Enough Already
STATEMENT: Our national debt is at crisis levels. Already we owe over $45,000 for every man women and child in America and we are piling on the debt every minute of every day with no relief in sight. We can’t control
spending unless we control entitlements – they are too big a part of the budget. We simply can’t afford the
safety net we have created.
ANALYSIS: You are aware that “entitlement programs” of Social Security, Medicare, the antipoverty programs, Medicare and Unemployment make up over 50% of our national spending. You believe that antipoverty programs are ripe for cost savings because the programs are inefficient and pay benefits to some people you believe are undeserving, such as the middle class.
BUT: Arguments for cuts generally come across as heartless and lose support. Most Americans want a safety net but most also agree that the one we have doesn’t work (See Public Opinion Page). Putting your effort at revamping one program at a time just comes across as cutting an important need for the poor. For example, the proposal to cut back the WIC program is answered by “but pregnant women need milk”; or Headstart by “but poor children need preschool”. These are shallow arguments and don’t get much accomplished. Instead the argument should be elevated at revamping the entire welfare system, one that encourages work, marriage and gives resources for the poor to make their own “milk and preschool decisions." In addition, most Americans agree that
we can’t afford to give benefits to the middle class but this argument can only be made when the programs are looked at in full and combined benefits examined. To date this has generally not been part of the welfare debate.
INSTEAD: Put your efforts at pushing for reform of the entire system. This is not a debate about whether conservatives care about the poor. They do. It is a debate about being smarter about how to help the poor and cutting out the middle class from benefits. This will have majority support in America and when accomplished will have resulted in something all Americans can all be proud of.
spending unless we control entitlements – they are too big a part of the budget. We simply can’t afford the
safety net we have created.
ANALYSIS: You are aware that “entitlement programs” of Social Security, Medicare, the antipoverty programs, Medicare and Unemployment make up over 50% of our national spending. You believe that antipoverty programs are ripe for cost savings because the programs are inefficient and pay benefits to some people you believe are undeserving, such as the middle class.
BUT: Arguments for cuts generally come across as heartless and lose support. Most Americans want a safety net but most also agree that the one we have doesn’t work (See Public Opinion Page). Putting your effort at revamping one program at a time just comes across as cutting an important need for the poor. For example, the proposal to cut back the WIC program is answered by “but pregnant women need milk”; or Headstart by “but poor children need preschool”. These are shallow arguments and don’t get much accomplished. Instead the argument should be elevated at revamping the entire welfare system, one that encourages work, marriage and gives resources for the poor to make their own “milk and preschool decisions." In addition, most Americans agree that
we can’t afford to give benefits to the middle class but this argument can only be made when the programs are looked at in full and combined benefits examined. To date this has generally not been part of the welfare debate.
INSTEAD: Put your efforts at pushing for reform of the entire system. This is not a debate about whether conservatives care about the poor. They do. It is a debate about being smarter about how to help the poor and cutting out the middle class from benefits. This will have majority support in America and when accomplished will have resulted in something all Americans can all be proud of.
Paul Ryan
Representative Paul Ryan is the Chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Mr. Ryan has published A Roadmap for America's Future, in which he said:
“The Federal Government’s current fiscal path is unsustainable:
it leads to unprecedented levels of spending and debt that will overwhelm the budget, smother the economy, weaken America’s competitiveness in the 21st century global economy, and threaten the survival of the government’s major benefit programs.”
“More ruinous in the long run is the extent to which the ‘safety net’ has come to enmesh more and more Americans – reaching into middle incomes and higher – so that growing numbers have come to rely on government, not themselves, for growing shares of their income and assets. By this means, government increasingly dictates how Americans live their lives; they are not only wards of the state, but also its subjects, increasingly directed in their behavior by the government’s ‘compassion.’ But dependency drains individual character, which in turn weakens American society. The process suffocates individual initiative and transforms self-reliance into a vice and government dependency into a virtue. The Nation becomes a sort of vast Potemkin Village in which the most important elements – its people – are depleted by a government that increasingly “takes care” of them, and makes ever more of their decisions for them. They take more from society than they provide for themselves, which corrodes society itself, from the inside out. The environment also becomes ripe for exploitation and control by the few who remain ‘ambitious.’ ”
“Now America is approaching a ‘tipping point’ beyond which the Nation will be unable to change course – and this will lead to disastrous fiscal consequences, and an erosion of economic prosperity and the American character itself. The current administration and Congress are propelling the Nation to the brink of this precipice.”
“But as noted earlier, this is not a call to dismantle government. Rather, the vision of this plan reflects a view expressed by President Reagan more than a quarter century ago: ‘It is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work – work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back.’ ”
Mr. Ryan has published A Roadmap for America's Future, in which he said:
“The Federal Government’s current fiscal path is unsustainable:
it leads to unprecedented levels of spending and debt that will overwhelm the budget, smother the economy, weaken America’s competitiveness in the 21st century global economy, and threaten the survival of the government’s major benefit programs.”
“More ruinous in the long run is the extent to which the ‘safety net’ has come to enmesh more and more Americans – reaching into middle incomes and higher – so that growing numbers have come to rely on government, not themselves, for growing shares of their income and assets. By this means, government increasingly dictates how Americans live their lives; they are not only wards of the state, but also its subjects, increasingly directed in their behavior by the government’s ‘compassion.’ But dependency drains individual character, which in turn weakens American society. The process suffocates individual initiative and transforms self-reliance into a vice and government dependency into a virtue. The Nation becomes a sort of vast Potemkin Village in which the most important elements – its people – are depleted by a government that increasingly “takes care” of them, and makes ever more of their decisions for them. They take more from society than they provide for themselves, which corrodes society itself, from the inside out. The environment also becomes ripe for exploitation and control by the few who remain ‘ambitious.’ ”
“Now America is approaching a ‘tipping point’ beyond which the Nation will be unable to change course – and this will lead to disastrous fiscal consequences, and an erosion of economic prosperity and the American character itself. The current administration and Congress are propelling the Nation to the brink of this precipice.”
“But as noted earlier, this is not a call to dismantle government. Rather, the vision of this plan reflects a view expressed by President Reagan more than a quarter century ago: ‘It is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work – work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back.’ ”