CONNECTICUT SENATE RACE HEATS UP:
MURPHY HAS TO DEFEND HIMSELF
FOR VOTING IN FAVOR OF
“THE ROMNEY RULE”
Last Monday, January 23rd, Democratic Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate and former Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz called out her primary opponent for the Senate nomination, Congressman Chris Murphy on his support of low taxes for the extremely wealthy at the expense of working middle class families who are compelled to subsidize the likes of quarter billionaire Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who finally caved in to pressure from opposing candidates and the public by releasing recent tax returns which reveal that he pays the lowest rate possible, 15% on his massive wealth and income. She called upon Murphy to answer for his vote and cited NY Times reporting as follows to document Murphy’s support of the super-rich:
“On May 28, 2010 Chris Murphy was one of only 34 Democrats who voted against a House bill that included an important provision to change the tax treatment of “carried interest”, by taxing 75% of investment income as ordinary income, and 25% as capital gains. It was expected to raise $17billion in revenue. The AFL-CIO characterized the bill as a significant way to “…close tax loopholes and ensure corporate accountability. “The bill passed by only 11 votes.”
The narrow margin of this vote and the unexpected support of so-called Democrats like Murphy ensured passage of the bill enabling the likes of Romney to pay at a lower rate than most middle class families and for billionaires such as Warren Buffet to pay less proportional taxes than their secretaries (to his credit, Mr. Buffet supports tax reform which would compel higher tax rates for himself and his wealthy colleagues, and supports President Obama’s “Buffet Rule” so named to honor his genuine sincerity—while more sarcastic pundits are referring to the unfair tax status quo as “The Romney Rule” because of the former Mass. Governor’s support of continuing obscenely low taxes for himself and his fellow super-wealthy executives as a matter of policy). On Monday Mrs. Bysiewicz issued a strong statement calling Mr. Murphy to task for his inane inconsistency by publicly proclaiming support of tax fairness while voting otherwise by saying:
“Congressman Chris Murphy’s vote to keep this loophole open ensured that Mitt Romney and other private equity executives were able to keep their 15 percent tax rate – a provision from the Bush Administration’s tax code that is lower than the rate most middle class families pay.
I strongly disagree with Congressman Chris Murphy’s decision to protect the tax loophole for Mitt Romney and Wall Street Executives. Instead, we should be looking out for the middle class. That’s why my plan will remove the tax loophole and hold Wall Street accountable for the financial crises they caused that continues to hurt the middle class.”
Hartford Government Examiner lauded Mrs. Bysiewicz willingness to address this issue head-on and commented:
“Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate and former Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz issued a strong statement opposing her Democratic primary opponent’s vote in favor of perpetuating a tax loophole which enables executives of private equity funds, in particular Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, to keep a low 15% federal tax rate – lower than the rate that almost all working families pay. Ms. Bysiewicz has prepared a 34 page, detailed and well-researched “Accountability Plan” for the economy, taxes and politicians and has prepared some videos explaining her positions accessible at the plan website linked here: http://www.susansplan.com/#. The New York Times reported that Connecticut Congressman and Senate candidate Chris Murphy was one of only 34 Democrats who voted to continue this status for those of wealth such as Romney, estimated to be worth a personal fortune of a quarter Billion dollars, and who has been extremely reluctant during the Republican Presidential primary to release his own tax returns and has thus far failed to do so.
Romney’s own stand on revealing the source of his wealth and to release his tax returns is vague [since this editorial was written Romney has very reluctantly released some of his tax returns for the past two years] and changing under pressure from Republican opponents, especially from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, whose own sources of wealth have come under scrutiny and accusations of shady dealings as a lobbyist and employee of Freddie Mac have run rampant throughout the campaign. The only concrete thing Mitt Romney has said at all as regards his own tax payments was in response to a reporter’s .question, when he responded that he “probably pays closer to the 15%.” The bill passed with Chris Murphy’s approval passed by only 11 votes, and without that minimum of Democratic support from Murphy and other Democrats that measure would certainly have failed and Romney and others of the extremely wealthy would be responsible for a farer share of the nations’ taxes.
Ms. Bysiewicz is on target with this strong statement, and Murphy has much to explain on this and many other votes. Chris Murphy seems all too often to fit in all too well with the old boy network down in Washington, DC and his support of the wealthy against the middle class is not what Connecticut is about nor what its taxpayers deserve. At this point we can only hope that Ms. Bysiewicz is capable of continuing her strong campaign and defeat Mr. Murphy in the Democratic primary, preceding her win to replace Joe Lieberman next November. It is now very apparent that it would also benefit the state if Mr. Murphy were to either not seeking reelection to the House, or be defeated for that nomination as well.”
Examiner continues to stand by its statement, and unreservedly and enthusiastically continues its endorsement and support of Mrs. Bysiewicz' bid to replace retiring U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman. I wish to personally express my gratitude to Susan for her sacrifices in pursuing this candidacy and for her many years of dedicated, effective and compassionate public service to the people of my home state.
Murphy’s pathetically weak response to his own blunderous actions came in this statement:
“On this particular vote they’re (Bysiewicz’s campaign) talking about, Chris’ vote had nothing to do with his support of carried interest. He definitely supports closing this loophole and has used his voice and vote to do that. Overall this bill added$54 billion to the deficit. Chris just wasn’t comfortable with that,” Curran said. He added, “People in Connecticut know where Chris stands on tax fairness. He’s voted repeatedly to close this tax loophole and to end the unfair Bush tax cuts. That’s why groups that fight for middle class workers here in Connecticut like UAW, CWA, CT Building Trades, CT Firefighters, CEA and the Working Families Party have been quick to support him in this important race.”
Mrs. Bysiewicz followed up with the following conclusive rebuttal:
“Congressman Chris Murphy’s excuse just doesn’t hold up. He has voted multiple times to increase the deficit but when the Democratic majority was on the verge of closing the carried interest loophole he suddenly was against more spending.
The bill Congressman Murphy voted against would have ended the tax break for executives of investment funds and generated $17 billion in revenue to offset a much needed jobs package.
This measure would have extended unemployment benefits, the research and development credit, tuition deduction, and provided a summer jobs program.
The AFL-CIO strongly advocated for the legislation stating, “The jobs bill makes significant investments in American jobs and cuts taxes to help the nation continue along the path of economic recovery and job growth. It includes provisions that will promote American job creation, provide relief for working families, prevent the outsourcing of American jobs, close tax loopholes and ensure corporate accountability.
It is no wonder that Congressman Chris Murphy has gone on to raise over $300,000 from Wall Street for his campaign for US Senate and is one of the top recipients of contributions from Hedge Funds.”
While Mr. Murphy is utilizing is salary devoting his time to voting on the House floor and in committee in support of the wealthy and taking advantage of the working class and the poor of Connecticut by so doing, Mrs. Bysiewicz has issued a detailed and convincing 34 page Accountability Plan designed to ensure economic fairness, growth, Wall Street reform, and to ensure that DC politicians such as Chris Murphy will answer for their actions. Mitt Romney does not require further aid from Chris Murphy, and Mr. Murphy absolutely needs to be denied the opportunity to have a stronger hand in aiding his millionaire and billionaire allies with a Senate seat. Sue Bysiewicz WILL assist the poor and the working middle class to achieve tax fairness. Chris Murphy, once turned aside for this Senate nomination, hopefully will be also relinquishing his House seat to a true Democrat who will stand up for taxation equity, shared responsibiliety and simple fairness.
Comments