Former 2012 presidential nominee and current U.S. senator Mitt Romney has apparently had a late-breaking revelation: the wealthy should pay higher taxes.
Romney—who long ago shed any reputation as a conservative fighter—has now drifted fully into soft-Democrat territory, using his remaining political capital to echo the Left’s favorite talking point. In doing so, he’s having his own Liz Cheney–style moment: loudly breaking with the base while expecting applause for his “courage.” Yes, the Mitt “please tax me more” version has officially arrived:
Typically, Democrats insist on higher taxes, and Republicans insist on lower spending. But given the magnitude of our national debt as well as the proximity of the cliff, both are necessary. DOGE took a slash-and-burn approach to budget cutting and failed spectacularly. Europe demonstrates that exorbitant taxation without spending restraint crushes economic vitality and thus speeds how fast the cliff arrives.
On the spending-cut front, only entitlement reform would make a meaningful difference, since programs such as Social Security and Medicare account for a majority of government outlays. No one countenances cutting benefits for current or near retirees. But Social Security and Medicare benefits for future retirees should be means-tested — need-based, that is to say — and the starting age for entitlement payments should be linked to American life expectancy.
And on the tax front, it’s time for rich people like me to pay more.
Our roughly 17 percent average tariff rate helps the revenue math. Doubling it — which seemed possible shortly after “Liberation Day” — would further burden lower- and middle-income families and would have severe market consequences.
I’ve read enough—if only for the entertainment value—and the adults in the room have weighed in. The editorial board at The Wall Street Journal cut through the noise with a dose of reality: wealth inequality isn’t the real problem. The ticking time bomb is entitlement reform and the trillions in unfunded liabilities Washington keeps pretending don’t exist.
Yes, Donald Trump vowed not to touch these programs, and I disagree with him on that point. But fixing Social Security and Medicare is going to require bipartisan action—and we know one party has zero interest in doing the hard work. Democrats won’t lift a finger unless it involves raising taxes or demagoguing the issue.
Social Security was never designed to function indefinitely. When it was created, living decades past retirement—often with multiple chronic conditions—was the exception, not the norm. Advances in medicine and pharmaceuticals have extended life expectancy, which is a good thing, but they’ve also blown up the math behind these programs. That reality is also a major driver of today’s runaway health care costs:
The first point to make is that if Mr. Romney wants to pay more taxes, by all means go ahead. Write a check to the Treasury. It’s a writ of attainder to target an individual with legislation, Democrats, but maybe Mitt won’t mind.
The rich who favor higher taxes pitch this as an act of civic virtue. But paying higher taxes on income or capital gains is no great sacrifice for them because they’re already rich. Mr. Romney made his fortune at Bain Capital, and good for him. He can afford to pay more now, but would the 28-year-old Mitt still on the make have thought so? Raising taxes makes it harder for others to get rich.
Mr. Romney is especially eager to raise the annual income cap on Social Security payroll taxes. That cap is $184,500 in 2026 and rises each year with inflation. Democrats want to raise the cap much higher or eliminate it. Mr. Romney thinks this should be the trade for entitlement reforms.
Not likely. Democrats eliminated the income cap for Medicare payroll taxes of 1.45% (2.9% including employer) in 1993, but have you noticed a Democratic desire to reform Medicare? They ran against Mr. Romney in 2012 by saying his modest reform amounted to throwing grandma off a cliff.
The Medicare tax increase has merely become another marginal-rate tax hike on work. The Social Security payroll tax is 6.2% each for employee and employer, so lifting the income cap on that tax on the working middle class would be even more onerous.
The U.S. has a federal debt problem, and entitlement reform is essential. It will happen because sooner or later lenders will demand it. Until then, we’ll consider tax increases when we see a Democratic presidential nominee propose a serious plan to reform Social Security and Medicare. Do not bet your retirement money on it happening.
But sure, Mitt, go ahead and cut your check to the IRS. Put your money where your mouth is.
