Huffpost Politics

Mitt Romney Campaign Attacks Military Cuts Paul Ryan Supported

Posted: Updated:

Mitt Romney's campaign Thursday criticized President Barack Obama for military budget cuts that Romney's running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) voted for, and implied that government spending is a useful economic stimulus -- at least if it's defense spending.

The attack was launched in a press release that coincided with Ryan speaking at a roundtable discussion on defense in Fayetteville, N.C.

"President Obama’s devastating defense cuts are set to have a massive impact on Fayetteville and the rest of North Carolina," said Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul in the statement. "Because of the President’s lack of leadership, North Carolina could be hit hard with thousands of job losses and millions of dollars in lost economic activity. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will restore our military’s strength and ensure our armed forces have the resources they need."

But what the statement leaves out is Ryan's leading role in crafting those cuts as chairman of the House Budget Committee. He also voted for the Budget Control Act that allowed the nation to raise its debt limit. Part of the deal was creating the "sequester" that requires $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts, including more than $500 billion from defense over 10 years.

Speaking at the roundtable, Ryan also blamed Obama for the sequester despite his own vote for it.

"We opposed it then; we oppose it now," Ryan said.

The GOP has recently begun trying to reverse the sequester, laying the cuts at Obama's feet, but Ryan and 173 other Republicans voted for them.

The suggestion that government spending is a good economic stimulus also represents recent GOP revisionism, with leaders on the Hill who often deride economic stimulus promoting it as an argument for heading off the sequester.

This story has been updated to include Ryan's comments from the roundtable discussion.

Also on HuffPost:

Close
Romney-Ryan 2012 Soundtrack
of
Share
Tweet
Advertisement
Share this
close
Current Slide

Suggest a correction