YOUNG GUNS II STARRING ERIC CANTOR, PAUL RYAN, AND “THE OTHER GUY” KEVIN MCCARTHY!
LOL 3 Chics couldn’t have put together a better video
House Budget Trailer: America Deserves A Better Path
Here’s the 70 page PDF of the Ryan budget plan. Makes for great bird-cage linings, and fish packaging, doesn’t it?
Ezra Klien’s synopsis here:
On the spending side, Ryan’s biggest cuts come from health-care programs. He eliminates the $1.5 trillion that the Affordable Care Act uses to purchase health insurance for 30 million Americans. Then he cuts Medicaid and related health programs by $770 billion — which is to say, by about a third. Medicare takes $200 billion in cuts on top of that. This graph from the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of Ryan’s budget tells the story:
What’s in the Paul Ryan plan? Love this Youtube RECAP:
REPUBLICAN BUDGET PRIORITES
1) Seniors would pay more for health care
2) Elderly & disabled would lose Medicaid coverage
3) 30 Million Americans would lose health coverage
4) Corporations & the rich would get $3 Trillion tax cut
5) Defense budget would get a boost (already tripled in last 15 years)
Yup – all that is in Paul Ryan’s proposed budget, released today.
Yes, Americans do deserve better, Mr. Ryan. They deserve better than your 2011 left overs.
Jennifer Granholm’s commentary on the Ryan budget unveiled:
“Paul Ryan’s budget plan was rolled out over the past few days with two slick video trailers — Pretty unusual for a congressional budget committee chairman. Seriously!
The videos had music and beautiful shots and lots of Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan walking down the halls of Congress. Paul Ryan earnestly talking to the camera. Long on Paul but short on details.
On the other hand, Paul Ryan’s budget unveiled today was clear. It presented a choice.
I so love it when choices are clear! He has done us a great favor by putting it all on the table.
So, here is your choice, America:
Guaranteed health care benefits for seniors, or tax cuts for the wealthy?
Food for poor children, or no taxes on offshore profits for multinational corporations?
Increases in defense spending, or 48 million Americans keeping health care?
The trade-offs are very straightforward. Mitt Romney, of course, has endorsed, full-throated, the Ryan plan.
So let me be the first one to say, Paul Ryan: Thank you so much!
Now for the reality check: this budget has absolutely no chance of becoming law.
Everyone knows it will never see the light of day in the senate.
So, Mr. Ryan, remind me: why you did this again?
Oh, of course, silly me, I forgot: you want to be on the Republican ticket as vice president!
Well, call me crazy, but I’m just not sure that putting the GOP nominee in the position of supporting huge cuts to medicare is the way to help your chances.
But hey, what do I know? I’m just a gal who’s grateful for the right to choose.”
Pingback: Hundreds Of Thousands Of People Owe Their Jobs to The Recovery Act…MEANWHILE Here’s A Recap of Romney’s ECONOMIC PLAN: The Ryan Budget Plan For America | 3CHICSPOLITICO
Posted at 05:21 PM ET, 03/21/2012
Ten questions for Paul Ryan and his supporters
By Jonathan Bernstein
In a scathing analysis, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted today that under Paul Ryan’s budget, “most of the federal government aside from Social Security, health care, and defense would cease to exist.”
Ryan’s plan doesn’t tell you this, of course. Instead, it focuses mostly on steep cuts that most Republicans probably feel fine about supporting — such as cuts to Medicaid, S-CHIP, and subsidies from the Democrats’ health care law.
But as the CBPP analysis spells out, the math of the plan simply requires draconian spending cuts elsewhere that would do away with most of the government. Those are unspecified. Remember, too, that Ryan’s tax reform proposal implies “about $6.2 trillion in tax deductions and loopholes over 10 years,” which of course are also unspecified.
So here are ten questions for anyone who supports the Ryan budget:
1) Do you support eliminating the child tax credit?
2) Do you support eliminating the deduction for mortgage interest?
3) Do you support eliminating the National Weather Service and all of NOAA?
4) Do you support eliminating Pell Grants and student loans?
5) Do you support ending all federal spending on highways, air traffic control, and other forms of transportation?
6) Do you support shutting down FEMA?
7) Do you support shutting down federal prisons, the FBI, and other federal law enforcement agencies?
8) Do you support ending all foreign aid — including Israel?
9) Do you support eliminating NASA?
10) Do you support eliminating the FDA and all food safety inspections?
There certainly are some — Ron Paul, for example, or Grover Norquist — who would probably be comfortable answering yes to eight, nine or even ten of these (and Paul would have more room to work with if he wanted it, since he supports significant military cuts). Perhaps Paul Ryan himself is one of them.
But make no mistake: for Ryan’s numbers to work, you’d need to answer Yes to most, if not all, of these questions. If Republicans claim to support Ryan but don’t answer Yes to them, then they’re just frauds.
THIS: If Republicans claim to support Ryan but don’t answer Yes to them, then they’re just frauds.”
Paul Ryan’s dangerous, and intentionally vague, budget plan
By Editorial Board, Published: March 20
THERE IS NO credible path to deficit reduction without a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases. This is the fundamental conclusion of every responsible group that has examined the issue, most prominently the Simpson-Bowles commission, and it is the fundamental failure of the budget blueprint released Tuesday by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Instead, and unfortunately, Mr. Ryan’s plan lunges in the opposite direction. He dangles the carrots of lower income and corporate tax rates. He says he would maintain tax revenue and in fact have it grow to 19 percent of the gross domestic product by 2025. Yet he fails to do the hard, and politically treacherous, work of specifying what deductions and credits he would eliminate in order to make all that happen.
“The new Ryan budget is a remarkable document — one that, for most of the past half-century, would have been outside the bounds of mainstream discussion due to its extreme nature. In essence, this budget is Robin Hood in reverse — on steroids. It would likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times (and possibly in the nation’s history). It also would stand a core principle of the Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission’s report on its head — that policymakers should reduce the deficit in a way that does not increase poverty or widen inequality. ”
Hi Dwaine. Thanks for posting this.
Under Chairman Ryan’s budget, our nation would be a very different one — less fair and less generous, with an even wider gap between the very well-off and everyone else (especially between rich and poor) — and our society would be a coarser one.
It need not be this way. In 1990, 1993, and 1997, policymakers enacted major deficit reduction packages that reduced deficits in a more balanced way, without increasing poverty. Deficit reduction does not require the Scrooge-like, Gilded-Age policies that the Ryan plan embodies. Our nation and our people are better, and they deserve better.