Romney’s Problematic Jobs & Tax Plans

This site sees a fair amount of traffic for the search query, “what does Mitt Romney believe”. We’ve done our best to answer the question, but recent analyses of Romney’s actual policy positions show that any attempt to do so may prove to be futile.

Over the past couple of months, there has been a concerted effort on the part of interested parties to uncover specifics of Romney’s tax plan. If you’re reading this, you probably already know that Team Romney has declined to offer specifics, and instead, made broad statements describing “loopholes” they claim will foot the bill. Josh Barro over at Bloomberg recently took a closer look at Romney’s tax plan as well as the studies the former governor cites as support.

The Romney campaign sent over a list of the studies, but they are perhaps more accurately described as “analyses,” since four of them are blog posts or op-eds. I’m not hating — I blog for a living — but I don’t generally describe my posts as “studies.”…

…Finally, I would note one item that the Romney campaign does not cite in support of its tax plan: Any analysis actually prepared for the campaign in preparation for announcing the plan in February. You would expect that, in advance of announcing a tax plan, the campaign would commission an analysis to make sure that all of its planks can coexist. Releasing that analysis now would be to the campaign’s advantage, helping them put down claims like mine that their math doesn’t add up.

Why don’t they release that analysis? My guess is because the analysis doesn’t exist, and the 20 percent rate cut figure was plucked out of thin air for political reasons without regard to whether it was feasible.

Mitt Romney claims that he isn’t concerned with 47% of the American electorate. He also seems to believe that 100% can’t do math.

As for Romney’s “jobs plan”, the fact checkers at the Washington post described this morning how his numbers don’t add up, and gave the Romney plan Four Pinocchios. It is important to note: this isn’t fact checking a single statement. Rather, the entire alleged basis for the Romney campaign, job creation, is based on a bogus plan. Whether you describe Romney’s policy positions as “fraudulent”, “flim-flam” or squishy, one thing remains clear: Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign is based upon the assumption that nobody will take a close look at his proposals and that he can run out the clock without anyone noticing.

Romney’s Tax Plan Changes the Conversation

A group whose reports were recently praised by Mitt Romney as providing “an objective, third-party analysis”, has issued a report that could be devastating to Romney’s White House ambitions.

The independent, third-party Tax Policy Center issued a report this week highlighting the tax burden shift from the wealthy to the middle class proposed by Romney. The new study basically concludes that, under the Republican’s plan, taxes will be cut for the very wealthy while increased for most middle and lower income taxpayers.

Several months ago, Romney cited the accuracy of the Tax Policy Center when the group analyzed the tax plan of Romney primary opponent Rick Perry.

Romney’s middle class tax hikes would come in the form of the elimination of the mortgage interest deduction, as well as health care and education deductions relied on by a large portion of middle class families.

Romney's plan would raise taxes on middle income earners, while providing deep cuts for the very wealthy.

Naturally, President Obama seized upon the report’s findings and translated the numbers to mean that the average middle class family would pay and additional $2,000 per year in taxes, while the average family earning over $1,000,000 per year would save about $250,000 via tax breaks.

The Obama campaign provided an online tax calculator to help individuals determine what it would mean to them.

Additionally, team Obama released a new ad whose theme will likely now become the centerpiece of his campaign against the former Massachusetts governor.

Obama Approval Rating Matches 2 Year High

While many Republicans like to tie Obama’s prospects of re-election to those of Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, the 2004 election bears too many striking similarities to compare it to anything else.

President Obama’s approval rating as measured by Gallup now matches its highest mark in nearly two years. Obama’s 14th quarter average approval of 46.8% has only led to an increasing number of comparisons between the 2012 and 2004 elections.

George H.W. Bush had an approval rating of 39.2% in July of 1992, Carter’s was 35.8% in July of 1980 and George W. Bush sat at around 47%.

Throw in an unlikable, seemingly out of touch, flip-flopping challenger from Massachusetts and you have your match. As it stands today, I would be surprised to see a final outcome much different than in ‘04.