Archive for January 13th, 2008

Read Full Post »

From Real Clear Politics:

Dismal Signs for the GOP

By George Will

Tuesday’s Republican primary is in one of the nation’s worst-governed states. Under a Democratic governor, Michigan has been taxed into a one-state recession. Native son Mitt Romney, the Republican candidate who best understands how wealth is created, might revive his campaign by asking: Who do you want to be president in 2010 when the Bush tax cuts, which McCain opposed, expire? Can automakers endure more regulations such as the fuel efficiency mandates that climate-fixers such as McCain favor? Do you want a president (Mike Huckabee, proponent of a national sales tax of at least 30 percent) pledged to radically increase the proportion of federal taxation paid by the middle class?

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Gov. Huckabee Supported Higher Taxes & More Government Spending

“Taxes are a necessary part of funding a reasonable and responsible government. Taxing too little can result in financial imbalances and deficits as well as underfunding truly vital roles the government should fill…” – Gov. Mike Huckabee (Gov. Mike Huckabee, From Hope To Higher Ground, 2007, p. 101)

Gov. Huckabee’s Record Of Higher Taxes And More Big-Government Spending:

This Morning, Gov. Huckabee Admitted That He Raised Taxes To Pay For Increased Government Spending. CBS’ BOB SCHIEFFER: “But you did raise taxes, didn’t you, Governor? I mean in addition to cutting taxes you did raise some taxes?” HUCKABEE: “Bob when you’re under a Supreme Court order, you do what you need to do to improve your schools. I worked with our legislature. And we got major really improvements done in our school system that without our kids would still be languishing in last place. I don’t apologize for raising the expectations and the hopes and the opportunities for the kids of my state. I don’t apologize for building roads either. I’d apologize for leaving my roads in a mess is what I’d be apologizing for if I hadn’t done it.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 1/13/08; www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPh67alcYSI)

Huckabee Raised Taxes $883.1 Million, Cut $378 Million In Taxes, For A Net Tax Increase Of $505.1 Million. “But a review of tax legislation passed while he was governor shows a net tax increase of $505 million, a figure adjusted for inflation and economic growth, according to the state Department of Finance and Administration. … The 90 cuts reduced tax collections by $378 million, according to the Department of Finance and Administration. Meanwhile, the department counts 21 tax increases that raised collections by $883.1 million.” (Daniel Nasaw, “Gaps Led To Taxing In Huckabee Years,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 10/9/07)

FactCheck.org: “Overall, His Tax Increases Outweighed His Tax Cuts By More Than $500 Million.” “As we’ve said several times now, Huckabee’s 94 tax cuts include things like a reduction for manufacturing machinery that reduced state coffers by $500 per year. And, overall, his tax increases outweighed his tax cuts by more than $500 million. As for signing the first broad-based tax cut in 160 years, we’ve noted before that then-governor Bill Clinton signed an income-tax reduction in 1991 that was quite similar to the one that Huckabee signed a few years later. ‘Broad-based’ is a matter of interpretation, but Huckabee’s claim still sounds like unwarranted hyperbole to us.” (FactCheck.org, www.factcheck.org, Posted 1/7/08)

The Average Arkansan Saw Their Taxes Increase Almost $1,000 Under Gov. Huckabee. “The average Arkansan’s tax burden grew from $1,969 in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 1997, to $2,902 in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2005, including local taxes.” (Daniel Nasaw, “Gaps Led To Taxing In Huckabee Years,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 10/9/07)

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain Is Pushing An Energy Tax Hike That Would Harm Michigan

McCain For Energy Tax Hike“What do John McCain, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Pew Center on Climate Change have in common? They have united to support a massive new tax increase on energy – which will raise costs throughout the economy and threaten the vitality of, among others, the oil and automobile industries I suspect that many who would be significantly harmed by McCain’s wrongheaded tax plan –  say, blue-collar workers in Michigan – have never heard of it.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Is Pushing For A Massive New Energy Tax Which Would Especially Harm Michigan:

Sen. McCain’s Legislation Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels. “What is not widely understood is that he is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Energy Policy Could Devastate The Auto Industry. “Higher energy costs will, among other things, raise the cost of manufacturing big-ticket items in American factories. And higher gas prices will likely raise demand for those classes of automobiles that tend to be manufactured overseas. Somehow, I think Michigan voters will be less than thrilled about this, should anyone bother to inform them.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Send Gas Taxes Sky High And Would Harm The National Economy:

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Hike Gas Taxes By 68 Cents Per Gallon. “The EPA has estimated what the McCain energy tax would mean to consumers. Since the bill’s provisions are phased in, the full cost of the tax would not be felt for a number of years. But in a letter to Senator McCain dated July 2007, the EPA estimated that the tax will be about $.26 cents in current dollars per gallon of gasoline by 2030 and $.68 cents per gallon by 2050.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Reduce United States GDP By As Much As $5.2 Trillion. “The effect on the economy of the McCain tax would be similar to any other broad-based tax. In the EPA’s own words: ‘The present value of the cumulative reduction in real GDP for the 2012-2030 period ranges from $660 billion to $2.1 trillion…the cumulative reduction in the present value of real GDP for the 2012-2050 period ranges from about $1.6 trillion to $5.2 trillion.'”  (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Has Repeatedly Teamed Up With Sen. Joe Lieberman To Push Radical Climate Change Legislation:

McCain-Lieberman Would Have Capped Carbon Dioxide Emissions. “The latest bill rejected by the Senate, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., would have mandated caps on carbon dioxide and a market-oriented system for trading them. Those who needed more energy could theoretically buy credits from those who could make do with less. But government would still have to establish the overall cap on energy use.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

  • McCain-Lieberman Would Have Hiked Gas Prices. “The increases in gasoline prices projected to occur (is) 9 percent in 2010 and 19 percent in 2025.” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

The American Council For Capital Formation’s Margo Thorning Said That McCain-Lieberman Would “Significantly Hurt Michigan’s Economy.” “Imposing the McCain/Lieberman bill… would also significantly hurt Michigan’s economy. Residential electricity prices are projected to rise by 12 to 30 percent, household income falls by up to $791 and there would be up to 33,000 fewer jobs in by 2010 compared with the baseline forecast, according to an analysis by CRA International.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

  • Thorning Said McCain-Lieberman “Would Seriously Harm Detroit’s Auto Industry.” “Proposals like McCain/Lieberman would seriously harm Detroit’s auto industry, as both union and management leaders noted earlier this month in a joint appearance before Congress. So profits would sink and jobs would vanish. That’s a high price to pay for a negligible benefit to the environment.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

Detroit News Columnist Thomas Bray Said That The McCain-Lieberman Plan Would Ultimately Result In A Huge Indirect Tax On The American People.  “Aside from the crucial question of whether a government bureaucracy is smart enough to do so, even environmentalists confess that Kyoto or McLieberman measures would have been a small first step in clamping a huge indirect tax on the American and world economy.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

The U.S. Energy Information Administration Estimated That McCain’s Global Warming Legislation Would Have Decreased U.S. GDP By $776 Billion. “The cumulative losses in actual GDP are about $776 billion (1996 dollars) in the SA.2028 (McCain-Lieberman)…. The peak, single-year impact on actual GDP under SA.2028 occurs in 2025, with a loss of $76 billion (1996 dollars), or about 0.4 percent of GDP. The largest percentage change in actual GDP, 0.5 percent, occurs in 2011, where the estimated loss in actual GDP that year is $57 billion…” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

“Impact Of McCain-Lieberman * If The Climate Stewardship Act Passes, It Would Increase:

  • Energy Costs By 30 To 50 Percent.
  • Unemployment By Nine Percent.
  • Electricity Costs By 46 Percent.
  • Fuel Oil Prices By 33 Percent.
  • Inflation By 27 Percent.” (Editorial, “Climate Stewardship Bill Would Starve U.S. Economy,” The Detroit News, 10/30/03)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) Said McCain-Lieberman Was “The Right Thing To Do.” “Continuing his fight for environmental protection and energy security, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) today joined a bipartisan group of Senators in offering an amendment to the Energy Bill that would ensure that America takes a leadership role in addressing the effects of global climate change. … Kerry said. ‘It is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.'” (Sen. John Kerry, “Kerry Joins Bipartisan Group In Offering Climate Change Amendment To Energy Bill,” Press Release, 6/22/05)

Sens. McCain, Kerry And Lieberman Voted For Global Warming Legislation That Was Soundly Rejected By Senate Republicans And Democrats. 49 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted against McCain’s “greenhouse gas” amendment to the energy bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #148: Rejected 38-60: R 6-49; D 31-11; I 1-0, 6/22/05, McCain, Kerry and Lieberman Voted Yea)

Read Full Post »

Yesterday, outside the General Motors Willow Run plant, Governor Romney held a media availability to address the indefinite lay-off of 200 GM workers that was just announced yesterday.  Tragically, announcements like this have become all too typical in Michigan today.   Below are excerpts of Governor Romney’s remarks:


“The reason that I came here today is because General Motors announced today that they are laying-off another 200 people from this facility.”

“This is not something which is designed just to get things back on track as part of a strategy to re-build and grow.  This is instead an indication of a long-term slide in the automotive industry, the domestic automotive industry.  America is not buying fewer cars.  Instead, we’re seeing the domestic automobile industry continue to slide. 

“And as year after year goes by, more and more layoffs occur and more plants are closed, the question is, ‘Where’s Washington?’  You hear some say that these are jobs that are just going away and we better get used to it.  But where does it stop?  Is there a point at which someone says, ‘You know, that’s enough’?  Or are we going to let the entire automobile industry, domestic manufactured automotive industry, disappear and just say, ‘Well, that was tough, that’s just the way it is’?  

“That’s not what I believe.  I believe it’s important to preserve manufacturing in this country and to preserve the automobile industry, including the domestic automobile industry.  I will work together with labor, with management, with the leaders of the political structure here in Michigan and in Washington to strengthen the automotive sector, the domestic automotive sector and the state of Michigan.  It is inexcusable to me to see these jobs going away again and again and again.

“I do believe that policies to invest in research and technology, basic science and research to develop the products of the future can help stimulate and re-build this industry.  I believe also in a savings plan to reduce the burden on the American people so that we can afford products of the future…

“And I also believe that Washington is doing too much anvil throwing.  The first CAFE program was a huge burden on the domestic manufacturing of automobiles.  The next CAFE program promises to do the same thing, and what help has been associated with it?  It’s almost like an unfunded mandate – a major change, a major burden on the automotive industry and then Washington saying, ‘Good luck Detroit, try to keep up.’ 

“Likewise, Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain proposed a unilateral cap and trade program on carbon emissions.  Look, we all agree that there should be a global effort to reduce carbon emissions.  But if you place that burden just on the U.S., you make the U.S. less competitive.  You make it more expensive to manufacture here, not only automobiles, but everything that we manufacture.  And so we need to have policies that are designed to strengthen our economy, strengthen our competitiveness, make sure that America can compete in the automotive industry and in others.  And as President, if I’m fortunate enough to have that job, I will not rest while Detroit continues to see layoff after layoff after layoff.  My heart goes out to the 200 people who are laid off from this facility or were announced to be laid off from this facility.  And I want to make sure that this doesn’t just keep on happening year after year and year with Washington saying, ‘So what?'”

For background on the GM plant, please seehttp://www.mlive.com

For background on Senator McCain’s CAFE proposals, please seehttp://mittromney.com

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain’s Push For Higher CAFE Standards
Reveals A “Curious Hostility” Toward Detroit

“[McCain] has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide. … As for CAFE, McCain is correct in stating that the industry has fought hard against higher fuel standards. As a senator whose job it is to protect American interests, McCain should join them. CAFE has cost the jobs of American autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Sen. McCain Has Pushed For Ever-Higher CAFE Standards, Without Regard To The Impact:

In 2002, Sen. McCain Teamed With Democrat Sen. John Kerry To Propose Higher CAFE Standards. “For the latest time since losing his bid for the GOP presidential nomination two years ago, Senate Commerce ranking member John McCain, R-Ariz., has teamed up with a prominent Democrat on legislation bitterly opposed by the Bush administration. This time, the issue is higher mileage standards for automobiles–and his partner is Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. McCain and Kerry Thursday agreed to introduce legislation that would increase fuel efficiency standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015.” (“McCain Again Teams Up With Dems,” National Journal’s CongressDaily, 3/8/02)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE Standards Be Economically Feasible. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #156: Adopted 64-31: R 46-7; D 18-23; I 0-1, 6/23/05, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE “Not Have An Adverse Impact On The Economy, Consumer Choice, And Auto Safety.” (S. 14, CQ Vote #310: Adopted 66-30: R 45-6; D 21-23; I 0-1, 7/29/03, McCain Voted Nay)        

Sen. McCain Voted In Favor Of Higher CAFE Standards For Pickup Trucks. (S. 517, CQ Vote #48: Adopted 56-44: R 40-9; D 16-34: I 0-1, 3/13/02, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain’s Higher CAFE Standards Are The Same As Higher Taxes:

Sen. McCain Knows That His Push For Higher CAFE Standards Is The Same As Higher Taxes. “Sen. John McCain didn’t expect an enthusiastic response this morning when he touted the need for higher fuel standards to the Detroit Economic Club. No surprise, the crowd didn’t exactly embrace the idea. Asked how raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards was ‘different than raising taxes,’ McCain acknowledged he didn’t think his proposal would be very popular. ‘I know, I said it’s a tough issue. CAFE standards have to be improved. There’s too much pollution in the environment, there’s too much dependency on foreign oil and we’re going to have to take a number of steps,’ McCain told the crowd. He finished his answer to dead silence.” (Amy Schatz, “McCain Urges Higher CAFE Standards – In Motor City,” The Wall Street Journal‘s Washington Wire, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire, Posted 10/9/07)

Sen. McCain’s Higher CAFE Standards Would Kill Michigan Jobs:

The Detroit News: “CAFE Has Cost The Jobs Of American Autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

General Motors Predicted The McCain-Kerry CAFE Plan Could Cost As Many As 100,000 Jobs. “Major automakers characterize the Kerry-McCain plan as a reckless attempt to legislate technology that could curtail sales of their most profitable SUVs and pickups. General Motors Corp. says that as many as 100,000 jobs would be lost.” (Jeff Plungis, “Automakers Support Alternate CAFE Proposal,” The Detroit News, 3/11/02)

General Motors’ Bob Lutz Said An Increase In CAFE Standards Would “Effectively Hand The Truck And SUV Market Over To The Imports, Particularly The Japanese.” “With Congress warming to new environmental rules, General Motors Corp. Vice Chairman Bob Lutz says a proposal for higher fuel-economy standards that’s gaining popularity in Washington would ‘effectively hand the truck and SUV market over to the imports, particularly the Japanese.'” (Justin Hyde, “GM Exec: Fuel Rules Could Doom U.S. Market For Trucks,” Detroit Free Press, 12/26/06)

  • An Increase In CAFE Standards Would Damage GM’s Large Vehicle Maker Share In North America. “A CAFE increase “would limit GM’s ability to build as many larger vehicles as its customers may demand. Larger SUVs and pickups are a key part of GM’s plan to improve profits in North America.” (Justin Hyde, “GM Exec: Fuel Rules Could Doom U.S. Market For Trucks,” Detroit Free Press, 12/26/06)

Gary Rogers, CEO Of FEV Engine Technology: “The Cost Would Be Astronomical And In My Opinion Would Bring This Nation To Its Knees From An Economic Perspective.” Rogers: “If you are a full-line vehicle manufacturer and you have to go from an average of 24 mpg across the entire fleet of vehicles sold to 36 mpg – a 50 percent increase – in a short period of time by auto industry standards, say 10 years, it would require simultaneously redesigning all vehicles, all engines and all powertrains. Not even GM has the resources to begin that kind of work. The cost would be astronomical and in my opinion would bring this nation to its knees from an economic perspective.” (Gerry Kobe, “The Real CAFE Numbers: Automakers Call Recent CAFE Proposals ‘Radical’,” Automotive Industries, 5/02)

McCain’s Support Of Higher CAFE Standards Will Cost The Auto Industry Billions And Will Impact Jobs. “McCain, together with Democrat John Kerry, were initial co-sponsors of the 35 mpg (so-called CAFE) mandate that just passed Congress — legislation that economists predict will cost the domestic auto industry $85 billion over a decade and impact thousands of jobs.” (Henry Payne, Op-Ed, “Taxing Michigan,” National Review, 1/11/08)

Sen. McCain Has Attacked Detroit For Not Supporting His Job-Killing Higher CAFE Standards:

McCain “Questioned The Auto Industry’s Credibility.” “McCain questioned the auto industry’s credibility, citing past opposition to federal regulations requiring seat belts, greater fuel economy and air bags. ‘Whatever it is, they’ve said it was going to be the end of the auto industry,’ McCain said. ‘It hasn’t happened.'” (Jeff Plungis, “Plan To Raise Fuel Rules Fails,” The Detroit News, 3/13/02)

McCain “Blasted” The Automotive Industry For Resisting Changes. “McCain blasted the automakers for resisting the changes. ‘The auto industry has resisted every single change in safety and efficiency for over 40 years,’ he said. ‘At one time they were against seat belts. At one time they were against air bags.'” (Deirdre Shesgreen, “Senate Applies Brakes To Plan Calling For Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards,” St. Louis Post Dispatch, 3/14/02)

  • The Detroit News: McCain Treated Automakers Like “They Were A Bunch Of Tobacco Executives.” “John McCain opened Senate hearings on the safety of sports-utility vehicles (SUVs) by treating the nation’s automakers as if they were a bunch of tobacco executives.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)
  • The Detroit News: McCain “Has A Curious Hostility Toward” The Auto Industry. “McCain, who chairs the powerful commerce committee, has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)
  • The Detroit News: McCain “Has An Unforgivable Ignorance Of The History Of Automotive Regulation.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Read Full Post »