New York Times (Article by Julia Preston): Rick Perry's most pointed attack against Mitt Romney in Tuesday night's debate concerned an immigration matter that came to light when Mr. Romney was campaigning for president four years ago.
"You hired illegals in your home," said Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, "and you knew for -- about it for a year." For Mr. Romney to say he was tough on illegal immigration was "the height of hypocrisy," Mr. Perry said.
While it is not clear that Mr. Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, ever knew directly that his landscaping company was using illegal immigrants to tend his lawn, the episode was embarrassing for him in 2007 when it happened, and it is awkward now.
The Boston Globe first reported in December 2006 that Mr. Romney was employing a lawn care company that regularly hired illegal immigrants. He said he had dismissed an illegal immigrant he discovered working on his property. But he continued to use the same lawn company, and a year later The Globe reported that the company had once again employed illegal immigrants for lawn care. The day of the second Globe report, Mr. Romney fired the company.
Mr. Romney said that he had continued to use the company because it had guaranteed that it would not hire any illegal immigrants.
At the debate, Mr. Romney said he would combat illegal immigration by adopting a nationwide electronic program to verify the immigration status of all new workers. And he fired back at Mr. Perry, saying, "I don't think I've ever hired an illegal immigrant in my life."
"You hired illegals in your home," said Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, "and you knew for -- about it for a year." For Mr. Romney to say he was tough on illegal immigration was "the height of hypocrisy," Mr. Perry said.
While it is not clear that Mr. Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, ever knew directly that his landscaping company was using illegal immigrants to tend his lawn, the episode was embarrassing for him in 2007 when it happened, and it is awkward now.
The Boston Globe first reported in December 2006 that Mr. Romney was employing a lawn care company that regularly hired illegal immigrants. He said he had dismissed an illegal immigrant he discovered working on his property. But he continued to use the same lawn company, and a year later The Globe reported that the company had once again employed illegal immigrants for lawn care. The day of the second Globe report, Mr. Romney fired the company.
Mr. Romney said that he had continued to use the company because it had guaranteed that it would not hire any illegal immigrants.
At the debate, Mr. Romney said he would combat illegal immigration by adopting a nationwide electronic program to verify the immigration status of all new workers. And he fired back at Mr. Perry, saying, "I don't think I've ever hired an illegal immigrant in my life."
Cain's Tax Math
At the start of the debate, Herman Cain said his much-discussed "9-9-9" plan "does not raise taxes on those that are making the least. It's simply not true."
But a growing number of independent analysts have concluded that it does.
The plan calls for deep cuts in the existing federal taxes on individual and corporate income, both of which would be reduced to a flat 9 percent from a system of tiered rates that run above 30 percent for the highest earners. Mr. Cain then proposes the addition of a 9 percent sales tax.
Analysts say Mr. Cain's plan would raise taxes for lower-income families and reduce the taxes paid by higher-income families.
"Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a terrific example of fiscal hocus-pocus," Edward D. Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California, writes in a coming analysis of the plan for the trade journal Tax Notes. "It is presented as a low-tax panacea, but it actually would raise the tax bills of many Americans very substantially."
Professor Kleinbard estimated that a family with $120,000 in income last year would have paid $541 less in federal taxes under Mr. Cain's plan. A family that earned $50,000, by contrast, would have paid $4,800 more.
The Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institute, concluded that the plan amounted to a 25.38 percent national sales tax. Flat sales taxes fall more heavily on lower-income families, siphoning off a much larger share of their total income.
It is also important to note that the 9-9-9 plan is only a transitional stage in Mr. Cain's broader plan to overhaul federal taxation. He has proposed the ultimate elimination of income taxes in favor of a flat 30 percent sales tax.
Border Fence Costs
Is it possible to build a fence along the 2,000-mile United States-Mexico border? If so, is it worth the cost? And would it effectively secure the border?
Most of the candidates are competing to outdo one another in their support for building a fence on, as Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota has put it, "every mile, every foot, every inch" of the border. Mr. Cain has called for an electrified barrier that could kill people, a statement he later said was in jest, then later still said he had meant.
Only Mr. Perry, whose state's border with Mexico is 1,200 miles long, disagrees about the sense of a fence along every mile, without conceding his commitment to security.
It would take 10 to 15 years and cost $30 billion to complete a fence, Mr. Perry said on Tuesday night. He argued that a more cost-effective approach would be to build one in high-traffic areas and to use "boots on the ground" and Predator drones to monitor other areas. "That is the way to shut that border down," he said.
The Department of Homeland Security agrees with Mr. Perry. Officials say that a fence is prohibitively expensive and inefficient, given that many stretches of the border are remote. The agency has completed about 650 miles of fence, mostly in cities and at points where illegal crossings are frequent. Most of the work was done under the Bush administration.
But a growing number of independent analysts have concluded that it does.
The plan calls for deep cuts in the existing federal taxes on individual and corporate income, both of which would be reduced to a flat 9 percent from a system of tiered rates that run above 30 percent for the highest earners. Mr. Cain then proposes the addition of a 9 percent sales tax.
Analysts say Mr. Cain's plan would raise taxes for lower-income families and reduce the taxes paid by higher-income families.
"Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a terrific example of fiscal hocus-pocus," Edward D. Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California, writes in a coming analysis of the plan for the trade journal Tax Notes. "It is presented as a low-tax panacea, but it actually would raise the tax bills of many Americans very substantially."
Professor Kleinbard estimated that a family with $120,000 in income last year would have paid $541 less in federal taxes under Mr. Cain's plan. A family that earned $50,000, by contrast, would have paid $4,800 more.
The Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institute, concluded that the plan amounted to a 25.38 percent national sales tax. Flat sales taxes fall more heavily on lower-income families, siphoning off a much larger share of their total income.
It is also important to note that the 9-9-9 plan is only a transitional stage in Mr. Cain's broader plan to overhaul federal taxation. He has proposed the ultimate elimination of income taxes in favor of a flat 30 percent sales tax.
Border Fence Costs
Is it possible to build a fence along the 2,000-mile United States-Mexico border? If so, is it worth the cost? And would it effectively secure the border?
Most of the candidates are competing to outdo one another in their support for building a fence on, as Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota has put it, "every mile, every foot, every inch" of the border. Mr. Cain has called for an electrified barrier that could kill people, a statement he later said was in jest, then later still said he had meant.
Only Mr. Perry, whose state's border with Mexico is 1,200 miles long, disagrees about the sense of a fence along every mile, without conceding his commitment to security.
It would take 10 to 15 years and cost $30 billion to complete a fence, Mr. Perry said on Tuesday night. He argued that a more cost-effective approach would be to build one in high-traffic areas and to use "boots on the ground" and Predator drones to monitor other areas. "That is the way to shut that border down," he said.
The Department of Homeland Security agrees with Mr. Perry. Officials say that a fence is prohibitively expensive and inefficient, given that many stretches of the border are remote. The agency has completed about 650 miles of fence, mostly in cities and at points where illegal crossings are frequent. Most of the work was done under the Bush administration.
No comments:
Post a Comment