DC’s Strange Love Affair with Paul Ryan

Jamelle Bouie explains why Republicans ought to be delighted with Rep. Paul Ryan’s “Roadmap for America’s Future”:

Under the Ryan plan, taxes for the richest 1 percent of Americans would fall by half, on top of making the Bush tax cuts permanent….Households with incomes of more than $1 million would receive an average annual tax cut of $502,000, and the richest one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans would receive an average tax cut of $1.7 million a year. To offset these tax cuts, the Ryan plan would place a consumption tax on most goods and services.

These taxes would overwhelmingly affect working and middle-class Americans. According to Citizens for Tax Justice, the Ryan plan would increase taxes by an average of $2,000 on everyone with an income under $100,000.

This is an underappreciated aspect of Ryan’s plan. Another underappreciated aspect, and one that’s fast becoming a pet peeve of mine, is that there’s nothing “smart” or “brave” about it. For some reason, practically everyone talks about how Ryan is the only Republican in Congress who’s willing to put his money where his mouth is and tell us exactly what he’d cut out of the federal budget. But he doesn’t. His plan merely caps various kinds of spending: there’s a cap on Medicare, a cap on Social Security, and a cap on domestic spending. Reduced to its policy essence, that’s it.

This is the fourth grade version of a “plan.” I can come up with something similar in about a minute. In fact, I will. Here’s my “plan”:

  • I think federal spending should be capped at 23% of GDP.
  • Interest on the national debt comes to 3% of GDP.
  • Social Security gets 5% of GDP.
  • Medicare gets 8% of GDP.
  • Defense spending gets 3% of GDP.
  • Domestic spending gets 4%.

Pretty good plan, huh? Of course I’d need to pad this out with lots of charts and tables, some quotes from famous people, and a policy proposal or two. Nothing damaging, mind you, mostly just things that hide the fact that I’m not really proposing any specific cuts, only offering a few broad spending caps and (natch) some tax cuts for the rich.

Oh, and his plan doesn’t eliminate the deficit, either. Other than that, it’s pretty good.

THE BIG QUESTION...

as we head into 2020 is whether politics and media will be a billionaires’ game, or a playing field where the rest of us have a shot. That's what Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein tackles in her annual December column—"Billionaires Are Not the Answer"—about the state of journalism and our plans for the year ahead.

We can't afford to let independent reporting depend on the goodwill of the superrich: Please help Mother Jones build an alternative to oligarchy that is funded by and answerable to its readers. Please join us with a tax-deductible, year-end donation so we can keep going after the big stories without fear, favor, or false equivalency.

THE BIG QUESTION...

as we head into 2020 is whether politics and media will be a billionaires’ game, or a playing field where the rest of us have a shot.

Please read our annual column about the state of journalism and Mother Jones' plans for the year ahead, and help us build an alternative to oligarchy by supporting our people-powered journalism with a year-end gift today.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

We have a new comment system! We are now using Coral, from Vox Media, for comments on all new articles. We'd love your feedback.