Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), who seems to be getting worse, appeared on Fox Business this week to insist that President Obama’s American Jobs Act is “the most socialist thing you can imagine.” Why? Because it’s “a government takeover of everything.”
Now, as an objective matter, I suspect most fair-minded observers would agree that Louie Gohmert isn’t terribly bright. That said, in case anyone’s forgotten, the White House plan totals about $450 billion, and roughly $250 billion of the package is made up of tax cuts. The rest includes about $60 billion for unemployment aid and job training, and $140 billion for infrastructure and saving public-sector jobs (teachers, firefighters, police officers).
If that’s “the most socialist thing you can imagine,” you (a) don’t know what “socialism” means; and (b) have a deeply strange imagination.
Indeed, when President Obama stresses the notion that the American Jobs Act is exactly the kind of package that should enjoy bipartisan support, he’s not kidding. To drive the point home, the DNC recently put together this video of Mitt Romney “endorsing” several key provisions in the White House plan.
Obama’s American Jobs Act offers $4,000 tax credits to businesses who hire those who’ve been out of work for six months or more — an idea Romney has explicitly endorsed in the recent past.
Obama’s American Jobs Act would cut payroll taxes in half for every worker and every small business — an idea Romney has also explicitly endorsed in the recent past.
Obama’s American Jobs Act would allow businesses to write off the cost of capital investments they make in 2012 — an idea Romney has also explicitly endorsed in the recent past.
Obama’s American Jobs Act intends to create jobs by investing heavily in infrastructure — an idea, you guessed it, that Romney has also explicitly endorsed in the recent past.
Taken together, it not only appears that Mitt Romney is on board with the Obama plan he claims to reject, but it also appears that Louie Gohmert believes Mitt Romney’s economic ideas are “socialist.”
