Mitt Romney fact check: Is he actually against redistribution? (+video)
Mitt Romney is treating 'redistribution' like a dirty word. But while he might like it less than Democrats do, Romney clearly believes in redistribution, too.
(Page 2 of 2)
“I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution – because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level – to make sure that everybody's got a shot. How do we pool resources at the same time as we decentralize delivery systems in ways that both foster competition, can work in the marketplace, and can foster innovation at the local level and can be tailored to particular communities?”
Skip to next paragraph
Correspondent
Liz Marlantes covers politics for the Monitor and is a regular contributor to the Monitor's political blog, DC Decoder.
-
In Pictures: On the Campaign Trail with the Romney-Ryan ticket
Recent posts
-
05.17.13
Bob Woodward compares Benghazi with Watergate. Is he right? (+video) -
05.16.13
Why Benghazi talking points make US government seem like Dunder Mifflin (+video) -
05.16.13
Why furor over IRS tea-party scandal won't subside, despite ouster -
05.16.13
President Obama wants to 'go Bulworth'? What's that? (+video) -
05.15.13
Five ways the IRS scandal will change Washington (+video)
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
First off, Obama’s statements about decentralizing delivery systems and fostering competition sound practically Republican (he was specifically criticizing the inefficiency of Chicago public housing and public schools). In context, he's actually arguing for a more streamlined system of government that employs free-market efficiencies and makes redistribution more effective – and by implication, more economical.
More to the point, however: In his attacks, Romney is treating “redistribution” in general as a dirty word – "He believes in redistribution. I don't" – when, in fact, it’s abundantly clear that Romney, too, supports redistribution, “at least at a certain level” (to use Obama’s own phrasing).
What would Romney call it when the government takes in tax dollars and uses them to pay for things like health care for poor folks? Is he saying he would eliminate Medicaid? We think not. Likewise, although Romney would tax the rich at a lower rate than Obama, his tax plan is still progressive.
As The New York Times’s David Firestone wrote Wednesday: “The government has long redistributed wealth, and … the country expects it to do so. That’s the point of a progressive income tax, which has been in effect for nearly a century…. The progressive tax remains so popular that Mr. Romney has promised to keep it, and he also insists he doesn’t plan to eliminate the safety net.”
Or as CNN’s Erin Burnett put it: “Mitt Romney, no matter what words he wants to use or what America he says he wants to believe in, believes in a progressive taxation system…. That is redistribution.”
Obviously, the real question – and a very legitimate one – is, how much redistribution is fair and best for society? In general, Democrats tend to want a little more, and Republicans tend to want a little less. But for Romney to pretend to be opposed to the entire concept of redistribution is totally untrue, based purely on what he himself says he would do as president.
Previous
Follow Us