Mitt Romney appeared at a private fundraiser in Palm Beach, Florida last night and he thought he was alone. But the press could hear his remarks from the sidewalk below the residence. As a result, we now know several things that Romney will promise his donors in private but will not discuss on the campaign trail.
For example, he has a plan to offset the cost of further lowering the marginal income tax rate on rich people.
“I’m going to probably eliminate for high income people the second home mortgage deduction,” Romney said, adding that he would also likely eliminate deductions for state income and property taxes as well.
“By virtue of doing that, we’ll get the same tax revenue, but we’ll have lower rates,” Romney explained. “The nice thing about lower rates is that small businesses not (sic) get to keep a larger share of what they’re earning and plow it back in to hire more people and expand their business.”
This would impact people who have a second home that they do not rent out. But the law as it currently stands only allows you to deduct mortgage payments on $1.1 million of debt, so anyone with more than that in mortgage debt would not be impacted. Yet, all of us would lose the right to avoid double taxation on our local, state, and property taxes. There’s a reason Romney will only propose this privately.
He has a plan for winning back Latinos, and it might surprise you:
Predicting that immigration would become a much larger issue in the fall campaign, Romney told his audience, “We have to get Hispanic voters to vote for our party,” warning that recent polling showing Hispanics breaking in huge percentages for President Obama “spells doom for us.”
Romney said the GOP must offer its own policies to woo Hispanics, including a “Republican DREAM Act,” referring to the legislative proposal favored by Democrats that would offer illegal immigrants a limited path to citizenship, to give Hispanic voters a real choice between parties.
That’s actually a very poor description of what the DREAM Act would do. The DREAM Act would offer citizenship to students who graduate from high school and have no criminal record. It’s designed for the children of illegal immigrants who came to this country through no choice of their own and grew up here and excelled in their studies. It’s a bill that Mitt Romney has promised to veto.
Indeed, the Democratic National Committee quickly responded to Romney’s remarks.
“If there had been doubt in anyone’s mind—least of all, Hispanics in America, that Mitt Romney’s far-right views on immigration would make him the most extreme presidential nominee in recent memory, his statement [Saturday] that he would veto the DREAM Act if he were president is appalling,” said Juan Sepluveda, the DNC’s Senior Advisor for Hispanic Affairs. “This piece of legislation has been supported by members of both parties.”
It’s not clear what a “Republican” DREAM Act would look like, but it appears to be one item on Romney’s Etch A Sketch agenda. Or, maybe, he was just telling his donors what they wanted to hear. That seems to be the case with the Department of Education because the following doesn’t even make any sense:
Asked about the fate of the Department of Education in a potential Romney administration, the former governor suggested it would also face a dramatic restructuring.
“The Department of Education: I will either consolidate with another agency, or perhaps make it a heck of a lot smaller. I’m not going to get rid of it entirely,” Romney said, explaining that part of his reasoning behind preserving the agency was to maintain a federal role in pushing back against teachers’ unions. Romney added that he learned in his 1994 campaign for Senate that proposing to eliminate the agency was politically volatile.At that time, Sen. Ted Kennedy ran ads against Romney — then a political neophyte — accusing him of being uncaring for saying he wished to eliminate the agency.
Romney told the audience here tonight (along with the Weekly Standard in an interview in early April) that that experience remains fresh in his mind. It’s contributed to his caution in publicly naming federal agencies and programs he would eliminate or dramatically curtail.
This is the Mitt Romney we have come to know and loathe. He says he would maintain the Department of Education mainly in order to use it as a weapon against teacher’s unions. While he might otherwise be inclined to eliminate the department entirely, he’s learned that it isn’t a politically popular policy and he certainly isn’t going to repeat the mistake of being honest about his feelings with the voting public. Maybe he will consolidate it with another agency (Homeland Security? Agriculture? Veteran’s Affairs?), but he will certainly gut its funding. Isn’t it good to know that Romney is such a visionary on the federal role in education?
One agency he was willing to put on the chopping block (at least, in private before high-rolling donors) is the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
“I’m going to take a lot of departments in Washington, and agencies, and combine them. Some eliminate, but I’m probably not going to lay out just exactly which ones are going to go,” Romney said. “Things like Housing and Urban Development, which my dad was head of, that might not be around later. But I’m not going to actually go through these one by one. What I can tell you is, we’ve got far too many bureaucrats. I will send a lot of what happens in Washington back to the states.”
If you were wondering if Ann Romney was offended when Hillary Rosen pointed out that she hasn’t worked a day in her life, don’t worry:
“It was my early birthday present for someone to be critical of me as a mother, and that was really a defining moment, and I loved it,” Mrs. Romney said.
Presumably, Ann Romney would love more birthday presents.
Finally, there’s a reason for me to continue to do what I do:
Romney also described his media strategy going forward, including his views on so-called “earned media,” and how the campaign might pair surrogates with complimentary news outlets.
He said his campaign had been well-covered by Fox News, but that Fox was watched by “the true believers,” and that he knew he would have to reach out to a broader audience in order to win over independents and women voters that will decide the election in November. He painted a picture of a media landscape in which liberal voices won out on television, but conservatives were strongest online.
“We are behind when it comes to commentators on TV. They tend to be liberal,” Romney said. “Where we are ahead or even is (sic) on twitter and on the Internet.”
So, to recap, Mitt Romney has come up with another tax proposal that won’t cost himself a dime but will nail the rest of us. He’s going to try to pretend that he never promised to veto the DREAM Act. He’s going to use the Department of Education to attack teacher’s unions since he can’t think of anything else worthwhile for them to do and he’s too cowardly to destroy the department entirely. He’s going to eliminate HUD. He and his wife are very excited about the fact that people are talking about his wife’s idleness. And he thinks he has an advantage online.
Got that?
Psssst….peek.
Heh Thanks.
How are we supposed to know this was the real Romney? That he wasn’t just bullshitting his donors, too? People have been known to say what their funders want to hear.
There’s just no way to tell who “the real Romney” actually is. If there is a brainwashed Manchurian candidate in this race, secretly worming his way to the presidency so he can impose communism on us once he seized power, it’s not Barack Obama.
true enough.
Although, he has to pay for his tax cuts somehow because the Tea Party is a real force now and won’t allow another huge infusion of debt. Yes, they will dissipate quickly without outside funding, but they’ve infiltrated Congress and the GOP to a degree that Romney can’t bully the party the way Bush did in 2001 and 2003.
To the extent that the “real Romney” is knowable, I’d suggest it includes at least the following elements:
*a powerful desire to be president (dating back at least 20 years);
*an amoral businessman’s desire for and ability to say and/or do almost anything to “close the deal”;
*a willingness, once in office, to work with whoever holds power in order to advance the Romney “brand”.
You missed the obvious one:
* A bedrock, unshakeable commitment to advancing the economic interests of the .00001 percent, at the expense of everyone else.
Everything else is negotiable.
Also, too: Space aliens, and underwear.
Not that that’s a whole lot stranger than transubstantiation.
“advantage online”
Wow! If there was any doubt that R-Money’s campaign is delusional, it’s that right there.
The Romney campaign seriously believes it has a bigger online advantage than the OFA??? Really?
The OFA which revolutionized the way campaigns use social media, viral video and quick action networking???
REALLY!!!
In fairness, I think he was more talking about media/blogs/twitter than campaign organization.
And…
R-Money’s presence on twitter/blogs ain’t even close to OFA. Unless they’ve been doing some stealthy stuff under the radar?
his campaign presence is lacking, but right-wingers have a strong presence on Twitter and on blogs.
Could Michele be so feisty?
Careful on your spelling, Boo. It’s Michelle, two l’s. The only Michele in public life (spelled with one l) is Bachmann, and yes, she can be that “feisty.” And quickly, too. It helps when facts are no deterrent.
That said: For Christ’s sake, Michelle’s gotten pilloried for suggesting that fat kids should exercise more. A comment like Ann’s would get not just the Neanderthals but everyone in The Village in an uproar. As Michelle, Barack, and everyone on their team is no doubt painfully aware, being black and in the White House means monitoring yourself ceaselessly to ensure that, unless the political advantage is clear, you never, ever give critics ammunition to call you “uppity.” (In polite language, of course.)
Even then: they will, anyway. The best you can do is comport yourself so that they sound like racist idiots when they go there.
yes, sorry for the typo.
Tough choices, that… stay at home in La Jolla California, or San Diego? Boston Massachusetts, New Hampshire, or Aspen Colorado?
And checking in with a nanny each day, between rides, to see how the kids are doing.
“We are behind when it comes to commentators on TV. They tend to be liberal,” Romney said. “Where we are ahead or even is (sic) on twitter and on the Internet.”
Can I have some of what Mitt is smoking?!? I wonder what Dancin’ Dave thinks when he hears that Mittens doesn’t watch his show because Mittens has no freakin’ clue.
this is who he is.
he is a human cipher with no core that would sell his mama for a block of votes.
the only thing he truly believes is that he should be President. everything else – negotiable.
remember what King Grover said about what the GOP needed in a President and tell me how Willard doesn’t fit that to a tee
When was the state/sales tax deduction put in?
Am I the only one who finds stuff like this rather chillingly dark?
He’s basically made it a fixture of his campaign to denounce his own father whenever the need arises.
That’s chillingly dark, yes, but Daddy Issues are standard Republican fare. In fact, I think they’re very nearly a prerequisite of being conservative at all.
Find me a president/candidate of either party who doesn’t have dad issues. The current president wrote a whole fucking book on the subject, where the emotional climax is him weeping on his father’s grave.
Did Dukakis has daddy issues?
Ann speaks the truth – it certainly was a defining moment for her.
Why should Mitt get them all? I’ll bet she wishes that she’d been the one to say ” I don’t care about the very poor” or “I love to fire people.”
The real Rmoneys have been on display for a while. Their bubble is almost indestructable. It’s so nice to create your own reality.