By JACK GILLUM
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan is a fiscal conservative, champion of small government and critic of federal handouts. But as a congressman in Wisconsin, Ryan lobbied for tens of millions of dollars on behalf of his constituents for the kinds of largess he's now campaigning against, according to an Associated Press review of 8,900 pages of correspondence between Ryan's office and more than 70 executive branch agencies.
For 12 years in the House, Ryan wrote to federal agencies supporting expansion of food stamps in his Wisconsin district. He supported city officials and everyday constituents who sought stimulus grants, federally guaranteed business loans, grants to invest in green technology and money under the health care law he opposes.
On the campaign trail, Ryan has called those kinds of handouts big-government overreaching. He tells crowds he supports smaller government and rails against what he calls President Barack Obama's wasteful spending, including the president's $800 billion stimulus program. Ryan renewed his criticism about stimulus spending in Thursday night's vice presidential debate.
"Was it a good idea to spend taxpayer dollars on electric cars in Finland or on windmills in China?" Ryan said. "Was it a good idea to borrow all this money from countries like China and spend it on all these various different interest groups?"
Yet the AP's review of Ryan's congressional correspondence showed that he sought stimulus funding on behalf of residents and at one point told federal regulators that cutting a stimulus grant in his district at the 11th hour would be "economically devastating."
Vice President Joe Biden cited during the debate Ryan's letters seeking stimulus money: "I love that. This was such a bad program, and he writes me a letter saying, writes the Department of Energy a letter saying, `The reason we need this stimulus, it will create growth and jobs.' His words. And now he's sitting here looking at me," Biden said.
Much of Ryan's correspondence is similar to other lawmakers performing constituent duties, describing problems that residents have reported. They include requests such as assisting a family missing airline baggage and helping a man who didn't receive a pancake maker he had ordered.
But in other correspondence, Ryan explicitly supports programs and encourages federal agencies to take actions. He supported in his congressional letters some Wisconsin farms' share of an $11.8 million loan guarantee but later criticized other loan guarantees, such as the $535 million loan that went to now-defunct solar panel maker Solyndra. He asked transportation officials for a grant for green technology and alternative fuels, although his proposed budget as House budget chairman called loans for electric car development "corporate welfare."
He's also supported federal money to help a Kenosha, Wis., community center cover health care costs of low-income families under Obama's health care reform law - the very program he and Romney say they will repeal if they win the White House.
Ryan spokesman Brendan Buck said AP's findings represented a member of Congress helping people in his district. "Part of being a congressman is vouching for constituents and helping them navigate the federal bureaucracy when asked," he said.
Among the ways Ryan went to bat for his constituents, as detailed in his correspondence:
-A Kenosha community center's grant proposal under the Food Stamps Access Research program, to educate families about the nutritional benefits of food stamps. Ryan said in a 2002 letter the program would increase the enrollment of eligible individuals in the program by providing laptop computers to pre-screen applicants. Ryan's budget proposed cutting food stamps by $134 billion over 10 years, although his spokesman said he "has always made clear we need a strong safety net."
-Letters offering support or forwarding requests for projects funded by stimulus money. Ryan's May 2009 letter to a regional Environmental Protection Agency office asked for its "full consideration" in awarding grant money to an organization under the National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program, which reduces diesel emissions.
Ryan also wrote to the EPA in 2009 on behalf of a small town trying to secure $550,000 in stimulus money for utility repairs. Ryan, whose staff requested meetings with the EPA about the matter, said the rescinding of the grant "would be economically devastating" to Sharon, Wis., since it already began spending the money. The EPA said project costs were incurred before October 2008, making the project ineligible for stimulus cash. Ryan has also voiced support for millions in EPA grant money to clean up abandoned building sites in Wisconsin towns.
-A 2002 Agriculture Department loan guarantee to develop a pork-packing and processing plant for farms in the region, including some in his district. The new factory appeared to be "state of the art" and worthy of funding, he said, adding: "It is my hope that the USDA will reach a favorable decision" on the application for a 60 percent federal loan guarantee toward a $19.7 million loan.
-A Kenosha health center's request to use money under Obama's new health care law to help meet health care needs of "thousands of new patients" who lack coverage. Ryan's December 2010 letter to the Health and Human Services Department, first reported by the Nation magazine and also obtained by the AP, appears at odds with his pledge to repeal "Obamacare."
-Support for a grant for the Historical Society in Milton, Wis., from the National Park Service for $271,000 in order to preserve a Civil War-era home. Ryan supported the plan in 2002, saying historical artifacts inside the former transfer point for slaves "have aged to a point where aggressive preservation and restoration is needed to save them." Meanwhile, he's supported recent cuts to the federal budget that would invariably affect national parks.
The AP obtained requested documents from nearly every executive branch agency, although many have been slow to provide any relevant files. Some Obama administration agencies declined AP's request to quickly turn over materials even though they involve an election that's just weeks away.
---
It's a little easier for a senator. One can always take the small government high road while the other gets every dime possible for the state. Congressmen don't have that luxury for their district.
excusing bad behavior (boorish) by saying such things as "Joe is Joe..." does not elevate his personal ungentlemanly language and behavior to respectable. I do not condemn him for his politics just his inane behavior more appropriate for a beer hall than the political stage in this country.
As a tax preparer I am of the opinion that a person is entitled to everything they can claim legitimately. If the law allows for a person to claim a credit or a deduction why not? While a person is not required to claim credits or deductions, it is my belief that if the law allows it then a person is walking away from money on the table.
Recently had occasion to help a female over-the-road truck driver. Her tax return was screwed up by a preparer who did not understand the allowed deductions for OTR drivers. While they are generous there are criteria to be applied, Once I got all that sorted out - it took a while! - we moved to another topic.
The new topic with her was discussion about her being an American Indian. I asked her why she didn't file the papers to prove her link to the local Indian population here in Michigan. It happens that the Pottowatomie (sp?) tribe opened a new casino and it was doing well. An Indian doesn't have to do a thing to get payout from the tribe. Her answer surprised me. She was flat out against claiming her lineage and using that as a basis for a distribution from the tribe she is related to by blood. She didn't go into details but she just asserted in no uncertain terms she didn't feel right about it...
That was the first time in over 20 years of writing taxes that someone has said in no uncertain terms that they would not participate in (claim) something that they were otherwise entitled to...
I have done the tax returns for other Indians over the years. Had one girl (I think she was all of 16 years old) who received a Form 1099-MISC (the report form that records the money the tribe sends out to registered members). Her amount was $15,000 (nice round figure!). She was still in high school. But because of that money she had to file a tax return and ended up paying tax (there was nothing withheld.
But, as a preparer, I still believe that if the system allows a person to claim a benefit, a deduction, a credit or some form of payout they should claim it. There is no dishonor in so doing. It has nothing to do with whether I personally believe that the "system" is right or not. It has everything to do with whether the law allows it - that is all.
My conviction is that our political system should be able to be changed when change is called for. There is a difference between not participating in a system on moral grounds and not participating because of other reasons. An example is owners of businesses who are Roman Catholic and who are required to pay into a system for reasons that smack up against their religious convictions. In the case of my OTR truck driver there was no moral reason so far as I know. She just chose to make do with what she earned on her own account. In the case of Congressman Ryan there likely was no moral objection either - rather there was a persuasion in his own mind that the system should be changed but hadn't yet been changed. In the meantime the law allowed for it so why not?
There is no conflict between using what the law allows and advocating for change in the same system...
On a personal basis I do not like the EITC (earned income tax credit) being part of the tax code. It has nothing to do with taxes - rather, it has everything to do with redistribution. Yet, as a tax preparer I will go after every opportunity I can find to legitimately get as much as I can for a filer. It is the right thing to do. This EITC thing is a "sacred cow" that is never talked about by politicians in terms of "tax reform" or changing the system. On a personal basis - seeing how much it is abused and misused - I would still advocate for change. We should, in my opinion, call it what it is - place that "benefit" in the social welfare programs that already exist in this country. I have no problem with social welfare programs but just believe that such things masquerading as related to the tax code (when it clearly isn't) should be in the program (that is, part of the system) where it belongs.
FWIIW