Arathain Kelvar wrote:
That's what I'm talking about. He has repeatedly said these two items over and over and over.
Sure, but emphasis matters. For example, there's a big difference in emphasis between these two statements:
Romney at the debate wrote:
Regulation is essential. You can't have a free market work if you don't have regulation. As a business person, I had to have — I needed to know the regulations. I needed them there. You couldn't have people opening up banks in their — in their garage and making loans. I mean, you have to have regulations so that you can have an economy work. Every free economy has good regulation. At the same time, regulation can become excessive.
<cross talk>
It can become out of date. And what's happened in — with some of the legislation that's been passed during the president's term, you've seen regulation become excessive and it's hurt the — it's hurt the economy. Let me give you an example. Dodd- Frank was passed, and it includes within it a number of provisions that I think have some unintended consequences that are harmful to the economy....I would repeal it and replace it. You — we're not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there's some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.
Romney's website (reflecting his stump speeches) wrote:
Mitt Romney will act swiftly to tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama Administration has imposed on the economy. He will also seek to make structural changes to the federal bureaucracy that ensure economic growth remains front and center when regulatory decisions are made. As president, Romney will work to repeal laws like Obamacare and Dodd-Frank that have given bureaucrats unprecedented discretion to craft unpredictable, job-killing regulations by the thousands of pages.
Romney will also initiate the immediate review of all Obama-era regulations with the goal of eliminating any that unduly burden the economy and job creation. And he will impose a regulatory cap on all agencies at zero dollars, meaning that an agency issuing a new regulation must go through a budget-like process and identify offsetting cost reductions from the existing regulatory burden. Other initiatives in a Romney Administration will include a new, cost-conscious approach to environmental regulation; an increased role for Congress in the approval of new regulations; and reforms to the legal liability system.
The debate statement is significantly more moderate than the campaign statement. I mean, hell, just look at the first sentence of each statement - "Regulation is essential" versus "Mitt Romney will act swiftly to tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama Administration has imposed on the economy". It's night and day.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
