Maryann Tobin

For all the ridiculous claims politicians make, few are as deceptive as saying that the best way to reduce the deficit is to make sure the government doesn’t collect any more revenue.

Think about it.

Erskine Bowles, who co-chaired the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility said in the Washington Post, “(Mitt) Romney said that his tax reform proposal is 'very similar to the Simpson-Bowles plan.' Unfortunately, the numbers say otherwise: His reform plan leaves too many tax breaks in place and, as a result, does nothing to reduce the debt.”

The U.S. owes about $14 trillion and counting. Mitt Romney claims he can reduce the deficit by cutting taxes, mostly for the wealthy.

“Romney’s tax cutting plans would increase the deficit by nearly $5 trillion over 10 years. That’s on top of keeping the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Romney has promised to close various loopholes to pay for his tax cuts, but he hasn’t specified which ones. Until he does, the Tax Policy Center concludes, his plan would cost $5 trillion — which would be added, yes, to the deficit,” according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center report cited in the Washington Post.

Another report from ABC News concurs.

“Romney’s proposed tax cuts – which include reducing all personal income taxes rates by 20 percent, eliminating the estate tax and zeroing-out taxes on investment income for couples earning less than $200,000 per year – would slash $360 billion in federal revenues in 2015 and will have to increases taxes on the middle class to pay for those losses.”

In step with the rest of the GOP, Romney wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. That adds another $4 trillion in lost revenue, bringing Romney’s total to $9 trillion.

Does that sound like a good starting point for deficit reduction?

Even Romney, who appears to be math-challenged, knows that adding $9 trillion in tax cuts would blow a hole in the deficit so big the aftershock would be devastating.

But the Romney tax plan doesn’t stop there. So to keep some semblance of balance, he has to drastically cut, or completely eliminate spending from every government program – except defense, where he has vowed to spend even more.

By ripping up to half of all government spending out of the economy, what do you suppose that would do to cities, towns, and workers across America?

The answer requires only five words: massive layoffs and abject poverty.

Higher unemployment also means fewer workers paying taxes, which makes the deficit even worse.

Erskine Bowles added, “You must have a balanced plan that reforms the tax code in a progressive, pro-growth manner and produces additional revenue if you are serious about reducing the deficit…without disrupting the country’s fragile economic recovery and hurting the disadvantaged.”

But in a secretly taped video at a $50,000 a plate Boca Raton, Fla., fundraiser in May, Mitt Romney said, "My job is not to worry about those people.”

“Those people” that Romney referred to consisted of 47 percent of the U.S. population who, he declared, “are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them.”

If the American people can be fooled into voting for a candidate who cares more about his own lifestyle than the quality of life for all Americans, then the country is in serious trouble if he is elected.

Romney and the Tea Party Congress

The quality of life for the American public is an afterthought to Romney, a philosophy that coincides with the Tea Party Republicans who took over congress in 2010. They have been allowed to get away with using their legislative power as a political weapon. Now Romney wants to win the White House so he can do the same.

That is not how power by elected representatives was constitutionally designed to be used.

There has to be more to a candidates’ vision than just deceiving voters to win the next election.

Selling a revenue neutral economic plan as a means of deficit reduction and economic growth is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.

Rather than finding new ways to suppress the vote, lawmakers should pass a constitutional amendment requiring all Americans to vote. Perhaps that is the best way to deal with those who place deception ahead of honesty.

If you like to write about U.S. politics and Campaign 2012, enter "The American Pundit" competition. Allvoices is awarding four $250 prizes each month between now and November. These monthly winners earn eligibility for the $5,000 grand prize, to be awarded after the November election.


Paul Ryan calls Social Security a ‘welfare transfer system’

Romney doubles-down on secret video remarks

Voter ID laws disenfranchise 5 million legal voters

Romney secret video reveals no plans to help economy or middle class

Citizens United damage: Is America still a democracy?