Paul Ryan Only Passed 2 Bills Into Law In More Than A Decade

[DonRedwood]

I find it very telling that one of the two bills passed gave a tax cut to the rich. The arrow law he passed changed taxing from % of cost (12.4% on the dollar) to a flat tax of 39 cents. That would mean that if you bought a $2 arrow pre-Ryan you would pay 25 cent tax. Post Ryan you pay 39 cents on the same arrow.

BUT...if you have lots of money to throw away on arrows it meant pre-ryan a $20 arrow had $2.48 tacked on for taxes but post Ryan you just had to pay 39 cents.

So, just like his tax plan, the little guy who is poor and can only afford the barest minimum saw his taxes jump while the rich guy who could afford carbide, steel tipped arrows made with the head knot feathers from Himalayan albino baby quail got a gigantic tax cut.

Even if the man has done almost nothing during his 13 years on his government salary, he has at least been consistent. Take everything you can from the little guy and give as much as you can to the rich.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/12/paul-ryan-bills_n_1769816.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

From the article: He's been in Congress for nearly 13 years, but Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has only seen two of his bills pass into law during that time.

Ryan, who Mitt Romney has tapped as his running mate, passed a bill into law in July 2000 that renames a post office in his district. Thanks to Ryan, the post office on 1818 Milton Ave. in Janesville, Wis., is now known as "Les Aspin Post Office Building."

The other time Ryan saw one of his bills become law was in December 2008, with legislation to change the way arrows (as in bows and arrows) are hit with an excise tax. Specifically, his bill amended the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 39-cent tax per arrow shaft, instead of a 12.4 percent tax on the sales price. The bill also "includes points suitable for use with arrows in the 11 percent excise tax on arrow parts and accessories."

[livetohike]

1. Not very productive, is he?

Thanks for posting this.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Not productive at all.

I hope his non-productivity will continue, as we make sure he won't be VEEP.

[DonRedwood]

3. His Congressional wages are over 2 MILLION dollars during that time!

I was being obsessive and did the math.... with just his wages figured in (no living expenses or travel or food, benefits, retirement, etc) and it come down to:

$1,019,050 per bill.

[rfranklin]

9. That's a good meme...do nothing Republican Congressman Paul Ryan collected...

millios and produced two bills!

[DonRedwood]

13. Get to work!

because I agree

[surrealAmerican]

4. Does anybody here know how many ...

... bills he has introduced? How does his ratio of bills introduced to bills passed compare to the ratios for other members of Congress?

Raw data is good, but without more information, I'm not quite sure what this means.

[DonRedwood]

6. It means that his ideas are so far out there that even during the Bush years only

two bills he wrote were passed.

I can't imagine that could be termed productive in anybody's book--whether he tried to pass 100 or just the 2.

[DonRedwood]

7. 71 and over 970 co sponsors here is a link to a washington post article

If you’ve heard of Paul Ryan, you’ve heard of Paul Ryan’s budget. But Ryan has been in the House of Representatives for 14 years and has proposed many, many other bills. Looking through the Library of Congress’s records, I counted 71 bills or amendments that Ryan has sponsored 71 bills or amendments and 971 bills that he has co-sponsored. That’s a lot of legislation, and some of it is pretty interesting. As Ezra noted, Ryan sponsored a Social Security privatization scheme that went so far the George W. Bush administration rejected it. So let’s dig a little deeper in the Ryan archives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/11/paul-ryans-non-budget-policy-record-in-one-post/

[Historic NY]

5. Republican dead wood obstructionist.

[Keefer]

8. I'm not one to do this type of thing, but...

I'm not one to do this type of thing, but, in this case I'll make an exception. Barack didn't have too much success either: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bills_sponsored_by_Barack_Obama_in_the_United_States_Senate

[DonRedwood]

10. facts are facts

so I don't mind seeing both sides of the coin.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

11. He also wasn't in the Senate nearly as long as Ryan was in the House.

[Keefer]

12. I know, and I agree, but...

I know, and I agree, but as DonRedwood pointed out, "facts are facts."

[DonRedwood]

15. I don't expect a lot from a newbie Congressman... (or any new hiree) but 13 years later

you would hope he would learn compromise and have the ability to still get work done. Obama's short time in the Senate does not compare to Ryan's 13 years.

[DonRedwood]

14. 13 years is a long time to work your way up and get some work done

But, in this case, I think it wa all just so far to the right that even the Repubs couldn't pass his stuff even when they had the majority.

That right there says a lot about how right things have gotten....