FACT CHECK: Mourdock Tried to Destroy Over 100,000 Hoosier Jobs, Now Takes Credit for Indiana’s Economy

0 Comments | Posted

Indianapolis, Ind.--Today, Joe Donnelly’s campaign for U.S. Senate responded to Richard Mourdock’s newest ad touting Indiana’s economic successes and asking voters if they are better off than they were four years ago.

“It’s rich that the man who tried to single-handedly destroy over 100,000 jobs in our state is now touting Indiana’s economic successes,” said Elizabeth Shappell, Donnelly communications director.  “Joe Donnelly fought tooth and nail to save those jobs, while Richard Mourdock fought to destroy the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of Hoosier families.  Mr. Mourdock, the truth matters.  And the truth is, you don’t have the record to talk about job creation here in Indiana.”


The Mourdock Record

Mourdock:  It’s tough to find anyone better off now than they were four years ago.   Our economy is still recovering, but we avoided an economic catastrophe--no thanks to Richard Mourdock’s lawsuit to kill more than 100,000 Hoosier jobs.  There is still a lot of work to do, but the U.S. economy has added jobs since February 2010, corporate profits have risen, and foreclosures are starting to decline. Richard Mourdock’s lawsuit trying to force the liquidation of Chrysler, if successful, would have eliminated over 100,000 Hoosier jobs.  [Center for American Progress, 9/4/2012; New York Times, 6/9/09; Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, 6/9/09]
Washington politicians like President Obama and Congressman Donnelly had their chance, but they’ve only made things worse.   Joe Donnelly opposed the President more than 30% of the time and broke with his party more than all but six Democrats.  [CQ Custom Member Profile, 2/2012; National Journal Vote Rankings 2011]

Joe Donnelly joined a bipartisan effort to prevent current tax rates from expiring for any income level.  Reported the New York Times, “Representative Joe Donnelly, a Democrat running for an Indiana Senate seat, announced Tuesday he would vote for the Republican plan to extend all the Bush-era income tax rates when it comes up in the House next week.” [New York Times, 7/24/2012]

Joe Donnelly joined Republicans and Democrats, such as Senator Richard Lugar, in supporting the American auto industry. [Evansville Courier-Press, 5/2/2012]
Here in Indiana, we’ve taken a different approach.  Balancing the budget, paying down our debts, and creating new jobs.   Mourdock’s lawsuit to liquidate Chrysler could have killed more than 1 million jobs:  more than 100,000 in Indiana.   Reported the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, “More than 1 million U.S. jobs - and more than 100,000 in Indiana - are riding on whether the bankruptcies of Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corp. are quick and orderly, according to a prominent research center's study.” Reported the New York Times, “Under the terms of the deal, Fiat can walk away as soon as June 15, a move that Chrysler executives warned would mean near certain liquidation. Executives testified in court that despite spending more than a year scouring the globe for someone to buy the company, none except for Fiat made an offer. And a lawyer for Chrysler argued in a recent court filing that the carmaker was losing $100 million a day while it was in bankruptcy.” [New York Times, 6/9/09; Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, 6/9/09]  

In his effort to destroy Hoosier auto jobs, Mourdock employed Manhattan-based White & Case LLP, which invoiced Indiana Taxpayers $2.8 Million For Legal Services. According to records provided by the Indiana State Treasurer’s office, the law firm of White & Case LLP charged $2,812,604 in attorney’s fees. The firm billed for a total of 6,878.5 hours for an average of $409 per hour. [White & Case LLP invoice to Indiana State Treasurer’s Office, 12/7/09]

Mourdock On Chrysler Lawsuit: “I Didn't Take A Pledge That I Would Support Every Job In Indiana.” In 2010, reported the Indianapolis Star, “Mourdock counters that he didn't place jobs in jeopardy, because he didn't manage Chrysler into bankruptcy. He said he's received ‘lots of pats on the backs’ for fighting to protect retirees. ‘I didn't take a pledge that I would support every job in Indiana under whatever means it takes to do it,’ Mourdock said. ‘The oath I took said I would support the laws of Indiana and support the Constitution of the United States. Constitutional rights for people for which I had a fiduciary responsibility were being violated, and I had no choice to do what I did. I certainly have no regrets.’” [Indianapolis Star, 10/19/10]

Mourdock Was Avid Supporter of “Cap, Cut, and Balance” Bill. In July 2011, CNHI reported that “[Mourdock is] convinced that raising the debt ceiling will result in its own severe consequences, dragging the nation deeper and deeper into debt. He’s an avid supporter of the so-called ‘Cap, Cut, and Balance’ bill that would mandate a balanced federal budget.” [CNHI Indiana, 7/19/11]

Cut, Cap and Balance Will Cost Americans 700,000 Jobs. Cut, Cap and Balance only raises the debt limit after the House and Senate pass a Balance Budget Amendment, cuts $111 billion in FY 2012, and places firm caps on future spending. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “these cuts would equal 0.7 percent of the projected Gross Domestic Product in fiscal year 2012 and would thus cause the loss of roughly 700,000 jobs in the current weak economy, relative to what the number of jobs otherwise would be.” Similarly, Scripps Howard News Service described the proposal as “both simplistic and economically destructive.” [House Republican Study Committee Website, accessed 7/15/11; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/16/11; Scripps Howard News Service Editorial, 7/5/11]

2 of 10 Corporations Mourdock Owned Stock In Paid No Income Tax From 2008-2010. According to a November 2011 study by Citizens for Tax Justice, Duke Energy Corp. and Baxter International, stocks owned by Mourdock and/or his wife according to his 2011 financial disclosure form filed with the Indiana Inspector General, paid no income taxes from 2008-2010. The combined profit for these 2 combines over that time period was $6.4 billion. [Corporate Tax Payers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10, Citizens for Tax Justice, 11/11; Financial Disclosure Statement – Richard Mourdock, Indiana Inspector General’s Office, 2011]
That’s the kind of Hoosier common sense I want to take to Washington.   Mourdock Compared Difference In Income Taxes To Debate On Slavery, “In 2011... We Are In A House Divided.” In June 2011, at a tea party event in Whitley County Mourdock stated “And what [Abraham Lincoln] meant by that was that slavery was either going to be totally eliminated from the United States or it was no longer just going to be restricted to the Southern states, it was going to go everywhere. That’s what the house divided is all about. Well in 2011 I am here to suggest to you that we are in a house divided. You know this past April when Federal taxes were paid, 47%, 47% of all American households paid no income tax – and I don’t mean that they got refunds back – I mean that paid no federal income tax.” [Whitley County Patriots event, 6/7/11]

Mourdock Challenged the Constitutionality of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Reported the
Evansville Courier & Press, “‘I challenge you in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution where those so-called enumerated powers are listed. I challenge you to find words that talk about Medicare or Medicaid or, yes, even Social Security,’ he [Mourdock] said then.  He does not specifically refer to the programs as unconstitutional, and does not call for their repeal. He does, though, say: ‘Nowhere is the word entitlement present in the enumerated powers.’”  The newspaper continues, “‘It [A MajorityPAC Ad] also says Mourdock claimed "a plan that essentially ends Medicare’ — a reference to the proposal by
Republican Mitt Romney's running mate, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, to instead hand seniors a voucher to purchase private insurance — does not go far enough.  He has praised Ryan's plan, but said in a meeting with Purdue University's College Republicans chapter that he doesn't think it ‘goes far enough, fast enough to start to roll back the scope of government.’” [Evansville Courier & Press, 8/23/12]

Mourdock said He Wanted to Repeal the Direct Election of Senators, Disenfranchising Hoosier Voters. “Repealing the 17th amendment. Do I think it will ever happen? No. Is it something that I would like to see? Yes it is. ” [American Bridge Tracking Footage, 2/4/12]

Mourdock told the Indianapolis Star that if he found himself in the minority in Washington, he didn’t care what committees he was assigned to, because he would spend all of his time campaigning to gain the majority.  [Indianapolis Star Editorial Board]
I’m Richard Mourdock and I approve this message because Hoosiers know what it takes to get our economy back on track.

V/O:  Richard Mourdock for Senate.
Mourdock: “I Think There Needs To Be More Partisanship.” Wrote political analyst Brian Howey in a February 2011 Evansville Courier & Press column, “After the speech, Mourdock added, ‘I think there needs to be more partisanship and frankly it's based on principle.’” [Brian Howey, Evansville Courier & Press, 2/27/11]

Mourdock Dismissed Calls For Increased Bipartisan Cooperation. Reported the Evansville Courier & Press in April 2012, “Mourdock told Courier & Press editors the election could point a new way for the party. The path would not involve unnecessarily ceding territory to political opponents, he said. ‘For all the cries for bipartisanship, it is bipartisanship that has taken us to the brink of bankruptcy,’ Mourdock said.” [Evansville Courier & Press, 4/19/12]

Mourdock Says the Highlight of Politics is to “Inflict” His Opinion on Someone Else. [Video of Richard Mourdock on MSNBC’s Daily Rundown, 5/9/12]

“Mourdock Views Victory As Something That Must Be Accomplished Through Partisan Strength.” Wrote Evansville Courier & Press columnist Eric Bradner in April 2012, “Lugar says that voting for well-qualified nominees of Democratic presidents helps get the picks of Republican presidents confirmed, too. Mourdock, meanwhile, would be much more likely to resist in hopes of forcing Democrats to temper their choices. It's a difference that underscores their styles: Lugar's someone who tries to achieve his objectives through collaboration and relationships built over time; Mourdock views victory as something that must be accomplished through partisan strength.” [Eric Bradner, Evansville Courier & Press, 4/28/12]



There are no comments yet.

Leave a Comment