Ryan Budget: A “Good Start?”

Since you’ll be reading a lot here and elsewhere over the next few days about the draconian impact implementing Paul Ryan’s budget proposal would have (especially if you wring out all the phony assumptions that distort it), thought I’d share a typical hard-core conservative reaction.

RedState’s Daniel Horowitz calls Ryan’s blueprint “a good start.” He then goes on to complain that it (a) doesn’t balance the budget until FY 2040; (b) maintains traditional fee-for-service Medicare as an option instead of eliminating it entirely; (c) doesn’t include Social Security privatization; (d) doesn’t cut enough (sic!) in Medicaid spending; and (e) doesn’t shut down any major federal departments or agencies like Commerce, HUD, Energy, or Education.

Other than that, Horowitz seems to like it a lot.

When you read that Tea Party types in the House and around the country are maintaining pressure on Ryan to go as far as he’s gone or further, this is the sort of perspective to keep in mind. With respect to every form of domestic governance, we’re talking Sack of Rome.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really works—and how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, I’ll make a donation

Ed Kilgore

Ed Kilgore is a political columnist for New York and managing editor at the Democratic Strategist website. He was a contributing writer at the Washington Monthly from January 2012 until November 2015, and was the principal contributor to the Political Animal blog.