Home > Politics > Political Punch

Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper

« The debate over crossdresser workplace protections | Main | Rudy attacks Hillary's "Baby Bond" »

Read my flips?

October 05, 2007 11:47 AM

They are among the most notorious words in politics -- the soon-to-be-broken promise made by George HW Bush when he spoke at the Republican National Convention in 1988: "Read my lips: no new taxes."

Politicians still make (and sign) no-new-tax pledges. But there can be a reluctance, based on Mr. Bush's experience.

To wit: In 2002, as the Boston Globe reported, Mitt Romney "broke with his predecessor, Jane Swift, and Republican governors before her by declining to sign a written vow not to raise taxes once in office. The decision disappointed state and national anti tax activists, but Romney wouldn't be pinned down. 'I'm against tax increases,' Romney was quoted as saying at a campaign stop in Springfield that March. 'But I'm not intending to, at this stage, sign a document which would prevent me from being able to look specifically at the revenue needs of the Commonwealth.'"

A Romney campaign spokesman called the pledge "government by gimmickry."

But … now it's 2007… and Romney isn't running for Governor of liberal Massachusetts but pursuing the GOP presidential nomination. So ….

In addition to signing the Americans for Tax Reform "taxpayer protection pledge," promising to oppose "any and all efforts" to increase income taxes, Romney is making an issue of it on the campaign trail.
Yesterday in Manchester, N.H., Romney said "I'm the first candidate, Republican or Democrat, to sign the tax pledge -- the no new tax pledge; and at the same time, among the leading contenders in both parties, I'm the only one that signed it at all, and so that's one difference" he has on taxes with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

This morning Romney launched a new radio ad about his new-found love of no-new-taxes pledges.

"I'm proud to be the only major candidate for President to sign the Tax Pledge," he says in the ad. "The others have not. I signed the Tax Pledge because I want everyone to know where I stand. We've got to get taxes down and grow our economy."

Why the change? Romney spokesman Kevin Madden tells us, "He believed then that he didn’t need to take one. More importantly, he did not raise taxes as governor. Now that he's running for President, he has learned that a simple straightforward pledge helps set the tone and focus minds on cost-saving reforms and spending cuts. Especially in Washington."

That seems to have been enough for New Hampshire anti-tax activist Tom Thompson, who endorsed Romney yesterday.

Is it enough for you?

What do you think?

-- jpt

October 5, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (5)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/22198020

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Read my flips?:

User Comments

Methinks that Gov. Romney's newfound love of such pledges is nothing more than a cheap attempt to garner publicity for his increasingly self-funded campaign. It's true that the desperate will do anything to set themselves apart from the crowd!

Posted by: chuck | Oct 16, 2007 3:17:39 PM

Friends don't let friends vote Republician!!

Posted by: Jeff | Oct 9, 2007 11:07:31 AM

Any of the Republican candidates are 1000% better then any of the Lib/Socialist/Dem candidates any day of the week.

Posted by: spock | Oct 6, 2007 11:38:06 AM

Romney faced a $3 billion deficit on his first day of office, and his $250 million of fees accounted for only 10% of the fix. The rest of the shortfall was made up the old fashioned way...cutting spending. Any day of the week, I'll take a candidate who raises fees and ends government subsidization of services below market value, rather than raising income taxes in a socialistic fashion.

Rudy continues to try and muddy the water on his fiscal record.

1. Rudy left the city with a $2.7 billion greater single-year budget shortfall than he found it ($1 billion if you don't count 9/11).

2. Rudy actually lowered taxes by $4.4 billion LESS than his campaign has claimed.

3. During the booming 1990's, Rudy borrowed an additional $16.4 billion on city debt, costing New Yorkers over a billion dollars more than their tax cuts to just pay the interest.

Posted by: Micah | Oct 6, 2007 4:27:54 AM

So far, Romney leads in New Hampshire by five points over Giuliani, and double digits over McCain. Polling is tough in New Hampshire at this early stage, because Independents can decide which party primary to vote in on Election Day. If the Democratic Primary is sown up by Clinton, for example, more Independents will decide to go to the GOP Primary, making the GOP Primary electorate a little less conservative. That trend might have accounted for the large, last-minute surge by McCain in '04 that pollsters totally missed.But, for now, Romney leads. And, historically, New Hampshire GOP voters are conservative, and anti-tax. The state also tends to give a big boost to candidates with New England roots, like Romney has. Voters there also like candidates who spend alot of time in-state. So far, Romney has held almost double the number of Giuliani's campaign events in New Hampshire. I think it will be percieved as 'stretching it' for Giuliani or McCain to buy into the tax 'flip-flop' arguement. Those two need to spend some more time there, and show their conservative credentials, or get left in the dust.

Posted by: SteveW | Oct 5, 2007 2:03:16 PM

Post a comment