2012 Candidates for President

Ron Paul

Summary

Congressman Paul opposed the Paul Ryan plan. He stated that the plan dealt with the debt and entitlement problems as if they were budgetary accounting problems. He stated that the problem is really a philisophical one on the role of government. He voted against the legislation.

Family Leader Speech

In April of 2011, Congressman Paul spoke at a conference organized by a local christian group called the family leader. He spoke about the Paul Ryan plan and the Obama budget and stated that neither went far enough to stop the welfare state or reign in projected spending. 

Neither of those budgets will solve our problems, or even come close. . ... We are dealing with a problem in Washington as a budgetary accounting problem and that’s not it. It’s a philosophy problem." Paul said. "What is the philosophy of government? What should the role of government be?

... Ryan, doesn’t reject that notion (of a welfare state). I do.

Voting Record

The Paul Ryan Plan

In April of 2011, the House voted on the Paul Ryan plan for the budget. The plan passed 233-193. Ron Paul voted against the Paul Ryan Plan

Sponsored and Cosponsored Legislation

This representative has not been identified as sponsoring or cosponsoring significant legislation related to this title.

Michele Bachmann

Summary

Congresswoman Bachmann has been generally supportive of the Paul Ryan Plan. She notes that what she supports is the need for changes in the way we deal with social security and medicare, and she supports the plan in general but has some concerns about the specifics. One specific item that she said may need to be addressed is the shifting of some costs onto senior citizens.

Reaction to Ryan Budget

In April of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for the Ryan proposal.

Bachmann Reacts to GOP Budget Plan

Washington, Apr 5 -

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement in reaction to the Budget Resolution introduced by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI):

“The fiscal disaster that’s been perpetuated by record levels of government spending is threatening to ruin our country. We need a way out and this plan merits our full attention. House Republicans are offering a budget resolution that is focused on job creation and debt reduction; the two key issues that the American people sent us here to address. This plan is proof that the new majority is heeding the calls of the American people to cut spending.

“The choice before us could not be clearer. President Obama’s spending plan will batter our economy and destroy jobs by adding $9.1 trillion to our national debt over the next ten years and raising taxes by $1.5 trillion. In stark contrast, the Republican plan cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the President’s budget. The plan intends to fully repeal ObamaCare and cut spending for it. This is what I have been working towards all along.

“I look forward to reviewing this plan further. It is time to put our nation on a sustainable fiscal path.”

Fox News Sunday

On May 1, 2011 Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News Sunday and spoke about the Paul Ryan Plan. She states that the proposed ideas are goals and not hard and fast deadlines and legislation. She notes that her support for the Ryan plan was given with an asterisk that the cost of health care for seniors may not be shifted so much to seniors.

WALLACE: What do you tell people nearing retirement who say I can’t afford to pay more of my own healthcare costs out of pocket? Which is what the Ryan and Republican Study Committee plans would do.

BACHMANN: And I understand that. I put an asterisks on my support, I put a blog posting up that said just as much. That is my area of concern, I support these bills with that proviso because there are a number of people across the United States who have exactly expressed the fear that you just mentioned. I think that that is what we need to do with Medicare. It isn't that were saying that we don't want people to have that health care, it's "Will there be a better way to fund it?" I think that there is a better way than the way that the federal government currently is funding that program.

Various ideas were put out on the table. Even Paul Ryan said that he was open to tweaking his position that he had staked out. One position that I’m concerned about shifting the cost burden to senior citizens. Seniors are saying, "look, I’m not in a positon to be able to handle that." I also share that real fear, that’s why I put that asterisks out there. 

Will there be greater efficiencies? I think so. Will there be choices and options that I think that we should offer people? Absolutely.

In the private sector, I'm a private business person, my husband and I have our own business ... What we try to do is offer better solutions all the time for our customers. The federal government isn't keen on doing that. That's what I think that the ingenuity is behind what Paul Ryan wants to do and behind what the Republican Study Committee wants to do. New and different ideas. And that isn't the be all and end all ... we're only just starting. But with the proviso and the asterisks that I agree with the concern for senior citizens and their fear that they will have to assume the costs themselves.

WALLACE: So you’re not wedded to the idea of a voucher program for Medicare?

BACHMANN: I’m wedded to the idea of efficiencies and cost cuttings and savings in healthcare, but how we get there is open to discussion.

Voting Record

The Paul Ryan Plan

In April of 2011, the House voted on the Paul Ryan plan for the budget. The plan passed 233-193. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the Paul Ryan Plan

Sponsored and Cosponsored Legislation

This representative has not been identified as sponsoring or cosponsoring significant legislation related to this title.

Herman Cain

New Hampshire Debate

In June of 2011, Herman Cain participated in the Republican Primary Debate in New Hampshire. He notes his support for the Paul Ryan plan.

KING: The speaker's point -- the speaker's point, Mr. Cain, was that if you've lost the American people, if they're not following you, you have to slow down until you can get them with you. Is that a fair point?

CAIN: We don't need to slow down. I hate to tell you -- I hate to be the one to give you the bad news, Doctor. You're not going to get most of the money you put into Medicare if we don't restructure it.

The reason we're in the situation we are today with Medicare and Social Security is because the problem hasn't been solved. We can no longer rearrange it. We've got to restructure those programs. And the Paul Ryan approach I totally support.

And he has been very courageous in taking the lead on this.

And you know that commercial where they have demagogued the whole thing with medi-scare and having grandma tossed off the bridge? If we don't fix this problem, it's going to be our grandkids in that wheelchair that they were going to be throwing off the bridge. We have got to fix the problem.

Rick Santorum

Fox News Appearance

In April of 2011, Senator Santorum appeared on Fox News and discussed the Paul Ryan plan and Medicare. He notes that the Paul Ryan plan for Medicare is similar to President Obama's plan in giving vouchers for those who need health care. He states that Medicare Advantage is the same plan the one being proposed.

New Hampshire Debate

In June of 2011, Senator Santorum participated in the New Hampshire Presidential debate. He spoke about his support for the Paul Ryan plan several times.

SANTORUM: No. We have a $1.4 trillion deficit, and it isn't getting any better anytime soon. We have to deal with this problem now. And what Paul Ryan has suggested, which I wholeheartedly support, is to use a program that is identical to what seniors already have. It's called Medicare Part D.

They have a program right now which seniors like. It is a program that's called a premium support program. We give seniors -- depending on income -- a certain amount of money so they can go out and they can purchase health care that they want that helps them -- and this is the key, John -- we need to include seniors in controlling costs.

What President Obama -- let me finish, please -- what President Obama has done is he put in, in the Obamacare bill, the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Ladies and gentlemen, seniors, Medicare is going to be cut, starting in 2014, by the federal government, and it's going to be rationing of care from the top down.

What Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum want to do, which is not radical, which is take a program, Medicare prescription drugs, that is 41 percent under budget, because seniors are involved in controlling costs, and apply it all to Medicare. It is the right approach for Medicare.

Sponsored and Cosponsored Legislation

This representative has not been identified as sponsoring or cosponsoring significant legislation related to this title.

Newt Gingrich

Summary

When initially asked about the Paul Ryan plan in May of 2011 on Meet the Press, Congressman Gingrich opposed the plan and referred to it as right wing social engineering. He stated that he opposed large changes to current social programs without the consent of the people. In June of that year, Congressman Gingrich was asked about his view on the plan in a Republican debate and stated that his previous words had been taken out of context. He asserted that he opposed implementing the plan if the American people did not support it. He echoed these statements in another debate in December of 2011. As part of his 2012 campaign literature, Congressman Gingrich has stated that his initial words were taken out of context, again asserting that he only opposed the plan if the American people did not support it.

Meet the Press

On May 15, 2011 Congressman Gingrich appeared on Meet the Press. When asked about his views on changing Medicare to a voucher system as is done in Paul Ryan's plan. Congressman Gingrich states that he opposes right wing engineering just as must as he opposes left wing engineering. He states that what he means by this is that he opposes vast changes to current policies without the support of the people.

New Hampshire Debate

In June of 2011, Congressman Gingrich participated in the Republican Primary debate in New Hampshire. He stated that he supported the Paul Ryan plan, especially on Medicaid.

King: All right, Governor.

Mr. Speaker, I want to bring you into this conversation, because I'm looking down -- I want to get the words just right -- your initial reaction to the Ryan plan? It's radical right-wing social engineering. Then you backtracked. Why?

GINGRICH: Well, first of all, it was a very narrow question, which said, should Republicans impose an unpopular bill on the American people? Now, I supported the Ryan budget as a general proposal. I actually wrote a newsletter supporting the Ryan budget. And those words were taken totally out of context.

I'm happy to repeat them. If you're dealing with something as big as Medicare and you can't have a conversation with the country where the country thinks what you're doing is the right thing, you better slow down.

Remember, we all got mad at Obama because he ran over us when we said don't do it. Well, the Republicans ought to follow the same ground rule. If you can't convince the American people it's a good idea, maybe it's not a good idea. So let me start there.

Second, there are certain things I would do different than Paul Ryan on Medicare. I agree strongly with him on Medicaid, and I think it could be done. But let me just say two quick things.

KING: Quickly.

GINGRICH: Congressman Tom Price has a very good bill in that would allow private contracting so those people who want to voluntarily could contract with their doctor or their hospital in addition to Medicare, and it would be outside the current system and it would relieve the pricing pressure on the current system. We did a study called "Stop Paying the Crooks." We think you can save $70 billion to $120 billion in Medicare and Medicaid annually by not paying crooks...

Fox News Iowa Debate

In December of 2011, Speaker Gingrich participated in the Fox News Iowa Debate. He was asked about his previous criticism about the Paul Ryan Plan and discusses Governor Romney's tweaking of the plan.

MODERATOR: You just responded this morning, sir, tweeted originally and with follow-up statements as a major break through of this plan on the part of Republican congressman Paul Ryan working with Democratic Senator Ron Wyden to find a sort of updated way to keep Medicare solvent. This would involve a choice, those who like the program as it is can stick with it. They will be a private option, et cetera.

But earlier on, this might have confused Congressman Ryan and others for whom you had said was the initial Medicare fix that it was right wing social engineering. Later on you backed off that comment, said there was much you could find in Mr. Ryan’s plan to like.

Can you blame Governor Romney for saying you have a consistency problem on this issue?

GINGRICH: I’m not in the business of blaming Governor Romney. I’m in the business to try and understand what we can do as a policy. If you go back and look at the “Meet the Press” quote I didn’t want reference him. And I’ll come back and say it again, a free society should make very big decisions with the support of the people.

Now you can earn that support. You can win a communications argument. Reagan was very, very good at that. But the only point I was making on “Meet the Press” is when you are going to have a major change, you have to communicate with the American people in order to ensure that they are for you.

Now Governor Romney came up, frankly, with a very good variation on the Ryan plan which allowed the maintenance of the current system. Paul has adopted that. And I think did a very brave act by Senator Ron Wyden, you now have a Democrat willing to co-sponsor the bill. I’ve endorsed the concept today. I think it is a big step forward. And I think Governor Romney deserves some of the credit for having helped figure out a way to make this thing workable.

So, I think it’s a nice thing to actually have a bipartisan plan in Washington that we could actually look at in a positive way and hope would help save Medicare.

Answering the Attacks

As part of his 2012 campaign website, Congressman Gingrich put out a page titled "Answering the Attacks." He addresses the controversy surrounding his position on the Paul Ryan Plan.

Paul Ryan (and the House GOP’s) Medicare Plan

Like Ryan and the House GOP, Newt supports a premium support model for Medicare. However, he wants seniors to have the choice to opt into the new system or to stay in traditional Medicare.

Newt agrees wholeheartedly with Rep. Ryan that we must give our seniors more choices than the current one-size-fits-all Medicare model. Both concur that creating the opportunity for seniors to buy private insurance is the key to both improving care and lowering costs.

The one key difference is that under Newt’s plan, as outlined in his 21st Century Contract with America, seniors will also have the choice to stay in the current Medicare system or choose a private insurance plan with support from the government to pay the premiums. The other difference is that Newt believes that seniors should have this option starting next year, not in ten years.

Q: So why did Newt use the term “right wing social engineering” on Meet the Press when discussing these proposed changes to Medicare?

Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter.

In response to the host’s hypothetical question of whether Republicans should change Medicare even if there is public opposition, Gingrich’s response was no you should not. One of Newt’s basic governing philosophies is that government should offer a better alternative to existing entitlement programs that seniors can freely choose. Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter. Newt regards Paul Ryan as one of the biggest innovators in Washington, D.C. and he deeply admires the seriousness and boldness of his historic Path to Prosperity budget.

Sponsored and Cosponsored Legislation

This representative has not been identified as sponsoring or cosponsoring significant legislation related to this title.

Jon Huntsman

Summary

Governor Huntsman supported the Paul Ryan plan to address the budget deficit, Social Security, and Medicare. In May of 2011, Governor Huntsman wrote an op-ed supporting the plan. He stated that he admired Congressman Ryan's plan to save Medicare and that those who were opposed to the plan had a moral imperative to propose an alternative. He reasserted his support for the plan numerous times throughout the campaign.

WFLA Interview

Time for Choosing

In May of 2011, Governor Huntsman wrote an op-ed discussing his support for the Paul Ryan plan and stating that anyone opposed to the plan had a moral imperative to propose an alternative.

Our Current Time for Choosing

This year marks the centennial anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birth—and America finds itself at a crossroads that brings to mind the title of that great man's famous speech in support of Barry Goldwater's presidential candidacy: "A Time for Choosing." We should not underestimate the seriousness of the responsibility. This is the moment when we will choose whether we are to become a declining power in the world, or a nation that again surpasses the great achievements of our history.

We are over $14 trillion in debt, $4 trillion more than we owed just two years ago. In 2008, the ratio of public debt to gross domestic product was 40%. Today it's 68%, and we are fast approaching the critical 90% threshold economists warn is unsustainable, causing dramatic spikes in inflation and interest rates, and corresponding declines in GDP and jobs.

Unless we make hard decisions now, in less than a decade every dollar of federal revenue will go to covering the costs of Medicare, Social Security and interest payments on our debt. We'll sink even deeper in debt to pay for everything else, from national security to disaster relief. American families will fall behind the economic security enjoyed by previous generations. Our country will fall behind the productivity of other countries. Our currency will be debased. Our influence in the world will wane. Our security will be more precarious.

Some argue for half-measures, or for delaying the inevitable because the politics are too hard. But delay is a decision to let America decline. The longer we wait, the harder our choices become.

The debt ceiling must be raised this summer to cover the government's massive borrowing, and we must make reductions in government spending a condition for increasing the debt ceiling. This will provide responsible leaders the opportunity to reduce, reform, and in some cases end government programs—including some popular but unaffordable subsidies for agriculture and energy—in order to save the trillions, not billions, necessary to make possible a future as bright as our past. It also means reforming entitlement programs that won't deliver promised benefits to retirees without changes that take account of the inescapable reality that we have too few workers supporting too many retirees.
 

I admire Congressman Paul Ryan's honest attempt to save Medicare. Those who disagree with his approach incur a moral responsibility to propose reforms that would ensure Medicare's ability to meet its responsibilities to retirees without imposing an unaffordable tax burden on future generations of Americans.

These aren't easy choices, and we must make them at a time of anemic economic growth and very high unemployment. That's why we must also make sweeping reforms of our tax code, regulatory policies and other government policies to improve our productivity, competitiveness and job creation.

The United States has the second-highest corporate tax rate in the world. We are losing out to countries that make it more attractive for businesses to invest there. Our tax code should encourage American businesses to invest and add new jobs here. We need a tax code that substitutes flatter and lower rates for the bewildering and often counterproductive array of deductions and loopholes, and that provides incentives to encourage savings, investment and growth.

We also need to pursue, as aggressively as other countries do, free trade agreements. Ninety-five percent of the world's customers live outside the U.S. We won't remain the most productive economy in the world if we embrace the mistaken belief that we can prosper by selling and buying only among ourselves, while other countries seize the extraordinary opportunities for economic growth that the global economy offers. Finally, we must reform public education, so that it prepares our children for the economic opportunities of this century, not the last one.

When I was the governor of Utah, we cut and flattened tax rates. We balanced budgets and grew our rainy-day fund. And when the economic crisis struck, we didn't raise taxes or rely on accounting gimmicks to hide obligations. We cut spending and made government more efficient. We increased revenues by facilitating a business environment in which innovators and job creators could expand our economic base. Utah maintained its AAA bond rating, and in 2008 it was named the best-managed state in the nation by the Pew Center on the States. We proved that government doesn't have to choose between fiscal responsibility and economic growth.

We should not accept that election-cycle politics make it too hard to make the decisions that are necessary to preserve the most productive and competitive economy in the world. This is not just a time for choosing new leaders. This is the hour when we choose our future.
 

Campaign Rally

In July of 2011, Governor Huntsman spoke in favor of the Paul Ryan Plan at a campaign event in Florida. He reasserted his views that the Paul Ryan plan had some good solutions.

I was called a radical because I’ve embraced the Ryan plan. Now if you take a look at the Ryan plan, there’s some pretty good fixes and solutions here. All I can say is, ah, guilty as charged.

CBS Foreign Policy Debate

On November 11, 2011 Governor Huntsman participated in the CBS foreign policy debate. He specifically endorses the Paul Ryan plan in citing the need to control the debt.

Major Garrett: Governor Romney, that's time. Governor Huntsman, please-- address Senator Demint's question, if you would, sir.

Jon Huntsman: Thank you, Senator Demint. It's an honor to be with you in your state-- as-- as it is-- many other great leaders of South Carolina. I think it's absolutely appropriate that-- Admiral Mullen would say that our most significant national security threat is right here at home. And it's our debt. I completely buy into that.

And if we're gonna get this nation moving in the right direction, we need to recognize that debt, as 70 percent of our GDP and moving up, becomes a national security problem. You look where Japan is, well over 100 percent debt to GDP. Greece, 170 percent-- to GDP. Italy, 120 percent.

So you get a sense of where our tomorrow is if we don't tackle the debt and spending. My speech was a very short one on debt and spending. It's three words: The Ryan Plan. I think The Ryan Plan sets out a template that puts-- everything on the table. Medicaid-- like-- Governor Romney, I'd send back to the states. Education, I wanna move closer to the states. You move education closer to the decision makers, the school boards, the families, you're a whole lot better off.

And I think there are some economic development functions, as well, legitimately that you can move closer to the state. But we've got to get our spending closer to 19 percent-- of our GDP as opposed to this unsustainable 24, 25 percent. 

Campaign Videos

Mitt Romney

No data available for this representative.

Rick Perry

No data available for this representative.

No data available for this representative.