The Economist: Mitt Romney Frontrunner 2012

End-of-the-year political assessments shadow the arrival of the New Year such as Helen Thomas dogs Robert Gibbs.  Giving a nod to our man Mitt, The Economist dubs Mitt Romney the presidential frontrunner for the Republican nomination 2012:

• Dec 31st 2009 - The Economist | NEW YORK
WE ARE hours away from ringing in the new year, and most Americans will be happy to leave 2009 behind. Only 46% of respondents in our latest poll described 2009 as a good year, and the reasons are obvious: unemployment is hovering around 10%, whole cities are collapsing, America is still mired in two seemingly endless wars, and the threat of terrorism persists. So what of the politicians who are supposed to deal with these problems? How did they fare in 2009? “Not well” would be the obvious answer, but I’ve asked my colleagues to consider who (or what) were the biggest winners and losers of the year. Here’s what they had to say:

New York: In a year when the unemployment rate rose by nearly three percentage points, there can be few winners. On the Republican side, Mitt Romney earns points simply for not being Bobby Jindal, Mark Sanford, Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin, all of whom had missteps in 2009 (though Ms Palin could just as easily be called a winner  since her love/hate numbers seem to rise in tandem). It’s still some way off, but Mr. Romney now seems the frontrunner for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

 It’s a good start for the New Year!

Mitt Romney on Meet The Press: How the Private Sector Gets Its Groove Back

Since the beginning of the recession, more than 7 million American jobs are pfffffffft…GONE! With the number of unemployed workers higher than it has been since 1983, government jobs sharply increasing, and banks nailing the ‘Don’t Apply For A Loan’ signs on their doors, how will the beleaguered private sector get its groove back?

David Gregory spoke with Mitt Romney about  our current recession and jobs (or lack thereof) on Meet The Press Sunday, December 13, 2009. Other participants included Alan Greenspan - former Fed Chairman, Jim Cramer - Host of MSNBC’s Mad Money, and Governor Jennifer Granholm (D-Michigan). 


Questions for Romney at 2:27, 8:37, 15:06, and 20:38.

…The right course here is not to create a new stimulus but to fix the one they’ve already passed. So let’s take that money that has been allocated to all sorts of government programs that aren’t necessary and are not growing the American economy and let’s, instead, focus that on efforts that will actually create jobs. And, investment tax credits, allowing businesses to expense capital expenditures in the first year, reducing the payroll tax - these kinds of things will get jobs growing immediately.

Mitt Romney 2012.

UPDATE - Mitt has released a statement about his appearance on Meet the Press through his Free & Strong America Pac at My thoughts on my Meet the Press interview this weekend Clips that only include his answers can be found on that page as well.

Will Romney Be Invited to Obama’s Jobs Summit?

Barack Obama announced today that come December, he’ll be holding a jobs summit. Looks like the 10.2 percent unemployment rate and the failure of the massive stimulus bill now has the White House grasping at straws, hoping to find something that works now.

Or, at least give Americans the impression that they’re trying to find something that works.

“I’m hoping that this is not just another press conference,” House Republican Whip Eric Cantor told POLITICO. “We’ve seen a lot of these dog and pony shows out of the White House, but there’s no follow through.” Cantor complained that the White House has not listened to Republican ideas on job creation.

When I first heard this news, my immediate thought was, “Mitt Romney has to be invited to this jobs summit, right? It would only make sense.” But then I realized that Obama would never invite Romney to such a thing. Just like Obama never once considered Romney to be his auto czar. While someone who is truly trying to solve these kinds of problems would include Romney, we have to remember that Obama is still playing politics. I will be shocked if Romney is invited to participate in Obama’s jobs summit.

Think of it this way: Obama holds his jobs summit and invites Romney to participate. Jobs summit is successful. Romney is now able to trumpet his success at jobs summit. In the end, Obama gave Romney the means to prove he can accomplish what Obama has failed to do over the past year. Romney now has this to use against Obama in 2012.

So don’t expect to see Romney’s name on the jobs summit roster. Like Cantor said, this is only a dog and pony show.

Hope Still Exists

Mitt Romney for President 2012
I was just browsing at mass.gov to see what mention the Commonwealth of Massachusetts gave of their best Governor ever. Sure enough, I found this short-but-legit bio of Gov. Williard Mitt Romney. It was refreshing to review all of his accomplishments leading up to his term as Governor, but an even greater respect was gained for Romney as I read over the important emphasis he put on education, promoting fiscal responsibility, cutting taxes, retaining businesses, creating jobs, and improving veteran benefits while serving as Governor:

Willard Mitt Romney (born 1947)
(Governor of MA 2003-2007)

Known for his keen business sense and his ability to turn flailing enterprises into highly successful ventures, (Willard) Mitt Romney was faced with the challenge of turning the Commonwealth of Massachusetts into a fiscally responsible state.

Awarded his B.A with highest honors as valedictorian from Brigham Young University in 1971, Mr. Romney earned an M.B.A. and the title of Baker Scholar from Harvard Business School while simultaneously receiving his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1975. He went on to serve as Vice President of Bain & Company, Inc, a Boston-based management consulting firm and founded Bain Capital which became one of the country’s most successful venture capital investment companies.

In 1994, Mr. Romney lost to Senator Ted Kennedy for U.S. State Senator of Massachusetts, but established himself as a national political figure. He expanded this political recognition into national attention several years later by serving as Chief Executive Officer of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games held in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Later in 2002, Mr. Romney replaced then Governor Jane Swift as the Republican candidate for governor and was elected governor of Massachusetts in November, 2002. Governor Romney closed a 3 million budget deficit his first year in office without raising taxes. His top priorities in office were: education reform, establishing the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program which rewards top achieving high school students with four year scholarships to Massachusetts state colleges and universities; Melanie’s Bill, which enforces strict penalties on repeat drunk drivers; lowering the unemployment rate by attracting and retaining businesses in Massachusetts; developing the Welcome Home Bill and Massachusetts Military Enhanced Relief Individual Tax Plan which provides National Guard members and veterans with enhanced benefits; and signing legislation to mandate that all citizens in the Commonwealth have access to quality healthcare.

Mr. Romney’s term ended in January, 2007. He chose not to seek re-election. On February 13, 2007, Mitt Romney formally announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president in 2008.

My viewpoint is in sync with that of Josephine G., a MRC fan who shared her thoughts today on the MRC Facebook page:

In the last presidential race, candidates were debating and espousing the issues that I heard Mitt give before anyone else had entered the race. I had heard him early on and was impressed that he had ideas and plans and direction. I knew that he was the one who had those ideas and others were playing politics. He is a leader, has integrity and he loves family, his God and this country. If America has the second opportunity to elect Mitt as president ..how foolish it would be to not listen this time! How detrimental [it was] to this nation not to elect him in the last election! The nation must get over political parties, politics, and petty reasons and elect a good man based on principles and the Constitution.

Thank you all for your patriotism and continued input, support, and promoting efforts here at MRC. Hope does exist. Let’s do all in our power to ensure that Mitt Romney is elected next time around. This means getting the word out to your friends, family, and co-workers, making sure that all within the sound of your voice know that there is a movement underway, a reLOVEution as the Paulites would say, a coalition of conservatives uniting here at MRC with one common cause: to restore America. Who’s with me?

~Aaronius

Mitt Romney: Fix the Stimulus

job losses

A new Op-Ed from Mitt Romney at NRO in regards to news that job losses accelerated in September and the unemployment stands at 9.8%:

Another Stimulus Is Not the Answer by Mitt Romney

With every month’s release of bad unemployment numbers, Americans must feel like Bill Murray’s character in Groundhog Day. The 263,000 lost jobs in September and the rise in the unemployment rate to 9.8 percent was far worse than forecast. What’s clear is that the stimulus bill as crafted has not worked. President Obama sold the stimulus as an immediate boost to the economy that would keep unemployment below eight percent. Rather than put the economy on sound footing, it has ushered in a new era of big government. Now the liberal voices in Congress will grow for yet another stimulus bill. That’s the wrong answer. We can’t afford anymore back-breaking debt that further hobbles our ability to remain competitive as a nation. The right answer is to fix the stimulus we have — throw out the provisions that are not directly tied to job growth and substitute incentives that will stimulate the private sector and create jobs.

Why do we continue to waste money on un-stimulating pet projects of the liberals while our economy falls into decay and our deficit skyrockets? The 2012 elections just can’t come soon enough.

Romney’s Op/Ed at Washington Times: Card-check

You may recall that Governor Romney was one of several conservatives invited to do a revolving column at the Washington times. Well, Romney’s first column is up today and he takes on the issue of card-check.

Click here for the whole column. Head over there to read/leave comments.

In 2006, my last year as governor of Massachusetts, I vetoed a card-check bill that allowed public workers to organize if a majority signed union authorization cards as opposed to casting a traditional secret ballot. The veto was a gain for the rights of employees and employers to a fair election, but the victory was short-lived.

After I left office, organized labor had another run at replacing the secret ballot with a card check. With the support of Democrats in the legislature, that same bill I had vetoed was passed again in 2007 - and my Democratic successor signed it into law. What happened next is a cautionary tale for Congress as it moves toward a vote on national card-check legislation.

With this powerful new tool, for the first time ever in Massachusetts, a charter school was unionized. One reason so many parents want their children in charter schools is precisely because they operate free of union contracts, so that when administrators want to try something new, they can implement it quickly.

For this, charter schools are fiercely resented by teachers unions as a competitor to failing public schools. Charter schools use a merit system, rewarding teachers according to results in the classroom. They don’t have complicated work rules that smother creativity, nor are they burdened with termination rules that make it almost impossible to dismiss an incompetent teacher.

The union drive started last year when the American Federation of Teachers met with a small group of teachers from the Conservatory Lab Charter School in Boston. Throughout the summer, they worked behind the scenes to sign up a majority of the 20 teachers at the school. Administrators learned of the successful organizing effort only after the decision to unionize had been made. For parents who may have liked the idea of a union-free school, there was no chance to be heard.

Not surprisingly, the chairman of the school’s trustees is worried that a collective bargaining contract will be loaded with so many workplace restrictions that it will make it harder for the school to fulfill its mission to experiment with new ideas.

Unfortunately, these kinds of underhanded power plays are what we can expect across the nation if card check becomes the law of the land.

By tilting the playing field in favor of unions, card check not only robs workers of a secret ballot, it deprives management of the right to express its point of view. It will dramatically change the workplace as we know it, just as it’s beginning to do for charter schools in Massachusetts. Small businesses will have to hire labor lawyers and follow burdensome new rules. If the parties can’t agree on a contract, mandatory arbitration follows and employers that don’t yield to union demands will have contracts foisted on them.

All of this will raise costs, leading to more unemployment. The Labor Department reported that nemployment in February rose to 8.1 percent as American employers cut another 651,000 jobs. Unions are supposed to serve the interests of working people, yet in this case more power for the unions would help destroy many thousands of jobs throughout the economy.

Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions. At their best, labor unions have always fought for the rights of workers, and generations of Americans have been better off for it. But the card-check proposal is not an example of unions at their best - it is a case of union organizers rewriting the rules at the expense of working people.

Its advocates claim that card check is a step forward for labor, as if workers should thank them for making unions less democratic. But anyone who would deny a worker’s right to vote on unionization by secret ballot is not advancing the cause of labor. They are just expanding the power of labor bosses. No one should be forced to publicly declare their intention before their employers and co-workers.

Leaders in the Democratic Party are eager to pay back the union bosses for their campaign support, even if it means selling out the American worker. Responsible members of Congress need to make it clear that Washington will not act to virtually impose unions on businesses. It is undemocratic, and it would devastate business formation and employment, worsening the present economic crisis.

By guarding against coercion and intimidation in the workplace, we can protect our economy from great harm, and secure the rights of employers and employees alike. The working people of America should be able to unionize the way their fathers and mothers did - by free choice and secret ballot.