Johnson reiterates defense of vote in favor of 2017 tax cuts that benefitted his business

'I did nothing for personal benefit or to benefit a few,' two-term senator says

OREGON, Wis. — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson on Monday again defended his vote in favor of the 2017 tax cuts that he admitted earlier this month benefitted his own plastics company, arguing he “stood up for small businesses” and was not acting to promote his own interests.

Johnson’s comments during a stop at the Oregon Area Fire/EMS District headquarters came a week and a half after he told attendees at an event in Medford that his business and those of some prominent donors benefitted from the tax law changes.

“My efforts were for the many, not the few,” the two-term senator, who is running for re-election, said Monday, reiterating his previous stance. “Now when you start talking about taxation, if you cut taxes for everybody, everybody gets a tax break, and people that make more money get more dollars cut, but that’s our tax system.”

Johnson also stressed he “did nothing for personal benefit or to benefit a few,” calling suggestions by opponents to the contrary “one of the grosser distortions by people that obviously want this Senate seat and by many members of the media.”

Johnson also seemed to hint he would be open to former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman’s review of the 2020 election continuing on past when Gableman’s contract is set to end later this month.

He took aim at officials with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, whom he accused of not being forthcoming with information crucial to Gableman’s probe.

“I think we need to understand exactly what happened in 2020 and we don’t have all the information,” he said. “I think the most scandalous thing, what’s happening right now is election officials – the officials of the Wisconsin Elections Commission – are not providing information to his investigation, so how can you close up an investigation when he hasn’t gotten the documents that would show exactly what happened and what didn’t happen?”

When asked why he voted against the American Rescue Plan, which included funding for first responders, Johnson said that while there is “worthy spending” in large legislative packages, his concerns about the nation’s debt led him to vote no at the end.

“I’m voting no on these massive spending packages that are further mortgaging our kids’ future,” he said. “Unfortunately, there aren’t enough people… willing to vote no and they’re just whistling past the graveyard in terms of how we’re debasing our currency, how we are affecting our childrens’ future. There’s no doubt about it, when you’re passing however many trillion dollars a spending package is, there’s going to be worthy spending, things I support, and generally what I’m doing behind the scenes is I’m making sure the good programs are included in those packages even though I might vote no at the very end. At some point in time, somebody’s got to say no to this.”