Romney tax returns: Could Reid’s unsubstantiated attack hurt Democrats?

Harry Reid, the Senate's top Democrat, says Mitt Romney paid no income tax for 10 years. His source, he says, is a Bain Capital investor. But he won't say who. The tactic could backfire.

|
Christopher DeVargas/Las Vegas Sun/Reuters
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney points to someone in the audience as he is greeted with cheers and applause at a campaign event held at Sierra Truck Body & Equipment, in North Las Vegas, Nevada Friday.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid is unabashed as he makes a serious, unsubstantiated claim about Mitt Romney: that the Republican candidate for president did not pay any taxes for 10 years. That, the Nevada senator says, is why Mr. Romney will not release tax returns beyond those he has already made public, his 2010 return and an estimate for 2011.

Senator Reid, in fact, is so certain he’s doing the right thing that he repeated his charge on the floor of the Senate Thursday night, and put it out in a statement. Reid’s assertion first appeared in a Huffington Post interview published on July 31. He said that about a month ago, he got a call from an investor in Romney’s former company, Bain Capital, who claimed that Romney did not pay taxes for 10 years.

“Now, do I know that that’s true? Well, I’m not certain,” Reid told HuffPo. “But obviously he can’t release those tax returns. How would it look?”

In his Thursday evening statement, Reid repeated his charge, citing “an extremely credible source,” but again did not name the source.  

To anyone concerned about the state of political discourse, Reid’s charge is cause for alarm.

“It’s another example of our political leaders not backing up allegations about the opposite party or another candidate with the facts,” says Carolyn Lukensmeyer, executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona, Tucson. “The American public is really disgusted, and from some polls we’ve done, even ashamed of our national leaders’ inability to solve problems.”

And it’s not that Republicans are angels. “We could easily be having this conversation about some statement from a leader in the other party tearing down [President] Obama,” Ms. Lukensmeyer says.

The likely upshot, she says, is that Americans become further alienated from the political process and just don’t vote.

But the campaigns are not in the business of driving up turnout in the name of civic participation. They just want one more vote than the opposition. If Reid’s tactic is perceived to be successful – Romney’s image remains poor and he loses in November – then chances are voters will be treated to more of same in the future.

Still, political analysts warn that Reid and the Democrats have to be cautious.

“People like a fair game in certain ways,” says Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public policy at Princeton University. “If there’s a perception that this is about innuendo, rumor, and character assassination, it can backfire.”

He cites Republican attacks on President Clinton in the 1990s, including impeachment, which ended up backfiring on the Republicans.

But Reid is a wily political operator – he almost miraculously won reelection in 2010 despite low job approval – so Romney & Co. can’t dismiss him lightly. In replying to Reid’s charge in an interview Thursday on Fox News, Romney showed rare pique in saying that Reid needs to “put up or shut up” with his allegations.

Some Democrats are giving Reid the benefit of the doubt.

“We know Harry Reid is one tough old boxer,” says Peter Fenn, a Democratic communications strategist. “And you know, he’s not letting up. He clearly thinks he’s onto something here, or he wouldn’t be doing it.”

Watchdogs on political discourse aren’t buying it. Without the evidence, they say, Reid should stop what some are calling McCarthy-esque tactics.

“What he said would not be admissible in court as evidence,” Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, told McClatchy Newspapers.

But in the court of politics, anything goes, it seems. Ever since Romney released some of his taxes in January – revealing that he had paid an effective rate of 13.9 percent in 2010, and also that he had accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands – he has been dogged by requests for more. So far, nothing illegal has emerged from Romney’s financial disclosures. And it could be legally possible for him to have paid no tax in some years.

Romney’s spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, has denied that there was any year in which Romney paid zero in taxes. In July, Romney told the National Review he did not want to release more returns because he was “simply not enthusiastic about giving [the Obama campaign] hundreds or thousands of more pages to pick through, distort, and lie about.”

Romney’s late father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, began the tradition of presidential candidates releasing tax returns, when he put forth 12 years’ worth in 1968. President Obama has released his tax returns back to 2000. In 2008, Republican nominee John McCain released only two years of returns. But he did not face pressure to release more, likely because he was running as a longtime senator and Vietnam War hero, not on a record in business.

Reid himself has not publicly released his tax returns, but his office says he is not required. He’s not running for president.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Romney tax returns: Could Reid’s unsubstantiated attack hurt Democrats?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0803/Romney-tax-returns-Could-Reid-s-unsubstantiated-attack-hurt-Democrats
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe