By: AIF Staff
On February 22nd, former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan will be a featured guest at UW-Madison’s La Follette School as part of the University’s Policymaker in Residence program. Ryan, who represented Southern Wisconsin for two decades in the House of Representatives, will talk with the UW community about ongoing fiscal fights in Congress, the increasing polarization in American politics, and his recently released book, American Renewal: A Conservative Plan to Strengthen the Social Contract and Save the Country’s Finances.
Previewing his remarks in Madison, Ryan spoke exclusively with WKOW’s A.J. Bayatpour in an interview that aired on Capital City Sunday. Excerpts of the interview follow and video of the conversation are accessible here.
On visiting UW-Madison & talking to young Americans about our fiscal challenges:
“I represented Southern Wisconsin for 20 years in Congress and have been visiting Madison on and off for my entire life, but also throughout my career. I’m speaking at the La Follette [School] and my main message is going to be the subject that I’ve been working on through this book from the American Enterprise Institute, which is: How do we make the 21st century a great century for all Americans? How do we avoid a debt crisis? How do we restructure our social safety net and our social contract and get our economy growing with all the big challenges we have in our future?
“It’s really more of a public policy address and I just like talking to young people [about these issues]. I teach Economics at the University of Notre Dame today, and that’s [part of] what I do now among other things and I just love engaging with young people about their future and the big policy challenges and choices they have in front of them.”
On a possible Biden-McCarthy debt ceiling deal:
“Senate Republicans don’t have the majority and therefore, they’re not in the driver’s seat. They’re not in a position to basically determine what comes to the floor and what doesn’t. So yes, it should be the House Republicans taking the lead because they are the only Republican majority that we have.
“And by the way, it’s very common for things to be attached to debt ceilings. I was on the Bowles-Simpson Commission in the middle 2000s, which was [created as] a result of negotiations on the debt limit. I also helped write the Budget Control Act, which again was because of the debt limit negotiation and that put spending controls and caps in place. So, it is very common.
“I did two of these deals with President Obama himself when Joe Biden was Vice President, which were a result of these [types of] negotiations. So yes, House Republicans should lead and yes, it is very typical to try and put some kind of fiscal reforms in place while you deal with a deadline.”
On McCarthy’s ability to navigate a thin majority & a push for fiscal common sense:
“It’s a razor thin majority and it’s going to be very hard for my successor, Kevin McCarthy, to get everyone on board and thinking that every move he makes is the right move. It’s almost impossible with a five-seat margin.
“The question is: Can he get good fiscal reforms and can you get President Biden to engage? I don’t know the answer that question, but it’s definitely worth the effort.
“What I like about this situation is the fact that Republicans are raising the issue that we have a debt crisis in our future, that really important programs like Medicare Social Security are going bankrupt this decade or the next decade, and that we ought to do something about it. It’s good to raise these issues.
“[Speaker McCarthy] should try to get some things done. Is he going to keep the caucus or the conference unified this entire time? It’s hard to do and I don’t necessarily see that happening. But [the debt ceiling] is going to be a bipartisan agreement at the end of the day anyway, because you have a Democratic Senate and a Democratic president, so whatever happens will be bipartisan and it will get bipartisan votes because it has to get bipartisan votes.”
On how a debt ceiling standoff might impact the markets:
“We had this happen in 2011. It was very temporary. I do not think we will default on our debt. I think the Department of the Treasury will make sure that they prioritize the spending so there is never a debt default.
“Frankly, I know there’s going be a lot of fireworks, a lot of hysteria, but at the end of the day and I’ve been through a few of these myself, I really do not think we will default on our debt. And I think it’s important that we make it crystal clear that the full faith and credit of the US government and the US Treasury are sacrosanct. I think you’re going to have a lot of hysterics surrounding that, but that’s what democracy is like. This is what governing is like, especially with divided government between two different parties, so I expect this time to be no different.
“It may be a little closer to the wire than probably other episodes but again, the goal here is to try and bring some fiscal sanity. If we weren’t heading toward a debt crisis like we are in this country, I don’t think you’d have all of these fireworks but we are heading toward a debt crisis and something does need to be done and it’s going to take more than just this episode over the debt limit but at least that conversation is getting started. To me that’s a good thing.
On the biggest threats to the United States at present:
“I’d say three things: 1) The debt crisis in the future. 2) The challenge from China and the race towards superior technology in areas like quantum computing. And 3) Our labor market problems which are a long-term economic problem but it’s [due, in part, to] our immigration laws.
“We’ve got to fix our immigration laws once and for all. We’ve got to prevent a debt crisis. And we’ve got to rise to the challenge on behalf of freedom and democracy against the tyranny from China.
“I think those are the three really big challenges for America. There are many other issues, but those are the big existential challenges: Get our immigration laws fixed, prevent a debt crisis, and rise to the challenge with the threat posed by China.”
On whether Social Security becoming discretionary spending will be part of a debt ceiling increase
“I don’t think it will. Joe Biden supported that in his early days. Many of us have supported that proposal. I don’t think that that’s going to happen. I think it’s Senator Scott from Florida’s proposal. I don’t think that’s the way to go. I think there are better things to do to get Social Security shored up short of doing that.”
On getting ahead of Social Security and Medicare’s looming insolvency:
“Let’s be really clear: Social Security goes bankrupt in 2033 which means there’s a 23% across the board benefit cut if we don’t do anything before that. And the Medicare Trust Fund goes bankrupt in 2028. Doing nothing means you’re complicit with the bankruptcy of these critical programs.
“What we propose in this book at the American Enterprise Institute is to shore these programs up. And here’s the good news: It’s sort of a stitch in time saves nine. If you reform these programs early, you can do it in such a way that it doesn’t change anything for people in and near retirement. And for those of us in the X generation who will not have solvent programs when we retire, you can make them whole.
“What we argue in this book and what I spend my time on here at the American Enterprise Institute is we believe in the social contract. We, Republicans and Democrats, the center-right and center-left believe that we should have health and retirement security for all Americans and that we should have a safety net to make sure people — like those who cannot help themselves because of some disability — are taken care of and brought back up on their feet. We want to revive the system of upper mobility and save that social contract because the social safety net programs are really important parts of American life. And I believe that there is a durable political consensus among Republicans and Democrats that we need to maintain that.
“The problem is that these programs were written in the 20th century in ways that are proving unsustainable in the 21st century. The sooner we start realizing this and having sober conversations about that and stop demagoguing the issue, the better off we’re going to be. The point is, doing nothing is a really bad idea because that means they go bankrupt and current seniors get hurt. So, by getting ahead of that problem and solving it for future generations means you can guarantee the social contract for the existing generation and that’s going to compound it. By the way, the government made these promises to the America people and they need to be honored, but they won’t be if we don’t do something. That’s the point I’m trying to make.”
On how to achieve a bipartisan consensus on immigration reform & why it matters:
“I tried three different times in my career to get an agreement on this issue. It’s probably, next to entitlement reform, one of the most vexing political issues of our time. Your question is the answer which is both sides have to give something to get something done. You need to have border security and crackdown on unlawful immigration, along with the kinds of critical reforms for legal immigration that ultimately make our system work.
“Our nation’s gross domestic product and our growth rate is basically cut in half in the 21st century versus the rate we grew at in the 20th century because of labor force participation. After the Baby Boomers, we don’t have as many people because our birth rates have declined and so, legal immigration is going to be a critical part of getting the American economy to grow and produce the type of opportunities and jobs that we used to know in the 20th century.
“I think we can do this, but it does mean both sides coming together and addressing each other’s concerns, which by the way, are both legitimate concerns, in my opinion.
“The problem is getting the politics right. It takes a president who is willing to put a lot of political capital on the line to do it and I just don’t frankly see it right now if Joe Biden runs for reelection. I personally wish he would not run for re-election so that he could get an immigration deal and put a lot of political capital on the table to get a deal that secures the border, cracks down on unlawful immigration, and also fixes the broken illegal immigration system so that we have a system that is working well.
“I think there’s a vote coalition in Congress there to get it done but it takes a lot of leadership, particularly from the White House, and I just haven’t seen that.”
On issues he regrets not tackling during the Speakership:
“There are too many, that list would be too long. The two issues that got away from me and that I wanted to see progress made on was, like I said, entitlement reform. I passed a budget with entitlement reforms four years in a row out of the House during my career but it didn’t get to the Senate and the White House.
“And immigration reform. I was a part of three different separate efforts to fix our immigration laws. In my farewell speech to Congress as the Speaker of the House, those are the two things I mentioned then and that’s what I’ll mention to you today. Those are the two policy things we have to get done….
“My hope and goal is that we can depolarize our politics to the point where we can get back to rational policy conversations to fix these problems. And by the way, if we do, we’re going to have one awesome century in America and we will yet again lead the free world in peace and prosperity. If we can solve our own domestic problems, we can really set a tempo and example for the rest of the world and show them what a great American 21st century looks like.”
To learn more about Ryan’s book, check out his recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.