Meet Paul Ryan 2.0

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) walks to a meeting with House Republicans on Capitol Hill October 16, 2013 in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Tim Alberta
Oct. 31, 2013, 4:05 p.m.

This was shap­ing up to be Paul Ry­an’s mo­ment.

With the Re­pub­lic­an Party reel­ing from a gov­ern­ment shut­down and a near dis­aster over the debt lim­it, the chair­man of the House Budget Com­mit­tee was tasked with lead­ing the GOP in a six-week bicam­er­al budget con­fer­ence. Re­pub­lic­ans, who de­man­ded these talks in ex­change for a short-term budget res­ol­u­tion, were ex­pec­ted to pur­sue big-pic­ture ne­go­ti­ations over Amer­ica’s long-term fisc­al chal­lenges.

But that’s not go­ing to hap­pen. Since be­ing ap­poin­ted as the Re­pub­lic­an ne­go­ti­at­ing chief two weeks ago, Ry­an has en­deavored to lower pub­lic ex­pect­a­tions for the com­mit­tee, say­ing he hopes to pur­sue small, tar­geted policy fixes rather than broad, sweep­ing re­forms.

“We don’t want to set ex­pect­a­tions that aren’t go­ing to be achieved. That’s not help­ful,” Ry­an told Na­tion­al Journ­al Daily on the eve of ne­go­ti­ations.

Ry­an ad­ded: “There won’t be a grand bar­gain. So we shouldn’t sug­gest that there will be.”

Such mod­esty of pur­pose sounds pe­cu­li­ar com­ing from a politi­cian who, after Re­pub­lic­ans re­gained the House ma­jor­ity in 2011, was cel­eb­rated by con­ser­vat­ives as Amer­ica’s fisc­al mes­si­ah. When Ry­an re­leased a budget that year, he de­scribed it as “the new House ma­jor­ity’s an­swer to his­tory’s call.”

In­deed, Ry­an viewed his role in mo­ment­ous con­text. Upon tak­ing the Budget Com­mit­tee gavel in 2011, he en­vi­sioned a great fisc­al set­tle­ment, built upon sweep­ing re­forms to Amer­ica’s en­ti­tle­ment sys­tem. But for nearly three years there­after, Wash­ing­ton failed to reach a com­pre­hens­ive agree­ment, with both sides balk­ing on con­ces­sions and re­vert­ing to fin­ger-point­ing that eroded trust and emp­tied the Cap­it­ol’s already-di­min­ished reser­voir of good­will.

Of course, Ry­an was no in­no­cent. After in­tro­du­cing one of the most ideo­lo­gic­ally-charged budgets ever seen on Cap­it­ol Hill—one that stood zero chance of be­com­ing law—Ry­an re­fused to com­prom­ise on the no-new-taxes plat­form that had come to define the House GOP. He voted against the Bowles-Simpson de­fi­cit-re­duc­tion plan in 2010, and later helped scuttle the “grand bar­gain” be­ing dis­cussed by Pres­id­ent Obama and Speak­er John Boehner in 2011. All the while, Ry­an and House Re­pub­lic­ans mocked Sen­ate Demo­crats for re­fus­ing to re­lease a com­pet­ing budget.

Then, in March of this year, Sen­ate Demo­crats passed their first budget in four years. Soon after, Sen. Patty Mur­ray, D-Wash., chair­wo­man of the Sen­ate Budget Com­mit­tee, met with Ry­an to dis­cuss the “many dif­fer­ences” in their blue­prints. But the talks stalled, and when GOP lead­er­ship blocked the path to a con­fer­ence com­mit­tee, Mur­ray blas­ted Re­pub­lic­ans for re­fus­ing to re­con­cile their budget­ary dif­fer­ences.

Re­pub­lic­ans re­versed course after the gov­ern­ment shut­down. When the dust settled and an agree­ment was reached, Re­pub­lic­ans could claim only one con­ces­sion: Ry­an would lead the GOP in­to a bicam­er­al budget con­fer­ence (Ry­an, for his part, voted against that deal).

Against that back­drop of dis­trust and dys­func­tion, Ry­an’s friends and col­leagues say, it makes sense to scale back ex­pect­a­tions for this newly-con­vened con­fer­ence com­mit­tee. Still, the irony is un­mis­tak­able. Three years ago, Ry­an hoped his ap­proach could change the way Wash­ing­ton does busi­ness. Three years later, the way Wash­ing­ton does busi­ness has changed his own ap­proach.

“I think ex­per­i­ence has been a hard teach­er here,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., a friend of Ry­an’s who is serving along­side him on con­fer­ence com­mit­tee. “He’d love to get in­to the ne­go­ti­ations and find out both sides are will­ing to go fur­ther. But we’re wise not to raise ex­pect­a­tions right now.”

Cole points out that Ry­an’s low-bar strategy is re­flect­ive not only of re­cent le­gis­lat­ive in­er­tia, but of cur­rent par­tis­an in­transigence. Demo­crats re­fuse to con­sider en­ti­tle­ment re­forms un­less ac­com­pan­ied by sig­ni­fic­ant ad­di­tion­al rev­en­ues. And for Re­pub­lic­ans in Ry­an’s con­fer­ence, the sug­ges­tion of more rev­en­ues—either through tax hikes or changes to the tax code—is a non­starter.

Ry­an, after months of one-on-one talks with Mur­ray, re­cog­nizes the scope of these dis­agree­ments, and sees little time to re­solve them. Their com­mit­tee must re­port by Dec. 13 wheth­er it has reached an agree­ment to re­con­cile budget­ary dif­fer­ences and fund the gov­ern­ment for the rest of fisc­al year 2014. If noth­ing is ac­com­plished, the coun­try will ca­reen to­ward an­oth­er gov­ern­ment shut­down on Jan. 16, and, pos­sibly, an­oth­er debt-ceil­ing crisis in early Feb­ru­ary.

Ry­an knows the dam­age Oc­to­ber’s fisc­al drama did to his party, and col­leagues say he’s de­term­ined to avoid an­oth­er such epis­ode. In his mind, this budget con­fer­ence isn’t an oc­ca­sion to swing for the fisc­al fences; rather, it’s an op­por­tun­ity to re­build trust between parties and reach com­mon ground. In­stead of de­bat­ing struc­tur­al changes to en­ti­tle­ment pro­grams, the con­fer­ence com­mit­tee will fo­cus on swap­ping out the se­quester cuts for smarter, tar­geted re­forms.

In­deed, Ry­an, who once fam­ously offered his budget as the “Roadmap for Amer­ica’s Fu­ture,” is now resigned to nav­ig­at­ing his Re­pub­lic­an Party safely through the next sev­er­al months.

“I think at this point, with the time frame, he’s just tak­ing a real­ist­ic ap­proach—and one that is much more likely to be suc­cess­ful,” said Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., Ry­an’s close friend and vice chair­man of the Budget Com­mit­tee. “Part of this is about re­gain­ing trust with each oth­er. And if there’s an op­por­tun­ity to do that through this pro­cess, then it will have a pos­it­ive out­come.”

But Ry­an hasn’t lost track of the big­ger pic­ture, his col­leagues in­sist. In in­ter­views with his three fel­low House Re­pub­lic­an budget con­fer­ees, a con­sensus emerged: Ry­an’s small-ball ap­proach is not a re­treat from his long-term fisc­al vis­ion, they said, but rather a quiet step in that dir­ec­tion.

“We don’t want to set the bar so high to the point where any­thing less is con­sidered a fail­ure,” said Rep. Di­ane Black, R-Tenn. “Ob­vi­ously there are some pretty big dif­fer­ences between the House and Sen­ate budgets. If we can get a down pay­ment on our debt, that’s a vic­tory.”

That phrase—”a down pay­ment”—is straight from the Ry­an mes­saging ma­chine. It’s how he framed his early-Oc­to­ber fisc­al pro­pos­al, which called for minor tweaks to Medi­care in ex­change for re­open­ing the gov­ern­ment and rais­ing the debt ceil­ing. (Not­ably, the plan did not touch Obama­care.) In selling this plan to skep­tic­al con­ser­vat­ives at an Oct. 9 meet­ing of the Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee, he ar­gued that by for­ging agree­ment on those smal­ler en­ti­tle­ment re­forms that Obama has en­dorsed, Re­pub­lic­ans would lay the found­a­tion for big­ger struc­tur­al changes down the road. They agreed.

Ry­an re­mains the only mem­ber of the House Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence who car­ries this cred­ib­il­ity. And while con­ser­vat­ives in the House have re­stric­ted his play­book with their ab­so­lute op­pos­i­tion to new rev­en­ues, they have un­waver­ing con­fid­ence in their ne­go­ti­at­ing chief to reach—or re­ject—any deal.

“This is a chance to get something done. Paul’s not go­ing to take a bad deal. Paul wants to get something that’s go­ing to move us in the right dir­ec­tion,” said Rep. Rob Woodall, R-Ga., who serves on Ry­an’s Budget Com­mit­tee and chairs the RSC task force on budget and spend­ing. “I don’t know what po­ten­tial there is, but if any­one can get a deal out of that con­fer­ence com­mit­tee, it’s gonna be Paul.”

Of course, this unique trust that con­ser­vat­ives have in Ry­an prompts the ques­tion: Why not use that cap­it­al to push for a big­ger deal, know­ing that he’s the one House Re­pub­lic­an cap­able of selling it?

Skep­tics sur­mise that Ry­an doesn’t want to risk fall­ing out of fa­vor with con­ser­vat­ives, which could jeop­ard­ize his polit­ic­al fu­ture, wheth­er he takes aim at the Ways and Means Com­mit­tee, the speak­er’s of­fice, or the White House. Still, oth­ers sug­gest a sim­pler ex­plan­a­tion: The tim­ing just isn’t right to push for a grand bar­gain.

Mean­while, there are whis­pers of “prag­mat­ic Paul,” re­fer­ring to the law­maker who, since re­turn­ing from his failed vice pres­id­en­tial run, voted in fa­vor of the “fisc­al cliff” deal, helped Boehner broker an in­tern­al cease-fire that raised the debt ceil­ing, and voted for two con­tro­ver­sial bills—Hur­ricane Sandy Re­lief and the Vi­ol­ence Against Wo­men Act—that passed with min­im­al Re­pub­lic­an sup­port.

Demo­crats see these in­dic­at­ors, and con­sider Ry­an’s long-term ob­ject­ive. They won­der when, if ever, Ry­an will merge his prag­mat­ic streak with the cap­it­al he pos­sesses among House con­ser­vat­ives.

“Paul Ry­an has a huge amount of cred­ib­il­ity in his caucus on budget is­sues,” said Rep. Chris Van Hol­len, D-Md., the rank­ing mem­ber of the Budget Com­mit­tee, who has worked closely with Ry­an in re­cent years. “He is the Re­pub­lic­an point-per­son on the budget. He’s got a lot of sup­port and a lot of cred­ib­il­ity. The ques­tion is, how does he want to use it?”

In con­ver­sa­tions with Ry­an’s friends and col­leagues, one word—”lead­er­ship”—echoes uni­ver­sally. Not in the con­text of House con­ser­vat­ives, or even the Re­pub­lic­an Party. Rather, they sug­gest, Ry­an sees a dir­ec­tion­less Con­gress fail­ing to ad­dress the na­tion’s most sig­ni­fic­ant prob­lems—and no one step­ping for­ward to bring the two sides to­geth­er.

Ry­an once hoped to lead by com­mand­ing sweep­ing changes to the fed­er­al budget. That ap­proach made him one of the most po­lar­iz­ing fig­ures in mod­ern polit­ics. Now, with the GOP brand badly dam­aged and Con­gress no closer to solv­ing the na­tion’s long-term fisc­al chal­lenges, Ry­an is chan­ging tack. His des­tin­a­tion hasn’t changed, Cole said, but he’s pre­pared to get there “step by step.”

“Nobody has to aban­don their prin­ciples,” Ry­an told mem­bers of the budget con­fer­ence when it con­vened Wed­nes­day. “In­stead, we need to find out where our prin­ciples over­lap. We won’t solve all our prob­lems “¦ so let’s fo­cus on achiev­able goals. Let’s find com­mon ground.”

This was shap­ing up to be Paul Ry­an’s mo­ment. In an un­ex­pec­ted way, it still could be.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.