Monday, August 13, 2012

Ezra Klein: Ryan Isn't a Deficit Hawk

DC's insider economic columnist Ezra Klein writes:

To the extent that voters know anything about Paul Ryan — and the humbling truth for those of us inside the Beltway, where Ryan is a household name, is that most of them don’t — they probably know him as an ardent deficit hawk who is unusually fearless when it comes to cutting government spending. 
Both impressions speak to a central misconception about Ryan’s policy interests: He is not primarily interested in reducing the deficit or cutting federal spending. He has voted to increase deficits and expand government spending too many times for that to be the case. Rather, the common thread throughout his career is his desire to remake the basic architecture of the the federal government...
But the real north star of Ryan’s policy record isn’t deficits or spending, though he often uses those concerns in service of his agenda. It’s radically reforming the way the federal government provides public services, usually by privatizing or devolving those public services away from the federal government.
Note further that when Klein says Ryan is for "privatizing", this does not mean that Ryan is for returning government controlled sectors to the free market. Ryan still wants government in the middle to pick and choose what corporations are to provide what services. In healthcare, for example, Ryan wants a voucher system where government gets to determine what corporations will be allowed to accept the vouchers.

Bottom line: Ryan isn't for lowering deficits or getting government out of the way.


  1. Wasn't it Norman Dodd who said that Americans would be "allowed" to determine what form of collectivism they would be subject to?

  2. You can't go by Ezra. He's like Krugman, anti-Repub all the time. Truth or lies, insight or incomprehension, it's all the same.

  3. I never expected a Romney to pick anyone that actually works to reduce the Beast of Government however I think a stronger liberty contingent in Congress especially leadership would be a better avenue to pursue governmental limits.