Facts are Clear

Instead of creating jobs, President Obama is really creating debt. Over thirty cents of every dollar is borrowed—much of it from China. He’s not just wasting money. He’s borrowing it, then wasting it.

A Desperate President’s Desperate Claims

Desperate presidents sometimes say desperate things.
Take Barack Obama as an example.
In the aftermath of Wednesday night's debate in Denver, the President said this: “I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney. But it couldn’t be Mitt Romney, because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. The fellow onstage last night said he didn’t know anything about that.” The president went on to say, “The man onstage last night, he does not want to be held accountable for the real Mitt Romney’s decisions and what he’s been saying for the last year. And that’s because he knows full well that we don’t want what he’s been selling for the last year.” And President Obama went on "Governor Romney may dance around his positions, but if you want to be president, you owe the American people the truth."
Let's deal with these charges in turn.
The President's claim that Governor Romney has been going around the country for months calling for $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy is pure fiction. Even President Obama's deputy campaign manager, Stephanie Cutter, admitted that the $5 trillion figure is inaccurate. What Governor Romney favors is a 20 percent cut in rates for everyone. But as Governor Romney explained to the President during the debate, he's committed to making his tax reform plan revenue-neutral by broadening the tax base and through the revenues generated from economic growth. So only if you intentionally ignore a key element of Mitt Romney's tax proposal do you get any revenue loss at all.
Governor Romney has raised several specific ideas on what the base broadening might include, including putting a fixed dollar-cap on deductions; or capping deductions as a percentage of adjusted gross income; or a tax reform modeled on the Bowles-Simpson Commission and the 1986 Tax Reform Act where specific tax loopholes are eliminated. Governor Romney fully recognizes, however, that any major overhaul of the tax system will result from a negotiation with Congressional leaders.
The truth is that Governor Romney is not just proposing a 20 percent tax rate cut. He's proposing a reform of the tax code that lowers the rate people pay on their income but increases the portion of their income subject to taxes.
What makes the false claim by President Obama doubly risible is that it came in the same debate in which Mr. Obama said, "I've put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan." But as any number of fact checkers (like Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post) have pointed out, the $4 trillion figures (a) counts $1 trillion in cuts reached a year ago in budget negotiations with Congress, meaning those savings are already in the bank; (b) counts $800 billion in savings in debt payments (from lower deficits) as a “spending cut,” which is a dubious claim; and (c) Obama is counting nearly a $1 trillion in savings from war money that no one expected to be spent anyway, now that the Iraq war is over and the Afghanistan war is winding down. As Mr. Kessler put it, "By projecting war spending far in the future, the administration is able to claim credit for saving money it never intended to spend. (Imagine taking credit for saving money on buying a new car every year, even though you intended to keep your car for 10 years.) Rather than good arithmetic, independent budget analysts called the maneuver 'a major budget gimmick.'” (Shockingly, the press has applied very little attention and scrutiny to President Obama’s invented claim that he’s put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan.)
There's also more than a little irony in having President Obama lecture Governor Romney about veracity in the aftermath of the indisputably misleading account by the President and his administration regarding the lethal assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
On the matter of accountability that the President professes devotion to: As I’ve pointed out before, this is a president who promised to cut the deficit in half, bring down health care premiums by $2,500 for a typical family, create five million new green energy jobs alone, lift two million Americans from poverty, and as president-elect, informed us that he had asked two of his top economic advisers, Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, to conduct a “rigorous analysis” of his economic recovery plan. The report that he released predicted unemployment would not rise above 8 percent if the stimulus plan was passed. None of those promises have been met. In fact, they have been utterly shattered.
I want to offer one more observation about Wednesday's debate. For the past four years, President Obama has relied to an inordinate degree on straw men and caricatures of the Republican Party and Governor Romney. What happened on Wednesday evening in Denver is that the President was actually called out on his distortions. Governor Romney carefully and patiently corrected Mr. Obama on issue after issue. The President didn't like it, and he proved entirely unequipped to respond to the points made by Governor Romney. As a result, he not only lost the debate; he was routed. But once President Obama was in front of a safe and supportive crowd, with no fear that his false claims would be refuted, he was back to doing what he does best: Misrepresenting the record and agenda of Governor Romney.
It is hard to believe now, but once upon a time, Barack Obama presented himself as a figure of intellectual integrity who would elevate public discourse. He's now been reduced to spewing distortions, and doing so in his typically mocking fashion. But maybe when a president doesn't have a record he can defend and a governing vision he can't articulate – when, like Robert Frost’s hired man, he has “nothing to look backward to with pride, and nothing to look forward to with hope" – that is what he's reduced to.
Perhaps it isn't a surprise, then, to see what President Obama has become. But it is nonetheless sad.

Peter Wehner, Senior Adviser for Romney for President, Inc.

 

Obama's $5 Trillion Falsehood

 There was wide agreement on Thursday morning that Mitt Romney won the first presidential debate of the general election. Why? Because he laid out the clear choice voters face this November between a real recovery or four more years like the last four years.

Middle-class families have been devastated in the Obama economy. Twenty-three million Americans are struggling for work. Median incomes have declined by more than $4,500 since President Obama took office. Today, nearly one in six Americans is living in poverty. That’s clearly not the real recovery our nation needs. And since President Obama has an indefensible record on the issue voters care about most – the economy – he’s been forced to resort to diversions, distractions, and outright deceptions about both his own record and Governor Romney’s proposals.

The most glaring example was his accusation that Mitt Romney is proposing a “$5 trillion tax cut.” But Jim Lehrer had barely thanked the audience for watching Wednesday’s debate before the fact checkers swooped in and declared President Obama’s claim to be false. By Thursday night, even the Obama campaign itself had to admit its charge was untrue. Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter admitted the falsehood saying, “Well, okay, stipulated, it won't be near $5 trillion.” In fact, multiple independent studies confirm that Mitt Romney’s tax reform plan will stimulate economic growth. This growth together with a broader tax base – these studies conclude – mean we can lower tax rates without increasing the deficit.

But what is even worse than President Obama’s deception about Gov. Romney’s proposal is the truth about his own. To be clear: the President has already raised taxes 21 times during his first term in office. And his only plan for a second term is to raise even more taxes – $2 trillion worth, in fact. Middle-class families and small-business owners will suffer most as a result, since his tax plan will subject nearly one million business owners to higher taxes, threaten more than 700,000 jobs, and cost the United States $200 billion in economic output. A study conducted by the independent and nonpartisan American Enterprise Institute (AEI) calculated that the annual cost of the debt President Obama has already racked up and the new spending he has proposed would amount to $4,000 per year in higher taxes on the middle class. And nearly five million middle-class Americans will be subject to a tax hike once Obamacare’s individual mandate is fully implemented.

Clearly, the Obama campaign was in full damage control mode at the end of this past week. Given such a devastating record, it’s no surprise Barack Obama will say and do anything to avoid talking about his middle-class tax-hike plan. And with 31 days to go until Election Day, we fully anticipate Mitt Romney will be hit by many more baseless attacks in the weeks to come as President Obama continues to avoid talking about his failed policies.

All we can do is fight back with the truth, plain and simple: Our country can’t afford another four years like the last four years. Mitt Romney has a plan to create 12 million jobs and turn our economy around, and he is the candidate who will deliver meaningful reforms to achieve the real recovery Americans need and deserve.

 

Gail Gitcho, the Communications Director at Romney for President, Inc.

$5 Trillion

Mitt Romney Digital | 7 October, 2012

President Obama continues to not tell the truth about Mitt Romney's economic plan even though news outlets and even the Obama campaign say that the claim is not true. President Obama's economic plan is a $4,000 tax increase on the middle class and is one more reason we can't afford four more years of his failed policies.

 

Can We Believe Him?

President Obama has campaigned for years on his commitment to the military. But President Obama signed $500 billion in defense cuts into law and proposed $500 billion more. President Obama's record on the military: saying one thing, doing another.

The Clear Choice In This Election

This week, we saw several reminders of the clear choice we face in this election – and why we can’t afford four more years like the last four years.
First came a new economic study about the debt that President Obama has put in place and, of course, about the debt that he’s planning on adding in a second term. Simply to pay the interest this debt, middle-class families will face a $4,000-a-year tax hike. That’s a direct consequence of the President’s failure to rein in spending. And it’s a very heavy, unacceptable burden for families who are already stretched too thin.

Second was the debate in Denver. President Obama could not defend his record. He offered no new ideas for how to fix the economy. I welcomed the chance to share my vision for renewed prosperity and opportunity, and I think it compared quite favorably to President Obama’s desire for big, trickle-down government.

And then finally, on Friday morning we received the latest monthly jobs report. We created fewer jobs in September than in August, and fewer jobs in August than in July, and we’ve lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs since President Obama took office. If not for all the people who have simply dropped out of the labor force, the real unemployment rate would be closer to 11%.
The results of President Obama's failed policies are staggering – 23 million Americans are struggling for work, nearly one in six are living in poverty, and 47 million people are dependent on food stamps to feed themselves and their families.
What we need is a real recovery – and, unlike the President, that’s exactly what I’m offering.
On the economy, President Obama's plans for a second term all come down to more taxes, more borrowing, and more spending. My Plan for a Stronger Middle Class will lead to rising incomes for everyone and create 12 million new jobs in my first term alone.
On healthcare, the President will implement Obamacare, with its trillion-dollar tax hike and massive raid on Medicare. I will repeal Obamacare – and replace it with real reforms that provide better and more affordable care.
On debt, President Obama will only dig a deeper hole. I will cut spending, restore our AAA credit rating, and balance our budget within a decade.
The choice in this election is clear. Under President Obama, we will have a stagnant economy that fosters government dependency and chronically high unemployment. But if you elect me as president, we’ll have pro-growth policies that foster upward mobility, strengthen the middle class, and lift people out of poverty.
That’s the choice in this election. And that’s why I’m asking for your support on November 6th.

-Mitt Romney | 6 October, 2012

Melanie

Melanie McNamara voted for Barack Obama in 2008. She believed he would lead our country to prosperity. Four years later, she's voting for Mitt Romney because she wants to make sure that our economy is growing again.

We Do Not Want Four More Years Of Where We’ve Been

America has a very dramatic choice it can make. We can keep going down the same road we're on, and if we go down the road we're on, we're headed for a weaker and weaker economy, with fewer people being able to get jobs than the people that really need them.
We're going to see kids coming out of school not able to get the jobs they need. That's the path we're on. That's the path of the status quo the President's fighting for. We do not want four more years of where we've been.
I represent a very different path. I will restore America's strength, I'll put America back to work, and I'll keep our military so strong no one would ever think of testing America's military might.

The Party and Vision of Lincoln

A society has an obligation to care for those in need. How we help the most vulnerable members in our midst is not simply a private matter, though it is surely that. It’s also a public concern. Securing justice for the poor and upholding the cause of the needy comes in many different forms, starting with our individual lives and including the good work of communities, civic associations, and places of religious faith and worship.
These institutions are the lifeblood of American society. They touch us all, one by one, where we live, and they offer the needy and the vulnerable not only generous material help but also the priceless gifts of human compassion and a path to dignity, responsibility, and hope. These are the institutions that, along with families, nurture human beings and shape human character. They are indispensable and irreplaceable.
Government also has an undeniably important role to play when it comes to helping those in need. While it can't offer the kind of personal loving support that lifts people out of misery and trouble, it can help to secure some basic material necessities and protect people from the risk of depravation and loss, and it can help to secure the environment in which our institutions of compassion and uplift can do their crucial work. Above all, government can put itself on the side of lifting the poor by putting itself on the side of economic growth and prosperity.
And this needs to be said as well: when it comes to the able-bodied, assistance that comes in the form of government benefits should be temporary, not indefinite and not endless. Whenever possible the goal should be to help people transition back to work and productive lives, not only because it's good for a society but also because it's good for individuals.
Work is important for people because it creates a sense of independence, self-reliance, and dignity. It allows people to exercise greater responsible for their lives and for those whom they love. And the true measure of a society's decency and compassion isn't, as Governor Romney says, how many people are on welfare or receiving food stamps; it is how many people are moving from government dependency to good paying jobs.
The goal here is a deeply American one: upward mobility, greater opportunity, and the chance to rise in life and better our condition. It is to provide every American, in every station in life, with what Lincoln called "an open field and a fair chance for your industry, enterprise and intelligence; that you may all have equal privileges in the race of life, with all its desirable human aspirations."
America at its best has thrived by remaining in that middle ground between two extremes: a sink-or-swim, you're-on-your-own society on the one hand and an egalitarian, redistributive, and government-centered one on the other hand.
The best way to maintain the right balance is to provide people with opportunities and the skills they need to seize them -- to provide them with the tools they need to shape their lives.
The on-ramps to upward mobility include a good education; strong, intact families; and neighborhoods and communities that provide children with safety and a sense of belonging. But the core argument Governor Romney has made is that opportunity and social mobility depend above all on a strong, growing economy. Instead of a stagnant economy that makes it too hard to find a job and pushes more and more people into poverty and on to food stamps, we can have a vital, robust economy that lifts millions out of poverty, that strengthens the middle class, that makes possible philanthropy and charitable giving, and the encourages self-reliance and achievement.
When we look beyond the horse race component of this campaign, it's clear, I think, that this election isn't simply a contest between two men; it is a contest between two profoundly different visions of America and our future.
We know what the Obama vision is because we know what the Obama record is: economic stagnation, increasing dependency, and the expansion of the Nanny State -- one that (in the words of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher) “takes too much from you to do too much for you.”
The Romney/Ryan vision for America is fundamentally different: economic growth, limited government, less dependency, greater self-reliance and more upward mobility – a beneficent society that provides people with the skills they'll need to succeed in a free economy and that provides a safety net for those who cannot care for themselves.
It is a society that is dynamic and decent, that is prosperous and generous, and that is marked by excellence and achievement and human flourishing. A society -- which is something different from a government -- that flourishes because it understands that individual accomplishment is not the opposite of mutual responsibility. Americans have always grasped that one without the other is impossible, and that the combination of the two adds up to the American dream.
Not surprisingly, it was President Lincoln who expressed that dream better than anyone: "The progress by which the poor, honest, industrious and resolute man raises himself, that he may work on his own account and hire somebody else... is the great principle for which this government was really formed." Lincoln went on to say this:

I don't believe in law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good. So while we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else…when he may look forward and hope to be a hired laborer this year and the next, work for himself afterward, and finally to hire men to work for him! That is the true system.

As it was then, so it is today.

 

Peter Wehner Senior Adviser for Romney for President, Inc.

Leaving The Obamacare Fantasyland

It has become impossible to take seriously the claims that President Obama and his campaign make about what Obamacare will deliver down the road. As Nancy Pelosi famously told America, “we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Well they passed it, we are finding out what is in it, and the evidence is clear: Obamacare is failing and will only continue to break the promises and confound the rosy predictions made about it.
Nearly every major promise that the President made about his $2 trillion program has been broken. Key components are failing as quickly as they can reach implementation. And as the Obama Administration careens ahead with its plans, problems are only getting worse.
It turns out that the skeptics who questioned the wisdom of a 2,700 page federal takeover of the national health care system were right after all.

President Obama Has Already Broken Most Major Promises He Made

Keeping Your Insurance. President Obama promised that Americans who like their insurance can keep it. But millions will lose it.

Tax Increases. President Obama promised that middle class families would see no tax increases. But millions will get them anyway.

Cost Control. President Obama promised that Obamacare would help control cost. But no such savings are expected to materialize.

Premium Savings. President Obama promised that premiums would decline by $2,500. But they have increased by $3,000, and even he is no longer claiming such savings for the future.

Medicare. President Obama promised, “not to mess with Medicare”. But seniors will see hundreds of billions in cuts, and millions of them will lose the coverage they rely on.

Key Components Of Obamacare Are Already Failing

CLASS. A new long-term, federally administered insurance program called CLASS was set to begin just this year. The trillions in new spending called for under the health law were to be partially offset from the revenues that this new program would collect. Democrats included this provision despite warnings from both Medicare’s Chief Actuary and the American Academy of Actuaries. Even Democrat Senator Kent Conrad declared that CLASS was a “Ponzi scheme of the first order, the kind of thing that Bernie Madoff would be proud of.” So it came as a surprise to literally no one that Secretary Sibelius announced plans to end the program within 19 months of President Obama signing Obamacare into law, admitting “it was unsustainable as the legislation was crafted.”

High-Risk Pools. Acknowledging that promised benefits to America’s most vulnerable wouldn’t actually begin for several years, Obamacare established high-risk pools that were intended to provide temporary access to care. Almost immediately, the program failed to deliver on its promise. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that not enough funding had been allocated and that enrollment would have to be limited to 200,000 people, a far cry from the 375,000 originally estimated. Even with these revised projections, the poorly designed program was destined for failure. As of June, only 77,877 actually enrolled. Worse, the program was already running way over budget. Indeed, despite being significantly under-enrolled, more than a quarter of the high-risk pools are already “running short of cash.”

Accountable Care Organizations. Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) promised to be “organizations formed by groups of doctors and other health care providers that have agreed to work together to coordinate care for people with Medicare.” But the Obama Administration’s regulations were described as “difficult, if not impossible to implement” by 10 medical provider groups who participated in earlier test cases of this heath delivery model. The American Medical Group Association reported then 90 percent of its members “would not participate” in the program as it was originally proposed. It turns out the President doesn’t quite have this health care system figured out, but the regulations keep pouring out.

Medical Loss Ratio. Obamacare contains a provision mandating that insurance companies spend at least 80 percent of premiums paid by beneficiaries on health care services. Instead of providing patients with increased access to care, this new federal mandate has had the exact opposite effect. Five health insurers – including two of the nation’s largest – have stopped selling health coverage in Indiana. The American Enterprise Group has stopped offering some plans in more than 20 states. Meanwhile, rebates for this year have amounted to as little as 0.1% of insurance costs and lead to rebates as low as $1. The ensuing administrative costs and confusion have done little for consumers while imposing significant burdens on small businesses.

Medical Device Tax. Obamacare places a 2.3 percent tax on the sale of medical devices. While that may seem small, the tax is on revenue -- not profit – and will impose an extraordinary burden on exactly the type of innovative and growing companies our health care system – and economy – desperately need. New therapies and treatments that patients rely on will be delayed while companies pull back on investment and research and jobs are shipped overseas.

Unconstitutional Medicaid Expansion. Initially, Obamacare held Medicaid funding hostage unless states agreed to dramatically expand their already unsustainable programs. The Supreme Court struck down this mandate, undermining one of the law’s main purported benefits.

The Problems Will Only Get Worse

Rampant Confusion. The Obama Administration has issued already issued 12,000 pages of new regulations, but as implementation dates loom it is consistently missing its own deadlines and states have now been waiting for months for the Administration to provide guidance on how they are expected to proceed.

Disastrous Design. The law’s poorly crafted definition of “affordable” insurance threatens to exclude millions of low- and middle-income Americans from Obamacare’s programs entirely, and its inconsistent treatment of state and federal programs may prevent many of those who do participate from ever receiving the benefits promised.

Broken Medicare. The Medicare Trustees have warned that Obamacare’s $716 billion in cuts “will not be viable.” Medicare’s chief actuary has called them “unrealistic.” At the same time, 15 percent of hospitals and nursing homes would become unprofitable. These are real cuts to real benefits, and they will ultimately jeopardize seniors’ access to care. Meanwhile, the Independent Payment Advisory Board that would supposedly rein in the growth in Medicare costs, is struggling to get off the ground as President Obama refuses to even nominate initial members.

Moving Beyond The Empty Promises

President Obama may want the American people to simply trust his predictions, and the studies put forward by his “experts,” about the exciting future that Obamacare holds. But given his track record, the only reasonable assumption is that everything that can go wrong will go wrong, and that Obamacare will prove to be exactly the big-government disaster its critics have warned.
The choice in this election is not about which candidate will make more grandiose promises about his plans. The choice is about which candidate’s plans will help the American people. By all indications, Obamacare has failed, is failing, and will fail. All at a cost of $2 trillion. Mitt Romney will repeal Obamacare, and replace it with common-sense, patient-centered reforms that actually improve the health care system by promoting competition and innovation, expanding access to care, and controlling cost.

Lanhee Chen, Ph.D., the Policy Director for Romney For President, Inc.