Possible Future House Minority Leader blames the Fed...

[Chieftain1776]

and believes revising monetary policy is the key to reform. Really interesting to see someone like Paul Ryan who voted for the bailout twice talk about monetary policy as a plank for Republican reform. Maybe times are a changin'

After two straight electoral defeats, it is time for a substantial party shake-up. We don't need a feather duster; we need a fire hose.

We need to be honest about the root causes of our current financial crisis: loose money, crony capitalism and a lack of market transparency and information. We need to adopt a policy of sound money by requiring the Federal Reserve to focus exclusively on keeping inflation in check, as I've proposed with my Price Stability Act. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose excesses helped lead to the current mess, must be taken off the backs of taxpayers. We need a complete overhaul of our outdated financial regulatory system to emphasize market transparency and accountability.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122637412685416573.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

[lodge939]

Sound money?! Wtf?

Maybe Ron is getting some House GOP dudes coming over to him "so, OK, can you explain this to us?"

[Chieftain1776]

I know that was really surprising...I just edited it with an underline.

[kathy88]

Sounds hopeful.

[adamni]

Sounds encouraging, but when he says "sound money", I don't think he means REAL sound money backed by gold and/or silver...

[lodge939]

Sounds encouraging, but when he says "sound money", I don't think he means REAL sound money backed by gold and/or silver...Yeah. I'd like to see this Price Stability Act

[Chieftain1776]

Yeah, I haven't looked up his bill, but he probably means a Milton Friedman price rule where they create a constant 2 or 3 percent in more dollars every year. I'd have to look at the bill but it's encouraging that it's a topic in the Wall Street Journal as well as in a bill presented by someone other than Ron Paul.

[forsmant]

Milton Friedman's price rule is discussed on mises.org here:

http://mises.org/story/3196

[lodge939]

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, has introduced the Price Stability Act of 2008 (H.R. 6053), legislation that would "require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to focus on price stability in establishing monetary policy to ensure the stable, long-term purchasing power of the currency, to repeal the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978."

[/URL]

nothing specific in the [URL="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-6053"]bill. (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-6053) seems pretty lean at the moment.

[WRellim]

and believes revising monetary policy is the key to reform. Really interesting to see someone like Paul Ryan who voted for the bailout twice talk about monetary policy as a plank for Republican reform. Maybe times are a changin'

After two straight electoral defeats, it is time for a substantial party shake-up. We don't need a feather duster; we need a fire hose.

We need to be honest about the root causes of our current financial crisis: loose money, crony capitalism and a lack of market transparency and information. We need to adopt a policy of sound money by requiring the Federal Reserve to focus exclusively on keeping inflation in check, as I've proposed with my Price Stability Act. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose excesses helped lead to the current mess, must be taken off the backs of taxpayers. We need a complete overhaul of our outdated financial regulatory system to emphasize market transparency and accountability.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122637412685416573.html?mod=djemEditorialPage


Paul Ryan is an idiot and a compromising "RINO" BS'er.

He'll blow with whatever he thinks the prevailing winds are in the Beltway (and will always be a "good little soldier" obeying his party leaders).

He does NOT mean what you think he means when he says "sound money" -- he's just talking about more Fed Reserve BS -- and he'll be "bipartisan" and go for "compromises" at every opportunity (his voting history shows that, BTW)

I know this guy personally (I'm in his district) and have listened to him waffle back and forth for years now -- he talked the "Bushie" game for quite a few years while supposedly advocating for "fiscal responsibility", and has sold out completely within the past few (once he got on the Budget and the Ways & Means Committees, his campaign funding INSTANTLY skyrocketed -- all courtesy of the F.I.RE. industry PAC's; cf here (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00004357)).

BTW, he's lying about his "district" going to Obama. And the REASON he got 64% of the vote is twofold:

1) His district is properly gerrymandered so that it is a "safe" district for the GOP. (Ergo he has a virtually assured house seat).

2) He had a campaign war-chest that was nearly 20x the size of his Dem opponent (who was NOT a serious contender, but rather a "just-in-case" candidate). -- See the comparison of expenditures here: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=WI01&cycle=2008 -- Ryan spent $2 MILLION, his opponent spent $127 thousand. (And as I said Ryan's campaign money did NOT come from within his district, it came from DC and NYC).

The MAIN part of his article I agree with is that we need a fire hose -- but Ryan is one of the ones who needs to get hosed OUT of the party -- IMO, the chief purpose of Ryan's article is as a CYA piece where he is trying to "switch teams" so that he doesn't suffer from that fire hose blast himself.

Don't be fooled by this guy.

[Chieftain1776]

yeah I remember studying it....he doesn't even go as far as a price rule just simply removes from the fed's mandate employment goals (some believe in something called the Phillips Curve) and still leaves a great deal of power in their hands:

`(b) Market Stability and Liquidity- Subsection (a) shall not be construed as a limitation on the authority or responsibility of the Board--

`(1) to provide liquidity to markets in the event of a disruption that threatens the smooth functioning and stability of the financial sector; or
`(2) to serve as a lender of last resort under this Act when the Board determines such action is necessary.

I'm also suspicious of the effectiveness of even removing the mandate...read up on Arthur Burns and Nixon and the Political Business Cycle. Nonetheless it's good to see the issue raised.

[Chieftain1776]

Paul Ryan is an idiot and a compromising "RINO" BS'er.

He'll blow with whatever he thinks the prevailing winds are in the Beltway (and will always be a "good little soldier" obeying his party leaders).

He does NOT mean what you think he means when he says "sound money" -- he's just talking about more Fed Reserve BS -- and he'll be "bipartisan" and go for "compromises" at every opportunity (his voting history shows that, BTW)

I know this guy personally (I'm in his district) and have listened to him waffle back and forth for years now -- he talked the "Bushie" game for quite a few years while supposedly advocating for "fiscal responsibility", and has sold out completely within the past few (once he got on the Budget and the Ways & Means Committees, his campaign funding INSTANTLY skyrocketed -- all courtesy of the F.I.RE. industry PAC's; cf here (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00004357)).

BTW, he's lying about his "district" going to Obama. And the REASON he got 64% of the vote is twofold:

1) His district is properly gerrymandered so that it is a "safe" district for the GOP. (Ergo he has a virtually assured house seat).

2) He had a campaign war-chest that was nearly 20x the size of his Dem opponent (who was NOT a serious contender, but rather a "just-in-case" candidate). -- See the comparison of expenditures here: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=WI01&cycle=2008 -- Ryan spent $2 MILLION, his opponent spent $127 thousand. (And as I said Ryan's campaign money did NOT come from within his district, it came from DC and NYC).

The MAIN part of his article I agree with is that we need a fire hose -- but Ryan is one of the ones who needs to get hosed OUT of the party -- IMO, the chief purpose of Ryan's article is as a CYA piece where he is trying to "switch teams" so that he doesn't suffer from that fire hose blast himself.

Don't be fooled by this guy.

You know I got that feeling from watching him on TV a few times. I think he doing what he can to move up the ladder but he does have a B+/A taxpayer unions rating (http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/details_all_years.php3?house_id=759). But again it's interesting that he feels it's to his benefit to raise the issue and he did put himself on the record as blaming the federal reserve's monetary policy so again not bad for a run of the mill conservative that may take leadership.

[WRellim]

You know I got that feeling from watching him on TV a few times. I think he doing what he can to move up the ladder but he does have a B+/A taxpayer unions rating (http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/details_all_years.php3?house_id=759). But again it's interesting that he feels it's to his benefit to raise the issue and he did put himself on the record as blaming the federal reserve's monetary policy so again not bad for a run of the mill conservative that may take leadership.

You're pretty close... you just need to add in the the word "whatever"...
Paul Ryan will do WHATEVER he needs to in order to move up the "ladder" in Washington D.C.
He's a professional politician -- has been since the day he got out of school -- he has essentially lived in the Beltway EVER SINCE and before gaining office, worked variously as an intern, legislative aid and speechwriter, making his networking contacts and "paying his dues."

The ONLY thing this guy has EVER done in his life is POLITICS. (He'll shovel a bunch of BS in his speeches about being a "businessman" but he started working in politics as a congressional aide in 1992 -- and since he was born in 1970... well, you do the math! The only time he worked any "private jobs" -- so called -- was when he was unable to secure a position in the Beltway, and then he had a few "consulting contracts" thrown his way via the "network" of GOB. See his "bio" here: http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=r000570 )


BTW, the "National Taxpayers Union" thingee... is basically a Beltway "Conservative" astroturf group (Grover Norquist used to be Exec. Director) so I wouldn't put ANY reliance on their "ratings" -- heck, they rate Ron Paul at an "A" but typically give him figures like 80%.

[Chieftain1776]

Yeah, that's our biggest problem even if we can get these hacks to articulate and even agree with limited government there's no way to hold them accountable after they make an about face. I mean the GOP keeps saying we need to return to our roots but it'll probably be the same betrayal all over again. Maybe term limits is an answer but it can't be done politically. I think the only a chance we have is with recruiting small business owners that want to return to their businesses or are still in business (ie Ron Paul was still practicing for awhile while still in congress), otherwise it's just another career ladder to climb.