Skip to comments.Santorum: The Paul Ryan budget is “a great blueprint,” but it doesn’t cut enough
Posted on 03/21/2012 3:36:32 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rick Santorum today gently criticized House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's latest budget effort --- but at least it was from the right rather than the left as was Newt Gingrich's "right-wing social engineering" criticism last year:
Hes put forward a great blueprint for people to campaign upon and shows clearly progress dramatic progress in the direction of shrinking the size of government, and liberating the economy through lower taxes and less regulations, he told Beck.
But of entitlement reform, Santorum said, we need to move forward quicker and he called for faster spending cuts.
Santorum was the only one of the presidential candidates not to release a statement about Ryans budget on Tuesday. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney quickly embraced the plan in a statement and comments to reporters, as did former House speaker Newt Gingrich.
Santorums more muted response may be connected to tricky politics in the House. Ryans budget faces a key vote on the Budget Committee he chairs on Wednesday. With Democrats unified in opposition, he can afford only two Republican defections or see an embarrassing defeat for what is designed to be the GOPs leading election year campaign statement.
Santorum has the luxury to call for larger cuts because he’s not in office right now — and he’s to be commended for doing so. We who have no political cost to count should keep up the drumbeat for the deepest deficit reduction we can muster. Unless we continue to demand a balanced budget and the elimination of the debt, it’s never going to happen.
It’s one thing to call for deeper spending cuts on the campaign trail, though. It’s another to profess Ryan’s budget “not good enough” from within the walls of Congress. It is disappointing that House Budget Republicans aren’t planning to offer a balanced budget — and I sympathize with conservative Republicans who are disappointed that Ryan’s budget doesn’t do even more to tame the debt and deficit. The Daily Caller’s Neil Patel argued before the Ryan plan was unveiled that Republicans should either offer a balanced budget or retire and give folks who would be willing to offer a BB a chance to serve in office — and I tended to agree with him.
At this point, though, Ryan has revealed his plan — and opposing it does nothing to move the ball forward on entitlement reform. Avik Roy writes:
At a Tuesday panel hosted by the Heritage Foundation, Representative Tim Huelskamp (R., Kan.) said, of the new Ryan plan for entitlement reform, I will be voting no. Its not good enough. Huelskamp is a member of the House Budget Committee; Ryan can only afford two other defectors if the budget is to make it out of the committee. Its just another promise that Im afraid will be broken, said Huelskamp. Its not the big leap America so desperately needs.
His out-front statement is giving cover, ironically, to more querulous Republicans, who dont want to put themselves out there as favoring bold entitlement reform, but can now claim that the Ryan budget isnt good enough as a way of symbolically maintaining their conservative bona fides.
Huelskamp cannot plausibly believe that Republicans will unite around a more aggressive deficit-reduction proposal and, more importantly, that such a proposal could pass even a Republican-controlled Senate. Hence, what Huelskamp is likely to achieve is the opposite of what he claims he intends: the destruction of any meaningful effort to reform our health-care entitlements. And it is health-care entitlements, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which are almost entirely responsible for the growth in the governments share of our economy.
That even Paul Ryan’s Budget Committee doesn’t yet feel emboldened by the support of the electorate to offer a balanced budget suggests we still have work to do on altering the composition of Congress — not just in terms of replacing Democrats with Republicans, but in terms of replacing timid Republicans with bold Republicans. Ryan is one of the boldest — but he can’t do it alone. As Congress becomes increasingly conservative, Ryan will offer increasingly conservative solutions. I’m convinced of it. For now, he’s doing the best he can with what he has.
He must have been misquoted.
As some FReepers like to remind us, he is a big government socialist, possibly even a communist. /s
The problem we still face is the fact that no one wants to take the blame for cutting even the most minimal things like bike trails and crap like that.
If Santoum is a fiscal liberal then Paul Ryan must be a socialist in good standing with the COMINTERN
These Republicans can’t even bring themselves to cut NPR and grants to La Raza and ACORN and stuff
Just when I lose hope he pulls me back in.
first thing- eliminate grants and funding of non-government organizations. end all corporate grants and subsidies.
But he wants to spend more money chasing after porn?
Not saying it’s a bad or a good idea, just saying... so what are you going to CUT, Rick?
I don’t feel like I even understand where he is.
As William F. Buckley used to say, We can't do worse by picking 535 people out of the phone book to put in Congress.
FReepmail Antoninus to be added or removed.
I think 535 people chosen from the phone book would probably ask “How much do we have to spend?” as the first question. These professionals don’t care, they will spend whatever they want.
Ryan’s budget is mostly less increase in the growth, not cuts.
He just wants to enforce laws that are on the books than making it up as they go along. How is that going to cost the Justice Dept more money?
What the he!! is the difference in the two "opposing" party's then?
The time they take to socialize us?
Is he ready to cut from SSI, Medicine, or Defense? If so, then hurrah for Santorum. If not, then its just rhetoric.
Yeah, me, too. But then he does something like tell the Puerto Ricans they have to start speaking English and I'm reminded of what a little smarty-pants he really is.
geez - I know loads of women that would like to go back and take that reliable guy, the one who did not make her weak in the knees but treated her very well. That is the same story with cutting government - START SOMEPLACE. Then revisit and cut more. Do that every two years and you might have a happy marriage of conservatives and elected politicians. (lol about marriage and it’s partners.)
Where's your budget?
Oh. You don't have one. I see.
But then he does something like tell the Puerto Ricans they have to start speaking English
I thought that was brilliant. I am sick and tired of people thinking they can become a state but not speak English. I know they are already Americans, but dang speak English for God’s sake. You know it is not hard to learn a language. I took Spanish for 4 years in High School, 2 in college and when I went down to Panama (military), I spoke Spanish when I left the military gate. Although I am serving the United States, I am still in their country so I spoke Spanish....was it perfect? No but at least I tried and they appreciated it. The one thing I believe is that with Santorum we will FINALLY have English as our official language....no other candidate would touch that.
I tend to agree with you. Multilingual nations have a poor record of success (Switzerland being the notable exception.) But don't expect to win many elections running on that plank in the country you're telling to change languages. I think it was a dumb move politically.
Of course, I think that including Puerto Rico (and Samoa, etc.) in the primary process at all is pretty dumb, too.
“He must have been misquoted.
As some FReepers like to remind us, he is a big government socialist, possibly even a communist. /s”
lol, I appreciate your sarcasm.
What I like is that Rick has been saying for a good while that he likes Ryan’s plan, but he (Santorum) calls it only a first step and WOULD GO EVEN FARTHER.
Here’s a snip of an interview Rick had with Rush in June of last year:
“I embraced the Ryan plan and said it’s a good first step and frankly I would go even farther than that, ..”