Posted on 12/29/2007 9:10:23 PM PST by freespirited
Summary
Romney's latest ad attacks McCain in New Hampshire with false and misleading claims:
It claims McCain "voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security." That's untrue. Nobody who is in the country illegally could be paid any Social Security benefits under McCain's immigration bill.
It implies McCain supported "amnesty" for illegal immigrants. That word isn't accurate. Illegal immigrants wouldn't have received a blanket pardon under McCain's bill. Instead, they would have had to pay thousands in penalties and fees to gain legal status. In fact, in 2005 Romney called McCain's proposal "reasonable" and said it wasn't amnesty.
The ad says Romney "cut taxes" in Massachusetts. While he did cut some taxes for example, enacting business tax credits tax rates remained unchanged. Plus, Romney raised state revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars per year by increasing fees and closing corporate tax loopholes.
Analysis
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney announced his ad attacking Arizona Sen. John McCain Dec. 28. It is set to run in New Hampshire, where the two face each other in the Republican presidential primary scheduled for Jan. 8.
Social Security for Illegal Aliens
In contrasting supposed differences between the two men, the ad's announcer falsely states that McCain "voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security." This tired and misleading claim was used by several Republicans against Democrats in the 2006 elections. We debunked it then, and it is no more true now that it is being used to attack a Republican.
The claim is based on the immigration bill that McCain cosponsored in 2005 and 2006. The bill died, but as we said before, the measure did not propose to pay Social Security benefits to illegal immigrants, not until and unless they become U.S. citizens or are granted legal status. Under current law, illegal immigrants who work and pay Social Security taxes may later receive credit toward future benefits for the amounts they have paid, if they become legal residents or citizens. The McCain measure wouldn't have changed that.
During the immigration fight Republicans proposed an amendment that would have prevented anyone who became a legal immigrant under the McCain bill from receiving credit toward future Social Security benefits for the taxes they paid and the time they had worked while in the U.S. without legal permission. McCain was one of 11 Republicans who voted to kill that amendment.
Thus, the statement that McCain "voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security" is false. Nobody proposed to pay benefits to anyone who is in the U.S. illegally. To be accurate, the ad might have said that McCain "voted against a measure that would have denied illegal immigrants Social Security credit for their work once they gain legal status." But such a truthful statement might not strike New Hampshire voters as so damaging.
"Amnesty" Again
The Romney ad also misleads by using the inaccurate and emotionally laden term "amnesty" to describe what the immigration bill would have offered illegal immigrants. As we've said any number of times, the dictionary definition of "amnesty" is a pardon for past offenses, and the McCain bill did not offer a simple pardon. Rather, it would have imposed thousands of dollars in penalties and fees on any illegal immigrant wishing to gain legal status.
The ad's wording is technically accurate on this score. It says, "He [Romney] opposes amnesty for illegals." What's misleading is the suggestion that McCain embraces "amnesty," when he doesn't. Romney's ad might truthfully have said he currently takes a tougher line on illegal immigrants than does McCain, but characterizing his opponent as favoring "amnesty" isn't accurate.
Also, while the former governor has hardened his stance on immigration, it's worth noting that he once called the legislation for which he now attacks McCain a "reasonable" proposal. In a 2005 interview with the Boston Globe after McCain's bill was introduced, Romney also said he didn't believe the legislation granted "amnesty."
Boston Globe (March 2007): In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as "quite different" from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.
McCain's Position
McCain issued a response to the Romney attack, alluding to the somewhat tougher stand on immigration that the senator has embraced since the defeat of his immigration plans. He said he now favors securing U.S. borders and instituting a "temporary worker program" before attempting to deal "comprehensively" with immigrants currently in the U.S. illegally.
John McCain: I'm familiar with tailspins and I think he's [Romney is] in one. Look, on the issue of immigration, my position is clear: We have to secure the borders, the borders have to be secured first. As president I would have the governors in the border states certify that the borders are secure. We learned a lesson and the message is they want the borders secured first. Then we go on to a temporary worker program and addressing the issue comprehensively.
A Misleading Claim About Taxes
We also find the ad's claim that "Romney cut taxes" to be misleading. It is true that Romney proposed some income tax cuts that the Democratic-controlled Massachusetts Legislature rejected. And he did succeed in cutting some taxes for example, he enacted property tax relief for seniors and approved business tax credits but overall tax rates remained the same. The conservative Club for Growth said his term included "some solid efforts" but that "overall, Romney's record on tax policy is mixed." Indeed, he increased state revenues significantly.
Technically, Romney's often-repeated boast that he didn't raise taxes is true, but it's also misleading, as we discussed in our critique of the second Republican presidential debate back in May. In 2003, to help close a big budget gap, he pushed through a number of increased state fees that brought in $400 million in their first year. For example, he doubled fees for marriage licenses and other court filings. He also quintupled the per gallon delivery fee for gasoline (money that is supposed to be for cleaning up any leaks from underground fuel tanks). Romney also "closed loopholes" in the corporate tax structure, a move that generated another $150 million in increased revenue.
Romney also shifted some of the state tax burden down to the local level, by cutting local aid revenues. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, representing the state's cities and towns, said Romney's cut "forced communities statewide to cut services and raise local taxes and fees." The exact amount of the local increases hasn't been determined, but Romney at least partly avoided increasing state taxes by forcing Massachusetts cities and towns to raise theirs.
Sources
S. 2611, 109th U.S. Congress, 2nd Session.
U.S. Senate, 109th Congress, 2nd Session. Vote No. 130.
S. 1639, 110th U.S. Congress.
Helman, Scott. "Romney's words grow hard on immigration." Boston Globe. 16 Mar. 2007.
Bovbjerg, Randall R. State Responses to Budget Crises in 2004: Massachusetts. 1 Feb. 2004. The Urban Institute. 16 May 2007.
Cardozo, Carol L., et al. State Budget '04: The Long Road Back. 1 Jan. 2004. The Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation. 16 May 2007.
Myth Romney and sHuckster. They deserve each other.
I’m no Mitt fan, but when he says that McCain supported Amnesty for illegals, he is spot on. McCain wrote the Amnesty bill for Pete’s sake. And under McCain’s bill after a quick touch back and citizenship application illegals would have indeed been eligible for social security benefits. McCain is Mr. Amnesty plain and simple.
Of course, Romney is only a half step behind in his support of Amnesty.
Newsweek? The libs at Newspeak want to see Romney defeated so they can get someone they can dismantle in the general election, like Huckabee or Giuliani.
McCain is an amnesty father. He is unfit to be President. Mitt is one I could easily support.
Newsweek now shilling for McCain. Everthing Mitt sad is accurate. Why do you keep posting articles from the leftest MSM who obviously want McCain to derail Romney?
Nail on head here. Romney called the proposal reasonable and denied that it was amnesty late in 2005. Therefore attacking McCain is pure hypocrisy ... worse than all of his flip flopping.
I believe Mitt has alienated the press more than the average GOP candidate. This could make him a nightmare nominee.
I don’t subscribe to your kind of censorship.
I don’t like either one of these guys but will vote for the GOP nominee. Of the two evils, it is pretty clear that only McCain has a prayer of defeating Hillary.
Have you looked at the head to head match ups? No one does worse than Romney.
The left sure supports him! They support him and trash Mitt....that doesn’t tell you anything?
Are you serious, at least Romney pretends to be conservative. McCain celebrates the fact that he has stabbed conservatives in the back at every opportunity.
Who are you supporting in this primary?
Either of them would be better than that incompetent ass Huckabee, but I'm still supporting Fred.
The Dims would eat Flip Flop Romney for lunch . He is the Republican John Kerry, only worse ....
During the immigration fight Republicans proposed an amendment that would have prevented anyone who became a legal immigrant under the McCain bill from receiving credit toward future Social Security benefits for the taxes they paid and the time they had worked while in the U.S. without legal permission. McCain was one of 11 Republicans who voted to kill that amendment.
McCain was ready and willing to shell out the social security to freshly approved "immigrants" (which was basically all illegal aliens who applied for "Z visas" under his bill) and credit them for "time served" as illegal aliens.
McCain is a loser.
Only Thompson and Hunter would give us a conservative approach to government.
“Why do you keep posting articles from the leftest MSM who obviously want McCain to derail Romney?”
You must not have noticed, but one of the goals here at freerepublic if I interpret JR and most freepers correctly is to derail Romney.
Yep, and playing right into the Democrat plan.
Yea what word isn't accurate? Amnesty, illegal, supported, or immigrants? Cause McCain supported amnesty for illegal immigrants.
By the way, what is this bogus “factcheck.org”?
Is that a McCain outfit?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.