Republicans drove this country to the brink of default, causing a downgrade of our S&P credit rating, because they refused to consider revenue increases as part of a deal with Democrats. However, they don’t like the way S&P singled them out, and the like even less they way polls reflect that voters hold them responsible for it. So to distance themselves from that culpability, Paul Ryan (R-WI) has claimed that Republicans are now willing to consider revenue increases. Does this mean that Republicans might actually consider asking the rich to pay a penny more? Reading between the lines of Ryan’s statement, it seems clear to me that the only thing that has changed is rhetoric.
House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) said he is open to revenue increases as part of a deal to reduce the deficit today, seemingly shifting positions from the hardline opposition his party has maintained against revenue growth. Ryan said on Fox News Sunday that he would be open to a deal that containes [sic] $3 or $4 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases if it came through a major reform of the tax code and was large enough. Host Chris Wallace asked if Ryan would be open such hypothetical deal if he were sitting on the joint super committee created by the deal to raise the debt ceiling. Ryan responded, “yes”…
…Watch it:
This willingness to consider revenue increases appears to be a significant shift in position for Ryan and the GOP, who have previously insisted that any tax reform be “revenue neutral,” i.e. offset every dollar in revenue increases with cuts to tax rates, ensuring no extra money flows into the Treasury.
Inserted from <Think Progress>
Here’s what gives him away. When Republicans talk about a major reform of the tax code, they mean raising taxes on the poor and middle classes, while lowering taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporate criminals. Also, when Ryan said “convincingly restructuring these entitlement programs” he means exactly what his budget already proposed to do: privatize Social Security, replace the care Medicare offers with a coupon, and turn Medicaid into a voucher program where Republican governors can divert the money.
In short, Ryan is offering to raise taxes on the poor and middle classes, if we allow Republicans to gut the big three. How about that! The new plan is the same as the old plan.
26 Responses to “Is Ryan Open to Revenue Increases?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Man speaks with forked tongue and I wouldn’t trust a damn thing that comes out of either side of his mouth.
Well said, Leslie.
Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling 7 times during the Bush administration with no debate. Then in Mid January, Eric Cantor, the GOP house majority leader said, “I’m asking you to look at a potential increase in the debt limit as a leverage moment when the White House and President Obama will have to deal with us.”
Then when the debt ceiling came, they followed through and created the entire political theater we saw — the brinkmanship the report talks about — and as a direct result, the downgrade occurred. Blame rests completely on republicans for this one
I wonder why the Democrats did not raise the issue of UNFUNDED wars, tax cuts, and Medicare benefits when the deficits ceiling increases came before Congress?
Jerry, I have seen them do so on CSPAN again and again. It does not reach the MSM.
Welcome JM! 🙂
You’re absolutely right, except for one small detail. When Obama caved on renewing the tax cuts for the rich, after drawing a line in the sand on that issue in 2010, he taught Republicans that they can get away with economic terrorism.
Exactly Tom Cat, which is why that was a BIG mistake and worthy of criticism.
From TC’s link, Ryan’s exact words were: “Higher revenue through more economic growth and tax reform.”
That does NOT equate to raising taxes at all – they’re just typical repubican Weasel Words for “Screw the Middle Class & the Poor”.
And for the record, filed under “You Broke – You Own It”, words directly from Standard & Poor’s Report making this the “Tea Party Downgrade”:
http://www.standardandpoors.com/ratings/articles/en/us/?assetID=1245316529563
The Repubs own this downgrade and they know it. You can’t cut spending in a recession – everyone knows that too, If he’s on that committee, we’ll get more spending cuts that particularly hurt the poor. 😡
I will be shocked if he is not on the Super Committee,
Nameless, this is the perfect citation at the perfect time.
I wish the dems had a more clear cut agenda – it seems that the r’s is very obvious, even if you “read between the lines” – and their agenda is winning out! It’s really a fascist one – keep education at a level where noone will be using logical skills to question what their “agenda” is – by allowing the state’s universities to be unaffordable, and the lower school systems decaying, and debunk the big 3 entitlement programs, deregulate the “watch dogs” of gov’t. so there are no controls on pollution standards – allowing corporations to expand and destroy at their wanton whims, shrink government accept when it comes to what you do in your bedroom or at your “women’s clinic” – control the Supreme Court – conduct enough wars to have control over world energy and keep the privitization of the military in enough power that the systematic torture can go unnoticed, and the corporations can continue to make money – and crreate an economy that is so poor that the kids will have to enlist in the military to do the ground fighting to free up the private army to do the more “enlightened” tech work – and prison keeping – until there is enough money in the power of the few to gain leverage over the masses! Even on “librium” I think I understand the agenda! However I can’t for the life of me clarify the democratic position nearly as well – I guess it’s somewhere in between, unless it’s secretly complicit in enabling the other!
Ryan is more puppet work – but who is the puppeteer, now that cheney is retired? Is it the Koch bros,?
I may be a little less vengeful today, but I’d sure like to see the dems put together a strategic agenda that will get us out of this quagmire that is engulfing the country!
I totally agree with you lee.
Lee, you’re right. Democrats have been so busy trying to put out Republican fires, that they are always a step behind and playing defense. While most Democrats are far more representative of the American people, the Republicans are more politically skillful, perhaps[ps because they are not bound by ethical restraints.
Republicans just want to speed up the transfer of money from the poor and middle class to the rich.
And establish a permanent one party regime.
Well, the problem with Ryan is that he mistakenly thinks he’s smarter than the rest of us. He has a different situation, now. Lying and fancified rhetoric are not going to get him any traction this time. That S&P report is a lot more understandable. It lays the blame squarely on Ryan’s jiggering of the figures and his party’s willingness to “junk” our financial standing for political gain. Will this self-esteemed mental giant be having any “townhall” meetings soon? ➡ 😈
Exactly right I think
If he does, the attendees will be completely AstroTurfed. The last time his constituents handed him his butt on a plate. He won’t let that happen again.
Of course the intelligent policy is smart government — not some preset percentage for governmental expenditure, (20% he mentioned) — but use government where it meets goals more effectively. Public economics is the study of this area. It is bad economics to fund lighthouses privately, or to run different sets of phone lines, or, it turns out, to pay for healthcare privately. It is time to dump the antigovernment ideology, and replace it with policy evaluation divorced from the private interests that benefit or lose from these decisions.
Paul, I could not agree more. Goods and services where economies of scale favor monopoly should be socialized.
Term limits ! Term limits– oh and did I say term limits ?
Term limits are not the answer. We already have term limits. They are called elections. We get the politicians we deserve. Don’t like it. Work to get more people to the polls. Don’t limit peoples choices. There are politicians that deserve to be elected more than a couple of times.
Phyllis, I agree with Jerry on this one. In ancient Greece, Solon proved that they don’t work. Instead of selling out for reelection, politicians sold out for cushy jobs after politics.
Let’s just hope to God that this idiot is not on the panel of 12. He’s already done his part to wreck the economy. Just think what he’ll do if he’s on that panel. Who select who is in the panel any way – I haven’t heard anything about that. I hope it’s Obama that gets to choose.
Lisa, each party in the House and Senate get to chose their own three. That’s what scares me. Republicans will appoint goose-steppers. Pelosi will appoint real Democrats. I fear Reid will appoint DINOs.