The new Massachusetts governor and lt. governor, Republicans Mitt Romney and Kerry Healey, have pledged to forgo their salaries during their four-year term as a symbolic sacrifice during tough economic times. Romney and Healey are millionaires and don’t need the money to live on. And it’s real money—Romney’s salary over the four years would be almost a million dollars.
You’d think people would welcome the symbolism as well as the gesture by the “rich” to sacrifice for others. You’d think so, but liberals are never happy. There has been a steady stream of letters to the editor in local papers actually attacking the move. Here’s a typical one.
The complaints boil down to two arguments. First, they complain that working without pay gives the impression that only the rich can serve in elected office. Wrong. Romney is not eliminating his salary for his successors; he’s saying he doesn’t need it. If he accepted the check, the liberals would complain that the rich were getting richer off the backs of the poor who were having services cut from the state budget. Romney’s successor will get a paycheck if he likes and you can be sure that none of our state representatives, most of them liberal Democrats, won’t even forgo their raises during tough fiscal times, never mind give up their paychecks.
Second, liberals are complaining that because Mitt is rich the sacrifice of his paycheck is not enough. As the letter linked to above says:
He will still have no difficulty paying his mortgage. He will still take any vacations he wants to. His children will still be able to afford any private school or university they wish to go to. I’m sure he and his family will not have to skip any medications, eyeglasses, or dentures they may need. Unfortunately, many others in the Commonwealth, in the name of fiscal responsibility, are being asked to sacrifice such basic needs.
It would be nice if the wealthiest in the country would sacrifice more of their luxuries so that others wouldn’t be short on their basic needs.
In typical liberal fashion, they are quick to tell other people how they should spend the money they have earned through their own hard work. These liberals don’t know how much or where Romney donates to charity (it’s probably a lot more than most liberal politicians; remember the Clintons’ famous donation of used shower curtains and underwear?) so how can they judge him?
It boils down to greed and jealousy. Someone else is wealthy, not because they or their parents worked hard and risked their well-being, but because they were lucky or cheated someone else. They say, I’m not rich, not because of my own failures or lack of ambition, but because someone else got rich instead of me.