TPMDC

Is Ryan's Social Security Slashing Budget Like Contract With America?

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Former Congressman and budget committee chairman Jim Nussle (R-IA) introduces the budget in 2004

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Former Rep. Jim Nussle, the architect of Republican budgets under President George W. Bush, says the GOP should spend political capital and embrace a plan that privatizes Social Security and ends Medicare. In an interview with TPMDC, Nussle said that even though Republican leadership isn't publicly jumping on board to Rep. Paul Ryan's budget "roadmap," it is a fiscally responsible framework that will guide the Republicans into the campaign season.

"Even if they don't go exactly the way he wants them to with the roadmap he gives them a lot of good ideas to pick and choose from," Nussle told me today.

And Nussle (R-IA) knows something about writing Republican spending plans, since he led the Budget Committee during Bush's first term. He most recently served as Bush's Office of Management and Budget director, lost the Iowa governor's race in 2006 and now leads a consulting firm.

Nussle compares the early reaction to the Ryan roadmap to when he and Rep. John Boehner (now minority leader) wrote the Contract with America in 1994.

TPMDC has been talking to conservative groups, former members of Congress and Republican consultants keeping a close eye on the 2010 midterm elections. The Ryan budget, which cuts Social Security and Medicare benefits and creates a Medicare voucher system, also offers broad tax cuts and includes a spending freeze and rescinds unspent funds from the $787 billion economic stimulus plan.

Nussle and Republican consultants unwilling to speak on the record say the GOP risks permanently being painted as the "party of no" and as lacking guts to present a real plan for fiscal solvency - something the party says President Obama has failed to do.

Nussle said questions about whether Democrats are fairly painting the Ryan plan as the Republican budget are moot because the GOP earned "a certain amount of criticism for not having a health care proposal."

"This may not be the official line, or the leadership bill, but Ryan is showing the way you can accomplish fiscal responsibility and tax reform and it does show the direction that we want to go in," Nussle said.

The interview comes as budget battle lines are being drawn on Capitol Hill - with House Republicans conflicted about supporting the Ryan plan and Democrats seizing on it as potential political windfall similar to the 2005 fight over privatizing Social Security.

Ryan, the Budget Committee ranking member , and his budget friends are digging in their heels and going more public each day in defense of his dramatic plan to slash Social Security and Medicare to end the deficit. (Who are in the Gang of 10? Find out here.)

Nussle, who considers Ryan a friend, said the congressman is one of the most creative members of the GOP caucus.

Republicans told me it's not that surprising that GOP leaders aren't attaching themselves to the Ryan plan - yet - since members will be fending off diverse challenges from California to Pennsylvania. Fiscal issues play differently across the nation and leadership is reluctant to embrace drastic cuts to popular social programs that are easily caricatured by political enemies.

"They are trying to stave off the attacks they stand for nothing and don't have any plans, but they also trying to be creative and manage campaigns across the country," Nussle said.

He advised Republicans jump on the most politically feasible parts of the Ryan plan and remain on offense.

It leaves the GOP vulnerable to the majority party's attacks similar to the Social Security fight in 2005, and our Democratic sources tell us they plan to exploit the Ryan plan as often as possible.

(TPM's Josh Marshall lays out the stakes for 2010 here.)

Ed. note: This post has been edited from the original.

Comments (28) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (2)

February 9, 2010 1:55 PM   

Ezra Klein sure suckered Ryan recently. First he praised the Ryan Plan for its honesty. Ryan took the bait and agreed to an interview a few days later.

Wiley
Very wiley

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 6:55 PM    in reply to JohnMcCSF

Props to Ezra for saying the right thing to get an interview with Mr. Ryan.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 2:04 PM   

This budget is nonsensical, and it is the same old set of tricks. Promise people 'vouchers' (or direct mainlining of taxpayers' money into insurance company coffers) to 'buy private insurance' and then have no rules for how the companies might treat you. Surely they would take the vouchers and then still charge you a ton of money.

But more than that, these ridiculous and stale ideas do need wide exposure so the general public can see them for what they are. Especially since we now see the Republican's ideas are unpopular in reality--but Frank Luntz has taught the Republicans to claim they are Obama's ideas...

Americans as patsies and dupes?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 2:16 PM    in reply to MyMy

You betcha.

Another Contract on America - are the voters stupid enough to buy this a second time? I'm guessing, sadly, yes.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 2:16 PM   

So it's a choice:

A: be a party with no ideas

B: be a party with bad ideas

Tough decision.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 2:39 PM   

Get the Ryan budget onto the floor and make the Republicans vote on it. If they vote 'no,' turn them over to the Tea Party crazies for a primary challenge by a nuttier candidate. If they vote 'yes' then get some old people on TV in their district to say they would have to move to a homeless shelter. Hit them hard at the first opportunity and at every opportunity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 8:29 PM    in reply to ericAZ

Precisely!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 3:48 PM   

I live in Ryan's district. He had a plan for health care too. Can you guess what it was? More privatizing of care by passing out vouchers and selling insurance over state lines. The old people ate it up at every town hall meeting like rabid zombies.

Now he's back with his Roadmap 2.0 and it's vouchers and privatizing again. His district has the highest infant mortality in the state and some of the highest unemployment as well. The manufacturing is gone and not just a long time ago, Chrysler left a few months ago so thanks a lot Golden Boy.

We've been fighting him for years and the rural, white areas of our district think he's the second coming. As for the urban areas-well the quicker we die or move on the better.

Make them vote on this POS budget and put some real dings in his veneer. SE Wisconsin can't take too many more years with him in Congress.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 10:36 PM    in reply to whachawant

Bet we won't hear a word about farm subsidies. That's how he keeps a lock on the rural areas.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 10:54 PM    in reply to Bass Ace

Which farm subsidies are you talking about exactly? The ones that were cut in the last farm bill?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

sbv

user-pic

February 9, 2010 3:56 PM   

once again, that would be the contract on america. if truly their supporters are in favor of privatizing social security, adding taxes to the middle class and vouchers for medicare; then there is no hope for any of us.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 4:25 PM   

The Contract on America had vague yet populist ideas like lower taxes and term limits. This has a lot more detail - which is what makes it so very toxic for the GOP.

I respect the honesty of the approach only in this respect - Ryan's plan is open about the real life consequences of the GOP's insane thoughts, and how little impact even severe cuts have relative to the deficit (5 years to destroy a surplus, 50 to fix the damage). It is still an insane alternative compared to targeted tax increases and an effort at bending the cost curve long term, but it is honest.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 5:32 PM    in reply to calbearinillinois

Ryan's approach isn't honest.

CBO by request did not score his tax cut proposal. Ryan's staff just asked them to assume the same amount of revenue overall when instead he is proposing slashing every revenue stream associated with tax on capital.

It only balances the budget by including spending cuts and excluding tax cuts, they are just dishonestly trying to sell the Social Security piece by claiming "well we balanced the budget".

In short it is the same deceptive piece of crap maneuvering the R's always do. Kind of like their health plan that scored as not covering a single uninsured American on net.

Demand we start with an honest score and this will go down in flames just as the Republican Health Care Plan (they did have one, it just didn't do anything for anyone but doctors and Big Insurance).

Score it. BTW cutting Social Security benefits mathematically does not cut total Public Debt. At all. It just shifts that debt from one category to another without changing the total Debt Clock at all. Meaning putting it in the context of an overall $13.8 trillion debt is also dishonest, it has no such effects.

This proposal is dishonest from top to bottom.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 4:33 PM   

Nussle is best remembered for wearing a brown paper bag over his head. I don't know if he had speaking points written inside because not every Republican is as handy at speaking as Palin.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 6:12 PM   

Newt has to cheat on and change wives again first before it's "new".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 6:55 PM   

Nussle: "They are trying to stave off the attacks they stand for nothing and don't have any plans, but they also trying to be creative and manage campaigns across the country," Nussle said.

Translation: "They're lying like a cheap carpet."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 7:31 PM   

PLEASE: It's "Contract ON America" and it damned near succeeded.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 7:48 PM    in reply to Cal Damage

I think it DID succeed. It got the ReThugs control of Congress, after which most of its ideas were scrapped because if the CORRECT people are in power, there's no need to restrict that power.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 7:40 PM   

So we have all the money in the world for Bush/Cheney military expeditions to enrich Haliburton and American Oil Companies The miracle of the loaves and fishes will occur if we enact more tax cuts for the wealthy, and to curry political favor from sixty five and over croud, we can enact an irresponsible drubs benifit, again unpaid for. All this to cement GOP, corporate and wealthy interests in this country. But when the Democrats are in power, we can't afford any social priorities mainly because of the irresponsible and incompetent management during the Bush/Cheney/Republican regime of the years 2000-2008.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 7:55 PM   

Conventionally, Social Security and Medicare are the "third rails" of politics because older voters need them and turn out for elections.

But, in addition to the already retired, we now have millions of people who are about to retire and (1) have lost 30% or more of their retirement savings in the financial crisis, (2) have lost much of the home equity, and/or (3) have lost their jobs, with little prospect at the age of 50+ of finding a good replacement.

I'm sure these people will be thrilled to hear about threats to the only safety nets they have left.

Maybe I'm missing something, but as a political strategy this is even more insane than Tea Baggers, Palin, and the rest of the crazy stuff I'm hearing about these days.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 8:20 PM   

I wonder how the Tea Party Grannies will like the ReThugs replacing their Medicare with government vouchers.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LAB

user-pic

February 9, 2010 8:23 PM   

PLEASE do try that again. That will make our job defeating your side SO much easier.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 8:37 PM   

All we need done is first ask the American people if they want thier Social Security benefits put on Wall Street and ask if the people on Medicare want a voucher to get thier insurance from? After that then have the Minority Party in Congress debate and vote on this budget presented by Rep. Ryan. Then the Democratic Party can bring up thier budget presented by President Obama and see which budget is liked better by the American people. You know the ones that will be totally affected by the budget.
That is the one thing that no one in Washington gets is that what ever they do or don't do directly affects those people on Main Street they keep talking about. However talking isn't helping me get medical insurance for a disorder that is still new and of course very expensive to treat.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 8:46 PM   

Do the Republicans REALLY want to become the party of Wall Street?

Doing this makes the Democrats job of ridding the Wall Street aura from them way easier.

"We Stabilized the Banking System and got our money back, The Republicans want to give Wall Street, the same irresponsible companies that created the worst recession since the great depression, all of your retirement money, do YOU want to gamble with your Social Security??"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 9:41 PM   

Let's take a vote on the Ryan bill to privatize social security and eliminate medicare!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 10:50 PM   

But will the Democrats have the heart to nail them on it? I saw Obama and Ryan go - sort of - head to head on this at that Republican retreat and Obama did not nail Ryan to the mat. Ryan actually thinks that by making his plan "only for those now under 55" means its not hurting anyone???? They won't treat over 65 multi-millionaires like that today but everyone who is now under 55 faces the prospect of being handed a voucher for health insurance instead of the guarantee of Medicare.

If Democrats had heart, it could be such a winner. It could get them tremendous support from everyone under 55 who would feel screwed over that they still have to pay into Medicare and Social Security for people now collecting and everyone over 55, but then they get handed a voucher. Its a bad deal.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 9, 2010 11:55 PM   

it does show the direction that we want to go in,"

I'm glad he said that just so people will realize what it actually means.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 10, 2010 5:25 AM   

Franklin Roosevelt was the veto king, 656, with a 1% turnover rate. Obama needs to drop this bipartisan baloney and this blaming everything on cloture rules in the Senate. He should just say, "I've got the veto. You want bipartisanhip? Then go ahead and get all bipartisan and override. Here's what I want. An extension of Medicare to every citizen and legal resident 50 and over. A placing of all military and war spending on budget. Reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. No unfunded liabilities. And now I'm going to retire to the Western White House in Maui to work on my jump shot until you people get some legislation worth signing on my desk. I've got three years still in office, and I don't plan on spending the working for narrow-interest groups hoping to fob costs off on others. Thank you all."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on