LOOKS LIKE RYAN: MITT’S PICK
If tonight’s reporting is correct, and if Mitt Romney really does announce at 9 A.M. Saturday that Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin is his running mate, Romney has made the most daring decision of his political career.
After spending weeks looking into Ryan’s history for The New Yorker, visiting his home town, and interviewing him twice, I am genuinely surprised that Romney chose him. First, let’s tally the risks of a Ryan pick.
For one thing, Ryan has no significant private-sector experience. Besides summer jobs working at McDonald’s or at his family’s construction company, or waiting tables as a young Washington staffer, Ryan has none of the business-world experience Romney frequently touts as essential for governing. In the run-up to his first campaign for Congress, in 1998, that gap was enough of a concern for Ryan that he briefly became a “marketing consultant” at the family business, an obvious bit of résumé puffing.
But Ryan’s Washington experience is also light, at least for a potential President—which, after all, is the main job description of a Vice-President. Ryan has worked as a think-tank staffer and Congressman, but he’s never been in charge of a large organization, and he has little experience with foreign policy. Given how Sarah Palin was criticized for her lack of such experience, I’m surprised that Romney would pick someone whose ability to immediately step into the top job is open to question.
And the experience that Ryan does have is not exactly what voters are clamoring for at the moment. The bulk of Ryan’s House career coincided with the Presidency of George W. Bush, during which he was a reliable vote for many Bush policies that have not aged well: Medicare Part D; the Iraq War; and the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Ryan told me that voting for all of that spending, which added trillions to the deficit, made him “miserable,” but he’ll need a better explanation in his October debate with Joe Biden.
Presumably, Romney’s main reason for picking Ryan is not his early deficit-busting record but his more recent rise to celebrity as a crusading policy wonk determined to tame the federal government. Romney, who has been extremely vague about what he would do if elected, will now own Paul Ryan’s ideas, which include privatizing Social Security, turning Medicare into a voucher program, bloc-granting and drastically cutting Medicaid, and reducing discretionary spending to levels that would affect every popular government program. This Ryan agenda will now fill the vacuum created by Romney’s unwillingness to lay out the specifics of his own plan. Even before this (apparent) announcement, Democrats were planning on tying Romney to Ryan’s policy platform. Now Romney has done it for them.
So what’s the potential upside? Romney seems to have realized that his spring and summer strategies have been a failure. Since winning the nomination, Romney’s plan has been to turn the election into a simple referendum on Barack Obama. With the ailing economy, Romney believed, he needed to do little more than stand around and wait for voters to sour on the incumbent. When they did, Romney would be there as the default alternative. In recent weeks, as Romney’s favorable ratings declined, some encouraging economic news dribbled out, and Obama’s poll numbers ticked up, a loud faction of Republicans began pointing out that Romney’s theory of the campaign was wrong. Their argument was that Romney needed to turn the race into more of an ideological debate. He needed, these Republicans said, to embrace a bold policy agenda that would dramatically contrast with Obama’s. Nobody made this case more loudly than Paul Ryan. Presidential candidates shouldn’t “run on vague platitudes and generalities,” he told me in one interview. “I want a full-throated defense for an alternative agenda that fixes the country’s problems,” he said in another.
Romney’s choice of Ryan will undoubtedly be criticized as capitulation to the right, and this pick does seem to demonstrate that Romney is not able or willing to distance himself from the base of his party. But the good thing about the Ryan pick is that the Presidential campaign will instantly turn into a very clear choice between two distinct ideologies that genuinely reflect the core beliefs of the two parties. And in that sense, Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan is good news for voters.
For more on Paul Ryan and the announcement of his place on the Republican ticket, see Ryan Lizza’s full Profile of the Wisconsin Congressman, James Surowiecki on Ryan’s budget, John Cassidy on Romney’s “Let’s talk about Ryan, not me” strategy, Jane Mayer on Ryan’s affection for libertarian hero Ayn Rand, Alex Koppelman on why the pick had to be Ryan or someone like him, and Amy Davidson on the first speeches that Romney and Ryan gave as running mates. And bookmark The Political Scene, the hub for all of The New Yorker’s coverage of the 2012 campaign.
Illustration by Jorge Arevalo
KEYWORDS
POSTED IN
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/08/looks-like-ryan-mitts-pick.html#ixzz23ICeHmax
Posts
Comments
363 COMMENTS |
Think about the presidents we had in the 20th century from FDR, LBJ and Truman to Eisenhower, Bush the Elder, Reagan and Ford. Look how the 21st century has started -- BUSH and OBAMA. The politicians of today do not measure up to those from the past century. What has happened
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:37:29PM BY SOONERI love it when those in the media complain about a Republican not having the most experience and lack of private sector experience. Priceless!
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:23:37PM BY KALIKCRICKNot too concerned about Ryan's private sector experience - the ticket has Romney for that. They are a well balanced team - private sector/public policy. Weak Washington experience? Ryan authored 2 budgets and had the guts to put them out there. That shows uncommon leadership and bravery - if only the more experienced in Washington could demonstrate the same.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:19:12PM BY JP01Mr. Lizza...seems you have a "knack" for beiing in the wrong place at the wrong time...or should I just qualifiy it by saying that your excruciating need to be blatantly Left has grossly affected your ability of discernment. I checked your bio. This is where I usually stop any discourse as it is an effort in futility. "Stuck on stupid" appears to apply. Had you given any real journalistic care or effort to researching Joe Biden [I believe we need to compare apples to apples], you would find that Biden had plagiarism in his history. Currently he is in constant need of oral surgery as he has always managed to get his foot in his mouth when he comments on anything. He is literally good humor, and kept around, I think to be the "Court Jester"...to divert attention. As for Obama, well...comparing him with Romney is interesting as Romney has so much more actual sober experience and actual work ethic to draw upon. This has been amply commented earlier. I am genuinely concerned about the fact that Obama's deep penchant and need to ~~fundamentally change~~ our United States (that he did not grow up in) into the Dream From His (absent) Father: a Communist society. Sy what you want about Romney, but I doubt he would continue on this course. This is the actual difference in philosophies. Had you spent ~~any~~ time doing any research on Obama, I am sure you would find this for yourself. But, the Left leaning ideologues probably already know and support this. It is frustrating that there is no ~~real journalism~~ any longer. It IS refreshing that the vast majority of home-grown Americans, and those who came here correctly can see through your tripe and drivel. But then again, you are Stuck on Stupid.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:09:47PM BY PIPPIN10The Obama administration is a cancer Paul Ryan is Methotrexate
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:03:43PM BY TEXASJEWthis is a pathetic attempt at a hack job by a writer clearly a complete hack.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 9:01:05PM BY RUSKNATIVENOW DID Joe Biden have any private sector experience except a couple years as a lawyer and rent collector? NO.... so what is the deal...Obama had NO private sector experience at all either.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 8:58:57PM BY RUSKNATIVEMr Lizza, The summer private sector experience at McDonalds will supersede the Obama/Biden ticket combined significantly. Using a cash register may help Ryan prevent yet another Moody’s United States downgrade and maybe he can help pass a budget, something the current administration has been unable to do. Put down the cool aid and make an attempt to be objective.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 8:52:40PM BY DMEHALEKIsn't that special? Romney has too much business experience and Ryan has too little. Frankly, I think that they complement each other and it's a wonderful choice by Mitt.
POSTED 8/11/2012, 8:35:26PM BY JACKCARTER"For one thing, Ryan has no significant private-sector experience." You mean, as opposed to all of that private sector exeprience that Obama and Biden have. Right?
POSTED 8/11/2012, 8:31:41PM BY MRLOGICAL