WASHINGTON — This week the House of Representatives will take the first real step in addressing our looming fiscal crisis by bringing “The Path to Prosperity,” a budget resolution for next year and beyond, to the House floor. This budget offers a clear contrast to the president’s speech on Wednesday.
It offers a contrast in credibility. Unlike the president’s speech, which was rhetorically heated but substantively hollow, our budget contains specific solutions for confronting the debt and averting the most predictable crisis in our nation’s history. It also offers a contrast in visions. Unlike the speech, our budget advances a vision of America in which government both keeps its promises to seniors and lives within its means.
Two months ago, President Obama submitted a budget for fiscal 2012 that did not deal with the major sources of government spending while calling for much higher taxes on American businesses and families. This budget was widely panned as lacking seriousness.
Now comes a deficit speech that doesn’t even rise to the level of a plan. Missing was a credible way to curb out-of-control spending. Instead, the president called for greater reliance on government price controls, which would strictly limit the health-care options of current seniors while failing to control costs. The president would couple this approach with $1 trillion in tax increases, which would destroy jobs and hurt the economy.
We cannot accept an approach that starts from the premise that ever-higher levels of spending and taxes represent America’s new normal. We have an obligation to fulfill the mission of health and retirement security for current retirees and future generations. We have a historic commitment to limited government and free enterprise. And we have a duty to leave the next generation with a more prosperous nation than the one we inherited.
The House Republican budget keeps America’s promises to seniors and those near retirement by making no changes to their current arrangements. It keeps America’s promises of health and retirement security for future generations by saving and strengthening our most important programs. And it keeps a promise that is implicit in our form of government: that a government instituted to secure our rights must be a limited government.
That is why “The Path to Prosperity” prevents spending and taxes from rising steadily to unprecedented levels, as they are currently projected to do. Doing otherwise would leave our children a nation that is less prosperous, less free and much deeper in debt.
If you are someone who agrees with the president that we cannot avoid this outcome without resorting to large tax increases, know this: No amount of taxes can keep pace with the amount of money government is projected to spend on health care in the coming years. Medicare and Medicaid are growing twice as fast as the economy - and taxes cannot rise that fast without a devastating impact on jobs and growth.
If you believe that spending on these programs can be controlled by restricting what doctors and hospitals are paid, know this: Medicare is on track to pay doctors less than Medicaid pays, and Medicaid already pays so little that many doctors refuse to see Medicaid patients. These arbitrary cuts not only fail to control costs, they also leave our most vulnerable citizens with fewer health-care choices and reduced access to care.
And if you believe that we must eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in these programs, know this: Eliminating inefficient spending is critical, but the only way to do so is to reward providers who deliver high-quality, low-cost health care, while punishing those who don’t. Time and again, the federal government has proved incapable of doing that.
Medicare is projected to go bankrupt in just nine years unless we act to curb the relentlessly rising cost of health care. This cannot be done with across-the-board cuts in Washington. It has to be done by giving seniors the tools to fight back against skyrocketing costs. That’s why our budget saves Medicare by using competition to weed out inefficient providers, improve the quality of health care for seniors and drive costs down.
The president’s proposals are aimed more at empowering government than strengthening the free market. He continues to prove he’s not up to the challenging work of reforming government to meet 21st-century needs. If he gets his way, the nation will endure huge tax hikes, seniors’ access to health care will be reduced - and we will experience an epic collapse of our health and retirement programs that would devastate our nation’s most vulnerable citizens.
House Republicans are fighting to prevent this. Our budget offers a compassionate and optimistic contrast to a future of health-care rationing and unbearably high taxes. We lift the crushing burden of debt, repair the safety net, make America’s tax system fair and competitive, and ensure that our health and retirement programs have a strong and lasting future. These issues are too important to leave to the politics of the past. If President Obama won’t lead, we will.
REP. PAUL RYAN, a Republican from Wisconsin, is chairman of the House Budget Committee.



Comments (53)
Add commentRep. Ryan; the Medicare expert
Now we have Ryan with no relevant education or experience telling us how Medicare should work. Almost his entire work experience is as a legislative aid and he has no technical education.
Medicare is actually very efficient with total overhead a fraction of all those efficient private insurance companies he loves. Medicare also limits payment to hospitals and physicians through its DRG schedules. The reason its medical benefit costs are high is that it covers only older people like me who have higher medical bills. Don't destroy Medicare; raise the monthly Medicare payment, especially for people with higher incomes.
Trashing Medicare would be a disaster.
REW
Don't throw seniors to the wolves
How does it make any sense to switch from a system with 3-5% overhead to one with 30% overhead?
Make no mistake the intent is to destroy Medicare.
What do you do when premiums are double the value of vouchers? Triple? Quadruple? Completely unaffordable?
Meet Wisconsin's own Paul Ryan
On April Fools Day, 2009, Congressman Ryan proposed an alternative to the 2010 United States federal budget that (among other things) would have lowered the top income tax rate to 25%, introduced an 8.5% value-added consumption tax, and would have replaced the Medicare system with a scheme where the federal government would pay part of the cost of private medical insurance for those over 65 starting in 2021.
Ryan later proposed that taxpayers be allowed to opt out of the federal income taxation system by paying a 10% flat tax on adjusted gross income up to $100,000 and 25 percent on any remaining income.His proposal would have passed in the House with Republican support, but 38 Republicans voted against it in the House, where it failed by a vote of 293-137 with 38 Republicans voting against it.
In January of 2010, Ryan came up with a new plan, proposing that Congress:
Cut income tax rates across the board;
Eliminate income taxes on capital gains, dividends and interest;
Abolish the corporate income tax;
Abolish the estate tax;
Abolish the alternative minimum tax;
Privatize a portion of Social Security
Eiiminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance
End traditional Medicare and most of Medicaid -- to be replaced with a system of vouchers whose value would decrease over time.
If that sounds like a great idea, Ryan's your guy :-)
No solutions, Boys?
Apparently the left-leaning, don't-cut-my-goodies believers who don't like Representative Ryan's suggestions do like more of the same we have now. I didn't see any suggestions on how to get the over-spending monster under control. The Chinese now own 29% of our massive trillion dollar debt. Perhaps they will like the Chinese health care system much better. We don't hear much about it so my assumption is that there's rationing involved. Gentlemen, please; offer your ideas. And quickly. The house of cards is beginning to unravel. More and more institutions are no longer accepting Medicare patients. When the system falls apart, from the inside as all socialist systems eventually do, what will your advice be then?
MEDICARE IS NOT EFFICIENT!
According to the uber right wing Office of Management and Budget, there was $47.9 BILLION in improper payments in 2010 alone.
Medicare is so riddled with fraud, that hearing the lefties on this board brag about how efficient it is makes me want to puke.
It's easy to keep your overhead low when there's no one to hold you accountable.
fraud?
When there are full length comercials and full page print ads in magazines for items to people on medicare....
Last Sundays Parade had a full page ad for 3 diabetic recipe pamphlets free to people on medicare only, just send your info and we'll bill medicare for you.
Some investigative journalist should look into these "dont worry about it, just give us your info and we will bill medicare for you" items, and there are plenty.
I think a great many $700.00 hammers will be revealed again.
mnwinedude
You obviously haven't been paying attention. Progressives have offered a lot of alternatives to our unsustainable system.
In every case the Republican insurgents screamed NO! and did everything they could to derail it.
In return they offered more of the same old Reduce Taxes on the Rich and all of our problems will be solved. Well guess what? We've been doing that for decades and it isn't working.
Trickle down is a fraud and the GOP knows it. They know it but they don't care because it cripples our economy and the goal is to cripple it to the point that they can eliminate Medicare and Social Security. In their mind that's money that rightfully belongs in the bank accounts of the Kochs and the other top 1%'ers.
LOL!
LOL!
Rearranging the deck chairs.
Sounds like we're rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking ship. Bond ratings dropping, deficits looming, deficits growing, air traffic controllers sleeping (and keeping their jobs!), lefties ranting and raving; these are a few of my favorite things? Anyone who still insists that this is some sort of plot to take poor people's money and constitutional rights is seriously delusional. That hum you hear from the East is not an efficient and effective government but our founding fathers spinning in their graves. Prepare to bend over and kiss.
I'm with stupid
reading comments is always such an amusement on stories like this. It always breaks down to my party is better than your party or "progressives" are evil "neocons" are evil. Wow you people are stupid. WOW. Just an FYI. :)
Medicare premiums
There are higher premiums for those whose adjusted gross income is high. Many cases of Medicare fraud have been prosecuted. Sometimes the perpetrators end up becoming governor of a state like Florida. If you know of fraud, report it.
The Republicans will never
The Republicans will never put an end to S.S. or medicare,because they know it wil cause an insurection they will not be able to put down.Use bushes atempt for an example.Any time you dont think so,what about the 100s of millions of people who have paid into it and the 100s of millions of people who are liveing on it,what are they going to tell them.
Any time the Republicans start up on these kind of things,we need to watch them very close, because it is always a cover up for they are doing that is worse.
guts
thanks for having the guts and brains to put something on the table! we're broke and the annointed one wants to spend MORE ,STUPID,how is learning on the job working? he is still voting "present"!
Sleepy; I dont get your
Sleepy; I dont get your point.I am aware of our population.
An example of what i am saying.
You have more than likly paid into SS all your working life, How would you feel if the gov kepted all that money ,and told you you would get nothing when you retired.
Our if you are retired,they told you we are going to stop paying you,you can sleep in doorways, and eat slop in a food kitchen. Its your tough luck.
Sleepy; i dont know what you would do, but i know what most people would,and it wouldnt be pretty.
Sleepy ; I suppose we
Sleepy ; I suppose we shouldent tax the rich trash, because they live in another country,and make money in our country.
I bet you dont like the Pledge of Alegence either .
Jackpo
Learn to spell. You come across as an uneducated hick.
i say....
tax the rich more as long as EVERYONE pays at least a dollar in taxes and nobody receives more than they pay in.
Think thats possible jackpo?
Heyyyyyyyyy Sleppy is rehab
Heyyyyyyyyy Sleppy is rehab the same as detox,ya otter know.
pudnet; when ya get ta be 75, you is allowed to miss a few words now and then.
I agree, everyone needs to
I agree, everyone needs to pay taxes from welfare up,and not just a dollar either but perhapes a smaller percentage But only when the rich pay there fair share.
jackpo they do
The rich do, the top 50% of taxpayers pay 97.30% of all income taxes, isnt that fair enough?
The rich do pay 97% of the
The rich do pay 97% of the taxes,before the loop holes,but when you deduct thier tax evasion,they are paying less than 8%.,and most of them pay nothing( general electric example)
you have sources for that
even with 8%, the top 50% still pay in 97.3% of all taxes.
We all know GE is Obamas baby with all the "green" programs they have, however, your answer STILL doesnt answer the question, why does 47% receive more than they pay in?
You are talking about the top
You are talking about the top 50%,that includes the middle class.I am talking about the 1% or the richest 400.
The middle class are the one taking the beating, mostly at the hands of the wealthy,altho the lower class is going to have to start paying too, thier should be no free way.
But the lower class should not pay till the upper class pays.
thats fine
but you still are avoiding the question, why is it fair that the lower class, as you call it, receives more than they pay in?
It isnt a wash, they get more. Quit avoiding the question. How is that fair?
G.E. is not Obams baby,Bushes
G.E. is not Obams baby,Bushes contracts got us ito this.
Its not who pays the most in taxes.It the percentage that is deducted from thier income.Show me any thing fair about deducting 8% from the wealthy,and 28% from the middle class.
I agee no one should recieve
I agee no one should recieve a free ride,people need to pay income tax not recieve it., but the rich need pay a fair percentage in too. I hope i answerd you question,i tryed to.
i want sources for your information
i need some sources on your statistics for the 3rd time.
I found this site that shows you are mistaken...
http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
The rich are using the same tax system that gets 47% a larger tax return than they pay in.
Until the system is fixed, I think the rich are paying in plenty. By the way, we do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
WE do have a revenue
WE do have a revenue problem.If the US could collect the taxes that it has been cheated out of,we would not be in the financel position we are in today.
And it is just plain stupid to give tax breaks to the rich that dont even live in our country.They earn thier income here,and love our milk and honey, but they will not help pay for it.
It s to bad the republicans cant do some thing to benifit America instead of continually trying to destroy it.
www money chimp com. WOW i
www money chimp com. WOW i bet that a goody.No thanks got better things to do.
since you were scared
that site lists the tax brackets, and sorry, people that make what you are complaining about fall into the 35% tax bracket. But please, list your sources on the 8% that these rich pay. I need to see them before I can believe you jackpo
businesses are a different entity than an individual tax payer. keep them separate, and we were talking about individual tax payers