PLANK OCTOBER 25, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

The last time Paul Ryan tried to show off his compassionate side, the effort failed miserably. It was two weeks ago, in Youngstown, Ohio, when Ryan stopped by a soup kitchen while en route to the airport. Dinner was over and most of the patrons had left. Ryan ended up cleaning some dishes, which—according to subsequent accounts—staff had left deliberately so that Ryan would have something to do in front of the cameras. A volunteer called Ryan’s visit “the phoniest piece of baloney.”
On Wednesday, during another visit to Ohio, Ryan gave the compassion thing another shot. But this time he used a more straightforward approach: He gave a speech on poverty. “We are here in partnership on behalf of an idea,” Ryan said, describing the goals he shared with presidential nominee Mitt Romney, “that no matter who your parents are, no matter where you come from, you should have the opportunity in America to rise, to escape from poverty, and to achieve whatever your God-given talents and hard work enable you to achieve.”
It sounded great, I’m sure. But it was still the phoniest piece of baloney, given what he and Romney have actually proposed to do if elected.
Let's start with the budget that Ryan crafted earlier this year and which House Republicans approved. It would dramatically cut spending on domestic programs—taking a huge, $3.3 trillion bite out of programs that target low-income Americans. At the same time, it would give new tax cuts to the rich. Romney has said he would sign something like Ryan's budget if it ever came to his desk. And while Romney been a lot less specific about the proposals he'd put forward, he’s made a few specific commitments, like vowing to cap non-defense spending at 16 percent of gross domestic product and promising Ryan-like changes to food stamps and Medicaid. Taken together, these suggest a budget plan with a similarly severe impact on low-income programs.
Support thought-provoking, quality journalism. Join The New Republic for $3.99/month.
And "severe" is not an overstatement. Just this week, the Kaiser Family Foundation updated a previous estimate of Ryan’s proposed reduction in spending on Medicaid. The report’s authors, all of them researchers at the Urban Institute, concluded that between 14 and 20 million people could lose Medicaid coverage—unless states made up for the lost funding on their own (which would be unlikely, particularly for more conservative states) or decided to make some of the cuts by reducing coverage for the disabled and elderly (which would simply distribute the pain differently).
That’s not all. A Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analysis suggested as many as 8 million people on food stamps could lose benefits under Ryan's proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). In case you were wondering, 85 percent of SNAP recipients have incomes below the poverty line and 40 percent of them have incomes that are less than half the poverty line.
Does the presence of such programs really make a difference in people’s lives? You bet it does. Last year, according to the Center on Budget, food stamps alone kept about 4 million people out of poverty, half of them children. Romney and Ryan claim that, like the old welfare system, today’s low-income programs encourage dependency. That seems overstated. The research I’ve seen suggests that programs “behavioral effects” are small relative to their negative impact on poverty. But even if Romney and Ryan are right, that’s an argument for redesigning the programs—not for defunding them.
In the speech, Ryan went out of his way to note that Romney had, over the course of a lifetime, been personally generous to people around him and those he perceived to be in need. The two of them have done a lot of that lately—talking about acts of charity as proof they care about the poor. I'm perfectly willing to believe that's true. I also think it's irrelevant. As president and vice-president, their actions would affect tens of millions of low-income Americans. If those people lose the supports on which they depend, Romney and Ryan's intentions won't matter a thing.
16 comments
Surely the simplest answer to the charity issue is also the one based most squarely on basic economics. Extreme poverty and homelessness are social consequences of economic activity, but they are also agents of social cost. Those who impose the costs are not the same people who bear them. This is a classic case of an externality. Accordingly, collective action is required to address the externality. The rest is just ideology masquerading as compassion.
- icarus-r
October 25, 2012 at 11:12am
This is some Orwellian view that you wouldn't HAVE poor people, if you didn't have programs FOR poor people. They'd have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps (perhaps with loans from their parents) and then they wouldn't be poor anymore. Problem solved, through upward mobility! This ties in with Romney/Ryan's wish-fulfillment Supply-Side view that giving a 20% cut in taxes while cutting Government domestic spending (but raise the military!) will magically generate 12 million new jobs. Their disconnect from reality would be hilarious, if it wasn't so deadly serious in its results.
- AllanL5
October 25, 2012 at 11:51am
Bottom line: you want to demonstrate you care about the poor? Raise taxes on the wealthy so we can afford those programs for the poor without borrowing from China. Anything less is immoral hypocritical posturing. We got a lot of that from George W. Bush already, who cut those taxes in the first place.
- AllanL5
October 25, 2012 at 11:53am
You guys misunderstand Paul Ryan. He is simply trying to reduce the number of poor people by keeping the rich off the welfare rolls. And, he wants us old folks, sick folks, disabled vets, so on and so forth to Take Responsibility For Our Lives. We could start by not eating so much. Paul Ryan is concerned about our health! He simply wants us to be Lean and Mean, like him. So, out with da food stamps. Poor guy. Nobody understands him.
- Sophia
October 25, 2012 at 1:02pm
The 47% comment, the vouchers, and transferring programs to the states all point in one direction. Romney and Ryan are not running for election to help the people in need. They are running to not help people in need. When Romney talks about the drastic increase in food stamp recipients under President Obama, he isn't concerned about the people in need of food stamps. He is worried about government and, specifically, whether he will be President.
- Nusholtz
October 25, 2012 at 1:43pm
Is this the weirdest election ever? At least in my memory. I can remember back to Adlai Stevenson, the time my mom voted for him and before that, she was a supporter of the Socialist Party and Norman Thomas. We had Young Democrats meetings in our little basement apartment. So that's about 60 years of political memories, from when I was two (so, I have always been interested in politics:) And, this year is just plain strange. It's surreal. On that subject, when did Socialism become a dirty word? And birth control - Thomas himself castigated the Church and white people for their ridiculous attitudes about birth control. Are we back in the dark ages?
- Sophia
October 25, 2012 at 2:52pm
Compassion. Want to give your own money to aid illegal immigrants? Fine. Want to support college aid for transgendered lesbian midgets? Fine.The problem w/liberal compassion is that it isn't voluntary. Liberals require everyone to contribute to their vision. Not everyone agrees w/that vision. Let's look at AFDC, the welfare program for single moms. In the 1950s, only 20% of black females had babies out of wedlock. Now the figure is 80%. Think of all the stunted lives of black teenagers who could have completed high school, could have maybe gone to college...but the "gubment" got a program to pay you to have babies. Gee, should I complete high school or should I grab my compassionate welfare? Compassionate liberals are responsible for the death of the black middle class, for the misery, poverty & early death ubiquitous in the housing projects. Thanks, FDR! &, LBJ! What a Great Society of compassion where individual lives are destroyed & cities (Detroit, etc) are destroyed so liberals at TNR can show how compassionate they are. The cliche is liberals care for the poor & conservatives are selfish. After 60 years of failed housing projects, doesn't anyone here get it that useless caring compassion leads the poor to disaster?
- raygun
October 25, 2012 at 3:25pm
What? And here I thought job creators, you know people who killed off, offshored or mechanized businesses that employed people including black men, are largely Republicans. Didn't you guys kill off the jobs? I don't think it's compassionate liberals who killed off entire industries and/or just plain screwed up because we were rich white guys, born to money and positions of power, and in the end proved insufficient to do the job creator thing. Note: WE didn't invent Bain Capital, master of stripping people of their money, loading companies with debt then scarpering with the profits.
- Sophia
October 25, 2012 at 4:19pm
Anyway, "compassion" isn't even the issue raygun. Basic fairness is though, if for no other reason that a country cannot flourish in an environment where people have nothing, where the rich own everything and the rest nothing, where a single medical bill can bankrupt a family. Enlightened self-interest would argue for sufficient food, clothing and shelter for everybody. And by the way your hero Ryan got through school on Social Security.
- Sophia
October 25, 2012 at 4:21pm
"We" did not have babies instead of going to school. WE went to school but were confronted with discrimination in the workplace. Which you guys think is just fine. And, having had kids after going to school and encountering workplace discrimination, WE encountered the world's most ridiculous health care system which strips people of their insurance in the event we actually get sick or lose a job due to RICH WHITE MALES SCREWING UP THEIR BUSINESSES and causing recessions. So WE can't take care of our kids. And it's ok with you if we die for want of affordable health care. And it's ok if Grandma comes to live with us - no Medicaid! Thanks a lot mo-fo. Now please return to your cave.
- Sophia
October 25, 2012 at 4:26pm
sophia: we..we..we..all the way home. The world's most ridiculous health care system...guess you prefer the system in the Congo, or Sierra Leone, or Haiti, or Detroit. Don't run your idiot mouth about whites until you can show us a great system run by your homies. Sorry your people never left the cave.
- raygun
October 25, 2012 at 4:36pm
The last sentence of this post should be drilled into the brain of every American potential voter by whatever means necessary. And raygun was evidently sent here to make mr. rationale seem intelligent and compassionate by comparison.
- cspencef
October 25, 2012 at 5:18pm
I have the perfect solution to hunger and poverty. Eat the poor.
- blackton
October 25, 2012 at 6:10pm
Compassionate liberals are responsible for the death of the black middle class, for the misery, poverty & early death ubiquitous in the housing projects. Really? By the way, what makes you think that capitalism on its own will solve the problems of the poor? Or do you think we should not have helped Paul Ryan's family after his father died and that we should not have helped Mitt Romney's father when he came to this country?
- Nusholtz
October 25, 2012 at 6:27pm
But Nush, those guys are white. It's the blacks and mexicans that are the parasites. They need to learn to pull themselves up by their bootstraps like Romney and Ryan did! Oh, wait...
- GSpinks
October 25, 2012 at 9:02pm
blackton "I have the perfect solution to hunger and poverty. Eat the poor." Somebody heard you: "New York City: Police officer dreams up cannibalism plot" "Gilbert Valle, a suspended New York City police officer has been charged with getting too close to carrying out his dreams of cannibalizing women. The judge in the case, U.S. Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman, described the charges as "profoundly disturbing."" http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/1025/New-York-City-Police-officer-dreams-up-cannibalism-plot
- arnon1
October 25, 2012 at 10:19pm