FACT CHECK: Romney Pulled McCain’s GOP To The Extreme Right
Mitt Romney has moved the Republican Party that John McCain led in 2008 to the extreme right. On issue after issue, from massive tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires to immigration, campaign finance, energy, and the environment, Mitt Romney’s Republican Party looks far more like a faction of the Tea Party than the party of John McCain.
AS THE 2012 NOMINEE, ROMNEY HAS SHIFTED THE REPUBLICAN PARTY FAR TO THE RIGHT COMPARED TO MCCAIN’S REPUBLICAN PARTY OF 2008
McCain Opposed And Voted Against The Bush Tax Cuts, While Romney Has Advocated Making Them Permanent As Part Of His Tax Plan
MCCAIN VOTED AGAINST THE BUSH TAX CUTS TWICE…
Sen. John McCain Voted Against The Bush Tax Cuts In 2001, And Again In 2003 When They Were Renewed. “Sen. John McCain was one of the few Republicans who opposed tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush in 2001, and he opposed them again when they came up for renewal in 2003. In 2001, McCain voted against a $1.35-trillion tax cut package, arguing that the tax cuts didn't do enough for the middle class, and because of a need for increased defense spending. Two years later, McCain again citied fiscal prudence for opposing $350-billion in additional tax cuts, specifically citing the unknown costs for the war in Iraq. ‘No one can be expected to make an informed decision about fiscal policy at this time,’ McCain said. ‘Let us wait until we have succeeded in Iraq.’” [Politifact, 8/4/08]
2001: McCain Opposed The Bush Tax Cuts Because “I Cannot In Good Conscience Support A Tax Cut In Which So Many Of The Benefits Go To The Most Fortunate Among Us, At The Expense Of Middle Class Americans Who Most Need Tax Relief.” Sen. McCain said on the Senate floor, “Mr. President, I rise to oppose the Conference Report on the Reconciliation bill. I do so after having expressed hope that the progress we made in the Senate bill to scale back the benefits going to the top rate taxpayers to make room for more tax relief to lower income Americans would prevail in the final tax bill. During the debate on the Senate version of the tax reconciliation bill, I had urged my colleagues that substantial tax relief to middle income Americans should be our top priority…. This Conference Report lowers the top rate cut to 35 percent, at the cost of delaying, for several years, much needed tax relief for married couples unfairly penalized by our tax code. I regret having to vote against this Conference Report. We had an opportunity to provide much more tax relief to millions of hard-working Americans. I supported a $1.35 trillion tax cut despite my concern that a tax cut of that size would restrict our ability to fund necessary increases in defense spending. But I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle class Americans who most need tax relief.” [Sen. McCain floor speech, Congressional Record, S7082, 5/23/03]
2003: McCain Mocked Extension Of The Bush Tax Cuts As A “So-Called Growth Bill” And Said “The Only Thing Growing Will Be The Tax Breaks For The Wealthiest Citizens Of This Country.” McCain said on the Senate floor, “Mr. President, I am extremely disappointed for our brave military men and women that the conferees for the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 decided to omit the Senate-passed Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act of 2003 from the conference report. I offered an amendment to the tax bill that would add the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act of 2003, which has been previously passed by the Senate. The amendment was accepted by unanimous consent. Since this legislation has already passed numerous times in the Senate, I believed that the conferees would include this important legislation for our military in the conference report without hesitation. But again, politics ruled the day. Despite the recent successful war in Iraq, which highlighted the bravery and sacrifice of our military, the conferees provided nothing for them in this so-called growth bill. The only thing growing will be the tax breaks for the wealthiest citizens of this country. And in a time where we are also facing growing deficits and must also pay for the cost of the war, what the conferees did in the interest of ‘getting a deal’ was the height of irresponsibility.” [Sen. McCain floor speech, Congressional Record, S5789, 5/26/01]
…BUT ROMNEY WANTS TO DOUBLE-DOWN AND MAKE THEM PERMANENT
Romney On Making The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent: “I Will Make Today's Low Individual Tax Rates Permanent.” Romney: “As president, I will firmly oppose tax increases. I will make today's low individual tax rates permanent, cut business taxes, and make the tough calls necessary to bring spending back in line with what we can afford. I will cap spending at 20% of GDP by 2016, which will require between $400 billion and $500 billion in cuts.” [Romney op-ed, USA Today, 2/8/12]
Romney Criticized McCain For Not Supporting Bush Tax Cuts. Romney said, “I don’t recall Senator McCain saying…that he was wrong to vote against the Bush tax cuts…I think he was.” Romney also said that “he was quicker than McCain to endorse President Bush’s tax cuts.” The Romney campaign aired a television ad attacking John McCain for voting against the Bush tax cuts. [Washington Post, 12/29/07; International Herald Tribune, 12/28/07; Atlanta Journal Constitution, 12/23/07;East Valley Tribune, 11/14/06]
THE BUSH TAX CUTS BENEFITTED THE WEALTHY AND RAN UP THE DEFICIT
Under An Extension Of The Bush Tax Cuts, At Least 27.5% Of The Benefits Would Go To The Top 1%. [Tax Policy Center, Extend 2001-03 Tax Cuts and AMT Patch; Baseline: Current Law; Distribution by Cash Income Percentile, 9/14/10]
Washington Post Editorial Headline: “Bush Tax Cuts Helped The Rich Get Richer.” [Editorial, Washington Post, 1/16/12]
Washington Post Editorial: Bush Tax Cuts Widened Gap Between Rich And Poor. “A report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service shows that, between 1996 and 2006, the share of total after-tax income attributable to dividends and capital gains grew by 40 percent, faster than any other category. Earned mostly by the well-to-do, investment income was the largest contributor to the increase in income inequality between 1996 and 2006, according to CRS. The tax cuts enacted at the urging of President George W. Bush magnified what CRS calls the ‘disequalizing’ impact of this shift.” [Editorial, Washington Post, 1/16/12]
CBS News Headline: “Study: Bush Tax Cuts Favor Wealthy.” [CBS News, 2/11/09]
CBS News: Bush Tax Cuts “Have Shifted More Of The Tax Burden From The Nation’s Rich To Middle-Class Families.” “President Bush's tax cuts since 2001 have shifted more of the tax burden from the nation's rich to middle-class families, according to a study released Friday by the Congressional Budget Office[…]People in the top 20 percent of incomes, averaging $182,700 a year, saw their share of federal taxes decline from 65.3 percent of total payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year, according to the study by congressional budget analysts. In contrast, middle-class taxpayers — with incomes ranging from $51,500 to $75,600 — bear a greater tax burden. Those making an average of $75,600 had the biggest jump in their share of taxes, from 18.5 percent of all payments in 2001 to 19.5 percent this year.” [CBS News, 2/11/09]
Congressional Research Service: Bush Tax Cuts “Generated The Largest 10-Year Increases In Budget Deficits.” “Back in 2001, CRS said, the Congressional Budget Office projected gradually rising federal budget surpluses for the next decade. The tax cuts helped alter the outlook ‘dramatically,’ and the budget in 2002 recorded a deficit for the first time since 1997. ‘The Bush tax cuts, with a $1 trillion 10-year price tag, contributed to this shift from budget surpluses to deficits,’ CRS said. Other contributors included the 2001 recession, the increase in defense spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Medicare prescription drug benefit. But the tax cuts ‘generated the largest 10-year increases in budget deficits,’ CRS said”. [Politifact, 4/29/11]
While McCain Pushed For Comprehensive Immigration Reform… Romney Opposed His Plan And Has Taken Extreme Immigration Stances Instead Of Advocating Comprehensive Reform
MCCAIN AND KENNEDY PROPOSED A COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM BILL…
2007: John McCain, Along With Ted Kennedy, Introduced Their Second Attempt At Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Which Would Have Allowed Undocumented Immigrants To Obtain Legal Status. “Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain are set to introduce a revised version of their sweeping plan to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, in a bill that's likely to restart a tense debate in Congress. The measure, which is being drafted in consultation with the White House, will largely mirror the immigration bill that stalled last year, according to lawmakers and aides involved in the process. That measure was blocked primarily because House Republican leaders were adamantly opposed to provisions that would have allowed undocumented immigrants to become US citizens… the bill is likely to enrage advocates of a get-tough approach to immigration by allowing most of the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants already in this country to earn legalized status. Early drafts of the bill would allow them to become citizens after about 12 years if they meet requirements such as learning English, passing a criminal background check, and paying back taxes and a $2,000 fine.” [Boston Globe, 2/28/07]
…BUT ROMNEY OPPOSED THE BILL AND CALLED IT “AMNESTY”
2007: Romney Said He Does “Not Support” McCain’s Immigration Reform Bill. “Romney spoke at length on illegal immigration on a day when he was in San Diego where illegal immigration is among the most emotional issues. The candidate said he does ‘not support’ legislation introduced by McCain and Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy that would offer a pathway to citizenship for longtime undocumented immigrants living in the United States. ‘Instead, we should have an employment verification system for enabling employers to identify who is legally able to work here and who is not,’ Romney said. ‘And then, once a system is in place, we would insist that employers follow the law, or be penalized, just like they are if they don't pay their taxes.’” [San Francisco Chronicle, 3/16/07]
2007: Romney Said “The Immigration Approach Proposed By Senators McCain And Kennedy Falls Short Of A Workable Solution To An Important Problem.” A Romney for president press release read, "The immigration approach proposed by Senators McCain and Kennedy falls short of a workable solution to an important problem. I respect Senator McCain, but my opposition to his bill is a matter of principled disagreement about policies and priorities related to enforcement of our immigration laws.” [Press Release, Romney for President, 6/4/07]
2007: Romney Said McCain’s Immigration Bill “Gave A Form Of Amnesty To Every Illegal Alien Already In The Country.” Romney told a television reporter, “Well that’s pretty straight forward. And that is, Mayor Giuliani, of course, was the mayor of a sanctuary city, and he said if you’re illegal you’re welcome in New York, we’ll protect you here. And that, I think is exactly the wrong attitude. And, of course, Senator McCain proposed and backed a bill, the last Senate version, which gave a form of amnesty to every illegal alien already in the country. So they’ve taken a very, if you will, sanctuary state of mind approach. And my view is, instead, that we should enforce our borders, secure them, that we should have an employment verification system to determine who’s here legally and not, and we should not provide amnesty to those that are here illegally. So it’s a very different course. And I think that’s in part why in the states I spend the most time, I’m getting the best support.” [Press Release, Romney for President, 11/13/07]
…AND HAS SAID HE WON’T CONSIDER COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM UNTIL THE BORDER IS SECURE – AND ROMNEY’S IDEA OF BORDER SECURITY IS A 2,600 MILE FENCE
Washington Post: “On Immigration, Romney’s Position Is To Secure The Border Before Considering Comprehensive Reform.” “On immigration, Romney’s position is to secure the border before considering comprehensive reform. At the town hall in Keene, he said that means to ‘turn off the magnet.’ ‘Employers in the U.S. who knowingly hire people who are here illegally — that’s the magnet,’ he said. ‘So we have to crack down on employers that hire illegals, make it easy for them to determine who’s here legally and who’s not, and then crack down on those who hire illegals.’” [Washington Post, 9/1/11]
Romney Said He Would Build A 2,600 Mile Border Fence. Diaz-Balart asked Mitt Romney: “Governor, specifically, do you agree or disagree with some of the issues that the governor of Texas says, as far as what you would consider enough to be able to declare the border safe?” Romney: “Well, first, we ought to have a fence. Secondly...” Diaz-Balart: “The whole fence, 2,600 miles?” Romney: “Yes. We got to -- we got to have a fence, or the technologically approved system to make sure that we know who's coming into the country,” [MSNBC/Politico Republican Debate, 9/7/11]
ROMNEY HAS SAID THE “ANSWER” TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS TO ADVOCATE “SELF-DEPORTATION,” WHICH MCCAIN CALLED INHUMANE
Romney On Illegal Immigration: “The Answer Is Self-Deportation, Which Is People Decide They Can Do Better By Going Home Because They Can’t Find Work Here.” SMITH: “You say you don’t want to go and round up people and deport them, but you also say that they would have to go back to their home countries and then apply for citizenship. So, if you don’t deport them, how do you send them home?” ROMNEY: “Well, the answer is self-deportation, which is people decide they can do better by going home because they can’t find work here because they don’t have legal documentation to allow them to work here. And so we’re not going to round people up. The way that we have in this society is to say, look, people who have come here legally would, under my plan, be given a transition period and the opportunity during that transition period to work here, but when that transition period was over, they would no longer have the documentation to allow them to work in this country. At that point, they can decide whether to remain or whether to return home and to apply for legal residency in the United States, get in line with everybody else. And I know people think but that’s not fair to those that have come here illegally.” [NBC Florida Debate, 1/23/12]
Sen. John McCain, A Romney Endorser: “Self-Deportation” Is Not A Humane Way To Treat Undocumented Immigrants In The United States. RAMOS: “You’re talking about a humane way. Is self-deportation a humane way to treat 11 million undocumented immigrants?” McCAIN: “No. I think there are some people who want to leave this country and return to the country they came from, but obviously it requires a broader solution than that, and we all know that.” [Al Punto, Univision, 2/5/12]
McCain Pushed For Landmark Campaign Finance Reform, But Romney Now Criticizes His Accomplishment, Claiming We Should “Get Rid Of It”
ONE OF MCCAIN’S SIGNATURE ACHIEVEMENTS WAS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD, AN OVERHAUL OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW…
McCain-Feingold Was Sen. John McCain’s “Signature Campaign Finance Law.” “Even Romney, the candidate whose well-moneyed allies are responsible for the super PAC attacks against Gingrich, has said that he would like to see those groups eliminated. The former Massachusetts Gov. received an endorsement from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) this week, who lamented on Thursday that his signature campaign finance law, the McCain-Feingold Act, was gutted by the Supreme Court in Citizens United, the decision that paved the way for super PACs to emerge.” [Huffington Post, 1/5/12]
…WHICH ROMNEY HAS CALLED A “DISASTER” AND SAYS WE SHOULD “GET RID OF IT”
Romney Called McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law “A Disaster,” And That The U.S. Should “Get Rid Of It.” Romney: “I would like to get rid of the campaign finance laws that were put in place McCain-Feingold is a disaster, get rid of it.” [Fox News/Wall Street Journal SC Debate, 1/16/12]
Romney: McCain-Feingold “Hurt Our First Amendment Rights.” Romney said, “And frankly, being a committee chairman is not leading a great organization or making great things happen. And for that matter, you know, what’s happened in Washington in the last 25 years? Have you seen the kinds of results that America wanted? Did they get the job done? Unfortunately not. So if he has been a leader, where has it led us? Look at his legislation. McCain-Feingold, that hurt our First Amendment rights? McCain-Kennedy, that was granting amnesty to 10 million illegal aliens? And then now, McCain-Lieberman, that wants to put a huge tax, effectively, on American gasoline buyers and rate-payers? His record is not of the kind of leadership you’d want to have.” [CNN, Late Edition w/ Wolf Blitzer, 1/27/08]
Romney Supported Allowing Unlimited Individual Donations Directly To Candidates. “But asked whether he supported a system that permitted unlimited individual donations directly to candidates, Romney replied, ‘Yes.’ ‘Yeah, what we have right now is unlimited political contributions, but they’re not controlled by the campaigns,’ he said. ‘They’re controlled by unaffiliated or uncoordinated entities, which, in my opinion, is the worst of both worlds. It means that large contributions have a big impact, and it means that the campaign can’t control them, so if we’re going to have big contributors, wouldn’t it be nice to have the campaigns responsible for what those contributors say?’” [Real Clear Politics, 12/30/11]
MCCAIN AND ROMNEY DISAGREED ON THE CITIZEN’S UNITED COURT DECISION THAT GUTTED THE LAW
Romney On The Supreme Court Decision, Citizens United: “I Think Their Decision Was A Correct Decision. I Support Their Decision.” “I don’t recall Romney having anything critical to say about the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, which ushered in the era of super PACs permitted to make unlimited expenditures on behalf of favored candidates. In fact, Romney told the Portsmouth (N.H.) Herald’s editorial board last month of the justices’ ruling: ‘I think their decision was a correct decision. I support their decision. I wish we could find a way to get money out of politics. I haven’t found a way to do that.’” [Ruth Marcus Column, Washington Post, 12/22/11]
Sen. John McCain Called Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United Decision, An “Outrage.” “GREGORY: What about -- what about the negative advertisement? I mean, this is the growth of the Super PAC in this race? Do you -- you condemn those as well on all sides? MCCAIN: I can condemn them on all sides and I condemn the United States Supreme Court for their naiveté in the citizens versus United -- a decision which is an outrage… There is too much money washing around politics, and it's making the parties irrelevant.” [Meet The Press, NBC, 1/29/12]
McCain: Citizens United Decisions Has Led To “A Flood Of Money Into Campaigns, Not Transparent, Unaccounted For.” McCain: “What’s happening now is what I predicted when Citizens versus United, United States Supreme Court, in what I think in one of the worst decisions in history, struck down the restrictions in the so-called McCain-Feingold law and a lot of people don't agree with that, but I predicted when the United States Supreme Court, with their absolute ignorance of actually what happens in politics struck down that law, that there would be a flood of money into campaigns, not transparent, unaccounted for, and this is exactly what is happening. And those are the rules and everybody is playing by those rules and I predict to you that in the future, there will be scandals, because there is too much money washing around political campaigns now that nobody knows where it came from and nobody knows where it's going.” [Early Show, CBS News, 1/5/12]
From Drilling To Climate Change, McCain’s Reasonable Positions On Energy Have Been Opposed By Romney At Every Turn
MCCAIN: “I BELIEVE CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL.”
Sen. John McCain: “I Believe Climate Change Is Real.” “I believe climate change is real. I think it’s devastating. I think we have to act and I agree with most experts that we may at some point reach a tipping point where we cannot save our climate. I don't think we’re there yet, but the overwhelming evidence is that greenhouse gases are contributing to warming of our earth and we have an obligation to take action to fix it.” [On the Issues: Climate Change, New York Times, Accessed 8/28/12]
ROMNEY SAYS HE DOESN’T KNOW IF CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL NOR WHAT IS CAUSING IT
2004: Romney Said: “I’m Not A Scientist…I Read One Book Over The Summer That Said, ‘Gee, Global Warming Is Happening For Reasons Unrelated To Human Participation,’ And Other Reports, Far More, Indicate, ‘No No, It’s Very Much Driven By Humans.’ Well, I Don’t Know.’” “Rather than get caught up in debate, Romney said, his administration decided to move forward. ‘I'm not a scientist,’ he said. ‘I read one book over the summer that said, “gee, global warming is happening for reasons unrelated to human participation,” and other reports, far more, indicate, “no no, it's very much driven by humans.” Well, I don't know.’” [Boston Globe, 5/7/04]
2011: Romney Said: “My View Is That We Don’t Know What’s Causing Climate Change On This Planet.” “‘My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet,’ Romney said in the speech, a clip of which was posted by the liberal blog Think Progress. ‘And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.’” [Boston Globe, 10/28/11]
ROMNEY DOES NOT THINK GREEN HOUSE GASES POLLUTE
Romney’s Spokeswoman: “Romney Does Not Think Greenhouse Gases Are Pollutants Within The Meaning Of The Clean Air Act” – “CO2 Is A Naturally Occurring Gas. Humans Emit It Every Time They Exhale.” “‘Gov. Romney does not think greenhouse gases are pollutants within the meaning of the Clean Air Act, and he does not believe that the EPA should be regulating them,’ said Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul. ‘CO2 is a naturally occurring gas. Humans emit it every time they exhale.’” [Politico, 7/19/11]
Romney Said “I Don’t Think Carbon Is A Pollutant In The Sense Of Harming Our Bodies.” According to the New York Times, “Despite a Supreme Court ruling to the contrary, Mr. Romney said the federal law did not give the agency authority to regulate carbon emissions. ‘I don’t think that was the intent of the original legislation,’ he said, ‘and I don’t think carbon is a pollutant in the sense of harming our bodies.’” [New York Times, 8/17/11]
WHILE MCCAIN HAS OPPOSED DRILLING IN THE ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE…
McCain Reiterated His Opposition To Drilling In The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. “Senator John McCain reiterated his opposition to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on Thursday, a day after his statement that he would be willing to ‘go back and look at it again’ sparked speculation among both opponents and proponents of drilling that he might change his mind. ‘My position has not changed,’ Mr. McCain said here on his campaign bus. ‘People have said to me, “I’m going to bring you new information about ANWR, how environmentally we can make it safe,”’ he said. ‘I’ll be glad to accept new information but my position has not changed.’” [New York Times, The Caucus, 6/19/08]
…ROMNEY MADE DRILLING IN THE ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE PART OF HIS ENERGY PLAN
Romney “Absolutely” Supported Drilling In The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge In Alaska, A Position “At Odds With Senator John McCain” And Other Republicans. “Governor Mitt Romney yesterday endorsed a proposal to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, putting him at odds with Senator John McCain of Arizona and others in the Republican Party who have fiercely resisted the Bush administration's efforts to open the site for oil exploration. In an interview with Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC political show ‘Hardball with Chris Matthews,’ Romney says he ‘absolutely’ supports drilling in the wildlife refuge because it would help reduce the country's reliance on foreign sources of oil, according to a transcript of the show, which was scheduled to be shown last night.” [Boston Globe, 12/13/05]
Romney’s Energy Plan Included Drilling In The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge And Alaskan Coast. “Explore and Develop Our Oil Reserves: Under the robust and efficient regulatory framework just described, a Romney administration will permit drilling wherever it can be done safely, taking into account local concerns. This includes the Gulf of Mexico, both the Atlantic and Pacific Outer Continental Shelves, Western lands, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and off the Alaska coast.” [Romney, Believe In America: Mitt Romney’s Plan For Jobs And Economic Growth, p. 93, 9/6/11]
Romney On Increasing Domestic Drilling: “I Will Permit Access To Our Resources In The Gulf Of Mexico, The Outer Continental Shelf, Western Lands And The Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.” [Mitt Romney op-ed, Columbus Dispatch, 3/5/12]