Right after the 2012 election, when Republicans trudged glumly back
to Washington, Speaker of the House John Boehner found two jobs for Paul
Ryan. By Ryan’s request,
he would stay on as chairman of the Budget Committee—he’d be the only
chairman holding on after his six-year term at the top of a committee
had ended. By necessity, he would also join a working group to help
Boehner negotiate a way around the “fiscal cliff.” Ryan would partner with
Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp and Energy and Commerce
Committee chairman Fred Upton in crafting proposals, strategizing, and
calculating. If the White House wanted to talk to Ryan, congressional liaison Rob Nabors knew where to find him.
It’s been a month. While the White House has been talking to Boehner,
Ryan hasn’t been so busy. The B-team of Camp, Ryan, and Upton has stayed
on the bench. Ryan hasn’t recently met or talked to key negotiators.
Ryan’s big moment in the talks, so far, came with the three-page offer
that House Republicans sent the president on Dec. 3. According to National Review,
Ryan “worked with Boehner to craft” the document. They spent two pages
explaining how proud they were of Ryan’s budgets and two paragraphs
offering $800 billion of unspecified revenue and $1.2 trillion of
unspecified cuts. And the White House rejected that at the speed of
Twitter.
Paul Ryan is irrelevant, but that can’t last. No one in modern times
has lost a national election and returned to such a powerful role in
Congress. John Kerry’s consolation prize was minority status in the
Senate. After his loss, George McGovern was so marginalized that he considered moving to England.
The chairman of the House Budget Committee can’t be marginalized. For
two years, Ryan was the de facto intellectual leader of the GOP,
introducing and passing spending plans that nearly every Republican
supported. He’s got two more years of that on the calendar, and his
rank-and-file members are thrilled. “The American people are looking to
him for ideas,” Colorado Rep. Cory Gardner told me last month. Gardner
and other freshman fans of Ryan believe that the vice-presidential
campaign, even if a loss, still helped him; without that, Americans
“might not have known who he was.”
Ryan’s absence from the “cliff” debate has actually helped his
clout—among Republicans. They resent their current position. They passed
their budgets (Ryan’s budgets). The media doesn’t seem to take that
seriously. Obama’s Democrats haven’t pushed a budget through since 2009;
the media doesn’t care.
“Our perspective is, ‘Yes, we think our budget is the way forward,’ ”
says Rep. Sean Duffy, a freshman from northwestern Wisconsin and a Ryan
stalwart. “The president rejected it. There was an effort to be
reasonable and to meet the concerns he had, so we came off the budget a
little, but the president needs to lead.”
That’s the polite version of the sentiment. In the Senate, utterly
marginalized by the Boehner-Obama talks, Republicans resent that the
“cliff” negotiation is so secretive. In a real budget debate, says
Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, “You have hearings on it. You have
witnesses. You have a debate about what you want, then you have mark-up.
That’s the way this should work ... as opposed to seeing on the news:
Do Speaker Boehner and President Obama get along? Is it going to be $1
for $2? For $3? That’s drivel. That’s meaningless.”
More: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/12/paul_ryan_has_been_quiet_since_barack_obama_won_re_election_but_he_will.2.html
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario