JONATHAN CHAIT APRIL 5, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Liberals are kind of short-circuiting in response to Paul Ryan's "Path to Prosperity," which contains so many bad Republican economic proposals in one place you don't even know what to say about it. But there's really one clear issue here that encapsulate both the intellectual and the political vulnerablity of the plan: It contains a massive, regressive tax cut.
Ryan does not want to talk about the tax cut. His video touting the plan focuses entirely on the debt, and makes no mention whatsoever of the tax cuts:
Ryan doesn't mention the tax cuts, of course, because they unravel the entire rationale for his proposal. Americans overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Ryan understands he can only make his plan acceptable if those cuts are seen as necessary to save the programs.
And certainly some level of cutting is necessary. But Ryan's level of cutting goes far beyond what's needed to preserve those programs, and it does so in order to clear room for a very large, regressive tax cut. He is making a choice -- not just cut Medicare to save Medicare, but also to cut Medicare in order to cut taxes for the rich.
Ryan does not want to debate that choice, but he ought to be forced to do so. That is exactly what Bill Clinton did to defeat the Republicans in 1995. Indeed, the debate was virtually identical. Republicans insisted the debt constituted an existential threat. They proposed to "save" Medicare by privatizing it. And Clinton pointed out that their plan cut Medicare in order to finance a regressive tax cut. He won the argument because Medicare is highly popular and tax cuts for the rich aren't.
Indeed, the divide on this issue is so overwhelming that Republicans simply refuse to acknowledge their position. The standard GOP approach to budget debates for twenty years has been to vigorously isolate debates about taxes and debates about spending. If presented with a question that ties together debates about taxes and spending, Republicans will automatically deny the premise, and recontextualize taxes as a question of economic growth or abstract fairness. The two can never be discussed in tandem, because doing so clarifies a choice Republicans need to obscure.
The response to Ryan's budget is really simple. He cuts Medicare and other vital programs in order to finance a huge tax cut for people who don't really need it. That's the point Republicans don't want to defend but should be forced to.
20 comments
This post demonstrates Chait at his strongest. A pleasure to read. Well done. Let's hope the Dems attack Ryan's proposal on the grounds elucidated above. It's very important that the Dems do this, led by Obama, and do it constantly. Most of the mainstream media will be perfectly content to repeat GOP talking points and flatter themselves that they're contributing to an "adult" conversation about the debt and deficit. The Dems have to make sure the GOP and mainstream media are not permitted to define the parameters of this discussion.
- DC Spence
April 5, 2011 at 12:35pm
It is highly interesting that the policy prescription dearest to the hearts of Republicans, i.e., cutting taxes for the rich, is anathema to huge numbers of Americans, so conservatives have to change the subject or practice deception every time they try to pull this off. The George W. Bush administration lied about the skewing of their tax cuts. Paul Ryan doesn't even bring up his plan's huge tax cuts. The GOP wants Americans to take their eyes of the ball and it is the duty of the Democrats to refuse to let them engage in this subterfuge.
- liberalref
April 5, 2011 at 12:39pm
Best encapsulation of the Ryan "solution" I've heard yet. Even after hearing the skip-to-the-right, now skip-to-the-left panel discussion on this morning's Diane Rhem show with the policy heavyweights that Cohn posted about the other day, I can't say I'm hearing much if anything from the left or the center or Obama for that matter on the Ryan "solution" to everything ailing America. Obscuring yet more tax cuts for the rich while 90% of Americans struggle is not just dishonesty, it's plain and simple class warfare in the name of saving America from ourselves.
- singlspeed
April 5, 2011 at 12:39pm
I heartily second your comment, DC.
- liberalref
April 5, 2011 at 12:40pm
Hear, hear. Ryan's proposal to eliminate Medicaid is a blatant attack on a bully's easiest target: those too weak to defend themselves. It's abhorrent in and of it itself, but to advocate for it in order to pay for EVEN MORE tax cuts for the rich... The mind reels. I don't want to immediately leap to being crude, but...fuck that. Obama should veto any budget bill that reaches that depth of evil. If it's a choice between a complete government shutdown until Congress comes to its senses or murdering the poor to make the filthy rich even richer, there is no choice.
- janus
April 5, 2011 at 12:43pm
Coupled with a large tax increase for working Americans. Because that's how the Republicans would "fix" social security, by increasing the payroll tax, a flat tax imposed only on the first (roughly) $110,000 of wages (and none on investment income). That's been the Republican tax policy for almost 30 years: cut income tax rates paid by the wealthiest Americans and increase payroll taxes paid mostly by lower and middle income Americans. And look at the fine mess that got us into. As Chait says, the Republicans should be forced to defend this policy. But they won't. And, except for rare occasions (Clinton in 1995), they haven't for the past 30 years.
- rayward
April 5, 2011 at 12:52pm
M2E2 baby! It's argument enough.
- AllanL5
April 5, 2011 at 1:08pm
Ryan's plan would be illegal if the "Balanced" "Budget" "Amendment" were enacted. And for all the talk about reducing the deficit, Ryan's plan wouldn't even do that until we're all commuting to work in flying cars - well, not all of us, because poor people and old folks on Medicaid will be used to fuel and lubricate the cars. America is the only industrialized country on earth that doesn't have a center-right party. We used to, but not any more.
- Geoff G
April 5, 2011 at 1:30pm
Slick vid. I'd say there's a few idio...low information voters out there that will be impressed by those nice charts and Ryan's comforting delivery. Would be nice to see a counter and a good one, maybe from your man, what's his face, the Steve McQueen of whiteboards with a toned down pres, no music, just the facts and the choices. I think that contrast could work well. Unless of course you want to throw a blonde or brunette into it wearing only America flags to help those low information voters. What's the bet that DC's fears are realized and the media fall over themselves in there attempts to portray their journalistic seriousness about those "tough choices" about "entitlements" and the Republicans get to magically seperate taxes from spending, again. I suppose this is what Obama's campaign is all about now: saving what social infrastructure you can.
- IggyPop
April 5, 2011 at 1:42pm
I agree with DC and LibRef about Chait's virtues. Does Ryan really mean to say that after ten years of lower taxes on the wealthy and the wealthy getting a dispropotionate share of the benefit of our economy while we accumulated unpaid the costs of two wars and a prescription drug benefit, that when the time has come to make up for lost ground on covering the expenses, the monied group sneaks out the back door only pretending to use the toilet and without paying?
- Nusholtz
April 5, 2011 at 2:01pm
Here's hoping that JC is on the president's daily reading list
- NR409654
April 5, 2011 at 2:03pm
This is outrageous and if the president backs down this time I think America faces a catastrophe. I simply cannot imagine the effects Ryan's proposal would have on ordinary Americans. It would be an absolute disaster. Talk about death panels. OMG. Incidentally at a time when Republicans, Tea Partiers etc moan and groan about helping the unemployed, ordinary workers, the poor, the sick, the disabled, the old, the middle class, teachers, the environment, education, food safety, the infrastructure, etc, and are trying to get rid of unions and disempower workers - Ryan wants to use Federal money to subsidize the insurance industry. Meanwhile in Arizona, also a great stronghold of "freedom," Gov. Brewer wants to fine people whose health habits are found wanting. This is nucking futz. All of it; and it's frightening.
- Sophia
April 5, 2011 at 3:14pm
It's not the Achilles heel. It's the entire point. Lower taxes for the wealthy is the source of almost the entire current right-wing economic agenda. All else is in support of that.
- K_Wilson
April 5, 2011 at 3:20pm
The moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party defies belief. Just how low is the GOP willing to sink in its subservience to the rich? Destroying the social safety net in order to free up money for another tax cut for the rich is absolutely reprehensible. Will this never end? And will the millions of ordinary Americans who get their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News ever have the scales fall from their eyes and see the Republican Party for what it is? Just what will it take? And here’s another question: Is there no one of stature remaining in the Republican Party who is willing to say, “Enough! What we’re trying to do is un-American and an affront to human decency!” Senator McCain, do you read these posts? This could be your last term in the Senate. Why don’t you go back to being the old John McCain? You know, the guy who told the truth about things. Aren’t you tired of being the pandering, lying party hack that you have become? Why don’t you use the next six years to redeem yourself? Start telling the truth about the irresponsible, destructive and morally repugnant Republican agenda. One truth that must be told is that the federal government needs more revenue, which will mean a simpler, fairer tax structure and higher taxes for some. And the rich will have to start paying more of the costs of running this nation. The GOP’s aim of increasing the disparities of wealth by pumping ever more money to the top 2 percent of Americans at the expense of the middle class and the poor has got to stop. The Republicans, of course, deny that they have any such intention. To even suggest that they do smacks of “class warfare.” Senator, do you have enough of a backbone to stand up in Congress and state that this is indeed the GOP’s agenda and that tax increases for the wealthiest Americans must be part of any reasonable plan to bring down our gargantuan budget deficits? Or will you continue to spout the Republican lie that tax cuts always increase revenues, so more tax cuts are called for? And let me complete this rant by asking where the churches have been while the Republicans have been working so hard to impoverish ordinary Americans. Why haven’t they denounced the heartless policies of the GOP? Why, to the contrary, have many churches urged their congregations to “vote righteously”—meaning for Republican candidates. Church leaders like to ask, “What would Jesus do in this situation?” Do they really think that Jesus would urge his followers to vote for a party that turns its back on the less fortunate or even espouses programs that would make those people’s lives even worse?
- DAVIDDREIER@EARTHLINK.NET-old
April 5, 2011 at 3:56pm
I've never seen a post that generated more rampant agreement than this one. It is apparently impossible to be too cynical about Republicans' cynicism regarding taxes and the budget.
- JackR
April 5, 2011 at 4:40pm
I have a question that I haven't yet seen answered anywhere -- does the promise Ryan is making to people who are 55 and older today, that they will see no decrease in Medicare and Social Security benefits over their lifetimes, mean that younger workers, who will not receive those benefits themselves, will still, over most of their working lives, be forced to pay the hefty payroll taxes they pay currently (for many young earners payroll taxes exceed income taxes) ? It is my impression that many younger people who support of these changes expect that they will be required to be pay less. Is that assumption true?
- esmense
April 5, 2011 at 4:56pm
No. The other side of Ryan's chopping of the safety net is the fact that he also wants to chop taxes - ON THE RICH. 95% of the people will pay more taxes and get less services. Yet, he is heralded by David Brooks as some sort of visionary who has "grasped reality with both hands." Right.
- Sophia
April 5, 2011 at 5:52pm
Brooks is a captive of his own "conservativism" in supporting this immature doofus with an Ayn Rand fantasy. He is all but declaring war on anyone under 55! A bold visionary indeed!
- MikeB.
April 5, 2011 at 6:25pm
I almost gagged when this piece of garbage starting complaining about demagogery? Really? After two years of "death panels" and other crud!
- MikeB.
April 5, 2011 at 8:35pm
This is where the rubber meets the road. This is where the people who support the Republican with campaigns with money get the goodies. This is where the battle must be joined.
- paskunac
April 6, 2011 at 6:15am