send to a friend | print | comment
FACT CHECK: Lentz uses debunked attack on tax policy
In voicing his support recently for a bill that aims to stop corporations from sending jobs overseas, Democrat Bryan Lentz made a damning claim about his Republican opponent: Pat Meehan, Lentz’s 7th District congressional campaign said, “opposes ending the tax loophole that benefits companies that send jobs overseas.”
Lentz’s campaign cited the fact that Meehan has signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge against raising taxes, a pledge signed by dozens upon dozens of Republican candidates across the country. But in asserting that signing the pledge equals opposing an end to such tax incentives, Lentz was recycling a Democratic attack line that has been thoroughly debunked in recent months.
Candidates who sign the pledge promise only to oppose increases in marginal income tax rates for individuals or businesses, as well as “any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.” The argument that such a pledge forbids a candidate from approving the elimination of tax incentives for companies to move jobs overseas was used frequently by Democrats during the run up to special congressional elections in Hawaii and Pennsylvania this year. On more than one occasion, referees like FactCheck.org found that the claim comes up short.
“The pledge only protects corporations from an increase in taxation overall,” the Web site wrote in April. “It explicitly allows elimination of any specific tax deduction or credit if matched dollar-for-dollar by an overall cut in rates. And it says nothing about jobs.”
Lentz’s campaign is correct that Meehan could not support the legislation in question, the Investing in American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, without violating the pledge. Americans for Tax Reform issued a “taxpayer protection pledge alert” last week advising that a vote for the bill would violate the pledge. It has issued similar alerts opposing similar legislation. But the blanket assertion that Meehan “opposes ending the tax loophole that benefits companies that send jobs overseas” is still unsubstantiated by the facts.
There is some debate among economists as to whether and how much the domestic employment picture would benefit from changing such tax incentives. But the issue has become a hot-button one in electoral politics, with Democrats often looking to claim a populist mantle while Republicans frame their position as better for business, and therefore jobs.
In a statement, Lentz campaign manager Kevin McTigue said that Meehan is beholden to Americans for Tax Reform, and that its opposition to changing taxation incentives is clear.
“Americans for Tax Reform has a clear record of consistently and openly opposing efforts to close a tax loophole that has contributed to the loss of good-paying American jobs overseas, and the shrinking of our nation’s manufacturing base,” McTigue. “Last week, in the latest example, the group said that it was opposed to legislation in Congress that was specifically designed to close this loophole, referencing its taxpayer pledge. Pat Meehan is a signer of this pledge.”
Meehan campaign manager Bryan Kendro said that “Lentz’s use of blatantly false information to attack Pat Meehan is symptomatic of a campaign that is lagging in the polls, overly reliant on [Democratic] talking points, and completely out of touch with the average voters disgust at typical politicians who will say or do anything to get elected. The fact is Pat Meehan took the Taxpayer Protection Pledge because he believes we need to hold the line on government spending and stop the out of control growth of the federal government. Bryan Lentz, with a record of raising taxes in Harrisburg, has refused to take that same pledge so it’s no wonder he feels compelled to run a campaign of mudslinging and half truths.”
Kendro didn’t specifically say if Meehan supports closing so-called tax loopholes, but added that Meehan “has already pledged his support for making the tax code of the united states more competitive with the rest of the world to make sure that jobs aren’t shipped overseas.”
•Also on pa2010.com: Meehan attack on Lentz supporter misses the mark
August 2, 2010 at 4:09 pm
Tags: Bryan Lentz, PA-7, Pat Meehan
Leave a Reply
pa2012.com blogs
Red in a Sea of Blue
Purple in Pennsylvania
The Latest from @pa2012 news
More UpdatesStay connected with pa2012.com:
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
a.
Aug 2nd, 2010
I think your argument is a little bit flimsy here. You say “the blanket assertion that Meehan ‘opposes ending the tax loophole that benefits companies that send jobs overseas’ is still unsubstantiated by the facts.” It seems to me that until Pat Meehan comes out and definitively takes a position on the Investing in American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we have to assume he is against it by nature of the fact that he signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge. That they issued a “taxpayer protection pledge alert” to the signers of the pledge further strengthens the assumption that Meehan stands in opposition to the passage of this bill. Since we have to assume that Meehan stands in opposition to the bill (until he says otherwise), then is it not safe to assume that he opposes ending these tax loopholes? In other words, by nature of his strong association with Americans for Tax Reform and their taxpayer protection pledge, Meehan is inherently opposed to this bill. And by being opposed to this bill, Meehan is implicitly opposed to the actions that such a bill would take. In fact, it appears that Brian Kendro had an opportunity to state Meehan’s position on the issue either way, and he did not. Lentz is justified in making such statements.
C Guiney
Aug 2nd, 2010
The complex questions that face our nation do not fit easily into the sweeping mandates imposed upon a candidate when he/she signs a blanket pledge like the ATR document.
If Meehan’s intent is to cut out loopholes that help make it profitable to send jobs overseas, he should say so, and refute the Lentz assertion directly.
Unfortunately for the voters, Mr Meehan is mute while his spokesman makes comments about ‘typical politicians’.
Perhaps this argument was debunked in Hawaii and PA 12. I still want a direct answer from Mr Meehan in PA 07.
P. O'Neill
Aug 2nd, 2010
Lentz is once again playing fast and loose with the facts – something that he often does – and the press is fianlly calling him on the carpet for it. The facts here are that Meehan is opposed to continuing the tax grab from Washington. He is in favor of the forgotten taxpayer. Lentz will support the Democrats’ continued tax grab. Lentz opposes the taxpayer. It is as simple as that.
Reality
Aug 2nd, 2010
If Meehan really doesn’t oppose closing the loophole, why didn’t he just say so? Why didn’t you pin them down with a direct question?
Angel69
Aug 2nd, 2010
If Meehan really will vote for ending the loopholes that send American jobs overseas, then say it, put it on the record!
Why the evasions from his press guy?
Is it because he knows if he goes to Washington he will vote NO to everything as a straight party line Republican?
MD
Aug 3rd, 2010
Pat M is going to win this in a walk. I am thrilled that the NDCC decided to waste $ on Lentz. Good work. That will help us in 1 or 2 of the marginal CD’s.
flynnbw
Aug 3rd, 2010
Echoing the previous comments — this would be really easy if Pat Meehan would just say that he’s against loopholes that allow offsourcing. If he can’t take a position on something like that, why is he running for Congress?
Bruce Bailey
Aug 3rd, 2010
Seems to me you’ve picked up the Meehan party line here, Dan, when reality is quite a bit murkier. Just because one side whines louder, it doesn’t make them any more correct.
To me, the facts point to a much different conclusion than the one you reached:
– Meehan has signed on to the ATR pledge
– The ATR says that supporting the Investing in American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act would violate the pledge
– Meehan (so far) has not changed his stance.
To me, that says Meehan is quite content to keep rewarding companies that send jobs overseas.
Maybe you can follow the convuluted logic of the Meehan camp that says otherwise. But I sure can’t.
And I’m pretty sure that anyone who’s lost a job after being outsourced to cheap foreign labor won’t be able to follow it, either.
Joe in Wynnewood
Aug 3rd, 2010
When you find a single Republican in Congress who will vote to close the loophole or end mulit-billion dollar subsidies to the Fossil Fuel industry or for any other tax related measure that would actually positively impact what they claim is their number one issue, the Deficit, well, then you can call the Democrats, including Lentz, liars. Until then, the claim appears to be fully buttressed by the facts on the ground.
Republicans, by their words and actions don’t give a damn about anyone but what President Bush so succinctly characterized as his base, the wealthiest 1% of the country.
debt to high
Aug 4th, 2010
I’m so happy Lentz’s people can’t get anything right. Meehan will win big because of these idiots Lentz hired.
Anthracite Alum
Aug 4th, 2010
Lets be honest. Pat Meehan will do whatever he is told by his handlers and the RNC talking points
mill.
He is vacuous and when speaking off script comes off like a boob. The only thing his his scripted stuff is missing is him calling himself a momma grizzly.
I think he is a nice guy but is an empty vessel.
At least Bryan is the real deal.