• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Democrats apply legislative pressure on Mitt Romney to release more tax returns

AdamT said:
I think he's saying that Americans prefer our accomplished president to an incompetent, tax cheating, pathological liar without a single core conviction ... to borrow your argument style.
Click to expand...

They did in 2008 when they elected Obama.
 
Wiseone said:
That is pretty stupid legislation obvious reaction to recent events, almost as bad as the one's requiring someone to display their birth certificate as well which was an obvious response to the birther junk. And I bring that up only because it compares so easily and not because I'm trying to make a silly "You did it too argument."
Click to expand...

The huge difference, to be president, required by the constitution you have to be born a US Citizen. Tax returns are not required.
 
"We don't have a budget and the majority of Americans aren't happy about healthcare or taxes. I know! Let's create a law regarding the requirements of presidential candidates, and let's make that law require the release of information that has ****-all to do with presidentin'."
 
VanceMack said:
Horse****. You didn't even THINK about it, nor did you think about his tax rate. It was never an issue, just as it wasn't an issue when it was revealed he is dodging taxes today in Massachusets. You simply don't CARE when it involves democrats.
Click to expand...

I suggest you quit arguing what I personally think because it's quite clear that you have no ****ing clue. Don't give me that "it's cause it's a democrat!" ****. I've already made posts about how I think that no one should be attacking Romney on Bain. I hear the details and I make up my mind. I hope that you can accept that without going unhinged in this thread.

This is obviously different. If it is standard procedure for a presidential candidate to release a decades worth of taxes, I find it odd that one of the candidates is so dead set against releasing them. I'm not saying he broke laws, I'm not saying i hate him cause he's rich, or any other silly talking points you are probably going to drag up. I simply am curious as to why he doesn't just release them. I didn't tell all of the other candidates to release them.
 
tessaesque said:
"We don't have a budget and the majority of Americans aren't happy about healthcare or taxes. I know! Let's create a law regarding the requirements of presidential candidates, and let's make that law require the release of information that has ****-all to do with presidentin'."
Click to expand...

Yeah, what they should be doing is filing abortion bill after abortion bill, right? That'll put people back to work.
 
AdamT said:
Yeah, what they should be doing is filing abortion bill after abortion bill, right? That'll put people back to work.
Click to expand...

What abortion bills are the federal legislative houses drafting?
 
upsideguy said:
A silly thing to legislate, though its obvious the fear on this is on the Republican side. They know they are damned if the do (Mitt certainly does not want to reveal he believes so much in America that all his money is out of the country and how much he made betting agains the American people in credit default swaps) and damned if they don't (people will just believe he is hiding these things). And, of course, if he takes too much time releasing his returns he gets to look untrustworthy (what's he hiding?) AND weak (really, why didn't you just do that in the first place?).

Good luck with this one Regressives. This is a winner for the Dems no matter how you slice it. Its probably time to name Pawlenty your VP so you can buy some cover.
Click to expand...

Fear on the Republican side, :doh, are you kidding me. A Democrat Senate trying to change the rules right before an election to help their guy out. DESPERATION, WEAKNESS, SCARED TO DEATH, AN OBVIOUS ATTEMPT AT A DISTRACTION TO COVER UP FOR OBAMA'S FAILURES. That is how the public will view this stupid ass stunt.
 
AdamT said:
Yeah, what they should be doing is filing abortion bill after abortion bill, right? That'll put people back to work.
Click to expand...

No, but it saves lives, something liberals don't care about, do "Death Panels" mean anything?
 
AdamT said:
Recently, you mean? How about as recent as yesterday? D.C. Abortion Bill Approved by House Judiciary Committee | NBC4 Washington

Or more generally: Republicans Push Antiabortion Bills - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

The first bill is specific to D.C., which doesn't have it's own legislative body as a state would, so that's not really federal law and would really only bring DC up to speed with most other states in terms of abortion limitations.


Your other link is from February 2011. And from that link, it seems those bills centered on government spending in relation to abortion, which is an economic issue (as excessive deficit spending is a prime reason the economy is stagnating).

A Judiciary Committee panel held a hearing Tuesday on a broad bill that aims to cut government involvement with abortion, and another committee will examine a bill Wednesday to change the abortion provisions of the new health law.

The most sweeping of the new measures, by Rep. Chris Smith (R., N.J.), seeks to undo any government connections to abortion, even indirect ones. It specifies that companies and individuals wouldn't receive tax breaks for health coverage if their policies covered abortion. House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) appeared at a press conference announcing the bill.
Click to expand...

So yeah, you're right that these bills are running through the fed, but you've still failed to make a valid point regarding them being as nonsensical and "wasteful" of legislative time as a mandate regarding presidential nominee tax returns. But keep hacking man, whatever works for you.
 
Prof. Peabody said:
You might doubt it, but it's going to happen. Why would they win more? They had complete control in 2009 and 2010 and still couldn't get the economy turned around. Why on Earth would anyone want more of that?
Click to expand...

For many they want a dependent society on government to care and lead them through their daily lives.
 
tessaesque said:
The first bill is specific to D.C., which doesn't have it's own legislative body as a state would, so that's not really federal law and would really only bring DC up to speed with most other states in terms of abortion limitations.


Your other link is from February 2011. And from that link, it seems those bills centered on government spending in relation to abortion, which is an economic issue (as excessive deficit spending is a prime reason the economy is stagnating).



So yeah, you're right that these bills are running through the fed, but you've still failed to make a valid point regarding them being as nonsensical and "wasteful" of legislative time as a mandate regarding presidential nominee tax returns. But keep hacking man, whatever works for you.
Click to expand...

Oh, if you're worried that they aren't wasting enough time on abortion that should be spent on jobs, fear not. I could have pointed to last month's "Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act" and many others from this year.

btw, the DC bill is not in line with most states as it brooks no exception for rape, incest or the health of the mother.
 
iguanaman said:
It's more like "The jig is up". The latest Gallup poll shows 54% want to see more of his returns. If you don't give voters what they want..........
Click to expand...

Ah... wise choice... let's make our legislative decisions based on narrow majorities found in insta-polls with small percentages of the nation as a whole, who wasted the time to do them!!! :doh

How about we make a law that says everyone who asks to see someone else's tax returns has to release their tax returns, too? You know what, let's also make a law that everyone who pays taxes at all should have to post them?

This is why the founding fathers were smart enough to have the legislators separate from the general public to make the wise decisions on their own... away from the ignorant masses...
 
IndepCentristMA said:
Ah... wise choice... let's make our legislative decisions based on narrow majorities found in insta-polls with small percentages of the nation as a whole, who wasted the time to do them!!! :doh

How about we make a law that says everyone who asks to see someone else's tax returns has to release their tax returns, too? You know what, let's also make a law that everyone who pays taxes at all should have to post them?

This is why the founding fathers were smart enough to have the legislators separate from the general public to make the wise decisions on their own... away from the ignorant masses...
Click to expand...

That is exactly why we are a Republic not a Democracy.
 
hazlnut said:
George Will

National Review

Matthew Dowd

Haley Barbour

Bill Kristol

All stated that Romney absolutely should release multiple (5-10 years) returns. Some suggested that he must be hiding something. Hey far-righties, do these names sound familiar??


This thread is asinine. The far rightie Obama haters are failing miserably. The American people are not going to elect someone worth half-billions dollars who has been hiding his money off shore for a decade. No one is going to elect a multimillionaire who paid no taxes several years in a row.

He's hiding something and his campaign will tank in the next month if he does't disclose the returns.
Click to expand...


Why do liberals hate wealthy people?
 
I wonder if congress actually has the constitutional ability to force disclosure of anything from a Presidential candidate if they are qualified by the constitutional requirements. Political pressure sure, but drafting laws on the matter? I dont think they really have the authority to do so.
 
OpportunityCost said:
I wonder if congress actually has the constitutional ability to force disclosure of anything from a Presidential candidate if they are qualified by the constitutional requirements. Political pressure sure, but drafting laws on the matter? I dont think they really have the authority to do so.
Click to expand...

Romney's tax retruns are no longer an issue.

Obummer will now have to come up with something else.

There are about 136 million taxpayers who have adjusted gross incomes less than $200,000, or 97 percent of all taxpayers. So even with an average tax rate of 14 percent, Romney paid a higher average rate than 97 percent of his fellow Americans. ...Even at 14%, Romney Pays a Higher Rate than 97% of His Fellow Americans | Tax Foundation

Average_Tax_Rates_2.png


There are roughly 123 million taxpayers who earn under $100,000, or about 88 percent of the 140 million Americans who filed a tax return in 2009. In other words, 88 percent of all taxpayers pay 8 percent or less of their income in income taxes.

Which gets us back to Mitt Romney's effective tax rate of 14 percent, after deductions. As the chart shows, this rate is still higher than the average rate paid by taxpayers earning up to $200,000.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Thank you, Democrats! Thank you!!!



This just goes to show how scared the Dems are of losing their asses, come November.
Click to expand...

Interesting. To be honest I thought if things started look bleak for the administration by fall, it would not be outside the realm of possibility for Romneys tax returns to be leaked if there is damaging information in them. Romney is not the only one who knows what's in his tax returns. The IRS knows too. If highly sensitive national security information can be passed on to the media by a 20 something year old jerk, certainly IRS tax records can be leaked to the media too by some young democrat activist employee of the IRS.

On the issue itself, I think Romney should be totally transparent with his tax records. As long as he's not, I assume there's a reason for it and will assume the worst upto and including possible fraud.
 
Transparency is a good thing so i can support this...
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Transparency is a good thing so i can support this...
Click to expand...

Really? Under what authority would congress pass such a law? Im just trying to get a straight answer on that because I dont see any authority to force a presidential candidate to have any qualifications beyond those in the constitution. All the other requirements are under state election rules on getting on the ticket and what have you, I dont see where disclosure of his personal finances is really under anyone's power but the candidates as a political expediency to transparency.
 
James Cessna: you are funny m8, and about this tax thinger, remember when these silly simple minded right wingers were all over Obama about is he an american, or a Iraqi or Indo, or.......lol well I started my own club right here and right now. I DEMAND to see Mitts marriage certificate, I want to make sure he does not have 7 wives(we all know those Mormons(MORON) are silly women haters) where is his proof that winch anne is his only wife? I DEMAND IT!!!!!!!
 
OpportunityCost said:
Really? Under what authority would congress pass such a law?
Click to expand...
Well the US Constitution does not say a lot of things. It says little about transparency. But that does not mean that it is unconstitutional...

All the other requirements are under state election rules on getting on the ticket and what have you, I dont see where disclosure of his personal finances is really under anyone's power but the candidates as a political expediency to transparency.
Click to expand...
Its an issue. Always has been always will be. Especially when it comes to taxation etc. Thats the whole issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom