1. Yuval Levin, a very credible domestic policy analyst, is more
favorably disposed to the Perry plan than others have been. In
particular, he notes that Perry's approach to entitlement reform is
bold, if vague, and that Perry's support for a premium-support
model of reforming Medicare (along the lines of what Paul Ryan has
proposed) is welcome:
...a fundamental reform of the payment system into a
premium-support model, along the general lines of the Ryan budget
(or perhaps something like a reform I've written
about here)
would make a huge difference. It's very significant that Perry has
put himself on the side of such reform, which is quickly becoming
the standard conservative view of the matter, and rightfully
so.
Levin might be a little off-track, however, in suggesting that
Perry's out in front of Mitt Romney in supporting a Ryan-style
approach to Medicare reform. He writes, "[i]f Mitt Romney did the
same, rather than voting present on the most significant fiscal
challenge our country confronts, he could finally be taken
seriously on budget issues too." Romney has in fact
expressed support for Ryan's Path to Prosperity, and has
promised his own plan along similar lines.
2. Howard Gleckman of the Tax Policy Center, however, thinks
Perry is simply telling people exactly want to hear:
Perry, whose campaign has been foundering, has put all his
policy chips behind what seems to be a remarkable
free-lunch-for-all plan. An old boss of mine used to measure
political candidates against what he called his pander-meter. For
GOP primary voters, this one rates a 10-with a bullet.
...
TPC doesn't yet know enough about Perry's plan to model it. But
at least at first glance it looks like an attempt to be all things
to all people-big tax cuts combined with a promise to balance the
budget with- this being campaign season-huge unspecified cuts in
spending.
Joseph,
SHAME ON YOU!
Mr. Perry doesn't just talk...he governs responsibly.
I am starting to get really pissed off at TAS knocking down a
good man.
Aaron has an excuse....he lives is Baaaaaston MA.
He views the whole country from his pin-hole of a New England
failed State.
What is your excuse?
Agent99| 10.26.11 @ 1:43PM
It isn't knocking down a good man, it's knocking the poor
campaigning of a poor campaigner. What's your idea here? That
conservatives should outsource the vetting of candidates to the
liberal media?
conservative bob| 10.26.11 @ 1:19PM
I believe most of the writers and commentators who claim to be
GOP or conservative are not serving the movement or the base well
at all. Me thinks they do bitch too much. Many are former
administration officials or legislative branch staffers who long
for the days when they had influence.
To a man (or woman) I think they have little idea as to how to save
the Republic and view things exclusively through a lens of 'how it
is properly done'. (Better stated as 'the way they used to do
it')
Almost all are from government or have their entire careers closely
entwined with government.
Their view of what is possible is limited.
They spend their time trying to impress each other with their wit
and insights.
I recommend that we accept their opinions with a healthy dose of
salt and skepticism. They are just a slightly outside of the
circle, elite.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.26.11 @ 11:48AM
Joseph,
SHAME ON YOU!
Mr. Perry doesn't just talk...he governs responsibly.
I am starting to get really pissed off at TAS knocking down a good man.
Aaron has an excuse....he lives is Baaaaaston MA.
He views the whole country from his pin-hole of a New England failed State.
What is your excuse?
Agent99| 10.26.11 @ 1:43PM
It isn't knocking down a good man, it's knocking the poor campaigning of a poor campaigner. What's your idea here? That conservatives should outsource the vetting of candidates to the liberal media?
conservative bob| 10.26.11 @ 1:19PM
I believe most of the writers and commentators who claim to be GOP or conservative are not serving the movement or the base well at all. Me thinks they do bitch too much. Many are former administration officials or legislative branch staffers who long for the days when they had influence.
To a man (or woman) I think they have little idea as to how to save the Republic and view things exclusively through a lens of 'how it is properly done'. (Better stated as 'the way they used to do it')
Almost all are from government or have their entire careers closely entwined with government.
Their view of what is possible is limited.
They spend their time trying to impress each other with their wit and insights.
I recommend that we accept their opinions with a healthy dose of salt and skepticism. They are just a slightly outside of the circle, elite.