Skip to footer

The Paul Ryan budget: 5 go-to sources for understanding it

Looking for in-depth analysis of the Paul Ryan budget plan? D.C. Decoder has compiled a list of excellent sources to help you sort out truth from fiction.

3. National Priorities Project

The National Priorities Project (NPP) provides a side-by-side comparison of Ryan's and President Obama’s plans, as well as an alternative budget by the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), which was introduced in the House of Representatives at the same time as the Ryan plan.

The chart format may not be the snazziest of the NPP’s many budget explainers, but it’s useful. Readers can quickly see how the three plans differ. For example, Mr. Obama’s and the CPC’s plans call for no changes to SNAP (the food stamp program), while Ryan’s plan would create a block grant for SNAP and make cuts over the next 10 years. Obama’s plan calls for $350 billion in spending to create jobs over the next several years, and the CPC’s calls for $2.9 trillion over 10 years, while Ryan's plan does not outline specific job-creation initiatives.

The NPP's goal is to explain to Americans where their tax dollars are spent and how citizens can influence government budget decisions. A donor-funded organization, its website is user-friendly and provides many tools to explain how the federal budget works.

The NPP has a page just for budget basics, with answers to questions such as “Where does the money come from?” and with breakdowns of sources of tax revenue. Discretionary spending, mandatory spending, and total spending are portrayed in colorful, clickable pie charts. The NPP also has several interactive features that let users input information about their taxes and their state to see how their tax money is being used.

3 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.