Either during the next debate or in some huge speech soon, Mitt Romney needs to come out and say, “Hey guys, I know we have this huge deficit and that we need every dollar we can. So I have decided that I will not be accepting the Presidential salary of $500,000 a year and WE’LL PUT THAT BACK INTO THE ECONOMY!!!”
roaring applause
Even more, I can’t think of a good way for Obama to attack that. He can defer the salary himself, but then he’s just copy-catting Romney. Even if he defers it, then talks about how Romney doesn’t need the money anyway, it just looks like he’s grasping for straws against him.
I doubt Romney will take a salary, but it would be kinda silly of him to try to make a big deal out of it. As a deficit reduction measure, its meaningless. And it would hardly help him with his current plutocratic image.
Plus making a big deal out of it would seem like he’s pressuring the much poorer Obama into taking a paycut, which strikes me as kind of dick. The Obama’s could probably make due with Obama’s book royalties, but unlike Romney, the Presidential salary is the majority of Obama’s earning. Ditching it would make a big difference on his families lifestyle post-Whitehouse (and they’re already taking a hit for being President, as Michelle would presumably still be working if her husband wasn’t Prez).
Plus being President is a hard job. I hardly begrudge Obama or a putative President Romney their salary. I’d be uncomfortable with making it a job that people felt they needed to do for free. If for no other reason then there are some otherwise good politicians who probably couldn’t afford to work for free (Biden, for example, who IIRC was the poorest man in the Senate for a while).
We’re the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we can afford to throw our leaders some cash.
I don’t think this is going to change many minds. Earlier this year he dismissed the nearly $400K in speaker’s fees he made last year as “not very much” and he paid an extra $500K in federal income tax this year just so that he could claim that he paid over 14%. While giving up the presidential salary would make a nice symbolic gesture, I don’t think those not already inclined to vote for him are going to see it as some meaningful sacrifice for the country on his part.
And I don’t ask my employer for compensation for the parking meter when I go to a meeting downtown. The two or three quarters that I eat are about as significant to me as a half million is to Romney. BFD- does he want a medal or a chest to pin it on?
Perot said that running in 1992. He didn’t talk in CAPITAL LETTERS, or talk about how it would go back into the economy (what?), he said it would be a symbolic gesture, since everybody in government was going to have to pitch in.
That worked OK. But announcing it like a grandiose favor would not work well.
More importantly, wouldn’t it shift the focus of the news cycle for a good little bit? That can be majorly important when every day counting down to the election matters as far as popular opinion goes.
Pretending the proposal were serious, as opposed to an ironic take on Romneyish announcements of meaningless cuts a-la-Big Bird, this would be the sort of thing you announce after you are elected, because rubbing in the public’s face that you don’t need the money is not good campaign strategy.
And actually, ***accepting ***the salary is what puts that money into the economy (if the Prez actually spends/invests it at home rather than offshore it to park it in a tax shelter, or stuff it in the mattress). Merely refusing it just saves on the deficit. Besides I would not want it becoming established that after a certain point being personally wealthy leads to the expectation that you’ll work as a volunteer from there on out – starts with the President and ends, where? Take the damn pay, I want to be able to demand that you earn it.
So he takes the $500,000 and goes on a tour across America buying out everything these little podunk stores have in stock? All the while talking about this is what the rich are doing for the national economy?
Also, I think there’s a way he could say it in the delivery where he drives home the point that this is a budget cut for himself, not a braggadocious sneer/middle finger towards the American public.
Yes, to the extent it would shift the media focus it would be even more towards the fact that Romney is rich and can’t relate to the middle class, many of whom might toil their whole lives to make as much as Romney can afford to turn down with virtually no impact on his standard of living. Any effort Romney makes to shift the media focus needs to be to direct it towards jobs and the deficit, not himself.
Nobody would care, and it’s not in Romney’s best interest to draw people’s attention to his wealth. As a practical matter, though, what would happen to the money if he declines to take a salary?
I guess it would not be spent…Its just like your household budget. You take in, say, $5,000 a month but then you spend about $6,000 a month. When you decide not to buy a bag of chips, that money just isn’t spent. It doesn’t go towards gas or the mortgage because you don’t have money, remember? You spend more than you make every month.