Political Animal
Blog
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was campaigning in New Hampshire the other day, and defended his “corporations are people” line. It was a boilerplate response, but a different part of his pitch stood out for me.
Romney continued to deliver his anti-tax message when asked about a recent op-ed article by billionaire investor Warren Buffet in the New York Times arguing that rich people should have to pay higher taxes.
Romney has said repeatedly that he will not raise taxes on anyone. But he also said he would not seek to lower taxes on the wealthy. “I don’t want to waste time trying to get tax cuts for wealthy people because frankly, wealthy people are doing just fine,” Romney said.
This is, I suppose, Romney’s way of trying to sound reasonable. He’s not going to ask the rich to pay a little more to lower the deficit, but he’s also not one of those crazies who want to give the wealthy even more tax breaks.
There are, however, two problems with this.
First, if Romney is serious about fiscal responsibility — he’s clearly not, but if he were — ruling out modest tax increases on millionaires and billionaires just doesn’t make any sense. There’s just no realistic way to bring the budget closer to balance without asking the very wealthy to pay a little more.
Second, Romney may think he’s positioning himself as sensible and pragmatic by ruling out tax cuts for the wealthy, but let’s not forget that Romney also sang the praises of Paul Ryan’s budget agenda, widely endorsed by congressional Republicans. And what did the Ryan agenda do? It cut taxes for the wealthy.
…Mr. Ryan may speak about the deficit in apocalyptic terms, but even if you believe that his proposed spending cuts are feasible — which you shouldn’t — the Roadmap wouldn’t reduce the deficit. All it would do is cut benefits for the middle class while slashing taxes on the rich.
And I do mean slash. The Tax Policy Center finds that the Ryan plan would cut taxes on the richest 1 percent of the population in half, giving them 117 percent of the plan’s total tax cuts. That’s not a misprint.
In fact, the Ryan plan would lower the top tax rates for individuals and corporations to 25%, from the current 35%.
And yet, Romney has not only praised the Ryan plan, he said he’d sign it as president.
“Wealthy people are doing just fine”? That’s true, but Romney has nevertheless endorsed a plan to slash taxes for the rich a lot. The reasonable shtick is just for show.
Facebook
Twitter
SadOldVet on August 26, 2011 2:28 PM:
Vote for Romney
He has a policy position for everyone!
So what if they are inconsistent on a daily basis.
citizen_pain on August 26, 2011 2:30 PM:
On the corporations are people thing... I wonder if I could incorporate myself, then write off everything I spend money on.
I'm surprised no one has attempted this yet, I think it'd be a great way to expose how ludicrous it really is to consider corporations people.
square1 on August 26, 2011 3:06 PM:
Frankly, anyone who isn't willing to roll back ALL of the Bush tax cuts -- or replace them with a significant increase in corporate taxes, or a financial transaction tax - is not serious about the deficit.
Steve Benen repeatedly engages in a rhetorical slight of hand. Benen repeatedly denounces the Bush tax cuts as a significant contributor to the deficit, and shows charts demonstrating the fiscal harm that the tax cuts created. But then he endorses, defends, or excuses, the decision of the administration and Democratic congressional leaders to only seek the repeal of the tax cuts for marginal income over $250k.
In reality, the vast, vast bulk of the hole that was blown in the budget was caused by the tax cuts on marginal income BELOW $250k.
Someone who is serious about fiscal responsibility would point out that the U.S. economy did just fine under the Clinton tax rates, including before Clinton lowered the cap gains rate. Someone who is serious about fiscal responsibility would advocate simply returning to the Clinton-era tax rates, in toto. Or would advocate an alternative revenue stream to make up the difference.
However, politicians -- and their sycophantic defenders -- who lack the courage to tell Americans the truth about taxes (presumably out of fear that the public will not believe that higher taxes can result in a stronger economy) are not serious about fiscal responsibility. They are no different than Romney.
Michael on August 26, 2011 3:40 PM:
Yes square, but that is not the reality we live in, of which Benen is aware. You must deal with your current realities for that is the only way to actually get things done.
A purely progressive or purely republican agenda does not work, in the context of today's makeup.
The political realities also are predicated on a democratic win in the next election to right the ship, so Obama's cool strategy works.In september , it will be an interesting battle , one of which should be putting republicans on the extreme defensive.
Kathryn on August 26, 2011 5:49 PM:
Poor grown up Richie Rich, it's not easy to keep all your positions up to date from hour to hour. What's up with his new screaming mode at town halls, by the way, is Mittens supposed to look forceful. Doesn't work for me (surprise), he just seems irritable and condescending.
Does anybody think there's a chance in hell that Brian Williams will ask any tough questions of Perry, Romney, Bachmann debate in the NBC? Do tell Cong. Bachmann, how will you accomplish $2.00 a gallon of gas if you're elected and Brian, have a follow up because you know the gobbledygook she'll be reciting from memory. Meanwhile, Gov. Perry, do you stand by your views, stated in your recent book, that social security is a ponzi scheme, medicare unconstitutional, still think senators should be appointed and not elected and do you support the work, changing the history of the country, of David Barton and all the ravings of the preachers you hobnobbed with at you faith event several weeks ago? Pick a couple Brian and follow ups please! Not holding my breath, of course.