400 Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
- Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
- Local 202.783.3870
Government goes to those who show up. FreedomWorks makes it easy to hold your elected officials accountable in our fully interactive Action Center.
Find activists, groups, and events right in your own neighborhood. Join FreedomConnector to get involved and learn more about key issues threatening our economic freedom. Whether you’re looking for like-minded people, trying to boost your existing group’s impact, or simply trying to stay up on current events, FreedomConnector is the place to start. See what’s happening in your state today!Get Connected
400 Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Just 4 months ago, Members of Congress voted to pass the Ryan Budget, which would balance the nation’s budget in 10 years. Sounds great, or as many Republicans might now say, “sounded great.” Similar to the way Democrats discovered that they only like ObamaCare when it doesn’t apply to them, House Republicans recently decided they liked the Ryan Budget only in theory. Last Tuesday (7/30), the latest T-HUD (Transportation & Housing and Urban Development) Bill was taken off the floor due to a lack of support from moderate conservatives (and, of course, liberals). The following day (Wednesday 7/31), Hal Rogers, Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said “I believe that the House has made its choice: Sequestration—and its unrealistic and ill-conceived discretionary cuts—must be brought to an end.”
The new T-HUD Bill would cut $7 billion from the 2013 version, with especially hard shots being taken at the Community Development Block Grant (cut from $2.9 billion down to $1.6 billion), high-speed rail, and Amtrak (a 21% cut to its operating budget), so it was unsurprisingly unpopular, especially to the urban Republicans who rely on these funds for their pet projects. But, what did Members of Congress expect? The budget could be balanced quickly without cutting spending? Maybe they forgot that we are currently nearly $17 trillion in debt.
The fact of the matter is that 221 of the 232 House Republicans voted for the Ryan Budget (which, flawed as it was, would at least balance the budget in ten years), and then many of them turned around and opposed the T-HUD bill that was brought to the floor as a result. Voting for the sequester and a balanced budget, and then threatening to vote against the bills that arise as a result is, for all intents and purposes, the same thing as doing away with sequestration altogether. Members of Congress cannot simply rest their hats on the fact that they voted in favor of sequestration because it means nothing if they are unwilling to pass budget cuts.
While Rep. Rogers’s comments are disheartening, they may be accurate. He might be one of only a handful of Republicans to openly say he wants to get rid of the sequestration (after all, we’re talking about politics), but Members of the House are doing nothing to persuade us otherwise. If House Republicans continue to support removing the only real spending cuts that they have achieved in their three year majority, then what exactly have they been sent to Congress to do?
So yes, it was a step in the right direction that the Ryan Budget got passed, such as it is. But the point is moot unless the majority of Congress starts voting in favor of the post-sequester appropriations bills. If the T-HUD bill is any indicator (hopefully it isn’t), then balancing the budget will be even harder than anticipated.
It’s just another reminder, as FreedomWorks CEO Matt Kibbe is fond of saying, that “Sometimes you have to beat the Republicans before you beat the Democrats.”
Dear FreedomWorks member,
As one of our millions of FreedomWorks members nationwide, I urge you to contact your Senators and urge them to vote NO on S. 1243, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations (T-HUD) Bill. The T-HUD bill increases spending to $54 billion in fiscal year 2014 and contains wasteful pet projects that should be cut. Please tell your Senators to vote against this fiscally irresponsible bill that disregards the spending limits set forth by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
The massive Senate T-HUD bill will increase the national debt and hurt taxpayers. The spending levels in the bill are $2.4 billion more than President Obama’s request and $2.3 billion more than fiscal year 2013 spending levels. There are many inefficient programs in the bill such as the Essential Air Service and Appalachian Regional Commission. These programs that force taxpayers to subsidize low demand airports and special interest pet projects should be eliminated to boost economic prosperity. Other wasteful programs in the bill include the Federal Aviation Administration and Amtrak. These costly programs should be eliminated since the private sector can better handle transportation than government monopolies. Voting yes on the current appropriations bill that contains these wasteful programs would be fiscally reckless.
The T-HUD bill is a plan by big spenders in Washington to get rid of the sequester savings. Sequestration is a good step in the right direction and Congress must keep their promise on the sequester savings they made to the American people. Under sequestration, the funds for Transportation and Housing and Urban Development should be reduced from last year. The current bill breaks that spending promise. The massive appropriations bill that will increase the unsustainable national debt is a step in the wrong direction.
I urge you to call your Senators and ask them to vote NO on S.1243, the T-HUD Appropriations Bill. We will count their vote as a KEY VOTE when calculating the FreedomWorks Economic Freedom Scorecard for 2013. Our scorecard is used to determine eligibility for the FreedomFighter Award, which recognizes Members of Congress with voting records that support economic freedom.
President and CEO
Dear FreedomWorks member,
Capitol Hill Update, 7-29-2013
House& Senate/Schedule: Both chambers are in session this week, after which both will leave town for five weeks for the annual August recess. The session will resume on September 9th.
Legislative Highlight of the Week: Senator Mike Lee and Representative Mark Meadows have drafted letters for Members of Congress to sign to pledge their allegiance to voting against any government spending bill that includes continued funding for ObamaCare. While the implementation of ObamaCare continues to fall apart, the Obama administration’s response has merely been to give businesses a one-year waiver, while forcing individuals to comply as scheduled. In response, Senator Mike Lee wisely said, “if the administration will not enforce the law as written, then the American people should not be forced to fund it.” FreedomWorks agrees with Senator Lee, and has taken the extraordinary step of counting signatures on the Lee and Meadows letters as a Key Vote for our online scorecard.
House/Appropriations: On Tuesday afternoon the House will begin consideration of the appropriations bill for the Departments of Transportation and Housing & Urban Development (T-HUD) spending bill, H.R. 2610. The bill reduces spending by $4 billion under the sequester level, bringing the total down to $97.6 Billion (with $44.1 Billion in discretionary spending and $53.5 Billion in mandatory spending). The House will consider a large number of amendments to this bill on Tuesday and Wednesday.
House/Regulation: Rep. Todd Young (R-IN) has introduced the “Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act,” H.R. 367, which will require executive agency regulations that will have a major economic impact to be subject to a vote in Congress. This bill would prevent agencies like the EPA and the NLRB from passing economically-devastating regulations without a congressional vote. The REINS act would restore accountability and protect citizens’ rights by giving elected officials a voice in all major regulations issued. Congress is expected to vote on this bill on Thursday; FreedomWorks has issued a Key Vote in favor.
House/Health Care: On Friday, the House is expected to vote on Rep. Tom Price’s (R-GA) “Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act,” H.R. 2009. The bill would completely sever the IRS from any role in implementing or enforcing ObamaCare. Under the law as it currently stands, the IRS is set to have a primary role as the enforcer of ObamaCare’s mandates, which will require it to collect, in the words of one congressman, “every bit of sensitive information one would need to know to completely take over the identification of a person.” In light of recent scandals, having the IRS this directly involved with our health care is a frightening prospect. The support of FreedomWorks activists was instrumental in getting this vote to the floor, and FreedomWorks has issued a Key Vote in favor of the bill.
House/Education: The House this week will vote on the Rep. John Kline’s (R-MN) Bipartisan Student Loan Certainty Act of 2013, H.R. 1911, which the Senate passed last week. This legislation would tie the interest rate on loans to the yield of a ten-year Treasury bond, instead of directly fixing interest rates as it has done in the past. The argument is that it allows more market forces to work. However, interest rates will still have a cap and will be distorted by the Federal Reserve (which controls the cost of Treasury bills). Thus, this approach is a marginal improvement at best, and will continue the government’s poor track record on tuition costs, credential inflation, and educational choices. Read more here.
House/Government Oversight: The House will also be considering a large number of smaller bills relating to government oversight and reform. A number of these bills have good ideas, such as stopping the pay to government employees who are placed on administrative leave, and making it easier to fire federal employees who have committed a criminal act on the job. To see the full list of bills that the House will be working on this week, check out the Majority Leader’s floor schedule HERE.
Senate/Appropriations: Early this week the Senate is expected to vote on their own version of the T-HUD appropriations bill (S.1243), which sets the departments’ discretionary spending at $54 billion for fiscal year 2014. Sponsored by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), the bill would greatly exceed the spending caps set by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and is nearly $10 Billion above the House version of the bill. This is part of a larger movement by the Democrats to eliminate the sequestration cuts leading up to the renewal of the Continuing Resolution to fund the federal government. Accordingly, FreedomWorks will be issuing a Key Vote against this bill.
Senate/Energy: Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rob Portman (R-OH) recently introduced the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, S. 761, and it could come to the floor this week. The bill is problematic for a variety of reasons. Chief among them is that the bill would allow the Department of Energy (D.O.E) to set up new standards and reward states for abiding by them. Additionally, the bill would make the Federal Data consolidation center more accessible, and would allow the D.O.E to start conducting studies and making suggestions to congress on national building standards, an effective assault on federalism. FreedomWorks opposes this bill.
Capitol Hill Update, 7-29-2013House& Senate/Schedule: Both chambers are in session this week, after which both will leave town for five weeks for the annual August recess. The session will resume on September 9th.
Capitol Hill Update, 22 July, 2013
House & Senate/Schedule: Both chambers are in session this week, and will remain so until August 2nd.
Legislative Highlight of the Week: Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) has proposed an amendment to the DoD appropriations bill that would withhold funding to NSA surveillance activities being conducted without a judge's warrant. However, the House Rules committee is expected to vote Monday night on a “structured rule” process, which would not allow amendments like Amash’s. This proposal is a simple 4th amendment protection reaffirming that American citizens have the right to due process and the presumption of innocence under the law before being spied upon by their own government.
**UPDATE** Amash's amendment will be brought to the floor of the House, thanks in part to the phone calls of hundreds of FreedomWorks activists. FreedomWorks will issue a Key Vote: YES in favor of Rep. Amash's amendment.
House/Appropriations: The house will vote on the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, H.R. 2397 this week. Sponsored by Rep. C.W. “Bill” Young (R-FL), this bill appropriates $513 billion for defense spending on top of $86 billion in emergency war spending. This amount ignores the sequester cuts, supposedly in exchange for those cuts being applied elsewhere in the budget. In addition, the House is advancing this bill under a rule that does not allow for the open amendment process that leadership had promised for all appropriations bills.
House/Energy: On Thursday the House will vote on the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act of 2013, H.R. 2218. The bill seeks to encourage recovery coal combustion residuals and establish requirements for the proper management and disposal of coal combustion residuals. However, the bill places more burden on coal companies that will in turn hurt our domestic energy sector and economy.
House/Energy: The House will also vote Thursday on the Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013, H.R. 1582, sponsored by Rep. Bill Cassidy (LA-6). This will require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit a report that details increase in cost, increase in energy prices, and change in employment, that a proposed regulation on energy production, supply, distribution, or use would have. This only applies to regulations that will have an economic effect of $1 billion of more; whereas the current definition of a "major rule" is a regulation have an effect of $100 million or more. Thus, this bill would not provide oversight to a majority of major rules being promulgated, while possibly raising the bar for how significant a regulation has to be before receiving oversight. A weak reform overall.
Senate/Student Loans: Later this week the Senate will vote on its Student Loan Bill, a bipartisan compromise which would artificially reduce interest rates on student loans to below 4% from its current 6.8%, and would also pin the interest rate to federal treasury bond rates. Manipulating interest rates in this way distorts the student loan market and sends false signals that encourage students to take on more debt that they may not be able to afford to pay back. The free market solution would be to take the government out of the business of fixing loan interest rates, but both parties seem primed to pass this market-distorting "solution" instead.
Senate/Appropriations: Both the House and Senate may vote on the Transportation/Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) appropriations bill this week, but may end up taking the vote next week. The Senate version, S.1243, sponsored by Sen. Patty Murray (WA), has a $54 billion dollar price tag, a $6 billion increase from last year. This attempts to undo the sequester cuts. As of now, the House version is $44.1 billion.
Capitol Hill Update, 22 July, 2013House & Senate/Schedule: Both chambers are in session this week, and will remain so until August 2nd.
FreedomWorks Capitol Hill Update for the Week of March 18th
House & Senate Schedule: The House and Senate are both in session this week but will both be going on spring Spring recess beginning Friday. They will reconvene during the week of April 8th.
Legislative Highlight of the Week: The House budget written by Paul Ryan (R-WI), H.Con.Res. 25, will likely come to a vote in the house this Wednesday. Meant to balance the budget in 10 years, the bill is the official House budget which will stand in contrast to the Senate budget proposed recently by Senator Patty Murray. The budget will maintain post-sequester levels of spending, offer entitlement reform, repeal ObamaCare, block grant food stamps and Medicaid, and offer fundamental tax reform. The Ryan budget holds revenues at their current level while reducing spending by $80 billion in the first year. Over ten years Ryan expects the plan to save $4.633, though the debt will still rise to over $18.8 trillion by 2024. But the biggest knock against Ryan’s budget is that it essentially balances on the back of Obama’s tax hikes, keeping revenues at current levels.
House/Budget: The house Republican Study Committee (RSC) is expected to offer an alternative, conservative budget plan later in the week. The RSC budget will achieve balance in four years, while spending $6.9 trillion less than the CBO’s current projections. The budget also caps discretionary spending to $950 billion until the budget balances in 2017. Defense spending will remain at the same levels as the House Budget Committee proposal. Debt will be kept a 18.5% of GDP over ten years. The RSC budget does keep the revenue levels generated by the ObamaCare taxes, although like the Ryan budget it does eliminate ObamaCare itself entirely.
Continuing Resolution: Today (Tuesday) the Senate will vote on amendments to an amended version of the Continuing Resolution (CR) passed by the house last week, H.R. 933. Senators will be given the opportunity to bring to a vote any amendments to the bill. Once it is past the Senate, the C.R. will return to the House, which will likely pass the amended version before leaving town this Thursday. FreedomWorks has issued a Key Vote NO on the C.R. in the Senate, and has already scored against poassing the C.R. in the House.
Senate/Budget: Democratic Senator Patty Murray has proposed the Senate’s budget, S.Con.Res. 8, which will likely see a vote by the end of the week. The bill only reduces debt to 62.3% of GDP while keeping government spending to 19.8% of GDP by the tenth year.This budget increases taxes by nearly $1 trillion over ten years, and never achieves balance.
Senate/Budget Amendments: As part of the budget process, Senators will be allowed to offer any number of amendments that are considered “germane”, which leads to what is popularly called a “vote-a-rama”. Senators introduce their amendments and are given a minimal amount of time (thirty seconds to a couple of minutes) to pitch their amendment, and then a vote is held. It is expected that several of these amendments will be ones that are worthy of support – stay tuned for more on these later this week.
FreedomWorks Capitol Hill Update for the Week of March 18th
Wednesday, in the critical battleground state of Ohio, Paul Ryan spoke about his plan for the 46 million Americans who live in poverty saying that "in this war on poverty, poverty is winning.” With one in six Americans living in poverty, Ryan said that he and Mitt Romney would help them join (or rejoin) the middle class. "Many of those living in poverty today were in the middle class just a few years ago. We can help them regain the ground they've lost.” He also stressed the importance of those already in the middle class being secure in their financial futures.
Ryan made the point that increased government spending doesn’t always pay off. "Just last year, total federal and state spending on means-tested programs came in at more than one trillion dollars. How much is that in practical terms? For that amount of money, you could give every poor American a check for $22,000," he said. "Instead, we spend all that money attempting to fight poverty through government programs. And what do we have to show for it? In most of these programs, especially in recent years, we're still trying to measure compassion by how much government spends, not by how many people we help escape from poverty.”
Romney said that the best way to help people escape from poverty was through a better education which, he said, could be achieved through education reform. "Sending your child to a great school should not be a privilege of the well-to-do. Mitt Romney and I believe that choice should be available to every parent in our country, wherever they live."
He also appealed to Democrats and independents in stressing Romney’s business record as a way to grow the economy and fight poverty. He said "Whatever your political party, this nation cannot afford four more years like the last four years. Mitt Romney? This is a man who is uniquely qualified and ready to deliver this recovery. Why? Because he understands how an economy works and what it takes to make it grow."
Wednesday, in the critical battleground state of Ohio, Paul Ryan spoke about his plan for the 46 million Americans who live in poverty saying that "in this war on poverty, poverty is winning.” With one in six Americans living in poverty, Ryan said that he and Mitt Romney would help them join (or rejoin) the middle class. "Many of those living in poverty today were in the middle class just a few years ago.
Looking for information on Paul Ryan's budget plans and the "Ryan Roadmap?" Look no further.
We've compiled this list of links to help activists, bloggers, and journalists learn more about the policy vision of Paul Ryan, the young conservative and legislative entrepreneur whom Mitt Romney has chosen as his running mate.
The three basic iterations of the Roadmap are presented in reverse chronological order, from newest to oldest.
ROADMAP 3.0 (112th Congress) (FY 2013 House Budget Resolution) (2012)
The third distinct iteration of the Ryan Roadmap looked much like the second, but modified the Medicare reform section to preserve original, 1960s Medicare alongside Ryan's proposed new, competitive ("premium support") model, which would compete with private plans for seniors' business in a new Medicare "exchange" managed by the Medicare agency. (This approach is sometimes called "Wyden-Ryan," for its two co-authors Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin).)
The plan also waived the current-law Budget Control Act sequester and in its stead increased defense spending by roughly $700 billion over ten years, relative to current law, while reducing annually appropriated non-defense spending by roughly $800 billion.
The plan would save about $4 trillion over ten years (2013-2022), out of a projected roughly $44 trillion in ten-year spending. It would reduce federal outlays to about 20 percent of GDP, down from about 24 percent today. And it would reduce publicly held debt to about 62 percent of GDP, down from nearly 80 percent today.
Roadmap 3.0 passed the House in the form of H.Con.Res.112 on March 29, 2012, by a vote of 228 to 191. Ten House Republicans voted against the resolution. No House Democrats voted for it. A more fiscally conservative alternative was also offered, by the House conservative caucus, the Republican Study Committee; but it failed.
The Senate rejected Roadmap 3.0 (H.Con.Res.112) on May 16, 2012, by a vote of 58 to 41. Five Senate Republicans voted against the resolution. No Senate Democrats voted for it. Three more fiscally conservative plans were also offered, by Senators Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania), Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), and Mike Lee (R-Utah); but all three failed. Senate Democrats did not offer a budget plan of their own.
Detailed summary with graphs: Ryan FY 2013 budget plan (Bipartisan Policy Center) - 2012-08-12
How they voted: Senate vote on H.Con.Res.112 (Ryan budget) - Govtrack - 2012-05-16
Report Card: Rand Paul "Tea Party Budget" = Best in Class (FreedomWorks graphic) - 2012-05-15
How they voted: House vote on H.Con.Res.112 (Ryan budget) - Govtrack - 2012-03-29
ROADMAP 2.0 (112th Congress) (FY 2012 House Budget Resolution) (2011)
The second distinct iteration of the Roadmap -- introduced after Republicans had taken control of the House and Ryan had become chairman of the House Budget Committee -- differed from the first interation in several key ways. It added a provision to fully repeal ObamaCare (which had been enacted in March 2010), and it dropped universal health insurance tax credits, Social Security personal accounts, and the increase in the Social Security retirement age.
Roadmap 2.0 also largely exempted defense from spending reductions. The bulk of the plan's first-ten-year savings, therefore, came from three sources: Medicare (which then represented 13 percent of the federal budget); Medicaid (8 percent); and domestic discretionary spending (19 percent). Thus, 40 percent of the budget pie was targeted to produce 100 percent of the plan's first-ten-year savings.
Like the ObamaCare law, Roadmap 2.0 proposed to reduce Medicare spending by $500 billion over the first ten years, although notably by means of Ryan's "managed competition" reform rather than the Democrats' across-the-board Medicare payment cuts and bureaucratic rationing. The Medicare reform in Roadmap 2.0 was largely unchanged from its predecessors; but once all House Republicans voted for it, it immediately became the object of intense attack by Democrats, who (misleadingly) accused Republicans of "ending Medicare as we know it" and (falsely) of "ending the Medicare guarantee."
The plan would save about $5.8 trillion over ten years (2012-2021), out of a projected roughly $46 trillion in ten-year spending. It would reduce federal outlays to about 20 percent of GDP, down from about 24 percent today. And it would reduce publicly held debt to about 70 percent of GDP, down from nearly 80 percent today.
The income tax portion of the plan was thoroughly overhauled. Both the taxpayer choice provision for individuals and the VAT-like consumption tax for corporations were dropped. In their place, the plan generally described an individual and corporate income tax system that would be simpler and flatter than the existing code, with a top rate in both systems of no more than 25 percent. To avoid losing revenue, the plan assumed the elimination of numerous tax credits, deductions, and exemptions, but did not specify which ones. Mathematically speaking, to achieve a 25 percent top rate, virtually all existing credits, deductions, and exemptions would have to go.
Roadmap 2.0 passed the House in the form of the bill H.Con.Res.34, popularly known as the Ryan Budget, on April 15, 2011, by a vote of 235 to 193. Four House Republicans voted against the resolution. No House Democrats voted for it. A more fiscally conservative alternative was offered, by the House conservative caucus, the Republican Study Committee; but it failed.
The Senate rejected Roadmap 2.0 (H.Con.Res.34) on May 25, 2011, by a vote of 57 to 40. Five Senate Republicans voted against the resolution. No Senate Democrats voted for it. Two more fiscally conservative alternatives were also offered, by Senators Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) and Rand Paul (R-Kentucky); both alternatives failed. Senate Democrats did not offer a budget plan of their own.
Report Card: Grading the Budget Plans (FreedomWorks graphic) - 2011-05-26
How they voted: Senate vote on H.Con.Res.34 (Ryan budget) - Govtrack - 2011-05-25
How they voted: House vote on H.Con.Res.34 (Ryan budget) - Govtrack - 2011-04-15
H.Con.Res.34 (FY 2012 House Budget Resolution) (final legislative text) - GPO - 2011-04-15
H.Con.Res.34 (112th Congress) (Ryan budget for FY 2012) - Govtrack - 2011-04-15
The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America's Promise (PDF document) - 2011-03
The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America's Promise (resources page) - 2011-03
"Ryan Roadmap Plan 2.0" (Ryan budget for FY 2012) (legislative summary) - 2011
ROADMAP 1.1 (111th Congress) (Legislative Proposal) (2010)
Roadmap 1.1, introduced in 2010, looked much like its predecessor, but added provisions to: 1) raise the Medicare retirement age to 69.5 by 2021; 2) index future increases in the Social Security retirement age to grow with projected lifespans, thus likely increasing it to age 70 by the year 2100.
H.R.4529 (111th Congress) Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2010 - Govtrack - 2010-01-27
ROADMAP 1.0 (110th Congress) (Legislative Proposal) (2008)
The original Ryan Roadmap -- introduced in 2008, when Democrats controlled the House and Senate -- included a number of bold reforms to reduce spending and avert America's entirely foreseeable debt crisis. It constituted a comprehensive, integrated package, unified by an optimistic, conservative vision. Its reforms included the following: Accelerate the currently scheduled increase in the Social Security retirement age to 67, by 2021. For seniors aged 55 and under, gradually reduce the future growth of promised Social Security benefits (more so for higher-income retirees than for lower-income ones). Create optional Social Security personal accounts. Modernize Medicare into a competitive "premium support" model based on the existing Medicare Advantage program, for seniors then aged 55 and under, beginning in 2022. Block-grant Medicaid and SCHIP back to the states. Convert the existing tax-code subsidy for employer-provided health benefits into a "managed competition" system of universal health insurance tax credits coupled with health care "exchanges" and certain federal regulations. Establish spending reductions targets, to be enforced by sequesters (automatic, across-the-board spending reductions, should the caps be exceeded). The plan also overhauled the tax code, in two ways. It transformed the individual income tax into a Taxpayer Choice system, allowing taxpayers to choose between paying their income taxes under the existing tax code or under an alternative, simpler, flat-rate system. And it replaced the existing corporate income tax with a new, VAT-like consumption tax. The plan assumed that future tax revenues will remain indefinitely in the range of 18 to 19 percent of GDP.
Roadmap 1.0 did not specify any agencies for elimination. Nor did it balance the budget, except in the distant future, under certain optimistic assumptions. But it did reduce long-term borrowing sufficiently to forecast a spectacular reduction in the national debt as a share of national output, relative to current law, over the next four decades.
H.R.6110 (110th Congress) Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2008 - Govtrack - 2008-05-21
Looking for information on Paul Ryan's budget plans and the "Ryan Roadmap?" Look no further.
Yesterday, the House passed Paul Ryan's ten-year budget plan on mostly party lines while rejecting President Obama's budget unanimously. In my audio update this morning, I discuss the votes and give a brief look at the state of the national budget debate.
P.S. In the update, I name the 10 Republicans who voted against the Ryan budget, characterizing them as fiscal stalwards. That isn't quite right. Some of them are squeamish Republicans who apparently don't want to cut spending, at least not in the way that most of their fellow Republicans do.
The strongest fiscal conservatives, whom I should have named, but unfortunately didn't, are the following five Republicans who voted only for the more conservative alternative, the RSC budget, which was the only plan offered that would balance the budget. They are: Justin Amash (MI), Joe Barton (TX), Tim Huelskamp (KS), Paul Broun (GA), and Ron Paul (TX). These five are the cream of the cream. We need more like them in Congress.
For a more detailed written account, and additional information on the budget debate, go to this recent blog post.
Dean Clancy is FreedomWorks' Legislative Counsel and Vice President, Health Care Policy
Click to listen! Yesterday, the House passed Paul Ryan's ten-year budget plan on mostly party lines while rejecting President Obama's budget unanimously. In my audio update this morning, I discuss the votes and give a brief look at the state of the national budget debate.
Want more freedom? Become a member today!