Amid Political Upheaval, Pat Ryan Keeps Focus on Affordability

In his second term representing New York’s 18th Congressional District, Rep. Pat Ryan, D-N.Y., is focused on what he sees as his constituents’ most urgent concern: the rising cost of living.

His push to lower grocery prices, reduce housing costs, and protect Social Security comes as he warns of mounting economic challenges — widening inequality, corporate consolidation, and federal policy shifts that, he argues, threaten the financial security of everyday Americans. He has also raised concerns over billionaire Elon Musk’s influence on federal agencies.

Ryan, who campaigned on making the Hudson Valley “more affordable, more safe, and more free,” remains optimistic despite what he calls “direct threats and risks” to those priorities.

“In the first few weeks of the Trump administration, we’ve seen quite direct threats to those values and real, tangible harms to my constituents,” he said in an interview with The Herald at his Washington office on Wednesday.

“What I’m optimistic about is that I think folks are seeing that clearly and starting to say, in a nonpartisan way, even a nonpolitical way, this just isn’t the community that we are and want to be, the country that we are and want to be,” he said.

His concerns come as Republicans hold the White House and control both chambers of the 119th Congress, where they maintain a narrow 218-215 majority in the House. With Washington deeply polarized, any progress on his legislative agenda will depend on forging bipartisan alliances — an effort he has already set in motion.

An Affordability Agenda

On Jan. 29, Ryan reintroduced the Lowering Grocery Prices Act alongside Rep. Michael Lawler, R-N.Y. The bipartisan bill, originally introduced in 2024 with then-Rep. Marcus Molinaro, R-N.Y., failed to advance in the House. It would direct the U.S. Government Accountability Office to analyze grocery prices over the past two decades and develop a national strategy to curb rising costs.

The proposal is part of what Ryan has dubbed his “affordability agenda”, a legislative package comprising seven bills aimed at easing financial pressures on Hudson Valley families.

Among them is the Protecting Social Security Act, which would block cuts to Social Security, prevent an increase in the retirement age, and require every county to maintain a Social Security office, according to Ryan. “We’ve now had two out of the three Social Security offices in my district closed, including the one in Poughkeepsie,” he said.

Another measure Ryan has sponsored, the Stopping Pharma Ripoffs and Drug Savings for All Act, seeks to lower prescription drug costs by targeting pharmacy benefit managers — corporate intermediaries that negotiate drug prices.

To address housing, Ryan has reintroduced four bills: the Working Families Housing Tax Credit Act, the PRO Housing Act, the Deliver Housing Now Act, and the Mortgage Rate Reduction Act.

“It’s a lot,” he admitted. “But I think the goal, especially something I learned in my first Congress, is to introduce these bills right up front so that we have the whole session to try to drive them through.”

Additionally, Ryan and Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., have introduced the Stop Sports Blackouts Act, which would require companies to refund customers unable to access programming they have already paid for due to disputes between providers.

“The idea for the bill came from a conversation I had with an older constituent who was really rightly pissed that he pays a lot for his normal cable subscription, but he was missing many Yankee games because he’d have to also subscribe to Amazon Prime and Peacock and all these other crazy additional costs and services,” Ryan said.

A Looming Battle Over Taxes

While affordability remains a key focus, Ryan says the biggest legislative battle ahead will center on tax policy. 

“In the next few months, the Trump administration is gonna try to extend or even expand the massive, almost unprecedented tax cuts they gave to ultra-wealthy people and corporations five years ago, because it’s expiring,” Ryan said. “They’re gonna try to extend or likely expand those, which will just be crushing to middle-class and working-class people in this country, who will inevitably pay for that on their side.”

According to reporting by the Associated Press, an analysis by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Tax Analysis found that extending the current tax cuts would provide the wealthiest 0.1% of earners with an average tax reduction of $314,000. The projected cost of maintaining these individual and estate tax provisions is estimated at $4.2 trillion between 2026 and 2035.

“There are multiple coalitions, both within Congress and at the community level, standing up to oppose this,” Ryan said.

“It’s going to be a hard fight because right now, Republicans control so much of the government. We’ll need to work to convince some number of Republicans, particularly New York Republicans, I hope, who present themselves as moderates, that allowing these tax cuts to continue would be harmful to their constituents. They claim to be moderates — now would be the time to show that, rather than cave to the ultra, ultra-rich, which is what happened five years ago.”

Is the United States an Oligarchy?

Ryan stopped short of calling the United States an oligarchy but acknowledged that economic power is becoming increasingly concentrated among a small elite.

Merriam-Webster defines oligarchy as “a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes.”

“[Oligarchy] is a very academic term that might be technically correct,” Ryan said. “But the way I see it — and the way I hear from folks in my district — is this: Everyone except for the top 1% is struggling more and more. Wages are stagnant, yet they see a very small group of people accumulating enormous wealth while often paying little or no corporate taxes.”

Ryan cited Jeff Bezos and Amazon as an example, arguing that some of the world’s wealthiest individuals and corporations contribute far less than what working- and middle-class Americans pay in taxes.

In 2024, individuals earning between $47,151 and $100,525 were subject to a 22% federal income tax rate on their taxable income.

By comparison, from 2014 to 2018, Jeff Bezos reported a total income of $4.22 billion and paid $973 million in federal taxes, according to ProPublica. That amounts to an effective income tax rate of 23% — similar to what many middle-class Americans pay.

However, ProPublica’s reporting highlights that traditional tax rates do not account for the actual growth in wealth among the richest Americans. To capture this financial reality, the investigation compared the amount of federal income taxes paid by the 25 richest Americans to the estimated increase in their net worth during the same period. It found that between 2014 and 2018, the 25 wealthiest Americans saw their collective wealth grow by $401 billion but paid only $13.6 billion in federal income taxes — resulting in a “true tax rate” of just 3.4%. By this measure, Bezos’s $99 billion increase in net worth during that time means his true tax rate was just 0.98% per year when compared to his total wealth gains.

“We see those same people seated in the front row at Trump’s inauguration, ahead of even his cabinet members,”Ryan said. “That, to me, is a striking visual of where things are heading if people don’t stand up and say, ‘That’s not what this country is about.’”

Concerns Over Elon Musk’s Influence

Beyond tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy, Ryan expressed concern over their influence in government decision-making — specifically Elon Musk’s access to critical federal infrastructure.

Musk was granted access to the Federal Treasury’s payment system after being appointed to lead the Trump administration’s newly created Department of Government Efficiency. When asked how concerned Americans should be about his involvement, Ryan was unequivocal.

“I think if we don’t put accountability on it, which right now there is not any, it could be an existential risk,” he said. “And I don’t say that lightly.”

The Treasury’s payment system distributes Social Security payments, veterans’ benefits, and federal salaries, ensuring millions of Americans receive essential funds on time through the Federal Reserve’s Automated Clearing House network, which processes trillions of dollars in transactions annually.

Ryan pointed to the lack of oversight over Musk’s role, raising the possibility of unchecked power over essential federal payments.

“There’s not even oversight right now of if he were to stop payments to some group of people — for whatever his reasons,” Ryan said. “Whether it’s so he can make more money at his companies, which get government contracts, by the way, or because he doesn’t like them or whatever the case may be. I mean, that is just so directly counter to our Constitution and the whole reason we formed the country in the first place.”

Musk was also involved in placing all U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) employees on administrative leave globally, effective Thursday, Feb. 6.

USAID is a federal agency responsible for distributing humanitarian aid, medications, disaster relief, and economic development assistance worldwide. The administration’s directive, Ryan argued, threatens critical international aid efforts.

“I do believe USAID, although they don’t get everything right, is a really important way to build trust and build the allies across the world, which prevents wars,” Ryan said. “Which, having served in war myself, I take very personally. That has to be our goal: to prevent war.”

Ryan also questioned the legality of the action, arguing that USAID was created by Congress under Article I of the Constitution and cannot be unilaterally disbanded by the president.

“There’s also the process piece here, which is really important,” he said. “Which is that definitively, without question, that’s an agency created by Congress under Article I of the Constitution, that the president cannot unilaterally disband.”

As protesters demonstrated in support of USAID outside the Capitol, Ryan acknowledged that while he does not support the administration’s actions, he remains focused on serving his district.

“There are a lot of things happening that I don’t agree with and that I think are harmful to our country. But it’s a really important moment to stay focused on the three core things that are my central mission on behalf of my constituents,” he said. “And so, making sure that I have that focus and that prioritization — and maintaining that focus — is really important.”

The Fight for Rural EMS

Ryan is working on bipartisan legislation to secure federal support for rural EMS services, an issue he describes as a growing crisis.

“I am working on early bipartisan legislation on figuring out how to get federal help and support around the crisis of access to EMS —rural EMS,” he said. “I particularly saw this firsthand as county executive prior to this job, where it was a huge problem. I know it’s a huge problem in Dutchess [county], and I’ve been talking a lot with the prior commissioner and, of course, the county executive about this. And now, as they figure out who the new commissioner is going to be, we did secure funding.”

That funding, he explained, includes a $1 million federal grant that will likely be included in the upcoming federal budget.

“That will be, hopefully, passed in the next month or two,” Ryan said. “At least somewhat directed toward improving the two-way communication system and radio system for emergency response, including EMS. So that’s a step in the right direction.”

However, Ryan said the underlying issue is systemic — federal funding structures fail to account for how EMS agencies actually operate.

“Right now, the federal government — the way we reimburse healthcare costs through mostly Medicare and Medicaid — it doesn’t factor in the way that EMS works,” he explained. “So agencies, mostly volunteer agencies, are not getting any funding from the federal government to do that response. That’s just an untenable situation.”

Ryan argued that the long-term solution is to rewrite federal reimbursement rules so EMS services receive appropriate compensation for providing on-site medical care, not just for transporting patients.

“If you’re responding to these calls, that is delivering healthcare, and there should be appropriate either Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement for that,” he said. “But right now, that’s not happening. They only get paid for the transport, and even for the transport, they don’t get paid enough. But they’re also, of course, providing care. So the federal government has an important role to play. So does the state government. I know the state’s working on it as well, but it shouldn’t be on the counties or municipalities alone.”

Medicare and Medicaid Cuts: “A Real Threat”

Asked whether older residents in upstate New York should be concerned about cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, Ryan didn’t hesitate.

“The short answer is yes,” he said. “And I wouldn’t raise an alarm if I didn’t feel it was a real threat, because I wouldn’t want to — I mean, that’s such an important thing for people, including my own parents, that are now receiving Medicare coverage and help.”

He pointed to House Republican proposals that include raising the retirement age, cutting funding, and privatization efforts that, he argues, would lead to higher costs and lower-quality care.

“We’ve seen in writing — in everything from Project 2025 to what’s called the Republican Study Committee, which is the House Republicans’ policy plan — clear proposals to either raise the age, which would cut off access for millions immediately, or weaken and privatize Medicare, leading to lower quality of care and higher costs, too,”Ryan said. “So those are their plans, in writing.”

He also tied the proposed cuts directly to the Republican tax agenda.

“That’s all going to be part of — by the way — the whole, what they call reconciliation,” he said. “They’re going to address all the tax stuff we talked about, but also figure out how to pay for it. What they want to do — the Republicans, and again, this is all documented — is cut funding, mostly to Medicaid, but potentially to Medicare as well, in order to pay for more tax cuts for the ultra-rich and big corporations.”

Ryan warned that veterans’ healthcare could also be at risk under the proposed cuts.

“They’re talking about $2 trillion in cuts, and the only way you can go at those cuts is through some of what are called mandatory spending programs,” he said. “That likely includes veterans’ healthcare, specifically the VA Health Administration, which runs all the hospitals and provides care.”

In anticipation of these cuts, Ryan has reintroduced the Protecting Social Security Act and is working on additional legislation to strengthen Medicare protections.

A Narrow House Majority and a Path Forward

With a razor-thin House majority, Ryan acknowledged that House Democrats face an uphill battle in blocking social program cuts, but he remains optimistic.

“I think we can. I think we have to,” he said. “I mean, it’s existential. We should be expanding people’s coverage. At a minimum, we should be keeping it the same. But they’re talking about cutting it.”

Ryan pointed to bipartisan public pressure as a critical factor in shaping the debate.

“We’re already hosting town halls, and we’re already getting lots of letters, emails, and phone calls—not just from Democrats, but from independents and Republicans in our districts,” he said. “And I believe, across the country, people are increasingly aware of these risks and are, in a very patriotic way, saying, ‘No way. Don’t take away these things that we’ve earned and are counting on.”

Beyond public pressure, Ryan believes the tight House margin presents an opportunity to stop extreme measures.

“The margin of the House is so tight,” he explained. “Once [Elise] Stefanik resigns, it’s basically one seat. All it takes is one — or more, but one — Republican with some backbone and some courage to stand against this or stop this.”

Ryan said he has been working behind the scenes to convince moderate Republicans to oppose proposed cuts. “I am genuinely, in good faith, working to have private conversations with my Republican colleagues—to say, ‘Let’s not be partisans. Let’s be patriots. Let’s actually do the right thing here.’”