Fact Check: Romney’s Proposals Stated in First Presidential Debate

CHICAGO–(ENEWSPF)–October 3, 2012.

FACT CHECK: Romney’s Energy Plan Is Written By Big Oil for Big Oil, And Can’t Get Us To Energy Independence

Despite Mitt Romney’s claims that his plan would make North America energy independent, the truth is that Romney’s energy plan was written by Big Oil, focuses principally on oil drilling, and would maintain $4 billion in subsidies for Romney’s Big Oil friends, while not getting us to the energy independence he promises. He cannot achieve energy independence by 2020 while opposing President Obama’s fuel efficiency standards and other clean energy investments. Mitt Romney would walk away from the critical investments in renewable and incentives – like the wind production tax credit – that have helped make us, under President Obama’s leadership, the least dependent on foreign oil that we’ve been in 20 years, and will help get us to cut our net oil imports in half by 2020.

ROMNEY’S ENERGY PLAN WAS WRITTEN BY BIG OIL, FOCUSES ON OIL DRILLING AND WOULD MAINTAIN SUBSIDIES FOR ROMNEY’S FRIENDS IN THE OIL INDUSTRY

Romney’s Energy Plan “Is Basically All About Oil, Coal And Gas.”  “No sooner had Mitt Romney released his long-awaited energy policy Aug. 23 than a small army of reporters and pundits started drilling into the details and coming up with barely a kilowatt of vision or substance. The plan is basically all about oil, coal and gas.” [K Kaufmann, Desert Sun, 9/1/12]

A Romney Aide Revealed The Energy Plan Had Been Developed In Consultation With Oil And Gas Executives, Including Harold Hamm, Romney Advisor And Donor Who Owned Continental Resources Oil Company. “An individual close to the Romney campaign said that Mr. Romney’s staff drafted the proposal in consultation with industry executives, including Harold Hamm, an Oklahoma billionaire who is the chairman of the campaign’s energy advisory committee and chief executive of Continental Resources, an oil and gas driller.  Just this week, the oil and gas industry gave nearly $10 million toward the Romney election effort in two fund-raisers.  The Romney aide, who said she was not authorized to speak on the record about the plan, said that any consultation with industry officials was simply to tap their expertise and did not mean the proposal was being shaped to serve their interests.  Mr. Romney’s proposal drew immediate praise from the industry, which has complained that gas production on public lands has slowed under President Obama, even while it has surged on private lands.” [New York Times, 8/24/12]

Huffington Post: Romney’s Energy “Plan Underlines The Fact That The Republican Party And The Oil, Gas And Coal Industries, Long In Agreement On Policy And Ideology, Have Grown Closer Than Ever Before” – And Romney’s “Top Energy Adviser Is The Wealthiest Oilman In The Country.”  “Two days later, before a crowd wearing a mix of hardhats and cowboy hats in Hobbs, N.M., Romney unveiled his energy plan, which makes no mention of climate change and focuses on reaching energy independence by 2020 through increased extraction and use of oil, gas and coal, accompanied by reduced regulation for these industries. The plan underlines the fact that the Republican Party and the oil, gas and coal industries, long in agreement on policy and ideology, have grown closer than ever before. Romney, whose top energy adviser is the wealthiest oilman in the country, is on pace to raise more money from these industries than either George W. Bush or Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) did when he ran for president. The industries are also pumping millions into the new unlimited money vehicles, super PACs and dark money nonprofits, that are spending tens of millions of dollars per month to influence the election.” [Huffington Post, 8/24/12]

Romney Would Keep $4 Billion A Year In Tax Incentives And Tax Breaks For Oil And Gas Drilling. Romney’s energy positions include: “Keep tax incentives and tax breaks for oil and gas drilling. These amount to about $4 billion a year.” [Washington Post, 9/11/12]

ROMNEY WOULD CUT OFF FUNDING FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY WHICH HE DEEMED IMAGINARY ENERGY AND OPPOSES THE PRESIDENT’S INCREASED EFFICIENCY STANDARDS

Romney Has The “View That The Government Should Cut Off Aid To Renewable Energy.” “Romney’s view that the government should cut off aid to renewable energy marks a reversal for the candidate.” [Washington Post, 6/8/12]

Under Romney’s Energy Plan Renewable Energy And Energy-Efficiency Would Get The Short Shrift – Romney Zeros Out Federal Incentives For Solar, Wind Or Renewable Businesses. “Then there’s the glaring absence of any mention of climate change or how much more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases all that mining, transportation and fossil fuel-burning will cause, not to mention public health impact. Renewable energy and energy-efficiency also get short shrift from Romney. Any federal support would be limited to basic research — no incentives for solar, wind or other renewable businesses.” [K Kaufmann, Desert Sun, 9/1/12]

TIME: “Romney Has Suggested That Wind And Solar Are ‘Imaginary’ Sources Of Energy, But They Can Now Power 15 Million Homes, And Their Industries Employ More Than 300,000 Americans. That’s Real.” “Before President Obama took office, the U.S. had 25 gigawatts of wind power, and the government’s ‘base case’ energy forecast expected 40 GW by 2030. Well, it’s not quite 2030 yet, but we’ve already got 50 GW of wind. We’ve also got about 5 GW of solar, which isn’t much, but is over six times more than we had before Obama. Mitt Romney has suggested that wind and solar are ‘imaginary’ sources of energy, but they can now power 15 million homes, and their industries employ more than 300,000 Americans. That’s real.” [Michael Grunwald, TIME, 8/10/12]

The Hill Headline: “Romney Campaign: Let Wind Energy Credit Die This Year.” [The Hill, 7/30/12]

NBC’s Mike O’Brien Tweet: “Romney Spox Saul On The New CAFE Standards: ‘Governor Romney Opposes The Extreme Standards That President Obama Has Imposed…’” [@mpoindc, Twitter, 8/28/12]

AS GOVERNOR, ROMNEY CONDEMNED COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS, CLAIMING THEY KILL PEOPLE…

Bloomberg: “As Governor Of Massachusetts, Romney Once Vowed To Close A Coal Plant Because It ‘Kills People.’” [Bloomberg, 8/24/12]

2003: Romney Vowed To Close An Aged Coal-Fired Power Plant Declaring “That Plant Kills People.” “Just after he took office, in 2003, he had attended a news conference at Salem Harbor, Mass., vowing to close an aged coal-fired power plant and declaring: ‘That plant kills people.’ His administration went to work on what would become the nation’s first regulations on the emission of carbon dioxide, and helped launch negotiations on a Northeast regional compact to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.” [Wall Street Journal, 11/11/11]

In The Same 2003 Press Conference In Which Romney Claimed A Coal Plant “Kills People” Romney Said The Salem Harbor Coal Plant’s Extension To Comply With Massachusetts Clean-Air Guidelines Should Be Denied. “To detract from that narrative, the Obama campaign often points to Romney’s 2003 press conference outside the PG&E Salem Harbor plant at which he said ‘that plant kills people.’ During that same press conference – called so Romney could affirm his position that the Salem Harbor plant should not be given a two-year extension to comply with Massachusetts clean-air guidelines established in 2001 – Romney said some other things that if applied to this year’s presidential election could be construed as undermining his current attack against Obama.” [Columbus Dispatch, 9/21/12]

…AND CHAMPIONED HIS POWER PLANT REGULATIONS FOR MASSACHUSETTS AS “TOUGHEST IN THE NATION”

Romney Described His New Mercury Rules As A Part Of Massachusetts’ “Toughest-In-The-Nation Clean Air Rules.” “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, R, has set in motion new rules that he said would ‘significantly limit mercury emissions from the state’s four coal-fired power plants as part of Massachusetts’ toughest-in-the-nation clean air rules.’ The regulations codify a proposal he first made last September.” [Electric Utility Week, 6/07/04]

Romney’s Environmental Czar Ellen Roy Herzfelder Stated: “We Really Are First In The Nation To Create A Standard For Mercury In The Electricity Sector… It’s A Huge Step Forward In Bringing Clean Air To Massachusetts.” [Boston Globe, 5/26/04]

2005: Romney Touted Massachusetts As “The First And Only State To Set CO2 Emissions Limits On Power Plants.”  “On Dec. 7, 2005, the Romney administration unveiled the final orders. ‘These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,’ then-Gov. Romney said in a press release touting Massachusetts as ‘the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.’” [Wall Street Journal, 10/6/11]

UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA, THE UNITED STATES’ DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL WAS AT ITS LOWEST LEVEL IN 20 YEARS, AND IS CALLING ON CONGRESS TO EXTEND THE PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT

In The First Eight Months  Of 2012, The United States’ Dependence On Foreign Oil Was At Its Lowest Level In 20 Years. According to the Energy Information Administration, in the first seven months of 2012, the percent of net imports of petroleum as a share of petroleum products supplied averaged 41.9%. According to Energy Information Administration data, this is the lowest level since 1992 when the percent of net petroleum imports as a share of petroleum product supplied was 40.7%. [Calculated from Energy Information Administration data, Monthly Energy Review, September 2012]

  • The Energy Information Administration Projects That Net Oil And Petroleum Imports As A Share Of Consumption Will Fall From 45 Percent In 2011 To 41 Percent In 2012 And 39 Percent In 2013. According to the Energy Information Administration’s Short Term Energy Outlook: “The share of total U.S. consumption met by total liquid fuel net imports of both crude oil and products has been falling since peaking at over 60 percent in 2005. In 2011, it averaged 45 percent, down from 49 percent in 2010.  EIA expects that the total net import share of consumption will continue to decline to 41 percent in 2012 and to 39 percent in 2013 because of the substantial increases in domestic crude oil production. If the 2013 forecast holds true, it would be the first time the share of total U.S. consumption met by total liquid fuel imports is less than 40 percent since 1991.” [Energy Information Administration, Short Term Energy Outlook, September 2012]

President Obama Is Calling On Congress To Extend The Production Tax Credit That Spurs Clean Energy Production By Providing A Tax Credit For The Production Of Clean Energy Like Wind. From a White House fact sheet: “The Production Tax Credit, which expires at the end of 2012, provides a 2.2 cent per kilowatt hour credit for utility scale wind producers. Congress should act to extend the credit. By extending the PTC benefits for American clean energy producers we can avoid layoffs across the country: The wind industry projects that nearly 30,000 jobs will be lost next year if the PTC expires, including direct jobs as well as those in its supply chain.” [White House Fact Sheet, 5/22/12]

  • The American Wind Energy Association Projects That Failing To Extend The Production Tax Credits Would Put 37,000 Jobs At Risk. According to a press release from the American Wind Energy Association: “A recent study by Navigant Consulting found that extending the Production Tax Credit for wind energy will allow the industry to grow to 100,000 jobs in just four years, while an expiration would kill 37,000 jobs within a year.” [American Wind Energy Association, 4/25/12]

UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA, EMPLOYMENT IN THE COAL MINING INDUSTRY REACHED ITS HIGHEST LEVEL SINCE 1996, AND THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE  HISTORIC INVESTMENTS IN CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

EMPLOYMENT IN THE COAL MINING INDUSTRY REACHED A 15-YEAR HIGH IN 2011

Nationwide In 2011, Employment In The Coal Mining Industry Hit Its Highest Level Since 1996. According to preliminary data from the Mine Safety and Health Administration, the average number of employees in the coal mining industry was 94,729, the highest average employment since 1996 when there were 96,324 people employed in the coal mining industry. [Mine Safety and Health Administration, Mine Injury and Worktime Quarterly Statistics Coal Data 1993-2010, accessed 4/15/12; Mine Safety and Health Administration, Mine Injury and Worktime, Quarterly, January – December 2011, Final]

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS MADE HISTORIC INVESTMENTS IN CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY AND IS SUPPORTING DOZENS OF PROJECTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY

The Obama Administration Is Implementing A More Than $5 Billion Investment Strategy In Clean Coal Research And Development Which Has Attracted More Than $10 Billion In Private Investment. “Today’s awards are part of a more than $5 billion investment strategy by the Obama Administration in clean coal technologies and R&D. This strategy, which has attracted over $10 billion in additional private capital investment, is designed to accelerate commercial deployment of clean coal technologies – particularly carbon capture and storage (CCS) – and to position the United States as a leader in the global clean energy race.” [Department of Energy Press Release, 6/6/12]

The Recovery Act Made The Most Significant Investment In Federal Carbon Capture Research And Development Since The 2007 Energy Bill. According to a report by the Congressional Research Service: “In addition to the annual appropriations provided for CCS RD&D, the legislation most significant to federal CCS RD&D program activities since passage of [Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007] EISA has been the Recovery Act (P.L. 111-5). As discussed below, $3.4 billion in funding from the Recovery Act was intended to expand and accelerate the commercial deployment of CCS technologies to allow for commercial-scale demonstration in both new and retrofitted power plants and industrial facilities by 2020.” [Congressional Research Service, “Carbon Capture and Sequestration: Research, Development, and Demonstration at the U.S. Department of Energy,” 4/23/12]

FACT CHECK: Romney’s 5 Point Plan Would Not Create Jobs

In tonight’s debate, Mitt Romney cited his 5 point economic plan and said that it would help create jobs.  But independent economists have said that Romney’s budget plan could slow the economic recovery and eliminate jobs, while his 5 point plan doesn’t add up.

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 Headline: “Economists: Romney’s Ideas Wouldn’t Fix Short-Term Crisis, And Could 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” And “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]

Nobel Prize-Winning Economist Joseph Stiglitz: “The Romney Plan Is Going To Slow Down The Economy, Worsen The Jobs Deficit And Significantly Increase The Likelihood Of A Recession.” [Bloomberg, 6/5/12]

ROMNEY PROMISES ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

REALITY: ROMNEY’S PLAN IS BASED ON OIL DRILLING AND CUTTING OFF INVESTMENTS IN RENEWABLE ENERGY – BUT WE CAN’T DRILL OUR WANT TO ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

Romney Has The “View That The Government Should Cut Off Aid To Renewable Energy.” “Romney’s view that the government should cut off aid to renewable energy marks a reversal for the candidate.” [Washington Post, 6/8/12]

  • TIME: “Romney Has Suggested That Wind And Solar Are ‘Imaginary’ Sources Of Energy, But They Can Now Power 15 Million Homes, And Their Industries Employ More Than 300,000 Americans. That’s Real.” “Before President Obama took office, the U.S. had 25 gigawatts of wind power, and the government’s ‘base case’ energy forecast expected 40 GW by 2030. Well, it’s not quite 2030 yet, but we’ve already got 50 GW of wind. We’ve also got about 5 GW of solar, which isn’t much, but is over six times more than we had before Obama. Mitt Romney has suggested that wind and solar are ‘imaginary’ sources of energy, but they can now power 15 million homes, and their industries employ more than 300,000 Americans. That’s real.” [Michael Grunwald, TIME, 8/10/12]
  • Romney Would Keep $4 Billion A Year In Tax Incentives And Tax Breaks For Oil And Gas Drilling. Romney’s energy positions include: “Keep tax incentives and tax breaks for oil and gas drilling. These amount to about $4 billion a year.” [Washington Post, 9/11/12]

Washington Post: “Romney’s Plan Spends A Lot Of Time Talking About Drilling” But “Energy Independence Will Require More Than Just Drilling — It Will Also Depend On Efficiency Standards That Romney Has Opposed.” “Energy independence will require more than just drilling — it will also depend on efficiency standards that Romney has opposed. Mitt Romney’s plan spends a lot of time talking about drilling. But it’s worth noting that both the EIA and Citigroup credit the Obama administration’s new fuel-economy standards for cars and light trucks as a major part of America’s lurch toward energy independence. By 2025, the increased CAFE standards are expected to reduce U.S. oil consumption by about 2.2 million barrels per day. Without those rules, energy independence looks nearly impossible. And Romney, for his part, has pledged to overturn those fuel-economy rules.” [Wonk Blog, Washington Post, 8/23/12]

REALITY: PRESIDENT OBAMA’S ALL-OF-THE-ABOVE APPROACH TO ENERGY HAS HELPED BOOST DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION AND REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL

President Obama Emphasized The Need For An “All-Out, All-Of-The-Above Strategy That Develops Every Available Source Of American Energy.” “But with only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves, oil isn’t enough.  This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy – a strategy that’s cleaner, cheaper, and full of new jobs.“ [Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address, 1/24/12]

  • In The First Eight Months  Of 2012, The United States’ Dependence On Foreign Oil Was At Its Lowest Level In 20 Years. According to the Energy Information Administration, in the first seven months of 2012, the percent of net imports of petroleum as a share of petroleum products supplied averaged 41.9%. According to Energy Information Administration data, this is the lowest level since 1992 when the percent of net petroleum imports as a share of petroleum product supplied was 40.7%. [Calculated from Energy Information Administration data, Monthly Energy Review, September 2012]
  • In The First Quarter Of 2012, Domestic Crude Oil Production Is At Its Highest Level In 14 Years. “Strong growth in U.S. crude oil production since the fourth quarter of 2011 is due mainly to higher output from North Dakota, Texas, and federal leases in the Gulf of Mexico, with total U.S. production during the first quarter of 2012 topping 6 million barrels per day (bbl/d) for the first time in 14 years.” [Energy Information Administration, 6/8/12]
  • Domestic Production Of Natural Gas Is At An All-Time High. According to Energy Information Administration data, the United States’ marketed production of natural gas was 24,169,613 million cubic in 2011, breaking the previous record of 22,647,549 million cubic feet in 1973.  [Energy Information Administration, 8/31/12]
  • Net Electricity Generation From Wind Has More Than Doubled Between 2008 And 2011. In 2008, wind generated 55,363 megawatthours of electricity in the United States. In 2011 the United States produced 119,747 megawatthours of electricity from wind. [Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly, September 2012]
  • Net Electricity Generation From Solar Has More Than Doubled Between 2008 And November 2011. In 2008, the United States produced 864 megawatthours of electricity from solar sources. In 2011 the United States produced 1,814 megawatthours of electricity from solar. [Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly, September 2012]
  • The Obama Administration Is Implementing A More Than $5 Billion Investment Strategy In Clean Coal Research And Development Which Has Attracted More Than $10 Billion In Private Investment. “Today’s awards are part of a more than $5 billion investment strategy by the Obama Administration in clean coal technologies and R&D. This strategy, which has attracted over $10 billion in additional private capital investment, is designed to accelerate commercial deployment of clean coal technologies – particularly carbon capture and storage (CCS) – and to position the United States as a leader in the global clean energy race.” [Department of Energy Press Release, 6/6/12]
  • The Obama Administration Issued A Conditional Loan Guarantee For The Construction Of The First Nuclear Power Plant In The United States In Decades, Which Will Provide Enough Energy For 1.4 Million People. From a Department of Energy press release: “The Energy Department and the Obama Administration are committed to restarting America’s nuclear industry to create new jobs and provide clean power to America’s communities. As part of these efforts, the Energy Department has awarded conditional loan guarantees to support the construction of the first U.S. nuclear reactors in more than three decades. The project, located at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Burke, Georgia, will bring two new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors online — supporting 3,500 construction jobs and 800 permanent jobs along with providing clean electricity to nearly 1.4 million people.” [Department of Energy, 12/20/11]

ROMNEY PROMISES TO GET TRADE TO WORK WITH A “CRACK DOWN ON CHINA WHEN THE CHEAT”

REALITY: PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS BROUGHT TRADE CASES AGAINST CHINA AT TWICE THE RATE OF HIS PREDECESSOR

President Obama Has Brought Trade Cases Against China At Twice The Rate Of His Predecessor. The Obama Administration has filed 8  complaints against China with the World Trade Organization. Under the eight years of the Bush Administration, the U.S. filed 7 complaints against China with the WTO. [WTO List Of Disputes Cases, Accessed 9/15/12; Cleveland Plain Dealer, 9/16/12]

The Obama Administration Has Brought A Total Of Nine Trade Cases Against China. The Obama Administration has filed 9 trade cases against China, including action to combat a surge of imported Chinese tires. [WTO List Of Disputes Cases, Accessed 9/17/12; MarketWatch, 9/11/09]

REALITY: PRESIDENT OBAMA IMPOSED STIFF TARIFFS ON CHINESE TIRES TO SAVE OVER A THOUSAND AMERICAN JOBS AND STAND UP FOR WORKERS IN AN INDUSTRY THAT EMPLOYS THOUSANDS IN OHIO

President Obama Imposed Stiff Tariffs On Chinese-Made Tires, For The First Time Imposing Safeguard Provisions To Protect A US Industry From Chinese Competition.   “The Obama administration will impose stiff tariffs on imports of Chinese-made tires after finding that a surge of imports has disrupted the U.S. domestic market… It is the first time the U.S. government has imposed special ‘safeguard’ provisions to protect a U.S. industry from Chinese competition.”  [MarketWatch, 9/11/09]

The International Trade Commission Estimated That Tariffs On Chinese Tires Would Save The Equivalent Of Approximately 1,200 American Jobs. “Commissioner Lane notes that in the first year of relief, the average of the outcomes from the COMPAS Model shows that the domestic industry’s domestic sales are likely to increase by approximately 6.8 million units on average. Although the model does not specifically project the impact of such an  increase in output on employment, at the highest level of productivity reflected in the period of investigation 6.8 million tires would equate to over 2.3 million additional hours for production related workers in the industry. While these hours may be a combination of additional hours for existing employees and new jobs, they nevertheless equate to nearly 1,200 jobs on a full-time basis.” [International Trade Commission Report, July 2009]

REALITY: ROMNEY REPEATEDLY CRITICIZED PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR IMPOSING TARIFFS ON CHINESE TIRES CALLING IT “PROTECTIONISM” AND “BAD FOR THE NATION AND OUR WORKERS”

Romney Attacked Obama’s Chinese Tire Tariffs As “Bad For The Nation And Our Workers” And Called It “Protectionism.” “President Obama’s action to defend American tire companies from foreign competition may make good politics by repaying unions for their support of his campaign, but it is decidedly bad for the nation and our workers. Protectionism stifles productivity.” [Romney, No Apology: Case for American Greatness, Page 119 (audio available), released 3/2/10]

Romney’s Campaign Attacked President Obama For Taking “Protectionist Action Against China” Through Chinese Tire Tariffs. Romney For President memo by policy director Lanhee Chen: “What message does it send the Chinese when President Obama takes protectionist action against China on behalf of Big Labor, undermining free trade principles for political gain? The Obama campaign has repeatedly held out its Section 421 action against Chinese tires as an example of President Obama’s supposedly tough China policy.” [Lanhee Chen Memo On China & Trade, Romney For President, 7/10/12]

Romney’s Campaign Released A Statement Calling The President’s Tire Tariff “Misguided.”  [Romney For President, Press Release, 9/26/12]

ROMNEY PROMISES TO IMPROVE EDUCATION

THE ROMNEY-RYAN BUDGET COULD CUT MORE THAN $115 BILLION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OVER THE NEXT DECADE…

If Cuts Were Applied Across The Board, The Ryan Budget Would Slash Education, “The Department Of Education Would Be Cut By More Than $115 Billion Over A Decade.” “Yesterday, House Republicans released their budget resolution for FY 2013… On top of the roughly $1 trillion in cuts in the Budget Control Act, it would be difficult to overstate the radicalism of the domestic cuts proposed by the House budget resolution. In 2013, it would cut annual non-defense funding by 5 percent. By 2014, the resolution would cut this funding by 19 percent in purely nominal terms… The Department of Education would be cut by more than $115 billion over a decade.” [Jeff Zients, Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, WH.gov, 3/21/12]

  • If Cuts Were Applied Across The Board, The Ryan Budget Would Cut Elementary And Secondary Education Funding By $4.8 Billion. According to the White House, cuts to elementary and secondary education, special education funding would total $4,847,000,000 under the Ryan Budget. [White House, 4/6/12]

ROMNEY’S PLAN: VOUCHERIZE AMERICA’S PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM WHILE OFFERING NO PLAN TO FIX FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Headline: “Mitt Romney’s Voucher-Like Education Overhaul” [Associated Press, 5/23/12]

Romney Proposed A “Voucher-Style System” For Education. “Shifting from the economy to education, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was proposing a voucher-style system that could significantly alter the public school system and revive the debate over school choice.” [Associated Press, 5/23/12]

Romney’s Domestic Policy Director Oren Cass Acknowledged That Under Romney’s Plan Schools Would Not Be Able To Accommodate Every Student Who Wants To Attend Them. “On a conference call with reporters before his speech, Romney’s Domestic Policy Director Oren Cass acknowledged that schools would not always be able to take every child who wants to attend them under the plan. High-performing charter schools around the country often hold lotteries to admit only a fraction of students who apply, and there’s reason to believe that the best school in any given area will have to turn away some low-income students who want to attend with their voucher. But Cass said Romney would also encourage more quality charter schools to start up to offer more choices.” [ABC News, 5/23/12]

  • “High-Performing Charter Schools Around The Country Often Hold Lotteries To Admit Only A Fraction Of Students Who Apply, And There’s Reason To Believe That The Best School In Any Given Area Will Have To Turn Away Some Low-Income Students Who Want To Attend With Their Voucher.”  [ABC News, 5/23/12]

Romney’s Education Plan Says That Students Should Be Allowed To Escape Failing Public Schools By Using Federal Dollars To Pay For Private Schools, Online Schools And Other Alternative Settings. “Calling it a ‘national education emergency,’ Mitt Romney said Wednesday that poor and disabled children should be allowed to escape failing public schools by using federal dollars to pay for private schools, online schools and other alternative settings.” [Washington Post, 5/23/12]

Former Education Secretary To George W. Bush Margaret Spellings Said She Stopped Advising Romney After He “Rejected Strong Federal Accountability Measures” Because Vouchers And Choice As Drivers Of Accountability Are “Untried And Untested.” “One notable skeptic is Margaret Spellings, a former education secretary under Mr. Bush, who this year was an informal adviser to Mr. Romney. She said she withdrew once the candidate rejected strong federal accountability measures.  ‘I have long supported and defended and believe in a muscular federal role on school accountability,’ Ms. Spellings said. ‘Vouchers and choice as the drivers of accountability — obviously that’s untried and untested.’” [New York Times, 6/11/12]

REALITY: ROMNEY WOULD RETURN THE MIDDLE MAN TO STUDENT LOANS AND SLASH FUNDING FOR PELL GRANTS

If Cuts Were Applied Across The Board, The Ryan Budget Would Slash Education, Meaning “9.6 Million Students Would See Their Pell Grants Fall By More Than $1000 In 2014, And, Over The Next Decade, Over One Million Students Would Lose Support Altogether.” “Yesterday, House Republicans released their budget resolution for FY 2013… On top of the roughly $1 trillion in cuts in the Budget Control Act, it would be difficult to overstate the radicalism of the domestic cuts proposed by the House budget resolution. In 2013, it would cut annual non-defense funding by 5 percent. By 2014, the resolution would cut this funding by 19 percent in purely nominal terms… 9.6 million students would see their Pell Grants fall by more than $1000 in 2014, and, over the next decade, over one million students would lose support altogether.” [Jeff Zients, Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, WH.gov, 3/21/12]

  • Steve Benen: “A Romney Administration Will Cut Pell Grants, Make It Harder To Get Student Loans, And Encourage Students Who Struggle With Tuition Costs To “Shop Around” Until They Can Find A College They Can Afford.”  “Yesterday, Mitt Romney unveiled a new education agenda, which vows to bring the middleman back. … Sure, Obama’s reforms save taxpayer money and help more young people go to college, but by streamlining the process, Democrats have cut into bank profits — and that can’t stand.  Taken together, it’s quite a pitch Romney has to make to young adults and their families: a Romney administration will cut Pell Grants, make it harder to get student loans, and encourage students who struggle with tuition costs to “shop around” until they can find a college they can afford.”  [Steve Benen, MSNBC, 5/24/12]

Romney’s Proposal To Repeal President Obama’s Overhaul To The Federal Student Loan Program Would Be “A Return To Bank-Based Student Lending.” “The presumed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney pledged Wednesday that, if elected, he would reshape or do away with two major Obama administration higher education policy initiatives: the overhaul of the federal student loan program and tighter regulations on for-profit colleges…He also calls for a return to bank-based student lending, which was phased out beginning in 2010 as part of the health care overhaul.” [Inside Higher Ed, 5/24/12]

  • Steve Benen: Romney’s Education Agenda “Vows To Bring The Middleman Back” To The Student-Loan System. “One of the overlooked accomplishments of President Obama’s term is the reform of the student-loan system — an effort that was decades in the making, but had been blocked by Republicans and bank lobbyists until 2010. Under the old system, the student-loan industry received billions in taxpayer subsidies to provide a service the government could perform for less. As Rachel explained on the show a month ago, in 2010, Democrats removed the middleman, streamlined the process, saved taxpayers a ton of money, and helped more young people get college degrees. Yesterday, Mitt Romney unveiled a new education agenda, which vows to bring the middleman back.” [Steve Benen, MSNBC, 5/24/12]

ROMNEY CALLED PRESIDENT OBAMA “OUT OF TOUCH” FOR ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO PURSUE MANUFACTURING JOBS

Romney Said “The President Seems To Be Out Of Touch” For Encouraging Young People To Pursue Manufacturing Jobs. “At the stop in Detroit, Romney said Obama showed he was ‘out of touch’ this week when he encouraged young people to pursue manufacturing jobs. ‘Last month, 5,000 people lost their jobs in manufacturing,’ Romney said. ‘The president seems to be out of touch.’” [Detroit News, 6/9/11]

Wall Street Journal: Romney “Appeared To Scoff… At The Notion Of Manufacturing As A Job Engine For The Future.”  [Wall Street Journal, 6/24/11]

Wall Street Journal: Romney “Twice This Month Said That The President Was Out Of Touch For Suggesting Young People Go Into Manufacturing” But “We Have Had Manufacturing Growth That Rivals The Levels Of The 1980s.”  Jonathan Weisman said in an interview on the manufacturing industry: “Actually, Obama sees and opening here because Mitt Romney, twice this month said that the president was ‘out of touch’ for suggesting young people go into manufacturing, go into community college to study, different kind of high-end manufacturing techniques and if fact if you look at the sort of sluggish recovery of jobs, manufacturing is one of the bright spots. Not particularly beaming but we have had good strong manufacturing growth. We have had manufacturing growth that rivals the levels of the 1980s.” [News Hub, Wall Street Journal, 6/24/11

ROMNEY PROMISES TO CUT FEDERAL SPENDING

REALITY: ROMNEY PROPOSED $5 TRILLION IN NEW TAX CUTS BUT THE ONLY SPECIFICS ROMNEY HAS LAID OUT “WOULD MAKE THE DEFICIT BIGGER, NOT SMALLER, AND ADD TO THE DEBT, NOT SUBTRACT FROM IT”

Los Angeles Times: “Romney Says He Wants To Balance The Budget Within Four Years, But He Has Not Spelled Out A Plan To Do So.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

  • Los Angeles Times: Romney Has Only Spoken In Specifics About Plans That “Would Make The Deficit Bigger, Not Smaller, And Add To The Debt, Not Subtract From It.” “Romney says he wants to balance the budget within four years, but he has not spelled out a plan to do so. Instead, most of the plans he has talked about specifically – significant new tax cuts, increased defense spending, no changes in Medicare or Social Security until people now 55 reach retirement age, postponing the automatic spending cuts scheduled to start Jan. 1 – would make the deficit bigger, not smaller,  and add to the debt, not subtract from it.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

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]

  • Los Angeles Times: Romney “Promises To Cut Taxes, But Fails To Explain How He’d Pay For The Move Without Ballooning The Federal Deficit.” [Los Angeles Times, 7/5/12]
  • Washington Post Headline: “Romney Confirms His Tax Cuts Won’t Be Paid For.” [Greg Sargent , Washington Post, 8/3/12]

REALITY: ROMNEY HAS SET ARBITRARY GOALS FOR DEFENSE SPENDING THAT WOULD COST OVER $2 TRILLION

Headline: “Defense Spending To Spike $2.1 Trillion Under Romney” [CNN, 5/10/12]

Romney Hasn’t Said How He Would Pay For His $2 Trillion Increase In Defense Spending. “Romney, by contrast, has called for increasing active-duty military personnel by 100,000 troops and boosting the nation’s fleet. He has also said he would increase defense spending — by ensuring that the budget would not fall below 4% of the nation’s gross domestic product. He has not said, however, how he would pay for that increase, which some analysts project would add more than $2 trillion in government spending over the next decade.” [Los Angeles Times, 5/31/12]

Brookings Institution’s Peter Singer: Romney’s Budget Proposal Which Included Additional Defense Spending Did Not “Reflect Fiscal Sanity.” “Romney’s plan to spend more at the Pentagon adds yet another layer of complexity to a set of proposals that would remake the fiscal landscape. Romney has proposed a slew of tax cuts, and plans to cap federal spending at 20% of GDP. But in both cases, the Romney campaign hasn’t fully explained how those provisions will be paid for. The lack of detail means that Romney’s claim of moving toward a balanced budget requires a great deal of trust.  … Other budget experts expressed similar concerns about Romney’s proposal, including Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who said the plan for additional spending does not ‘reflect fiscal reality.’” [CNN, 5/10/12]

Defense News: “Romney Advisers Acknowledge That Today’s Fiscal Reality Could Make It Difficult To Realize The 4 Percent Goal.” [Defense News, 6/17/12]

Defense Budget Analyst, Todd Harrison: Setting Defense Spending At 4% Of GDP Is Arbitrary – Defense Spending Should Be Based On Need And Not The Size Of The Economy. “For [senior fellow for defense budget studies at the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Todd] Harrison, setting defense spending at 4 percent of GDP isn’t helpful because it’s an arbitrary standard, he said… Over the past 20 years, the base defense budget has averaged 3.3 percent of GDP, according to Harrison said. ‘What you spend on defense really should be a function of your security needs, and what you think the threat environment is and what you think you need to protect the country,’ he said. ‘It shouldn’t be a formula based on the size of your economy.’” [Defense News, 6/17/12]

 ROMNEY PROMISES TO CUT TAXES FOR SMALL BUSINESSES

REALITY: THE ROMNEY-RYAN TAX HIKE COULD RAISE TAXES FOR 30 MILLION SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS

If Romney’s Tax Plan Was Paid For, Taxpayers Making Less Than $200,000 Would See Average Tax Increases. [Tax Policy Center, On The Distributional Effects Of Base-Broadening Income Tax Reform, p. 16, 8/1/12]

  • Politifact: “To Make Romney’s Plan Revenue Neutral,” Those Making Less Than $200,000 Would “See Outright Tax Increases.” “But to make Romney’s plan revenue neutral, deductions would also have to be removed for people with incomes below $200,000, and the effects of that would be significant, the study found. In fact, the elimination of the deductions would mean outright tax increases for everyone with incomes below $200,000. People with taxable income between $50,000 and $75,000, for example, would see an average net tax increase of $641. They’d save $984 from Romney’s rate cut, but lose $2,672 in write-offs.” [Politifact, 8/3/12]

Tax Policy Center: Nearly 30 Million Americans With Business Income Earn Less Than $200,000. According to Tax Policy Center data on tax units with business income, there are: 2,762,000 that earn less than $10,000; 3,089,000 that earn between $10,000 and $20,000; 2,983,000 that earn between $20,000 and $30,000; 2,904,000 that earn between $30,000 and $40,000; 2,558,000 that earn between $40,000 and $50,000; 4,796,000 that earn between $50,000 and $75,000; 3,861,000 that earn between $75,000 and $100,000; and 6,568,000 that make between $100,000 and $200,000. In total, there are 29,522,000 tax units with business income that earn less than $200,000. [Tax Policy Center, T11-0148 – Baseline Distribution of Business Income, by Cash Income Level; Current Law, 2011, 6/7/11]

REALITY: THE ROMNEY-RYAN BUDGET COULD CUT SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FUNDING BY 19% – A CUT OF $170 MILLION

The Ryan Budget Would Cut Domestic Discretionary Spending By 19 Percent, And “Since The House Has Refused To Specify What Would Be Cut, We Consider The Impacts If The Cuts Are Distributed Equally Across The Budget.” “Yesterday, House Republicans released their budget resolution for FY 2013… On top of the roughly $1 trillion in cuts in the Budget Control Act, it would be difficult to overstate the radicalism of the domestic cuts proposed by the House budget resolution.  In 2013, it would cut annual non-defense funding by 5 percent.  By 2014, the resolution would cut this funding by 19 percent in purely nominal terms. Over a decade, the resolution would cut over $1 trillion in non-defense spending on top of the reductions the President has already signed into law.  The cuts in non-defense discretionary funding are nearly three times as deep as the cuts under the so-called sequester — cuts that we and most objective analysts have always regarded as an unwise and unacceptable. What would it all mean? The Budget doesn’t say.  In fact, the Budget resolution includes a magic asterisk — or, in more technical parlance, an ‘allowance’— for $897 billion in unspecified cuts. But what could the resolution mean?  Since the House has refused to specify what would be cut, we consider the impacts if the cuts are distributed equally across the Budget. The result would be that.” [Jeff Zients, Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, WH.gov, 3/21/12]

2012: The Enacted Small Business Administration Budget Was $900 Million. [Fiscal year 2013 Budget, Office of Management & Budget, p. 240]

REALITY: ROMNEY WOULD REPEAL OBAMACARE, AND WITH IT THE TAX CUTS FOR SMALL BUSINESS

Romney: “If I’m President, I Will Repeal Obamacare, And I’ll Kill It Dead On Its First Day.” [Romney town hall, Collinsville, IL, 3/17/12]

Romney: “Friday Is The Second Anniversary Of Obamacare. It Is Past Time To Abolish The Program, Root And Branch.” [Mitt Romney Op-Ed, USA Today, 3/22/12]

The Affordable Care Act Provides Tax Credits To Help Small Business Owners Afford The Cost Of Covering Their Employees And Is Targeted To Businesses With Low- And Moderate-Income Workers. “This new credit helps small businesses and small tax-exempt organizations afford the cost of covering their employees and is specifically targeted for those with low- and moderate-income workers. The credit is designed to encourage small employers to offer health insurance coverage for the first time or maintain coverage they already have. In general, the credit is available to small employers that pay at least half the cost of single coverage for their employees.” [IRS Fact Sheet, 4/19/2012]

 The Small Business Health Care Credit Currently Covers Up To 35 Percent Of Small Business’s Health Insurance Costs And Will Increase To Cover Up To 50 Percent In 2014. “For tax years 2010 through 2013, the maximum credit is 35 percent for small business employers and 25 percent for small tax-exempt employers such as charities. An enhanced version of the credit will be effective beginning Jan. 1, 2014. Additional information about the enhanced version will be added to IRS.gov as it becomes available. In general, on Jan. 1, 2014, the rate will increase to 50 percent and 35 percent, respectively.” [IRS Fact Sheet, 2/14/2012]

The President’s Tax Reform Framework Proposes Expanding The Health Care Tax Credit Created In The Affordable Care Act To Businesses With Up To 50 Workers. “Reform and expand the health insurance tax credit for small businesses. This credit, created in the Affordable Care Act, helps small businesses afford the cost of health insurance. This reform would allow small businesses with up to 50 workers to qualify for the credit (up from 25), provide a more generous phase-out schedule, and substantially simplify and streamline the tax credit’s rules.” [The President’s Framework For Corporate Tax Reform, February 2012]

FACT CHECK: President Obama Has A Plan To Reduce The Deficit In a Balanced Way

Mitt Romney has no credibility when it comes to reducing the deficit. The truth is that President Obama has already signed $1 trillion of deficit reduction into law as part of a plan to reduce the deficit by more than $4 trillion while asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share and investing in an economy built to last. Romney refuses to ask for a penny more from the wealthy – even pledging to reject a deal including 10 dollars in spending cuts for every 1 dollar of new revenue – and would have to raise middle class taxes or explode the deficit in order to pay for his $250,000 tax cuts for multi-millionaires and increased defense spending.

PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS A BALANCED PLAN TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT BY MORE THAN $4 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT DECADE, WHILE ASKING THE WEALTHY TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE AND INVEST IN AN ECONOMY BUILT TO LAST

Center On Budget And Policy Priorities: The President Signed The Budget Control Act, Which Included More Than $1 Trillion In Deficit Reduction And Will Cut Non-Defense Discretionary Spending To Its Lowest Level As A Share Of The Economy Since 1962. “Two-fifths of the $1.5 trillion in savings from cutting and capping funding for discretionary programs comes from defense, while the other three-fifths comes from reductions in domestic and international programs. These reductions will shrink non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level on record as a share of GDP, with data going back to 1962. The $1.5 trillion in reductions in discretionary spending also will produce lower interest payments on the debt. The interest savings amount to about $250 billion, bringing the total deficit reduction achieved to date to more than $1.7 trillion.” [Center On Budget And Policy Priorities, 9/25/12]

Center On Budget And Policy Priorities: President Obama’s Budget Would Stabilize The Debt Over The Coming Decade Through “A Balanced Combination Of Spending Cuts And Revenue Increases.”  “If Congress enacted the Obama budget in full and its economic assumptions proved correct, the debt would stabilize over the coming decade although, as the White House acknowledges, policymakers would have to subsequently enact significant further deficit reduction to keep the debt stable in future decades. The budget either achieves or approaches this key fiscal target for the coming decade with several trillion dollars in deficit reduction, through a balanced combination of spending cuts and revenue increases.” [Center On Budget And Policy Priorities, 2/16/12]

The President’s Budget, Which Incorporates Deficit Reduction Enacted In 2011, Would Cut The Deficit By More Than $4 Trillion Over The Next Decade. “That is why in this Budget, the President again has put forward a plan that will, together with the deficit reduction enacted last year, cut the deficit by more than $4 trillion over the next decade. This would put our Nation on the right course toward a level of deficits of below 3 percent of GDP by the end of the decade.” [White House Office Of Management And Budget, February 2012]

President Obama Proposed Eliminating Special Tax Breaks And Loopholes For Oil And Gas Companies And The Very Wealthy As Well As Ending The Bush Tax Cuts For Families Making More Than $250,000 A Year. “In the Budget, I reiterate my opposition to permanently extending the Bush tax cuts for families making more than $250,000 a year and my opposition to a more generous estate tax than we had in 2009 benefiting only the very largest estates. These policies were unfair and unaffordable when they were passed, and they remain so today. I will push for their expiration in the coming year. I also propose to eliminate special tax breaks for oil and gas companies; preferred treatment for the purchase of corporate jets; tax rules that give a larger percentage deduction to the wealthiest two percent than to middle-class families for itemized deductions; and a loophole that allows some of the wealthiest money managers in the country to pay only 15 percent tax on the millions of dollars they earn. And I support tax reform that observes the “Buffett Rule” that no household making more than $1 million annually should pay a smaller share of its income taxes than middle-class families pay.” [FY2013 Budget Message Of The President, February 2012]

The President’s FY2013 Budget Calls For Investment In Infrastructure, Education, And Manufacturing Research While Keeping Discretionary Spending Flat. “President Obama will call for new spending on infrastructure, education and manufacturing research, as well as higher taxes on top earners… Officials said the budget would abide by spending caps set by Congress in the August budget deal, keeping discretionary spending levels essentially flat in fiscal 2013. Over the decade, discretionary spending would drop from 8.7% of gross domestic product to 5%, officials said.” [Los Angeles Times, 2/10/12]

ACCORDING TO TREASURY ANALYSIS BASED ON CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE DATA, ABOUT 90 PERCENT THE SHIFT FROM SURPLUSES TO DEFICITS BETWEEN 2001 AND 2011 IS ATTRIBUTABLE BUSH ADMINISTRATION POLICIES AND THE EFFECTS OF THE RECESSION

Fifty Nine Percent Of The Shift From Surplus To Deficit By 2011 Is Directly Attributable To Bush Administration Policies And Twenty Nine Is Due To Updated Economic And Demographic Shifts, While Only 12 Percent Is Attributable To Obama Administration Policies. According to the Department of Treasury, in January 2001, CBO projected cumulative surpluses would total $5.9 trillion through 2011. Instead, cumulative deficits have totaled $6 trillion. A U.S. treasury analysis based on CBO data shows that fifty-nine percent of the shift from surpluses to deficits is attributable to Bush administration policies including Bush-era tax cuts, the wars in Iran and Afghanistan, changes to Medicare Part D, and other spending. Twenty nine percent of the shift from surpluses to deficits is attributable to conditions unrelated to legislation, including updated economic and demographic projections. Twelve percent is attributable to Obama administration policies, including the Recovery Act, the December 2010 tax law, and other spending and tax cuts. [U.S. Department Of Treasury Calculations Based On Congressional Budget Office Data, U.S. Department Of Treasury, 2/19/12]

  • In January 2001, The Congressional Budget Office Projected Cumulative Surpluses Would Total $5.6 Trillion Through 2011, But Instead, Cumulative Deficits Have Totaled $6 Trillion—A Difference Of Approximately $11.9 Trillion. [U.S. Department Of Treasury Calculations Based On Congressional Budget Office Data, U.S. Department Of Treasury, 2/19/12]
  • Bush Administration Policies Contributed $7 Trillion To The Shift From Surpluses To Deficits Between January 2001 And August 2011. According to the Department of Treasury, tax cuts signed into law under President George W. Bush added $3 trillion, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan added $1.4 trillion, Medicare Part D added $300 billion, and other spending added $2.3 trillion. [U.S. Department Of Treasury Calculations Based On Congressional Budget Office Data, U.S. Department Of Treasury, 2/19/12]
  • Obama Administration Policies Contributed $1.4 Trillion To The Shift From Surpluses To Deficits Between January 2001 And August 2011. According to the Department Of Treasury, the Recovery Act added $800 billion, the December 2010 tax law added $250 billion, and other spending and tax cuts added $410 billion. Note that these totals only reflect effects of policies, including temporary policies, through 2011. They do not reflect deficit reduction proposed in the President’s FY2013 budget going forward. [U.S. Department Of Treasury Calculations Based On Congressional Budget Office Data, U.S. Department Of Treasury, 2/19/12]
  • Changes In Economic And Demographic Projections Not Due To Legislation Contributed $3.45 Trillion To The Shift From Surpluses To Deficits Between January 2001 And August 2011. According to the Department Of Treasury, factors that the Congressional Budget Office terms “technical” and “economic,” including all changes not due to the cost of new legislation, including updates to economic and demographic projects, contributed 29 percent, or $3.45 trillion, of the shift from surpluses to deficits between January 2001 and August 2011.” [U.S. Department Of Treasury Calculations Based On Congressional Budget Office Data, U.S. Department Of Treasury, 2/19/12]

ROMNEY PROPOSED $5 TRILLION IN NEW TAX CUTS – WHICH WOULD SHOWER MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES WITH EVEN MORE BENEFITS WHILE RAISING TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS – BUT THE ONLY SPECIFICS ROMNEY HAS LAID OUT “WOULD MAKE THE DEFICIT BIGGER, NOT SMALLER, AND ADD TO THE DEBT, NOT SUBTRACT FROM IT”

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]

Wall Street Journal: “A New Study Released Wednesday Suggests That Mitt Romney’s Tax Plan Would Benefit The Rich And Hurt The Poor And Middle Class, No Matter How Current Blanks In The Plan Are Filled In.” [Wall Street Journal, 8/1/12]

Los Angeles Times: “Romney Says He Wants To Balance The Budget Within Four Years, But He Has Not Spelled Out A Plan To Do So.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

  • Los Angeles Times: Romney Has Only Spoken In Specifics About Plans That “Would Make The Deficit Bigger, Not Smaller, And Add To The Debt, Not Subtract From It.” “Romney says he wants to balance the budget within four years, but he has not spelled out a plan to do so. Instead, most of the plans he has talked about specifically – significant new tax cuts, increased defense spending, no changes in Medicare or Social Security until people now 55 reach retirement age, postponing the automatic spending cuts scheduled to start Jan. 1 – would make the deficit bigger, not smaller,  and add to the debt, not subtract from it.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

ROMNEY’S LAID OUT $7 TRILLION IN SPENDING BUT THE ONLY SPECIFICS ROMNEY HAS LAID OUT “WOULD MAKE THE DEFICIT BIGGER, NOT SMALLER, AND ADD TO THE DEBT, NOT SUBTRACT FROM IT”

CBPP: 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]

Wall Street Journal: “[Romney’s] Defense Spending Plans, Which Could Add Another $2 Trillion To The Budget Over The Next Decade, Further Complicate His Math.”   [Wall Street Journal, 8/13/12]

Los Angeles Times: “Romney Says He Wants To Balance The Budget Within Four Years, But He Has Not Spelled Out A Plan To Do So.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

Los Angeles Times: Romney Has Only Spoken In Specifics About Plans That “Would Make The Deficit Bigger, Not Smaller, And Add To The Debt, Not Subtract From It.” “Romney says he wants to balance the budget within four years, but he has not spelled out a plan to do so. Instead, most of the plans he has talked about specifically – significant new tax cuts, increased defense spending, no changes in Medicare or Social Security until people now 55 reach retirement age, postponing the automatic spending cuts scheduled to start Jan. 1 – would make the deficit bigger, not smaller,  and add to the debt, not subtract from it.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/12]

EVEN UNDER A FAVORABLE ANALYSIS, ROMNEY’S PLANS COULD INCREASE THE DEBT TO 96% OF GDP – HIGHER THAN UNDER THE PRESIDENT’S PLAN

Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget: Even If Romney Paid For His Tax Cuts, He Would Increase The Debt To 85% Of GDP – And Without A Specific Plan To Pay For Them, Romney Would Increase The Debt To 96% Of GDP. “In our current intermediate-debt scenario, we estimate that Governor Romney’s plans would result in debt levels at about 86 percent of GDP in 2021. Should Romney enact sufficient base broadening – likely including substantial changes to the major itemized deductions and exclusions – so that his entire plan is deficit-neutral to current policy, his debt levels would be at about 85 percent of GDP in 2021. On the other hand, if Governor Romney enacted these additional tax cuts without offsets, his 2021 debt levels would be 96 percent of GDP.” [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Primary Numbers: The GOP Candidates and the National Debt, 2/23/12]

  • According To The Congressional Budget Office, The President’s Budget Stabilizes The Debt As A Share Of The Economy At 76 Percent. [“An Analysis Of The President’s 2013 Budget,” Congressional Budget Office, Table 2, March 2012]

The Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget’s Debt Analysis Assumed Romney Would Pay For His Increase In Defense Spending In Its Intermediate Scenario. “Governor Romney proposes to put in place a defense spending floor at 4 percent of GDP per year, which is more than we forecast in our realistic baseline… The Romney campaign has stated its commitment to finance these costs through further non-defense savings, so we assume in the low and intermediate-debt scenarios that the costs would be fully offset.” [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Primary Numbers: The GOP Candidates and the National Debt, 2/23/12]

FACT CHECK: Romney Would End Medicare As We Know It And Turn It Into A Voucher Program

Mitt Romney just repeated the false claim that the President made $716 billion in cuts to Medicare and has no plan to protect the program. The AARP endorsed Obamacare because it extended the life of the program by nearly a decade by reducing unnecessary insurance company subsidies and rooting out waste and fraud. Mitt Romney’s plan would bankrupt Medicare by 2016, turn the program into a voucher system, and could increase costs for seniors by more than $6,000 a year – based on an analysis of his current plan. In fact, the savings Romney just decried were included in his running mate’s budget, which Romney called “marvelous” and promised to sign into law.

THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT EXTENDS THE SOLVENCY OF MEDICARE PART A TO 2024, CUTS WASTE AND FRAUD IN MEDICARE,  AND STRENGTHEN BENEFITS FOR SENIORS

AARP:  The Affordable Care Act “Protects And Strengthens Guaranteed Benefits In Medicare.”  “The legislative package [the Affordable Care Act] cracks down on insurance company abuses and protects and strengthens guaranteed benefits in Medicare, the program millions of our members depend on and in which millions more will soon enroll. It closes the dreaded Medicare Part D ‘doughnut hole,’ a gap in prescription drug coverage that is life-threatening for many. … And it improves efforts to crack down on fraud and waste in Medicare, strengthening the program for today’s seniors and future generations.” [AARP Press Release, 3/10/12]

The Affordable Care Act Extends The Solvency Of Medicare Part A To 2024, Eight Years Longer Than Without Health Care Reform. “The Medicare Trustees Report released today shows that the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is expected to remain solvent until 2024, the same as last year’s estimate, but action is needed to secure its long-term future.  In 2011, the HI Trust Fund expenditures were lower than expected. Without the Affordable Care Act, the HI Trust Fund would expire 8 years earlier, in 2016. ” [Center For Medicare & Medicaid Services, 04/23/12]

  • The President’s Budget Would Extend Medicare’s Solvency An Additional Two Years. “The Budget contains several proposals that build on initiatives included in the ACA to help extend Medicare’s solvency while encouraging provider efficiencies and improved patient care. Specifically, the Budget modifies payments to certain providers, to address payments that exceed patient care costs. It also reduces Medicare’s payments to providers for beneficiaries’ nonpayment of their deductibles and copayments. The Budget also aligns Medicare drug payment policies with Medicaid policies for low-income beneficiaries. These, along with other Medicare proposals, would extend the solvency of the Hospital Insurance trust fund for an estimated two years.” [Fiscal Year 2013 Budget, February 2012]

ABC News Fact Check: Spending Will Be Reduced By Getting Rid of Fraud and Ending Overpayment To Private Insurance Companies.” “Medicare spending will continue to grow, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), but ACA will slow that growth….spending will be reduced by getting rid of fraud and ending overpayments to private insurance companies. It sends a message to those insurance companies: Operate more efficiently.”  [ABC News, 6/28/12]

Cleveland Plain Dealer Politifact Has Rated The Assertion That The Affordable Care Act Cuts Medicare False. “The NRSC’s claim cites a real figure — $500 billion — that is part of the health reform debate. But it incorrectly describes it as $500 billion in Medicare cuts, rather than as decreases in the rate of growth of future spending. And the NRSC piles on the incorrect talking point about “government-run health care. On the Truth-Meter, the NRSC’s claim rates as False.” [Cleveland Plain Dealer, Politifact, 06/09/11]

ROMNEY AND RYAN VOW TO REPEAL THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT WHICH COULD BRING MEDICARE CLOSER TO INSOLVENCY

Romney: “If I’m President, I Will Repeal Obamacare, And I’ll Kill It Dead On Its First Day.” [Romney town hall, Collinsville, IL, 3/17/12]

New York Times Editorial: “The Affordable Care Act Helped Push Back The Insolvency Date By Eight Years, So Repealing The Act Would Actually Bring The Trust Fund Closer To Insolvency, Perhaps In 2016.” [Editorial, New York Times, 8/18/12]

THE ROMNEY-RYAN PLAN WOULD END MEDICARE AS WE KNOW IT – TURNING IT INTO A VOUCHER SYSTEM…

Nw York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait: President Obama’s Argument That Romney Would “End Medicare As We Know It” Is “Undeniably True.” “Today President Obama talks Medicare in Florida and argues that Mitt Romney will ‘end Medicare as we know it.’ The claim is undeniably true, though keep in mind that ‘as we know it’ is a fairly elastic term.” [Jonathan Chait, New York Magazine, 7/19/12]

Romney Adviser Tara Wall Said Romney And Ryan “Are Certainly 100% On The Same Page And On The Same Path Relative To Saying That We Have To Reform Medicare, Offering Options Like Vouchers.” [CNN Newsroom, CNN, 8/14/12]

Romney: “Paul Ryan And My Plan For Medicare I Think Is The Same, If Not Identical It’s Probably Close To Identical.” [WBAY (Green Bay, WI), 8/15/12]

  • Bloomberg: “Ryan’s Budget Bill Also Would End Traditional Medicare By Capping Spending And Offer Vouchers To Buy Private Insurance.” [Bloomberg, 8/13/12]
  • Romney’s Medicare Plan: “Medicare Is Reformed As A Premium Support System, Meaning That Existing Spending Is Repackaged As A Fixed-Amount Benefit To Each Senior That He Or She Can Use To Purchase An Insurance Plan.” [Romney Press Release, Spending Plan – “Cut The Spending,” 11/4/11]
  • Reuters: “Ryan’s Plan Calls For An End To The Guaranteed Benefit In Medicare And Replaces It With A System That Would Give Vouchers To Recipients To Pay For Health Insurance.” [Reuters, 8/12/12]

…WHICH WOULD SHIFT MORE COSTS ON TO SENIORS AND INCREASES COSTS BY MORE THAN $6,000 EACH YEAR

Los Angeles Times Headline: “Seniors Would Pay The Price Of Ryan’s Plan To Overhaul Medicare.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/13/12]

Los Angeles Times: Under The Ryan Budget “Seniors Would End Up Paying Almost Twice As Much Out Of Their Own Pockets.” [Los Angeles Times, 4/7/11]

New York Times Editorial: Ryan’s Plan Would Turn Medicare Into A Voucher System And “Would Leave Older Americans On Average With $6,400 In Extra Costs By 2022, According To The Congressional Budget Office.” “Most voters know little about Mr. Ryan. Those who have heard of him are probably most familiar with his Medicare plan, which would turn the program into a voucher system that would pay beneficiaries a fixed amount for their medical care, leaving them on their own if the voucher did not cover their costs. This notion so alarmed the public last year that Mr. Ryan was forced to backtrack and leave the existing Medicare system as an option. Even so, the plan would leave older Americans on average with $6,400 in extra costs by 2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office.” [Editorial, New York Times, 8/13/12]

  • Center On Budget And Policy Priorities: Under Ryan’s Plan, Seniors On Medicare Would Pay $6,350 More In Out-Of-Pocket Costs By 2022. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Off the Charts blog, 4/8/11]

Harvard’s David Cutler: Even Analyzed, “Conservatively,” A Voucher Plan Like Romney’s Could Increases Costs By $6,800 “For A Person Reaching Eligibility Age In 2030.” “In 2011, CBO released an analysis of Ryan’s first premium support plan, which replaced traditional Medicare with vouchers that seniors would use to help pay for private insurance.  The CBO found that it would cost private plans 39% more than traditional Medicare to deliver the same services. There were two reasons for this: first, private plans have higher administrative costs (including profits), and second they have less bargaining power and therefore would need to pay higher rates to providers. That 39% works out to an extra $6,400 a year for a typical 65 year old in 2030. Under the new premium support plan, which our paper analyzed, all new retirees receive a voucher that they can use to buy coverage from a private plan or from traditional Medicare. Because traditional Medicare is still an option, the erosion of bargaining power under the new Romney-Ryan plan is less immediate. Still, it is there. Anything that moves a significant share of people out of traditional Medicare will mean that Medicare has to pay more to ensure access. Conservatively, we estimated that the total extra costs to care for seniors in the future would be half what CBO estimated – 19.5% rather than 39% – and that effect would take 10 years to phase in. Adding these amounts over expected lifetimes yields the numbers we reported in our previous analysis. To show what this implies on an annual basis, we divide the increase in real costs by years of life remaining as of the age of Medicare eligibility.  Figure 3 shows the results.  The additional costs are $3,200 annually for a person reaching eligibility age in 2023, $6,800 annually for a person reaching eligibility age in 2030, $12,000 annually for a person reaching eligibility age in 2040, and $17,800 annually for a person reaching eligibility age in 2050.” [David Cutler, A Follow-Up on the Analysis of the Romney-Ryan Medicare Plan, 10/2/12]

  • Harvard’s David Cutler: “Even Under The Revised Voucher Proposal, The Additional Cost To Enroll In Medicare For The Vast Bulk Of People Will Be $6,000 Annually Or More.” [David Cutler, A Follow-Up on the Analysis of the Romney-Ryan Medicare Plan, 10/2/12]

ROMNEY VOWED TO DO AWAY WITH THE $716 BILLION MEDICARE SAVINGS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE RYAN BUDGET ROMNEY CALLED “MARVELOUS”

Romney: “The President’s Cutting $716 Billion From Current Medicare. I Disagree With That. I’d Put Those Dollars Back Into Medicare.” [60 Minutes, CBS, 9/23/12]

Romney “Papers Over” The Important Fact That “Ryan’s Budget Blueprints — Which Republicans Overwhelmingly Voted For In 2011 And 2012 — Includes The Same [Medicare] Cuts He’s Slamming.” “‘There’s only one president that I know of in history that robbed Medicare — $716 billion to pay for a new risky program of his own that we call Obamacare,’ Romney said in a CBS interview Sunday evening.  The claim is central to Romney’s strategy of deflecting attacks on his vice presidential pick’s plan to remake Medicare. But it papers over important facts, one of which is Ryan’s budget blueprints — which Republicans overwhelmingly voted for in 2011 and 2012 — includes the same cuts he’s slamming.” [Talking Points Memo, 8/13/12]

Associated Press’s Kasie Hunt Tweet: “Romney, 3/28:‘I Think It’d Be Marvelous If The Senate Were To Pick Up Paul Ryan’s Budget And To Adopt It And Pass It Along To The President’” [@kasie, Twitter, 4/3/12]

FACT CHECK: Romney Has Long Record of Supporting Outsourcing, President Obama Supports Insourcing

Mitt Romney has a long record of outsourcing and would promote it as president. As independent news reports have highlighted, Mitt Romney invested in companies that were pioneers of outsourcing and as governor, he helped ship Massachusetts jobs to India. But Mitt Romney would promote outsourcing by eliminating corporations’ taxes on overseas profits, which could create 800,000 jobs overseas in countries like China, India, and Mexico. President Obama has a jobs plan that would close corporate loopholes and eliminate tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas, and instead reward companies that create more jobs here at home.

ROMNEY LED INVESTMENTS IN COMPANIES THAT OUTSOURCED JOBS, INCLUDING SOME COMPANIES THAT GREW INTO SOME OF THE LARGEST OUTSOURCING AND OFFSHORING COMPANIES IN THE WORLD

Washington Post: “Mitt Romney’s Financial Company, Bain Capital, Invested In A Series Of Firms That Specialized In Relocating Jobs Done By American Workers To New Facilities In Low-Wage Countries Like China And India.” [Washington Post, 6/22/12]

  • Washington Post: “During The 15 Years That Romney Was Actively Involved In Running Bain…It Owned Companies That Were Pioneers In The Practice Of Shipping Work From The United States To Overseas Call Centers And Factories.” “During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.” [Washington Post, 6/22/12]
  • Washington Post Ombudsman: “Bain Knowingly And Far-Sightedly Made Strategic Investments, With Romney At The Helm, In These Pioneering Outsourcing Firms In The Late 1990s, Which Grew Into Some Of The Largest Outsourcing And Offshoring Companies In The World. And Romney And Bain Shared In Their Profits While He Was Chief Executive And After He Left.” [Washington Post, 6/29/12]

Bain Capital Earned Double The Return On Its Investment In Holson Burnes But Workers Were Left Jobless And Work Was Shipped Overseas. “For Bain, the plan was a financial success: Holson Burnes raised $24 million from its initial public offering on the over-the-counter trading market, with Bain executives retaining the majority of the company’s shares. Bain, in the end, reaped more than double the return on its initial investment. But workers were left jobless just as the local economy began to slump. … The cost-cutting continued at Holson Burnes. By 1992, the company manufactured nearly 75 percent of its photo frames overseas, according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. One of the company’s clock-making divisions also shipped work overseas from a Rhode Island plant.” [Associated Press, 12/19/11]

Bain Capital Invested In A Circuit-Board Manufacturer Company That Sent Production From Colorado To Mexico. “Two companies that Bain had an investment in closed a printed circuit-board manufacturing plant they had in the state, costing several hundred jobs when production was sent to Dallas in one case and to Mexico in another.” [Denver Post, 5/29/12]

  • During Bain Capital’s Investment, Circuit-Board Manufacturer SMTC Corp. Announced It Would Close The Denver, CO Plant And Move Production To Chihuahua, Mexico. “To offset losses, SMTC will close an assembly plant in Denver and take a one-time charge of $15 million to $20 million. Production from Denver will move to Chihuahua, Mexico.” [TheStreet.com, 3/30/01]

ROMNEY VETOED A PROPOSAL TO PREVENT MASSACHUSETTS FROM SENDING STATE JOBS OVERSEAS AND SIGNED A CONTRACT FOR A CALL CENTER IN INDIA

2004: Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Barred Outsourcing of Massachusetts State Jobs Overseas. “In a surprise move, Romney also vetoed a provision barring overseas outsourcing by vendors doing business with the state, even though in March he proposed a $29 million package of incentives designed to discourage Massachusetts companies from moving jobs out of state. Romney said that the plan included in the budget was hastily crafted and would drive away some businesses while failing to create jobs here.” [Boston Globe, 6/26/04]

Romney’s Administration Signed A Contract For A Food Stamp System That Involved A Call Center In India. “When Romney was governor of Massachusetts, his administration signed a $160,000-per-month contract with Citigroup to operate an electronic food stamp system that included a consumer call center in India.” [Boston Globe, Political Intelligence, 5/2/12]

Boston Herald: “Gov. Mitt Romney Admitted Yesterday That He Sent State Jobs To India And Then Utah.” [Boston Herald, 2/23/06]

PRESIDENT OBAMA WOULD END TAX BREAKS FOR COMPANIES SHIPPING JOBS OVERSEAS AND CUT TAXES FOR COMPANIES BRINGING JOBS BACK TO AMERICA…

President Obama’s Tax Reform Framework Removes Tax Deductions For Moving Production Overseas And Provides New Incentives For Bringing Production Back To The United States. “Remove tax deductions for moving productions overseas and provide new incentives for bringing production back to the United States. The tax code currently allows companies moving operations overseas to deduct their moving expenses—and reduce their taxes in the United States as a result. The President is proposing that companies will no longer be allowed to claim tax deductions for moving their operations abroad. At the same time, to help bring jobs home, the President is proposing to give a 20 percent income tax credit for the expenses of moving operations back into the United States.” [The President’s Framework For Tax Reform, February 2012]

…BUT ROMNEY ATTACKED THE PRESIDENT’S PLAN, SAYING IT WOULD “KILL JOBS”

Romney “Attacked President Obama’s New Tax Plan” Which Would “Eliminate A Number Of Existing Tax Breaks And Subsidies For Corporations And Reduce The Marginal Corporate Income Tax Rate From 35 Percent Down To 28 Percent.” [Washington Times, 2/22/12; Romney Rally, Chandler, AZ, 2/22/12]

  • Romney: President Obama’s Corporate Tax Reform Proposal Would “Kill Jobs.” “Mitt Romney charged Wednesday that President Obama’s new corporate tax proposal would kill jobs, and instead offered some details of his own plan to address the nation’s tax code. … ‘He’s proposing today a corporate tax plan which I understand sounds like he’s lowering taxes but he’s raising taxes – raising taxes on businesses by hundreds of billions of dollars,’ Romney said. ‘Raising taxes will kill jobs. My plan will create jobs. That’s the difference between the two of us.’” [CNN, 2/22/12; Romney Rally, Chandler, AZ, 2/22/12]

ROMNEY’S PLAN TO ALLOW CORPORATIONS INVESTING OVERSEAS TO AVOID U.S. TAXES COULD ENTICE COMPANIES TO CREATE 800,000 JOBS OVERSEAS

Reuters: “A Territorial System Would Prompt U.S. Companies To Shift Offshore Even More Income Than They Already Do And Jobs Would Follow, Worsening Unemployment And The Economy, Critics Say.” [Reuters, 9/14/11]

Citizens For Tax Justice: “Giving Corporations A Permanent Tax Exemption For Their Purported Offshore Profits Will Make Things Much Worse.” [Reuters, 9/14/11]

Economist Kim Clausing: Under A Territorial Tax System “The Tax Incentive To Locate Jobs In Low-Tax Countries Would Increase Significantly” Which “Would Increase Employment In Low-Tax Countries By About 800,000 Jobs.” “What would the effects be if the United States shifted to a pure territorial system? … it would encourage job creation abroad instead of at home. Based on my research and that of other experts in international taxation, it is possible to estimate how many jobs are at stake in this debate. In 2008 U.S. multinational firms employed 10 million workers in affiliated firms abroad. Under a pure territorial tax system, the tax incentive to locate jobs in low-tax countries would increase significantly, which I calculate would increase employment in low-tax countries by about 800,000 jobs.” [Kimberly A. Clausing, A Challenging Time for International Tax Policy, Tax Notes, 7/16/12]

  • Economist Kim Clausing: Under A Territorial Tax System, The 800,000 Jobs Created Overseas “Could Displace Jobs At Home.” “Under a pure territorial tax system, the tax incentive to locate jobs in low-tax countries would increase significantly, which I calculate would increase employment in low-tax countries by about 800,000 jobs… If U.S. unemployment rates are low, jobs abroad need not displace jobs at home, although the composition of jobs may change (and multinational corporate jobs are often good, high-wage jobs). In this economy, however, those new, low-tax-country jobs could displace jobs at home. With high unemployment rates, why further tilt the playing field in favor of jobs in low-tax countries? And given today’s budget climate, avoiding further erosion of the corporate tax base should be a priority.” [Kimberly A. Clausing, A Challenging Time for International Tax Policy, Tax Notes, 7/16/12]

Source: http://www.barackobama.com