Here's why real conservatives should oppose the Ryan budget:
1. It maintains the federal leviathan working to control our lives. FACTS: The Ryan budget won't result in the single closure of any sizable federal agency and explicitly avoids layoffs of federal workers. As Roll Call newspaper put it, "Ryan's budget eliminates the deficit in 2023 not because of large new spending cuts relative to his past budgets, but because he's keeping hundreds of billions of dollars a year of President Barack Obama's own budget policies in place." There's nothing "conservative" about using Obama's phony budgeting.
2. The Ryan budget also maintains the Obamacare taxes needed to fund Big Uncle Sam. Again, quoting Roll Call, "Ryan's budget also would not balance without the $600 billion-plus increase in taxes extracted by the president in the fiscal cliff deal." What's "conservative" about backing Obama's tax increase?
3. The result of the Ryan spending and tax decisions is that he sacrifices the conservative principle of reducing the role of the federal government for a goal of a balanced budget, which is a numbers exercise (albeit an important one). And that is exactly what happened in the Reagan budgets (I was there) and during the Gingrich era in the 1990s, when we achieved a budget surplus but didn't get Big Uncle Sam out of our lives. Is that what conservatives want?
4. The Ryan budget violates the 10th Amendment and restricts the 7th Amendment right to civil jury trials. It unconstitutionally crushes each state's right to maintain its own civil justice system, by mandating federal limits on damages available in healthcare-related lawsuits. The plan ignores the opinions of the most respected Republican-side and libertarian legal experts and officials who have repeatedly written that Congress has no authority to enact federal caps on medical malpractice lawsuits, especially under the majority opinion in the Supreme Court's Obamacare opinion. These experts include Prof. Randy Barnett; Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli; legal experts Rob Natelson, John Baker and Carrie Severino; and Reps. Ted Poe, Louie Gohmert and Lee Terry, and Senators Tom Coburn and Mike Lee. The National Conference of State Legislators has always protested federal caps as a violation of the states' right to operate their civil justice systems without federal interference. Tea party leaders such as Judson Phillips and the Tea Party Patriots criticized the passage of caps by the Republican House in the last session of Congress.
5. The same caps do nothing to raise the quality of health care in the U.S., which is why Republican-side healthcare experts don't support federal caps on such lawsuits (e.g., Avik Roy, Jim Capretta and Tom Miller). A recent study by respected academics punctures five myths of medic..., but these realities are ignored by Rep. Ryan and House leadership.
6. The combination of the continued federal presence in the regulatory agencies and the proposed civil immunity for the entire medical community, from doctors to insurance companies to nursing homes, make the Ryan budget a perfect vehicle for Crony Capitalism. Federal bureaucrats will feel free to preempt state laws and restrict individual freedom in all types of settings. There's no effective "STOP" sign on Uncle Sam in the Ryan budget.
Conservatives and Tea Partiers should oppose the Ryan budget. It doesn't promote the conservative vision of a reduced role for the federal government in our lives. It continues to "feed the beast." It infringes on states' and individual rights. It's not a conservative or Tea Party manifesto and should not excite or inspire any conservative, Tea Partier or libertarian. It doesn't project the Founding Fathers' vision for the nation or for a limited government. There's no reason to spill any political blood over it.
Views: 496
Tags: Avik, Barnett, Bill, Coburn, Constitution, Constitutional, Cuccinelli, Fathers, Founding, Gingrich, More…
Comment
Better than either the Democrat's plan or a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.
Comment by Thomas on March 14, 2013 at 7:25am It is not so much that the liberal ideology is corrupt and corrupting, it's problem is it's consistency -- It's consistent tendency to result in actions that are in direct conflict with the most fundamental laws of nature: The laws of physics. The result is then consistently predictable: "The law of unintended negative consequences."
It is simple-minded silliness to think and act as if printing more fiat counterfeit money and using it will somehow enable you to "print" your way to a government and/or an economy able to function at greater than 100% efficiency.
And, by the way, our state and local governments are criminal enterprises who willfully receive stolen property from the largest and most lucrative criminal enterprise that has ever existed: "Our" federal government. We, the people, and our descendents are the victims of the grand larceny and money laundering that is being perpetrated by all of our governments in a cooperative symbiotic relationship with the financialist banksters on Wall Street.
Comment by Kate Bowe on March 13, 2013 at 9:19pm 
Comment by Marcia Wood on March 13, 2013 at 7:12pm What a bunch or malarky - suprised Judson would even consider posting this... WE'D BETTER WAKE UP AND UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT Ryan's budget actully does - so we want to go for a 20 trillion dollar deficit? Don't chase a balanced budget just for the sake of "Balance." Try a trillion dollars in tax increases, check out all taxes we will experience as we allow Obama's gang to blindside us. If the tea parties had a great budget they might have considered talking to Paul, he's very nice to communicate with and would willingly listen to you.
Comment by Jim Woods on March 13, 2013 at 4:47pm Interesting. Three of Andrew Cochran's bullet points appear to be about aspects of the Ryan budget that would adversely impact the income of malpractice attorneys. Would it be improper for me to ask what Andrew Cochran does for a living? If not, then pray tell why caps on lawsuits is so important. Most people are focused on matters like spending, taxing, debt, quality care, etc.
As to the rest of Mr. Cochran's critique, I would like to remind everyone that in politics it takes 50%+ of the voters to win. Unless and until we win the majority of public opinion, we lose. So does Ryan's budget help us win over public opinion? The "talking points" make it sound like it would.
Let there be no confusion. Neither the Ryan, the Senate, or Obama's budget is going to be passed as is. If anything passes, it will be a hodgepodge that nobody likes. The keys are whether or not we win more than we lose, and if we build momentum for the next battle. That is what the left has been doing for 100 years, one small step at a time at frequent intervals, and a few big ones at long intervals.
Trying to transform the American culture to conform to our ideal overnight is like trying to boil the ocean. It isn't going to happen, and the time, effort and money we spend trying to make it happen will be wasted.
Now if some people think they can meet and get an ideologically correct proposal put together in the near future, I invite them to go do that. Until they come back with their proposal, we have the Ryan, the Senate and the White House proposals on the table. If anything gets passed, we want it to be more Ryan than Senate or White House.
We do that by talking publicly about what is good about the Ryan budget, and what is bad about the Senate and White House budget. Our suggestions for improvement should go in private to our Congressmen and Senators, not to the public.
We need to put an end to these "circular firing squads". The American Indian tribes rarely if ever worked together to defend their land from the "White Man"; they spent more time and energy warring against each other than they did against the "White Man". How did that work out for them?
Comment by Roc29 on March 13, 2013 at 1:08pm Gerald Smith:
I don't necessarily disagree with anything that you said.
But, if the majority of the voters don't understand the philosophy and principles of why our founders did what they did, how are you going to get them to understand that by giving away responsibility for their well being they are also giving away authority over how they live their lives.
The (dependent) spoiled child doesn't want to hear his parents say that they can't afford the new toy that he wants and will sell his soul to the devil to get it.
Our dependent spoiled citizenry doesn't want to hear that it is immoral to burden our posterity with unending debt and will vote for who ever will promise them an end to worry, tribulation and strife.
The sad reality is that you can't change anything if you don't win elections and get in office. And without an informed electorate you can't say no and win an election over someone who say yes.
With the mass media as an echo chamber of the party that say yes, how do you get people to believe that their liberty is being taken away?
Comment by J.R.Wallon on March 13, 2013 at 12:52pm SOME ONE HAS TO DO SOMETHING! MAYBE EVERY ONE SHOULD LAY OFF FOR A WEEK.NO WORK NO MONEY GOING TO WASHINGTON.IF A WEEK WON'T GET THEIR ATTENTION TRY A LONGER PERIOD TILL THE A******S WAKE UP AND DECIDE TO CUT SPENDING BY ABOUT 20%.
Comment by Gerald Smith on March 13, 2013 at 12:31pm Response to Roc29 -- the democrat/socialists are playing the long game because they are driven by ideology just as are many of their bretheren -- greens, communists, animal rights whackos, islamo-nazis, and atheists. Normal folks tend to focus on winning the next election and afterward going back to our lives, win or lose. That's not to say that our "leaders" could not do a much better job of standing their ground, messaging and thinking 2-3 steps ahead which is what Obama does. The really sad fact is that so many in Congress like Boehner, Cantor and McConnell lack the conviction of the Tea Party. If they had it they would to want to stand up and slug it out. That they chose to not even try to defund Obamacare in the latest CR was absolutely criminal.
Comment by Kate Bowe on March 13, 2013 at 11:40am Comment by Roc29 on March 13, 2013 at 11:39am The quest for perfection is the enemy of the good.
How come the Democrats can perfect incrementalism and the Republicans can't.
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!
Join Tea Party Nation