Know the facts. Get the truth.

When you’re faced with someone who misrepresents the truth, you can find all the facts you need right here—along with ways to share the message with whoever needs to hear it.

Romney opposes the Buffett Rule, supports economic policies that have serious consequences for women

Mitt Romney is launching misleading attacks on President Obama when it comes women and jobs, but it’s his own policies that will have drastic consequences for American women. Take his opposition to the Buffett Rule.

Intent on protecting tax cuts for wealthy Americans like himself, Mitt Romney has continually opposed the Buffett Rule—legislation that would restore tax fairness by making sure that millionaires don’t have a lower income tax rate than middle-class families. Romney insisted on CNBC that the Buffett Rule would “choke off the growth of America’s economy.”

 

As Vice President Joe Biden noted, there is “a stark choice” between President Obama and Mitt Romney when it comes to supporting economic security for women:

The Buffett Rule says that multi-millionaires should pay at least the same percentage of their income in taxes as middle-class families do. The Romney Rule says the very wealthy should keep the tax cuts and loopholes they have, and get an additional, new tax cut every year that is worth more than what the average middle class family makes in an entire year.

The Buffett Rule plays a crucial role in making sure millionaires pay their fair share so we can reduce the deficit and invest in education, infrastructure, and innovation that have a significant impact on women. If just one member of America’s top 400 wealthiest millionaires pays a fair share under the Buffett Rule, it could mean up to $32 million in revenue.

That $32 million could mean over 5,400 students receive Pell grants for college. Of the 3.4 million additional students who have received Pell grants since the President took office, approximately 2.3 million are women. That $32 million could also keep more than 300 teachers in the classroom by preventing them from being laid off. Women hold more than two-thirds of teacher jobs in the US.

Meanwhile, Romney’s policies would not only drive up the deficit, but would make deep cuts into programs that many American women rely on. Here are just a few of the consequences Americans would face:

  • Current workers would see a 40 percent cut in Social Security benefits, according to analysis of a similar plan. Women represent 57 percent of all Social Security beneficiaries 62 years old or older. For unmarried women, including widows, who are 65 or older, Social Security makes up 49 percent of their total income.

  • Medicaid beneficiaries would see cuts to the program and a repeal of the Medicaid expansion in the Affordable Care Act. Medicaid provided over 21 million low-income women with basic health and long-term coverage in 2008.

  • Every man, woman, and child in America would see over $16,000 in additional debt if Romney does not propose additional spending cuts or offsets for his $5 trillion in tax cuts.

There is a clear difference between the economic support women see under President Obama and consequences they’d see if Romney is elected. Economic policies like the Buffett rule should promote the economic security of women, not jeopardize it like Romney would.