MEMO: Abel Maldonado’s False Equivalency On Tax Delinquency
To: Interested Parties From: Ty Matsdorf, American Bridge 21st Century RE: Abel Maldonado’s False Equivalency On Taxes Date: 8-7-2012 Over the last couple of days, Abel Maldonado’s rampant abuse of the tax system and his IRS delinquencies have resurfaced in the media. While his abuses have been so longstanding that they may seem to be “old news,” it is worth remembering just how egregious they are. But first, as the issue of taxes has become a flash point in his Congressional race, it is important to dispel an emerging narrative: that both candidates in the race “have tax troubles.” Saying this is like saying Gabby Douglas and I are both gymnasts because I did a half-somersault while falling out of bed this morning. According to media reports, Congresswoman Capps had a clerical error that was immediately corrected upon discovery. Lt. Gov. Maldonado on the other hand abused the tax code over the course of several years, and still to this day hasn’t paid the more than $4 million he and his company owe in taxes. A quick refresher on the Maldonado record is after the jump.
Richard Mourdock Can’t Seem To Make Up His Mind On Indiana Jobs.
We are all well aware of Richard Mourdock’s attempt to cripple the Indiana economy and destroy thousands of jobs by suing to block federal assistance to Chrysler. But when campaigning in South Bend, he seems to have suddenly turned over a new leaf. He is now bemoaning the loss of 24,000 jobs and $1.1 billion dollars that would happen as a result of the sequester cuts of defense spending. Mourdock’s apparently forgotten that he claimed government doesn’t create jobs. And he thinks entire branches of the military should be eliminated. And he doesn’t consider it his job to protect Hoosier jobs. So does Richard Mourdock care more about protecting government jobs or dramatically slashing the federal budget? Or is he really most interested in saying whatever it takes to get elected? Mourdock Backed Away From Sequester Cuts To Pentagon Citing Job Loss. According to the South Bend Tribune, “When the congressional "supercommittee" failed last fall to agree on a plan to reduce the federal deficit by $1.2 trillion over 10 years, it set in motion a default plan for cutting spending. The plan calls for $1.2 trillion in across-the-board cuts, including $600 billion from defense programs, that will start taking effect Jan. 2. Richard Mourdock, the Republican state treasurer running for one of Indiana's seats in the U.S. Senate, believes government needs to be smaller and less expensive. But, during a campaign stop earlier this week in Mishawaka, he warned against allowing the default plan to take effect… Mourdock said the defense cuts would lead to the loss of nearly 24,000 jobs in Indiana and a $1.1 billion hit to the state's economy. He mentioned that companies such as AM General and Honeywell would be affected in the South Bend area.” In addition, “Mourdock said there might be reasonable spending cuts to make in the Department of Defense, but the default reduction of $600 billion would be disastrous.” [South Bend Tribune, 7/25/12] Mourdock Said Government Doesn’t Create Jobs. Mourdock said, “Congress doesn't create any jobs. There are a bunch of private sector companies who want to create those jobs. The fact that we have congressmen of either party claiming they created jobs is just false. There job should be to keep government at its more limited purpose so the private sector can create jobs.” [AB 21 Tracking Footage, 2/15/12] Mourdock Asserted That “I Didn’t Take A Pledge That I Would Support Every Job In Indiana,” Had No Regrets About Position. “‘I didn't take a pledge that I would support every job in Indiana under whatever means it takes to do it,’ Mourdock said. ‘The oath I took said I would support the laws of Indiana and support the Constitution of the United States. Constitutional rights for people for which I had a fiduciary responsibility were being violated, and I had no choice to do what I did. I certainly have no regrets.’” [Indianapolis Star, 10/19/10] Mourdock Question The Necessity Of All The Branches Of The Armed Services. According to the National Review, “‘here’s always going to be a lot of duplication,’ Mourdock said. ‘We look today at the historical setup of Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard. There’s a lot of duplication and bureaucracy right there. In the 21st century is that necessary? I’m not sure that it is.’” [National Review, 4/30/12]
MEMO: Questions Romney Can Clear Up With His Tax Returns
TO: Interested Parties FROM: Rodell Mollineau, American Bridge 21st Century DATE: July 16, 2012 RE: Questions Romney can clear up with his tax returns Mitt Romney has been trying very hard to run out the clock on this campaign without providing a complete and accurate picture of his finances. He has released his returns for 2010 and [whatever he releases], but that does not provide a full accounting of his financial priorities and practices. For example, from his limited release to this point, very serious questions need to be answered about his offshore holdings, trusts, and ongoing profit from his private equity career. He is also taking great pains to distance himself from his involvement with Bain Capital post-February 1999, but yet refuses to release his tax returns over that period which would prove his veracity on the subject. Romney’s father started the tradition of releasing his taxes by providing 12 years. Romney himself provided 23 years of taxes when he was being vetted for the vice presidential slot under McCain (and losing out to Sarah Palin). So, it should be easy for Romney to put a number of questions to rest by simply providing the public with his income taxes just as he provided them to John McCain. Here are the questions that could be easily answered through a full and transparent disclosure.
MEMO: Questions Romney Can Clear Up With His Tax Returns
TO: Interested Parties FROM: Rodell Mollineau, American Bridge 21st Century DATE: July 16, 2012 RE: Questions Romney can clear up with his tax returns Mitt Romney has been trying very hard to run out the clock on this campaign without providing a complete and accurate picture of his finances. He has released his returns for 2010 and [whatever he releases], but that does not provide a full accounting of his financial priorities and practices. For example, from his limited release to this point, very serious questions need to be answered about his offshore holdings, trusts, and ongoing profit from his private equity career. He is also taking great pains to distance himself from his involvement with Bain Capital post-February 1999, but yet refuses to release his tax returns over that period which would prove his veracity on the subject. Romney’s father started the tradition of releasing his taxes by providing 12 years. Romney himself provided 23 years of taxes when he was being vetted for the vice presidential slot under McCain (and losing out to Sarah Palin). So, it should be easy for Romney to put a number of questions to rest by simply providing the public with his income taxes just as he provided them to John McCain. Read the full memo after the jump.
Connie Mack Agrees: We Should Phase Out Medicare, Social Security
At a Tea Party event in Central Florida, Connie Mack agreed with an event attendee who suggested we eliminate the corporate income tax and eventually phase out Medicare and Social Security. Wonder how this will play with Florida voters?
BRIDGE BRIEFING: Romney's Record on Issues Impacting the African American Community
Romney Administration
Romney Failed To Appoint Minorities To Top Positions In His Administration As Governor. According to the Associated Press, “A new report faults Governor Romney for failing to appoint minorities, particularly Latinos and Asian-Americans, to top positions in his administration. Of 163 top-level positions, fewer than eleven percent were held by minorities. That’s according to the report by the McCormack Graduate School’s Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy at U-Mass Boston. Latino appointments made up one-point-eight percent of the total number of posts, even though Latinos make up seven percent of the state’s population. Asian-Americans make up four percent of the state population, but hold fewer than one percent of total top-level positions. A Romney spokesman defended the governor’s record -- saying approximately 52 percent of all employees in the administration are women, and 22 percent are minority.” [Associated Press, 12/6/06]Romney: "It's Not A Tax Hike. It Is A Fee."
With Romney & other Republicans attacking Obamacare as a tax increase, it's worth looking at how Romney viewed an identical policy when he was governor. Here's brand new video from the Mass. archives in which Romney says of the tax penalty for not purchasing health insurance: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment."
MEMO: Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Sarah Steelman’s Record On Taxes And Fees
After Sarah Steelman stated categorically that she “never voted for a tax increase” during a debate on June 11, 2012, her record on taxes has become a major campaign issue. American Bridge was quick to point out an obvious tax increase that John Brunner missed when leveling his attack. He even went so far as to launch a website attacking Steelman on her tax record. But none of these attacks come anywhere close to a comprehensive look at Steelman’s record of voting for taxes and fees on Missourians. After an exhaustive review of her voting record, American Bridge has compiled numerous examples of votes for taxes and fees in direct contradiction to Steelman’s ridiculous claim. A few highlights:
- Steelman voted 23 times in favor of sales taxes - Steelman voted 23 times in favor of tourism taxes - Steelman voted 8 times in favor of waste fees - Steelman voted 6 times in favor of transportation taxes - Steelman voted to authorize increasing the Senior Citizens Service Fund Tax - Steelman co-sponsored an education bill that increased the sales tax by 1%, state corporate income tax to 6.75%, and state personal income tax to 6.5% - And many more
Steelman may talk a good game on taxes, but her record tells an entirely different story.Steelman "Never Voted For A Tax Increase"?
On Monday, Republican Senate candidate Sarah Steelman made a sweeping (and incorrect) claim about her voting record in the Missouri state senate when she stated that she “never voted for a tax increase.” This has sparked a heated back and forth between Steelman and one of her primary opponents, John Brunner, who took a swing and missed when the attack spiraled downward into an argument about semantics. Brunner argues that Steelman voted to make a temporary tax permanent. Steelman counters that Brunner “does not understand the legislative process.” And while that may be true, it is less because he is mischaracterizing the vote Steelman cast and more because there is a much clearer example of Steelman voting to raise taxes. In 2002, Steelman voted to create a brand new tax. Here is text from the legislation Steelman supported:
“In addition to all other fees and taxes required or paid, a tax is hereby imposed upon licensed retail pharmacies for the privilege of providing outpatient prescription drugs in this state. The tax is imposed upon the Missouri gross retail prescription receipts earned from filling outpatient retail prescriptions.”
“A tax is hereby imposed.” Maybe Brunner should run with that one instead of arguing about the difference between “increasing” and “extending.” Steelman Voted To Create Retail Pharmacy Tax In Order To Fund Medicaid Pharmacy Program. On May 15, 2002, Steelman voted for the Senate Substitute version of the Senate Committee Substitute version of HB 1898, a bill that created a retail pharmacy tax “for the privilege of providing outpatient prescription drugs.” The bill imposed a new retail pharmacy tax upon all licensed retail pharmacies in Missouri in order to fund the state’s Medicaid Pharmacy Program. The retail pharmacy tax was limited to 6% of a pharmacy’s monthly gross retail prescription receipts. According to the Missouri House of Representatives, “This act imposes a tax upon licensed retail pharmacies in Missouri for the privilege of providing outpatient prescription drugs. The tax rate of up to [sic] will be based on monthly gross retail prescription receipts of pharmacies, not to exceed 6%... All revenues from the tax will be deposited in the Pharmacy Tax Fund, created in the act. Moneys in the fund will be used to provide payments for services related to the Medicaid pharmacy program.” The bill was passed by a vote of 24-9. [Missouri State Senate, Daily Journal of the Senate, Day 73, 5/15/02, Page 1655; Missouri House of Representatives, Official Summary, HB 1898]BRIDGE BRIEF: The Truth About Romney & The Auto Rescue