Money men: Who are top 5 donors to Romney?

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON For a casino mogul worth an estimated $25billion, $34.2 million may sound like chump change. Yet that's how much money Sheldon Adelson has donated so far to aid Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and organizations supporting Romney this election, making him the donor of donors for the GOP.

Other top donors giving millions of dollars to aid Romney's campaign include Texas money moguls and the head of an energy conglomerate.

Political donations can open doors that are closed to most people. Big-dollar donors are often invited to state dinners at the White House and other events with the president.

Based on an examination of more than 2.3 million campaign contributions The Associated Press has ranked the top five financial supporters bankrolling the Republican presidential run:

No. 1

Sheldon Adelson, 79, owner of the Las Vegas Sands casino empire.

Total: $34.2 million

Adelson is the largest declared donor to the Romney campaign and supporting political committees, providing more than $34.2 million this election season. He and his wife, Miriam, have given $10 million to Restore Our Future, a super PAC backing Romney. Adelson also joined relatives to give $24million to committees backing former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. And he has made public pledges vowing to give as much as $100million this election more broadly to the GOP. He would benefit from loosened trade restrictions.

No. 2

Harold Simmons, 81, owner of Contran Corp., a Dallas-based conglomerate worth an estimated $9 billion that specializes in metals and chemical production and waste management.

Total: $16 million

Simmons is a longtime backer of GOP and conservative causes. He has donated $16 million to the party's efforts this year, including more than $11million to American Crossroads and $800,000 to Restore Our Future. Simmons also gave $2.2 million to Super PACs backing former GOP presidential candidates Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. He also owns a majority stake in Valhi Inc., a Texas-based waste management company, and could benefit from a proposed Nuclear Regulatory Commission rule change that would allow the company's Texas facility to store spent uranium from nuclear power plants.

No. 3

Bob J. Perry, 80, head of a Houston real estate empire worth an estimated $650 million.

Total: $15.3 million

Perry has given about $15.3million to aid the Romney campaign and allied causes so far this election season. Long active in Texas and national GOP politics, Perry donated nearly $9 million to Restore Our Future and a total of $6.5 million to American Crossroads. Before backing Romney this year, Perry gave $100,000 to the super PAC backing Texas Gov. Rick Perry (no relation).

No. 4

Robert Rowling, 58, head of Dallas-based TRT Holdings.

Total: $4.1 million

Rowling has given at least $4.1 million to Republican Party and candidates this election. Most of his donations, $4 million, went to Rove's American Crossroads, both through personal donations and through his firm. Rowling also has given $100,000 to the pro-Romney Restore Our Future super PAC. Rowling's holdings are worth an estimated $4.8 billion and include Omni Hotels, Gold's Gym and Tana Exploration, his family's oil company.

No. 5

William Koch, 72, an industrialist whose South Florida-based energy and mining conglomerate is worth an estimated $4 billion.

Total: $3 million

Koch has given $3 million to the Restore Our Future, including a $250,000 personal donation and $2.75 million through his corporation, Oxbow Carbon LLC, and a subsidiary, Huron Carbon. Unlike his brothers, who are longtime supporters of Republican and conservative causes, Bill Koch has funded both GOP and Democratic Party candidates in the past. Koch's corporate interests have repeatedly battled against what company officials have decried as government interference. Oxbow spent $570,000 last year on lobbying in Washington, mostly aimed at mining, safety issues and climate change.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Romney Ad Says Obama Distorts Tax Cut Plan

In a television ad released Sunday, the Romney campaign returned to one of the most contentious issues of the presidential debate, accusing President Obama of falsely claiming that Mitt Romney would cut $5 trillion in taxes.

Mr. Obama repeated the accusation several times in the debate last Wednesday and that assertion has been a staple of Democrats’ accusations that Mr. Romney’s economic plans favor the rich.

“President Obama continues to distort Mitt Romney’s economic plan,’’ the narrator of the ad says. “The latest? Not telling the truth about Mitt Romney’s tax plan.’’

The ad cites an independent fact-check by The Associated Press and even includes a sound bite of Stephanie Cutter, Mr. Obama’s deputy campaign manager, telling CNN, “Well, O.K., stipulated, it won’t be near $5 trillion.”

The issue turns on semantics as much as math. Mr. Romney has proposed a package of tax cuts, including a 20 percent reduction in marginal income tax rates and zeroing out estate taxes, as well as making permanent the Bush-era tax cuts. Add everything up and the theoretical loss of federal revenue over 10 years is $5 trillion, according to the independent Tax Policy Center.

But that is only half of the story. Mr. Romney describes his proposal as “revenue neutral’’ – any hole punched in the annual deficit would be filled by eliminating tax deductions on high earners and closing other loopholes.

“I’m not looking for a $5 trillion tax cut,’’ Mr. Romney insisted in the debate. “What I’ve said is I won’t put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit. That’s part one. So there’s no economist that can say Mitt Romney’s tax plan adds $5 trillion if I say I will not add to the deficit with my tax plan.’’

Mr. Romney has left himself open to the Democrats’ attacks by not specifying how he would make up the loss in revenue, specifically which tax deductions he would eliminate. And he also counts on his plan to spur economic growth and add to tax collections, a proposition that federal budget experts have difficulty factoring into their estimates.

The issue is hardly going away.

The Obama campaign released its own video on Sunday accusing Mr. Romney of rewriting his earlier proposals during the debates, including the $5 trillion reduction in taxes. “When the cameras rolled, a performance began,’’ the video says. “But the problem is, that’s all it was.’’

And on Thursday Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who will face Representative Paul D. Ryan in a vice presidential debate this week, mocked Mr. Romney’s claims about his tax proposals. “Last night we found out he doesn’t have a $5 trillion tax cut,’’ he said. “I guess he outsourced that to China or something.’’

View the original article here

Romney Takes Liberties With Claims About a Bipartisan Past

When Mitt Romney accused President Obama in their debate Wednesday night of refusing to work with Republicans, he held up his own record as the Massachusetts governor as an example of what political cooperation can achieve.

As a Republican governor whose legislature was 87 percent Democrats, he said, “I figured out from Day 1 I had to get along, and I had to work across the aisle to get anything done.” The result, he said, was that “we drove our schools to be No. 1 in the nation. We cut taxes 19 times.”

Mr. Romney and the legislature did at times get along, Massachusetts schools were often top-rated, and some taxes did drop during Mr. Romney’s four years as governor, from 2003 through 2006. But a comparison of his claims to the factual record suggests that all three take liberties with the truth.

While the governor and the legislature came together to produce balanced budgets and enact a signature health care reform bill, much of those four years were characterized by conflict and tensions. In the opening months of his tenure, Mr. Romney vetoed a Massachusetts House plan to create new committees and raise staff members’ pay, and the legislators rejected his flagship proposal, a nearly 600-page plan to overhaul the state bureaucracy.

Mr. Romney proved to have a taste for vetoes, killing legislative initiatives in his first two years at more than twice the rate of his more popular Republican predecessor, William F. Weld, The Boston Globe reported in 2004. The lawmakers responded in kind by overriding his vetoes at a rapid pace.

By 2004, the second year of his term, Mr. Romney was provoked enough to mount an unprecedented campaign to unseat Democratic legislators, spending $3 million in Republican party money and hiring a nationally known political strategist, Michael Murphy.

The effort failed spectacularly. Republicans lost seats, leaving them with their smallest legislative delegation since 1867. Democratic legislators were reported at the time to have been deeply angered by the campaign’s tactics.

“They had a deteriorating relationship during the first two years,” Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor and expert on state politics at Tufts University, said in an interview. The campaign “was designed to demonstrate that he could make life difficult for them if he chose to do so. It did not endear him to them.”

Mr. Romney quickly initiated a charm offensive, inviting Democratic leaders to dinners at his home for the first time since taking office two years earlier. But the legislators were soon “infuriated,” Mr. Berry said, when Mr. Romney, testing the presidential waters, began traveling outside the state and casting brickbats at Massachusetts’s traditionally liberal values before crowds of potential supporters.

On education, Mr. Romney was factually correct in stating that Massachusetts students were ranked first in the nation during his tenure. Massachusetts students in grades four and eight took top honors or tied for first in reading and mathematics on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress, a federal Department of Education test often called the nation’s report card.

However, educators largely agree that the state’s rise to first place was a result of a wholesale reform of state schools enacted 10 years earlier under Governor Weld. The reforms, carried out over eight years, doubled state spending on schools and brought standards and accountability to both administrators and students.

“Governor Romney does not get to take the credit for achieving that No. 1 ranking,” said Mike Gilbert, the field director for the nonprofit Massachusetts Association of School Committees, “but it did happen while he was in office.”

Under Mr. Romney, neither the governor nor the legislature enjoyed notable successes in education, although Mr. Romney is credited with battling successfully against efforts to dismantle some of the 1993 reforms.

Mr. Romney and the legislature cut deeply into state grants to local governments in 2003 amid a state budget crisis, forcing many school districts to raise property taxes. In 2006, Mr Romney vetoed a bill passed unanimously by the legislature that established standards for preschool education and set long-term plans to make it universal. He said the programs would cost too much at a time of budget austerity.

Mr. Romney’s claim that he was responsible for 19 separate tax cuts is also technically accurate. But here, too, the complete story paints a very different picture.

Perhaps the most substantial tax reduction occurred in 2005, when Mr. Romney’s administration wrote legislation refunding $250 million in capital gains taxes to 145,000 investors. But the legislation carried out a court ruling finding that the taxes had been illegally withheld in 2002; the court gave the state the option of refunding the taxes or rewriting the law to correct the illegality.

Mr Romney proposed the latter, and the legislature agreed.

Of the remaining 18 tax cuts, many were proposed by the legislature, not Mr. Romney, and others were routine extensions of existing tax reductions that were due to expire. One was a change in the Massachusetts tax code to make it conform to changes in the federal code. Two were one-day sales-tax holidays.

Mr. Romney’s critics note that his administration was also responsible for revenue-raising measures which, under that loose definition, might well be called tax increases. In his first year, Mr. Romney closed business tax loopholes and increased fees on an array of services, from marriage licenses to home purchases.

“Our numbers on revenue are that he raised about $750 million annually — $375 million from fees and $375 million from corporate taxes,” said Michael Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

In 2004, Mr. Romney signed legislation allowing local officials to collect an additional $100 million in commercial property taxes from businesses.

View the original article here

Romney Has Conciliatory Remarks on Obama and Health Overhaul

3:09 p.m. | Updated Mitt Romney said Sunday that he would retain elements of President Obama’s health care overhaul, blamed Republicans as much as Democrats for the “mistake” of agreeing to automatic cuts in military spending to avoid a fiscal crisis and acknowledged that Mr. Obama’s national security strategy has made America in “some ways safer.”

The remarks, made in an interview on the NBC News program “Meet The Press,” seemed to mark the emergence of a less openly partisan, more general-election-oriented Republican nominee, who is intent on appealing to middle-of-the-road voters who have not yet made up their minds. At one point, Mr. Romney said that a speech on Thursday by the country’s last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, had “elevated” the party’s convention in Charlotte, N.C.

When the show’s host, David Gregory, asked Mr. Romney what elements of Mr. Obama’s health care program he would maintain, Mr. Romney said he would still require that insurance companies cover those with pre-existing conditions, just as the president’s law has.

“I’m not getting rid of all of health care reform,” Mr. Romney said, while emphasizing that he planned to replace the president’s plan with his own. “There are a number of things that I like in health care reform that I’m going to put in place. One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.”

Mr. Romney, whose standing in several national polls improved slightly after the Republican convention in Tampa, said, “I’m in a better spot than I was before the convention.”

“People got to see Ann and hear our story,” Mr. Romney said, referring to this wife. “And the result of that is I’m better known, for better or for worse.”

With the Federal Reserve contemplating actions to stimulate the economy, Mr. Romney registered his disapproval, saying that he did not think that “easing monetary policy is going to make a significant difference in the job market right now.”

Mr. Romney, who has criticized the president over the rising federal debt, said he would seek to balance the budget in 8 to 10 years, perhaps after his own potential presidency would end. Any attempt to do so in a first term, Mr. Romney said, would have “a dramatic impact on the economy — too dramatic.”

Mr. Romney said he disagreed with a compromise made last year by the White House and Congressional Republicans that called for automatic cuts to military spending as a way to force a deal on deficit reduction.

“I thought it was a mistake on the part of the White House to propose it. I think it was a mistake for Republicans to go along with it,” he said.

The interview provided another forum in which Mr. Romney was questioned about the omission in his convention speech of any mention of the war in Afghanistan. Mr. Romney seemed defensive when Mr. Gregory asked him about criticism from the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard — and from others on both sides of the ideological divide — ­ that he did not speak about the conflict in accepting his party’s nomination at the Republican convention in Tampa, Fla.

“The Weekly Standard took you to task in your convention speech for not mentioning the war in Afghanistan one time,” Mr. Gregory asked. “Was that a mistake, with so much sacrifice in two wars over the period of this last decade?”

Mr. Romney answered, “You know, I find it interesting that people are curious about mentioning words in a speech as opposed to policy,” noting that he had discussed the war in Afghanistan just before the convention, in a speech to the American Legion. “I went to the American Legion,” he said, “and spoke with our veterans there and described my policy as it relates to Afghanistan and other foreign policy and our military.”

When Mr. Gregory noted that his American Legion address did not have the same large audience as the convention speech ­ — “tens of millions of people” — Mr. Romney replied: “You know, what I’ve found is that wherever I go, I am speaking to tens of millions of people. Everything I say is picked up by you and by others, and that’s the way it ought to be.”

In leaving the war out of his convention address, Mr. Romney seemed to have left an opening for President Obama, who said in his own speech: “Tonight, we pay tribute to the Americans who still serve in harm’s way. We are forever in debt to a generation whose sacrifice has made this country safer and more respected. We will never forget you.”

Pressed on his social views, Mr. Romney reiterated that he did not think that taxpayers should have to pay for abortions and that he wanted Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Reminded that he had once called himself a “severe” conservative, Mr. Romney seemed to play down that description. “I am as conservative as the Constitution,” he said.

In an appearance in Melborune, Fla., Sunday, President Obama, picking up where former President Bill Clinton left off, said that the budget proposals offered by Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan do not add up.

The president was quick to jump on appearances by his Republican rivals on the Sunday morning talk shows, in which they were asked separately what loopholes they would close to pay for their proposed tax cuts. Neither of the men answered the question.

The relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton started off rocky — Mr. Obama, after all, ran against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2008. But after Mr. Clinton’s ringing endorsement of Mr. Obama in a well-received Democratic convention speech on Thursday, the president mentioned his Democratic predecessor at every stop on a bus tour of Florida over the weekend.

“President Clinton told us the single thing missing from my opponents’ proposal was arithmetic,” Mr. Obama told a rally here, to a burst of applause.

“When my opponents were asked about it today,” Mr. Obama said, “it was like 2 plus 1 equals 5.”

Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this post misstated a subject Mitt Romney addressed during his convention speech. He did not mention conflict in Afghanistan.

View the original article here

After a Disappointing Jobs Report, Romney Attacks Obama

Michael Appleton for The New York TimesMitt Romney questioned President Obama’s jobs policies at a campaign event on Friday in Orange City, Iowa.

SIOUX CITY, Iowa – Seizing on a disappointing jobs report, Mitt Romney questioned on Friday whether President Obama “knows what he’s doing” when it came to fixing the economy.

“There’s almost nothing the president has done in the past three and a half, four years that gives the American people confidence that he knows what he’s doing when it comes to jobs and the economy,” Mr. Romney told reporters as he stopped here for a campaign rally.

In Mr. Romney’s first remarks since the Democratic National Convention wrapped up on Thursday night, the Republican nominee said Mr. Obama had offered little more than empty promises. The employment report released on Friday morning showed that the economy added 96,000 jobs in August, down from a revised figure of 141,000 in July and well below the 125,000 level economists had been expecting.

“What is he going to do to get this economy going?” Mr. Romney said. “And all he said last night was the same as what he said four years ago — which, by the way, he made a lot of promises four years ago. Can you think of any of those promises that was met? I mean, he was going to create jobs. We haven’t. Lower unemployment? He hasn’t. Rising take-home pay? It’s gone down.”

His appearance in Iowa came as the Romney campaign was ramping up activity on another front. It announced on Friday a major advertising campaign in eight swing states. The commercials – 15 in all – are specifically tailored to resonate with voters in each of those states.

In Florida, for example, people will see commercials about falling real estate values and high foreclosure rates. In Colorado, where the military and defense contractors are large employers, people will hear how the president’s budget cuts could cost 20,000 military jobs there.

And here in Iowa, they will hear how “excessive government regulations are crushing small businesses and family farms.”

View the original article here

Obama, Invoking Clinton, Says Romney Budget Doesn't Add Up

MELBOURNE, Fla. — President Obama, picking up where former President Bill Clinton left off, said Sunday that the budget proposals offered by Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan do not add up.

The president was quick to jump on appearances by his Republican rivals on the Sunday morning talk shows, in which they were asked separately what loopholes they would close to pay for their proposed tax cuts. Neither of the men answered the question.

The relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton started off rocky — Mr. Obama, after all, ran against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2008. But after Mr. Clinton’s ringing endorsement of Mr. Obama in a well-received Democratic convention speech on Wednesday, the president mentioned his Democratic predecessor at every stop on a bus tour of Florida over the weekend.

“President Clinton told us the single thing missing from my opponents’ proposal was arithmetic,” Mr. Obama told a rally here, to a burst of applause.

“When my opponents were asked about it today,” Mr. Obama said, “it was like 2 plus 1 equals 5.”

On NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Mr. Romney did not answer several questions from the host, David Gregory, on which tax deductions he would seek to eliminate, saying only that he would target “some of the loopholes and deductions at the high end” while lowering the “burden on middle-income people.”

On the ABC News program “This Week,” Mr. Ryan said that “the best way to do this is to show the framework, show the outlines of these plans, and then to work with Congress.”

Mr. Clinton, at the Democratic National Convention, said the Romney-Ryan plan did not  add up. Since then, Mr. Obama has adopted that line on the stump, and he has reiterated it in almost all of his public remarks.

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: September 9, 2012

An earlier version of this post said incorrectly that former President Bill Clinton addressed the Democratic convention on Thursday. His speech was Wednesday.

View the original article here

Column: Obama takes aim at Romney

Cal Thomas is a conservative columnist. Bob Beckel is a liberal Democratic strategist. But as longtime friends, they can often find common ground on issues that lawmakers in Washington cannot.

By H. Darr Beiser,, USA TODAY

Head of the Democratic National Committee: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida tests the podium Tuesday in Charlotte, in preparation for the first day of the party's convention.

By H. Darr Beiser,, USA TODAY

Head of the Democratic National Committee: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida tests the podium Tuesday in Charlotte, in preparation for the first day of the party's convention.

Today:Obama takes the stage

Bob: Gallup reports that Mitt Romney had the smallest polling increase from any presidential convention since 1984. Romney's address to the GOP convention in Tampa, according to Gallup, was the least well-received speech since Bob Dole in 1996. Romney wanted this election to be a referendum on Barack Obama, but because Romney failed to close the sale on his own candidacy, he's given Obama an opening to make Romney an issue.

Cal: Nice try at those DNC talking points, Bob. Here in North Carolina, where I am spending the week with your political brethren, the new Elon University/Charlotte Observer Poll shows Romney leading President Obama 47% to 43% in the state. But enough about polls. Last week, we agreed on what Romney needed to say to the GOP convention and those watching on TV. Now, what do you think the president should say in his speech tonight?

Bob: In his acceptance speech, Romney did not harshly attack the president, which I thought was a good strategy. He let others, including Paul Ryan, do his dirty work for him. Speaker after speaker at the Democratic convention has attacked Romney for proposing warmed over policies from "the last century" and his running mate as radical and dangerous. Obama should do something similar, and to the extent he mentions Romney, it should be to compare the president's policies, popular or not, with Romney's lack of a single new idea.

Cal: The "last century" with its economic booms and defeat of communism in Russia and fascism in Germany is looking better all the time. I agree the president has a record. I anticipate the "failure" of the Democratic convention will be that Democrats will offer more of the same failed solutions. The president made some spectacular promises four years ago, few of which he has kept. It's going to be very difficult to defend that record, given the high expectations he generated, especially on unemployment, which he pledged the stimulus would hold to under 8%. Even Maryland Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley admitted to Bob Schieffer last Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation that America is no better off today than it was four years ago.

Bob: My cardinal rule in politics is to effectively manage expectations. The goal of any campaign should be to keep expectations in the right place so the candidate's strengths can exceed expectations and in the process minimize his weaknesses. If any president has ever suffered from high expectations, it's Barack Obama.

Cal: That was not the Republicans' fault. He almost single-handedly created those expectations with all of that lowering of the oceans business and other messianic talk.

Columns

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes a variety of opinions from outside writers. On political and policy matters, we publish opinions from across the political spectrum.

Roughly half of our columns come from our Board of Contributors, a group whose interests range from education to religion to sports to the economy. Their charge is to chronicle American culture by telling the stories, large and small, that collectively make us what we are.

We also publish weekly columns by Al Neuharth, USA TODAY's founder, and DeWayne Wickham, who writes primarily on matters of race but on other subjects as well. That leaves plenty of room for other views from across the nation by well-known and lesser-known names alike.

Bob: I agree. Obama has himself to blame after raising expectations during his extraordinarily effective campaign in 2008. He made promises that were nearly impossible to fulfill, particularly about changing the tone in Washington. He did not expect to be facing a Republican Party that had moved radically to the right and had no interest in working with President Obama.

Cal: Whatever happened to the Democratic Leadership Council, which Bill Clinton headed? These were moderate Democrats who were willing to compromise to move the ball forward. Look at the convention lineup of speakers. There isn't a pro-life, smaller-government, lower-taxes, less-spending, traditional-marriage speaker among the lot. The Democratic Party is now ruled exclusively by the hard left, and yet there are many Democrats who favor some, or all, of these moderate-to-conservative issues. Do you think the president in his speech tonight will have anything to say to these Democrats?

Bob: The DLC was a Clinton-driven organization that left the scene when he did. If you like radical speakers, Tampa was full of them last week. Back to the president's speech. I think Obama must address the expectations issue, and I know some people around him agree. As he told a CBS reporter, he failed "to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism."

Cal: It's a little late for that, don't you think?

Bob: No, I don't. For all his formidable skills as a campaigner and orator, Obama failed to tell the country why he was embarking on new directions in health care and why his stimulus package was necessary. He never sought to downplay the expectations of 2008 when he knew full well that they could not be met. Therefore, I think Obama needs to do a bit of mea culpa in his speech to let the voters know that he knows he hasn't met all their expectations, but that he is making every effort to do so.

Cal: A mea culpa doesn't fit his personality and will seem disingenuous. It would be like Madonna suddenly advocating modest dress. The public is cynical enough about politicians in both parties. The late comedian George Burns is supposed to have said, "Sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you've got it made." Given the public's growing distrust of government, it is increasingly difficult to "fake sincerity." You've been a strategist. Should he attack Romney, or ignore him?

Bob: As I've mentioned, a little of both. When Obama talks about Romney, he should avoid talking about Bain Capital and Romney's refusal to release more of his tax returns. Those issues have been covered in his advertising and by others. Rather, Obama should point out that Romney is quick to raise all the problems facing America and has yet to offer solutions to solve them.

Cal: That's a fair point. As for Bain, Deroy Murdock wrote last week in the New York Post, "Bain's private-equity executives have enriched dozens of organizations and millions of individuals in the Democratic base — including some who scream most loudly for President Obama's re-election." So lay off Bain, Mr. President, and tell us if we're in for more of the same policies if you are re-elected.

Bob: Speaking of policies, even TheWall Street Journal panned Romney's speech because he offered no new policies beyond cutting taxes, increasing defense and, in a break with his running mate, Romney said he will protect Social Security and Medicare. This adds up to massive deficits and perhaps taxes on the middle class. It's no wonder so many economists laugh at Romney's warmed over trickle-down policies.

Cal: With the national debt climbing past $16 trillion, I'm glad you are suddenly concerned with debt, which is caused by overspending, not under-taxing. More and more voters don't trust either party to do what it says, but I think they'll give Republicans one more chance to rescue us from this financial sinking ship. If they fail, as we have written in a previous column, voters will keep tossing out incumbents until they get leaders who will do the necessary things to repair the economy.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Theft of Romney records probed

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON The Secret Service said Wednesday it is investigating the reported theft of copies of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's federal tax records during a break-in at an accounting office in Franklin, Tenn. Someone claiming responsibility demanded $1 million not to make them public.

An anonymous letter sent to Romney's accounting firm and political offices in Tennessee and published online sought $1million in hard-to-trace Internet currency to prevent the disclosure of his tax filings, which have emerged as a key focus during the 2012 presidential race. Romney released his 2010 tax returns and a 2011 estimate in January, but he has refused to disclose his returns from earlier years.

Romney's accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, said there was no evidence that any Romney tax files were stolen.

Secret Service spokesman Edwin Donovan confirmed the agency was investigating. The Romney campaign declined to comment.

Franklin police said there were no recent alarms or break-ins reported at the site.

The building does not restrict access during business hours and has no guard. Access to the doors and elevators appear to be controlled by keycard.

The data theft was claimed in letters left with political party offices in Franklin and disclosed in several Tennessee-area newspapers.

Peter Burr, the chairman of the county's Democratic Party, said he received a version of the letter and a thumb drive on Aug. 27.

"I have no way of knowing this is real or not," he said.

An anonymous posting on a file-sharing website said the returns were stolen Aug. 25 from the accounting firm's office.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

SEC filings limited in proof of Romney CEO role

WASHINGTON (AP) – When Bally Total Fitness filed a proxy statement with the federal government in April 2000 identifying its major investors, the list included Mitt Romney as "sole shareholder, sole director, president and chief executive officer" of Brookside Capital Investors Inc., a Bain Capital investment fund that effectively controlled 5% stock ownership in the national health club chain.

By Jose Luis Villegas, The Sacramento Bee via AP

Mitt Romney speaks to the VFW convention in Reno on Tuesday.

By Jose Luis Villegas, The Sacramento Bee via AP

Mitt Romney speaks to the VFW convention in Reno on Tuesday.

Romney was the undisputed owner of Brookside, a Bain management partnership. It had been used for years to oversee some of the private equity company's expanding investments and takeover deals, including a $1 billion acquisition of Domino's Pizza the same year. But other Bain partners also held voting power in the interlocking investment funds the company used, along with Brookside, to exercise its stock ownership.

That complicated business relationship is at the core of the presidential campaign dispute over whether dozens of reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission show Romney's continuing role as CEO in the three years after he left Bain Capital in February 1999 to head Salt Lake City's Winter Olympics. Romney was named at least 39 times in SEC filings as sole shareholder and chief executive of Bain funds used in corporate takeovers and other investment deals, according to an Associated Press review.

Former SEC officials and other legal authorities familiar with securities law say such filings were legal formalities that reflected Romney's ownership stakes, not his actual management of the shares. Romney could have kept his management role during that period, they said, but the SEC documents are useful in establishing his "beneficial ownership" — the voting power over stock holdings that he shared with his Bain partners.

The SEC's beneficial ownership statements have been required corporate filings since 1968, when a congressional act enforced their use to ward off the threat of surprise takeovers of public companies. The 1968 Williams Act ordered that any individual or company buying up more than 5% of a public company's stock needed to file a 13-D beneficial ownership statement within 10 days of the transaction.

The filings are used by the SEC, companies and investors as an early warning system to show the sudden accumulation of large stock stakes, said Brian J. Lane, a partner at the Washington law firm of Gibson Dunn and former director of the SEC's Corporate Finance Division, which oversees corporate filings.

After media reports cited Romney's SEC filings last month in raising questions about his role at Bain Capital after leaving for the Olympics in 1999, Democratic Party officials questioned whether those documents were accurate. Stephanie Cutter, President Obama's deputy campaign manager, said Romney was "either misrepresenting his own position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people."

The Romney campaign objected to her comments. Cutter later said she was not accusing Romney of committing a crime, but she and other Democratic Party critics have continued to question his SEC filings.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Romney Team Outpaces Obama in Fund-Raising Again

Mr. Romney and the Republican National Committee took in $101.3 million in July, his campaign announced Monday, as Republican donors rallied behind their presumptive nominee with the national convention only a few weeks away. The president’s campaign announced on Twitter on Monday morning that his July fund-raising with the Democratic National Committee topped out at about $75 million — the third month in a row they have brought in less than the Republicans.

Mr. Obama’s team appears to have all but conceded the money race, deluging the president’s grass-roots supporters this summer with fund-raising e-mails and warning supporters of the financial advantage that the Republicans will hold going into the final months of the campaign.

“Make no mistake, we will be outspent,” a senior campaign official said during a conference call with reporters last month.

More detailed information about the July fund-raising, including how much the candidates themselves raised and how they spent their money, has not yet been released by the two candidates. All campaigns are required to report their fund-raising to the Federal Election Commission by Aug. 20.

But the Republican figure keeps Mr. Romney and his party on pace to bring in $800 million for the cycle, the target set by Mr. Romney’s team in April. Roughly a quarter of the Republicans’ haul, $25.7 million, came in donations under $250, as Mr. Romney worked to increase his appeal among small donors.

“Americans are clearly looking for a change in the White House,” Reince Priebus, the chairman of the R.N.C., said in a statement. “While President Obama claims that his economic plan ‘worked,’ the American people know that his policies haven’t worked and he has failed to fix our economy.”

Because Mr. Obama easily outraised Mr. Romney all of last year and early this year, the president does not need to beat Mr. Romney in the months ahead to bring in the roughly $750 million his team has said they wish to raise in this cycle.

But heavy spending on field organizers, technology and advertising — more than $400 million through the end of June — appears to have cost Mr. Obama the impressive cash advantage he once had. And Democratic-leaning “super PACs” have raised far less money than their Republican counterparts, forcing Mr. Obama to spend heavily on attack advertisements against Mr. Romney, even while conservative groups pummel him on the airwaves.

The Republicans have used the cash surge of the last two months to begin trying to match Mr. Obama’s field advantage, opening about 250 offices around the country, recruiting volunteers and hiring more than 600 staff members for the fall campaign. On Saturday, the R.N.C. announced that organizers had made their one millionth voter contact of the election cycle. The committee has also begun running general election advertisements, as Mr. Romney began doing in May.

The campaign, the Republican National Committee and a joint fund established by the Republicans to raise presidential campaign cash ended July with $185.9 million in cash on hand. They did not disclose what part of the money would end up in Mr. Romney’s campaign coffers, which can accept only $5,000 from each donor every election cycle, and how much would go to the R.N.C., which can accept more than 10 times that amount from each donor.

Mr. Obama did not disclose how much money his campaign and the D.N.C. have on hand.

The strong fund-raising puts renewed pressure on Mr. Obama to bring in more cash and suggests certainty that Mr. Romney will remain financially competitive with an incumbent whose fund-raising prowess has long been a hallmark.

Underscoring the campaign’s changed fortunes, Mr. Obama’s campaign is no longer announcing its fund-raising totals in lush videos featuring his senior staff or field workers. Instead, on Monday, not long after Mr. Romney made his announcement, Mr. Obama’s campaign put out its total in a brief message to his Twitter followers, thanking them for their money.

“Every bit helps,” the campaign wrote.

View the original article here

Romney Calls Reid's Tax Claims a Diversion From Jobs Report

6:26 p.m. | An updated version of this article can be found here.

NORTH LAS VEGAS, Nev. — Mitt Romney on Friday said that he had paid “a lot of taxes” every year and accused the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, of falsely claiming that he had not — saying the senator did so as a tactic to draw attention away from lackluster employment and economic numbers under President Obama.

Mr. Romney also suggested that either the White House or Obama campaign officials could be behind what he characterized as false accounts of him not paying taxes for years.

“Harry Reid really has to put up or shut up,” Mr. Romney said. “So Harry, who are your sources? Let’s have Harry explain who that is.”

Mr. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said in a statement on Thursday that “I was told by an extremely credible source that Romney has not paid taxes for 10 years.” But the senator has provided no evidence to back up the assertion.

Mr. Romney has said he is likely to pay a total of $6.2 million in taxes on $45 million in income over the two tax years of 2010 and 2011; he has released his 2010 return and says he will release his 2011 return when it is completed.

But he declined again on Friday to disclose more than those two years, a refusal that has drawn attacks from Democrats — who argue he must be hiding something — and criticism from many Republicans who fear his unwillingness to adhere to a more detailed and customary tax disclosure is distracting from the Romney campaign’s message.

Mr. Romney said that Mr. Reid’s attacks and the call for more of his tax returns was really an effort to divert attention away from poor jobs numbers and the unemployment rate, which has ticked up to 8.3 percent, according to a new government report on Friday.

“By the way Harry, I understand what you are trying to do here,” Mr. Romney said. “You are trying to deflect the fact that jobs numbers are bad, that Americans are out of work, and you’re trying to throw anything up on the screen that will grab attention away from the fact that the policies of the White House haven’t worked to put Americans to work, and the policies of the Senate haven’t even got a budget in place.”

“Now let me also say categorically: I have paid taxes every year, and a lot of taxes, a lot of taxes,” Mr. Romney added. “So Harry is simply wrong, and that’s why I’m so anxious for him to give us the names of the people who have put this forward.”

“I wouldn’t be at all surprised to hear the names are people from the White House or the Obama campaign, or who knows where they are coming from,” he said.

View the original article here

Obama Spends the Most in June, but Romney Raises More

Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee spent $70.8 million in June, including about $38 million on television advertising, as the president’s campaign sought to batter Mr. Romney over his ties to Bain Capital, the private equity firm.

Mr. Romney and the Republican National Committee spent $38.8 million, including about $11 million on television advertising — more than double what Mr. Romney’s campaign spent in May but far less than Mr. Obama.

But because money raised for the election cannot be spent until after the two parties hold their nominating conventions at the end of the summer, Mr. Obama appears to have far more money available to spend in the critical weeks ahead, when each candidate seeks to define the other.

Mr. Obama had an estimated $72 million in primary cash available at the end of June, thanks to a vast army of small donors who can give again and again without hitting the $2,500 contribution limit for primary season. Half of Mr. Obama’s money in June came in checks of less than $200. Mr. Romney has an estimated $20 million in primary money. Many of his early donors gave the maximum contribution while he was still spending heavily to fend off his Republican rivals in the first half of the year.

But Mr. Romney sharply improved his take from small donors in June, with checks of under $200 accounting for about a third of his fund-raising, suggesting that Mr. Obama’s advantage might not persist.

The primary cash for the candidates does not include money not yet transferred to their campaigns from the fund-raising accounts each candidate shares with his party.

The deficit in available money leaves Mr. Romney dependent on the Republican-leaning outside groups that have spent heavily in recent months to keep Mr. Obama on the defensive. American Crossroads, the leading Republican “super PAC,” this week announced a new $9 million campaign against Mr. Obama that criticizes the president for what the group says are unfair attacks on Mr. Romney. Restore Our Future, a super PAC backing Mr. Romney, spent about $15 million between April and June, including $7.6 million in June, a month when it raised $20 million.

Donations to Restore Our Future included $10 million from the casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson and his wife, $1 million from the real estate developer Harlan Crow, and $2 million from the Texas homebuilder Bob Perry, according to commission reports.

Tax-exempt “issue groups” that do not report their donors have spent millions more against Mr. Obama.

Mr. Romney has used that breathing room to crisscross the country attending fund-raisers to fill his war chest, exploiting his joint committee with the R.N.C. to bring in checks far in excess of what he could accept for his campaign. The committee, Romney Victory, brought in $140 million in the three months through June.

With the primary behind him, Mr. Romney has also begun building out his campaign staff and infrastructure, investments Mr. Obama and the Democrats made months ago. The Romney campaign’s payroll more than doubled between April and June, while his spending on direct mail has more than tripled. He spent close to a half-million dollars on office equipment in May and June. Mr. Romney’s campaign also spent $559,689 in June on “campaign promotional items,” according to election commission reports.

Mr. Obama substantially increased his expenditures on polling, spending $2.6 million in June, a fivefold increase over May. He continued to spend heavily on online advertising, with bills of about $4.4 million in June, and data mining, continuing a yearlong effort by Mr. Obama’s campaign to refine its attack on Mr. Romney and reconstitute the vast army of grass-roots supporters that helped power his 2008 victory. Mr. Obama’s spending on events — including stages, sound and lighting — also jumped in June, as he began hitting the campaign trail more intensively.

Both candidates are relying heavily on “bundlers,” supporters who gather checks from friends and business associates and help host fund-raisers. A list of bundlers posted by Mr. Obama’s campaign on Friday named individuals and couples. The top rank of bundlers, who have raised at least $500,000 each, included roughly 200 individuals accounting for at least $100 million of Mr. Obama’s haul.

Such disclosures are not required, and Mr. Romney has refused to name his fund-raisers. An analysis published this month by USA Today found that Mr. Romney has close to 1,200 bundlers, hundreds of them executives in the financial industry.

View the original article here

Barrier to Romney Tax Disclosure Is the Candidate Himself

10:11 p.m. | Updated A revised version of this post is available here.

Mitt Romney has said it every way he can: He is not releasing any more of his tax returns.

Mr. Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, is facing millions of dollars in searing ads from President Obama and a rising chorus of puzzled Republicans, all urging him to reveal more of his financial history.

But with each answer he gives, Mr. Romney seems more determined than ever that voters will not see any of his tax history before 2010.

“In the political environment that exists today, the opposition research of the Obama campaign is looking for anything they can use to distract from the failure of the president to reignite our economy,” Mr. Romney told National Review on Tuesday, explaining his opposition to a broader release of his personal tax data.

“I’m simply not enthusiastic about giving them hundreds or thousands of more pages to pick through, distort and lie about,” he said.

That follows an equally emphatic statement last Friday, when Mr. Romney brushed aside calls for him to make public more than the 2010 returns he has released and the 2011 documents he has said are coming soon.

“Those are the two years people are going to have, and that’s all that’s necessary for people to understand something about my finances,” Mr. Romney said in an interview on CNN.

The definitive nature of Mr. Romney’s statements appears to have all but shut down any public contemplation from his close advisers that he might reconsider. Kevin Madden, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney, declined to talk about internal discussions on the issue, but made clear who was in charge.

“I would point you to the governor’s statements,” Mr. Madden said. “That guides the campaign’s position.”

Another senior adviser to the campaign said Wednesday that he had “heard of no division in the inner circle on this.”

“He is determined not to release more, and they support him,” the adviser said of Mr. Romney and his aides. “Plus, there is no evidence that voters care about this. They think they know enough about Mitt Romney’s finances.”

But that answer has not satisfied a growing number of Republicans who have said that Mr. Romney’s refusal to release more of his tax returns threatens to do him lasting political damage as he nears the final stage of the presidential campaign.

On Tuesday, the editors of National Review wrote that the Republican campaign was “playing into the president’s hands” by refusing to release the tax returns. They predicted that Mr. Romney would eventually have to cave in to the demands.

“The only question is whether he releases more returns now, or later — after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits,” they wrote. “There will surely be a press feeding frenzy over new returns, but better to weather it in the middle of July.”

In the last several days, similar calls have come from Republican pundits and governors, and from some of Mr. Romney’s former rivals for the party’s nomination.

“Politically, I think that would help him,” Representative Ron Paul of Texas told Politico. “In the scheme of things politically, you know, it looks like releasing tax returns is what the people want.”

George Will, the conservative commentator, said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that Mr. Romney should release more tax returns quickly.

“If something’s going to come out, get it out in a hurry,” Mr. Will said. “I do not know why, given that Mitt Romney knew the day that McCain lost in 2008 that he was going to run for president again that he didn’t get all of this out and tidy up some of his offshore accounts and all the rest.”

Mr. Romney’s hard-and-fast refusals have also energized the Democratic attacks. Mr. Obama’s Chicago-based campaign is continuing to hammer him with new television ads, web videos and commentary from surrogates.

The Democratic National Committee on Wednesday released a video making fun of Mr. Romney by juxtaposing his statements on his tax returns with images of a man in a top hat doing a horse ballet.

“Do we really want a president who dances around the issues?” the video asks.

The horse featured in the video is Rafalca, and is owned by Ann Romney, who took some offense to the video in an appearance on ABC on Wednesday. By late Wednesday, the D.N.C. apologized and said it would no longer use the horse in videos or ads.

“Our use of the Romneys’ dressage horse was not meant to offend Mrs. Romney in any way, and we regret it if it did,” said Brad Woodhouse, the communications director for the D.N.C. “We were simply making a point about Governor Romney’s failure to give straight answers on a variety of issues in this race. We have no plans to invoke the horse any further to avoid misinterpretation.”

Mr. Woodhouse said the existing video, and a second similar one also released earlier Wednesday, will remain available online.

A television ad by Mr. Obama’s campaign went up in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, just as Mr. Romney held an event in the state. Titled “Makes you Wonder,” the ad raises the possibilities that Mr. Romney has additional overseas tax havens that would be revealed by releasing his tax returns.

“Makes you wonder if some years he paid any taxes at all,” the ad says. “We don’t know because Romney has released just one full year of his tax returns.”

Mr. Romney’s campaign has sought to change the subject, accusing the Democrats of going on the attack because of what they say are the failed economic policies of Mr. Obama’s administration.

Mr. Madden said that Mr. Romney had disclosed personal financial information “beyond what the law requires” and said that should be enough.

“What’s important to voters is the state of the economy and who’s going to fix it,” he said. “What they really want is a focus on the issues. That’s where the governor is focused.”

View the original article here

On the Trail, Romney Runs Into Some Opposition

Evan McGlinn for The New York TimesMitt Romney at the Middlesex Truck & Coach factory on Thursday in Roxbury, Mass.

BOSTON — On the campaign trail it is known as “bracketing” — when a representative of the opposition tries to sully the message of a stage-managed rally.

Mitt Romney’s staff members proved masters of the practice during the Republican primary race, lurking to speak with reporters after speeches by Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

On Thursday, Mr. Romney got the same treatment when two Democratic politicians from Boston tried to counter his visit to a small business here, where he attacked President Obama once again for his “you didn’t build it” remark.

“When the president said if you’ve got a business you didn’t build it,” Mr. Romney said, standing beside Brian Maloney, 69, who runs a bus and truck repair shop in the Roxbury neighborhood, “come here and talk to Brian.”

On the sidewalk, Tito Jackson, a city councilman representing Roxbury, said that as Massachusetts governor, Mr. Romney had done little to help businesses in the area, which is largely black and Hispanic.

“I’m very happy that former Governor Romney found his way here,’’ Mr. Jackson said. “But you know what, he didn’t create jobs when he was governor. He didn’t find himself in this community that often. And now we as people — Roxbury — we know you, Mitt Romney. We know you.’’

Mr. Romney, of course, was not making a serious play to win deep-blue Massachusetts in November. He was using the backdrop of a successful small business, Middlesex Trucking & Coach, to hammer Mr. Obama on the economy.

“This is a day where we received some news that is not encouraging,’’ Mr. Romney said. “Jobless claims are up in this country again and consumer confidence has now shown the third straight month of decline. That is a record that has not been matched since 2008.’’

And for a third straight day, Mr. Romney attacked the president for remarks he made about the debt that entrepreneurs owe to government for investments in education and roads.

“Now I know that some people think what the president said was just a gaffe,’’ Mr. Romney said. “It wasn’t a gaffe. It was instead his ideology.’’

He seemed to be responding to a statement by the Obama campaign earlier in the day that Mr. Romney had taken the president’s comment out of context. Speaking at a firehouse in Virginia last week about the support that entrepreneurs receive from society, Mr. Obama said: “Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.’’

It is unclear if the president’s “that” referred to roads and bridges, or to businesses. But to Mr. Romney there was no doubt the phrase revealed a basic difference in their philosophies: rugged individualism vs. mutual dependence.

“The president does, in fact, believe that people who build enterprises like this really aren’t responsible for it,’’ he said, standing in a truck bay and using a Craftsman tool box for a lectern. “That, in fact, it’s a collective success of the whole society that someone builds enterprises like this.’’

Mr. Maloney, in business since 1980, was an ideal embodiment of Mr. Romney’s message. “I take umbrage at the suggestion that people don’t start and build businesses,’’ he said. “I started out with 50 bucks and worked with my hands to afford grad school at night. My wife supported me.’’

He said government had not helped, and only brought complicated regulations. “It’s overbearing,” he said.

But Felix G. Arroyo, an at-large member of the Boston City Council, speaking in front of several dozen chanting demonstrators, cited Mr. Romney’s record of job creation as governor, when Massachusetts ranked 47th in the nation over his four years in office.

“The facts of his leadership of our state do not speak to him as a job creator,’’ he said.

Mr. Jackson, the councilman, cited a remark of Mr. Romney’s reported by The Boston Herald in 1994, that private investors do not think of backing businesses in inner-city Roxbury or nearby Dorchester. “Why do we never think about it? Crime,’’ Mr. Romney was quoted saying.

(On the defensive about it the next day, he said he would encourage investors to seek out the neighborhoods).

“If he didn’t have the vision for turning around Roxbury then,’’ Mr. Jackson said, “how is he going to have that vision when he’s president?’’

While showing Mr. Romney around his company, Mr. Maloney looked out a window at the protesters and said: “We’ve done a lot for the neighborhood. It’s a shame those people are out there.’’

“Oh, that’s the nature of politics,’’ Mr. Romney responded, according to a pool reporter. “There are always two teams. We’re always bothering each other’s teams.’’

View the original article here

Romney, GOP spring ahead in fundraising

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Mitt Romney outraised President Barack Obama in May, the first time the Republican presidential challenger has jumped ahead of Obama and his prodigious fundraising apparatus. The numbers illustrate how Romney and the Republican Party have jelled as a force after a protracted GOP primary.

Other developments

Automatic defense cutslooming in January would be more devastating than previously feared and make it impossible for President Barack Obama to refocus his national-security strategy, a bipartisan group of former lawmakers and retired military officers said Thursday. Members of the Bipartisan Policy Center painted a dire picture for the nation's economy, the military and large and small defense contractors if the automatic reductions occurred on Jan. 2, 2013. Based on a special task force's calculations, the group said the cuts would mean an indiscriminate, across-the-board 15 percent reduction in programs and activities within the military, not the 10 percent that had been estimated.

Scoffing at a White House veto threat, the House voted Thursday to repeal a tax on medical-device makers that Republicans cast as a job-killing levy that would stifle an innovative industry. Lawmakers approved the measure 270-146, with 37 Democrats from states with a heavy presence of medical- equipment makers like Minnesota, New York and California joining all 233 voting Republicans. Most Democrats said the bill was yet another GOP attempt to weaken President Barack Obama's health-care overhaul, which created the tax to help pay for that law's expansion of health-care coverage to 30million Americans.

A group seeking to recall Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder announced Thursday that it has ended the effort following Gov. Scott Walker's victory in Wisconsin's recall election. The group called Michigan Rising said it will stop collecting signatures, noting it already was short of its own gathering goals. Instead, the group said it will focus on a long-term effort to form a progressive think tank, develop progressive leaders and support current progressive legislators.

-- Wire services

Romney and his party raised more than $76 million last month, the campaign said Thursday. Obama's campaign reported that it and the Democratic Party raised $60 million for the month.

Obama, forced onto the defensive by lackluster employment numbers, launched a television ad Thursday in nine key election-year states targeting Congress and blaming lawmakers for not acting on his job proposals. The approach represents an expanded ad focus for Obama, who had been going after Romney.

The fundraising numbers and Obama's new ad signal a new stage in the campaign as a resurgent Romney capitalizes on his emergence as the GOP's standard-bearer and as Obama is forced to confront the political implications of a weak economic recovery.

"We got beat," Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote bluntly in an e-mail to supporters, urging contributors to step up their giving.

For Romney, the latest figure represents a significant jump in fundraising. He and the GOP brought in $40 million in April, just short of the $43.6 million the Democratic president and his party raised that month. What's more, Romney is getting a significant boost from Republican-leaning super PACs that have raised far more and spent far more than their Democratic-leaning counterparts.

Romney, stepping up his criticism of Obama, campaigned and was raising money Thursday in Missouri. In a speech at a factory in St. Louis, Romney accused Obama not only of a failure of policy but of "a moral failure of tragic proportions."

Citing millions of unemployed or underemployed Americans, Romney said that Obama nevertheless claimed he was doing a great job.

"I will not be that president of doubt and deception," he said.

Asked afterward to comment on topping Obama in fundraising, Romney said only: "Long way to go."

Obama was mixing more fundraising with official business Thursday as he wrapped up a two-day West Coast trip that included four fundraisers on Wednesday. He started the day under a sweltering sun in the Los Angeles area at a breakfast fundraiser for about 300 people. Tickets started at $2,500.

Later, addressing about 2,500 college students at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Obama picked up on the theme of his latest campaign ad and blamed congressional inaction for the lack of additional job growth.

"If they had taken all the steps I was pushing for back in September, we could have put even more Americans back to work. We could have sliced through these headwinds more easily," Obama said.

Obama campaign officials noted that Romney's fundraising surge could be temporary and that it reflects his recently sealed standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, which allows him to raise more general election money. It also lets him raise money jointly for his campaign and for the Republican Party.

The Obama officials pointed out that Democratic presidential challenger John Kerry briefly experienced a similar surge in fundraising over President George W. Bush in the spring of 2004 after Kerry had locked up the nomination.

In his e-mail, Messina sought donations of $3 or more to "close the gap" against Romney in fundraising.

"More people giving a little bit is the only way to compete with a few people giving a lot,'' he said. So, let's fight like hell and win this thing."

Obama has been an active fundraiser and lately has stepped up the number of events he holds with donors. As of Thursday, the president has done 153 fundraisers since filing as a candidate for re-election on April 4, 2011, according to statistics kept by CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller. During same period in the 2004 election cycle, Bush had participated in 79 fundraisers.

In all, Obama and the Democratic National Committee and other state-focused funds have hauled in more than $500 million during the 2012 election campaign, compared with more than $480 million for Romney and the Republican Party.

The Romney campaign reported that the party and the campaign had $107 million cash on hand at the end of May. Obama's campaign did not list its comparable figure on Thursday, but last month, it reported $115 million in the bank through the end of April, with the DNC listing $24 million in hand.

Obama's new ad does not mention congressional Republicans, but its target is clear. Republicans have proposed their own measures aimed at creating jobs and have blocked several Obama proposals to promote hiring of teachers and police officers and to increase infrastructure projects. Obama has proposed paying for those measures with tax increases on wealthier taxpayers, an idea Republicans reject.

The ad is airing in the key presidential-election states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The campaign declined to reveal how much it was spending on the ads, saying only that it was a "significant" purchase of air time.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Romney Adviser Takes U.S. Political Debate Overseas

A senior economic adviser to Mitt Romney criticized President Obama and his policy toward crisis-torn Europe, and Germany in particular, in an op-ed article in a leading German newspaper on Saturday, raising the question of the propriety of taking America’s political fights into international affairs.

The article — written by R. Glenn Hubbard, the dean of the Columbia Business School and a former adviser in the Bush administration, and published in the business journal Handelsblatt — drew a rebuke from the Obama campaign.

“In a foreign news outlet, Governor Romney’s top economic adviser both discouraged essential steps that need to be taken to promote economic recovery and attempted to undermine America’s foreign policy abroad,” said Ben LaBolt, press secretary for the president’s re-election campaign.

Every presidential election seems to test the frequently quoted cold war-era axiom of former Senator Arthur Vandenberg, a Republican who cooperated with President Harry S. Truman, that “politics stops at the water’s edge” — though even then the rule was often observed in the breach. Separately, the Hubbard critique illustrates how the austerity-versus-stimulus debate concerning Europe is also a proxy for the ideological fight over fiscal policy that Democrats and Republicans are waging in this country.

“Unfortunately, the advice of the U.S. government regarding solutions to the crisis is misleading. For Europe and especially for Germany,” Mr. Hubbard wrote, according to a translation of his article from the Handelsblatt Web site.

He opposed what he described as the Obama administration’s efforts “to persuade Germany to stand up financially weak governments and banks in the euro zone so that the Greek crisis would not spread to other states.”

“These recommendations are not only unwise,” he added, “they also reveal ignorance of the causes of the crisis and of a growth trend in the future.”

Mr. Hubbard proposed a classic conservative pro-austerity, anti-Keynesian approach, arguing that cutting government spending will restore public confidence, encourage growth and avert future tax increases.

“Long-term confidence in solid government financing shores up growth and enables the same scope for short-term transitional assistance,” he said. “Mitt Romney, Obama’s Republican opponent, understands this very well and advises a gradual fiscal consolidation for the U.S.: structural reform to stimulate growth.”

Mr. Obama and his Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, are in the camp with economists who argue that the German-led push for austerity in Europe — at a time when businesses and consumers are too weak to spend — has produced a spiral of job losses, belt-tightening and, lately, a backlash against several governments.

But, Mr. Hubbard wrote, “President Obama’s advice to the Germans and Europe has therefore the same flaws as his own economic policy — that it pays for itself over the long term if we focus on short-term business promotion.”

When Mr. Obama ran for president in 2008, he received some criticism for a foreign trip that included a speech in Berlin before 200,000 Germans. At the time, Chancellor Angela Merkel objected to plans to use the city’s historic Brandenburg Gate as a backdrop for what a Merkel spokesman called “electioneering abroad,” leading Mr. Obama to speak at another site. But Mr. Obama did not explicitly criticize Bush administration policies, despite their prominence in the American debate that year. He mainly extolled the partnership between the United States and Germany — and Europe, more broadly — in promoting freedom and prosperity around the globe.

A Democrat with experience in foreign policy and presidential campaigns, who asked not to be identified as weighing into the debate, suggested that the Vandenberg rule had lost resonance in a polarized age. “The ‘water’s edge’ is changing, and not just because of climate change,” he said. “It’s too bad, but there it is.”

The Romney campaign declined to comment.

View the original article here

Romney Raises More Than Obama in May

1:09 a.m. | Updated The revised version of this post is available here.

Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign shot past President Obama’s in fund-raising in May, collecting more than $76.8 million — nearly $17 million more than his rival.

The Republican fund-raising haul — the first full month that Mr. Romney and the Republican National Committee were in partnership — was nearly double what was collected the prior month.

And it easily topped Mr. Obama’s fund-raising in May. The president’s campaign announced on Thursday that its joint fund-raising operation with the Democratic National Committee had raised $60 million.

A statement from Mr. Romney’s campaign said the campaign and the Republican National Committee ended May with $107 million in cash.

“It is clear that people aren’t willing to buy into ‘hope & change’ again,” said Spencer Zwick, Mr. Romney’s national finance chairman. “Voters are making an investment because they believe that it will benefit the country.”

The surge in fund-raising for Mr. Romney came even as he clinched the delegates necessary to become the Republican nominee — a green light for Republican donors who might have been on the sidelines throughout the primary process. It also paved the way for the Republican National Committee to link its operations and fund-raising efforts with the Romney campaign.

Aides to Mr. Obama said they were not especially worried because they had expected Mr. Romney to have a good fund-raising month. They said some Republican donors likely gave the maximum they could in May and will not be able to give again in the coming months.

But the financial comparisons underscores the concern that Mr. Obama’s campaign has expressed to supporters over the past several months about the need for stepped-up financial contributions.

Democrats have warned that despite the president’s fund-raising prowess, he could be outspent during the upcoming months as Mr. Romney’s spending is supplemented by historic levels of fund-raising by outside political groups, particularly “super PACs.”

Mr. Obama’s campaign announced his total on Twitter Thursday morning, saying that the average donation was just more than $50. The $60 million includes money raised directly by his campaign and by the Democratic National Committee.

“The campaign raised more than $60 million across committees in May,” the president said. “Thanks to everyone who chipped in.”

The campaign and the Democratic committee raised $43.6 million in April, about the same amount as Mitt Romney raised that month.

The announcement by Mr. Obama comes two days after Republicans succeeded in beating back the recall of Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, who had a big lead over his opponent in campaign cash.

Mr. Obama held a fund-raiser with Hollywood celebrities, including the actor George Clooney, in early May, just after he announced his support for same-sex marriage. The event reportedly raised $15 million for Mr. Obama’s campaign.

Democrats had worried whether Mr. Obama’s public support for the issue would cost him support in important swing states like Virginia and North Carolina. But the decision was hailed by supporters of Mr. Obama’s in the gay community, and it appears to have bolstered fund-raising for the president among wealthy members of that group.

View the original article here

Democrats Hit Romney on 'Message of Wisconsin' Comments

Democrats sought to turn the tables on Mitt Romney Friday afternoon by seizing on comments he made in Iowa that suggested the country doesn’t need more firefighters, police or teachers.

Mr. Romney was responding to President Obama’s earlier remarks about the private economy’s being “fine.” In doing so, Mr. Romney dismissed Mr. Obama’s call for more aid to state and local governments.

“He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers,” Mr. Romney said of Mr. Obama. “He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Democrats pounced on the comment, saying it proved that Mr. Romney would like to eliminate jobs for teachers, firefighters and police officers.

“Could Mitt Romney be any more disconnected from the concerns of middle-class Americans?” said R.T. Rybak, the vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee. “To suggest that police, firefighters and teachers aren’t helping the American people and aren’t vital to our communities shows that he has no clue what’s going on in the real world.”

Mr. Rybak added: “Mitt Romney’s assertion that the American people don’t benefit from firemen, policemen and teachers is so detached from reality I did a double take – I had to check twice to be sure he had actually said it.”

The rapid response team for the Democratic National Committee sent out numerous statements Friday afternoon, clearly intended to try to change the subject. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, issued a statement echoing the party response.

“We knew Mitt Romney liked firing people, but we didn’t know that included firefighters and cops,” Mr. Schumer said. “Middle-class voters already distrust Mitt Romney for being out-of-touch and uncaring about regular folks. Bragging about wanting to give pink slips to first responders only cements that perception.”

Follow Michael D. Shear on Twitter at @shearm.

View the original article here

Obama and Democratic Party have twice the cash of Romney

WASHINGTON – President Obama and the Democratic Party possess more than twice the cash reserves of his Republican rival Mitt Romney, but his financial advantage is slipping as the general-election fight gears up.

By Carolyn Kaster, AP

President Obama has raised $233.5 million for his campaign thus far.

By Carolyn Kaster, AP

President Obama has raised $233.5 million for his campaign thus far.

Obama and the party ended April with more than $139 million in hand, reports filed late Friday with the Federal Election Commission show.

On the Republican side, Romney and the Republican National Committee have said they raised a combined $40 million last month as the party began uniting around its presumptive nominee and had stored $61.4 million in their accounts at the end of April.

Just a month earlier, Obama had held a 10-to-1 cash advantage over Romney. April's figures don't count the money that will be raised and spent by GOP-aligned super PACs and other groups to oppose the president's re-election.

Not counting party fundraising, Obama took in $25.7 million in April — about $10 million less than he raised in March.

So far, Obama has raised $233.5 million for his re-election, compared with $265.5 million at this point four years ago as a candidate.

News also emerged Friday that Romney has dipped into his personal fortune for the first time in this election.

He and his wife, Ann, have donated $150,000 of their own money to a joint fundraising committee whose proceeds are shared with his campaign, the national party and state committees. Romney, who is worth as much as $250 million, spent nearly $45 million of his own money to help fund his unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid.

Friday's report shows Obama's fundraising apparatus continues to be funded with help from donors who give in small amounts and can be tapped again for contributions in the months ahead. Slightly more than half of the money that flowed to his main campaign account last month came in amounts of $200 or less.

By contrast, about $1 out of every $8 he raised in April came from people who donated $5,000, the maximum a candidate can receive directly from an individual for the primary and general election. Those donors included Ford Motor board member Edsel Ford II and actor Robert DeNiro, who recently hosted a fundraiser that featured first lady Michelle Obama.

Romney had not filed reports Friday detailing his fundraising with the Federal Election Commission. Presidential candidates and many super PACs must do so by Sunday night.

Contributing: Associated Press

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

On Stump, Romney Is Fond of Bill Clinton and Obama Praises Reagan

And for that matter, just for clarity, Ronald Reagan certainly would not be supporting President Obama, either.

To listen to the candidates on the campaign trail these days is a form of political whiplash. Mr. Romney lavishes praise on the very Democratic Mr. Clinton for breaking with his party’s traditional big-government orthodoxy, while Mr. Obama harks back to the very Republican Mr. Reagan for agreement that millionaires should not pay lower tax rates than the middle class.

The inside-out rhetoric, of course, is mainly about scoring points against the opponent in an increasingly fiery election year. When Mr. Romney refers favorably to Mr. Clinton, it is to make the point that Mr. Obama has abandoned the centrist legacy of his Democratic predecessor. When Mr. Obama invokes the spirit of Mr. Reagan, it is to argue that the Republican Party of Mr. Romney has drifted far away from its popular roots.

But the admiration expressed for the two former occupants of the White House also testifies to the fluidity of presidential reputations. Lost to history, it seems, is just how much Democrats loathed Mr. Reagan in the 1980s as an anti-communist zealot who thought that ketchup was a vegetable. Or how much Republicans despised Mr. Clinton in the 1990s as a slick huckster who dishonored the Oval Office. In the space of time, polarizing presidents have become historic statesmen.

“Presidential candidates occasionally seem to recant their onetime political opposition to a recent president of the opposite party,” said the presidential historian Michael Beschloss. “One reason is that with some historical distance, they may sometimes come to genuinely appreciate leadership qualities they didn’t notice before.” But, he added, “more often it’s politics.”

Mr. Beschloss recalled that Gerald R. Ford and the elder George Bush opposed Harry S. Truman in 1948 but after entering the White House themselves cited him, genuinely, as a role model. Richard M. Nixon derided George McGovern for not living up to the legacy of Mr. Truman and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Even Mr. Reagan cited John F. Kennedy in arguing for tax cuts, overlooking his own past criticism of the Democrat’s economic policies as “old Karl Marx.”

Frank J. Donatelli, a former Reagan White House political director, said the flattery had less to do with genuine admiration than calculation. “You want to show that your opponent is at odds with a respected former president from his own party as a way to marginalize him,” Mr. Donatelli said. “It’s a bid for centrist voters who nevertheless admire Reagan and Clinton’s records and results.”

Still, the notion that Democrats could hold out Mr. Reagan as a model or Republicans could do so with Mr. Clinton suggests how passions fade over the years. Both left office with high approval ratings and came to be appreciated for their successes, while failures and scandals have been overlooked. Mr. Reagan today is remembered for restoring national confidence and helping end the cold war. Mr. Clinton is remembered for reforming welfare and balancing the budget. It helped that both presided over periods of economic growth with comparatively little armed conflict overseas.

Mr. Obama began citing Mr. Reagan during the 2008 campaign as a political jab at his primary opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Unlike her husband, Mr. Obama said, Mr. Reagan had been a “transformative political leader.” Now with Mrs. Clinton in the cabinet and Mr. Clinton on the campaign trail alongside him, the president has dropped the comparison, but he still cites Mr. Reagan to make arguments in favor of economic, immigration and nuclear disarmament policies.

He quoted Mr. Reagan just last month as he pushed for a new tax on millionaires. “That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior was Ronald Reagan,” Mr. Obama said. “He thought that in America, the wealthiest should pay their fair share, and he said so.”

A couple weeks later, Mr. Obama was at it again. “Ronald Reagan could not get through a Republican primary in this election cycle,” he said. “Could not get through it. Here’s a guy who raised taxes. That in and of itself would have rendered him unelectable in a Republican primary.” Standing with him that evening was none other than Mr. Clinton, no longer a poor shadow of Mr. Reagan in Mr. Obama’s rendering but now a president who accumulated a “remarkable record” as he turned around a party that “was a little bit lost.”

Mr. Clinton has become a frequent touchstone for Mr. Romney lately as well. Instead of the president impeached for lying under oath to cover up an affair with an intern, Mr. Clinton in this telling is the apostle of fiscal responsibility as opposed to that “old-school liberal” now in the White House.

“Almost a generation ago, Bill Clinton announced that the era of big government was over,” Mr. Romney said this week. “Even a former McGovern campaign worker like President Clinton was signaling to his own party that Democrats should no longer try to govern by proposing a new program for every problem.

“President Obama,” he went on, “tucked away the Clinton doctrine in his large drawer of discarded ideas, along with transparency and bipartisanship. It’s enough to make you wonder if maybe it was a personal beef with the Clintons, but really it runs much deeper.”

From Mr. Romney’s perspective, it does not hurt to remind centrist Democrats of the past tensions and disagreements between Mr. Obama and the Clintons.

Not that every president from another party becomes suddenly acceptable. Mr. Romney has implicitly compared Mr. Obama to Jimmy Carter, while Mr. Obama routinely links Mr. Romney to the policies of George W. Bush. When Mr. Bush endorsed Mr. Romney before ducking into an elevator this week, Mr. Romney made little note of it, but the Obama camp eagerly spread the news.

To guardians of the former presidents’ legacies, the latest campaign-trail tributes ring hollow. John D. Podesta, a former Clinton chief of staff who now leads the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said it was “ironic that Romney is so exuberant in embracing Clintonomics” since Mr. Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy, invested in education and technology, and balanced the budget. “Maybe Romney was too busy firing people in the ’90s to have noticed,” Mr. Podesta said.

Craig Shirley, a conservative consultant and Reagan biographer, likewise said that Mr. Obama’s invocations of Mr. Reagan were off base. “At first blush, I would say good for him,” he said. “But deeper, I would say Obama is profoundly misinformed if he thinks Ronald Reagan would agree with any of his policies. The fundamental difference is Reagan believed in people while Obama believes in government.”

View the original article here