Obama Campaign Wants Romney To Release 5 Years Of Tax Returns

[Mayhem]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/17/obama-romney-tax-returns_n_1796291.html

With the spotlight back on Mitt Romney's tax returns, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina reached out to the Romney campaign on Friday pledging a deal: If Romney releases five more years of tax returns, the Obama campaign will no longer criticize the presumptive GOP presidential nominee for his refusal to disclose more information.

"I am writing to ask again that the Governor release multiple years of tax returns, but also to make an offer that should address his concerns about the additional disclosures," Messina wrote to Romney campaign manager Matt Rhoades. "Governor Romney apparently fears that the more he offers, the more our campaign will demand that he provide. So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more -- neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign."

But Romney's campaign was unmoved. Rhoades offered the following response:

Hey Jim,
Thanks for the note.

It is clear that President Obama wants nothing more than to talk about Governor Romney’s tax returns instead of the issues that matter to voters, like putting Americans back to work, fixing the economy and reining in spending.

If Governor Romney’s tax returns are the core message of your campaign, there will be ample time for President Obama to discuss them over the next 81 days.

In the meantime, Governor Romney will continue to lay out his plans for a stronger middle class, to save Medicare, to put work back into welfare, and help the 23 million Americans struggling to find work in the Obama economy.

See you in Denver.

Thanks,

Matt Rhoades
Romney for President
Campaign Manager

The penning of letters comes a day after Romney sought to put an end to speculation over his taxes by telling reporters he has paid a tax rate of at least 13 percent every year for the past 10 years. His comments marked the first time Romney has directly rebuked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's charge that he didn't pay taxes for a decade, an allegation that placed a renewed focus on the former Massachusetts governor's tax returns. In turn, the Obama campaign had a simple response to Romney's claim: "Prove it."

With only 81 days to go until the election, it is unlikely that Romney will release additional returns to prove his statement. But Democrats will probably continue to press on and perhaps look to seize on the selection of Paul Ryan as Romney's running mate. According to the Atlantic, Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of 0.82 percent in 2010 under Ryan's budget proposal, a point the Obama campaign will try to highlight as the race moves forward.

Read the full text of Messina's letter below:

Dear Matt:
I am writing to ask again that the Governor release multiple years of tax returns, but also to make an offer that should address his concerns about the additional disclosures. Governor Romney apparently fears that the more he offers, the more our campaign will demand that he provide. So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more -- neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign.

This request for the release of five years, covering the complete returns for 2007-2012, is surely not unreasonable. Other Presidential candidates have released more, including the Governor's father who provided 12 years of returns. In the Governor's case, a five year release would appropriately span all the years that he has been a candidate for President. It would also help answer outstanding questions raised by the one return he has released to date, such as the range in the effective rates paid, the foreign accounts maintained, the foreign investments made, and the types of tax shelters used.

To provide these five years, the Governor would have to release only three more sets of returns in addition to the 2010 return he has released and the 2011 return he has pledged to provide. And, I repeat, the Governor and his campaign can expect in return that we will refrain from questioning whether he has released enough or pressing for more.

I look forward to your reply.

Jim Messina

Obama for America Campaign Manager

 

[xfire]

Why isn't Romney being properly vetted?

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

Why hasn't Nobama been properly vetted?

 

[xfire]

Why hasn't Nobama been properly vetted?

If you didn't understand that I was riffing on that very sentiment, you wear bigger clown shoes than I thought, and if you don't understand why I was riffing on it, just do the world a favor and stay out of political discussions.

 

[PlumpRump]

Romney really should release at least a quarter century of tax returns. Its only proper, considering that the Obama administration has been an unprecedented champion of personal and governmental transparency.

 

[xfire]

Five years would be sufficient to prove what a tax-dodging douchebag he is. Of course he proves that by not releasing them, too. Winner winner chicken dinner, either way.

 

[PlumpRump]

Five years would be sufficient to prove what a tax-dodging douchebag he is. Of course he proves that by not releasing them, too. Winner winner chicken dinner, either way.

So transparency is what you desire, I get that. Now, would you kindly address my assertion that it is hypocritical for the Obama administration (not to mention you) to demand transparency when they themselves have an abominable record of personal and governmental transparency, especially despite the claims that they would be the "most transparent government in history"... or am I just "missing the point" again?

 

[xfire]

So transparency is what you desire, I get that. Now, would you kindly address my assertion that it is hypocritical for the Obama administration (not to mention you) to demand transparency when they themselves have an abominable record of personal and governmental transparency, especially despite the claims that they would be the "most transparent government in history"... or am I just "missing the point" again?

The Obama Administration has an "abominable record of transparency" compared to who? How often do you check http://www.whitehouse.gov/
The real question is, how hard have you looked? Or, here's a better question, what, specifically do you want Obama to divulge? Fast and Furious, perhaps?

 

[PlumpRump]

The Obama Administration has an "abominable record of transparency" compared to who? How often do you check http://www.whitehouse.gov/
The real question is, how hard have you looked? Or, here's a better question, what, specifically do you want Obama to divulge? Fast and Furious, perhaps?

Are you really citing Whitehouse.gov as a tool for transparency? The place where information control could not possibly be more obvious, not simply for Obama, but for any President who has ever sat in the Oval Office during its existence? Letting out the information you want to let out is not transparency.

For your first question, well, he has an abominable transparency record compared to the last 5 administrations, at least, according to one Washington lawyer with nearly 35 years of experience filing FOIA cases.

As to your other question:
-Fast and Furious couldn't hurt, could it?
-Followed with an explanation of why the healthcare discussions were not broadcast on C-SPAN or online, as promised.
-Why he failed to keep his "sunlight before signing" pledge.
-The Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.
-His Occidental, or Harvard Records and how he paid for law school maybe?
-Maybe just even release his Columbia College thesis.
-Disclosing cabinet and administration officials' attendance at Super PAC meetings.
-Clearing up why he has 20+ SSN's doesn't seem to be that difficult to do.
-The makeup and findings of the so-called "Super Committee."
-His legislative records from the Illinois state senate, which seem to be missing.
-A lack of enforcement of EO 13457 which mandates high levels of transparency in congressional earmarks.
-Maybe a statement about what happened to his "contracts and influence" database that he promised.
-The details of the PhRMA deal.
-A discussion about his "Lobbyists In/Out EO" in relation to why William Daley was his Chief of Staff.

All of those things might be a good start. Either that, or just shut up about "a new era of government transparency." Either, or.


Understand, I fully comprehend the utility, and often times necessity, of information control for the office of the Presidency. My point is that is seems a little hypocritical to demand openness and transparency from a political opponent, when even Politico and CNN question his.

 

[Sam Fisher]

 

[Mayhem]

Now wait a minute. On one hand you say the administration isn't transparent enough, on the other you won't shut up about White House leaks. You can't have both, so pick one.

 

[Rey C.]

Pretty clear to me what's going on here: Mitt feels that it would be better to gloss over not releasing his tax returns rather than having to spend the next three months explaining his relatively low (for his income) effective tax rate and all of the foreign interest and dividend entries that would show up. For those who want to (conveniently) paint this as a strategy developed by the "anti-capitalist, socialist, communist, Nazi, illegal immigrant luvin' Dems"... this can of worms got opened by the GOP runners during the primaries.

The risk that Romney takes with his current strategy is that the longer he lets this go on, the more speculative things that his opponent can say regarding the returns and foreign income sources. But if Mitt knows that releasing the returns would be like revealing the dead hooker buried in the backyard to the detective at the door, he really can't release the returns. What's so ironic about this is that the birthers did this to Romney, because they're the ones who went on & on for years about a birth certificate. Now their man has a similar issue... only it's a more serious skeleton in the closet. Donald Trump and the other moonbats made these sorts of tactics fair play.

 

[meesterperfect]

Ok so harry , while on the taxpayers dime, gets up on the floor of the senate and flat out lies and says " the word is out, Romney has paid no taxes in ten years".............
and what? He should shit his pants and start handing over his tax returns to pmsnbc or something?
fuck that.
And if he really paid no taxes don't you fools think that the irs would have been on to him by now?
its all just A) a desperation move by obamas people because they have no achievements or ideas to run on.
b) clear pandering for the idiot vote, which is their only hope at this point.

 

[xfire]

its all just A) a desperation move by obamas people because they have no achievements or ideas to run on.
b) clear pandering for the idiot vote, which is their only hope at this point.

Obama is leading all polls. Why do you keep pushing the lie that he's desperate? No achievements? What rock are you living under?

 

[bobjustbob]

Romny doesn't have to release his taxes any more than Obama has to release his birth cirtificate. Everyone that needed to see them did. Drop this shit and move onto fixing the country's problems.

 

[Rey C.]

And if he really paid no taxes don't you fools think that the irs would have been on to him by now?

Why would the IRS be on him? No one claimed that he didn't file his tax returns. Filing and paying are two entirely different things.

My guess is that Mitt has paid something, but not very much. I suspect that in many years, he was able to (legally) shield much/most of his income from taxation. Mitt really is quite sharp when it comes to finance. That cannot be taken away from him. Let's take his Simplified Employee Pension IRA, for instance. He and the other Bain partners would place money in the IRA's, just as you or I might. But unlike you or I, in their case, they had direct control over the actual companies whose stocks then went into those SEP IRA's. By doing it that way, even a relatively small investment in a company that currently has a low value, when loaded up with assets and/or income at a later date, would produce other worldly returns... as they could artificially inflate the value of the company and its shares down the road (shares of which the Bain partners had complete ownership of). Maybe some poor grammar and sentence structure there, but am I making sense? Anyway, Mitt Romney's SEP IRA is estimated to be worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million. This would have been from a maximum of $50,000 in annual SEP IRA contributions on his part. You don't have to take my word for it - do the math. I don't care who you are, without being in a special position, you can't make $50,000 annual investments and end up with $100 million... unless you live to be several hundred years old. At the end of 20 years your invested capital/principal would be $1 million. Using simple interest (no compounding), we're talking about a 9,900% return here. Now :cmon:

I'm not criticizing the man for doing that. It's fucking genius! It really is. And it's perfectly legal too. I'm OK with it. I'm damn impressed. But try explaining that to a 50 year old plant worker (voter!) who watched his IRA or 401K fall by 40% in 2009 and even now probably isn't worth what it was in 2008. That guy probably wouldn't be as impressed as I was when I read details of how Mitt and the boys at Bain did what they did. I doubt that Romney has broken any laws. But I think the problem is, he doesn't have any desire to explain the slick means that he's used to build that tidy (lowly taxed) fortune.

 

[Mayhem]

Romny doesn't have to release his taxes any more than Obama has to release his birth cirtificate. Everyone that needed to see them did. Drop this shit and move onto fixing the country's problems.

Obama did release his birth certificate. And the deal with Romney is that his career is emblematic of the country's problems. Unregulated wheeling and dealing, getting over on the system using slick moves not available to the working man, talking about deficits while the money he should have paid in taxes sits in Switzerland and the Caymans.

 

[rjdogma]

Romney needs to release the records. This isn't going away. It's going to continue to be a problem throughout the campaign.

 

[Straight Shooter]

Why would the IRS be on him? No one claimed that he didn't file his tax returns. Filing and paying are two entirely different things.

My guess is that Mitt has paid something, but not very much. I suspect that in many years, he was able to (legally) shield much/most of his income from taxation. Mitt really is quite sharp when it comes to finance. That cannot be taken away from him. Let's take his Simplified Employee Pension IRA, for instance. He and the other Bain partners would place money in the IRA's, just as you or I might. But unlike you or I, in their case, they had direct control over the actual companies whose stocks then went into those SEP IRA's. By doing it that way, even a relatively small investment in a company that currently has a low value, when loaded up with assets and/or income at a later date, would produce other worldly returns... as they could artificially inflate the value of the company and its shares down the road (shares of which the Bain partners had complete ownership of). Maybe some poor grammar and sentence structure there, but am I making sense? Anyway, Mitt Romney's SEP IRA is estimated to be worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million. This would have been from a maximum of $50,000 in annual SEP IRA contributions on his part. You don't have to take my word for it - do the math. I don't care who you are, without being in a special position, you can't make $50,000 annual investments and end up with $100 million... unless you live to be several hundred years old. At the end of 20 years your invested capital/principal would be $1 million. Using simple interest (no compounding), we're talking about a 9,900% return here. Now :cmon:

I'm not criticizing the man for doing that. It's fucking genius! It really is. And it's perfectly legal too. I'm OK with it. I'm damn impressed. But try explaining that to a 50 year old plant worker (voter!) who watched his IRA or 401K fall by 40% in 2009 and even now probably isn't worth what it was in 2008. That guy probably wouldn't be as impressed as I was when I read details of how Mitt and the boys at Bain did what they did. I doubt that Romney has broken any laws. But I think the problem is, he doesn't have any desire to explain the slick means that he's used to build that tidy (lowly taxed) fortune.

Lately, Romney has been saying that his investments are in a blind trust which he has no control over. However, back in 1994 when Romney was running against Ted Kennedy for the Senate, he had a totally different point of view about how much control one exercises over his/her own blind trust

 

[mikexmoran]

Can we see Romney's birth certificate?

I'm really not that curious. I think we know what we would find in his tax records. He took advantage of every loop hole possible and has tons of money off shore.

It probably isn't a good thing and maybe I just need a cup of coffee, but I'm really bored by this election. I'll vote for Obama and I think he'll win, but I'm feeling apathetic.