Romney's bipartisan budget work in MA
It's an accomplishment that he brags on a lot. Unfortunately not everyone remembers it the same way. And unfortunately for him, some people are talking about it:
Over the past month, Mitt Romney touted similarities between the fiscal mess he inherited as Massachusetts governor and the current U.S. budget deficit, arguing that he reached bipartisan solutions to his state's problems and would do so again if elected president. His campaign bills the new theme as Romney's "closing argument" for the 2012 race, and presented it at all three presidential debates, in swing-state television ads and on the stump.
"I was elected as a Republican governor in a state with a legislature that was 85 percent Democrat," Romney said last week outside a construction services company in Ames, Iowa. "We were looking at a multi-billion dollar budget gap. But instead of fighting with one another, we came together to solve our problems."
A detailed Huffington Post review of Romney's budget proposals from his first year in office, however, reveals that he advocated deep cuts to programs serving the state's most vulnerable -- even when those cuts had little effect on the state's fiscal position. Romney's aggressive reductions to social programs did not earn support across the aisle. The state legislature ended up overriding more than 115 Romney vetoes in his first year as governor.
"There was no magic in the Romney approach," recalled former Democratic state Rep. Dan Bosley. It was "cut as many social programs as you can." Bosley added: "If we didn't override every one of his vetoes, we overrode most of his vetoes. ... There wasn't a bipartisan effort to run government."
Romney targeted many programs that had been historically supported by both parties. He pushed to eliminate or gut more than 20 state programs serving veterans, disadvantaged children, and adults with severe physical disabilities. He also sought to cut money for breast cancer screenings, suicide prevention and programs that assisted the blind and the deaf.
These cuts would have totaled $26.8 million -- 2.2 percent of the $1.2 billion state budget deficit that Romney inherited upon taking office. None of these cuts were necessary for balancing the state's budget. All were overriden by the Democratic state legislature, and the state still closed its budget gap with room to spare.
Since these cuts were never enacted, Romney can technically tout a bipartisan budget record. The legislature eventually approved a budget that eliminated the deficit by closing tax loopholes for corporations, cutting other spending, and raising tolls and licensing fees. But Romney's unimplemented proposals reflect priorities reminiscent of the GOP federal budget proposed by his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), which would slash food stamps, health care for poor children, public housing and other aid to the needy.
Seems to be lying by omission if not outright lying. Is this how he'll "get things done" in the White House?
Many details at the link.
Here is a link that might be useful: source of course