Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, July 1, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Sun coverage
Attack: Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney raised fees and taxes as governor of Massachusetts.
Method of delivery: It came in a television ad and was emphasized in a Las Vegas news conference organized by Democrats last week that featured Nevadans — cosmetologists, gun owners, nurses — who would have been hit by the fee increases.
The Obama campaign TV ad begins with a grainy Romney in 2002 promising to cut taxes. Narrator: “As governor, Mitt Romney did cut taxes ... on millionaires like himself.”
The ad claims that Romney raised $1.5 billion in taxes and more than a thousand fees, ticking off a list in an increasingly rapid-fire voice.
Strategy: This is part of the effort to paint Romney as favoring the rich and having a disregard for the middle class. There’s no attack as universal as the suggestion that an opponent is a hypocrite.
Fairness meter: When Romney came into office, he faced a $3 billion budget hole, Romney’s former chief legal counsel Dan Winslow told the Sun. Romney told his cabinet to get to work — make cuts, find efficiencies and, yes, raise some fees.
He drew a line in the sand on taxes. The fees, though, were voluntary, Winslow said.
“People could choose not to have that service or be in the regulated entities,” he said.
Some of the fees hadn’t been adjusted for inflation in decades.
Sound way to run a state, maybe, but fees were raised. So that’s legit.
But the ad claims Romney also raised taxes to get that $1.5 billion.
That claim is dicier. Romney closed tax loopholes, Winslow said, and that’s also the citation in the backup provided by the Obama campaign.
Closing tax loopholes, such as those Democrats claim oil companies get, is different than a tax increase.
Given that, this line of attack gets an Eye Roll.
If Obamacare is a tax so is Romneycare...guess he raised taxes.
You can't have it both ways...
If President Obama 'raised fees' and 'closed tax loopholes' (as is in the works; hope springs eternal)...
Right-winger's & TeaNuts would go BALLISTIC and charge that 'Obama is raising TAXES!!!'...
RIght, right???
Is it fair? What the Heck does that mean "Fair?" Is it the TRUTH? YES..and all the entire political/government machine has been grinding out regulations/fees/fine/penalies..mandate on every conceivable LEGAL human and inhuman activity and Now..Inactivy
Roberts merely stated.. that all human activity..inactivity cannot be regulated under the commecrce act..and that fees/fines/penalties on legal activety/inactivity is a tax
That is what Roberts said ..and "free health care" is not FREE.
A vote for Obama is a Yes Vote for unlimited government power..A vote for Romney is a warning to the government to clean up its act..
The voters will decide and I think the idiots will vote for their "free health care" from the "Good King Obama" ..but remember the government now owns everything you have..and has complete and absolute control over your activity and inactivity..
Enjoy!
didn't nevada have a similar argument a few years ago about raising fees and not calling them a tax? and any time a democrat wants to close a tax loophole it's always called a tax increase by republicans.
and here are a few of the fees romney raised as governor: marriage licenses, driving permits, deed recording, mortgage recording, firearms registration.
romney's chief legal counsel is quoted in the article as saying, "People could choose not to have that service or be in the regulated entities." Sure i guess one could choose not to get married, or learn to drive, or buy a house, or transfer property, or purchase a firearm--the latter of which would brand any democrat a communist.
so is this ad fair? it doesn't matter. no one plays fair. there is zero regulation on political ads so it doesn't matter if it's fair or not.
CBarrius
Exactly which of your enumerated regulated activities are not regulated in Nevada..and taxed?
Are you saying that it is only q question of "how much." A democrat in Nevada would not raise fees that much..???
It sounds like the old joke about the word "whore."
"A man asks a women if she would sleep with him for a million dolars. She said YES..He said "How about ten dollars.. She gets huffy and says "What? Do you think I am a whore?" He says "We have already established that..we are only arguing about price."
And as for using regulation and taxation to control behavior..the Rebuplicans have learned the Democrats tricks..Mississippi has regulated and taxed abortion clinics/mills out of the state..
So it depends on how much and whose ox is getting gored..except ..the government does not have the unlimited power to tax.no matter what Roberts said..
Can we get a little less hyperbole in these comments? Even a single shred of reality would be nice.
To think that these same people can't figure out why no one takes them seriously.
OK..the government can intentially use regulation, taxation (mandates/fees/fines/penalties) to control behavior (cigarettes) and businesses (strip clubs/abortion mills)
BUT Romeny raised 1.5 billion by raising fees in one State?
Obama's EPA closed down all American manufacturers of class 8 engines..save one..
What did it cost America to put every manufacturer of class 8 engines out of business in American is jobs, tax revenue..and damaage to collateral industries such as trucking and agriculture?
Is it fair to say Romney raised fees/taxes..Yes, to pay for an expanded welfare state..
I believe in repentence..and Romney has repented..Obama has not
You don't close a 3 billion dollar budget deficit with fees.
Romney stuck it to the middle class and gave rich people another pass instead of taxing them for all their greed and exploitation.
If Romney is a tax and fee raiser, then what is Obama. Obama has spent over $10 trillion in the last three years and what does he have to show for it. Obama has failed in all three fronts, foreclosures, unemployment and the economy. He has destroyed the middle class but his campaign ads say differently. The middle class are going into poverty in record numbers, but it could of all been avoided if Obama would of just bailout and threw some stimulus their way. Obamacare was a victory for some, but you pay check will be smaller because you medicare deduction will go up .9% to pay a portion of Obamacare the rest come from the 50% of taxpayer that actually pay income tax. Obama has it wrong like usual, Romney is not president, but he should be.
The Republican point about regulation has been proven:
The government does use regulation and taxation (mandates/fees/fines/penalties) to intentionally control behavior (cigarettes) and discourage business (strip clubs and abortion mills)
Therefore..excessive regulation and taxation does discourage business and has a negative effect on the behavior of people in business (ship jobs overseas, go out of business)
What cannot be regulated and taxed..for "health" reasons, such as the rape kit tax on strip clubs " who promote "unhealthy attitudes toward women?"
Republican Mitt Romney banned assault rifles and created govt health care while Gov of MA.
I can t wait till the Romney&Obama debates, you betcha..
:-))
"Can we get a little less hyperbole in these comments? Even a single shred of reality would be nice."
-------------------------------
Such a request might be more sincere coming from someone who didn't engage in such hyperbole. A stroll through your comments shows that, with all due respect, you should heed your own advice.
------------------------------------
The fact that Rupert Murdoch stood by his comments on Twitter that it is "doubtful" that billionaire-backed Mormon bishop Mitt Romney will beat Obama in 2012 Election as appeared on Huffington Post should be enough for Romney to quit like that joker SPalin, his fanatical obsession to replace in the oval office the first black U.S. President in the history of the USA after 235 years of white monopoly. Better for him to dignify the cult by advising those irresponsible Do Nothing Congress members to create jobs for the more than 20 million unemployed Americans struggling to survive than shamelessly receive six-figure salaries plus perks doing nothing beneficial for 99% of 350 million Americans the past four years.
manhunt
Play the racist card while making bigoted remarks about Mormons?
Where the heck do you think you are? BOTH Nevada Senators are Mormons and many public officials in Western States of both parties have been Mormons; bishop, jack and otherwise.
The Bigoted Racist Left..on full display. West of Denver..bigoty toward Mormons gets you nowhere and nothing..and as my mother once said.."There is nothing East of Denver!"
M. Malone,
Please provide the source for this contention:
"Obama's EPA closed down all American manufacturers of class 8 engines..save one..
What did it cost America to put every manufacturer of class 8 engines out of business in American is jobs, tax revenue..and damaage to collateral industries such as trucking and agriculture?"
And show the context is accurate as well.
"Caterpillar has determined independently that it will not supply EPA 2010-compliant engines to truck and other on-highway original equipment manufacturers (OEMs)."
Mac..No Volvo( foriegn engine manufacturer) Detroit Deisel..??
Cummins is supplying the engines but..the warranty work is too expensive. There are problems with the EGR valve..it blows turbos at $$$+ about every 60,000 miles..and a few other..minor problems like melting pavement and setting the woods on fire..
Cummins can't afford the warranty work and the owners can't afford the engines after the engines are out of warranty..
This is from owners..drivers, mechanics, not from web sites or government handouts..
I just talked to an owner of a 2006 volvo..He said he was getting rid of it because he couldn't keep it out of the shop and it was going out of warranty. He was looking to buy an older 525 Cummins
Mark..
Remember Gibson Guitar?
Here is a June 12, 2012 article about International (Navistar) and the problems..
"Navistar has incurred $10 million in fines for the production of non-EPA 2010 compliant engines, according to its second quarter results.
Navistar ran out of emissions credits, which it had previously relied on to meet the 2012 emissions standards in its GVWR >14,000 pounds engine family, on February 29, 2012. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it would impose a penalty of at least US$1,900 per non-compliant engine after this point.
Daniel C. Ustian, Navistar chairman, president and chief executive officer, said: "Certainly, our first half performance was unacceptable. It included a warranty reserve to repair early 2010 and 2011 vehicles. We were also affected by speculation surrounding our engine certification for our Class 8 engine, which is why we are working tirelessly with the U.S. EPA to get resolution."
HINT HINT..no class 8 engine can meet the regulations..the technology is just not there so Navistar has "carbon credits" until it can comply..but..that is a hell of a "TAX" $10 million dollars..SHEESH
Mark
I read a website..no date..but the author claims that Cummins has not solved the problems and is using carbon credits..just like Navistar for 2010 and later models
And the last comment about trucks:
"The emmisions-related technology results in a high rate of problems, particularly with ECM calibration, exhaust gas recirculation,and engine sensors resulting in more problems and downtime..
So..the manufacturers are either on the edge or like Caterpiller ..OUT
Mack Is Out (no longer manufactures it own engines.) Mack OEM use Volvos..
Cummins and Navistar are OUT (using carbon credits..and paying huge fines)
Volvo has the same problems as Cummins..expensive warranty work..and customer disatifaction..
Sun says "That claim is dicier. Romney closed tax loopholes" republican are for tax reform - no secret
---------
Really there is no comparison? Tax reform increases revenue
By January 2014 21 new taxes in the Obamacare bill kick in resulting in over $675 billion in new taxes. Mostly from the middle class.
Before that January 2013 Obama has baked in another $500 billion per year in automatic rate increases mostly from the middle class.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has reported that the Obama January 1, 2013, $500 billion tax increase will shrink the economy 1.3 % tanking it into a recession. CBO also estimate that unemployment rises to 9.2%
The $500 billion annually in automatic taxes that Obama already has going into place 1/1/2013 includes:
- lowest income tax rate jumps from 10% to 15%
- middle income tax rate goes from 28% to 31%
- highest income tax rate jumps from 35% to 39.6%
- capital investment gains go from 15% to 23.8%
- the child tax credit is being reduced
- 15% dividends tax changed to be regular income up to 43.4%
- pay roll taxes up 2.9%
- new 3.8 % investment surtax including on real estate
- inheritance taxes exemption is reduced from $5 million to $1 million and the rate goes from 35% to 55%
Our system CAN be changed:
In the 2008 presidential race, the candidates spent a total of $1.7 billion, double what was spent in the 2004 race. Who knows if we can tabulate this year with all the secret money now allowed?
In the U.K. election, a spending cap of 20 million pounds, about $33 million, was imposed on each of the major parties. Of course, campaigns there are less expensive partly because of a ban on paid radio and TV advertising or any ads on matters of "political or industrial controversy." We could enact a hybrid of this--keep political ads on weekends only, for instance.
But the major difference between elections in the two countries is the duration of the campaigns. in the UK on April 6, then-Prime Minister Brown announced that the national election would be May 6. Although some campaigning and positioning of candidates obviously took place prior to April 6, the heart of the campaign took place in a compressed, intensive time frame. One month is surely enough time to size up the candidates. With all this endless blather here the only one who says he still hasn't made up his mind who to vote for is Carmine and believing him is a mistake no one should make. We have all decided already, those who may be truly on the fence will make up their mind in one month the same as 1 year.
The campaigning of presidential candidates here officially starts in January of the election year with a series of primaries and caucuses, leaving 10 months to Election Day. In reality, candidates position themselves at least two years earlier with exploratory committees, campaign fundraisers and book writing.
There is no reason why we can't shorten the cycle to a more realistic and tolerable length. Maybe not one month like the Brits, but certainly no more than three.
How long does it take for candidates to communicate their positions on issues? How long does it take for the electorate to get to know the candidates, their qualifications and their election platform? Are voters from the U.K. that much smarter than Americans that they need so little time? Are the candidates in the U.K. so succinct and articulate in the expression of their positions that they need only one month to run an effective campaign? Do the Brits go to the polls with inferior information? Are we better informed voters?
Obviously no. One reason for the mounting expense of our elections is the multitude of stakeholders in the process -- campaign advisers, media strategists, political advisers, and pundits and commentators. Sean Hannity and Billo the clown would have to resort to picking their noses more than they do already
Moreover, for the mainstream media, print as well as broadcast, elections are a revenue stream. For example, TV and radio stations in so-called battleground states in the 2008 presidential primaries reported record revenue based on an unanticipated avalanche of last-minute advertising buys by the candidates. Surely, they will fight fiercely to protect these windfall revenue opportunities. Too bad ABC, NBC, etc You can go back to selling Wheaties and Cheerios.
Despite the obvious lessons we could learn from the U.K., the outrageous expense and duration of our elections is unlikely to change. There is simply too much money at stake, and too many stakeholders stirring the pot, for us to ever wean our political system from the tradition of increasingly expensive and hopelessly endless election campaigns.
But if we elect Romney it will get 10 times worse. So to me, the ad in question is pretty tame. My rating is a smile of knowledge.
Another thing that is strange to me is the political ads at all. I have lived in Las Vegas for 7 years now and have watched local TV twice -- once for a Reid/Angle Debate and the time we got the snow 3-4 years ago. So I really am not exposed to these ads. I only watch typically commercial free podcasts of political nature and Christian podcasts.
I still watch the Packers and Bears on my dads tv with live pause. We will start watching about an hour after the game begins. Between restroom and snack breaks we usually end up about 10 minutes later than the games.
I think that turning off the TV is the best choice. I really enjoy my commercial free life.
Many fees are not voluntary. For instance, for the self employed, if they are required to have a license or business permit to pursue their livelihood, the fee is hardly voluntary. They can pay it or be unemployed.
Of course, Romney had apparently rather employ people in India than those of his own state, so why should this be a surprise? Privatization is not a magic bullet, as much as the GOP tries to sell it as such in their headlong rush to vilify public employees.
It was a required mandated fee made possible by the tax code to penalize those who failed to participate in the tax payment for those who would be required to pay a penalty. Thank you
You can parse the words anyway you want but the bottom line is no one cares about this issue. What they do care about is how Romney is trying so hard to keep us in the dark about his past as governor. He will not show the American people more than one year of his tax returns. He will not tell us why he took state property as governor when he took his administrations hard drives. He will not come clean on his off shore and swiss bank accounts not to mention his questionable $100 million dollar IRA. He will not tell the American people in any detail what he will do as president other than add another 5 trillion to the debt with more tax cuts for the rich. He only goes on Fox and refuses to be specific about anything. This is Tricky Dick Nixon jr. and the people know it. If the Grand Obstructionist Party is OK with this lack of information good for them but educated people know who Romney is and what he is going to do. The election boils down to the education of the people. One side looking for truth and the other side is content with voting against their own interests in the name of conservatism and fanatical religion as long as they win. The GOP wants to force their backward thinking philosophy on all of us and make this country a oligarchy. Nothing else matters.