Deficit hawks are fiscal conservatives who believe the best way to reduce the deficit, pay off national debt, and balance the budget is by increasing taxes in addition to cutting government spending. George Voinovich of Ohio was perhaps the most recent best-known deficit hawk in the United States Senate, as were Warren Rudman of New Hampshire, Phil Gramm of Texas and Fritz Hollings of South Carolina and Bob Dole of Kansas during their years in the Senate. The Peterson Foundation is a prominent advocate of this position. The Concord Coalition is a bipartisan political advocacy group made up of deficit hawks and is perhaps the largest and most influential political advocacy group dedicated to promoting a balanced budget.
So, if you buy that definition (and the examples) as at least near the mark, is Paul Ryan a deficit hawk as the media states over and over ad nauseum? Give me a break!
I completely agree with Jonathan Chait over at the New Republic when he declaims in an aside
Stop calling Ryan a "deficit hawk." He voted for all of Bush's tax cuts. He voted for all the wars. He voted for Bush's Medicare prescription drug bill. He voted against the deficit-reducing Affordable Care Act. He voted against the Bowles-Simpson plan. He opposes any deficit reduction plan that increases revenue. Ryan is anti-government but he is clearly not a deficit hawk.
This guy Paul Ryan, this Ayn Rand acolyte, is not a deficit hawk by any stretch of the definition - but just because his Republican friends are loudly proclaiming him a savvy deficit hawk does not mean that the bulk of the media should follow suit. Give me a break!
Don't you believe it!