But the question is hard to answer for another reason, too. Senator McCain and his team have avoided releasing any specifics. Taylor Griffin, for instance, one of McCain's trusted, close advisors, danced away from details about Social Security, because he says McCain fears the debate might become politicized. Seriously. Here's the most beef I can uncover from Griffin or McCain:
"The history of the Social Security debate has taught that too many specifics, especially during a presidential campaign, has polarized the debate."
In contrast, if you want to know what Obama's plan is you can readily find volumes of information describing his specific positions and detailed proposals on taxes and the economy, or virtually any other issue. McCain's savvy; he's been in Washington a long time, and his team knows that the devil's in the details, so they won't give any on his website or in interviews. Clever campaigning, perhaps, but it makes it hard for a voter to make an informed choice.
Let's not dither: we're all in favor of lowering taxes and cutting federal spending, we'd all like to have more discretion in spending on what we personally favor and enjoy. Meanwhile the present budget deficit means that whoever wins the November election faces a gargantuan task leading the country out of the hole. “I will not pretend we can achieve them without cost, or without sacrifice, or without the contribution of almost every American citizen,” Senator Obama said on Monday, “But I will say that these goals are possible, and I will say that achieving them is absolutely necessary if we want to keep America safe and prosperous in the 21st century.” I'll return to Obama's New Energy speech in a bit, but in terms of taxes and the economy? Vision alone won't do it, and both candidates owe us specifics of how they'd manage the budget to overcome the deficit.
The Tax Policy Center, in a report disputed by Douglas Holtz-Eakin (arguably McCain's key economic advisor,) said that McCain's "...proposals on the stump are often far more sweeping than the more measured options outlined by his campaign." That they might as much as double the tax impact of his formal proposals, while Obama's off-the-cuff additions would reduce the impact of his plan (by roughly one-sixth, they say.)
Who can we believe? And who are we? There's nobody following the campaign who doubts Obama will champion tax policies that will impact those who earn a quarter million dollars or more in a year. Fortunately, while those folks have economic challenges, they need not worry about the price of a gallon of gas or the cost of bread, and their children will probably be able to afford any college they choose. In his "New Energy" speech on Monday (see below) in Lansing Michigan Obama, for instance, repeated his call for a windfall profits tax on oil companies while focusing on eliminating oil imports from the Middle East and Venezuela within 10 years, while McCain's speeches and press releases on energy are somewhat vague - basically, "drill now, and build nuclear plants."
Obama offers New Energy for America
So, what of the various rumors circulating in email or reports echoing in the media lately? Let's turn to a non-partisan group that has found fault with both major candidates at times, PolitiFact. Here are some highlights from their clear summary page on taxes. Click the meter(s) if you want the details on each of these "facts."
- "Obama will charge a 28% tax on all home sales."
- Obama wants to "restore" the estate tax that George W. Bush "repealed."
- McCain will keep the estate tax at 0%, the same as it is now.
- Obama will "cut taxes for working families."
- McCain July 30th, 2008 in a television ad: Obama "says he'll raise taxes on electricity."
- Tax rates were significantly higher "in the '40s, the '50s, and the '60s."
- Obama wants to "enact the single largest tax increase since the Second World War," according to John McCain on Tuesday, June 10th, 2008 in Washington, D.C.
- McCain and Bush are millionaires who are "for tax cuts for millionaires."
- John McCain on Monday, August 4th, 2008 on the Bush tax cuts.
PolitiFact is a project of the St. Petersburg Times and Congressional Quarterly to help track truth in the presidential campaign. The Times and CQ analyze the candidates' speeches, TV ads, and interviews daily to determine and report on whether the claims are accurate.
So, when you ask who will raise "my" taxes more, the answer depends on who you are. If you work for BP, or Exxon/Mobil, or if you can earn a million dollars in under four years, your personal weatlth and earning potential may suggest you support McCain (although where he finds the money to fund his admittedly vague proposals still could affect you adversely.)
Despite the fact that Obama has hired more economic advisors, McCain might need more advice.
Despite the fact that politics relies on perception, voters need facts to make informed choices. For individuals earning under a quarter million dollars a year concerned with their personal finances as a key issue, a close reading of Obama's plans probably wins the vote. Either way, McCain's claims that Obama will raise taxes are wrong.
