Paul Ryan in OnTheIssues Fact Checking


On Health Care: FactCheck: No, Medicare cost doesn't exceed national defense

Paul Ryan writes, "Medicare & Medicaid together consume 22% of the federal budget--more than national defense, including the costs of the two wars." That statement is only true if one defines "national defense" strictly as the budget for the Department of Defense (totaling $664B, or 20% of the 2010 budget, compared to $793B for Medicare/Medicaid, or 23% of the 2010 budget). Ryan adds the "two wars" clause to imply a more general definition of "defense," but just adding the two wars excludes several very large defense expenditures in departments other than DoD: These are the low-end estimates for the 2010-2012 budget; see our "Background on Homeland Security" page for more details.
Source: OnTheIssues FactCheck on Young Guns, p.116 May 2, 2011

On Principles & Values: FactCheck: "Progressivists" is intentionally insulting term

Ryan uses the term "Progressivist vision" on p. 131; the same term is used on p. 98, p. 112, & pp. 129-132. The term has no political meaning except to insult Ryan's opponents. There are no political groups in America who call themselves "progressivists. The term is akin to using "Democrat Party" as an insulting term for "the Democratic Party" (there is no "Democrat Party," and no one uses that term except in a derogatory manner). The authors, evidently, attempt here to invent a new derogatory term.

Ryan further misleads readers by asserting, "Left-of-center politicians stopped calling themselves 'liberals' and started calling themselves 'Progressives.' I can't say precisely why they made this switch." That is factually incorrect. Liberals and progressives are distinct factions in the Democratic Party, akin to libertarians vs. Christian conservatives in the Republican Party. Hillary Clinton represented the liberal faction in 2008; Barack Obama represented the progressive faction.

Source: OnTheIssues.org FactCheck on "Young Guns" May 2, 2011

On Tax Reform: FactCheck: JFK cut rates by 20%, but from twice today's rate

Ryan claims JFK cut taxes and we can do the same now. Is that historically accurate?RYAN: You can cut tax rates by 20 percent and still preserve these important preferences for middle-class taxpayers--

BIDEN: Not mathematically possible.

RYAN: It is mathematically possible. It's been done before. It's precisely what we're proposing. It's been done a couple of times, actually. Jack Kennedy lowered tax rates, increased growth. Ronald Reagan, Republicans & Democrats have worked together on this.

THE FACTS: The top marginal tax rate in 1962 was 91% and JFK proposed lowering the top rate to 65% (compared to a top rate of 37% today). Yes, JFK did cut tax rates by more than 20%. But in the context of the much higher rates in 1962, cutting tax rates meant something very different than today--Ryan hence cannot realistically apply the lessons from JFK to today. No politician of any party today would even consider RAISING tax rates to the LOWER levels proposed by JFK in 1962!

Source: OnTheIssues FactCheck on the 2012 Vice Presidential debate Dec 10, 2012

The above quotations are from Presidential Primary Fact Checking by OnTheIssues.org.
Click here for main summary page.
Click here for a profile of Paul Ryan.
Click here for Paul Ryan on all issues.
Paul Ryan on other issues:
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology/Infrastructure
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to:
1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140
E-mail: submit@OnTheIssues.org
(We rely on your support!)

Page last updated: Nov 03, 2024