POWIP Piece of Work In Progress

Paul Ryan on the actual fierce urgency of now

Change I can believe in.

And he's not using it as just another throw-away line, you know, a cliche-JUST WORDS!, like Present-dent Obeyme.  No, the Wisconsin Congressman is talking about real choices that we face, as a nation, in the not-so-distant future:

"Are we going to reclaim the American idea -- an entrepreneurial economy where you make the most of your life, you tap your potential, we reinvigorate the principles of liberty, freedom, free enterprise -- and defend the morality of that -- or are we going to abandon that and switch over toward a European-style, cradle-to-grave welfare state where we drain people of their incentive and will to make the most of their lives and make them more dependent on the government?"

"[Progressives] believe that we ought to have the government so much more involved in our lives, as the more determining factor in our lives, rather than ourselves. So we have to ask ourselves a question: Do we want an entrepreneurial society that gets prosperity turned back on in the 21st century, where individual merit, entrepreneurial activity defines the American economy, or are we going to have more and more people dependent on the government for their livelihoods? And that is going to drain them of their ability and their will to make the most of their lives. That's sort of the fork in the road we are at, and it's really being precipitated by the current direction of our government and the debt crisis because of entitlement explosion that's coming in the future. Those things are coming together. We've got to make a decision in 2010 and in 2012 what kind of country we want to be in the 21st century economy."

Ryan, a refreshing change from the archetypal, ingratiating, phony career politician, contrasts the opposing ideologies clearly, succinctly, and starkly; which, in my humble opinion, is what more conservatives need to be doing these days.  Outline clear choices for the public, instead of "Democrat" vs "Democrat-lite", and let them make their choice.

But in addition to his refreshing candor and economic prowess, Mr. Ryan also has a vision of what we must do to get our economy, and indeed the nation, back on the right track.  That vision is contained a plan called, "A Roadmap for America's Future"; a link for an interactive site where his plan is explained is here, and a link to the Congressional document is here.  In short, his plan addresses healthcare through market based processes, as well as reforming entitlements, the budgetary process, and the tax codes.  The tax code part is one of my personal favorites:

A world-class tax system should be simple, fair, and efficient. The U.S. tax code fails on all three counts. The system is notoriously complex, as families must spend significant time and money negotiating a labyrinth of deductions and credits, a tangle of different rules for characterizing income, and a variety of schedules for taxing that income. The code is also patently unfair, as many of the deductions and preferences in the system – which serve to narrow the tax base – are mainly used by a relatively small class of mostly higher-income individuals. It is also highly inefficient, as tax considerations, rather than economic fundamentals, often distort individual decisions to work, save, and invest, leading to a misallocation of resources and slower economic growth. 

This reform proposal responds in a fundamentally American way: it offers individuals a choice. Individuals can choose to pay their Federal taxes under the existing code, with all the familiar deductions and schedules; or they can move to a highly simplified income tax system. The simplified plan broadens the tax base by clearing out nearly all of the existing deductions and credits, compresses the tax schedule down to two low rates, and retains a generous standard deduction and exemption level. The tax form for this system would fit on a postcard. The goal is a more simple, fair, and efficient tax code, the components of which are described below.

Sounds like a winning idea to me, Paul.  But I'm not the only one taking note, listen to the observations of Niall Ferguson of Harvard Business school who  also recognizes the value of Ryan's proposals:

Ferguson called for what he called “radical” measures. “I can’t emphasize strongly enough the need for radical fiscal reform to restore the incentives for work and remove the incentives for idleness.” He praised “really radical reform of the sort that, for example, Paul Ryan [the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee] has outlined in his wonderful ‘Roadmap’ for radical, root-and-branch reform not only of the tax system but of the entitlement system” and “unleash entrepreneurial innovation.” Otherwise, Ferguson warned: “Do you want to be a kind of implicit part of the European Union? I’d advise you against it.” [emphasis-ed.]

There are many conervatives in the GOP leadership, the grass-roots groups, and among the rank and file, that strongly recommend that the Republicans as a whole, and indeed the entire conservative "movement", get behind Paul Ryan's plan; very much in the same way that like minded folks got behind, "The Contract for America", in the early 1990's.  I am in complete accordance with this notion and, speaking as one who writes letters and telephones my "congresscritters"ad nauseam, would urge all conservatives to not only become familiar with the details of Ryan's plan, but to strongly urge their representatives to get behind it as well.  Not simply for political reasons, but because of value to our nation, at a critical juncture, of the entire plan.

I admire Paul Ryan greatly, and think that he could become a major player in national level politics.  Although our old pal sdferr from the PW commentariat thinks him an excellent legislator, would prefer to see him stay in the House of Senate, and often takes me to task for suggesting otherwise at this juncture, I confess to secretly wishing to see him somewhere on the presidential ticket in 2012; if motivated only by the dearth of talent that I see now at that level.  I mean, does Daniels/Ryan, or Christie/Ryan, really sound that bad to you, dear reader?

Still, whether as VP, or Speaker of the House, I believe that Paul Ryan knows the right direction for our nation, can articulate his vision well, is capable of summarizing perilously "wonky" solutions in a way that laypersons and dilletantes can easily grasp, and who's tall, dark, and handsome good looks don't hurt either.  Indeed, the only shortcoming I percieve is a lack of direct foreign policy experience; a persian flaw that can be overcome by surrounding oneself with the right people.  He's most definitely an "Anti-Obama"; a quantity that America will surely need after 4 years of the Cloward-Piven-ist, Trans-National-Socialist, MaObama.

All-in-all, a very Reagan-esque package, if I do say so myself, and someone to keep an eye out  for in the years to come.  Tell me your impressions, kind reader; what do you think?

Rocketman