DEBATE PREP: American Bridge Releases 13 Issue Briefs On Paul Ryan's Record
In advance of the vice presidential debate, American Bridge has released 13 policy-based research briefings laying out the truth about Republican Vice Presidential Nominee Paul Ryan's record. Find these briefings at the links below.
BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Trade
Ryan Opposed Efforts To Punish China For Currency Manipulation
In 2010, Ryan Opposed The “Currency Reform Fair Trade Act” To Impose Tariffs On Countries With Undervalued Currencies. According to the Boston Globe, “In 2010, when the House voted on the Currency Reform Fair Trade Act, Ryan was among the 79 congressmen who opposed the measure. The bill passed – 348 to 79, with 99 Republicans voting in favor – but was not taken up by the Senate so it never became law. The legislation would have given the president expanded authority to impose tariffs on the imports from countries that have ‘fundamentally undervalued’ currencies.” [Boston Globe, 8/16/12]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Social Security
Ryan Said Social Security Privatization Was Not Necessary, But He Preferred It Personally. According to a transcript of “The Charlie Rose Show,” Ryan was asked, “When you look at that Social Security for a moment, do you think it’s necessary to reform Social Security with private accounts?” Ryan responded, “No, it’s not necessary. I personally prefer it because, look at me, for example. I’m 40 years old. I’ll about a one percent return on my payroll taxes if Social Security could pay me my benefit, which, of course, it can’t… It’s not privatized. It’s managed by the government in safe index funds. It harnesses the power of compound interest so they grow their money at five percent or six percent per year instead of negative one percent. They get better benefits. It’s a nest egg they control that goes to their property.” [PBS, “The Charlie Rose Show,” 11/15/10]
BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And K-12 Education
The Ryan Plan Would Reduce Education Funding By Over $115 Billion Over 10 Years, Undermining Critical Education Programs
Office Of Management And Budget: The Ryan Plan Would Cut Critical Education Programs By Reducing Department Of Education Funding By More Than $115 Billion Over 10 Years. According to a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release, “Ryan's Plan Cuts Critical Education Programs. ‘The Department of Education would be cut by more than $115 billion over a decade. 9.6 million students would see their Pell Grants fall by more than $1000 in 2014, and, over the next decade, over one million students would lose support altogether. This would derail bipartisan education reforms and deeply undermine K-12 education and college opportunity [...] Roughly two million slots in Head Start would be eliminated over the next decade -- cutting 200,000 children from the program in 2014 alone.’ [OMB, 3/21/12]” [Targeted News Service, 3/25/12] The Oregonian: The Ryan Plan Would Cut Investments In Education And Training By 53 Percent. “According to the Center for American Progress, the Ryan plan would ‘disinvest’ in education and training by 53 percent, diverting resources away from primary and adult education, career and technical training, community colleges, postsecondary education and student aid, at a time when our world educational status is already in perilous decline.” [The Oregonian, 5/2/11]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Higher Education
Ryan Told Student He Should Work Three Jobs Instead Of Relying On Federal Student Loans
Philadelphia Inquirer: Ryan Told A Student That He Should Work Three Jobs In College Instead Of Relying On Grants. According to a Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial, “It should be remembered that Ryan, a frequent critic of Pell Grants, is the same congressman who suggested to a college student in October that instead of relying on grants he should do what Ryan did - work three jobs to pay for college. The congressman is to be congratulated on his work ethic, but if he believes it is a model for success in college for everyone, he is sorely mistaken.” [Philadelphia Inquirer, Editorial, 2/21/12]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Medicaid
The Ryan Plan Would Block Grant Medicaid To States And Cut Medicaid Spending By $800 Billion Over 10 Years
Ryan Plan Slashes Medicaid By Making It A State Block Grant. According to Sun-Sentinel, “The Ryan budget plan would cut federal spending on Medicaid, which provides health care for the poor, and begin distributing money by block grant to states. The plan would do away with Medicare’s direct payment for health care for seniors, replacing it with a voucher system in which recipients choose private insurers. The Congressional Budget Office found that part of the plan, which would take effect in 2022, could nearly double out-of-pocket costs for seniors.” [Sun-Sentinel, 4/16/11] Ryan Budget Would Cut Medicaid By $800 Billion Over Next Ten Years, And Steadily More After That Until Cuts Extended To Over Half Of The Program. According to the Center For Budget And Policy Priorities, “The Ryan plan would cut Medicaid by more than $800 billion over the next ten years and steadily larger amounts after that (on top of the Medicaid reductions that would result from Chairman Ryan’s call to repeal health reform). After several decades, Medicaid would be cut by more than half. Yet Medicaid already costs substantially less per beneficiary than private insurance because it pays health providers rock-bottom rates and has low administrative costs. In addition, its per-beneficiary costs have been rising more slowly than private-sector health care costs. Assertions that Medicaid costs are highly inflated and that states can provide comparable health care for much less money may serve as convenient rationales for severe cuts in health care for some of the nation’s most vulnerable people, but they do not reflect reality. Last year, the Urban Institute estimated that a very similar Ryan Medicaid block-grant proposal would likely cause 14 to 27 million low-income Americans to lose coverage by 2021 (in addition to the 17 million people who no longer would gain coverage due to the repeal of health reform and its Medicaid expansion).” [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/12]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Medicare
The Ryan Plan Would End Medicare As We Know It By Turning The Program Into a Voucher
Wall Street Journal: Ryan Plan Would “Essentially End Medicare.” According to Naftali Bendavid at the Wall Street Journal, “The plan would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills.” [Wall Street Journal, 4/4/11] Wall Street Journal: Romney’s Proposal Would Privatize Medicare. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Mitt Romney waded into the hot-button issue of Medicare, proposing to offer future seniors a choice between the current fee-for-service health plan or a voucher to purchase health insurance plans offered by private insurance companies. The Romney Medicare plan could become a hallmark of the 2012 presidential campaign should he win the Republican nomination. Democrats had already planned to make the Ryan plan a centerpiece of their efforts to unseat Republicans in Congress. Now, Mr. Romney has thrust Medicare privatization into the presidential race.” [Wall Street Journal, 11/4/11]Medicare Would Be Turned Into A Voucher System
Politifact: Claim That Ryan’s Budget Plan Would Turn Medicare Into A “Voucher” Was Mostly True. According to Politifact, “U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez yesterday attacked a Medicare reform proposal from Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan by claiming it would turn the health care program into a voucher system…It’s accurate that Ryan’s plan, starting in 2023, would provide premium support payments for new beneficiaries to purchase private insurance or a plan that acts like traditional Medicare. The term ‘voucher’ generally describes this approach. We rate the statement Mostly True.” [Politifact, 10/5/12] Ryan’s Alternative Plan To The Health Care Bill Replaced Medicare For Everyone Under 55 With A Voucher System. According to a New York Times column, “In recent weeks, critics have done a nice job highlighting flaws in the White House plan (which Congress is now turning into an actual bill). What the critics have not done nearly so well, however, is explain which politically realistic plan they prefer. Paul Ryan, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee, has admirably produced a detailed alternative to the Democrats’ plan. It would balance the budget by getting rid of Medicare for everyone under 55 and replacing it with a voucher system. When I recently asked another high-ranking Republican what he thought about the Ryan plan, however, he replied, ‘Paul is very thoughtful.’ Follow-up questions did not yield further details So I agree that health reform should do more to reduce spiraling medical costs. But saying so doesn’t qualify as hard-headed fiscal realism. In fact, it’s the easy thing to say. The bigger issue is how policy makers can achieve the goal, given the political realities.” [The New York Times, Column, 3/10/10]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Women
Wage Discrimination
Ryan Voted Against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to Prevent Wage Discrimination. In 2009, Ryan voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The Senate measure was nearly identical to some provisions in the House passed version HR 11. The final bill allowed employees to sue employers for wage discrimination within 180 days of their last paycheck affected by the alleged discrimination. The measure was designed to overturn a 2007 Supreme Court decision (Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.) that ruled a worker could not bring a wage discrimination suit more than 180 days after the initial discriminatory act. The Senate version of the bill did not include a provision from HR 12 that would have required employers seeking to justify unequal pay for male and female workers to prove that such disparities are job-related and required by a business necessity. [Roll Call 37, S 181, 01/27/2009; CO House Action Reports Legislative Week, 1/26/09] Ryan Voted Against Paycheck Equity. In 2008, Ryan voted against a bill that would lift the cap on compensatory and punitive damages that women may be awarded in wage discrimination cases. The bill would also require employers who contended that pay discrepancies did not result from discrimination to give an actual business reason for why female employees were paid less than their male counterparts. Democrats argued that the bill would close some loopholes for pay discrimination. “The current system is rife with loopholes that allowed employers to avoid responsibility for discriminatory pay scales,” Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) said. Republicans criticized the legislation, saying that it would be fodder for frivolous lawsuits. “This bill will make it easier for trial lawyers to cash in, and taxpayers should be outraged that their money is being put to such use,” Representative Virginia Foxx (R-NC) said. [Roll Call 556, H 1338, 07/31/2008; CQ Today¸7/31/08]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And Veterans
Ryan Plan Would Slash Non-Discretionary Spending, Which Funded Veterans’ Health Care
Ryan Budget Would Slash Funding For Crucial Programs Assisting Vulnerable Individuals, Including Low-Income Housing, Head Start, Child Nutrition Programs, And Home-Delivered Meals For Senior Citizens. “Also striking is Ryan’s slashing of non-defense discretionary spending, which funds everything from veterans’ health care to medical and scientific research, highways, education, national parks, food safety, clean air and clean water enforcement, and border protection and other law enforcement. This part of the budget also funds a number of programs to assist poor or otherwise vulnerable people such as low-income housing; child care for the working poor; Head Start; the Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program (WIC); and home-delivered meals for seniors. The Budget Control Act of last August substantially cut funding for non-defense discretionary programs by imposing tough annual budget caps, but the Ryan budget would cut these programs nearly $1.2 trillion below the caps. In fact, it would slash funds for non-defense discretionary programs over the coming decade by $800 billion below the level to which that funding would fall if sequestration occurred every year through 2021.” [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/12]Ryan Plan Would Slash Benefits For Veterans
The Post Standard: Ryan Plan Would Pay For Tax Cuts On Top Earners And Corporations By Slashing Entitlements, Pell Grants And Benefits For Veterans. According to The Post Standard, “As the GOP continues its war on women, it adds to its victims the weak, disabled, elderly, poor and disadvantaged. Congressman Paul Ryan’s ‘Path to Prosperity,’ lauded by our representative Ann Marie Buerkle as ‘courageous,’ is in fact downright cowardly. Ryan wishes to extend the Bush tax cuts and cut the top tax rate for individuals and corporations from 35 percent to 25 percent. He pays for this by slashing Medicare, Medicaid, Pell Grants, food stamps, low-income housing subsidies and veterans’ health care.” [The Post Standard, 6/9/11]BRIDGE BRIEFING: Ryan And The 47%