COMMENTARY | Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and now a leading conservative GOP presidential candidate, recently discussed Paul Ryan’s proposed budget plan while being interviewed on a Wisconsin radio show on March 23. In his own obscured perspective, he solemnly explained that the new plan would “preserve Medicare and Social Security” and “does not balance the budget on the backs of the poor and elderly.” In an absolutely direct contradiction to what Romney said, the true initiative of Ryan’s plan will in fact hurt all those citizen-based programs and individuals briefly mentioned. Now, with the quotes at hand from the live broadcast that early morning, only two assumptions can be fathomed from Romney’s blind statements: either he didn’t really bother to analyze the exact nature of Ryan’s budget proposal, or, he is actually just completely and utterly lying for his own personal reasons. A better look at the budget plan will clarify this case of a mistaken endorsement.
Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, announced on March 20 a 2013 budget plan that is a newly revised form of last year’s highly criticized budget proposal. Ryan’s plan is oddly entitled “The Path to Prosperity.” And prominently outlined in the conservatively premised plan, are the detrimentally large monetary extractions from our nation’s most valuable lifeline programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, and foods stamps.
The proposed cuts of $5.3 trillion in the span of a decade would greatly effect the poor, senior citizens, and subsequently cause many to lose health care and become uninsured. Low-income students would have a difficult time acquiring a degree in colleges or universities, and funding for education and research would be dissolved. The middle class would also further be threatened by Paul Ryan’s budget plan as it calls for extremely generous tax breaks for the rich and powerful, and even rewarding companies who outsource intrinsic American jobs; there is even the underlying attempt to reconstruct outsourcing loopholes that democrats have openly fought to repeal. Josef Stiglitz, an economic Nobel-prize winner, commented on Ryan’s budget plan as being blatantly organized “by the 1 percent, and for the 1 percent.”