Obama: Ryan plan would reduce Romney's tax rate to 1 percent

President Obama speaks during a campaign event on Saturday, Aug. 18, 2012, in Windham, N.H.

/ AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

(CBS News) Under the budget plan offered by Republican vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., Mitt Romney would "pay less than 1 percent in taxes each year," President Obama charged during a New Hampshire campaign swing Saturday.

"That's a pretty good deal, just paying one percent in taxes; you're making millions of dollars," the president said in his second remarks of the day in Rochester, N.H., repeating the claim he first made earlier in Windham, N.H., that the plan put forth by Ryan -- the House Budget Committee chair -- would cut Romney's tax rate to less than 1 percent.

"Now, here's the kicker: They expect you to pick up the tab," he continued to an eruption of "boos."

Mr. Obama urged his New Hampshire supporters to approach Romney and Ryan when they arrive in the state for campaign events Monday "so you can tell them if you think this is fair. And you should ask them, 'How do you think that's gonna grow the economy again? How is that gonna strengthen the middle class?'"

The president's speech was designed to rip Romney on taxes, which has been a prominent theme so far in this campaign. A recent dust-up arose after Romney refused to release additional tax returns to help quell allegations perpetuated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that Romney hasn't paid taxes in a decade.

"Their ideas are pretty simple - they're not hard to explain," Mr. Obama said of the GOP ticket to the Windham crowd of about 2,300. He said they "think if we get rid of more regulations on big corporations and big banks - some of which we put in place to prevent another taxpayer-funded bailout -- and if we do more tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans, then somehow prosperity's gonna rain down on all of you."

(Watch a clip of President Obama's remarks in Windham, N.H., in the video to the left.)

Though his prepared remarks deemed the Republicans' philosophy "trickle-down fairy dust," Mr. Obama opted for starker language in his delivery, repeating the "trickle-down snake oil" line he introduced earlier this week.

But even before the president took the podium in Windham, the Romney campaign issued a statement striking down the one-percent tax rate claim in his prepared remarks as "yet another false attack."

"The fact is, President Obama wants to raise taxes on private investment and job creators, which will lead to higher unemployment and fewer jobs," Romney campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said. "The Romney-Ryan Plan eliminates taxes for the middle class on interest, dividends and capital gains and implements pro-growth policies to deliver more jobs and more take-home pay for middle-class families."

Later in the speech, the president addressed the ongoing debate on Medicare. While Ryan earlier in the day tried to put a face to his own Medicare argument by introducing his mother as a beneficiary of the program, Mr. Obama hypothesized that Ryan and Romney "know it's not a very popular idea" to offer seniors vouchers, as they've proposed, "because now they're being dishonest about my plan since they can't sell their plan," which the president claimed would force seniors to shell out an additional $6,400 for health care.

"They're trying to throw everything at the wall just to see what will stick," the president said, going on to tout his administration's work in "strengthening Medicare" and saving seniors money on prescription drugs. He said the "only changes to your benefits" he's made while in office is allowing Medicare to also cover new preventative services like cancer screenings "for free."

[wdrussell1]

The wackos have just changed the term from, trickle down economics, to, job creators.
It was a failure 30 years ago and a failure now.

[alanrobisch]

how many angels can fit on the top of a pin or how many times can the president lie and cheat to get reelected. Also note now cbs is defending nasty ads I wonder why Maybe its to reelect the president.

[erichsh]

ABC News and Jake Tapper doing the job that CBS News refuses to do! Obama is blathering about a 2010 Ryan position on capital gains that (a) Romney himself flatly stated he would not do, and that (b) was not in Ryan's latest plan.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/under-ryan-plan-romney-would-have-paid-less-than-1-percent-in-taxes-is-it-true/

[erichsh]

Seems like CBS News "fact-checks" every Romney campaign statement, conveniently taking issue with every one of them. Meanwhile, Obama and other Democrats can make any outrageous claim they want - and CBS and others will pass their words on verbatim, making headlines, and never challenged.

[jefflz-2009]

Wait a minute, what about those tax returns? An important point that I discovered online from a tax preparer is that the only return released for 2010 is subject to amendment without penalty since it is within the 2 year amendment period. This means this return and the one for 2011 are meaningless.. we really know nothing for certain about Romney's taxes and it is further reason for the absolute need to see returns for years that go beyond the penalty-free amendment period. The Medicare smoke screen - RomneyRyan would trash Medicare by the way- is designed to take the heat off his non-disclosure. It simply won't work.

[riptide213]

"We don't pay taxes. The little people do."

Leona Helmsley

Is Mitt today's political embodiment of Helmsley dogma?

[Johnstone39]

This charge by the Democrats is total BS. They are grabbing a talking point from a two year old Ryan plan that reduced capital gains rates to zero, among other things. Not only does the most recent Ryan Plan not do this, but the Romney-Ryan plan, which is the plan that should be debated, only reduces capital gains rates for those making less than $200,000 per year, not for Romney.

[dj_chi]

The issue is where is Ryan going with his legislative agenda. If he's softening his stance to appeal to certain groups, then the older plan shows more of his true feelings. Like his longstanding desire to shut down Medicare alltogether - regardless of how he's shelving his real views to accept Romney's views. If Ryan were needed to take the President's job, we need to know where his head is - and what he'd then be able to do without worrying about subjugating his intentions to someone else's.

[dj_chi]

Oh, and for the record Ryan's budget wasn't actually his. It was born from the conservative Heritage Foundation. That's actually the place where Obamacare was born too.

[jefflz-2009]

Anyone who thinks Romney's tax returns are going to disappear as an issue is dreaming. People want transparency not smoke and mirrors. Romney Ryan plan more huge tax cuts for the wealthy even beyond the outrageous Bush cuts. They want to pay for these cuts by slashing social programs like Medicare. Sweet deal for Romney and Ryan, no?

[Johnstone39]

The Democrats will just lie and spin about what is in the returns if Romney releases more returns. The want to talk about anything except Obama's terrible record:

Tiny 1.5% GDP growth, fewer people employed now than when Obama took office, high 8.3% base unemployment rate (U3), horrific 15% real unemployment rate (U6), highest poverty rate since the 1960s, record percentage of Americans receiving food stamps, record percentage of Americans receiving Federal disability and record annual annual defecit spending leading to a record 16 trillion dollar national debt. This is the worst economic recovery in 75 years. Obama's economic policies have failed by every economic measure and have us rapidly going down the road towards a Greek style bankruptcy.

So if you want to keep growing poverty, welfare and an unsustainable debt burden that will end in national bankruptcy, re-elect President Obama, but if you want to grow the economy and jobs while putting the country back on sound fiscal footing, elect Romney and Ryan.

[Chili-dog1]

here is an interesting article from 2009
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/13/business/fi-swiss13

from that article "Some 3,000 U.S. residents have voluntarily disclosed their foreign bank accounts to the IRS this year, compared to fewer than 100 in 2008, said one U.S. government official who asked not to be identified."

was Mitt one of the 100 or one of the more than 3000?

Look at his history of hiding his finances and decide for yourself.

[alphabet77-2009]

There is a reason he doesn't want us to see his tax returns. It would be so easy to allay all these suspicions by just releasing them, but he does not. He has calculated the potential losses of disclosing and not disclosing, and has chosen the latter.

This is especially curious since his own father, George Romney, released 12 years of taxes. Does he not revere the memory of his father?

[alphabet77-2009]

That is a very interesting fact. Thank you for your reference. I will take note of it.

[Chili-dog1]

When Romney initially released his financial disclosures as a candidate, he conveinently forgot to include his foreign investments. He hat to retroactively add them.

When Romney ran for Governor of Mass. he had to retroactively amend his state income tax filings in order to meet residency requirements.

I think it is all too likely that Romney had to file for tax amnesty in 2009 for failure to declare all of his income.