Mitt Romney is adamantly persisting in his refusal to release his tax returns beyond his single 2010 filing and partial figures for 2011. That refusal is beginning to cost him politically and to cause dissension among his fellow Republicans.
The presumptive GOP presidential nominee told an interviewer that he was simply not enthusiastic about giving the Democrats "hundreds or thousands more pages to pick through, distort and lie about."
First, if the returns are public the Democrats can't lie about them. Second, the Republicans have plenty of attack artists in the fold to combat any distortions. And, third, it violates an admirable tradition, although one grudgingly honored, of transparency in presidential politics that goes back at least as far as his father, George Romney, who in 1967 released 12 years' worth of his returns.
The absence of evidence to the contrary has left the Democrats free to indulge in lurid speculation about offshore tax dodges in such financial havens as the Cayman Islands and Bermuda and the $3 million Swiss bank account that appeared in Mr. Romney's 2010 return and then quickly disappeared.
His reticence has not made it easy on his advisers. Pressed to explain why Mr. Romney, who said he had stepped down from all his top offices in Bain Capital in February 1999, was still listed in company filings as chairman and CEO through 2002, senior adviser Ed Gillespie explained that Mr. Romney had "retired retroactively."
The concept of retroactive retirement was quickly and widely mocked. Those were the years Mr. Romney was saving the 2002 Winter Olympics in Utah. Why not just say so?
Mr. Romney says the Democrats only want to use his tax returns to distract attention from President Barack Obama's handling of the economy, but his secrecy about his finances has itself become an issue and a distraction.
Prominent Republicans — including former Mississippi governor and GOP chairman Haley Barbour, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley and the candidate's former rival for the nomination, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas — have called on Mr. Romney to release his returns. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, another former rival, urged Mr. Romney to be as transparent as possible.
The conservative National Review editorialized that Mr. Romney's only decision was "whether he releases his returns now, or later — after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits."
With the London Olympics, the August doldrums and the electorate's notorious disinterest in presidential politics pre-Labor Day, "now" is the best time he's likely to get.
Birds return to Steckel Park ...
Around the world and back
Slow VA claims process frustrates ...
Danger on rural roads
Gold Coast Concert Chorus
Football All-Star Game Preview
Rick Godwin moves up in ...
Five Questions for Spring Football
Camarillo students create chalk art
Nursery burns near Oxnard
Baseball: Marina 11, Thousand Oaks ...
Ventura County's Most Wanted June 18th
Whole Foods Oxnard opens
The Star's All-County Boys Volleyball…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 64
viking2265 writes:
Did the Star do an editorial on demanding that Obama release all his college transcripts? His birth certificate? His business dealings and house buying from convicted felon Rezco?
I'm all for Romney releasing his tax returns...at the same time Obama releases all of his hidden records.
Lets_Be_Truthful writes:
That was disappointing to see.
Lets_Be_Truthful writes:
So why is it ok for one side to "wait until after the election" and the other side not to?
Barney writes:
A bad piece of legislation will always be a bad piece of legislation. Only ignoramuses don't understand that.
oneonpch writes:
Oh guys... Its all so simple. What you see here is a stalking horse for something else that's more interesting:
The real issue is a Bain investment in a company called "Stericycle". Search around on google - do your own research, here is an example article.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07...
Basically the Obama campaign knows that Romney was running Bain when they invested in this company that worked with aborted fetuses.
Romney, for his part will do ANYTHING to keep any documents that connect him to this from coming to light.
Naturally, Obama isn't going to let go of the issue and Romney will be forced to fess up. Should become very entertaining say ... around October!
Tashi writes:
I don't care and I wish we could stick to the important - the economy!
Chilibreath writes:
It's Classic liberal hypocrisy wherein lefties blindly feel that whatever wrong they do is okay because it’s for “the greater good,” but conservatives have to be laid out for every questionable deed committed, whether real or imagined. Of course it doesn’t hurt that the left has the support of the mainstream media, academia and the entertainment industry, and it doesn’t hurt that a number of uncommitted voters still believe in angels and astrology, so they are easily swayed by opinion pieces this one … unsigned and homegrown by our local rag.
jimbojoker writes:
The Republicans hate the president more then they love America.
JustKaySee writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
SoCalArmyBrat writes:
I'm sick of the whole Mitt Romney tax return debate. If Barack Obama and the DuNCes want the returns released, then they should release every tax return President Obama and Michelle Obama have ever filed (joint and separate); each individual Fast & Furious document ever produced; every tax return for all his bundlers and to add to the above post, let's throw in his high school transcripts, just to be obstinate.
ENVIROSCIGUY writes:
In the "meritocracy" that has replaced our democracy, "we the people" are on a need to know basis with the miracle-working experts like Romney. He is the first of the true "one-percenters" to run for president. His records will show that THEY PLAY BY A DIFFERENT SET OF RULES.
Obama, like all Presidents, keeps secrets because his records will show that the one-percenters tell HIM what to do.
YourPaperboy writes:
If there was something wrong with Romneys taxes the IRS would have already done something about it. There isn't. There is no story here,
ENVIROSCIGUY writes:
There is nothing ILLEGAL because "they" (the elites of the meritocracy) write the laws.
Please show me the math for an IRA worth $100 million, and I'll show you a special IRS law for one-percenters that make such an account possible for a select few.
Lets_Be_Truthful writes:
I would actually add Kennedy to that 1%er list. Same back door politics and corruption, just different era.
worldfxr writes:
Amen, Well Stated. Obama has so many issues that are unresolved. Including being a natural born citizen. He is a fraud, lier, and the list can go on and on. This call for Romney's records is nothing more then a diversion from Obama's nation destroying tactics. Vote smart in November. This country's very existence, is at stake.
Lets_Be_Truthful writes:
Lol, how could I forget one of my favorite SNL candidates like Perot.
worldfxr writes:
Thank You for these facts. I have seen most of this over time from various sources. I will copy and forward this on to "Many". This pathetic excuse of a President is taking this nation to chaos and its ultimate demise. WE MUST Elect Rommey and change more members of congress to begin undoing the extensive damage this "Lier in Chief" has done.
northwestprincess writes:
Not sure what you call a "true" one-percenter ~ must be objective. John Kerry is labeled as a one percenter, as is the wonderful family guy John Edwards and even Al Gore, all ran for pres. Those gentlemen, along with the Clinton's are one-percenters, many higher than others, but they are still in that "evil" club. Even princess pelosi has said pbo needs to move on from this tax disclosure issue and deal with more important issues, like, maybe, the economy, the diversion isn't helping. Then again, pelosi has not turned over her tax records as requested, and, only 17 out of 535 house members turned over theirs when asked.
Traditional writes:
Good post. Thanks.
The print edition of the Star does have a cartoon of Obama refusing to share info on his background. It does provide a little (just a little) balance to the subject.
ENVIROSCIGUY writes:
Washington was the wealthiest of all, especially if you count all THE HUMANS HE OWNED. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02...
But Romney, if elected, would surpass them all. Yet he didn't farm. He didn't buy real estate. He didn't inherit a huge amount or marry money. No, Mitt made his money as a "middle man". He bought businesses from one owner and sold them to another (after cooking the books, breaking the unions, or outsourcing the labor).
Chilibreath writes:
Maybe the VCS is starting to feel the heat from it's few remaining subscribers.
jesocr writes:
Romney may have something with his reason that releasing his tax returns will not end it. Look how the right keeps asking for more from President Obama they are never satisfied.
rationalthinker writes:
Romney probably is not stupid enough to have committed tax fraud on his returns. So, what could he be hiding?
The history of returns will likely show the following. In 2008 he probably lost 25 to 40% of his net worth due to Republican national economic mismanagement.
By the end of 2010, the one year he has at least partly released, in all likilihood he not only recovered his losses but probably did far better than that under the so called "failed" Obama stimulus or how well he did once Obama's policies took effect. So, he can't show just how bad it got even for him under Bush because the evidence of his and the nation's recovery under Obama economic stewardship will rip the guts out of his and the Republican TBag entire political program. His solution, show one year but do not show anything with which it can be compared. He's hiding, among other things, just how bad the economy got under Republican stewardship.
Additionally, if he releases his actual full returns the public will be treated to information as to just how much of his income is the result of outsourcing jobs. His company, Bain, has a record of economic terrorism second to none when it comes to making American workers feel threatened. That's also what he is hiding. His tax returns will show that.
And, maybe, just maybe, he IS STUPID ENOUGH to have needed to accept the IRS's 2009 Amnesty for failure to honestly file with respect to offshoring of income.
JettBadger writes:
The 1%-ers are the filthy rich. The entiled few whose unbelievable wealth allows them to play by a different set of rules. These rules are created and enforced by the 9%-ers, the legislators, high officials, and the nation-wide surveillance and security apparatus. There is no distinction here for partisan differences, our leadership is now the exclusive lap-dog of the elite, catering to their needs while actively suppressing discontent within the remainder of society. The divisions we now experience- left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative, occupy vs. tea party- are the meaningless and constantly re-inforced tools used by our leaders to cover up their complicity in this arrangement. American citizens need to realize this treasonous behavior for what it is....an anti-democratic corruption of our nations highest ideals.
acerbas writes:
A fine example of the tu quoque fallacy. http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
No defense of Romney's sleaziness, just point the finger at Obama. No question in my mind that both of them are sleazy, that's what you get when the candidates are hand picked by their corporate masters. We do not have a democracy; we have a kleptocracy. What kind of a democracy do we have when your choice is between one corporate puppet or another? Check out their campaign contributions and you'll find that many corporations donated to both of them. Romney and Obama are both empty suits. Over 50 years ago a Republican president warned us of the dangers of the military-industrial-congressional complex, and his prophesies have come true in spades. http://tinyurl.com/6planko
For an amusing take on Romney read this: http://tinyurl.com/82jbwfa
Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.
~ H.L. Mencken
raylaw43#321876 writes:
Not well-researched. Where are the credible citations? If the State of Hawaii certifies that Obama was born there, he was born there. Willard was born of an American mother and a Mexican father, according to his birth certificate, which nobody has questioned, and his father was born of a family of polygamists, which is why they moved to Mexico. Why wasn't George Romney questioned when he ran for President in 1968? Why isn't Willard questioned?
Nobody has said that there is anything improper in the Romney tax returns. As Judge Learned Hand(real name) said: there is a difference between tax evasion, which is illegal, and tax avoidance, which is legal.
Deducting mortgage interest is tax avoidance. Deducting mortgage interest when you have no mortgage is tax fraud and illegal.
However, Willard has an IRA worth $100,000,000. He and I are close to the same age. For most of my life, the maximum IRA contribution was $2000/yr. After 2002, Willard had no ordinary income(Ann said yesterday that he took no income as governor).
Where did the money come from and how did he do it?
Bob_Ingersoll writes:
Funny - sort of like how a non practicing lawyer went from 10k in the bank to multi-millionaire after becoming Senator Harry Reid. You see one, you see them all.
Perplexed writes:
Here's a list of the Democratic Presidential candidates over the last 50+ years who did NOT release more than one year of tax returns before the election.
2004 - Kerry
2000 - Gore
1992 - Clinton
1988 - Dukakis
1984 - Mondale
1976 - Carter
1972 - McGovern
1968 - Humphrey
1964 - Johnson
1960 - Kennedy
Decline2State writes:
Ray:
The problem with posters like these is they believe that "well researched" means they read it on a right wing blog or web site so it MUST be true. These folks don't live in the world you & I do where we not only are required to deal in facts, but we are also required to support our assertions with citation to relevant authority. It's the difference between bloviating ignorance and education, Ray.
BCChick writes:
Wasn't Romney born in Mexico?
PeaceinCalifornia writes:
There is a great article in The Smithsonian about that. His father was born in Mexico, in a Morman settlement that was founded when polygamists were outlawed in the US. Because jobs are scarce in Mexico, many of the Mexican youths in that settlement are forced back into the US to find work. They also fled back because of violence in the area. Some have stayed. Romney's cousins still love there.
It is pretty intersting.
There is also a pretty intersting piece about Obama's heritage, too.
Definately worth a read.
acerbas writes:
Ah, how I love the pronouncements of these greedy, clueless gazillionaires, especially Madame "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche" Romney.
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/44414
Economics is the publishing of political agendas that are hidden within known false assumptions. If one accepts these assumptions, then one accepts the hidden agendas. This brilliant method for subliminal programming has been very effective in instilling libertarian ideals into university students for half a century.
~ Jay Hanson
raylaw43#321876 writes:
The reason why I love this site is because the posters make cross-examination too easy. Years ago, I learned "logical positivism"(see Alfred North Whitehead) and deductive reasoning. I cross-examine using syllogisms.
Here, most people assume or believe that their major premise is true and they jump to the conclusion. I attack their major premises and they cannot respond with real facts.
There are a few folks here who understand my methodology, as you do, but there are some folks who do not realize that rational analysis and sarcasm are more effective tools than direct confrontation.
ENVIROSCIGUY writes:
I notice you did not cite your source. Was that because you made up your list?
Tax returns became a big deal after Agnew plead no contest to tax evasion in 73. Since then EVERY candidate has released more than 2 years. http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictur...
ENVIROSCIGUY writes:
PS: Except for McCain, who released only 2 years.
Tom__Johnston writes:
I'll agree with some of the commentary here that the whole issue of Romney's tax records MAY be a side-show to the real issues (whatever one thinks they are) during this election.
Even further towards the realm of carnival side-show are the comments that persist in the fringe "birther" comments that peppered these comments.
What is missed is that this is NOT the "Perfect Time" for Romney to release these records. That time has come and gone, that time was way up front in this whole campaign of Romney's. The controversy here is a direct result of the campaign blunder of failing to realize this issue needed to be confronted head on, early on, and moved on past.
Instead of being a distant campaign memory, it is fresh meat for everyone to ruminate on.
If Romney's campaign is this mis-managed (as other examples show) just what sort of President is he capable of being? He either picks bad advisors, or does not listen to them...not good either way for Mitt's prospects IMHO.
northwestprincess writes:
Yes, while you're at it Mitt disclose why your speaking voice is so polished, modulated, why you don't stutter & lapse into long ah's, da's. Also, why didn't you seal your school records, you think the public will care that you graduated cumlaude from Harvard Law School & Harvard School of Business? Then there's the fact that you don't drink, smoke, and have never done drugs even in college, what kind of a role model for American's is that? Oh, also, there's the fact that you go to Church on a regular basis, what candidate does that? And, disclose how you remained faithful and stood by your wife as she fought cancer and MS, as she stayed home to raise your five sons, and disclose why none of them have criminal records, yes, America wants to know. Finally, disclose that you made your fortune, you did not get it from dad or a wealthy wife, you actually "build" it, working, creating jobs at staples, how can the 50% of American's on welfare relate to that? Yes, Mitt, you have a lot of disclosing to do ~~~
PeaceinCalifornia writes:
Those are all great things. But, I am pretty sure his Dad had money, so he didn't build everything himself.
Mitt is running, basically, on the economy issue. If his tax returns show that he has sheltered his money, or has not supported the US in keeping jobs here or working to shirk taxes, then that is an "economy" issue. I am assuming that is why he is not releasing the tax records. He doesn't want the 99 percent to see how little his tax percentage has been. Looks bad.
PeaceinCalifornia writes:
There is also the Bain Capitol issue. I am pretty sure that "retroactively" retiring is not a norm. Their records show that he brought in salary during the years he claims he didn't work for them. What is that about? Seems strange that someone would pay you after you have quit.
It is possible that he was still "in charge" but didn't keep up on what the people under him were doing. If that is the case, it is not really the behavior we want from our commander in chief. We want someone who is going to work.
Oceaneagle writes:
The only newspapers in the US that disable comments are Scripps. And only for stories praising leftist ideals that may provoke right wing criticism.
BLW930 writes:
Perhaps there are other things Romney does not want the average voter to see:
Perhaps the percentage of income taxes paid?
Perhaps the percentage if income to charity?
Perhaps the offshore bank accounts?
Perhaps the income and bonuses from Bain will say something contrary?
Perhaps he made Millions on the Iraq/Afghanistan wars?
Perhaps he made Millions on disposing fetuses.
Perhaps he made million flipping oil/gas futures - helping to drive fuel prices up?
Only one way to clear it up.........
RELEASE YOUR LONG FORM TAX RETURNS DURING THE BUSH YEARS...
Let's see what you were doing under President Bush when all "R'money" disappeared over to the bailouts?
R'money, --- I mean Romney, did your hedge fund receive Federal Bailout money??
Did it???
Pierpont writes:
Unlike creating wealth like farmers, manufacturers and inventors what Romney has accomplished is manipulating the wealth and productivity of others.
The manipulators are winning...
Chilibreath writes:
Word to the VCS editor who sets the tone/direction for this rag: maybe it's time to PRETEND that your publication is neutral so you don't lose any more subscribers. How badly do you want to explain to corporate why your subscription base is bailing faster than passengers on the Titanic? (I just have to say this) I'm just saying!
pagnini writes:
What does Romney have to hide? RELEASE THE TAX RETURNS or save us all the bother and just admit that you profited from Bain Capital moving good jobs overseas, and/or paid zero or almost no taxes for those years. Simple as that.
greaterthanroomtempIQ writes:
Would that be the Chamber of Commerce that is bought and paid for by the Chinese government?
greaterthanroomtempIQ writes:
Well I guess the right wingers agree with Anne Romney's statement that they have released "all the information YOU PEOPLE need to know". What an arrogant condensing b*tch. Clearly the Romneys discuss this in their household in this manner. Who would support someone who thinks of the rest of America as YOU PEOPLE who have no need to know what kind of sleazy business dealings they have had in the last half decade, what their allegiances are and where they have buried their ill-gotten money made by destroying American businesses. The Romneys and their supporters make me sick.
partsman805 writes:
And Obama should release his college transcripts
pacman writes:
And they live below the poverty line constantly wondering how they can provide for their familes....what's your point?
Mitt and his ilk wonder instead whether they should tear down the perfectly good 3,000 sq.ft. beach house they just purchased and replace it with a bigger one just so they can visit the beach on the west coast for a couple of weeks a year. Yeah like he has any grip of the reality of the average American.
smackyd writes:
Rhetorically, is Romney > McCain. No. McCain got 37% of the California vote to Obama's 61% in 2008. Do yourselves a favor and get over it. The only way you can oust Obama is if you move to a state where the vote can be swung. Alas, you won't, you're too content in your life here in lovely California.
If you cared you'd move to Ohio or Florida, maybe Illinois where delegates can be won. Only problem is you probably don't understand the electoral college.
So, maybe if your life has gotten so much worse under Obama you'll "do for your country" and leave California for a swing state so Obama can be unseated. But you won't, your to content being fat, white, in your 60's collecting Social Security and Medicare under the hand of the current socialist regime.
You're nothing but paper tigers. Romney's going to get slaughtered.
Maybe you should consider moving to Canada. Oops, my bad they have universal health-care, how socialist of them. Plus Canada doesn't let anyone driving a PT Cruiser across the border.
If I were a Republican strategist I'd say move out of the state. California is always going to be for the donkeys. Plus the state would be better off without people who live off of the system, yet don't contribute to or care about the betterment of society.
Doxster writes:
simiwayne,
You're a trip!
Tell you what - I'm in the 28 percent tax bracket. Romney is in the 14 percent tax bracket. He makes exponentially more money than I. What bracket are you in?
The issue here is showing tax records, not records related to non-income matters.
Although, I personally believe my income tax records are nobody's business but mine, the precedent has been set to show said records when running for the office of President.
Want to participate in the conversation? Become a subscriber today. Subscribers can read and comment on any story, anytime. Non-subscribers will only be able to view comments on select stories.