GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
As political strategists decamped for Michigan and points south, many here wondered how Willard Mitt Romney could lose 2008’s first primary to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., 32 to 37 percent, respectively, despite Romney’s four years as governor of contiguous Massachusetts and some $15.5 million in reported campaign expenditures. Granite State Republicans, previously keen on Romney, likely soured on his legacy as a tax hiker who increased levies in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
Boston newspapers informed their New Hampshire readers of Romney’s rising-tax tide.
“Tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of legislation supported by Romney,” Boston Science Corporation chairman Peter Nicholas wrote in the Jan. 6 Boston Herald. Romney boosted taxes on subchapter S corporations owned by business trusts from 5.3 percent to 9.8 percent, a four-fifths increase. Nicholas called this “an important disincentive to investment, growth and job creation.”
“Corporate taxes went up $210 million under Romney,” the Herald editorialized. “And we wonder why companies look north, south, east and west, anywhere but Massachusetts, to expand?”
“Imposing business tax increases is wrong for the people of Massachusetts,” Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce CEO Paul Guzzi complained to State House News Service last year: “We’re down 140,000 jobs since 2001.”
While Romney sped a $275 million capital-gains tax rebate, scored property-tax relief for seniors and secured a two-day, tax-free shopping holiday, he imposed $283 million in business “loophole closures” and $501.5 million in increased fees on marriage licenses, gun registrations, gasoline deliveries, real-estate transfers, and more. Under Romney, the Tax Foundation calculated, Massachusetts fell from America’s 29th most business-friendly state to No. 36.
Romney’s sledding became even tougher when Republicans here learned that his 2003 and 2004 tax legislation covered those who work, conduct business, and/or invest in Massachusetts, but live elsewhere. According to figures the Massachusetts Department of Revenue provided, between 2003 and 2006, such New Hampshirites shipped Massachusetts $95 million above what they paid when Romney arrived. The average check from such a Granite State commuter grew 19.2 percent under Romney.
This bad tax news helped push Romney into McCain’s shadow.
Romney’s worrisome tax record now faces a fresh challenge from his rival, Rudolph W. Giuliani. New York’s former mayor flew to Florida Wednesday to unveil what Club for Growth (CFG) president Pat Toomey calls “a supply-sider’s dream.”
Giuliani proposes that Americans could file an optional, 11-line, one-page Fair and Simple Tax (FAST) form. They would enjoy mortgage-interest, charity, and state/local tax deductions, a $3,500 personal exemption, a $1,000-per-child credit, and a new health-insurance exclusion of $15,000 for families and $7,500 for individuals.
More dramatic, today’s six brackets, reaching 35 percent, would become three: 10, 15 and 30 percent. A family of four earning $80,000 would save $2,207 or 24 percent in taxes. At $120,000, they would save $7,014, or 36 percent.
Americans who cherish today’s 67,204-page tax code could keep it. Others could volunteer for the FAST tax. “Your Money. Your Choice,” as Giuliani’s slogan goes.
Giuliani would index the alternative minimum tax to inflation, and eventually scrap it. He would bury the death tax. Corporate taxes, higher only in Japan, would fall from 35 to 25 percent. Capital-gains and dividend taxes would tumble from 15 to 10 percent. President Bush’s tax reductions would become permanent.
“This tax cut — the largest in history — would represent a monumental leap forward for the American taxpayer and the U.S. economy,” says Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist.
“Giuliani understands that the way to create more economic growth is to lower the burden and inefficiency inherent in the current system, much as he did in New York,” says CFG’s Toomey. “Economic conservatives should be very excited by this bold, new tax-cutting plan.”
“Every Republican that I can see in this race is promising to lower taxes,” Giuliani told journalists here on primary eve. “But here is the difference: I am the only one who actually has done it — big time.” Giuliani reduced Gotham’s tax burden 19 percent, totaling $9.8 billion.
For his part, Romney wants taxes “simpler, and flatter and lower,” but offers few specifics.
With plenty on their minds already, Republicans now can weigh Romney’s sad, statist record on taxes against Giuliani’s audacious, hopeful tax agenda.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.
January 13th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
excellent info - thanks!
January 13th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Right on schedule, Deroy. Thanks for another hit piece that I don’t need to read. Any piece that contains the name “Willard”, referencing Mitt, in the first sentence will be biased, totally lacking in objectivity. Have a nice week. We’ll be waiting for your next effort (not).
January 13th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Whenever anyone refers to Mitt as Willard, I immediately dismiss the article or comment.
It shows real immaturity and a lack of objectivity.
January 13th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
That is one of the biggest piles of crap I’ve ever read. Romney must scare all of the leading candidates because they are all going after him, he must be their biggest concern. They, and their worshippers (Deroy), spin everything they can and it doesn’t seem to make much difference. When you have Huck and Mac making deals to work together against Romney and Giuliani supporters piling this crap up, Romney must be in better shape than I though.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Deroy is a useless, waste of time, embarrassing hack. It didn’t take long to figure who wrote this and realize it wouldn’t be worth reading.
Cross-posting Deroy’s articles are an embarrassment to this site. There are too many Pro-Rudy front page posters on this site who are smarter and more articulate than Deroy. Instead of wasting our time with one this hit pieces how about instead Aron, Kavon, or somebody else writes a post. Even though I would disagree with them it’s better than the post and run crap we have to put up with from Deroy.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Whenever i see an article by deroy murdock, i usually take it with a salt mine.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
This one was actually a little bit better. He spent a full half of the article positively assessing his candidate’s tax plan, and only half attacking Mitt, rather than the usual 10-90 split.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Nice copy and paste effort there Deroy. You put some serious thought into this one.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Hmm, Deroy seems to have stirred the Rombot pot. Nicely done!
January 13th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
whats wrong with willard?
January 13th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Nice analysis, but it does not seem to hold up to the facts. in new hampshire, romney won handidly in those areas where taxes matter most.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelBarone/2008/01/12/the_political_landscape_after_iowa_and_new_hampshire
“Mitt Romney’s appeal seems to be strongest among economic conservatives, impressed perhaps by his business record and untroubled by his switches on cultural issues. He carried southeast New Hampshire, where abhorrence of Taxachusetts is strong. “
January 13th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
McCAin goes from 7% to 33%. If anybody ever doubted the power of the MSM there you have it. THis is way more than momentum it is the MSM lovefest for McCAin.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
If someone calls Mitt “Willard”, its as credible as when someone calls Obama “Hussein”.
If you’re going to mock someone’s name, then it proves that your main concern is undermining that person, rather than presenting a balanced viewpoint. Name calling is something that most people grow out of, but not Deroy.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
This article is trash.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Other than the section on Mitt, this is an excellent reading. It is nice to know that if Rudy does win the nomination, we will be able to have some more changes in our present pocket. I am still worried for my children and grandchildren’s pockets. Will there be any? Deray, what has Rudy said about elimating debt, resolving entitlement issues, and rein in government spending (other than not filling in 2/3 of the positions left vacant by retirees or something.)
January 13th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Romney rated 12th in the nation from Club for Growth in the most liberal state in the union, while Huckabee rated 46th in the nation and got an F from CATO. Pick on huck if you want to do something worthwhile.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
i’m still not getting why to call him willard is a problem? I like the name
you can hardly compare willar to hussein.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I live in MA. Romney is known to have the held the line on taxes for those of us who live here. That was a clear and consistent message for four years. This article is what is known as selective reporting. Thematically and pragmatically, Romney was the most anti-tax Governor we’ve had here in 20 years and that was an UPHILL battle in a state with NO (NOT ONE) national republican office holders.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
John Galt, there’s nothing wrong with Willard, but it is often used in contempt by those who hate Romney — just as those who don’t like Fred Thompson call him “Freddie.” Just my perception.
I think if Mitt goes by the name Mitt, then it is respectful to use that name. The same with the other candidates.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
#13 - Exactly.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
I honestly cannot remember the last time Deroy Murdock had a front page post that was 100% truthful. I really can’t. Oh well. What can you expect from a Rudy hack anyway.
Romney didn’t raise fees $501.5 million. He raised them $260 million. The remainder were enacted prior to Romney’s term as Governor and took effect once he was in office. Romney also vetoed the legislature’s marriage fee hike.
There’s some more details on Romney’s record here, but I have increasingly come to the point of view that the only people who may care are the ones who support him already.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:10 am
[...] http://race42008.com/2008/01/13/rudys-audacious-hope-on-taxes/ Deroy Murdoch 1-13-2008 [...]
January 14th, 2008 at 5:12 am
This faulty analysis has been called out before…
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2007/08/03/setting_romneys_record_straight/