In an appearance on CBS This Morning (video), Romney senior adviser Ed Gillespie said that Mitt Romney’s only ideas to grow the economy are to repeal Obamacare and cut taxes. What Gillespie didn’t mention is that independent economistshave said Romney’s policies would notstrengthen the recoveryand could make the economy worse in the short run. He also ignores that Romney’s tax plan – $5 trillion in tax cuts weighted towards millionaires and billionaires and no plan to pay for them – will explode the deficit. Here are the facts:
ECONOMISTS SAY ROMNEY’S ECONOMIC POLICY PLANS WOULD “DO MORE HARM IN THE SHORT TERM” AND “PUSH US DEEPER INTO RECESSION AND MAKE THE RECOVERY SLOWER”
Washington Post’s Greg Sargent: Economists Said Romney’s Economic Policy Ideas “Would Do Little Or Nothing To Fix The Immediate Crisis, And Could In The Short Term Make Things Worse.”“Mitt Romney frequently faults President Obama for not having any kind of plan to pull us out of our employment slump. But wouldMitt Romney’s ideas help fix the economic crisis? I asked two economists to take a look at that question. Their conclusion: While both said they support some of Romney’s long term goals, they both agreed that Romney’s ideas would do little or nothing to fix the immediate crisis, and could in the short term make things worse.” [Greg Sargent, Washington Post, 6/7/12]
Senior Adviser At Moody’s Analytics Mark Hopkins: Romney’s Policies “Would Do More Harm In The Short Term.” Asking whether Romney’s economic policy ideas would create jobs in the short-term: “‘On net, all of these policies would do more harm in the short term,’ added Mark Hopkins, a senior adviser at Moody’s Analytics. ‘If we implemented all of his policies, it would push us deeper into recession and make the recovery slower.’” [Greg Sargent, Washington Post, 6/7/12]
Senior Adviser At Moody’s Analytics Mark Hopkins Said Of Romney’s Policies: “If We Implemented All Of His Policies, It Would Push Us Deeper Into Recession And Make The Recovery Slower.”Asking whether Romney’s economic policy ideas would create jobs in the short-term: “‘On net, all of these policies would do more harm in the short term,’ added Mark Hopkins, a senior adviser at Moody’s Analytics. ‘If we implemented all of his policies, it would push us deeper into recession and make the recovery slower.’” [Greg Sargent, Washington Post, 6/7/12]
ROMNEY PROPOSED $5 TRILLION IN NEW TAX CUTS, ON TOP OF MAKING PERMANENT THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY, WHICH WOULD SHOWER MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES WITH EVEN MORE BENEFITS
Romney’s Tax Plan Includes An Extension Of The Bush Tax Cuts.“Governor Romney would permanently extend all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts now scheduled to expire in 2013.” [Tax Policy Center, The Romney Plan (updated), 3/1/12]
- Under An Extension Of The Bush Tax Cuts, At Least 27.5% Of The Benefits Would Go To The Top 1%. [Tax Policy Center, Extend 2001-03 Tax Cuts and AMT Patch; Baseline: Current Law; Distribution by Cash Income Percentile, 9/14/10]
Center On Budget And Policy Priorities: Romney’s New Tax Cuts Would Cost $4.9 Trillion Over A Decade, On Top Of The Cost Of Extending The Bush Tax Cuts.“The Tax Policy Center estimates that the Romney tax plan would lose about $480 billion in tax revenue in calendar year 2015, beyond the revenues losses inherent in maintaining current policy (such as continuing all of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts). Over the 2014-2022 period, that implies a total reduction in revenues of about $4.9 trillion, relative to current tax policy.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,5/21/12]
Mitt Romney refusing to answer reporters’ questions about his out-of-touch plan to boost our economy by slashing jobs for teachers, firefighters, and police officers.
Since Romney unveiled his middle class job elimination plan on Friday, his Campaign Chairman John Sununu has said Romney’s comment was not a gaffe, Romney surrogate Newt Gingrich promised that there’d be “fewer teachers” if Romney was elected, and commentators agreed that the remarks accurately depicted Romney’s approach to governing.
And we have reason to believe them – this approach is the same one Mitt Romney pursued in Massachusetts, helping drive Massachusetts down to 47th in job creation and 44th in economic growth. Romney Economics didn’t work then and it won’t work now.
WATCH IT HERE:
MITT ROMNEY: “I DONT’ WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT”
WHY, MITT ROMNEY?
Mitt Romney’s lies: Wherein I blow my top
by: WillyK
Mon Jun 11, 2012 at 16:03:42 PM CDT
I know that this blog should focus on what is happening in Missouri and when we deal with national policies, we need to show how it will affect Missourians. Well, the presidential election will affect Missourians. If Mitt Romney wins it will affect thousands and thousands of Missourians and in a very bad way. If he wins because he lies more blatantly than any previous lying candidate, it’ll be a painful, cryin’ shame. Ipso facto, we all have an obligation to call him out whenever we learn about his lies – doesn’t matter how many other places have the scoop – we’ve got to amplify the message which is, simply put, Mitt Romney cannot be trusted.
Case in point: Just so it’s clear where President Obama stands, here is a new campaign video decrying what the GOP has done to our economy by cutting public sector jobs. He makes his attitude about the disastrous GOP tack against public employees, that is, teachers, firemen and policemen, crystal clear:
http://blog.showmeprogress.com/diary/7342/mitt-romneys-lies-wherein-i-blow-my-top
Mitt Romney’s Budget Will Lead to Fewer Teachers
By Matthew Yglesias
| Posted Tuesday, June 12, 2012, at 9:41 AM ET
Mitt Romney is now backtracking from his previously stated view that America needs fewer cops, teachers, and firemen and now claims it’s “completely absurd” to say that he wants this on the grounds that these are local government services.
Perhaps. But since Romney went through the trouble of releasing a white paper on federal education policy he’s presumably aware that federal dollars partially finance local schools. And under the budget framework that Mitt Romney shares with Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., those federal dollars are going to become very scarce. So either the relative wages of teachers compared with other college educated workers are going to need to tumble (which seems unlikely and ill-advised), or Romney budgeting will lead to fewer teachers. This is pretty elementary. He wouldn’t be literally forcing towns to reduce the size of their teaching staffs, but the policy makes no sense unless you think cutting back on the number of teachers is fine for the country.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/06/12/mitt_romney_s_budget_will_lead_to_fewer_teachers.html