CORRECTION: In a previous version of this article, the sector in which Mitt Romney has spent his life was misstated. Romney has spent his “whole life in the private sector.” The Daily Orange regrets this error. 

In the last week of the election, there’s little time left for President Barack Obama’s campaign to adequately expose Mitt Romney for his hypocritical record on the issues.

Voters need to understand the records of the candidates. Romney’s record as governor in Massachusetts and the stances he had during the Republican primary debates are useful to look at. It is the failure of the Obama campaign for not adequately showing his history.

If Romney wins the presidency, he will be among just a few presidential candidates who fail to win his home state. Romney is hardly competing in Massachusetts, where he was governor for one term from 2003 to 2007. Massachusetts voters have seen enough not to give him another chance to lead. He trails Obama in most polls by 15 to 20 percentage points.

While in presidential debates, Romney has decided to have himself called “governor.” He has also contrasted this by repeating that he’s spent his “whole life in the private sector.” Romney has campaigned for president once and also campaigned for the Massachusetts Senate seat.

For someone in the private sector, he’s spent a lot of time trying to break out and become a leader. In his final year in office in 2006, he spent 212 days out of state, according to the Boston Globe.

When Romney speaks about his time as the governor of Massachusetts, there is a large disconnect between who was responsible for successes. Oftentimes, the state’s legislature deserves the credit for the state’s successes, not the governor.

During his term in office, Romney says he was bipartisan and compromised with the legislature. Compromise can hardly describe how he dealt with a veto-proof majority of 85 percent Democrats in the state senate.

The governor had no choice.

Romney prides himself on his education record in the state, often touting the No. 1-in-the-country rankings. Yet there is little he can point to as evidence that he created this success. Massachusetts was and still is one of the best states for education in the country.

Romney also oversaw the state’s response to the Big Dig ceiling tunnel collapse. In 2006, a woman died when a ceiling panel from a newly constructed tunnel fell and crushed her car, killing her. Romney’s administration hired Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, the company responsible for the collapse, to evaluate its own work on the tunnel and determine the fixes necessary.

“It was essentially the proverbial fox guarding the chickens,” state Sen. Marc Pacheco (D) said. “It continued under Romney’s watch,” he told the Associated Press.

Romney has also made major shifts in policy positions outside of Massachusetts. It leaves experienced Massachusetts voters informed and knowledgeable about his shifts, while the rest of the country knows little about what he has said and done in the past.

On abortion, he said it should be “safe and legal in this country” when he debated against Sen. Edward Kennedy. Now, he says he is anti-abortion and it is “bad law and bad medicine.”

Obama has failed to bring up Romney’s Massachusetts record enough. Voters in Massachusetts know his record, but their voices have not been heard. Those who are voting for Obama know his record from the last four years.

Romney’s business experience is valuable to look at, but his governing experience is even more important because it is tangible proof of his abilities. If Obama fails to expose all of Romney’s record as governor, he will do so at his own peril.

Voters should carefully examine each of the candidates’ leadership before voting for them. Just looking at Romney’s business record is not enough to be fully informed.

Harmen Rockler is a senior newspaper journalism and political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at horockle@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @LeftofBoston.

Published on October 29, 2012 at 1:00 am