Who Is That Masked Man?

            A video has surfaced in which Romney candidly tell supporters that 47% of Americans don't pay income taxes and are immune to the magic bullet of tax cuts. Where did this 47% number come from? They come from an Urban Institute-Brookings study conducted in 2006, which was redone in 2011. The current number on non-income tax paying households is 46%.

            A person might assume that those not paying income taxes are “victims” living on the dole, suckling the national teat. The Brookings Tax Cetner, who conducted the study, points out that 60% of people not paying income taxes are working. They are paying many other taxes, including payroll taxes, property taxes, state and local taxes, and Social Security taxes. According to Brookings, the reason these Americans don’t pay income taxes is that their tax obligation is zeroed out by deductions. They point out that the tax code benefits Americans of all socio-economic strata. They note that the greatest beneficiaries of the tax code are the wealthy.

            I note that our current numbers of Americans not paying income taxes are a historic anomaly. These numbers rose sharply after the crash of 2008 and peaked in 2009. Current numbers show that 49% of American households receive some form of Government benefits. This is up from 30% in 1986. I see a strong correlation of Government benefits and an aging population and a profound permeating need within our society.

            23 million Americans are un- or under-employed. One out of seven households is on food stamps. Wages are falling. Americans are suffering more now than they have in decades.   

            Those are the numbers. Then there are the narratives which capitalize on them. One popular narrative is that in America, half of our population is dependent on Government. This segment of the population wants views Government assistance as an entitlement and wishes to increase such aid. Like most political narratives, this is not particularly reflect the facts, but this won’t deter true believers in that narrative.

            Another popular narrative is that the Democratic agenda is redistribution of wealth, i.e. socialism. Republicans recently trotted out a tape of Obama stating that he favored redistribution of resources. Like all political narratives, this one is not quite accurate. The  recording came from Senator Obama’s (first term) speech at Loyola University in 1998. I’m waiting for a replay of Reverend Wright any day now. If you actually listen to the Loyola recording, Obama advocates redistributing resources to create a social safety net, and then spends the rest of the speech promoting free market capitalism. Besides, Obama may actually have learned something about how the world works and think differently than he did in 1998.  

            The Presidential race is a contest of narratives, i.e. alternative worldviews. It is also a contest of perceptions. Romney’s problem is one of public perception. At the core, he appears to be hiding something. He doesn't appear authentic, connected with average people. For example, Romney released his 2011 tax returns along with compilations of previous returns. Why on earth his campaign would voluntarily submit compilations rather than actual tax returns is beyond me. The standard is to release 10 years of tax returns. He looks evasive.

            People don't really care what percentage/amount of taxes Romney actually paid. It might cheese off a few people that he paid half the percentage that they did, but that's not what all the “tax controversy” is about. Essentially, Romney plays into the narrative that he is out of touch with the lives and concerns of many Americans, whether this is framed as he's a guy who writes off half the country or has offshore bank accounts to hide his money. Like all political narratives, these are not particularly accurate. I’m not sure why Romney seems so distant and evasive. I do observe that he hides his true personality and ethics behind a Neocon persona.

            It is really too bad that Romney is forced to hide who he is. It's too bad the Republican Party is so screwed up that they put a bushel over this guy’s light. Romney's personal ethic is that of service and caring. There are many, many personal examples of this. Do you know of any? Why? Blame it on the thought police in his Party.

            Romney is not permitted to talk about his religion, his family, his integrity, his charity, and the many lives he has blessed A Gallup poll this week shows that Obama connects with the average person 66% to 23% for Romney. This number shows that half of Romney's own supporters don't believe he connects with them. For the Republicans, Romney was always more of a concept than a cause. Now the accusations and blame are flying within his own Party. A campaign in trouble is like a bad marriage.

            While my praise for Romney’s character might sound like a bromance novel, there may be some truth in the instinctive public caution against embracing Romney. People can tell if they are respected. While a solid case can be made for Romney's caring on a case-by-case basis, his personal value system may keep him from authentically viewing the average Joe and Jane with respect. These are people who want jobs. They don't want to start a business. They don't want to build a great corporation. They are not extraordinarily ambitious. They are not entrepreneurs. They just want a job. They want security and to work for somebody else. Joe and Jane still mentally live in the 20th century.

            In some ways, I agree that the America of the past is in the past. Americans have to get smarter, innovate, and become entrepreneurial to compete in the 21st century. Most Americans would not agree with this. They just want a job. They would say they want “opportunities”. So what are you going to do? You need to respect people where there at......or not.

            So if Mitt’s fundamental values of entrepreneurship and initiative are not where most Americans are, perhaps this is what most Americans are sensing. Mitt, if you want to be respected, you have to respect others first.

            I also am unclear what Romney is passionate about but I am quite interested. Listen to a passionate person. You can't fake passion. It is apparent that Romney is a non-ideologue running in an ideological age. Consider the disconnects this might produce.

            In my opinion, to move forward Romney needs to do some soul-searching. He has to define for himself what he stands for, what big change he will make, and make that message clear. Whatever that message is, it will be unpopular with many people. Big messages usually are. But it is an act of leadership and will earn my respect. He should craft his message as though he was talking to his grandchildren and fill in the blank “In 2012, I stood for....” By not clearly taking a stand, the narrative is that you