Paul Ryan on the need to stop the looming tax hikes

http://paulryan.house.gov/
http://www.house.gov/budget_republicans/
http://www.facebook.com/reppaulryan
http://www.twitter.com/reppaulryan

Regarding Rep. Chris Van Hollen's efforts to stop a bipartisan agreement to prevent tax increases because it does not go far enough to increase taxes [3:30]:

And so they're willing to hold up all the tax breaks, all of the other tax rates on middle-class families and small businesses so they can get this smaller tax increase in the estate tax? I'm not going to get into the 'who's a hostage-taker' discussion here. What is the estate tax? It's a double-tax on death. Economists will tell you that it's really not a tax that just soaks the rich, but it's a tax on capital that deprives business investment, and therefore job creation.

Going to a 35% [estate tax] rate is not enough for Chris [Van Hollen] and other House Democrats, and so they're willing to scuttle the entire agreement -- an agreement which has bipartisan support in the Senate, an agreement with the President of the United States -- an agreement to prevent tax increases from hitting our economy.

If the President bows to this pressure and participates in scuttling this deal, then what does that say about our ability to have confidence and bipartisanship in this new era of divided government? How well will we be able to reach agreements that will stick if people are angry in parts of their party, and he unravels these deals?

We are not interested in changing this deal. We're interested in passing this through. We already have an agreement with the President and Senate Democrats. If the Democrats in the House scuttle this deal, the first thing we do is to prevent these job-killing tax increases, which will have to be done retroactively after the first of the year.

Regarding the need for true pro-growth economic reforms [6:17]:

This is a compromise, and there are parts of this bill I do not like. The worst thing we can do is hit this economy with an across-the-board tax increase on everybody in January. I don't see this bill as a 'stimulus.' I see this bill as preventing further damage to the economy, not injecting growth into the economy. If we don't pass this, then we will have damage inflicted on this economy.

Regarding mischaracterizations of what is at stake [7:05]:

Only in Washington is 'not raising taxes' considered a 'tax cut'. We're not cutting taxes. We're preventing tax increases from occurring. We don't see this as particularly stimulative; it just prevents bad policies from going forward.

Regarding Van Hollen's admission that "we're not going to hold this up at the end of the day" [9:49]:

I think Chris [Van Hollen] just made some news. That's fairly noteworthy because as of just a day or two ago, we were thinking they were going to do a 'take it or leave it' approach and scuttle this entire agreement. If what Chris Van Hollen is saying is true and let this agreement come to a vote, and not rig the rules in the amendment process, then we might be able to move forward here. That's interesting to me.

Regarding Democrats' continued rhetoric of division [10:11]:

Class warfare might make for good politics, but it makes for rotten economics. At the end of the day, we have to ask ourselves a question in this country: are we interested in treating the symptoms of poverty and economic stagnation through income redistribution and class warfare -- or -- do we want to go after the root causes of poverty and economic stagnation by promoting pro-growth policies and prosperity? That is the difference of opinion here.

Regarding the urgent need to get a grip on spending and tackle the looming debt threat [11:20]:

We need to cut spending. I find it sort of interesting that after this massive spending spree that took place over the last two years, the creation of two new health care entitlements, now there is concern about deficits when they have a chance of raising taxes. We are not interested in raising taxes. We're going to come out of the gates going after spending -- spending cuts, spending controls, and reforms to the structure of spending.

Regarding a renewed interest in tax reform [11:57]:

If we get to the point of doing tax reform, which I think is important, we should go with a broader base and lower rates for economic growth. Erskine Bowles, Alice Rivlin and other centrist Democrats agree with that premise. I would love to see the chance of getting a compromise so we can have good pro-growth tax reform, not tax increases, but lowering rates so we can have economic growth in America. That's a step in the right direction.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• paul-ryan
• house-budget-committee
• wisconsin
• tax

[kmg501]

This first wave of Tea party Republicans is going to need another wave in 2012 to really make a difference. This nation has been driven to the far left for 100 years. People don't even know what a "center" is anymore. As it stands I never want to work on the books again. I don't want any of my energy contributing to this insane upside down society that was formerly known as America.

Get the government out of my life and wallet and then I'll get back on board and not before.

[creativebuzz]

Paul Ryan is simply Brilliant! He never has to rely on "talking Points". He has answers. Answers that make sense. Economic common sense. In any debate I have seen him in, he never talks down to others, even the clueless Chris Mathews. I hope Congress and the nations will follow his lead. America needs a leader like Paul Ryan right now.

[qltwabd]

@IMAutubeuzr I like your idea. It makes a lot of sense. We need to simplify taxes so everyone can understand how they are collected and used.

[dkkght46]

Now days the only thing ensured is death, taxes and taxes at death. Vote Democrate we know better what to do with your money than you do!

[joekiddone]

Must read at The American Spectator:

The New Big Picture by Peter Ferrara

[timuwe]

Boy there are a lot of expectations for this incoming congress. I hope the GOP can deliver.

[mcap52]

How about we attack THE REAL ISSUE??? Is our current taxing system LEGAL???? When someone asks THAT question,they will have my utmost respect.

[IMAutubeuzr]

GO FLAT TAX! If you are going to work on tax reform, a flat tax of 3% for feds, 12% for state and 2-3% for local government is a great start. No dedications (no coercive power of government to get the People to do what it wants us to do!), lose about 95% of the IRS, eliminate the need for everyone to have complicated tax forms for federal taxes at the very least.

[IMAutubeuzr]

But, Rep Ryan: The POTUS is not responsible for authoring bills so any agreement with him/her is irrelevant. He shouldn't have ANY dealings with Congress until the bill comes to his desk (IMO) but given recent history, that's not very likely.

Rep Ryan is da MAN! Just don't think any 'agreement' with POTUS means anything in the proper path of creating a law.

[XGAGAlover]

Paul Ryan makes sense, at least he proposes *real* solutions. One thing Paul does that most politicians do not do is answer the questions posed to him.

[wwwint2]

@MikeBrew328 Phony? The man has the courage to take on entitlement reform - that alone is worthy of respect.

[MikeBrew328]

Paul Ryan is a phony, as much as I want to like him