海角大神

I keep hearing that Mitt Romney鈥檚 pick of Paul Ryan 鈥渆nables the country to have the debate it needs to have,鈥� or 鈥減ermits us to have a grownup discussion,鈥� or 鈥渇inally presents America with a real choice.鈥� The聽New York Times聽oped page proclaims: 鈥淟et the Real Debate Begin!鈥�

Debate? What debate?聽

Romney isn鈥檛 even standing by Ryan鈥檚 budget plan. He鈥檚 been distancing himself from it from the moment he tabbed Ryan for the ticket.聽 鈥淚鈥檓 the one running for President,鈥� he keeps saying in response to reporters鈥� questions about whether he agrees with Ryan.

Not even Ryan will say publicly what the Romney economic plan entails. 鈥淲e haven鈥檛 run the numbers yet,鈥� he repeats 鈥� as if there were numbers in the Romney plan to run. But the numbers in Romney鈥檚 plan are like the numbers in Romney鈥檚 tax returns 鈥� they鈥檙e invisible to anyone who might have an interest in knowing.聽

But even if Romney were to adopt Ryan鈥檚 budget plan intact we still wouldn鈥檛 have a real debate because Ryan鈥檚 own plan itself lacks specifics that add up.

None of the budgets Ryan has come up with as chair of the House Budget Committee indicate which tax loopholes he鈥檇 close and exactly which programs for lower-income Americans he鈥檇 eliminate in order to balance the budget.

Ryan claims that his revenue targets can be met by 鈥渂roadening the tax base,鈥� but he hasn鈥檛 said how he鈥檇 do it.聽聽He鈥檚 insisted on keeping two of the biggest loopholes that overwhelmingly favor the wealthy 鈥攖he preferential tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

In fact, Ryan鈥檚 budget is larded with so much defense spending and so many tax cuts for the wealthy that it doesn鈥檛 even lower the debt 鈥� when exposed to realistic assumptions.聽

It baldly assumes that tax cuts for the rich will generate revenues totaling 18.4 percent of the economy over the next decade. That鈥檚 supply-side nonsense. When the non-partisan聽looked at Ryan鈥檚 budget plan, it calculated that revenues would average only 16.3 percent over the decade 鈥� $4 trillion less.

Under that revenue estimate, Ryan鈥檚 budget would increase debt as a share of the economy for more than four decades 鈥� pushing the public debt to over 175 percent of GDP by 2050.

We can鈥檛 even have a clear debate about programs like Medicare, because Romney and Ryan seem determined to sow as much confusion as possible about their proposed voucher system. (At least Romney says his own approach to Medicare is 鈥渁lmost identical鈥� to Ryan鈥檚.)

They鈥檝e been charging all week that President Obama鈥檚 Affordable Care Act 鈥渞obs鈥� Medicare of more than $700 billion over the next decade. In reality, the Romney-Ryan plan saves exactly the same amount. But it does so by shifting costs to seniors whose vouchers won鈥檛 keep up with the projected cost of health care. Obama鈥檚 savings come from reduced payments to medical providers.

What鈥檚 really driving Medicare costs 鈥� as well as future federal budget deficits 鈥� is the increasing costs of health care overall, combined with aging boomers. But don鈥檛 expect a debate over how to reign in healthcare costs because Romney and Ryan haven鈥檛 put forward a healthcare plan. All they want to do is repeal the Affordable Care Act, leaving 50 million Americans without health insurance coverage.

We won鈥檛 have a clear debate over whether to raise tax rates on the wealthy because Romney and Ryan are sticking to the conservative bromide that the wealthy and big corporations need more tax cuts in order to create jobs 鈥� even though America鈥檚 top earners are now taking home more of the nation鈥檚 income than they have in eighty years, and corporations are sitting on more than a trillion dollars of cash they don鈥檛 know what to do with.

We won鈥檛 even have a debate over how to prevent another meltdown of Wall Street or a taxpayer bailout of 鈥渢oo-big-to-fail鈥� banks because Romney and Ryan don鈥檛 have a plan for preventing another Wall Street crisis. All they want to do is repeal the Dodd-Frank act.

Romney鈥檚 choice of Ryan won鈥檛 usher in a 鈥渞eal debate鈥� about much of anything except, perhaps, the danger to our democracy of billionaires like casino-magnate Sheldon Adelson (whose blessing Ryan immediately sought this week) who are pouring tens of millions of dollars into negative advertising. (Adelson alone has committed $100 million of his fortune.)

Those negative ads, by the way, are making it all the harder for average Americans to sort out the truth from well-financed big lies 鈥� and understand, let alone debate, the big issues this election year.