Jonathan Chait hits Paul Ryan out of the Park*
Hilariously, the result of Ryan’s Dave-like search through the budget — and the only example of a putative budget savings mentioned anywhere in the piece — is his claim to have discovered a savings in the student loan program. In fact, this example is exactly the opposite of what Ryan (and the story) proclaim.
[skipped part about how the old program gave billions a year to banks for no discernable reason]
Ryan is a fervent ally of the college lending industry. In 2007, he was one of only 71 Republicans to vote against the College Student Relief Act, which would have cut the interest rate on many student loans, including the FFEL program, in half. Inside Higher Ed notedthat the bill would cut “deeply and directly into lenders’ profits.” The bill passed the House 356-71, but stalled in the Senate.
So, that’s the one idea this fresh-faced reformer comes up with the balance the budget: shovel billions of dollars in extra subsidies to an inefficient and wildly corrupt industry whose water he has faithfully carried. And this isn’t an exception –Ryan’s record is one of wild fiscal profligacy. I realize he’s cute and energetic and exudes an aw-shucks Midwestern earnestness, but the reality bears absolutely no relation to the image.
Ouch. Given the rules of the poliitical game that’s got to leave no mark.
* This is a metaphor and has nothing to do with assaulting people with baseball bats.
Well, isn’t this bit of information an interesting addition to the discussion regarding the Ryan Road Map and all the good it will do for America’s budget woes. I guess the only question then is who will it be good for besides the college loan industry.
CoRev, I can’t wait to hear your excuses for Rep Ryan’s sorry excuse for representation of his constituents, unless you consider the banking industry his real constituency.
Jack, it’s not my issue. So you can play this alone.
[skipped part about how the old program gave billions a year to banks for no discernable reason]
“Old program” was signed into law in 1965 as part of LBJ’s (Democrat) Great Society. In addition in 1965, both the House and Senate were controlled by the Democratic Party.
[skipped part about how the old program gave billions a year to banks for no discernable reason]
“Old program” was signed into law in 1965 as part of LBJ’s (Democrat) Great Society. In addition in 1965, both the House and Senate were controlled by the Democratic Party.
So if you are to reach the prima facie conclusion that Ryan’s opposition to the legislation is because he carrying water for the banks, you must also conclude, prima facie, that the people who enacted the legislation, Democrat President/Senate/House are also carrying water for the banks.
As per Sammy, Ryan’s economic and ethical philosophy ignores social usefulness. He could give a damn about that particular issue.
He is a naive, utopian libertarian. As destructive as his distant twin, the Marxist.
That definitely made me more curious about him because he is not only good looking but really smart as well for his own interest. it reminds me of Frank Abagnale Jr.
Of course, flirting with crisis is arguably part of the plan. There has always been a sense in which voodoo economics was a cover story for the real doctrine, which was “starve the beast”: slash revenue with tax cuts, then demand spending cuts to close the resulting budget gap. The point is that starve the beast basically amounts to deliberately creating a fiscal crisis, in the belief that the crisis can be used to push through unpopular policies, like dismantling Social Security.