Systemic, long-term change is needed in Washington, but after four years with President Barack Obama setting the nation’s course, that change has not come.
Let’s acknowledge some of Obama’s achievements up front, including the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 and bringing Osama bin Laden to justice.
But in regard to the issue that is front and center for Americans — jobs and economic recovery — this nation remains stalled.
And on the issue that most threatens our nation’s future well-being — unchecked federal spending — this nation is more than stalled. It is in reverse.
In four years, our national debt slid from $10.7 trillion to $16.1 trillion, coming despite Obama’s promise to cut annual deficits in half.
Obama’s mistake was that he favored short-term, targeted solutions. Think “Cash for Clunkers,” for example, or those stimulus payments. Instead, long-range, core change is needed.
We also believe that while health care reform was and is needed, his health care plan was an overreach in more ways than one. Though legal, it was unwise. It was imprudent to add another national entitlement promise when there are serious questions about whether existing entitlement programs, such as Social Security and Medicare, can even survive.
The question is, will Mitt Romney bring the systemic change this nation needs?
Let’s start off with a central disagreement between the two candidates: the role of taxes in reducing the federal debt.
Romney won’t raise any new taxes to reduce the deficit. Period.
Obama believes taxes should be raised on the wealthy, and he would then use the tax code to provide more incentives to certain industries, such as manufacturing, to get the economy moving. Again, targeted, short-term solutions.
It’s true that the nation’s wealthiest 2 percent — individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000 — can pay more, but why should they? We don’t think any American should have to pay 40 percent of his income in federal taxes — not to mention the good amount that’s also spent on local, state and federal taxes — regardless of what that person makes.
Romney’s plan is to roll back individual income tax rates for all income groups by 20 percent, and cut the corporate tax rate from 35 to 25 percent, while at the same time reducing personal and corporate deductions.
This gets us closer to the kind of overhaul that is needed.
Some in Obama’s own camp have even acknowledged that Romney’s plan will not result in a tax hit to the middle class, as the president first alleged. Recently, Obama campaign spokesman Jen Psaki confessed that the elimination of enough deductions and loopholes, which Romney proposes, could in fact cover nearly $4 trillion of the $5 trillion in tax cuts.
According to The Wall Street Journal, “Princeton economics professor Harvey Rosen, cited by the Obama campaign as a source for the claim that the Romney plan must raise taxes on the middle class to avoid increasing the deficit, now says that Team Obama has been misrepresenting his research.
“In fact, his work shows that increased economic growth from a more efficient tax code and lower marginal tax rates will allow Mr. Romney to cut rates and deductions, while avoiding both a rate hike on the middle class and a deficit increase.”
When it comes to systemic problems, think Big Bird. Recent posturing over that “Sesame Street” character is telling.
During the first debate, Romney bluntly warned moderator Jim Lehrer that he would cut off funds for public broadcasting if the nation was having to borrow money from China to pay for it. If true, it’s the kind of thing a debtor nation must do.
The Obama campaign attacked Romney on that point.
Sure, funding for public broadcasting is an insignificant part of the budget, but if Obama isn’t even willing to cut one one-hundreth of 1 percent of federal spending for something that is non-vital to America, then the president is not serious about reducing spending at all.
If Obama is not serious about that, he is the wrong person for the job.
Mitt Romney should be the next president.
Opinion
Endorsement: Mitt Romney for president
- Opinion
-
-
Other Views: Conflicts in SEC
Money talks. In the continuing dispute over the all-too-cozy relationship between the people who create and sell financial products and the people who rate their risk, the money says: Shut up and let us do what we want.
-
Phill Brooks, columnist: Missouri Senate did what Founding Fathers had in mind
George Washington once described the Senate as being like a saucer in which you pour coffee or tea.
-
Our View: Fixing failure
Some 1,200 injured workers will finally get the payments they are owed. In its final week in session, Missouri’s General Assembly, through bipartisan efforts, passed a solution to address the insolvency of the state’s Second Injury Fund.
-
Herb B. Kuhn, guest columnist: Delaying Medicaid reform could hurt rural Missouri
The Missouri Legislature missed a rare opportunity in the just-ended session to transform Medicaid and make a real difference in the lives and health of hundreds of thousands of our neighbors. Rural Missouri has the most to lose from the legislature’s failure to act.
-
Kevin Wilson, guest columnist: When fear wins out, so do the terrorists
I’m going to make a bold statement that’s sure to draw a lot of comments, but hear me out before reaching for the keyboard to type a rebuttal.
-
Sandie Morgan, guest columnist: Unions benefit workers more than they may know
In a recent guest column (Globe, May 14), Elliott Denniston made the case for Missouri not to become a right-to-work state, and he made this case very well.
-
Marta Mossburg, columnist: Maybe government is tyrannical after all
Less than two weeks ago President Obama stood in front of graduates from The Ohio State University and told them to reject those who warn of government tyranny.
-
Our View: Spying on us
Distrust of government secrecy has been elevated to an exceptional level with the disclosure the Justice Department covertly examined two months of Associated Press phone records to determine who leaked details to the AP about a foiled terrorist plot.
-
Our View: Pass on the legacy
Forty hungry members of the 1st Kansas Colored Volunteer Infantry began gathering corn at the Rader farm near the village of Sherwood when they were ambushed by a guerrilla band of about 70 Southern sympathizers.
-
Our View: Big Brother looms large
The federal government, working under the cloak of secrecy, has been having a heyday at the expense of all Americans.
- More Opinion Headlines
-



