Resurrecting the Ryan budget
Already, the Romney campaign聽insists聽that voters should pay no attention to Paul Ryan鈥檚 fiscal agenda. It is the Romney-Ryan tax and budget plan, they say, not the Ryan-Romney plan.
Good luck with that.
Both Democrats and conservative Republicans will spend the next three months arguing otherwise. And like them or not, Ryan鈥檚 more comprehensive鈥攁nd far more controversial鈥攑lans are likely to garner most of the attention.
After all, big ideas seem to make Romney nervous. Thus he ducks the pesky details. But Ryan charges ahead. He loves his ideas, and he wants to tell people why they should too.
Ryan has been nothing if not a fountain of policy: Social Security private accounts in 2004, his Roadmap for America鈥檚 Future in 2008, and his ambitious budgets in 2011 and 2012.
But, for Ryan, these ideas are about more than economics. They define the very relationship between people and their government. In my lifetime, only three presidential candidates鈥�Bill Clinton, Barry Goldwater, and Adlai Stevenson鈥攁nd one vp candidate鈥�Jack Kemp鈥搘ere as passionate about ideas as Ryan. (Of course, Goldwater, Stevenson, and Kemp all lost, while Clinton, the passionate centrist, won).
Ryan isn鈥檛 about winning political points, or power for its own sake. For him, controlling the levers of government is an opportunity to remake government.
In 2009, I interviewed Ryan at a Tax Policy Center聽forum. He was there to talk about tax reform, but he cast fiscal policy in much broader terms:
鈥淲e ought to have a safety net to help people who truly cannot help themselves鈥ut [we]don鈥檛 want to turn it into a system in which people become dependent on the state, become complacent, substitute fear and dependency on benefits [for] liberty.鈥︹��
That鈥檚 why Ryan鈥檚 hot-button聽 tax and spending agenda聽 sometimes makes Republicans so uncomfortable.聽 They are looking win elections. He wants to change the world and isn鈥檛 shy about saying how.
In his wonderful聽New Yorker聽 biographical聽sketch, Ryan Lizza asked Paul Ryan about the difference between those who merely criticize and those who also offer alternatives:
聽鈥滻f you鈥檙e going to criticize, then you should propose鈥 think you鈥檙e obligated to do that,鈥� he said. 鈥淧eople like me who are reform-minded ignore the people who say, 鈥楯ust criticize and don鈥檛 do anything and let鈥檚 win by default.鈥� That鈥檚 ridiculous.鈥�
For Ryan, it isn鈥檛 about deficits. It鈥檚 about low taxes and small government. Indeed, his fiscal plan cuts taxes so deeply that even with聽substantial spending reductions, he wouldn鈥檛 balance the budget until at least mid-century.
Over the past few years, Ryan has scaled back his tax reform. His original聽Roadmap聽would have collapsed today鈥檚 six tax rates to just 2 (10 percent and 23 percent), abolished all taxes on capital gains and dividends, replaced the refundable tax credits that provide the basic safety net for low-income working families with a bigger standard deduction, and dumped the corporate income tax for a consumption tax.
The most recent House budget, however, was more mainstream GOP fare. It would cut the top individual rate to 25 percent (Romney would cut it to 28 percent), tax investment income at no more than 15 percent (like Romney), and keep the corporate income tax but lower the top rate to 25 percent (as would Romney).
The Tax Policy Center聽estimates聽the revenue elements of the House budget would add about $4.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, and raise only about 15.5 percent of GDP in revenues.
Ryan would offset some of this by cutting back tax deductions, credits, and exclusions. Like Romney, Ryan won鈥檛 say exactly how. But unlike the man at the top of the ticket, I get the sense Ryan can鈥檛 wait to do so. In our 2009 interview, he spoke with great enthusiasm about how he鈥檇聽defeat the lobbyists who protect these tax breaks.
In 鈥�09, Ryan said he鈥檇 replace the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance with a refundable tax credit. GOP presidential nominee John McCain backed that idea in 2008, but Romney has, so far, been unwilling to go there.
Even more controversy will come on the聽spending side, where Ryan has consistently proposed deep cuts in government programs: He鈥檇 slash Medicaid by $800 billion over 10 years, shift Medicare from a guaranteed insurance program to one where seniors get a government subsidy to buy their own coverage, and chop all other spending from about 13 percent of Gross Domestic Product to about 4 percent. Here, again, Romney has been far less specific.
Like it or not, Romney now owns聽Ryan鈥檚 agenda. In a different world, Obama would present his own serious alternative deficit reduction plan, not just attack Ryan鈥檚. If he did so, we might have the kind of聽fiscal debate so many of us hope for. But in the real world, Ryan鈥檚 ideas will be red meat.
