The Paul Ryan Record – Not as Fiscally Conservative as You Think
By Marcus Tully - August 11, 2012 at 8:57 AM
Filed under Bailout , Debt & Spending , Economy , Elections , Opinion , Presidential
Filed under Bailout , Debt & Spending , Economy , Elections , Opinion , Presidential
With the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate in the 2012 election, Romney is hoping to strengthen his credentials as a budget cutting “deficit hawk” through association with Ryan’s famous budget plan. Given the other choices which Romney was considering this is probably a good overall choice. As Republican Liberty Caucus Chairman Dave Nalle said in response to the announcement:
“While Paul Ryan is by no means the most exciting or creative choice for a running mate, his selection does suggest that there would be an emphasis on budget cutting in a Romney/Ryan administration. Using the Ryan plan as a starting point and with the addition of deeper cuts and more significant reforms to entitlements, Republicans controlling both houses of Congress and the Presidency might be able to pull the country back from the brink of the fiscal abyss.”
The problem is that Ryan’s reputation as a fiscal conservative may not have much substance to it and his positions on other key issues are at the very least worrisome. He has received a great deal of press for a budget plan which does include some cuts and restructuring of medicare, but despite fearmongering from the left, the cuts are far too small and the reforms too limited to really pull us back from the edge of the abyss of debt which faces the nation.
The Ryan plan might be a good starting point if it was augmented with more substantial spending reductions and more comprehensive entitlement reform, but that would require a very proactive and fiscally conservative Congress. By itself it is just not sufficient. It takes a decade to balance the budget and potentially 40 years to deal with the debt, by which time there may be no economy left to save.
In addition, Ryan’s record on spending and other budgetary issues gives little hope that he is terribly serious about promoting limited government. In 2010 the Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin published an analysis of his record and the report is not encouraging. I am reprinting it here in its entirety for those who are concerned about Ryan’s real credentials as a fiscal conservative.
| Increasingly our Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan has become a national media darling. Representative Ryan is consistently being promoted on social media networks and by the Republican Party of Wisconsin and the nationwide “free market” group Americans for Prosperity.The fact of the matter is that Congressman Ryan voted with George W. Bush 94% of the time. That’s why Ryan’s 2007 Republican Liberty Caucus Liberty Index score, which ranks members of Congress on their voting record from a constitutional perspective, was 91% on economic issues but only 56% on social issues. In 2006, his score on the Liberty Index was 66% on economic issues and 67% on social issues. He has scored better on the Liberty Index; his 2008 score, for example, was 88 both on social and economic issues — an impressive score.It appears that when Paul Ryan’s party is doing the spending, raising debt limits, and acting unconstitutionally… Ryan goes with the flow.
Congressman Ryan’s actual record leaves much to be desired. The issue Ryan is most known for is his interest in cutting the deficit and balancing the budget. But why did the Congressman vote to bail out the auto industry, to pass the Medicare package to the tune of $400 billion, and to nationalize education via No Child Left Behind? Paul Ryan on Bailouts and Government Stimuli Paul Ryan on Entitlement Programs Paul Ryan on Education -Voted YES on No Child Left Behind Act (2001) Paul Ryan on Civil Liberties Paul Ryan on War and Intervention Abroad Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid. According to Michelle Malkin in 2009, “[Paul Ryan] gave one of the most hysterical speeches in the rush to pass TARP last fall; voted for the auto bailout; and voted with the Barney Frank-Nancy Pelosi AIG bonus-bashing stampede. Milwaukee blogger Nick Schweitzer wrote: ‘He ought to be apologizing for his previous votes, not pretending he was being responsible the entire time, but I don’t see one bit of regret for what he did previously. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to let him get away with it’.” Congressman Ryan: if you don’t like debt, stop voting for debt. |
Ryan’s record of fiscal irresponsibility has continued beyond 2010 when this article was written. He has since voted to raise the debt ceiling multiple times and approved ongoing extensions of military spending on unnecessary foreign wars. To be fair his record on fiscal issues has become increasingly mixed. He has voted against foreign aid, farm subsidies and some other specific spending increases as well.
Possibly of even greater concern is Ryan’s ongoing record of absolute irresponsibility in the area of civil liberties. Since 2010 Ryan has been on the wrong side of almost every important vote involving basic Constitutionally protected rights. He voted to extend the PATRIOT Act, for CISPA, for DOMA, for the NDAA (three times), to expand the Department of Homeland Security, to extend troop commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and to give the President the power to appoint department heads without Senatorial approval. At a time when more and more Republicans are waking up to the threat of expanded government power to operate without observing traditional limits on their police power these votes are a major concern.
TARP, bailouts, entitlement expansion, endless military spending and bigger, more intrusive and less constitutional government. Is the Ryan record an example of the kind of policies a financially imperiled nation needs and which grassroots Republicans are demanding? Ryan is probably a gesture in the right direction, but Liberty Republicans should be concerned that the gesture is more symbol than substance and demand a clear and aggressive fiscal plan from the Romney campaign.
On August 11th, 2012 at 10:46 am
I’m curious what you would suggest at this point. At what point is the Liberty agenda best furthered by finding the positive to emphasize, and temporarily replacing criticism with silence? I’m not disagreeing with any issue of substance here, nor the service you’re providing by disseminating information. But, I do think there is a time to put on your poker face and play the hand you’ve got, true?
On August 11th, 2012 at 11:11 am
Thanks for what you do RLC
On August 11th, 2012 at 5:12 pm
So are you voting for them, or not?
On August 11th, 2012 at 7:07 pm
[...] Paul Ryan's Record Match His Rhetoric." For some strange reason, the link is now bad. Here is a new RLC analysis of Ryan that includes the original post in its entirety and concludes: Ryan’s record of fiscal [...]
On August 12th, 2012 at 12:18 am
The republicans and the democrats, two heads; one snake.
On August 12th, 2012 at 1:55 am
Why?
If people who want liberty continue to accept charlatans like Paul Ryan, they will always have an excuse to show loyalty to a charlatan party.
If you want change, your voting habits should reflect that you will no longer accept what is being shoved down your throat. The charlatans would like nothing more than your vote, and they really don’t care whether you hold your nose or not.
How do YOU think they will ever learn, if you continue giving them what they want?
On August 12th, 2012 at 1:55 am
My comment was meant for Christian B.
On August 12th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
Christian the problem with putting your poker face on and falling in line is that at best we will have a VERY mediocre recovery with these two and if voices like his aren’t out there warning of the future problems that these eletists will bring we of the limited government mindset will never have a chance to win an election and allow the country to turn itself around. I want to make sure you heard me correctly, Romney can’t hide his arrogance often in his speeches or interviews he falls back on his “I created x amount of jobs” when he was governor, rarely , (never to my knowledge) has he said when I was governor the people of Massachusets created x amount of jobs it is always I created I did this I did that. The country needs government to get out of the way by tightening it’s own belt getting rid of oppressive buearocracies and overburdensome regulations, has either one of them said much about that ? The country will lead itself out of this mess if this would happen
On August 12th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
AMAZING, my comment is awaiting moderation, what happened to all this free speech stuff. My comment is awaiting censorship how about that, maybe your space on my Facebook is needing moderated, meaning my time is of greater value to me than to be moderated by you or anyone else.
On August 12th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
So are you backing Romney / Ryan ? Seems your record piece is not so for him ?
On August 12th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Christian B, no, not true. The pot is statism. It’s time to stop playing with their dealer.
On August 12th, 2012 at 8:28 pm
Lol what a joke, Romney Isn’t even the RNC nominee yet. No, I’m voting for Ron Paul.
On August 13th, 2012 at 7:11 am
Christian B:
I think point you are looking for is when we get a trustworthy candidate that is pointed in the right direction. Ryan and Romney are not those candidates. Their spending plans still show increased spending each and every year. That is the wrong direction. If their plan called for even a modest $1 cut in spending next year it would be less than ideal in my eyes but it would be a step in the right direction.
But then I also am looking for a candidate I can trust to mean it. Ryans record shows he can not be trusted to decrease spending.
On August 13th, 2012 at 7:27 am
Join Ranks, or die! Paul Ryan and Mr. Romney are not my favorite candidates at all, however they are the candidates and whatever their problems, they are far better than the opposition. The real key is that the republicans need the Presidency, the House, and 61 Senators so the Demacruds can’t filibuster the Republican agenda.
My recommendation is to accentuate the positive and minimize the negative. Elect Republicans at all levels. Then continue to pick off the RHINO’s as opportunity allows.
On August 13th, 2012 at 8:51 am
Stupid article, Mr. Tully … what was your point in even writting it? Ryan is as conservitive as can be and as we go through this election you will be educated. The fact that he voted 90% with George Bush proves to me and I’m sure Romney, that he will be a fine vice president and 8 years later a great president!
On August 13th, 2012 at 10:18 am
While I agree with the majority of your stances,(no one agrees 100%)this election isn’t about personal freedoms as much as it is fiscal responsibility. Why? Simple, if we don’t change the fiscal direction away from the current track, we wont have ANY personal freedoms, except those that China lets us keep.
Once we fix the financial explosion coming down the road, and quickly, THEN we can go after the idiocy that is the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, et al. If you fight for the latter first, then you might get rid of a few of them, but the entitlement programs will crush the economy in such a way that having gruel for dinner will look good.
On August 13th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
James. Unfortunatley we get a lot of comment spam, so we have to make sure that a human goes over the comments to keep it on topic. Nothing which is even vaguely relevant and not written by a bot gets censored, not even your intemperate ranting about how you’re being censored, based on nothing at all.
Dave
On August 13th, 2012 at 2:07 pm
Edward, I think the reason for the article is to point out to people like you who think that Ryan “is as conservative as can be” that this is not, in fact, true and that his real record is one of a fiscal moderate who goes along with almost all the big spending opportunities which come his way from the GOP leaders or from Obama.
Dave