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.
You might check with backhoe - he keeps quite an archive.
The picture I remember was of McCain and his wife on a stage at a rally - and I think it was during McCain’s “shadow convention” - because he was acting like a spoil sport because he didn’t win the nomination.
I can’t help but wonder if McCain will act the same way this time when he loses.
He still supports the assault weapons ban. That’s a deal-breaker for me.
McCain and Stem Cell Research Round-up
SEN. JOHN McCAIN: THE ULTIMATE "RHINESTONE HERO"
SEN. JOHN McCAIN: THE ULTIMATE "RHINESTONE HERO" Part II
U.S. Sen. John McCain is no War Hero
John McCain: The Manchurian Candidat
McCain Is Booed by Labor Activists
McCain Rides to Kerry's Rescue: "John Kerry is Not Weak on Defense" (Today Show alert)
John McCain SCREAMS AT 9/11 FSA MEMBERS FOR OPPOSING HIS BILL TO GIVE AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS
A number of articles on McCain. (some the same as above)
McCain Seeks to Change California Primary
McCain/Soros by Rabbi Areyh Spero
Soros' "Reform" (an article about Soros‘ instrumental hand in McCain/Feingold)
Not Child‘s Play [McCain/Schumer bill could effect FR?]
McCain's Letter (McCain aligns with Global Enviro activists)
The Turning Point on Global Warming (McCain and Lieberman Op-Ed Alert)
Climate bill sets stage for debate (Sens. McCain, Obama, and Lieberman join forces)
McCain: Global warming is fact, must be addressed [hurl alert]
McCain Looked into Caucusing with Democrats
McCain Still Disliked by Fiscal Conservatives (Club For Growth)
John McCain Goes Left for Money
McCain, Obama Make Deal on Financing
Sens. Snowe, Collins to head Maine exploratory committee for McCain
Double Talk Express. McCain in his own words. VIDEO
More YOUTUBE - McCain On Abortion (UH OH! YouTube Has a Video of Him in 1999)
The following links posted by raving utter and lifted by me…
How Cindy McCain was outed for drug addiction(stole drugs from the American Voluntary Medical Team)
John McCain: Hypocrite by Mark R. Levin
John McCain and the Kemper Marley organised crime network
McCain and his Chicom Connections: Posts #17 and #18 by Calpernia
McCain Screams at 9/11 Families for a Security America Member for Opposing his Illegal Amnesty Bill
More links I found...
TEN REASONS NOT TO SUPPORT MCCAIN (Free Republic thread from 2000
Yes, he supports it, and if it passes his desk, he’ll probably sign it, just like Bush would. That nothing has come to Bush in the 7 years he’s said he’d sign it suggests it won’t happen.
Still, Romney understands the right to keep and bear arms includes the right to have them with you for protection. Fred Thompson has said he supports allowing states to prohibit people from carrying their weapons for protection on public college campuses.
This is important in my state, where a gunman killed 32 people because nobody was allowed to have a weapon to stop him. Our state prohibits it’s citizens from having their weapons to defend themselves, and Fred Thompson said in response to a question that he supported allowing states to ban weapons from campuses.
So which is worse, not being able to buy a few guns that, if you wanted, you could purchase right now (the AWB didn’t require you to turn in weapons, it just kept you from buying in the future), or not being able to carry your weapon for protection?
Every candidate is a compromise, except maybe Hunter on this issue.
Meanwhile, Fred Thompson is a speech-grabber, having banned EVERY citizen from their free speech rights under the 1st amendment. Taking away the right to purchase a couple of more guns from the few people who would want to do so is bad, but not nearly as bad as taking away the 1st amendment rights to speech from EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN, at precisely the time (right before an election) that it is most important.
Under the McKennedy Amnesty plan, the invaders would only have to pay $2000 for U.S. citizenship. Less than the average cost that they pay a coyote to smuggle them over the border.
Then you are in luck since it looks like it won’t happen...
Romney maybe derailing himself in a most interesting way...
Yes indeed. That is Romney's Achilles heel. His ROI is way skewed and the GOP money boys see that.
That is something "self funding" can't help, and indeed makes it much worse.
One great thing about tonight is that you can see Mc Kennedy slithering out of sight for the winter. He tried to FLIP on AMNESTY but the people of Iowa were not fooled and he is gone except in Democrap states where he will find solice.
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.