Obama Response to McCain Ad
“This ad is just more of the same old false and discredited attacks that Senator McCain knows aren't true. Senator McCain will say or do anything to hide the truth: while Obama will cut taxes for the middle class, McCain will give a billion dollars in new tax breaks to America's eight largest corporations, while his plan provides no direct relief for more than 100 million American Families. And despite his rhetoric, he's refusing to support the bipartisan Senate proposal to expand production and invest in renewable energy because he wants to protect tax breaks for oil companies. We've seen what happens when we put the oil companies and their lobbyists ahead of working families, and that's exactly what Americans want to change in this election,” said Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan.
JOHN MCCAIN AD WATCH
“TAXMAN”
AD SCRIPT
AD BACKUP
Celebrity? Yes. Ready to lead? No. Obama's new taxes could break your family budget.
The press warns the "taxman cometh".
OBAMA OFFERS A NET TAX CUT THAT WILL CREATE THE SAME LEVEL OF TAXES THAT PREVAILED UNDER REAGAN
Obama Plan Would Be A Net Tax Cut That Would Create The Level Of Taxes that Prevailed Under Ronald Reagan. Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee wrote, “Overall, Sen. Obama's middle-class tax cuts are larger than his partial rollbacks for families earning over $250,000, making the proposal as a whole a net tax cut and reducing revenues to less than 18.2% of GDP -- the level of taxes that prevailed under President Reagan.” [Wall Street Journal, 8/14/08]
THE OBAMA PLAN OFFERS THREE TIMES THE TAX BREAK FOR MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES THAN MCCAIN
Obama Plan: $80 Billion A Year In Tax Cuts “To Middle-Class Workers, Homeowners And Retirees.” “Senator Barack Obama proposed a plan on Tuesday to provide at least $80 billion a year in tax cuts to middle-class workers, homeowners and retirees, saying if he was elected president he would ‘end the preferential treatment that's built into our tax code.' Mr. Obama said he would give a $500 tax credit to more than 150 million workers, create a tax credit for homeowners who do not itemize their deductions and eliminate income taxes for older taxpayers who make less than $50,000 a year.” [New York Times, 9/19/07; Tax Fairness For The Middle Class]
Analysts Say That Obama's Tax Cut Plan “Offers Three Times The Break For Middle Class Families Than Proposals” Of McCain. “The tax cut plan of Democratic nominee to be Barack Obama offers three times the break for middle class families than proposals of likely Republican nominee John McCain, according to analysts working for a left-leaning think tank. Families making between $37,595 and $66,354 of annual income with Obama would get an average tax cut of $1,042 per family while McCain's tax cut for this group would be $319, the report states.” [Nashua Telegraph, 6/12/08]
Tax Policy Center: Under Obama's Plan The Middle Of The Middle Class Would See Taxes Cut By $1,042 A Year; McCain's Tax Plan Would Give Them Only A $319 Tax Cut. According to the non partisan Tax Policy Center's computations, “under Mr. Obama's plan, the middle of the middle class, or those earning $37,595 to $66,354, would see taxes cut by $1,042 a year. Under Mr. McCain's plan, taxes for people in that category would also fall, but by $319; the largest chunk of the benefits would go to those making $2.8 million a year or more.” [New York Times, 6/13/08]
OUTSIDE OBSERVERS AGREE: CLAIMS THAT OBAMA WILL RAISE TAXES ARE “WRONG,” “FALSE,” “MISLEADING”
McCain's Chief Economic Advisor: “I Used To Say That Barack Obama Raises Taxes…I Stand Corrected.” “Take this one, for instance: ‘The choice in this election is stark and simple,' John McCain said at recent Denver event, repeating a phrase that is a staple of his stump speech. ‘Senator Obama will raise your taxes. I won't.' Seems clear enough, right? You already know the old argument: Republicans cut taxes, Democrats raise them. Except it's not true, at least not in the way that it seems. But don't take my word for it. Here is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain's chief economic policy adviser. ‘I used to say that Barack Obama raises taxes and John McCain cuts them, and I was convinced,' he told me in a phone interview this week. ‘I stand corrected [about Obama's plans].'” [Time, 7/24/08]
Independent Economists At The Tax Policy Center Came To The Conclusion That Obama's Tax Plan Offers A Net Tax Cut And Holtz-Eakin Has Repeatedly Used This To Claim Obama's Plan Is “Fiscally Irresponsible.” Michael Scherer of Time wrote, “So I want to make a few things clear. First, the Obama campaign calculates that its tax plan offers a net tax revenue reduction over ten years, if the health plan is included. Second, independent economists at the Tax Policy Center come to the same conclusion. Third, Holtz-Eakin has repeatedly, and quite seriously, invoked the net-tax-cut calculations of Obama to make the argument that the Democrat has a fiscally irresponsible economic plan.” [Time, 7/30/08]
Time: McCain's Tax Plan “Benefits Mostly Those In Higher Income Brackets While Obama's Plan Benefits Mostly Those In Lower-And Middle Income Tax Brackets.” “They do, however, offer plans that differ strikingly from each other. McCain's tax plan benefits mostly those in higher income brackets, while Obama's plan benefits mostly those in lower- and middle-income tax brackets. McCain wants a tax cut for corporate profits, while Obama has proposed a whole host of tax cuts that will benefit those in the middle-income brackets.” [Time, 7/24/08]
“Overwhelmingly Most Americans Will Not See Their Income Taxes Increased” Under Obama's Tax Plan. Anne Mathias, an economist at the Stanford Group Company, “points out that 95.1% of the American people are in households that earn less than $200,000 -- so overwhelmingly most Americans will not see their income taxes increased, if Obama's math is correct.” [ABC News, 7/7/08]
Annenberg Political Fact Check: Claim That Obama “Promises More Taxes On Small Business, Seniors, Your Life Savings, Your Family” Is “Simply Not True For The Vast Majority Of Viewers Who Will See It.” “The TV ad also says that Obama ‘promises more taxes on small business, seniors, your life savings, your family.' This statement is simply not true for the vast majority of viewers who will see it. Obama, in fact, promises to deliver a $1,000 tax cut for families making up to $150,000 a year, and he says he would increase income tax rates, capital gains tax rates and taxes on dividends only for those with family incomes over $250,000 a year, or for single taxpayers making over $200,000.” [FactCheck.org, 8/8/08]
Washington Post Fact Checker: McCain Campaign Attacks on Obama Tax Plan “Overblown,” “Wrong,” and “Greatly Exaggerated.” “The McCain camp is attempting to persuade Americans that their taxes will increase dramatically with Barack Obama as president. The presumptive Republican nominee has repeatedly said that Obama would enact ‘the largest tax increase since the Second World War.' A surrogate, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, insists that Obama has not proposed ‘a single tax cut' and wants to ‘raise every tax in the book.' … The claim that Obama will ‘enact' the largest tax increase since World War II is also overblown. The Bush tax cuts will expire automatically at the end of 2010, so it is hardly a question of ‘enacting' a new tax increase. ... Carly Fiorina is wrong to claim that Obama has proposed no tax cuts and wants to raise ‘every tax in the book.' John McCain is on more solid ground when he claims that Americans from many different backgrounds could be affected by a rise in capital gains taxes, but he has greatly exaggerated the adverse impact.” [Washington Post, 6/11/08]
Politifact: McCain's Statement That Obama's Tax Plan Would Raise Taxes Is “False.” Politifact reported, “So calling it a tax increase might not be considered fair. There's no disputing that taxes will rise, but the question of who's responsible for that tax increase is another matter entirely. At PolitiFact, we've concluded, as have others, that it's unfair to call Obama's plan a tax increase merely because it doesn't change existing tax law to keep rates low. We think about it this way: The reason taxes will increase is because of tax policy signed into law not by Obama, but by somebody else… the more recent data — combined with the fact that Obama's proposal does not constitute a tax increase in the traditional sense, since some taxes would be lower under his plan than they would under current law — persuades us to classify McCain's statement as False.” [Politifact, 6/11/08]
Washington Post: McCain's Attack On The Obama Tax Plan “Crosses The Line From Reasonable Argument To Unacceptably Misleading.” “Barack Obama and John McCain have important differences on tax policy. These are fair game for campaign ads, and no one expects 30-second spots to be suffused with nuance. But Mr. McCain's latest attack on the Obama tax plan crosses the line from reasonable argument to unacceptably misleading.” [Editorial, Washington Post, 8/10/08]
Obama's taxes mean "higher prices at the pump".
OBAMA'S WINDFALL PROFITS TAX WOULD GIVE A $1,000 ENERGY REBATE TO CONSUMERS
Obama Called For A $1,000 Energy Rebate To Be Paid For By A Windfall Profits Tax On Oil Companies. “Barack Obama said Friday that a windfall profits tax should be imposed on the oil industry to subsidize a $1,000 ‘emergency' rebate for consumers struggling with surging gas prices. The rebates had already been announced as part of his tax relief proposal, but the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee said the release of a disappointing jobs report Friday called for the immediate adoption of the plan, which he said would provide a rebate that would ‘be enough to offset the increased cost of gas for a working family over the next four months.'” [CNN, 8/1/08]
Obama's taxes a "recipe for economic disaster". Higher taxes. Higher gas prices. Economic disaster. That's the real Obama.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approved this message.
MCCAIN Supports the Bush tax cuts that he once opposed because they were too tilted to the wealthy
McCain Supports the Bush Tax Cuts that He Once Said were “Too Tilted to the Wealthy,” and “Go to the Most Fortunate Among Us, At The Expense of Middle-Class.” In late 2007, McCain promised, “I will not let the Democrats roll back the Bush tax cuts.” During a January 2008 GOP debate, McCain said: “I think it's very important that we make the Bush tax cuts permanent.” And on an episode of Fox News Sunday, McCain said, “We need to make Bush tax cuts permanent.” [Associated Press, 10/10/2007; McCain Press Release, 12/18/2007; MSNBC/FAU GOP Debate, 1/24/2008; Fox News Sunday transcript, 2/3/2008]
· 2005: McCain Said The Bush Tax Cuts Were “Too Tilted To The Wealthy, And I Still Do.” “In May 2001, Mr. McCain was one of only two Republicans -- the other was Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island -- to vote against President Bush's $1.35 trillion 10-year tax cut. … Later, he said he also opposed the 2003 tax cut because it, too, disproportionately benefited the rich. ‘I just thought it was too tilted to the wealthy, and I still do,' Mr. McCain told Stephen Moore, a member of The Wall Street Journal editorial board, in an interview published on Nov. 26, 2005. These days, Mr. McCain says at almost every campaign stop that he wants to make those tax cuts permanent rather than have them expire, as the law stipulates, because getting rid of them would have the effect of a tax hike.” [The New York Times, 3/3/08]
· 2001: McCain Said He Could Not “In Good Conscience” Support the Bush Tax Cuts That “Go to the Most Fortunate Among Us, At The Expense of Middle-Class Americans Who Most Need Tax Relief.” “I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle class Americans who most need tax relief.” [Congressional Record, 5/26/01]
SUPPORTED THE PERMANENT REPEAL OF THE ESTATE TAX, WHICH WOULD HELP THE TOP 0.3% WEALTHIEST AMERICANS
McCain Supported the Permanent Repeal of the Estate Tax, Which Would Help the Top 0.3% Wealthiest Americans. McCain voted with all but one of his Republican colleagues for cloture on the Death tax Repeal Permanency Act, which failed in the Senate, 57-41. [HR 8, Vote 164, 6/8/2006: Failed 57-41: R 53-2 D 4-38 I 0-1]
· In 2009, Repeal Of The Estate Tax Would Help Only 0.3% Of The Richest Americans. “As a result of the increase in the exemption level, the number of taxable estates has dropped from more than 50,000 in 2000 to fewer than 13,000 in 2006, and it will fall to about 7,000 in 2009. In percentage terms, that means a little over 2 percent of all estates were subject to the tax in 2000, 0.5 percent are subject to the tax today, and by 2009 that number will fall to 0.3 percent, meaning only 3 out of every 1,000 people who die will owe any tax.” [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/2/06]
MCCAIN STEERS THE BULK OF HIS TAX CUTS TOWARD THE WEALTHIEST FAMILIES AND ABOUT 100 MILLION HOUSEHOLDS, INCLUDING 37 MILLIONS SENIORS WOULD GET NO RELIEF UNDER MCCAIN'S PLAN
About 100 Million Households, Including 37 Million Seniors, Would Get No Relief Under McCain's Plan And Only 1 Million Seniors See Rebates. “McCain's economic platform rests on the premise that the nation's economic challenges are minor and primarily psychological. How else can you explain his policies? McCain has not even proposed a short-term stimulus. His tax cuts ignore middle-class workers — about 100 million households, including 37 million seniors, would get no relief. Only 1 million seniors see rebates under his proposal, which brazenly prioritizes wealthy households over elderly Americans living on fixed incomes.” [Ari Melber, Politico, 7/21/08]
McCain's Plan To Cut Taxes Leaves Out 101 Million Middle Class Households. “McCain's plan is tilted toward corporations and the most affluent, neglects middle-class Americans and lacks immediate solutions, Obama's advisers said today in a conference call with reporters held to unveil a report critical of the Arizona senator's proposals. … McCain's plan to cut taxes for the middle class by increasing the dependent exemption leaves out 101 million households without children, according to Obama's report. His plan gives tax cuts to the nation's wealthiest 2 percent and to large corporations, the report said.” [Bloomberg, 7/6/08]
National Review: McCain's Tax Plan “Offers Very Little In The Way Of Direct Benefits To Americans In The Middle Of The Income Scale. “Our own worries about the McCain plan are different. It offers very little in the way of direct benefits to Americans in the middle of the income scale. Controlling spending and cutting corporate tax rates may benefit them a great deal — but only indirectly and eventually.” [Editorial, National Review, 1/8/08]
McCain Would “Steer The Bulk Of The Benefits To The Wealthiest Families” And “Biggest Benefit Would Flow To Those In The Top 0.1% -- Those With Incomes Above $2.8 Million.” According to the Wall Street Journal, “both John McCain and Barack Obama promise to cut taxes for the majority of Americans. But an Obama administration would redistribute income toward lower- and middle-class households, while a McCain White House would steer the bulk of the benefits to the wealthiest families, according to a nonpartisan analysis of the still-evolving tax plans of the presidential candidates. … Under Sen. McCain, those in the middle -- making between $66,354 and $111,645 -- would see their after-tax income increase by 0.7%. The biggest benefit would flow to those in the top 0.1% -- those with incomes above $2.8 million -- who would see their after-tax income increase by 4.4%. Sen. Obama skews his tax cuts toward the lower- and middle-end of the income scale. Those in the middle would see their after-tax income increase by 2.4%, or $1,042. Americans with incomes above $2.8 million would see their after-tax income decrease by 11.5%.” The Nashua Telegraph also noted that a report by The Tax Policy Center concluded that “23 percent of McCain's tax cut goes to the wealthiest Americans making more than $2.8 million a year.” [WSJ, 6/12/08; Nashua Telegraph, 6/12/08]
MCCAIN'S BUDGET PLAN WOULD ADD $5 TRILLION TO THE DEBT OVER THE NEXT DECADE AND HIS PLAN TO BALANCE THE BUDGET IS NOT CREDIBLE
Tax Policy Center Report Said That McCain's Budget Plan Would Add $5 Trillion To The Debt Over The Next Decade. “Obama's plan -- cuts targeted to middle- and low-income Americans and increases for the wealthy -- would increase the national debt by an estimated $3.4 trillion in the next decade, the center said. Under a similar analysis, McCain's plan -- largely a continuation of Bush's tax reductions -- would add $5 trillion.” [Los Angeles Times, 7/24/08]
WP: McCain's Plant To Balance The Budget By 2013 “Is Not Credible.” “McCain says that President McCain would balance the federal budget by 2013. The plan is not credible. … Mr. McCain sells American voters short -- and he does himself a disservice -- with his implausible claim.” [Editorial, Washington Post, 7/14/08]
NYT: McCain's Campaign Spending Claims Are “Illusory.” “The McCain campaign says it will fill the hole with spending cuts. It would‘reclaim billions' by rooting out existing earmarks and prohibiting new ones; impose a one-year freeze on discretionary spending other than for defense and veterans; and ‘reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations' to use toward deficit reduction. These claimed savings are illusory.” [Editorial, Washington Post, 7/14/08]
Center On Budget And Policy Priorities Director Said “It Seems Unlikely [That McCain Could Balance The Budget], Particularly Given That Senator McCain Has Not Been Willing To Be Specific About What Programs He Would Cut.” “Jim Horney, director of federal fiscal policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the center's analysis, even assuming a fast drawdown of troops in Iraq, found McCain would have to cut around $400 billion worth of federal programs to balance the budget by 2013. ‘It seems unlikely, particularly given that Senator McCain has not been willing to be specific about what programs he would cut,' Horney said. ‘And even if he were willing to, there's a real question of whether the Congress or the public would go along with the kinds of cuts required to balance the budget, assuming the tax policies that he's proposing.'” [AP, 7/8/08]
