This article's lead section may not adequately summarize its contents. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of the article's key points. (April 2012)

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (June 2011)

Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC

Type	Subsidiary of The McGraw-Hill Companies, limited liability company
Industry	Financial services
Founded	1860, present corporation status in 1941
Founder(s)	Daryl Lethbridge
Headquarters	New York City, United States
Revenue	$2.61 billion US$ (2009)[1]
Employees	10,000 (approximate)
Parent	The McGraw-Hill Companies
Website	standardandpoors.com

Company headquarters at 55 Water Street in New York City (2008)

Standard & Poor's (S&P) is a United States-based financial services company. It is a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies that publishes financial research and analysis on stocks and bonds. It is well known for its stock-market indices, the US-based S&P 500, the Australian S&P/ASX 200, the Canadian S&P/TSX, the Italian S&P/MIB and India's S&P CNX Nifty. The company is one of the Big Three credit-rating agencies, which also include Moody's Investor Service and Fitch Ratings.^[2] Its head office is located on 55 Water Street in Lower Manhattan, New York City.^[3]

History[link]

The company traces its history back to 1860, with the publication by Henry Varnum Poor of History of Railroads and Canals in the United States. This book was an attempt to compile comprehensive information about the financial and operational state of U.S. railroad companies. Henry Varnum went on to establish H.V. and H.W. Poor Co. with his son, Henry William, and published annually updated versions of this book.^[4][5]

In 1906, Luther Lee Blake founded the Standard Statistics Bureau, with the view to providing financial information on non-railroad companies. Instead of an annually published book, Standard Statistics would use 5" x 7" cards, allowing for more frequent updates.^[4]

In 1941, Poor and Standard Statistics merged to become Standard & Poor's Corp. In 1966, the company was acquired by The McGraw-Hill Companies, and now encompasses the Financial Services division.^[4]

Credit ratings[link]

Countries with a AAA credit rating as of January 2012.

As a credit-rating agency (CRA), the company issues credit ratings for the debt of public and private corporations. It is one of several CRAs that have been designated a nationally recognized statistical rating organization by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

S&P issues both short-term and long-term credit ratings. Below is a partial list; see S&P's website for more information.

Long-term credit ratings[link]

World countries by Standard & Poor's Foreign Rating:^[6][7]

Green - AAA Turquoise - AA	Lighter blue - A Dark blue - BBB	Purple - BB Red - B
Grey - not rated

The company rates borrowers on a scale from AAA to D. Intermediate ratings are offered at each level between AA and CCC (e.g., BBB+, BBB and BBB-). For some borrowers, the company may also offer guidance (termed a "credit watch") as to whether it is likely to be upgraded (positive), downgraded (negative) or uncertain (neutral).

Investment Grade

• AAA: An obligor rated 'AAA' has extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments. 'AAA' is the highest issuer credit rating assigned by Standard & Poor's.
• AA: An obligor rated 'AA' has very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments. It differs from the highest-rated obligors only to a small degree. Includes:
  • AA+: equivalent to Moody's Aa1 (high quality, with very low credit risk, but susceptibility to long-term risks appears somewhat greater)
  • AA: equivalent to Aa2
  • AA-: equivalent to Aa3
• A: An obligor rated 'A' has strong capacity to meet its financial commitments but is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligors in higher-rated categories.
  • A+: equivalent to A1
  • A: equivalent to A2
• BBB: An obligor rated 'BBB' has adequate capacity to meet its financial commitments. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the obligor to meet its financial commitments.

Non-Investment Grade (also known as junk bonds)

• BB: An obligor rated 'BB' is less vulnerable in the near term than other lower-rated obligors. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties and exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, which could lead to the obligor's inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.
• B: An obligor rated 'B' is more vulnerable than the obligors rated 'BB', but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitments. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor's capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitments.
• CCC: An obligor rated 'CCC' is currently vulnerable, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions to meet its financial commitments.
• CC: An obligor rated 'CC' is currently highly vulnerable.
• C: highly vulnerable, perhaps in bankruptcy or in arrears but still continuing to pay out on obligations
• CI: past due on interest
• R: An obligor rated 'R' is under regulatory supervision owing to its financial condition. During the pendency of the regulatory supervision, the regulators may have the power to favor one class of obligations over others or pay some obligations and not others.
• SD: has selectively defaulted on some obligations
• D: has defaulted on obligations and S&P believes that it will generally default on most or all obligations
• NR: not rated

Short-term issue credit ratings[link]

The company rates specific issues on a scale from A-1 to D. Within the A-1 category it can be designated with a plus sign (+). This indicates that the issuer's commitment to meet its obligation is very strong. Country risk and currency of repayment of the obligor to meet the issue obligation are factored into the credit analysis and reflected in the issue rating.

• A-1: obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is strong
• A-2: is susceptible to adverse economic conditions however the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is satisfactory
• A-3: adverse economic conditions are likely to weaken the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation
• B: has significant speculative characteristics. The obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial obligation but faces major ongoing uncertainties that could impact its financial commitment on the obligation
• C: currently vulnerable to nonpayment and is dependent upon favorable business, financial and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation
• D: is in payment default. Obligation not made on due date and grace period may not have expired. The rating is also used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition.

Stock market indices[link]

It publishes a large number of stock market indices, covering every region of the world, market capitalization level and type of investment (e.g., indices for REITs and preferred stocks)

These indices include:

• S&P 500 – free-float capitalization-weighted index of the prices of 500 large-capitalization common stocks actively traded in the US.
• S&P 400 MidCap Index
• S&P 600 SmallCap Index^[8]

Governance scores (GAMMA)[link]

A GAMMA score reflects S&P's opinion of the relative strength of a company's corporate-governance practices as an investor protection against potential governance-related losses of value or failure to create value. GAMMA is designed for equity investors in emerging markets and is focused on non-financial-risk assessment, and in particular, assessment of corporate- governance risk.

History of CGS and GAMMA scores[link]

S&P has developed criteria and methodology for assessing corporate governance since 1998 and has been actively assessing companies' corporate-governance practices since 2000.

In 2007, the methodology of stand-alone governance analysis underwent a major overhaul to strengthen the risk focus of the analysis based on the group's experience assigning governance scores. GAMMA analysis focuses on a number of risks that vary in probability and expected impact on shareholder value. Accordingly, S&P's analysis seeks to determine the most vulnerable areas prompt to potential losses in value attributable to governance deficiencies. Recent developments in the international financial markets emphasize the relevance of enterprise risk management and the strategic process to governance quality. GAMMA methodology incorporates two new elements, addressing these areas of investor concern. It also promotes the culture of risk management and long-term strategic thinking among companies.

GAMMA methodology components[link]

1. Shareholder influence
2. Shareholder rights
3. Transparency, audit, and enterprise risk management
4. Board effectiveness, strategic process and incentives

GAMMA scale[link]

For the GAMMA score, the S&P uses a numeric scale from one to ten (with ten being the best possible score). At the S&P's discretion, a GAMMA score can be publicly disseminated or used privately.

• GAMMA-10 and GAMMA-9 – in S&P's opinion, the corporate-governance processes and practices at the company provide a very strong protection against potential governance related losses in value. A company in these scoring categories has, in S&P's opinion, few weaknesses in any of the major areas of governance analysis.

• GAMMA-8 and GAMMA-7 – in S&P's opinion, the corporate-governance processes and practices at the company provide strong protection against potential governance related losses in value. A company in these scoring categories has, in S&P's opinion, some weaknesses in certain of the major areas of governance analysis.

• GAMMA-6 and GAMMA-5 – in S&P's opinion, the corporate-governance processes and practices at the company provide moderate protection against potential governance related losses in value. A company in these scoring categories has, in S&P's opinion, weaknesses in several of the major areas of governance analysis.

• GAMMA-4 and GAMMA-3 – in S&P's opinion, the corporate-governance processes and practices provide weak protection against potential governance related losses in value. A company in these scoring categories has, in S&P's opinion, significant weaknesses in a number of the major areas of governance analysis.

• GAMMA-2 and GAMMA-1 – in S&P's opinion, the corporate-governance processes and practices provide very weak protection against potential governance related losses in value. A company in these scoring categories has, in S&P's opinion, significant weaknesses in most of the major areas of analysis.

Downgrade of U.S. long-term credit rating[link]

On August 5, 2011, following enactment of the Budget Control Act of 2011, S&P lowered the US's sovereign long-term credit rating from AAA to AA+.^[9] The press release sent with the decision said, in part:

• " The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
• " More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
• " Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon."^[9]

The United States Department of the Treasury, which had first called S&P's attention to its $2 trillion error in calculating the ten-year deficit reduction under the Budget Control Act, commented, "The magnitude of this mistake – and the haste with which S&P changed its principal rationale for action when presented with this error – raise fundamental questions about the credibility and integrity of S&P’s ratings action."^[10] The following day, S&P acknowledged in writing the US$2 trillion error in its calculations, saying the error "had no impact on the rating decision" and adding:^[11]

In taking a longer term horizon of 10 years, the U.S. net general government debt level with the current assumptions would be $20.1 trillion (85% of 2021 GDP). With the original assumptions, the debt level was projected to be $22.1 trillion (93% of 2021 GDP).^[11]

Downgrade of France's long-term credit rating[link]

On November 11, 2011 S&P erroneously announced the cut of France's triple-A rating (AAA). French leaders said that the error was inexcusable and called for even more regulation of private credit rating agencies (CRA's).^{[12][13][14][15]} On January 13, 2012 S&P truly cut France's AAA rating, lowering it to AA+. This was the first time since 1975 that Europe's second-biggest economy, France, had been downgraded to AA+.^[16] The same day S&P downgraded the rating of eight other European countries: Austria, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Malta, Slovenia, Slovakia and Cyprus.^[17]

Publications[link]

The company publishes The Outlook, a near-weekly (48 times a year) stock market analysis newsletter, which is issued both in print and online to subscribers.

Standard & Poor's Governance Services analysts issue a monthly GAMMA Newsletter containing comments and views on corporate governance-related matters in emerging markets (BRIC and beyond).

Criticism[link]

CRAs such as S&P have been subject to criticism in the wake of large losses beginning in 2007 in the collateralized debt obligation (CDO) market that occurred despite being assigned top ratings by the CRAs.

Credit ratings of AAA (the highest rating available) were given to large portions of even the riskiest pools of loans. Investors trusting the low-risk profile that AAA implies, purchased large amounts of CDOs that later became unsaleable. Those that could be sold often took staggering losses. For instance, losses on $340.7 million worth of CDOs issued by Credit Suisse Group added up to about $125 million, despite being rated AAA by S&P.^[18]

Companies pay S&P to rate their debt issues. As a result, some critics have contended that S&P is beholden to these issuers and that its ratings are not as objective as they ought to be and that, in fact, this "pay to play" model makes their ratings meaningless at best and perhaps would more accurately be compared to the role of the "shill" in a game of three card monte.

In April 2009, the company called for "new faces" in the Irish government, which was seen as interfering in the democratic process. In a subsequent statement they said they were "misunderstood".^[19]

Some critics have pointed out that the company and other rating agencies were part of the cause of the global financial crisis of 2008–2009, for example when Moody's downgraded Freddie Mac^[20] or, to quote Time, when "both agencies granted AAA rating to Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) that were chock-full-of crap mortgages, thereby helping to precipitate the 2008 financial collapse"^[21]). Ezra Klein wrote for The Washington Post that "Standard Poor's didn't just miss the bubble. They helped cause it," but he said S&P took the right action to downgrade the U.S.^[22] On the other hand, Paul Krugman wrote, "it’s hard to think of anyone less qualified to pass judgment on America than the rating agencies," and, "S&P’s demands suggest that it’s talking nonsense about the US fiscal situation".^[23] Perhaps more revealing and supportive of Paul Krugman's comment, David Wyss, who was chief economist at S&P till July 2011 noted to a reporter on August 17, 2011: "The credit agencies don't know any more about government budgets than the guy in the street who is reading the newspaper."^[24] Such insider comments lay fresh doubts about the key ratings decisions by S&P. And, in a recent Wall Street Journal article, Mark Adelson, S&P's chief credit officer since June 2008, openly decried the quality of S&P analysis and analysts; yet the majority of them (including Clifford Griep, the former chief credit risk officer) remain employed by S&P. While Mark Adelson reviewed and edited the U.S. downgrade notice, he did not really question the reasoning, nor spot the $2 trillion error in the computations. Furthermore, on August 6, 2011, the CEO Deven Sharma publicly stated that he had no prior knowledge that such a rating change was even in the works for the prior day, but quickly went on to defend the move; in a surprise development, Deven Sharma left S&P in early September amid mounting criticism of the firm's ratings and research.

With the US downgrade some have accused S&P of causing further damage for its own agenda. S&P acknowledged making a US$2 trillion error in its justification for downgrading the US credit rating,^[25] but stated that it "had no impact on the rating decision".^[26] "A judgment flawed by a $2 trillion error speaks for itself,"^[27] said a spokesman for the United States Department of the Treasury. Jonathan Portes, director of NIESR, Britain's longest established independent economic research institute, has observed that "S&P's record . . . is remarkable. The agency downgraded Japan's credit rating in 2002, since when it has had the lowest long-term interest rates in recorded economic history. That did not, however, stop S&P rating numerous sub-prime mortgage-backed securities as AAA, or maintaining its rating on Lehman Brothers until the bitter end."^[28]

The SEC is investigating whether the intent to downgrade the U.S. was leaked prior to the public announcement, since the stock market fell sharply for no apparent reason a day earlier, fed by rumors of an impending downgrade. Another issue that has concerned commentators is that an S&P rating — for example, of the US government or any other national government — can have, and has had, a distinct effect on a truly global scale, but the decision on these ratings are made by the company's employees who are not elected by the public, and are not accountable for their decision making process. There is no appeals process against a credit-rating decision.

In August 2011, S&P filed a letter with the SEC in an attempt to water down a proposal requiring credit rating agencies to publicly disclose "significant errors" in how they calculate their ratings. The SEC proposal, issued in May 2011, would require credit raters to disclose more about their methods and strengthen internal controls to protect against conflicts of interest.^[29][30]

Antitrust review[link]

In November 2009, ten months after launching an investigation, the European Commission (EC) formally charged S&P with abusing its position as the sole provider of international securities identification codes for U.S. securities by requiring European financial firms and data vendors to pay licensing fees for their use. "This behavior amounts to unfair pricing," the EC said in its statement of objections which lays the groundwork for an adverse finding against S&P. "The (numbers) are indispensable for a number of operations that financial institutions carry out – for instance, reporting to authorities or clearing and settlement – and cannot be substituted.”^[31]

S&P has run the CUSIP Service Bureau, the only International Securities Identification Number (ISIN) issuer in the US, on behalf of the American Bankers Association. In its formal statement of objections, the EC alleged "that S&P is abusing this monopoly position by enforcing the payment of licence fees for the use of US ISINs by (a) banks and other financial services providers in the EEA and (b) information service providers in the EEA." It claims that comparable agencies elsewhere in the world either do not charge fees at all, or do so on the basis of distribution cost, rather than usage.^[32]

See also[link]

	New York City portal
	Companies portal
	Economics portal

Paul Ryan
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Wisconsin's 1st district
Incumbent
Assumed office January 3, 1999
Preceded by	Mark Neumann
Chairman of the House Committee on the Budget
Incumbent
Assumed office January 3, 2011
Preceded by	John Spratt
Personal details
Born	Paul Davis Ryan (1970-01-29) January 29, 1970 (age 42) Janesville, Wisconsin
Political party	Republican
Spouse(s)	Janna Ryan
Children	Elizabeth, Charles, and Samuel
Residence	Janesville, Wisconsin
Alma mater	Miami University (B.A.)
Religion	Roman Catholic
Website	U.S. Congressman Paul Ryan

Paul Davis Ryan^[1] (born January 29, 1970) is the U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's 1st congressional district, serving since 1999. He is a member of the Republican Party, and has been ranked among the party's most influential voices on economic policy.^[2][3][4]

Born and raised in Janesville, Wisconsin, Ryan graduated from Miami University in Ohio and later worked as a marketing consultant for Ryan Incorporated Central, run by a branch of his family. In the mid to late 1990s, he worked as an aide to United States Senator Bob Kasten, as legislative director for Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, and as a speechwriter for former U.S. Representative and 1996 Republican vice presidential nominee Jack Kemp of New York. In 1998, Ryan won election to the United States House of Representatives, succeeding the two-term incumbent, fellow Republican Mark Neumann.

Ryan currently chairs the House Budget Committee, where he has played a prominent public role in drafting and promoting the Republican Party's long-term budget proposal. He introduced a plan, The Path to Prosperity, in April 2011 as an alternative to the budget proposal of President Barack Obama, and helped introduce The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal in March 2012, in response to Obama's 2013 budget.^[5] Ryan is one of the three co-founders of the Young Guns Program, an electoral recruitment and campaign effort by House Republicans. He endorsed Republican presidential candidate and former Governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney for the 2012 United States presidential election.^[6] Ryan has been considered as a possible running mate for Romney.^[7]

Early life, education, and career[link]

Ryan was born and raised in Janesville, Wisconsin, the youngest child of Elizabeth A. "Betty" (née Hutter) and Paul Murray Ryan, a lawyer.^[8][9][10] He is of Irish and German ancestry,^[11] and is a fifth-generation Janesville native. Ryan's great-grandfather is Patrick William Ryan, who founded the Ryan Incorporated Central construction business in 1884.^[12] Ryan's mother is an outdoors enthusiast who led her husband and four children (Ryan's sister Janet and two brothers, Tobin and Stan) on regular hiking and skiing trips in the Colorado Rocky Mountains.^[9][13] As a boy, Ryan attended Camp Manito-wish YMCA, a wilderness canoe tripping camp located in Boulder Junction, Wisconsin; while in college, he returned there to work as a staff member and counselor during summer vacation.

Ryan attended Joseph A. Craig High School in Janesville. In college, he briefly worked for Oscar Mayer as a Wienermobile driver.^[14] Ryan went on to graduate from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, with a BA in economics and political science in 1992. He also studied at the Washington Semester program at American University and was a member of the Delta Tau Delta social fraternity. Following his studies, Ryan returned to Wisconsin and worked as a marketing consultant for an earth-moving company run by a branch of his family.^[13][15]

Ryan was 16 years old when he found his father in bed, dead from a heart attack at age 55. As a result, he received Social Security survivor's benefits until he turned 18. Ryan's grandfather and great-grandfather had also died from heart attacks, at ages 57 and 59 respectively.^[16]

Early political career[link]

In 2005, Ryan said, "The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand".^[17] New York magazine has claimed that Ryan requires his staff to read Atlas Shrugged.^[18] In 2012, however, he said that while as a young man he became interested in economics because of her novels, "It’s a big stretch to suggest that a person is therefore an Objectivist... I reject her philosophy. It's an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person's view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas. Don't give me Ayn Rand."^[19]

During his junior year at Miami University, Ryan worked as an intern opening mail for the foreign affairs advisor assigned to Senator Bob Kasten of Wisconsin.^[20] Concerned that her son "...was destined to become a ski bum", Betty Ryan reportedly nudged him to accept another congressional position as a staff economist attached to Kasten's office.^[20][21] In his early years working in D.C., Ryan moonlighted on Capitol Hill as a waiter at the Tortilla Coast restaurant and as a fitness trainer at Washington Sport and Health Club, among various other side jobs.^[22]

After Kasten was defeated by Democrat Russ Feingold in 1992, Ryan became a speechwriter and a volunteer economic analyst with Empower America, an advocacy group formed by Jack Kemp, former education secretary Bill Bennett, the late diplomat Jeane Kirkpatrick, and former Representative Vin Weber of Minnesota.^[16][23]

Ryan worked as a speechwriter for Kemp, the Republican vice presidential candidate in the 1996 United States presidential election, and later worked as legislative director for US Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. Ryan then returned to Wisconsin, where he worked as a consultant to an earth-moving company.^{[citation needed]} In 1998, he ran for Congress.

U.S. House of Representatives[link]

Following his first election to the US House of Representatives in 1998, one of Ryan's priorities as a new congressman was to convert a truck into a rolling district office. This allowed him to keep regular congressional office hours with his constituents at various locations across Wisconsin's 1st congressional district.^[24][1]

In 2002, Ryan voted in favor of the Iraq War resolution, authorizing President George W. Bush to use military force in Iraq.^[25] In 2003 he voted in favor of the Medicare Part D prescription drug expansion.^[26]

In 2005, Ryan spoke at a Celebration of Ayn Rand event hosted by The Atlas Society. During the event, Ryan spoke about the influence of Atlas Shrugged on his life.^[27]

He is one of the three founding members of the House GOP Young Guns Program.

In 2008, Ryan voted for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Wall Street bailout that precipitated the Tea Party movement, and the bailout of GM and Chrysler.^[28]

In 2010, The Daily Telegraph ranked Ryan the ninth most influential US conservative.^[2] In 2011, he was selected to deliver the Republican response to the State of the Union address.^[29]

In 2012, Ryan accused the nation's top military leaders of using "smoke and mirrors" to remain under budget limits passed by Congress.^[30] Ryan later said that he misspoke on the issue and called General Martin Dempsey to apologize for his comments.^[31]

Ryan's Second Budget Plan[link]

At the end of March 2012, the House of Representatives passed a newer version of Ryan's budget plan along partisan lines 228 yeas to 191 nays; ten Republicans voted against bill, along with all the House Democrats.^[32] Ryan's budget would reduce all discretionary spending in the budget from 12.5% of GDP in 2011 to 3.75% of GDP in 2050. This goal has been criticized as unrealistic since it includes spending on defense, which has never fallen below 3% of GDP.^[33] Congressman Justin Amash, a Republican from Michigan criticized Ryan's budget for insufficient cuts, its continuation of deficit spending through 2022 and beyond, and its exemption of military spending from reductions. ^[34] His budget has also been criticized because it would not balance the budget until 2035. Marc Goldwein, the policy directory for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget stated "We may never, as a country, have a balanced budget again, And you know what? We don't have to." Ryan saw this as evidence of the severity of the deficit crisis.^[35]

The 2012 Ryan budget also received criticism from elements of the Catholic Church, specifically from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and from faculty and administrators of Georgetown University. In its letter to Rep. Ryan, the group of Georgetown faculty and administrators criticized the Ryan budget as trying to "to dismantle government programs and abandon the poor to their own devices," going on to say that Catholic teaching "demands that higher levels of government provide help—"subsidium"—when communities and local governments face problems beyond their means to address such as economic crises, high unemployment, endemic poverty and hunger." The letter also criticizes Ryan for his attempts at "gutting government programs" and states that Ryan is "profoundly misreading Church teaching."^[36] A statement issued by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops criticized the Ryan budget in similar terms.^[37] Ryan rejects the bishops' criticism that his budget plans would disproportionately cut programs that "serve poor and vulnerable people."^[38] Ryan's difficulties with the Catholic Church worsened when videos of Ryan praising and endorsing the "morality" of Ayn Rand's hyper-individualist philosophy were published on Youtube in 2012. ^[39]

In May of 2012, Ryan voted for H.R. 4310 which would increase spending on defense, Afghanistan and various weapon systems to the level of $642 billion - $8 billion more than what was agreed to by President Obama and the Congress in the summer of 2011. ^[40]

Committee assignments[link]

• Committee on the Budget (Chairman)
• Committee on Ways and Means
  • Subcommittee on Health

Caucus memberships[link]

• Congressional Middle East Economic Partnership Caucus
• International Conservation Caucus
• Republican Study Committee
• Sportsmen's Caucus (Co-Chair)

Roadmap for America's Future[link]

Ryan speaking at CPAC in February 2011.

On May 21, 2008, Ryan introduced H.R. 6110, titled "Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2008."^[41] This proposed legislation outlined a plan to deal with entitlement spending.^[42] Its stated objectives were: to ensure universal access to health insurance; to strengthen Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security; to lift debt from future generations; and to promote economic growth and job creation in America.^[43] Despite significant press coverage, it did not move past committee.^[44]

On April 1, 2009, Ryan introduced his alternative to the 2010 United States federal budget. This alternative budget would have eliminated the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, lowered the top tax rate to 25%, introduced an 8.5% value-added consumption tax, and imposed a five-year spending freeze on all discretionary spending.^[45] It would also have replaced Medicare.^[46] Instead, it proposed that starting in 2021, the federal government would pay part of the cost of private medical insurance for individuals turning 65.^[46] Ryan's proposed budget would also have allowed taxpayers to opt out of the federal income taxation system with itemized deductions, and instead pay a flat 10 percent of adjusted gross income up to $100,000 and 25 percent on any remaining income.^[47] Ryan's proposed budget was heavily criticized by opponents for the lack of concrete numbers.^[48] It was ultimately rejected in the house by a vote of 293-137, with 38 Republicans in opposition.^[49]

In late January 2010, Ryan released a new version of his Roadmap.^[50] The modified plan would: give across the board tax cuts by reducing income tax rates; eliminate income taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest; and abolish the corporate income tax, estate tax, and alternative minimum tax. The plan would privatize a portion of Social Security,^[51][52] eliminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance,^[52] and privatize Medicare.^[51][52]

On April 15, 2011, the House passed the Ryan Plan by a vote of 235-193. Four Republicans joined all House Democrats in voting against it.^[53] A month later, the bill died in the Senate by a vote of 57-40, with five Republicans and most Democrats in opposition.^[54]

Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman criticized the contention that Ryan's plan would reduce the deficit, alleging that it only considered proposed spending cuts and failed to take into account tax changes. According to Krugman, Ryan's plan "would raise taxes for 95 percent of the population" and produce a $4 trillion revenue loss over ten years from tax cuts for the rich. Krugman went on to label the proposed spending cuts a "sham" because they depended on making a severe cut in domestic discretionary spending without specifying the programs to be cut, and on "dismantling Medicare as we know it," which is politically unrealistic.^[55]

In response to Krugman, economist and former American Enterprise Institute scholar Ted Gayer wrote a more positive assessment of the Ryan plan. Gayer agreed that, as written, the plan would cause a $4 trillion revenue shortfall over 10 years. He noted, however, that Ryan had expressed a willingness to consider raising rates in his tax plan.^{[clarification needed]} Gayer concluded that "Ryan’s vision of broad-based tax reform, which essentially would shift us toward a consumption tax... makes a useful contribution to this debate."^[56]

Journalist Ramesh Ponnuru, writing in National Review, argued that the revenue loss to which Krugman refers is based on a comparison between Ryan's plan and current law, which "includes middle-class tax increases... cuts in payment to Medicare providers... [and] the expansion of the Alternative Minimum Tax."^[57] He added that "current law automatically raises the tax rates to pre-Bush levels in 2013... so if you're comparing the tax level with current law, Ryan's plan represents a tax cut" and "the CBO's actual projections for the Ryan plan show a debt level in 2021 that is $4.7 trillion lower than its projections for Obama's budgets."^[57]

Rick Foster, the chief actuary of Medicare, endorsed Ryan's plan for reducing Medicare costs: "If you can put that pressure on the research and development community, you might have a fighting chance of changing the nature of new medical technology in a way that makes lower costs like this possible and more sustainable. I would say that the Roadmap has that potential. There is some potential for the Affordable Care Act price reductions, although I’m a little less confident about that."^[58]

In December 2011, it was revealed that Ryan would begin a new push for changes in Medicare in 2012 by working with Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon to modify Ryan's previous Medicare proposal. His most recent approach for semi-privatization of Medicare would keep traditional Medicare as an option for senior citizens, but would also introduce private insurance into an exchange market to compete with traditional Medicare. Seniors would still be given a voucher to purchase care if they so desired, as in his previous proposal. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has supported a similar plan in his campaign.^[59]

Opposition to SOPA[link]

On January 9, 2012, four months after the introduction of Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), Ryan pledged his opposition to the bill, saying, "The internet is one of the most magnificent expressions of freedom and free enterprise in history. It should stay that way. While H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act, attempts to address legitimate problems, I believe it creates the precedent and possibility for undue regulation, censorship and legal abuse. I do not support H.R. 3261 in its current form and will oppose the legislation should it come before the full House."^[60]

Political campaigns[link]

Ryan was first elected to the House in 1998, when two-term incumbent Mark Neumann retired from his seat in order to make an unsuccessful bid for the Senate. Ryan won both a Republican primary over 29-year-old pianist Michael J. Logan of Twin Lakes and the general election against Democratic opponent Lydia Spottswood.^[61] Ryan successfully defended his seat against Democratic challenger Jeffrey C. Thomas in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.^[62] In 2002, Ryan had also faced Libertarian candidate George Meyers.

2008[link]

Ryan defeated Democratic nominee Marge Krupp by a wide margin in the 2008 general election.^[62]

2010[link]

Ryan defeated both Democratic nominee John Heckenlively and Libertarian nominee Joseph Kexel by a wide margin in the 2010 general election.

Electoral history[link]

Personal life[link]

Ryan married Janna Little, a tax attorney,^[1] in December 2000.^[8] The Ryans live in Janesville with their three children Elizabeth Anne, Charles Wilson, and Samuel Lowery.^[63]

Ryan is a Catholic and is a member of St. John Vianney's Church.^[64]

Ryan is a fitness enthusiast and promotes fitness as a daily routine for young people. In 2009, his exercise program was based on the P90x fitness program.^[22]

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan

	Biography portal
	Politics portal
	Wisconsin portal