For months, Rep. Paul Ryan has been watching the GOP presidential primary. As candidates have outlined tax reforms and championed growth, he’s cheered. On the fiscal front, however, he has heard little from leading contenders. Privately, he’s grumbled about the lack of specifics.
But after recent conversations with Romney and reading his latest USA Today op-ed, Ryan is enthused. The former Massachusetts governor supports a defined-contribution model for Medicare — in which beneficiaries are allowed to choose their own plans — the keystone of the budget passed by House Republicans. “It shows we’re all singing from the same hymnal,” he says.
Advertisement
“It shows me that he’s willing to be bold and specific on the big issues of the day,” he adds.
Ryan acknowledges that Romney’s plan is not a copy of the House GOP budget. And he’s fine with that, including Romney’s inclusion of traditional Medicare as an option within a defined-contribution model. “Alice Rivlin has been pushing this for a while,” Ryan says. “It works just as well as the other ideas. It’s different than what we have proposed, but it’s a fixed amount that you can take to either your private plans or a traditional fee-for-service system. As far as budget savings and driving patient-centered reforms, it still accomplishes that goal.”
Any nitpicking over Romney’s decision to leave traditional Medicare services as an option, Ryan says, misses the larger point of the op-ed. “This plan is in perfect keeping with what we’ve been talking about,” he says. “The key is to move toward a defined-contribution system where the money runs through the person instead of the government, driving patient-centered reforms.”
With Romney backing the general thrust of the House budget, “this helps us more clearly delineate the choice that truly faces the country,” Ryan says. “You have to take political risks, you have to take policy risks and apply principles to the policies of the day. As a party, we’re now firing on all cylinders.”
Romney, Ryan predicts, will likely be slammed by progressives for his proposal. Earlier this year, Ryan became a favorite target of Democrats’ after shepherding related reforms through the House. “They got me pushing grandma off a cliff,” he chuckles. “Of course he’s going to get attacked. All the more reason this is a good move. It shows boldness and a willingness to take political risk.”
“This is the moment where we need political leaders to do that in order to save the country,” he says. “That’s why I enjoy seeing this kind of leadership among our candidates.”
— Robert Costa is a political reporter for National Review.
I read Romney's plan to reduce the size of the federal government and cut spending this morning and it makes good sense to me. He's able to articulate his ideas in a way that puts my mind at ease and I'm able to envision his plan for America. He lays out his plan with step by step, tangible solutions. No other Republican candidate has been able to come up with anything close to a real road map for America's future like this. Romney continues to re-assure this Conservative that he is the right man to put an end the Obama regime and turn this failing economy and nation around.
Very encouraging. I already liked Romney, this makes it a lot easier. Romney's really growing on me. No apparent personal baggage, either. (Knock wood.) Sometimes it's good to be a boring Republican.
“This is the moment where we need political leaders to do that in order to save the country,” he says. “That’s why I enjoy seeing this kind of leadership among our candidates.”
Agreed.
I would add what we have in a leader like Mitt Romney is his ability to get this plan passed.
I think Mitt is by far and away the best candidate we have with his strong history of working with warring sides...he's done it in business and he's done it in government...with those skills Mitt would be able to actually pass this thing.
Also Mitt's superior communication is the best to make Americans understand why this country needs the plan.
I found Romney's op-Ed less than reassuring. He talked a good game about eliminating programs that weren't necessary for government to do but offered no examples to indicate what he would place in that category. From his statement that he'd merely reduce speeding on programs the likes of the National Endowment for the Arts one can infer that not many, if any at all, would be cut. I'm afraid Romney is another technocrat kicking the can down the road. I like Paul Ryan but his approval of Romney doesn't sway me. To my mind, Romney lacks Ryan's understanding of why it is we have to get our fiscal house in order. It's not just an accounting issue; at base it's an issue of who we are as a people. Certainly politics is partly the art of the possible, but we need leaders with larger imaginations envisioning larger possibilities.
It isn't blow back from progressives that is the problem.
It is those people who call themselves "conservative" who are hell-bent on getting Obama re-elected by continually portraying Romney as untrustworthy.
Romney's business reputation for honesty was so impeccable on his name alone he brought back the 2002 Olympics from disaster, but in poltics the websites that were bought out by Salem Communication have slandered Romney non-stop.
This mischaracterization of Romney is purposeful and dishonest. Many of their lies have become conventional wisdom. This website is no exception.
IN 2008 NRO endorsed Romney. He has not changed, he is better than ever. In fact we have not seen such a capable and prepared leader in the Republican Party in this generation. Yet you hesitate.
You have fallen prey to the brainwashing.
We have enemies in our mist. They hate Romney. They are enemies to real reform. They claim to be conservative, but they only care about keeping Romney out.
Google them: Salem Communcations.
It will be easy enough to see what their real problem is with Romney.
They picked the private websites that were most influencial in 2008, and made them staunchly anti-Romney.
Two sites will not even allow Romney to be complimented. If someone says a positive thing about Romney they are automatically banned.
This Orwellian attack is happening within the Republican Party.
There are wolves in sheeps clothing among us. And they would rather see 4 more years of Obama than Romney win. And the reasons have nothing to do with Romney's politics.
I'll vote for Romney if he's nominated, and I'm not sure anyone else in the current field is both electable and better, but if I have to vote for Romney, as when voting for GWB, I'll do it with my eyes open.
Salem? The people who syndicate Hugh Hewitt? When I read Hugh's book, 'A Mormon in the White House? " four years ago I volunteered for the Romney campaign. It's still one of the finest political biographies available. I can't believe Hugh's network would slander Romney. Disagree, sure; we're conservatives, we disagree without demonizing.
"by continually portraying Romney as untrustworthy."
we aren't portraying anything. Romney has only himself to blame. He's shifted positions on almost ALL major conservatives themes (abortion, gun control, fiscal conservatism etc)
I for one will stay home before I vote for him. IMO, a Romney presidency would probably be worth than another Obama presidency, because the Republicans would lose what little backbone they got since Obama came to office.
Instead we would get a surge of more bipartisn big government like we did when Bush was in office.
Thanks but no thanks. I refuse to vote for another big government candidate. And no matter what Romney says, that's what he really is.
Reading Romney's USA Today editorial finally nudged me into his camp. Romneycare was a huge obstacle for me to overcome, but I've heard and read enough from him now to believe him that he is truly serious about repealing this horrendous piece of legislative malpractice. He is showing that he has the ability to articulate the conservative message and why our policies have the best chance to turn the economy around . . . I also think he could go toe to toe with Obama and would come across as the mature adult in the room, with a responsible plan to get the nation working again and tackle our debt. I also really, really like the idea of a defined-contribution plan for Medicare. Sounds like that will allow me to be in charge of my healthcare rather than the government in my "advanced" years. Besides, as a self-declared Ryan groupie, if Paul Ryan gives a nod to Romney's ideas, they instantly gain credibility with me.
Entitlement reform is going to be very difficult given the generational tug-of-war on top of the normal partisan issues. Romney will need to show more ability to stand up for what he says he believes in if he wants to actually see his Medicare plan implemented. External Link
Romney will start getting attacked from the left if he captures the nomination. Until then it will be any candidate who seems to be moving into the forefront who will get the attacks, one by one. First it was Palin, then Bachmann, now Cain. The msm is really shameless. But is the electorate noticing this?
Romney may not be the bold conservative that some are hoping for, but I understand Ryan's endorsement.
From Paul Ryan's perspective, anyone who is helping him push the rock uphill is on the right side, even if he's pushing at not quite the right angle or not all that hard.
Romney copies the house plan and takes on traditional medicare as an option. Very creative, and no doubt he knows where the winds blow.
Talks a good game, even to the point of winning over people like Ryan. Highly doubt he will aggressively pursue these reforms, especially if the winds turn.
Well, the fact that Romney has come out for switching from a defined benefits plan in health care to a defined contributions plan, and that this has won a certain enthusiasm for Romney from Ryan is very encouraging. I like Ryan and I suppose he's sold me on Romney, given the fact that the other Republicans all look pretty challenged right now.
However, it may be that Ryan is putting the best face on Romney in order to get conservatives to stop pushing Ryan to run and stop criticizing Ryan for not running. The worse the current Republican field looks, the more irresponsible Ryan looks, to some people, for not jumping in when the nation needs him. So maybe Ryan is trying to take the heat off himself. No doubt many conservative bigwigs have also discreetly told Ryan that, if he's not going to run, it's his responsibility to use his influence to convince people they don't need him and can be enthusiastic about the current field, or someone in it.
It's sort of like the most beautiful girl has rejected the prized suitor. The beauty then feels incredibly embarrassed as all the available girls stand by hoping the prized suitor will now take an interest in one of them, but he doesn't, he keeps trashing them and pursuing the beauty. So Ryan, the embarrassed beauty, exaggerates the attractions of the available girls, especially the only one who seems to be realistically nubile at this point, namely Romney.
But I don't really put much weight on that cynical scenario, so I guess I'm sold on Romney. I felt enthusiasm for Cain for a while, but he just seems too uninformed about too many things. I felt enthusiasm for Perry for a while (incredible Texas job growth and a very strong fiscal conservative free market outlook), but can he win after George Bush? Can he win when he's not a policy wonk who can debate? Can he win when he's only informed about the big picture, but doesn't know that many details? I still like Perry, but unless he can get himself more in gear, I'm sold on Romney. Romney has huge drive, huge energy, huge command of details, and he's moved right.
And don't repeated polls show that in a matchup against Obama, Romney has repeatedly been doing better than all the other Republican candidates?
Follow
