of fiscal conservatism for many.
However, even a cursory look at Ryan’s twelve-year record in the House reveals that he has been anything but a fiscal hawk. It wasn’t just one bad vote here and there either. Time after time, Ryan voted for legislation that expanded the size of the federal government and increased our debt and deficit. In 2001, he voted for No Child Left Behind and the accompanying increase in federal education spending. In 2003, he voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, expanding the entitlement which he now seeks to rein in. In 2005, during the debate over privatizing Social Security, Paul Ryan and John Sununu proposed legislation which would guarantee that no future Social Security recipient would receive lower benefits than which the current system offered. While some argued that this would actually save money over the long run by changing the rate of growth, in reality it would make it more difficult to reform Social Security by guaranteeing an unsustainable level of benefits. In 2008, he voted for TARP and then later for the auto-company bailouts. Most recently, he voted for caps on CEO compensation. For someone like Ryan who is a self-professed Ayn Rand fan, some of these things seem like they are straight out of Atlas Shrugged. Now, I am not naive enough to think that there are droves of Republican congressmen with perfect voting records. But for someone who is supposed to be the new face of fiscal conservatism, Paul Ryan’s voting record demonstrates that he has been anything but a fiscal conservative, especially when it comes to entitlements.
Despite my criticisms of Ryan, I like many parts of his plan, especially the voucher system for Medicare and the block grants for Medicaid. But it appears that Paul Ryan saw the writing on the wall when it came to which way the Republican Party was moving, especially with the rise of the Tea Party. That is the motivation for his “Path to Prosperity”- not some long-held beliefs in the ideals of fiscal prudence or limited government.
Category: Liberals suck, Politics
Ryan is my Rep. I vote for him. He is a Republican first and foremost. He followed GW Bush’s lead but declined an appointment to be Bush’s White House budget director in GW’s second term. Ryan put out his Roadmap right before Bush left office, so I am thinking he was establishing himself in the Republican party with the party line votes before veering from the party line on fiscal matters (that’s just my opinion, but I’ve been watching him for several years). I didn’t agree with a few of his positions, but overall, he’s a helluva lot better than a lot of head-in-the-sand politicians. And I REALLY like the fact that he comes home to his community and I see him around town and he is approachable. Yes, I pin his ass down and I tell him to continue holding the line of fiscal conservatism.
Hooah, Operator Dan! Hoorah!
Establishment Republicans are part and parcel of why we are where we are.
Ryan’s bill is a solid first step. But even he has to realize that the amount remains minor until our debt is paid back in full and ween ourselves off borrowing money.
Until then, it’s just a matter of degree.
I agree, we can’t ever forget what someone did in the past and must hold that against them the rest of their career, because that’s how you get stuff done in this country. Judging someone for a decision they made at the moment is easy when looking back and seeing the effects in the long run.
I’m assuming you were against Bush for his drinking and drug abuse then as well, correct?
Jesus, you really do like throwing in those strawmen, dontcha you little fucking troll? BTW–drug abuse? Care to substantiate that? And drinking? Not in 25 years, as I understand.
Now if you want to criticize the man’s RECORD, by all means, go right ahead.
But you can’t even call your bullshit apples-oranges.
Chris T, I’d say his record is open to criticism seeing as how what he’s voted on has been very recent dickhead.
Ryan, at least, seems to have had his “come to Jesus” moment. Boehner, not so much.
It’s a start, though, and we need to start somewhere to keep this ship afloat.
So, Mr. Troll, or can we call you Chris? We’re safe in assuming that you’re against Obama, for his drinking, drug use, lack of any job experience whatsoever, and friends from the extreme left of the radical fringe of this country? Would that be a fair assumption, Skippy?