Ever since Mitt Romney named Paul Ryan as his running mate, the UK media has raced to portray him as a fiscal Sarah Palin and suggest that he advocates extremist policies. If anyone wants to find out for themselves, and learn about his policies and ideas, where do they start? Here is an introduction to one of the most interesting and intellectually substantial figures in American politics.
Background
Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan said a lot about the direction of the Presidential election campaign. It disappointed conservatives who wanted Romney to select a VP candidate based on identity politics, or to keep the campaign a referendum on Obama. But it was a triumph for those of us who want to see a genuine battle of ideas, or an ‘opposing visions of America’ election, between the Republicans and Democrats.For Ryan, it finalises a lofty ascent from research institutes to the intellectual leadership of US Republicans.
Ryan’s political outlook has been largely attributed to the principle of self-reliance which he was forced to accept following the premature death of his father. This perhaps explains his persistent calls for strong leadership in Washington to tackle the big problems the country faces.
Following years as a think-tanker, Congressional staffer and Congressman (elected in 1998), focusing primarily on economics and budget reform, it was the big Democrat victories over Republicans in 2006 that crystallised for Ryan that then was the time to make a difference. He used his new position as the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee to utilise staff and time to pore over the fiscal position of the US, and in particular, how reforming entitlements could bring down the path of US public debt. This formed the basis for his original Roadmap for America’s Future.
His diagnosis of America’s problems
His critique has been clear and consistent since. The US is on an unsustainable debt path (caused by both parties), which will be primarily driven by rising entitlement spending. Without significant reform to these entitlements, the US will eventually face a debt crisis or ever increasing taxation and/or deep cuts to military spending with big national security implications, coupled with slow economic growth.
Ryan therefore proposed radical solutions to avert this scenario in his Roadmap, with fundamental reforms of entitlement programmes, the most controversial of which was to replace Medicare with a voucher programme for all those under 55. This would be combined with across the board tax reform (the 2010 version, for example, advocated across-the-board income tax rate cuts; abolition of capital gains taxes and taxes on dividends and interest; abolition of the corporate income tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax). Already, he was building a reputation for effectively communicating his ideas in simple, accessible terms.
These solutions are the building block on which Ryan’s reputation has since flourished. But at the time, Republicans baulked at supporting them. Cautious in the Presidential year, John McCain largely ignored his recommendations. It was only after the devastating defeat that conservatives began looking for leadership. In Ryan, the Wall Street Journal identified a man with the capacity to offer a coherent critique of big government Democrats, and what’s more, a man with large chunks of an alternative plan already set out.
Increasing significance since 2008
As conservatives and Republicans rejected Obama’s economic policy: the stimulus, the intervention in energy markets, and the healthcare reforms; Ryan was best placed in Congress to benefit from the dissatisfaction which led to the victories of the fiscal conservatives of the Tea Party. He did not miss the opportunity: using the day of Obama’s 2010 State of the Union Address to re-launch his Roadmap, and directly confronting Obama on the huge hikes in discretionary spending seen in his first year. This and his six minute destruction of the deeply unpopular ‘Obamacare’ legislation made him a hero amongst conservatives, more than making up for a previous voting record which would be unpopular with many free-market purists.
He was always going to have a significant role in the 2012 election, whether as a VP candidate or not, because of his role in drafting and promoting the Republican House Budget proposals for 2012 and for 2013, dubbed each time ‘ The Path to Prosperity'.
These were certainly bold proposals to deal with long-term debts: the 2012 version cut $6.2 trillion from planned expenditure over ten years, taking spending on domestic government agencies back to 2008 levels and freezing for five years. It converted federal Medicaid spending to block grants for the states. It implemented a version of the voucher scheme (now called a premium-support model) for Medicare, and cut and simplified income and corporate taxes such that the highest rates were now 25 per cent. The 2013 version capped discretionary federal spending at $1.029 trillion and sought to over-turn the Obama administration's 2010 healthcare reform law. Each time, they were voted through the House along party lines, but defeated in the Democrat-majority Senate. It therefore made sense for Romney to pick a running mate who had united Republicans behind a budget and knew how Congress operated.
Critics of his plans
As Martin Wolf outlined last week, there has been serious debate about the viability of Ryan’s plans, with some criticism from conservatives who thinks it should look to cut defence spending, isn’t specific enough about how the tax reform will occur or who think it is politically unviable. Most conservatives are united behind it, however. Just ask New Gingrich.
The fact is, Ryan started this very serious debate, and has mobilised Republicans around him with a clear plan to deal with the issues. And this can only help Romney, who has struggled to convince the base of his own conservative credentials. The measures have been opposed by Democrats, but without them offering a real alternative. Indeed, it’s worth watching both what Erskine Bowles, one of those on Obama’s deficit commission which Wolf cites, or even Obama in 2010 have said about the seriousness of Ryan’s proposals.
In contrast to the UK media’s portrayal of it as an immediate slash and burn, cutting budget, it is very much a medium to long-term attempt to get overall tax, spending and debt to historic levels, and much less immediate than the budgets put forward by other Republicans in Congress.That’s not to say that Ryan’s plans, which will now surely form the basis of Romney’s economic policy, are not radical for the long-term. The question people should ask is, do America’s problems require radical thought?
His appeal
It will be tough to convince independents of the Republicans desirability. But Ryan has a charm and apolitical nature (he is less convincing when giving political speeches – see his VP confirmation speech), and an assuring manner. He will not be underestimated by Democrats. His consistent diagnosis of America’s problems prior to and during Obama’s term has made him a credible voice.
An effective communicator and debater, he’s mobilised support from the base, from libertarians for his tax and spending ideas, to social conservatives for his strong voting record on traditional concerns, to defence hawks for his rhetoric on the implications of high debts on national security.
He believes in American exceptionalism. He’s well-liked by many on the opposing side because he argues on ideas and not personalities and has carved out a useful ‘bipartisan’ label when necessary, despite being a thorn in the Obama administration’s side.
What is means for the Presidential race
His appointment is therefore a high-risk strategy for both sides. From the Republican perspective, some have argued he needs to be more politically astute to be effective. But his role will definitely help turn out the conservative vote, and shifts this to a ‘movement’ election.
For Obama and the Democrats, the Ryan pick creates opportunities and difficulties. Opportunities because the debate will be now about Obama vs. a version of the Ryan plan, rather than a referendum on Obama. Difficulties because Ryan is a formidable opponent. The winner is surely US democracy.