Quotes of the day

posted at 10:40 pm on March 20, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Absent reform, government programs designed in the middle of the 20th century cannot fulfill their promises in the 21st century. It is a mathematical and demographic impossibility. And we said so.

“We assumed there would be some who would distort for political gain our efforts to preserve programs like Medicare. Having been featured in an attack ad literally throwing an elderly woman off a cliff, I can confirm that those assumptions were on the mark…

“The president’s budget gives more power to unelected bureaucrats, takes more from hard-working taxpayers to fuel the expansion of government, and commits our nation to a future of debt and decline.

“The contrast with our budget couldn’t be clearer: We put our trust in citizens, not government. Our budget returns power to individuals, families and communities. It draws inspiration from the Founders’ belief that all people are born with an unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness. Protecting this right means trusting citizens, not nameless government officials, to decide what is in their best interests and make the right choice about our nation’s future.”

***

“Mr. Ryan proposes a budget path that would leave government unable to fulfill essential functions. As the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis finds, by 2050 his budget would reduce federal spending for everything besides Social Security, health programs and interest payments to less than 4 percent of the gross domestic product, down from 12.5 percent in 2011. Since, as the CBO notes, ‘spending for defense alone has not been lower than 3 percent of GDP’ since World War II, and Mr. Ryan wants to increase defense spending, there would be essentially nothing left for the rest of government — nothing for education, for highways, for veterans, for low-income families, for the FBI.

“Even in the short term, the Ryan cuts would be breathtaking. He would impose spending caps that would reduce domestic discretionary spending by $800 billion more over the next 10 years than the cuts agreed to as part of the debt-ceiling deal. Mr. Ryan argues that he would strengthen the safety net by transforming programs such as Medicaid and food stamps into block grants for the states. But the plan would cut Medicaid funding by one-fifth over the next decade, not to mention repealing the new health-care law’s expansion of Medicaid to those slightly above the poverty level.

“Mr. Ryan is right about the risks posed by the nation’s mounting debt. But we think his lopsided approach is dangerously wrong for the country.”

***

“Democrats are organizing media blitzes, House floor speeches and town halls back home to seize on the changes to Medicare that Republicans are expected to propose Tuesday. To blunt GOP talking points that only Republicans are willing to confront the debt, Democrats intend to unveil their own budget next week calling for a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes on the rich…

“‘They can run, but they cannot hide from their Medicare plan, which ends the Medicare guarantee at the same time they’re providing big new tax breaks to millionaires and protecting special interest tax loopholes,’ Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told POLITICO in an interview Monday…

“‘For the next few days, all our focus is going to be on Medicare,’ said a senior Democratic aide, who added that no Democrats were expected to support the House Republican budget when it heads to the floor for a vote next week.”

***

“The debut of the House Budget Committee chairman’s vision for what conservative governance could and should look like might win him kudos from the conservative policy class, but it elicits only groans from GOP political professionals.

“‘As a campaign issue, the budget is a significant challenge for GOP candidates,’ said Bob Honold, a GOP strategist and partner at Revolution Agency. ‘As a campaign strategy, it is so much more difficult for Republicans to communicate their responsible solutions than it is for Democrats to spook seniors with rhetoric.’

“Another senior GOP strategist was far more blunt. ‘Didn’t they learn their lesson?’ the source asked. ‘House Republicans are still under the mistaken impression they have to lead. It’s a presidential election year; they’re along for the ride.’”

***

“Most important, this budget tests Ryan’s reputation as a fiscal hawk, especially his tax plan. The latter would reduce the individual tax rates (which make up the majority of government revenue) to two brackets of 10 percent and 25 percent, while lowering the corporate tax rate to 25 percent. The Joint Committee on Taxation released a report last October saying that it would be hard to reduce the corporate tax rate to anything lower than 28 percent without losing money. Ryan’s plan would also create a territorial tax system that would offer a low tax rate, if any taxes, on the profit that U.S. companies earn overseas–a page from the playbook of the Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, who introduced a similar international tax plan last fall.

“To pay for these tax cuts, Ryan says that his budget would close tax loopholes–a political dodge both parties lean on heavily when talking taxes. But for an economic nerd like Ryan, the dodge does not come across well. Which loopholes? Would it be the wildly popular mortgage-interest deduction that encourages millions of Americans to buy homes, or the tax break that goes to employers that offer health care? And which segment of the population would bear the brunt of the elimination of certain tax breaks–the middle class, the poor, or the wealthy?”

***

“With the House set to engage in another vicious fight over today’s new 2013 budget proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., we are witnessing once again a phenomenon that’s been apparent since the 2010 election: the tea party movement still holds the commanding heights of American politics. It is still setting the agenda for national debate. It wants what it wants. And it doesn’t much care what anyone in either the GOP or Democratic Party thinks about it…

“Fault them if you will as a band of primitivist monomaniacs, question whether they are sincere enough to surrender their own Social Security and Medicare as well as everyone else’s, but the tea partiers are not going to fade away. They clearly represent a deep and abiding — and perhaps last-ditch– movement of resistance to the indomitable tendency of American government to grow ever larger. They know that the various eruptions of conservative rebellion since the Reagan era, including the Gingrich-led takeover of the House in 1994, each amounted to little more than one step forward, two steps back. They know that George W. Bush blew the budget out entirely. And they know that none of the GOP candidates, ‘establishment’ or not, is delivering up the answer they want. Except maybe for Ron Paul, which accounts for his rise from the fringes…

“Like them or not, they’re not going away, no matter who wins in November.”

***

“The reaction to Ryan’s tax plan will be the truly telling thing. He proposes to create two relatively low tax brackets but to do so in a way that achieves revenue neutrality by eliminating most deductions and exclusions. Almost certainly this will mean reducing or eliminating the mortgage-interest deduction, deductions for state and local taxes, and deductions for charitable giving. (Ramesh’s beloved child tax credit probably will survive, unfortunately.) The Committee to Reinflate the Bubble will fight tooth and talon to defend the mortgage-interest deduction, and they’ll have a great many middle-class homeowners behind them.

“Politicians in both parties (and many of my colleagues at this magazine) speak constantly of defending the interests of the middle class, but it is precisely the middle class that will have to see higher taxes or lower benefits or both if the country is to remain solvent. We could tax the rich at 100 percent and still fail to balance the budget, and the Bush tax cuts for the $200,000-and-up set are dwarfed by the Bush tax cuts for the middle class. Meanwhile, more than two-thirds of federal transfer payments go to the non-poor, mainly to the middle class. It is the middle class, not the wealthy, that enjoys relatively light taxation.

“Some generations have to storm Normandy, some have to give up tax-code housing welfare for relatively well-off homeowners. Watch your back, Mr. Chairman.”

***

“I’m very supportive of the Ryan budget plan. It’s a bold and exciting effort on his part and on the part of the Republicans and it’s very much consistent with what I put out earlier. I think it’s amazing that we have a president who three and a half years in still hasn’t put a proposal out that deals with entitlements. This president’s dealing with entitlement reform — excuse me — this budget deals with entitlement reform, tax policy, which as you know is very similar to the one that I put out and efforts to reign in excessive spending. I applaud it. It’s an excellent piece of work and very much needed.”

***

“‘We do believe that our nominee, whoever this person is going to be, is going to be perfectly consistent with this,’ Ryan told reporters as he unveiled his Road to Prosperity budget. ‘I’ve spoken to all of these guys – and they believe that we are heading in the right direction.’…

“‘Our nominee owes it to the country to give them a choice of two futures,’ Ryan said. ‘We’re helping him do that.’”

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

***

***

Click the image to listen.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

“Another senior GOP strategist Poli Sci Retard that happens to work for someone with an R next to their name was far more blunt. ‘Didn’t they learn their lesson?’ the source asked. ‘House Republicans are still under the mistaken impression they have to lead. It’s a presidential election year; they’re along for the ride.’”

We really need to jettison all this trash, no matter what letter they have after their name.

Get the f*** off my side. Or maybe I should get the f*** of yours and solidify my support for Johnson.

Paul Ryan. One of a handful of adults in the room.

MNHawk on March 21, 2012 at 6:56 AM

MJBrutus on March 21, 2012 at 6:55 AM

amazing the cajones for spewing that crapola…at least joe wasn’t going to take it, he knows bullsh!$t when he sees it…

cmsinaz on March 21, 2012 at 6:59 AM

morning mjb

cmsinaz on March 21, 2012 at 7:00 AM

next up on morning joe, sharpton to talk about white on black hate crimes..think I will have to turn it off as soon as his mug shows up on the screen…

cmsinaz on March 21, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Paul Ryan – the man who increased the national deficit now wants to cut it. Sounds legit.

LaughterJones on March 21, 2012 at 7:31 AM

“‘Our nominee owes it to the country to give them a choice of two futures,’ Ryan said. ‘We’re helping him do that.’”

Ya Well …
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make the walnut-sized brain think.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on March 21, 2012 at 7:32 AM

Embrace it, enact it, watch it work….

THE PAPPY PLAN

1. Seal the Southern border.
This one act would help to solve state entitlement and budget issues by the score (not to mention the impact on Federal budget $$$$. It would reduce crime (yes some illegals actually commit OTHER CRIMES).

2. 10% across-the-board Federal spending cuts……..and I mean CUTS.
If the budget is $3.5 trillion this year then cut it $350 billion. Next year if the budget is $3.1 trillion then cut it $310 billion, etc……

THIS is “fair”, it is “shared sacrifice” and…….easy to understand. IF you’re actually serious about fixing the fiscal mess we are in.

PappyD61 on March 21, 2012 at 7:35 AM

PappyD61 on March 21, 2012 at 7:35 AM

too many squishes in DC i’m afraid

cmsinaz on March 21, 2012 at 7:36 AM

Canopfor hello, Canopfor
the dang rooster has been up for hours, where’s my updates? /

angrymike on March 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM

Dana Milbank throws at bomb into the debate at WaPo; it’s the most outrageous pile of shite imaginable!
Ryan is deliberately planning to ‘hurt the poor!’

No I won’t link to it, but you can access it through RCP.

The clear truth is that ObamaCare will make everyone ‘poor!’

Obama repeatedly claimed that his health-care plan would lower annual family health-insurance premiums by $2,500 before the end of his first term as president.
But the Kaiser Family Foundation recently reported that the average family premium has increased $2,200 since the start of this administration.

In the case of ObamaCare, one of the principal sources of the lowball estimate used to justify the law is related to the insurance exchanges. The CBO originally estimated that one million Americans would lose their employer-sponsored care and be forced into the exchanges.

But a McKinsey & Co. study in June 2011 showed that 30%-50% of employers plan to stop offering health insurance to their employees once the health law is implemented in 2014.

Why? Because the decision employers face under ObamaCare is straightforward: Do they pay $20,000 per year for family coverage, or do they pay the $2,000 penalty to the government?

They will thereby make employees eligible for huge subsidies in the health-care exchanges—$10,000 if their household income is $64,000 per year. In a competitive environment, ObamaCare provides the incentive for employers to drop coverage.

According to the CBO, 154 million Americans are covered under employer-sponsored plans. What would be the cost to taxpayers if 50% of those individuals lost their coverage and became eligible for subsidies? The answer is difficult to calculate, but CBO’s answer is basically: Don’t worry, revenues will increase automatically to cover those costs (for example, employees’ taxable incomes will increase when they lose employer-provided coverage).

In reality, as government assumes a greater share of health-care costs, pressure to cut payments to providers will be enormous. Reduced government reimbursements to providers will cause massive cost-shifting to those remaining in the private health-insurance market. More employees will lose coverage. Before long, we will have what the left has long sought—a single payer health-care system modeled after Medicaid.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304724404577289363234579868.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

mountainaires on March 21, 2012 at 8:11 AM

mountainaires on March 21, 2012 at 8:11 AM

same talking point that was on morning joe earlier…it will be the main talking point for all libs
‘it will hurt the poor’

cmsinaz on March 21, 2012 at 8:19 AM

I love how everyone is wailing that you can’t get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. Seriously people, if you can’t afford your house without it, you can’t afford your house.

I just did our taxes for the first time since we bought ours; married filing jointly with two children and a mortgage in the DC/Boston corridor, I still filed a 1040a, because our interest, property and state taxes combined were a few grand short of the standard deduction. It does help that our mortgage is at 3.75%, but what helped the most was borrowing not what we were preapproved for by the mortgage broker but rather what gave us a monthly payment no greater than what we had been paying for rent.

I admit that I’d miss the child tax credit. I miss it already since one of my kids turns 17 this year, so my final tax bill is going to to up about 20% next year. It’s not like they suddenly cost $20 a week less because they’re in 11th grade instead of 10th. I’m off to HR to fill out a new W-4 so I don’t have to write the feds a four figure check next spring. Grrrr.

LibraryGryffon on March 21, 2012 at 8:30 AM

canop 4!

I see a new troll. It’s only gonna get worser.

Lanceman on March 21, 2012 at 8:37 AM

I see a new troll. It’s only gonna get worser.

Lanceman on March 21, 2012 at 8:37 AM

I did say Paul Ryan was one of a very few adults in the room. What do you expect from mental children other than something along the lines of, “Paul Ryan once voted for deficits so we have to have trillion dollar deficits forever and ever now!”

Yes, it will get worse. We’ve had the spectacle of Democrat women being paraded in front of the cameras, proclaiming, “I am woman hear me roar help me pick a religion that best matches my belief system, sugar daddy Obama.” There are no longer any depths we can’t explore as a country.

MNHawk on March 21, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Lanceman
You riled ppl early today, if it was me about Canopfor, check around 12:30 on this thread.
then you’ll understand.
Canopfor is my bud in early mornings.

angrymike on March 21, 2012 at 9:11 AM

I am no longer in favor of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. I think we need a 10% surplus amendment. It’s obvious Congress cannot control itself and even when trying to do so, it cannot resist financial “tricks” that would put anyone in the private world in jail. So to fix that we need not an amendment that requires a balanced budget but an amendment that requires that each and every year the budget show a 10% surplus.

Over50 on March 21, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Night Owl on March 21, 2012 at 4:02 AM

At first he cut it normal but now he shaves the sides and products it into a Mohawk to perform. Yes, it has been fun. I equate it to a very noisy soccer or little league game with me there video recording it. I can’t wait to link the video where he is both in the band and dressed as a zombie. The make up was disgusting.

Cindy Munford on March 21, 2012 at 9:40 AM

MJBrutus on March 21, 2012 at 6:55 AM

It’s amazing what they can say with a straight face.

Cindy Munford on March 21, 2012 at 9:45 AM

This needs to be repeated over and over. Either we cut back now or there will be no medicare.

Unfortunately, the dems will keep pandering and the dolts in this country will just keep feeding off the gravy train until there is no money except for the worthless paper that we print.

Alferd Packer on March 21, 2012 at 12:15 PM

mountainaires on March 21, 2012 at 8:11 AM

David Cameron (well, his Chancellor of the Exchequer that is)in the UK had the guts to actually propose a similar plan, the only difference there is that their political system is actually functional and once they have elected the cons there, they can actually govern and their majority rules functions… maybe Obama should have exchanged a few ideas with Cameron, before he ‘tucked him in bed’ on Air Force one :-)…

jimver on March 21, 2012 at 4:59 PM

They must be monitoring what I type here :-)

MJBrutus on March 21, 2012 at 6:42 AM

Man, I hope someone is!!!

Gohawgs on March 21, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5