President Obama and his allies are bellowing the unproven allegation, backed by some “fact checkers,” that Gov. Mit Romney’s tax proposal would harm the middle class.
Obama’s allied Super Pac, Priorities USA, which has become the go-to place for inaccurate information this campaign season, excreted a new ad saying Romney’s initiative would “tear down the middle class.”
The contention is based on a report last month by the Tax Policy Center stipulating that Romney’s tax reform plan, in order to be revenue neutral as advertised, would have to raise taxes on the middle class.
The White House is trying to portray the report as unbiased grunt work, but it’s not.
One of the authors of the report, the unfortunately named Adam Looney, WORKED FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA.
Where is that in the coverage of this issue?
He was a senior economist on Obama’s highly politicized Council of Economic Advisers, laboring under then-chairman and former Obama 2008 campaign adviser Austan Goolsbee.
Another of the authors, William Gale, is mentioned as having worked in the White House of George H.W. Bush. Even assuming that this somehow qualifies you as tilting to the right, Gale is no conservative.
He was critical of George W. Bush’s plan to reform Social Security with individual accounts, writing a paper in 2004 with two economists who would become among Obama’s top advisers, Peter Orszag and Jason Furman, slamming the idea. Two years ago, he wrote a Washington Post piece attacking the extension of the Bush tax cuts.
The third author, Samuel Brown, as far as I can tell, nobody’s ever heard of. I think he signed the Declaration of Independence.
The Tax Policy Center itself is a co-project of two of Washington’s leading liberal think tanks, the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution.
Without getting too far into the details, conservatives have criticized the paper for failing to sufficiently account for increased revenues that would occur because the Romney plan would produce MORE ECONOMIC GROWTH. Since the government taxes everything that moves, and more things would be moving, more taxes would be collected.
It would seem to me this is a significant, since the whole point of tax reform like Romney’s – which cuts marginal rates while eliminating economic behavior-distorting loopholes and deductions – is to increase economic growth by making the economy operate more rationally and efficiently.
The authors, in response to conservatives, have already cut in half their assessment of the ruin that would occur to the middle class under Romney’s proposal.
Given the growth in economic activity and the uncertainties surrounding the plan – Romney proposal doesn’t have many details – they should cut out the other half too.