Paul Ryan Signals Willingness To Raise Revenues, Shifting Positions Following Downgrade

[ProSense]

Paul Ryan Signals Willingness To Raise Revenues, Shifting Positions Following Downgrade

By Alex Seitz-Wald

House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) said he is open to revenue increases as part of a deal to reduce the deficit today, seemingly shifting positions from the hardline opposition his party has maintained against revenue growth. Ryan said on Fox News Sunday that he would be open to a deal that containes $3 or $4 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases if it came through a major reform of the tax code and was large enough. Host Chris Wallace asked if Ryan would be open such hypothetical deal if he were sitting on the joint super committee created by the deal to raise the debt ceiling. Ryan responded, “yes”:

WALLACE: If you were on that committee, and you get a deal — let’s say $3 or $4 dollars in spending cuts and entitlement cuts for every $1 in revenue increases, and the revenue increases came from tax reform <...> — would you be open minded to including some of that revenue as part of a debt deal?

RYAN: It all depends on the spending side of the ledger. … If we’re convincingly restructuring these entitlement programs and getting that spending line down to meet that revenue line, then can you have higher revenue growth through more economic growth and tax reform? Yes, the answer is yes.

Watch it:

<...>

This willingness to consider revenue increases appears to be a significant shift in position for Ryan and the GOP, who have previously insisted that any tax reform be “revenue neutral,” i.e. offset every dollar in revenue increases with cuts to tax rates, ensuring no extra money flows into the Treasury. “Our budget calls for revenue neutral tax reform,” Ryan said on the Laura Ingraham show last month. “You keep people’s tax rates high” if tax reform is not revenue neutral, he said. “We’re not going to raise taxes in this committee — number one,” Ryan said on Fox News host Sean Hannity’s show on Monday.

<...>

Now, however, it seems Ryan would be open to such a deal. While he didn’t acknowledge shifting his position, the move comes just two days after S&P downgraded U.S. debt for first time in history, placing much of the blame at the feet of Republicans for refusing to raise revenues.

Ryan's "look-over-there" moment: What Tea Party Downgrade?

[FreakinDJ]

1. major reform of the tax code = More Tax Cuts for Corporations

which means ALL that revenue will come from the working class

in addition to ALL the CUTS the working class will suffer

[ProSense]

3. That's

likely the formula in Ryan's head. Still, this does run counter to the whole no tax increase BS he and the Republicans have been pushing.

[FreakinDJ]

5. NO- all the GOP has been saying this all along

They want to restructure the Corp Tax Code with a NET reduction. If they are talking revenue increases you can guarantee they will be on the backs of the working class

[madinmaryland]

6. Yeap. That's what it is.

:grr:

[Cosmocat]

19. ABSOLUTELY!

EVERYTHING they advance related to taxes has this as its foundation, from the flat tax to the "fair" tax. They are like poisonous microbes that are always probing for a way to infect ...

I hear them talk tax reform, and I hear the shift you note, and when they get forced into the details they flush out - their ideal of "tax reform" is to close down all those evil loopholes like deductions for mortgages and children, while "simplifying" the corporate tax code ...

[Kennah]

2. Budget Munster for Tax Increases! Yeah!

[GCP]

4. So NOW the fucker gets religion

Once he's helped wreck the economy. :banghead:

[flamingdem]

13. Get ready for the new, more subtle onslaught nt

[applegrove]

7. You have to add the non revenue increasing current debt deal into that equation. It would be more

like 8:1 then.

[applegrove]

8. They are afraid of Obama running on increasing taxes in 2012.

[unblock]

11. nonsense, they love it when democrats call for higher taxes.

the only reason he's toning down the extremism is because they don't want to be characterized as the extremists that they actually are.

[applegrove]

12. But something like 80% of Americans want the politicians to raise some taxes.

[unblock]

16. true, especially on the rich and on corporations, but republicans have always believed

that even if raising taxes is good policy, it's terrible politics.
their "brand" is almost entirely centered around opposition to tax increases.
so they love it when democrats call for higher taxes because it solidifies their brand and is EXCELLENT for raising funds from anyone who hates tax increases.

then they can use those campaign funds to spread whatever lies they want or distract with whatever racist or jingoistic side "issue" they care to gin up.

[unblock]

9. although i think taxes should go up, i could live with "revenue neutral" tax reform

it's just that my idea of tax reform isn't paulryaynrandpaulryayn's idea of tax refom.

my idea is to close loopholes for the ultra-wealthy and jack up rates for the rich and super-rich, including adding another bracket or two for those earning a million and 5 million a year, then taking the revenue from that and using it to pay for increased exemptions and credits and lower tax rates for the poor and lower middle class.

i say revenue neutral, but of course i believe that such a tax change would give the economy a big boost and therefore increase revenue nevertheless.

[Beaverhausen]

10. No, I don't like the 'convincingly restructuring these entitlement programs" part

he still wants to get rid of medicare, etc.

[flamingdem]

14. But of course, they will simply find the indirect route nt

[tblue37]

15. He's making a bid for a seat on the committee--and when he gets it, he

will go right back to his n new revenues stance.

[JoePhilly]

17. That 2nd bold phrase is the one to pay attention to ...

He's basically saying that in his view, you get increased revenue with a growing economy.

And he's saying that you get a growing economy, by ending social programs, cutting spending, and lowering the tax rates.

He's not agreeing to consider raising taxes to increase revenues.

[Supersedeas]

18. Paul, this is Grover