On Tuesday, House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) released his budget for the federal government in 2013. Dubbed the Path to Prosperity, the plan trims spending, reforms taxes and looks to market-based reforms to health care entitlement programs—all key elements of The Heritage Foundation’s Saving the American Dream budget plan.

The Ryan budget is a tremendous improvement over liberal plans, including President Obama’s 2013 proposal, say Alison Fraser, who directs Heritage’s Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, and Patrick Louis Knudsen, a senior Heritage budget expert. The Senate has not released a budget proposal in several years.

» Ryan will be speaking about his plan at The Heritage Foundation on Thursday morning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern. Watch live online.

A successful federal budget, Fraser and Knudsen argue, should:

  • Cut spending sharply and quickly
  • Begin decisive entitlement reform
  • Avoid tax hikes
  • Ensure a strong national defense
  • Include pro-growth tax reforms
  • Move swiftly towards a balanced budget

According to Fraser and Knudsen, “Ryan’s budget is not perfect. Few consensus political documents can be.”

Nonetheless, the plan includes several strong elements and provides a stark contrast with the liberal alternatives, Fraser and Knudsen write:

President Obama’s budget, which relies on enormous tax hikes, shirks any solutions to the twin crises of excessive spending and soaring debt, and never comes close to balance.

Ryan has put forth a serious plan worthy of serious consideration. His budget lays out substantive policy choices, cutting spending, reforming entitlements, and avoiding tax hikes. It also outlines a tax reform that would strengthen the economy and by implication further strengthen government finances through organic revenue growth. It represents real progress toward tackling the nation’s fiscal and economic challenges. Congress and the President should now move toward a real consensus that achieves all the Ryan plan suggests and more.

Ryan’s budget, they continue, “shares the same basic philosophy of The Heritage Foundation’s budget plan, Saving the American Dream.” Our plan cuts spending and balances the budget in ten years—and not at the expense of our men and women in uniform. Moreover, it implements neededed reforms to entitlement programs and updates the tax code to make it simple and fair.

Tell us in the comments: What do you think of Paul Ryan’s budget proposal?

Comments (65)

David - March 22, 2012

Would this budget plan actually reduce spending, or just reduce the projected increases in the baseline like his last budget proposal would have. He started out promising $100 billion in “cuts” by which he meant reducing the projected baseline increase of $155 billion to an increase of “only” $55 billion. Then he compromised the $100 billion down to $50 billion, which by various analyses slowed the projected $155 billion increase anywhere from only $35 billion to only $15 billion, so at best he allowed spending to increase $155 billion – $35 billion = $120 billion, and he might have allowed spending to increase as much as $155 billion – $15 billion = $140 billion. While that’s doubtless better than what the Democrats would have preferred, reducing the speed at which you’re doing in the wrong direction still leaves you going in the wrong direction. 🙂

Thomas Caro - March 22, 2012

I am concerned that nobody is talking about the Education Block Grants to the States.
If the Federal Govt is going to turn around and send the money back to the states – just don’t take it.
We will save on the bureaucracy that supports the filtering of my money through the Federal Gov’t on both sides. Also we will be returning to States rights and the 10th Amendment. Let the states do what they think is best.
I think there is a place in education for the Federal Government it is in the research and providing information to the states that can be used or not as they see fit.

Donald - March 22, 2012

It’s a well thought out budget that should lead us in the right direction!!!!!!!!

MARK - March 22, 2012

Move swiftly towards a balanced budget? I don’t like the sound of that. Balance the budget. If you don’t, you will not gain back the trust of citizens that live within budget or teach the other citizens to live within their means.

Steven Peters - March 22, 2012

Rep. Ryan’s plan is only a down payment on the path to fiscal sanity. It is probably more change than the socialists in the Senate and the big government Republicans will pass, but it continues to fund unconstitutional and unneeded federal government.

It took decades to create Leviathan in Washington. I fear we cannot afford decades to kill the monster. It will eat us if we do not strike at its heart swiftly.

Edward Sobus - March 22, 2012

The cuts don’t go deep enough and fast enough to be of any value. Dept of Education and Energy have to go. neither are doing thier job. The amount of administration these two have alone is staggering. Children are not being taught and the Energy Dept has not done enough to get us off of foreign oil. EPA needs to be cut way back as well. We need hard decisions now, not down the road. If we ever expect to get control of this spending, we need stringent policies that make big changes now, not later.

C. Larry Bradford - March 22, 2012

I think Ryan’s budget suggestions miss the regulatory costs and should address them.

Walt - March 22, 2012

To David’s point, it does appear to cut spending, but it doesn’t do enough on entitlements. With the number on Social Security and Medicare doubling as we speak, we must take stronger steps in this area. Delay payments another year or two, means test above certain pretty high levels (i.e., 100k income per year), and reinstitute the payroll tax recently cut.

Bob - March 22, 2012

I”ll be dead before the budget is balanced in 2040. What is needed is immediate reduction in spending, not reducing the rate at which we spend. The Dept of Education and Energy must go. Not wait until the time is right. The time is now. Ryan and the Republican Leadership just don’t get it. They’re still trying to protect their influence and their jobs. I agree with David, reducing the speed at which our money is being spent while going in the wrong direction, doesn’t change the direction. We’re still going broke and there is no assurance that a future Congress will abide with this current budget. Cut now, cut deep, and start the bleeding. Bad news doesn’t get better with age, it just gets older.

Bob - March 22, 2012

I’ll be dead by the time this budget is balanced. We can’t wait for the timid Republicans to get this right. The Department of Education and Energy must go, along with many other Agencies and unneeded Govt. entities. Ryan and the Republican Leadership are afraid to cut the spending because they have friends that contribute to their campaigns. I agree with David, reduced spending going in the wrong direction, is still going in the wrong direction. Cut now, cut deep, and start the bleeding. Bad news doesn’t get better with age, it only gets older.

Jim Thompson - March 22, 2012

I agree with most repliers, especially Edward Sobus’ argument to eliminate the Dept. of Education and Dept. of Energy. And if we do not get a balanced budget and start reducing the debt now, it may never happen.

Judith K - March 22, 2012

Paul Ryan has always seemed to be a brilliant man and a unique politician with no agenda other than to assist our country from very unwise economic spending. He must work within the system and we should all understand that. We must also lend a hand and do our parts by adding our weight. I feel we a playing tug-of-war with disaster on the other end of the rope.

William Briggs - March 22, 2012

The budget proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan is a move in the right direction but is not enough to keep the federal government from continuing to grab more power and takes too long to balance the budget. I believe the budget proposed by Rand Paul would balance the budget in only 5 years and put the federal government back in it’s intended place, working for us, not us for them.

Clinton Jameson - March 22, 2012

Congress should pass this bill to help this Country get back on the right track.

William Vessey - March 22, 2012

I’m assuming this plan is the Roadmap 2.0 that has been out for some time? While not perfect it does answer all the questions about baselines and projected program increases.


Courtney - March 22, 2012

Generally, I like the move toward simplification of the tax code (ordinary Americans should be able to file their own taxes) and the courage to reform our “sacred” entitlement programs. I am really disappointed at the elimination of mortgage interest write off as if no one considers the real estate market an investment. My husband and I have real estate holdings that are part of our retirement plan and the interest deduction is a large part of making the investment pencil. Under Ryan’s flate rate option, our effective tax rate increases and deductions go away. Although I like the courage to propose something new, I do not see many Americans adopting the flat rate option unless the higher tax bracket was dropped to say 20%. Since everyone likes to use Buffett as an example, why would he pay a flat 25% when he can use deductions to get to 11% as reported? Most people itemizing do not have an effective tax rate higher than 25%. Also, why would lower income Americans pay 10% when they can use the current system and pay close to nothing?

Ben Dickey - March 22, 2012

The Ryan plan is the only one that comes close to balancing the budget. Our tax rates are punitive, the regulations are even worse, and no matter how much tax revenue comes in, Washington can always spend more. I am affraid if conservatives do not prevail in November, our Republic is lost.

Jo - March 22, 2012

I don’t understand why the welfare system doesn’t make the reciepients of the benefits accountable. What would be wrong with allowing them to work for what they get?. It would not only benefit the people with building of self esteeme and self worth but they could be building skills and possible future jobs and getting off the welfare rolls. Why couldn’t the single women with children who use the reason why they can’t work watch the children of other women who in turn would be working for their welfare money at a job. What jobs..lets see. If the government is just giving the welfare away in the first place just make it a paycheck for work done. Cleaning up the highways, thinning the forests, tutoring problem children, working in soup kitchens, babysitting other womens children (it would be nice if the government would supply space for this childcare..) freeing up the mothers time to go learn a job skill. making laws that unless they work in some capacity for 8 hours a day, 40 hrs a week, they would no longer be eligable for welfare, this should also apply to people on unemployment. allowing of course time for them to persue a job that they deam suitable..but still working an adjusted amount of time in the interum. Why is is necessary to reward people who for generations have taken government money.? Granted there are some who can’t work and truely need the money. This is what the system was set up for. Old people, disabled people. But I gotta tell you the other day I was behind a lady on welfare at the grocery store who was purchasing items I would never be able to afford. Then she whipped out cash and payed for a carton of cigarettes..over 50.00..I gave up smoking years ago because I couldn’t afford it. She was a younger able bodied person and this makes my blood boil..I work hard for what I earn and my tax dollars are given to what appears to me a leach on my hard earned dollars..I for one am sick to death of this nanny state we have become.. I try to be kind but how did this happen? Take from the old who have paid taxes all their lives and give to young able bodied people as a reward for doing nothing but riding the system..what a sorry situation. Put them to work doing something with their leisure time. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand if you are putting out the bucks anyway, have them do something for it..duh

J.Guidry - March 22, 2012

Eliminate the EPA, DOE(both of them), stop using the baseline method of budgeting, sensibly reform the tax code(a consumption tax), follow the constitution in what the feds are allowed, then we have a starting point for recovery from this Obamination of the last several decades. Getting rid of the Fed Bank would be another great idea. Ryan’s plan is a good one, it just didn’t go far enough. He took a scalpel to a diseased limb when a butcher knife is needed.

Neil C - March 22, 2012

Paul Ryan’s budget is a conservative, foundation plank for the Republican Platform.

Conservatives, consider establishing the Republican Platform prior to selecting the nominee who gets to influence it greatly.

Make Ryan’s budget a cardinal issue upon which Congressional, Presidential and Senate candidate run. Have a promise from all candidates that if elected, they will work for its passage in time for a Presidential Signature immediately after inauguration.

Establish other planks similarly, such as, total and absolute repeal of ObamaCare.

Unless corrective action is explained and taken decisively, we, The People, will be piped over the edge like the other lemmings because we were unwilling to pay the Piper’s Price. Liberty’s preservation is always the low cost solution for individuals.

Jacqueline Gordon - March 22, 2012

Awesome! It is about time we take steps “forward” & stop the spending!!

Great Job!

Edward Stone - March 22, 2012

Has anyone thought about reducing the Federal Gov’t. perhaps by eliminating the overlapping agencies and also eliminating the Department of Education for a start?

Cynthia Stang - March 22, 2012

While I give credit to Paul Ryan for taking on entitlements, his plan does not balance the budget for decades. I prefer Rand Paul’s budget. Perhaps they could work together.

Robert Autenrieth Sr. - March 22, 2012

It’s a start in the right direction that will never happen until we have all 3 branches in consertive hands.

Fred Wilson - March 22, 2012

A good start but probably more than can be passed by this Congress so not much chance of actually doing what really needs to be done.

I would like to see more in the way of tax reform. By that I mean replace the income tax with a simple consumption tax on the end user.

The Simple Consumption Tax

Proposed, an amendment

Section 1. The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2. A tax to be collected at the point of consumption of all new goods and services, except as exempt by this act, at a rate to be set by 2/3 vote of Congress as required, is hereby established. Items in the following classes shall be exempt; unprepared food, drugs, and medical treatment.

Elana - March 22, 2012

I commend Paul Ryan for attempting to get Congress to pass a budget. However, it will take too long. I believe that RAND Paul’s 5-year plan is more sensible and we would do well to take a long, hard look at it.

conrad masterson - March 22, 2012

It is hard to know how I feel about this plan. The concepts are fine, but what does each one mean? There is no detail. I want to know what he means by:

“Cut spending sharply and quickly” Cut what and when?

“Begin” decisive entitlement reform And then do what?

I think I understand “Avoid tax hikes”

What does “Ensure a strong national defense” mean? There is a lot of defense waste, so it can be cut without damaging defense.

What is “Include pro-growth tax reforms”? I want specifics.

As for “Move swiftly towards a balanced budget”, I want to know how fast and why it cannot be faster? There is no reason we cannot freeze hiring and cut some existing programs this year.

Instead of talking about block grants, why not eliminate the program entirely, fire the Federal staff, reduce tax rates, and let the states increase their taxes if they want the program? I want to see some true cuts, not simply a reduction in growth!

John Getz - March 22, 2012

MY one MAIN comment is that word “entitlement.” My Social Security is no more an entitlement than Ryan’s retirement, or any AFSME coerced retirement. They’re all taxpayer dollars, period.

C.A.Reed - March 22, 2012

I totally support Paul Ryan. I do think, however, that older people should be able to have the alternative to medicare too. I am 63 and dread being pushed onto Medicare. I also do not think receiving your SS should be connected to taking Medicare.

J.M. Cartwright - March 22, 2012

Just like Obamacare- we need to see it before offering any intelligent opinion. Too often we are asked to form an opinion based on incomplete or flawed data.

Jeanne Huibregtse - March 22, 2012

My husband (68) is still working so we have not yet been forced into the Medicare system. We would like to have the choice to get our own health care policy offered by Rep. Ryan in his plan.

Ken Ramold - March 22, 2012

Balanced budget until 2040? Spare me. We’re on the fast track of becoming Greece with our 16 trillion dollar debt. Let’s give some serious consideration to Connie Mack’s Penny Plan that cuts baseline budgeting by 1% and balances the budget within 8 years. This is simple and doable folks!

John - March 22, 2012

I don’t trust Congress do do anything that will help Social Security recipients and Medicare recipients and medicaid recipients. I am very angry that Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are referred to as “entitlements”. We are forced into paying into these programs over the years while Congress spends the money irresponsibility rather than placing the money into an account or program similar to an insurance business. If the money paid in by workers had been protected from congressmen and invested even at three percent, there would now be all kinds of money for retirees. Now days, they want to use a negative label–entitlement–to refer to those living on the very money they were forced to pay out for Social Security and Medicare–Medicaid, too. Congress needs cut their own salaries and all the bureaucratic departments by fifty percent; the tremendous debt incurred by Obama’s and Congresses’ poor decision making would soon evaporate. With the Social Democrats and the Rinos running our government, it is very easy to understand why we Americans are losing our freedoms.

Virginia Fabbri - March 22, 2012

Ryan’s budget is a step in the right direction but not enough. Rand Paul’s budget proposal contains more of the things this country needs. Please consider supporting Rand Paul’s budget and give us the opportunity to let our senators and representatives know we support it with a letter to email to all in Congress. Thank you.

Jay Swinea - March 22, 2012

I applaud the initiative that Congressman Paul Ryan and the House Budget Committee have taken with this proposal.. It is obviously a product of hard work and belies true concern for our nation. All comments of the opposing Democrat party which has – now for years – not even bothered to propose a budget, are vacuous and are an insult to every taxpayer of this country. I resent such flippantly vagrant an attitude.

I am an Independent businessman with over 60 years of experience. I know whereof I speak. Whether public or private, any initial (read “proposed”) budget is a “working document.” Certainly, proposed budgets engender revision/tweaking. But, legitimate discussions cannot begin until all parties have offered their respective budgets and, thereby, declared their positions….in a sincere and upright manner.

Steve - March 22, 2012

When did Americans become selfish cowards?

Frank from Mich. - March 22, 2012

Paul Ryans plan, though not perfect, is based on logic. The democrats seem to base all their plans on emotion, which in any circumstance usually results in a poor outcome.
One phrase that I heard, even from Paul, is “Establishment”, when referring to our “Leaders”. I do not think our government was suppose to be ruled by an establishment, rather, governed by the people. Carreer politicians lose touch with the people, especially those in office for up to 30 years. I don’t want a “ruling class” against the citizenship.

clarence b. butler - March 22, 2012

1. how will rep ryans budget plan effect present day veterans

2. How many federal agencies has obama created since
becoming president ???

Don - March 22, 2012

I understand there are two different tax brackets. Bracketing anyone into separate tax brackets is not fair and equal treatment, no matter how you slice it. Why is one guy taxed less because he falls under 24.99%, and therefore pays the lesser tax of 10%, but the next guy, just makes the 25% cut and is taxed at that rate. Where is the conservative who can speak plainly and clearly about a flat tax. No one can ever say that a flat tax rate (the same rate for everyone) isn’t fair.

Joseph McKennan - March 22, 2012

When I was a lot younger, a million was an astronomical number. I could buy 10 cinnamon bears for a penny…..
It seems nowadays that a million is what politicians use for bribes, incentives, etc. The REAL money is in the federal budget where billions are stepping stones to the trillions. Intelligent people (with integrity) can understand that over the years life has grown complicated but……. NOT THAT COMPLICATED. What are the leaders of this nation doing?
I had to work hard and be diligent with what I earned. I can say that I offered assistance to my neighbor if I saw he could use help. I did it voluntarily.
I resent the tactics of politicians who take what is mine and give it to someone who doesn’t lift a finger to help himself. I REALLY resent the fact that foreigners (legal and illegal alike) have more constitutional rights than I do now. If politicians want my support do what Paul Ryan is doing. The US government is a hog that is ready for the freezer

Sonie - March 22, 2012

It’s a start in the right direction, but take a look at the propaganda the White House is announcing; that Ryan’s budget is harming those on Medicare and Medicaid….take a look and address these charges. So many retirees struggle to make it, and when hey have worked hard all their lives, contributed, and to be put into financial straits is not right. Hopefully, this will solve that. I believe we must also reform taxes to the Fair Tax to increase money flowing to the Gov’t, while eliminating income, capital gains and death taxes.

Larry Dunham - March 22, 2012

We have to start somewere and this is positive. Just like like we were told in Carters 70’s it would take 10 years for anything to happen effecting gas prices and oil independence. Will over 30+ years later we are still being held back and if we had started then we could oil independent now. So lets start with Ryans plan, at least we “will not have to pass it in order find out what is in it”.

johnboy - March 22, 2012

Make the tax code simple, get rid of deductions, & AMT.
This man needs to run for President in 4 yrs — start now!
Move over Boehner.

GREGORY W GRAVES - March 22, 2012

It is good to see so many people taking the time to pay attention. This is a great country and it was evident 8/12/2010 in DC at the Restoring Honor rally. My fellow Americans from all over this country came together to show unity and we want our country back this means making real changes real spending cuts not projected spending cuts. In my business if we spent $100,000 this year and we needed to cut $50,000 next year that means we would only spend $50,000 this is a real cut not raising our budget to $150,000 and then cutting $25,000 and calling it a cut that is a flat out lie not a cut.Cut now cut everywhere stop the lies.

Howard Woods - March 22, 2012

John’s proposal to begin the balancing of the budget by cutting congressional compensation by 50% is a good start, but who are we kidding, those D.C. rogues and fools can never reduce their addiction to evermore spending. At present I am one of a growing number of citizens who think we have already passed the tipping point and are doomed to currency failure, national bankruptcy, disastrous riots, and the death of our national democracy. Economic enslavement shall be the heritage we pass to our grandchildren.

chuck - March 22, 2012

unless it can cut $1 trillion a year to pay the debt then its not serious and even at that we are looking at a teenagers entire life

chuck - March 22, 2012

i agree with jo that if you receive taxpayer money you should be responsible with it , drug tests for one, if you have money for drugs then you dont need tax payers help

Mollie Lazarus - March 22, 2012

This is a move in the right direction but is not as quickly as we might like. However, with the Democrats unable to come up with a budget in 3+ years and going off the cliff in accelerating debt it makes Ryan’s Plan a sensible one to move America toward living within it’s means. I strongly support it!

Joseph Terico - March 23, 2012

I would love to see Ryans budget passed and signed into law. The librals dont have a clue how to run this great country of ours. They are the poison within the country thanks to great people like Rep Ryan who love there country, who work hard to bring a buget proposal to the table. Thanks rep Ryan for all the hard work and love of country.

Peter - March 23, 2012

some modest suggestions for the budget:
1. The Federal Government shall not spend more than 90% of the 2011 Tax receipts. The 10% difference must be used to retire the debt and deficit. This action must be conducted until the debt is paid.
2. Welfare programs shall be changed so that loans (and not grants) shall be made to remedy life emergencies. The recipient is liable for the repayment of the moneys advanced by the taxpayer – when the recipient has recovered his strength and capabilities.
3. A chronic welfare recipient shall be deemed a ward of the state; and wards of the state shall lose their all rights of citizenship since they no longer contribute to the welfare our society and therefore cannot be allowed to make policy decisions for our society.
Let us start our political reform implementing these simple ideas.

Eustace R. Lake - March 23, 2012

I think that Paul Ryan is moving in the right direction, he just needs to double the speed.
The real problem is enforcement of the Constitution. Each politician is sworn to uphold it but don’t. So what good is a Consitiution that is not enforced?

kristen price - March 23, 2012

This is an attempt to get democrats to sign on but they won’t do it anyway. The Dept. of Education and Energy absolutely need to be ELIMINATED! There are a lot of other reulatory bureaucracies that need to be eliminated too. CUT! CUT! CUT!

Thomas Dunphy - March 23, 2012

Terrible bill. Again Congress kicks the can down the road. Ryan’s balances the budget in 2040. Who can we trust? It is so sad that a man of Ryan’s intellect and status is acting like a democrat. We have no one protecting the American taxpayer.

Jeff Yetter - March 24, 2012

“Stop Rolling Downhill Like A Snowball Headed For Hell”. ‘Ol Merle just might agree that this is a start toward doing just that. First we curb the momentum, then we get it under control. At least Paul Ryan is doing SOMETHING!

Colin - March 25, 2012

Make the cuts now!!!. Get rid of Departments of Energy, Education and the EPA. Balance the budget in 5 years. The Rand Paul / Jim DeMint plan does just that. I totally agree with some of the comments made here, ie: “if we do not act swiftly now to get this thing under control it will never get done”. We cannot afford to wait.

David - March 25, 2012

Need to get more “press” on Ryan’s !! The American public [ in general] needs to here about common sense, tough choices and a real “path” way forward. Not the double talk that the left is offering.

(Mr.) Lynn C. Rogers - March 26, 2012

We HAVE to cut spending, sharply and quickly, and if the U.S. economy is to survive, we must make substantial reforms to entitlement programs such as social security and medicare. I do not believe that anyone who truly understands the gravity of the situation would mind increasing the age for retirement under Social Security a couple of years, and also would not mind shaving medicare benefits gradually over a period of years. Finally, we must repeal Obamacare, It is an anchor around the neck of this country, and we cannot possibly manage to swim with it.

Jeanee - March 26, 2012

I agree with Jo’s comment – why aren’t welfare recipients required to work for what they get. I understand that there are some who are completely unable to work – but those are the exceptions — NOT the rule. There are 3 or more generations that have been on welfare – not what was supposed to happen. Of course, Social Security dollars weren’t supposed to be spent on anything but Social Security either and look what happened there!

Patsy Durham - March 27, 2012

It’s great as always.

Denny Converse - March 27, 2012

It’s a great start towards financal sanity. Even last years budget was superior to Harry Reids (zero equals zero). Is there any hope for Ryan to accomplish what he intends to in a shorter time period? Other Congressamen appear to be willing to support a shorter time period. We need to grow the economy to expedite the “recovery”.

carolinerh - March 27, 2012

Ryan’s plan is a place to start the road back to an America that is vibrant, jobs available, etc., etc. I am sure, however, the RINOS and liberals and Demos will vote against it because it would not benefit them any more. It may not be a perfect plan, but no plan is. We have to start somewhere and stop the current no plan progress of this Administration. Then, after elections start on how to cut spending, remove duplicate departments and personnel, get rid of public unions, get feds out of education and our lives, and get back to limited government with only the program set forth by the Constitution and our forefathers. Let’s get started forward even if in small steps!

Kit Williams - March 27, 2012

I don’t quite know why we are not bold enough to create plans to quickly phase out the Departments of Energy, HUD and Education and consolidating others (Veterans Affairs into DOD, EPA into Interior, combining Agriculture & Commerce. There should be massive savings if we go back to only the founders’ Constitutional functionality.

Jeanne Ziemak - May 7, 2012

I think the Ryan plan is a step in the right direction. We need to do something about entitlements. I don’t consider Social Security an entitlement program because my employer and I have been paying into it. I would accept the idea of raising what goes in and increasing the age of retirement, after all Americans are living well past the age of 65!! The EPA has to go that department has only made things worse. When gas goes up so does the price of food and everything else! Also the Depart of Education is a failure. They are to busy pushing a secular agenda and not expecting students to achieve. Our tax system is a mess and rewards those who don’t pay into it. I think all Americans should be taxed to some degree based on what they make, except in cases of poverty. Plus we need to get back to “Made in the USA” and not China! A fairer tax system would help companies to achieve and keep work here.

Lawrence - April 3, 2014

I support Ryan’s budget proposal even though it could go further. But as is or more comprehensive, I doubt the American people will support it because many will fear they will lose something. Also, like Pres Obama is doing, Democrats will ridicule it and play on the fears of the people.

jim - December 6, 2016

paul ryan needs to be in jail he has hurt millons of poor and disabled people in the usa he is not The Path to Prosperity is cuts to people that are disabled we will lose more test that we need and can’t get and we have to wait months to see a doctor at all and we can’t get tests done or glass’s or hearing aids or teeth fixed to paul ryan is fired

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *