Skip to main content
editorial

With his widow’s peak, tragic eyes and lean frame, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan always seemed the picture of fiscal probity. To see him was to think, There’s a guy I wouldn’t mind doing my taxes.

The image served him well. Mr. Ryan rose to become Speaker of the House of Representatives by portraying himself as a debt hawk intent on getting the nation’s finances in proper order.

Now Mr. Ryan has announced his impending retirement. He won’t seek re-election in the November midterms and will leave the speakership at the beginning of next year.

Because his career became something of a symbol and defined an era of American conservatism that still has many proponents, it’s worth taking stock of his achievements and failures to see what, if anything, can be learned from his example, especially by Canadian fiscal conservatives.

First, the achievement. Mr. Ryan put debt on the agenda more forcefully than any other U.S. politician of his generation. He was onto something. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out recently, only four large nations have a higher gross debt-to-GDP ratio than the United States: Japan, Greece, Italy and Portugal. Not an enviable group.

Mr. Ryan spoke about the problem with a rare zeal and urgency. In an influential speech at the American Enterprise Institute, he warned that “the debt poses an existential threat to all we hold dear.” For this kind of talk, the Wisconsinite became a darling of American fiscal conservatives.

Now comes the failure. After the 2016 elections, Republicans controlled Congress and the Presidency, giving them a golden chance to get the country on sound fiscal footing.

Instead, by passing massive tax cuts for corporations, rich people and their heirs, without corresponding spending cuts, Mr. Ryan and his party are ballooning the debt.

The bipartisan and non-profit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the Trump-Ryan tax cuts will cost $5.5 trillion – yes, trillion – in lost revenue over the next decade. The same group projects that the national debt will double by 2028 under the new tax code.

Yet, in a press conference announcing his departure, Mr. Ryan called the tax reform one of his proudest achievements as a member of Congress.

Liberals, and even some fellow conservatives, had been making the case for years that Mr. Ryan’s obsession with cutting fat had more to do with a stark, moralistic view of society inspired by his self-professed hero, the sci-fi novelist and libertarian idol Ayn Rand, than with balancing the books.

Former Republican speaker Newt Gingrich went so far as to accuse Mr. Ryan of “right-wing social engineering” – of trying to use tax and program cuts to reward the deserving rich and motivate the undeserving poor.

Because these abstruse and hard-hearted aims constituted his true program all along, fiscal stewardship was always a means, not an end, for Mr. Ryan.

Perhaps needless to say, standing up for the rich while piling on debt was not particularly popular. At Gallup’s last count, 46 per cent of Americans had an unfavorable view of the Speaker – a higher tally than ever. Meanwhile, the Republican Party he has embodied better than anyone for close to a decade trailed Democrats badly in national polls.

Canadian conservatives can learn from this. Though Mr. Ryan’s closest northern analogue, Maxime Bernier, narrowly lost the Conservative leadership last year, the party’s grassroots still carry a torch for the free-market firebrand.

They should instead focus on a more compassionate, less moralistic conservatism. Imagine a response to the fentanyl overdose crisis that cracks down on dealers but also funds treatment and harm prevention on a massive scale. Or a revenue-neutral carbon tax that cuts emissions while offering tax relief to low-income families.

Of course, the other object lesson offered by Paul Ryan’s failed political project is his relationship with Donald Trump. Mr. Ryan has an obvious distaste for the President but has studiously avoided criticizing his administration even as it spirals further into mayhem.

Mr. Ryan calculated that propping up a dangerously unqualified populist in the White House was a cost he would pay in return for the tax cuts he wanted. The chaos in Washington is a reminder that no policy agenda is worth embracing a demagogue for – above all, not a cruel agenda derived from the pages of Atlas Shrugged.

Interact with The Globe