|
May 29, 2008
Obama vs McCain On Economics
Thorley Winston at The Volokh Conspiracy has this to say about Obama vs McCain on economic policy: On Health Care - Obama favors creating a new federal entitlement and a new federal bureaucracy to force every private health plan to conform to the "genero[sity]" of the new entitlement. McCain opposes both mandates and entitlements and favors letting consumers buy their own health insurance policies across State lines and restoring market competition to the health insurance market. On entitlements - Obama favors raising Social Security taxes (again), thinks that Medicare Part D wasn't generous enough, and thinks that comparatively poorer young people were put on this Earth to pay for the benefits promised to the comparatively wealthier retirees who voted them into existence in the first place. McCain opposes expanding existing entitlements, wants to means-test Medicare, and has consistently supported letting younger workers opt at least partially out of Social Security. On farm subsidies - Obama favors farm subsidies including ethanol. McCain has consistently opposed farm subsidies even to the point of going into Iowa to denouncer ethanol subsidies. On free trade - Obama favors backing out of our existing trade treaties unless they include more trade restrictions to benefit various special interest groups that support his campaign (read: unions). McCain has been one of the most ardent supporters of free trade to the point of talking to voters among whom it might be unpopular to convince them that they should support it. On taxes, spending and earmarks - Obama favors not only repealing the Bush tax cuts but higher levels of taxation on top of that, favors even higher levels of spending, and supports earmarks (ask his wife's employer). McCain has never voted for a tax increase and generally favors lower taxes, has bucked his own party on spending (particularly for popular programs) and doesn't do earmarks. == You know, I could get to like McCain. Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 05.29.08 at 12:04 PM
Comments
aj, Uh. You are right about what McCain could do as a Senator vs as President. You are wrong about what he has done. However, having a guy who thinks like McCain with the President's pulpit may be useful. M. Simon · May 30, 2008 02:17 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
May 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
May 2008
April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSALLAMERICANGOP See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Straight talk? In Beverly Hills?
Vets For Freedom Has Some Questions when earned is unfair, unearned is fair! Second City Cop Just don't question their patriotism.... How do I tell Coco they want to kill her? Obama vs McCain On Economics What really happened? (I'll never have time to know....) Clayton Cramer Is Running For Idaho State Senate Who says eagles don't carry off kids?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
And he could start those things in this place known as Congress.
As a Senator.
Presidents don't get to make legislation and he will have a tough time getting anything like what he wants out of the next Congress. Presidents usually get very little of their legislative agenda done, if he is saying that he will veto bills that do not contain these things, that is a good plus and a selling point as the negative power is an effective one. If that is what he is saying then it would be a good reason to look at him... he hasn't said that as it would be a bombshell to have a candidate run on the actual powers the President gets.
He has had decades to lead in the Senate on these matters. That is why we have Congresscritters: to make laws.
I would prefer if he addressed the powers that the President *does* get, instead of trying to tout an agenda he is unwilling to press from Congress. And I do hold that exact, same standard to any Congresscritter running for the office of President. If they put forward a lovely legislative agenda, then I do really question if they know what office it *is* they are running for. None of those left running appear to have a clue amongst them. Pretty typical: they are Senators.