ThinkProgress Logo

Election

Economy

42 Republicans Who Called Mitt Romney A Tax Raiser

By Josh Israel posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Jun 28, 2012 at 3:46 pm

In light of the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling today upholding the Affordable Care Act as constitutional under Congress’ power of taxation, Congressional Republicans moved quickly to spin this loss as a “massive tax increase.”

But if these Republicans believe that individual mandates constitutes a tax increase, they must therefore believe that Mitt Romney raised taxes in Massachusetts when he signed RomneyCare into law. Here are just some of the scores of House and Senate Republicans who apparently believe Romney is a tax raiser:

  1. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): The Supreme Court has spoken. This law is a tax. The bill was sold to the American people on a deception
  2. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH): House Republicans remain committed to #FullRepeal of the president’s health care law and all its tax hikes, fees and mandates
  3. House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA): #ObamaCareInThreeWords –> Huge Tax Increase. < -- ‪#FullRepeal ‪#ObamaTax
  4. Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL): Check out this interview with President Obama from 2009 when he “absolutely” rejects the idea that the healthcare…
  5. Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS): Flashback: White House sold #Obamacare as “NOT A TAX” in 2009http://1.usa.gov/LDAWsH #hcr #tcot
  6. Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL): We must now face 2 realities: 1 the Pres #healthcare plan is a new tax & now the law of the land & 2 that #FullRepeal has to be top priority
  7. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): Health care law still jeopardizes access to quality care for many in KS & stifles job growth via higher taxes & costly regs. #FullRepeal
  8. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH): By imposing coercive tax on Americans, hc law is an unprecedented fed overreach into personal lives. Will continue to fight to repeal it.
  9. Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV): #ObamaCare has now been affirmed as a colossal #TaxIncrease on middle class Nevadans & @Berkley4Senate voted for it.
  10. Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX): Ways & Means: Supreme Court’s Health Law Decision Leaves in Place 21 Tax Hikes Costing Taxpayers More Than $675 Billion

    11. Read more

NEWS FLASH

Despite Nearly $1M FreedomWorks Smear Campaign, Hatch Wins Primary In Landslide | FreedomWorks for America, the super PAC for former Rep. Dick Armey’s (R-TX) FreedomWorks USA, invested more than $942,000 on independent expenditures aimed at defeating Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) and instead nominating former state senator Dan Liljenquist for his seat. In Tuesday’s Utah Republican primary, Hatch won renomination, winning by a two-to-one landslide. The party backed Hatch for a seventh term, despite FreedomWorks for America’s attack ads smearing Hatch for his votes for the same debt limit increases that Armey himself had supported.

Economy

Why The Individual Mandate Is Not A ‘Massive Tax Hike’ On The Middle Class

By Travis Waldron posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Jun 28, 2012 at 12:30 pm

The Supreme Court ruled today that the Affordable Care Act, the comprehensive health care reform package signed by President Obama in 2010, is constitutional. The Court upheld the law’s most controversial provision, the individual mandate, ruling that it is constitutional under the government’s authority to levy and collect taxes.

Republicans have falsely claimed the mandate was the “biggest tax increase ever in American history,” so of course, conservatives immediately jumped on the idea that the individual mandate was a massive tax hike on the middle class, reviving an argument Republicans have made since the law passed more than two years ago:

WISCONSIN GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R) declared that it was a “massive tax increase.”

INDIANA SEN. DAN COATS (R) said “Right now we have something with a big tax and the American people who rejected that in 2010 are going to have a chance to break the tie in 2012.”

LOUISIANA GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (R) said “Ironically, the Supreme Court has decided to be far more honest about Obamacare than Obama was. They rightly have called it a tax. Today’s decision is a blow to our freedoms.”

IDAHO SEN. MIKE CRAPO (R) touted that the mandate was ruled a tax. “Now, we’re back into that argument,” he said.

Watch Coates:

The mandate can indeed be characterized as a tax, as the Court found. But it is not a massive tax hike on the middle class, much less the biggest tax hike in American history. The tax imposed by the individual mandate amounts to either $695 or 2.5 percent of household income for those who don’t have insurance and are not exempt based on income levels. By comparison, the payroll tax cut extension Republicans repeatedly blocked earlier this year would have added 3.1 percentage points to the tax and cost the average family $1,500 a year.

The mandate, meanwhile, would hit a small amount of Americans — somewhere between 2 and 5 percent — according to a study from the Urban Institute. The number could be even lower depending on the law’s success: in Massachusetts, the only state with an insurance mandate, less than 1 percent of the state’s residents paid the penalty in 2009.

The majority of the Affordable Care Act’s other taxes, such as a payroll tax increase and a tax on high-cost health plans, are aimed at upper-income Americans. In exchange, millions of jobs will be created as new people enter the health care system and millions of people will gain access to affordable, quality insurance that they otherwise would not have. And, as we detailed earlier today, the Court’s decision to uphold the entirety of the law will have significant benefits for the nation’s economy.

Tell Congress that you stand with Obamacare by adding your name here.

Update

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) characterized the mandate as a “middle class tax increase,” claiming that millions of Americans are going to have “an IRS problem.” Watch it:

Climate Progress

Biden Slams Romney Over Wind Tax Credits In Iowa

By Stephen Lacey posted from Climate Progress on Jun 28, 2012 at 11:30 am

Speaking in Dubuque, Iowa yesterday, Vice President Joe Biden lashed out at Mitt Romney for his willingness to kill a key tax credit for the wind industry — a sector that supports more than 7,000 jobs in the state.

With energy now a top issue in the presidential campaign, the Administration is starting to use Romney’s disdain for renewables against him in states like Iowa, where wind accounts for 20 percent of electricity and supports hundreds of businesses.

“We are importing less oil than [at] any time in the last 16 years,” Biden said. “But we think you got to bet on it all … You had our good friend Mitt Romney saying he dismissed wind and solar by saying they’re ‘two of the most ballyhooed forms of alternative energy.’ Tell that to the 7,000 workers manufacturing wind power here in Iowa.”

President Obama was in Iowa last month touting the economic impact of the wind industry and urging Congress to extend the production tax credit set to expire at the end of this year. According to a study from Navigant Consulting, around 37,000 American jobs could be at risk if the tax credit expires.

The Obama Administration is doing everything it can to counter attacks from Romney and other Republicans on energy — pushing offshore oil drilling in the Arctic, approving the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, and using its climate and energy chief to “woo” the oil and gas lobby.

However, until recently, the Administration said very little about tax credits for renewable energy, leaving the issue in the halls of Congress. But with strong bi-partisan support for wind in the Midwest, a more aggressive messaging strategy on the economic consequences of allowing the tax credit to expire could give the Administration an advantage. It seems to be just now grasping this.

David Roberts of Grist recently explained the significance:

Despite support from Iowa Republicans for wind (and despite that turbine photo-op), Mitt Romney has expressed only contempt for the industry. He would end federal support for solar and wind alike, technologies that, he has said, “make little sense for the consuming public but great sense only for the companies reaping profits from taxpayer subsidies.” (Y’know, like Iowa’s own TPI Composites, the 700 people it employs, and the town it saved.)

The fact is, if Republicans win Congress and Romney becomes president, all federal support for clean energy will dry up and Newton, along with other Midwestern towns that have been revitalized by wind, will suffer yet another devastating blow. I wonder if Iowa voters — sitting in one of 2012′s most important swing states — were thinking about that when Romney came to the state recently to lecture about the deficit.

Federal incentives for the industry has broad support from the public too. A recent poll showed that 64 percent of Americans support an extension of the production tax credit for wind and other renewable energy technologies.

Security

Cheney Adviser Guided Romney ‘Hard Line’ China Position

By Ali Gharib posted from ThinkProgress Security on Jun 28, 2012 at 10:46 am

Reuters reported yesterday that sharp disputes have erupted within Mitt Romney’s foreign policy team. One “long-time Republican activist” close to the campaign’s moderate wing expressed concern that Romney’s “instinct is to call the Cheney-ites.” In other words, the neoconservatives on Romney’s team often win out over moderate voices.

Today, a New York Times report reinforced that view with a more concrete example. During the diplomatic crisis over Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, who escaped house arrest and sought refuge in the U.S. embassy, Romney took the Cheney-ite “hard line” on the advice of a former adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. Romney, at the time, blasted the Obama administration’s handling of the crisis — before it was resolved.

According to the Times, this “hard line” adopted by Romney came directly from a literal “Cheney-ite” — not a Cheneyesque ideologue, but an actual former adviser to the ultra-hawkish former vice president. According to Romney advisers who spoke to the Times anonymously:

One adviser said to favor a more calibrated approach was Evan A. Feigenbaum, a co-chairman of Mr. Romney’s Asia-Pacific working group and a former State Department official. Arguing for a relatively more aggressive response was Aaron L. Friedberg, another co-chairman who was a national security aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Friedberg is known for favoring a hard line on China, and others say it was almost certain the two men would stake out different ground.

Before the Chen incident, Romney-endorser and former U.S. ambassador to China Jon Huntsman said Romney’s China bluster was “typical” campaign rhetoric. As the Times put it, “Romney and his team respond to foreign crises and formulate policy in a highly charged political atmosphere.” The Times went on:

Mr. Romney and his tightknit staff often seek the most expedient way to gain political advantage and attack rivals. That can mean staking out ground well to the right in order to sharpen contrasts with Mr. Obama.

Romney probably stakes out these sorts of positions because his national security and foreign policies lack substance and, at other times, are difficult to distinguish from Obama’s. Romney presses for more military spending, but can’t overcome contradictions in his plan to reduce the debt and deficit. His bluster appears to draw distinctions on issues like Iran — where, despite past and some present hawkishness among advisers, Romney’s campaign positions looks a lot like Obama’s — and Syria, where Romney calls for arming rebels, something the Obama administration is already facilitating.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up