The Dicey Search For A GOP Savior: The Case Of Paul Ryan
February 9, 2010 / 9:47 am • By Dr. Melissa Clouthier
Desperate for an articulate spokesman, many in the GOP seem willing to accept nearly any Republican politician as long as he meets these criteria:
1. Good looking
2. Well-spoken
3. Likable
While these traits are certainly nice, they’re not going to necessarily change governance much unless the inside of the person has some core conservative values.
Supporting a candidate or politicians with only these traits leads some to believe that the Republican party has no core values–that they’re still operating from a foundation of expedience.
Enter Paul Ryan. Matt Lewis has a piece up about the love affair with Paul Ryan and says this:
Though he talks like Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman, some of Ryan’s most high-profile votes seem closer to Keynes than to Adam Smith. For example, in the span of about a year, Ryan committed fiscal conservative apostasy on three high-profile votes: The Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP (whereby the government purchased assets and equity from financial institutions), the auto-bailout (which essentially implied he agrees car companies – especially the ones with an auto plant in his district—are too big to fail), and for a confiscatory tax on CEO bonuses (which essentially says the government has the right to take away private property—if it doesn’t like you).
While Ryan’s overall voting record is very conservative, the problem with casting these high-profile votes is that they demonstrate he is willing to fundamentally reject conservatism when the heat is on.
Because it is impossible to believe the highly intelligent and well read Rep. Ryan was unfamiliar with conservative economic principles, one must conclude he either 1). Doesn’t really believe in free market economics, or 2). Was willing to cast bad votes for purely political purposes.
From my standpoint, ignorance can be forgiven and overcome; the other explanations, however, seem to be disqualifiers for higher office.
Should a guy like Paul Ryan be encouraged? I have called him a “rising star” myself.
Does the Republican party risk losing good leaders if they’re “imperfect”?
Well, it seems to me that fiscal conservatism should be a baseline for any Republican. Paul Ryan’s votes from here on out need to be examined. Yes, he’s a nice looking, well-spoken, charismatic politician. He also needs to be part of the change Washington needs to fiscal restraint.
6 Responses to “The Dicey Search For A GOP Savior: The Case Of Paul Ryan”
February 9 2010 / 9:12 pm
Reply
It is ok to have a little more moderate President. The movement toward conservatism in the Legislature is what is important. He is conservative enough to sign conservative bills into law, but he might also be moderate enough to sign liberal bills into law.
The key is the Legislature. That is where the conservative reform needs to focus. Not that I would be willing to elect Romney or Huckabee. If one of those is the choice I would rather have Barry with a conservative legislature.
February 10 2010 / 12:10 am
Reply
I’ll give Paul Ryan credit for at least coming forward with a plan to cut Medicare. That’s more than just about everyone else.
But he did vote for the unfunded Medicare prescription drug plan, which is probably the single most irresponsible fiscal action taken in my lifetime. I happen to support drug coverage for seniors but we should be actually paying for it.
I look forward to this “fiscal conservative” talk by Republicans either getting exposed as nonsense or blowing up in their face. It is appealing rhetoric but an actual plan won’t go over very well with the public once they see what it means to them.
February 10 2010 / 11:30 am
Reply
Mr Griffith:
It seems to me that there is an interesting list of folks that voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug plan. THAT is the most irresponsible fiscal action taken in your lifetime?!? Why? Possibly because it was the most irresponsible of George W’s presidency? $1B was set aside at the time of passage with a cost planned at $400B over 10 years. The projections I have seen are that it will contribute about 25-33% of the Medicare shortfalls in the future. I don’t think you were around for LBJ’s Medicare debacle in 1965… I would say it isn’t the worst because it should very easily be repealed.
By the way, isn’t the current healthcare legislation worse by a factor of 10 or so? Since the “savings” included really won’t materialize, maybe we can get that healthcare done so you can have a new “most irresponsible fiscal event.” That is probably a more logical reason to pass the reform than other excuses I have heard…
Either way, I think I agree with your position that the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act should be repealed and the current Healthcare legislation should be scrapped.
February 10 2010 / 12:56 pm
Reply
To the contrary Chalms, The Dem’s health plan is both paid for and necessary, though it does have a lot of cost shifting. I’m reasonably confident that the cost shifting would flesh out to be a major net plus for the American people.
Two big picture points: First if healthcare is about 17% of GDP, and 10% of people aren’t covered, then covering them should cost about 1.7% of GDP. There are reasons that this 1.7% overstates the cost (uninsured are often young and healthy, etc..) but even 1.7% is totally doable.
Second, we absolutely, positively, need government provided healthcare to be based on so-called “evidence-based” medicine. The Dem’s plan sets the groundwork for this, although it isn’t binding. Better to set the groundwork now, even though you won’t get a pick-up in the CBO numbers. Atul Gawande, McAllen vs El Paso.
By the way, the second most irresponsible fiscal action(s) in my lifetime were those two foolish and short-sighted Bush Tax Cuts. Medicare was fine, it just hasn’t been kept actuarially sound. Why? Seniors have politicians by the balls. And I can’t wait until they turn on the Republicans once they realize “fiscal conservative” means cutting their programs.
February 11 2010 / 4:34 pm
Reply
Humm…Should one not know why Ryan voted the way he did one should not assume it was political or ignorance.
I would need more info to form an oppinion for or against Ryan’s political future.
More McCains may be needed in the military; but, not in the conservative movement.
Evil can only be defeated with an unwavering principle of freedom for all peoples.
March 3 2010 / 11:06 am
Reply
The most irresponsible thing in my lifetime is the statement by Mr. Griffith: “The Dem’s health plan is both paid for and necessary, though it does have a lot of cost shifting.” That’s the utterance of someone not paying attention.