Not Interested in Ryan’s Budget

Just for the record I don’t have the least interest in Paul Ryan’s budget. I don’t care about his intentions. From what I’ve read from both sides of the aisle he makes assumptions that are just too dubious. I don’t think it has any more chance of passing anything other than, possibly, the House (although even that is doubtful) than the president’s budgets have for the last several years.

7 comments… add one
  • Icepick Link

    When I heard that Ryan’s plan assumed the repeal of Obamacare I knew it wasn’t serious. If we’re going to budget fantasies, then let’s pretend that a magic pill will be invented that can be produced cheaply and cure all illnesses. Healthcare costs will plummet as doctors are reduced to setting broken bones and birthing babies. Fiscal problems solved!

  • jan Link

    Ryan including an Obamacare repeal in his plan was a way to instantly discredit it. It is magical thinking at best, considering the R’s only have a third of the power in DC. But, maybe he is looking at such a plan as more of a road map on where he wants to go, rather than a plan that insures a perfect route to get there.

    In the meantime The Daily Caller has printed a bullet point list of his raw ideas.

    From the few interviews I’ve heard, I don’t think even Ryan expects his plan to be much more than a working outline, one which would ideally be fodder for discussion in both the House and Senate, in reaching something fiscally better than they have going for them at the present.

  • Icepick Link

    jan, the budget process is already broken. There was no point in including something that can’t possibly happen until 2018. It just wastes time while everyone talks about it and the pols rehash the same-old same-old, complete with all the ill-will that is guaranteed to exacerbate. If he wants to repeal Obamacare, let him mention that at his next presser.

  • PD Shaw Link

    @icepick, I listened a little to Ryan on MSNBC this a.m., and I think he wants to replace it with something that he thinks would better achieve the goals of universal coverage/ guaranteed issue. He was conceding that the popular aspects of Obamacare are here to stay. There seems to be a rhetorical divide here where the Administration is no doubt begging for Congress to fix aspects of the law, but the Republicans don’t want to help improve a law they don’t like. OTOH, Obama will never sign something that can be characterized as a repeal.

  • jan Link

    Ice,

    Everything seems broken in DC these days. I agree, though, about the futility of including Obamacare in his plan. It instantly threw a bucket of cold water on it.

    But, it does stir up more talk about budgets. And, with the dems and president presenting legitimate budgets of their own, at least it will circumvent having another CR substituted in it’s place. Also, Ryan stated yesterday that budget proposals uncover more details of what is being spent by the government than CRs do, which will give greater financial transparency as to where money is going and to whom it is going to.

  • steve Link

    His budget has no cuts to defense or Social Security. Minimal cuts to Medicare. Big cuts to Medicaid and cuts Obamacare to nothing. IOW, it cuts spending for the poor, while retaining it for the elderly. Looking at the GOP voter base, this is not surprising.

    PD- Holz-Eakins and Roy made a proposal based upon using the existing ACA. It had major problems, but it is the way to go. The ACA, after all, is largely derived from GOP plans. It would be pretty easy to modify it. It already has plans for HSAs (that could be increased), high deductible insurance (those could be further increased), plans to sell across state lines (that could be expanded) and lots of other stuff they claim to like. The problem remains that the GOP just doesnt have a plan when it comes to health care.

    Steve

  • jan Link

    . IOW, it cuts spending for the poor, while retaining it for the elderly. Looking at the GOP voter base, this is not surprising.

    Your’re always looking on the dour side of anything produced by a Republican. It should not surprise anyone that the defense budget would be restored (even Panetta was hot and bothered by these cuts). Furthermore, cutting expenditures on the ‘poor,’ is kind of a vague politicial shot, since most discretionary spending is spent on the poor. Who are the poor these days, anyway?

    Medicaid expenditures, as I read it, are given to the states to sort out — a states-rights position that has long been a Republican stance.

    You like the ACA, and continue to deride the republicans for not coming up with a specific plan. However, I think their plan is to have every state devise their own plan related to the medical needs of their special demographics.

Leave a Comment