Romney-Ryan 2012

Romney announce Paul Ryan as VP pick
photo: Mary Altaffer/AP:

My heart is lighter today at the prospects for our beloved country’s future.

We were wrong (as most were) on who Romney would pick as a running mate, but not disappointed. My biggest concern about Paul Ryan as a possibility was, how will we replace him in Congress on the budget committee? But I believe we can deal with that.

What I see is a very articulate, remarkably positive representative of our constitutional rights. One of the most encouraging reports I read concerned how similar Ryan is to the kind of people Romney surrounded himself with at Bain: very smart, well-educated, detail oriented and strong on data, and scrupulously honest. He expected a lot from the few worthy of hiring. It wasn’t about some good old boy network, chatting up deals on a golf course; the Bain way is thorough, logical, and sensible. Unprepared employees were much more likely to feel a Bain chill than an underperforming company.

Ryan is smart, data oriented, and fascinated by policy as it relates to the Constitution and free-market principles. That is also true of Romney. If you actually read or listen to his speeches, consistently Romney focuses on positive free-market principles. He has had the disadvantage of trying, as something of a data wonk, to explain the principles to liberals in Massachusetts, and then have each tiny phrase taken out of context by opponents trying to paint him as moderate-to-liberal. Ryan is a good fit for VP because he is so very much like Romney; he is not going to pull a different direction or concern himself with his own agenda. They have the same agenda.

Romney’s ticket benefits because, when people hear Ryan, they hear the policy message connected to the underlying principles of freedom—much less filtered thus far by opponents and the media-in-their-pocket. Romney and Ryan say the same words, and suddenly the message gets through the fog.

The two of them are possibly also the most scandal-free pair to run for office in living memory. Both are faithful family men, both devoted to their religions. They surround themselves with similar sterling people. As Biden says (but, as is usual for him, unaware of the irony), it is "a clear choice the voters face this Noveber."

Romney has possibly the best preparatory experience to be president of any candidate in my lifetime. Ryan has good experience, and the right methods for learning that, if needed, even at his young age, he could step in as president. Certainly without a day of on-the-job training, he could handle the job better than the current underprepared chief executive. But think how much preparation he will have after eight years of being mentored in executive skill by a President Romney.

The enemy is rallying; the method will be that Ryan’s budget was all about cutting Medicare and starving seniors—despite the $700 Billion Obama cut from Medicare as part of Obamacare. Here is the basic info you need to know to fend off the media distortions (coming from American EnterpriseInstitute):

1. No one over the age of 55 would be affected in any way.

2. Traditional Medicare fee-for-service would remain available for all. “Premium support”—that is, government funding of private insurance plans chosen by individuals—is an option for those who choose it. No senior would be forced out of the traditional Medicare program against his will.

3. Overall funding for Medicare under the Ryan-Wyden plan is scheduled to grow at the same rate as under President Obama’s proposals. Is this “gutting Medicare” and “ending Medicare as we know it”? In reality, it’s the market giving seniors cheaper, higher quality choices they can take if they wish, with the traditional program remaining an option.

Romney, of course, has his own plan. It’s been out there for a year. He keeps paring down the message to make it more accessible, but the media continues to insist he has been vague and has no plan. While there are differences, in principle these two understand one another. Ryan has been an advisor, as well as a surrogate, to Romney.

If you like smart, logical, fact-supported and principle-based leadership, it’s hard to dream up a better pair. An amusing, brief summary of “20 Reasons Why Ryan Was a Good VP Pick” is a good read.

A day or two before the announcement, I came across this video of Ryan, speaking before the vote on Obamacare. It says in under two minutes what this election is about: the direction of America. Enjoy. And then find a way to support the campaign.

Veepstakes

My son Political Sphere has persuaded me about who Romney’s choice for VP will be. Here we are, going on record,  so that on the off chance we're right, we can say, “Yes, we knew it all along.” If we’re wrong, that’s no big loss. All the big name political prognosticators are making a wide range of guesses, which means most of them will be wrong as well.

I don’t know what Romney’s process will be for making this choice. But I do expect it will be meticulously thorough and principle based. I think I can trust his process. So whoever it is, there will be good reason.

I’m more or less representing Political Sphere’s reasons for the choice.

·         The VP needs to be consistently conservative, with a record.

·         The VP needs to be available—i.e., can better serve as VP than in his/her current position.

·         The VP ought to have a significant strength to bring to the ticket—such as foreign policy.

The relatively long list out there has several consistent conservatives. It’s a shorter list that also fits the second criterion. Rep. Paul Ryan articulates the conservative message better than most, but replacing him in Wisconsin, and therefore in the US Congress, would be difficult, unless Wisconsin makes a much larger shift than it has so far.

The same goes for Chris Christie. If we took away a conservative governor from New Jersey so early in their attempted recovery from budget disaster, we’d leave a gaping vacuum—not likely to be filled by another Chris Christie. It’s a similar story for Bobby Jindal. Louisiana finally has a chance to dig its way out of liberal corruption; let’s not take that away from them. Also, both Christie and Jindal could use a few more years of experience, and then be better ready to serve the nation following a Romney presidency.

It’s the same thing for Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida. We need him in the Senate. There’s no guarantee Florida would replace him with another conservative, let alone someone of his caliber. And the US Senate is in powerful need of every conservative we can get. Pushing through any conservative legislation (including repeal of Obamacare/tax) requires a senate majority. And, again, Rubio is young and has served at this level only a short time so far. Let’s just say we have a deep bench for future campaigns.

Some people talk about gaining constituencies: women, minorities, unions, etc. I don’t think that way. I’m not against someone because of rheir sub-constituency, but I can only be for them if they have the ideology and record, as well as the leadership ability, that we Americans need.

I think it’s safe to say the choice won’t be Condoleeza Rice. The reason is that the Romney camp is very good about not leaking info. You can be certain Ann Romney knows the rules. And it was Ann Romney who let out the idea that women were being considered, which in turn led to the speculation that it was certain to be Rice. That would only happen as a distraction; Romney doesn’t do trial balloons. Therefore, we can conclude that the choice is not Rice.

Choosing Marco Rubio because he is Hispanic is no more likely. Having a Hispanic or black or female would be a positive—only if that person fit all the other criteria. Because the spin from the opposition is that, if such a person is conservative, then they’re not really Hispanic or black or female, but rather a sellout or anomaly. So any populist-motivated choice is unlikely and unwise.

It’s time for the big reveal: our pick for VP candidate is Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona.

Senator Jon Kyl
official photo from Wikipedia

He has served as minority whip, the second highest GOP position in the Senate. He has roots in the Midwest, moving to Arizona for law school and staying in Phoenix. He is rated as the fourth most conservative US senator, which is high enough to meet the first criterion. And even Time Magazine admits he is one of the top 10 best senators.

And it may be a plus to have someone on the ticket who has legislative experience, rather than a second governor. Ann Coulter, who is the only other person I’m aware of who has been guessing Kyl as a VP possibility, admits that the two-governor thing might be the single drawback to her first choice, Chris Christie. (Note: I noticed her suggestion that it could be Senator Kyl only because Political Sphere had already brought him to my attention.)

John Kyl is retiring this term, and announced that decision early enough to allow for an unhurried election of a replacement. So he is available. Political Sphere thinks his reason for retiring is to be available as a VP pick—that this has been considered and not leaked for many months already. I don’t know if I can go that far, but I like the idea that a VP is there for no further political reason, but simply to serve the country. That was an advantage with Dick Cheney as Bush’s pick.

While Romney is well versed on foreign policy and worked with world leaders for the Olympics, John Kyl does bring some needed foreign policy experience. He has been the ranking member of the Crime and Terrorism subcommittee, as well as Immigration, Refugees and Border Security. I like that he is on the subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights. And it doesn’t hurt that he is the ranking member on Taxation and IRS Oversight, as well as on subcommittees for Health Care and for Social Security, Pensions, and Family Policy.

If you were going to design a senator’s background and experience to aid our country in a time such as this, you would give him the experiences of Senator Jon Kyl.

I think it’s likely that Arizona will go for Romney regardless of his VP pick (assuming he doesn’t choose someone with a fatal flaw, which I cannot foresee happening). But Kyl will help solidify the Arizona vote, which might help down ticket as well. He might even bring in some votes in nearby New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada. He was elected to the Senate in 1994, and served in Congress prior to that from 1987. Three terms was a good long run in the Senate, but not a whole lifetime career, as some have made it.

There’s been enough opportunity for opponents and media to fully vet him, and no skeletons have popped up. There has been plenty of time to have negatives appear on his record, but his record is strongly conservative, no matter who was president. The only recent big “controversy” was his statement that Planned Parenthood’s main business is abortion and should therefore not be receiving government subsidies. He used the figure 90%, which was not provable; Planned Parenthood self-reports but claimed that figure was vastly overstated. Hmm. As controversies go, that one doesn’t sound too bad.

There’s a lot to like about Senator Kyl. Maybe enough to put him on the Romney ticket. There was a bit of speculation that the decision would come sooner rather than later, but since the Olympics start this week, my guess is the announcement will wait until the media and the electorate can hear it. Maybe it will be during that week prior to the GOP convention. If the VP pick is Senator Kyl, then Ann Coulter is likely to get credit for being right. But remember, you read it here first.