Freshman senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania tells National Review Online that he supports Mitt Romney’s tax plan, and he predicts that its framework would boost GOP candidates in a general election, should Romney lead the ticket. “This is a winner,” he says. “It’s a more dramatic, more sweeping reform than anything he has proposed before on the tax side. Republican primary voters, I think, will almost universally see it as very pro-growth.”
Toomey adds that Romney’s proposal is a better option than Rick Santorum’s tax plan, which eliminates the corporate tax for manufacturers. “Senator Santorum’s plan has some constructive elements,” he says. “But my own view is that it’s best for the government to not be picking winners and losers. When you say that one sector will have a lower tax rate than another sector, you really are playing favorites. And I prefer a tax code that is neutral in that respect.”
To win in November, Toomey, who has not endorsed a presidential contender, says Republicans must have a strong, simple tax-reform message. Romney’s 20 percent across-the-board cut on individual tax rates, he says, provides a snappy, “supply side” blueprint. “I think having a bold, sweeping plan that people can understand in a moment is really important,” he says. “This could be part of that. There is a lot to still be disclosed. But this combines, as I did with my supercommittee plan, simplicity with fairness and lower marginal rates.”
“Simplicity, and fairness, and stronger economic growth, that’s a great combination,” Toomey says. “As you long as you explain it that way, and you stress how you achieve those three goals in one tax reform, I think that will play very well in the Philadelphia suburbs and many other places.”
Re: "Mitt Romney’s tax plan, and he predicts that its framework would boost GOP candidates in a general election, should Romney lead the ticket. “This is a winner,” he says. “It’s a more dramatic, more sweeping reform than anything he has proposed before"
Great! Free War! Free Lunch! Deficit Spend Out The Wazoo! Just Like Old Times! Destroy Iran and put it on the credit card! Great! Great! Great! That's a Winner for sure!
BTW, Toomey was paid $600 GRAND a year playing the Beltway Reptile Game at the Club For Growth. Another make-work Crony Job paying Big Bucks for just showing up.
Must be nice...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseClub for Growth is a totally privately funded 527 organization, I don't always agree with their political tactics (which are often extremely short sighted), but on policy substance they are one of the best organizations out there. I don't have any problem with Toomey taking that job or them paying him whatever they paid him, it isn't like he was working for Freddy Mac.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis must mean Republicans are going to stop pretending that the deficit and debt matters. Romney's plan would increase both.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm really hoping this is pure campaign fodder, because unless I'm missing something in Romney's WSJ op-ed there are no junk deductions and credits eliminated in the personal tax code. It's time for tax REFORM. We need more Reagan '86 and less Bush '03.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm cross-posting the same comment from the other Costa post on Toomey:
Well this is ironic
.
Pat Toomey is careful, but his statement is a half-way endorsement of the Arlen Spector of this primary (Romney) against the more conservative, Pat Toomey candidate.
By the way, I was in Camp Hill, PA during Toomey's first run against Specter when he spoke at the West Shore Library. He was asked why Santorum and Bush hadn't endorsed him. Mr. Toomey answered "really, they had to endorse Sen. Specter" and implied that he was sure both Sen. Santorum and President Bush would have rather had Mr. Toomey in the Senate than Arlen Specter. I, along with everyone else in the room, agreed.
Final irony: Pat Toomey would most likely not be serving in the Senate now had he won that 2004 primary.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy not have the ultimate in "bold" tax plans and just eliminate the whole thing. Flat tax of 0%. No wage, SS, medicare, gas taxes, nothing. That cannot be criticized for not being bold! Tax cuts do pay for themselves after all.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDo not forget that in 2004 Specter was not that bad. Strong supporter of Justice Thomas, strong supporter of Israel, the only Jewish Republican in the Senate. It took Obama to show haw bad Specter was. Toomey did not have a chance in 2004. We are lucky he got 51% in 2010, our best year, and hopefully we will have him for a while, but he should not settle old score by semi endorcing another liberal. Repeating Suntorum's mistake out of hurt feelings is even worse, than what Santorum did when he followed request of Republican President up for reelection.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse