By Deroy Murdock on 1.14.08 @ 12:08AM
If his lackluster economic record as governor of Massachusetts is any indication of how he would perform as president, Michigan voters should beware of Mitt Romney.
"Michigan is like the canary in the mine shaft," Republican
White House contender Willard Mitt Romney told voters in Warren
Friday. "What happens in Michigan is going to happen to the rest of
the country." He also claims in a campaign commercial, "I
understand how the economy works. There's a lot we can do to
strengthen Michigan."
One could take Romney seriously as an architect of economic
redevelopment if he had displayed such skills as Massachusetts
governor. Instead, his reign was a parade of economic stagnation
and retreat. He even advocated an SUV-tax increase that would have
hammered the very same domestic automotive industry he now says he
champions.
Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin of the Center for Labor Market
Studies at Boston's Northeastern University placed Romney's rule
beneath their statistical microscope. Let's hope what they
discovered is not contagious.
"Our analysis reveals a weak comparative economic performance of
the state over the Romney years, one of the worst in the country,"
the researchers wrote in the Boston Globe. Specifically,
they found:
* As U.S. real output grew 13 percent between
2002 and 2006, Massachusetts trailed at 9 percent.
* Manufacturing employment fell 7 percent
nationwide those years, but sank 14 percent under Romney, placing
Massachusetts 48th among the states.
* Between fall 2003 and autumn 2006, U.S. job
growth averaged 5.4 percent, nearly three times Massachusetts'
anemic 1.9 percent pace.
* While 8 million Americans over age 16 found
work between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed Massachusetts
residents actually declined by 8,500 during those years.
"Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any
gain in its pool of employed residents," professors Sum and
McLaughlin concluded.
Romney's vaunted healthcare plan also disappoints. It forces
individuals to purchase medical coverage and slaps the
non-compliant with "tax penalties," as a state-government radio ad
described them last November. These charges were $219 in 2007,
equal to the personal exemption on Massachusetts' state tax.
However, this year's formula could crank this figure up to $912.
Businesses with at least 11 workers either must offer health
insurance or face annual fines of $295-per-uninsured employee. This
is consistent with Romney's statement at a January 5 GOP
presidential debate: "I like mandates."
This program is run not by the free market, but by the
Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector, a Romney-created
government bureaucracy. For 2007, reports the Pacific Research
Institute's Sally Pipes, RomneyCare is expected to have cost
taxpayers some $619 million. That's $147 million and 31 percent
above original projections.
Romney blames all this on tinkering Democratic state
legislators.
"I don't know what's going to happen down the road as the
Democrats get their hands on it," Romney told the National Review
Institute. "I was a little concerned at the signing ceremony when
Ted Kennedy showed up."
Romney's Pontius-Pilate-like hand washing is thoroughly
unconvincing. Bay State Democrats would have struggled to hijack
health reform based on tax incentives, choice, and ownership, as a
true free-marketeer would have insisted, rather than RomneyCare's
easily scaled universal mandates, regulatory boards, and
government-imposed standards.
Romney also doomed Massachusetts by hiking taxes and fees, which
fouled that state's business climate.
"Tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of
legislation supported by Romney," Boston Science Corporation
chairman Peter Nicholas wrote in the January 6 Boston
Herald. Romney boosted taxes on subchapter S corporations
owned by business trusts from 5.3 percent to 9.8 percent, a
four-fifths increase. Nicholas called this "an important
disincentive to investment, growth, and job creation."
"Corporate taxes went up $210 million under Romney," the
Herald editorialized. "And we wonder why companies look
north, south, east and west, anywhere but Massachusetts, to
expand?"
While Romney sped a $275 million capital-gains tax rebate,
scored property-tax relief for seniors and secured a two-day,
tax-free shopping holiday, he imposed $283 million in business
"loophole closures" and $501.5 million in increased fees on
marriage licenses, gun registrations, gasoline deliveries,
real-estate transfers, and more. Under Romney, the Tax Foundation
calculated, Massachusetts fell from America's 29th most
business-friendly state to No. 36.
One of Romney's tax measures particularly should interest
Michigan voters. As U.S. Senator John McCain (R- AZ) on Saturday
told journalists covering his presidential bid in Michigan,
"Governor Romney says he supports the [automobile] industry, yet
when he was running for the governor of another state, he wanted to
raise the tax on SUVs."
Indeed, candidate Romney promised to "rework" Massachusetts'
automobile excise tax to favor fuel-efficient vehicles. As John
Gregg explained in the September 5, 2002 Milford
Daily News, lower taxes on such cars "could be offset by
higher charges for new gas guzzlers, the campaign acknowledged."
Romney also called for a 10-year sales-tax holiday for hybrid
gas/electric cars, such as the Toyota Prius. At the time of
Romney's proposal, such vehicles were much likelier to roll off of
assembly lines in Yokohama than Ypsilanti.
"This is a substantial tax savings for the buyers of these
vehicles," Romney's spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, told Gregg at the
time. "We want to encourage their purchase."
Romney's idea won immediate applause -- from the Left.
"It's an extremely popular idea in some environmental circles,"
said Seth Kaplan, a senior attorney with the Conservation Law
Foundation. "It makes an enormous amount of sense to reward what is
good behavior from a societal point of view."
"Conceptually, it makes a lot of sense," said Democratic State
Senator David Magnani. "It's a good Democratic idea, a good
environmental idea."
Massachusetts tax fighters, however, did not join in the liberal
applause. As Barbara Anderson, chief of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, told John Gregg, Romney's SUV levy "would be a tax
increase, and that is certainly unacceptable."
As Michigan voters consider Mitt Romney's prescription for
economic renewal, they would be wise to repeat these words: Don't
try this at home.
topics:
Taxes, John McCain, Business, Environment, Law, NATO