Alex Ram

On May 21, 2008 Ryan introduced H.R. 6110, titled "Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2008". This proposed legislation outlined a plan to deal with entitlement issues. Its stated objectives were to ensure universal access to health insurance; strengthen Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security; lift the debt from future generations; and promote economic growth and job creation in America. The act would have abolished the State Children's Health Insurance Program in 2010. It did not move past committee.

On April 1, 2009, Ryan introduced the GOP Alternative to the 2010 United States federal budget. This proposed alternative would have eliminated the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, lowered the top tax rate to 25%, introduced an 8.5% value-added consumption tax, and imposed a five-year spending freeze on all discretionary spending. It would also have replaced the Medicare system. Instead, it proposed that starting in 2021, the federal government would pay part of the cost of private medical insurance for individuals turning 65. Ryan's proposed budget would also have allowed taxpayers to opt out of the federal income taxation system with itemized deductions, and instead pay a flat 10 percent of adjusted gross income up to $100,000 and 25 percent on any remaining income. Ryan's proposed budget was heavily criticized by opponents for the lack of concrete numbers. It was ultimately rejected in the house by a vote of 293-137, with 38 Republicans in opposition.

In late January 2010, Ryan released a new version of his "Roadmap." It would give across the board tax cuts by reducing income tax rates; eliminating income taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest; and abolishing the corporate income tax, the estate tax, and the alternative minimum tax. The plan would privatize a portion of Social Security, eliminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance, end traditional Medicare and most of Medicaid, and terminate the Children’s Health Insurance Program. The plan would replace these health programs with a system of vouchers whose value would decrease over time.

Economist Paul Krugman took issue with the contention that Ryan's plan would reduce the deficit, alleging that it only considered proposed spending cuts and failed to take into account the tax changes. Ryan's plan "would raise taxes for 95 percent of the population" but the tax cuts for the rich would be large enough to produce a $4 trillion revenue loss over ten years. Krugman went on to label the supposed spending cuts a "sham" because they depended on making a severe cut in domestic discretionary spending, without specifying the programs to be cut, and on "dismantling Medicare as we know it," which is politically unrealistic.

In response to Krugman, another economist, Ted Gayer, was more charitable toward the Ryan plan. Gayer agreed that, as written, the plan would cause a $4 trillion revenue shortfall over ten years. He noted, however, that Ryan had expressed a willingness to consider raising the rates in his tax plan. Gayer concluded that "Ryan’s vision of broad-based tax reform, which essentially would shift us toward a consumption tax, ... makes a useful contribution to this debate."


Adapted from the Wikipedia article Paul Ryan (politician), under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki