The truth about Romney and Bain

By Michael J.W. Stickings

On the national political stage today, it's all about Romney and Bain Capital, when he left the firm and so the point in time after which, he claims, he bears no responsibility for its activities (and specifically for things like outsourcing). There has been a good deal of contentiousness, as Richard noted here and here, with FactCheck.org (which appears to be in complete and utter denial) and the Post's Glenn Kessler on one side, along with Romney's surrogates and apologists, and the Obama campaign, David Corn, Josh Marshall, and other reputable reporters, and the truth on the other. And then, today, came The Boston Globe:

Government documents filed by Mitt Romney and Bain Capital say Romney remained chief executive and chairman of the firm three years beyond the date he said he ceded control, even creating five new investment partnerships during that time.

Romney has said he left Bain in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, ending his role in the company. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed later by Bain Capital state he remained the firm's "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president."

Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney's state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain "executive" in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings. 

This is pretty definitive, even with Fortune taking Romney's side:

Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

Yes, but isn't that the point? He may no longer have been running the day-to-day operations of the firm after he left in 1999, but he was still ultimately in charge, still closely connected, still making money off its activities, and still involved not just with Bain but with some of the companies in which Bain invested, including sitting on various boards. Henry Blodget sums up the issue well:

Note that the Romney campaign does not deny that Romney was "chairman, CEO, and president" of Bain from 1999-2002.

What the Romney campaign says instead is that Romney "left" Bain in 1999 and had "no input on investments or management of companies after that point."

So, read to the legal letter, both of those statements may technically be true (or at least defensible).

Romney did leave Bain in 1999, at least for a leave of absence (he went to run the Olympics).

And it is possible that, once he left, he no longer had direct input into investment or management decisions.

However ...

As "Chairman, CEO, and President" of Bain, he damn well would have remained responsible for these decisions. In which case, saying he had "left" and implying that he had no involvement or responsibility whatsoever is highly misleading.

In other words, he was either responsible for what Bain did or he lied to the SEC. (What's more, as Mother Jones has reported, Bain was involved in outsourcing jobs well before 1999.)

Simply, as Adam Serwer writes at Mother Jones, Romney's story is "falling apart," with the evidence piling up:

The Boston Globe is not the first to report evidence that Romney may have been misleading the public about when he left Bain. Following a Mother Jones report two weeks ago showing that Romney was at Bain when it invested in a medical waste firm that disposed of aborted fetuses, my colleague Nick Baumann noted that several public documents indicated Romney was still involved with Bain years after he claimed to have left. Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall posted SEC filings where Romney's "principal occupation" is listed as "managing director of Bain Capital, Inc."

 

It is any wonder the Romney campaign, and Republicans generally, are responding with such intensity to this developing story? They're terrified it could bring down Romney's candidacy.

 

And they're right.