  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Taxes, Integrity and CharacterPosted on Jun 18, 2008By Joe Conason Once upon a time, there was a fiscally and socially responsible senator named John McCain. Despite his presidential ambitions, the Republican from Arizona spoke out against the economic royalism of his party’s leadership in the White House and Congress, and simply said no. He rejected the Bush tax cuts in 2001 because they provided an unearned bonanza for America’s wealthiest citizens while giving a pittance to the middle class and nothing to the working poor. To him, as a long-standing enemy of waste and profligacy, these proposals were not only unfair but also unwise. “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 need tax relief,” he said, joining courageously with Lincoln Chafee, then a senator from Rhode Island, as one of two Republicans who dared to cast such a crucial vote against president and party. Now Chafee is no longer in the Senate, having lost reelection in 2006 after enduring a brutal primary challenge from the Republican right. And McCain, now driven by ambition rather than principle, has changed. He supports the tax cuts that his conscience once moved him to oppose—and indeed, he promises to deliver even more lucrative benefits to those who need relief least, at the expense of those who need it most. Tax policy is rarely regarded as a character issue. It is possible to believe that rewarding the rich should be the main purpose of the tax code, and it is also possible to believe that taxation should advance rather than diminish equality—and it is possible for honorable people to argue either way. But in McCain’s case, the complete flip-flop and implausible explanation raise disturbing questions about his integrity. (That is particularly true of a candidate like McCain, who questioned the character of a primary opponent, Mitt Romney, for revamping his positions on abortion and other social issues.) By the time McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 he had established a strong position against their regressive effects. That stance marked him as a true maverick in his own party and a straight talker who spoke for the national interest against his own personal interests. Running against George W. Bush in the 2000 GOP primary, he mocked the Texas governor’s “misplaced” bonanza for the affluent. “Sixty percent of the benefits from his tax cuts go to the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans—and that’s not the kind of tax relief that Americans need,” he said. Despite his wife’s inherited wealth, he criticized proposals to repeal the estate tax for the same reason, noting that such legislation “would provide massive benefits solely to the wealthiest and highest-income taxpayers in the country.” As the chance to run for president again drew closer, however, McCain shifted toward conservative orthodoxy. In 2005 he voted for cuts in capital gains taxes that he had previously opposed, and in 2006 voted for essentially the same estate-tax repeal he had once denounced. And today his economic platform extends to the Bush tax cuts and makes them still more regressive—and more expensive. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, the McCain proposals would render almost one-quarter of their benefits to the top one-tenth of 1 percent of taxpayers. Those are households with annual incomes over $2.8 million. Families in the lower 60 percent of the income scale would receive 8 percent of the McCain plan’s benefits. This scheme would result in the loss of at least $4 trillion in revenue over the coming decade, as our physical infrastructure crumbles. Even more troubling than those numbers, however, is the contorted rhetoric that the Republican nominee-to-be has used to justify his policy reversal. Over the past several months, you see, he has discovered that he never really opposed the Bush tax cuts as unfair. He only opposed them because there weren’t enough spending cuts to balance the revenue reductions. At the same time, however, he now insists that cutting taxes actually increases federal revenues—the discredited supply-side mumbo-jumbo that he must endorse to win over his party base. But if reducing taxes actually raises revenues, then why is he so worried about spending cuts? Intellectual honesty was the currency of the straight talker, yet he has squandered that great asset by pandering to the most irresponsible ideologues. How he can bear to do this to himself is a mystery. Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer. © 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc. Previous item: Time for the Iraq Debate to Move On Next item: A Government of Law, Not Fear Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
Republican Economic Theories Don’t Add Up
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By Pacrat, June 22 at 1:31 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yep, that’s old Flipper McCain. He has rarely held the same opinion for more than a few hours - depends on his audience. The fact that he was brain washed as a POW in a war that most Americans no longer remember, doesn’t excuse him. He didn’t do any more than other POWS and Americans who fought that meaningless war. What is he doing and saying NOW?
Will McDork do the same in the White House in the very remote chance that he is elected? Heaven help us!
Report thisBy purplewolf, June 19 at 3:22 pm #
When McCain started with the “straight talk” line, I knew we were all screwed. Anyone who comes off with a line like that is a liar(time will prove this)and has no integrity. There has been too much contradiction coming from him, let alone the confusion in many of his speeches. He also has problems controlling his temper, whether it is Type A personality, shades of Alzheimer’s, senility, bi-polar or whatever his problem is. This is not a “good trait” in a leader
America needs someone who can keep their cool in a crisis, not some maverick flying off the handle at any given moment. Any person who cannot control himself is a danger to all of society and in this case if elected, the rest of the world. McCain has admitted he would rather wage more war and bomb his perceived enemies rather than sit down and discuss with them what his problem is with them. This sounds too much like my home town of Flint, Michigan. If someone has “dissed you”, or you have heard or think that someone has-no proof needed-you just go out and waste them. Problem solved.
Is this how we as Americans want to be known? The self-righteous bullies who kill others who think or do differently than we think they should according to our view(narrow)of the world as a whole. I for one want a better reputation for this country than what it has earned the past two terms of Baby Bush. How about you?
He admits he is not to educated with matters pertaining to the economy. We have had 7+ years of that so far. Are we better off today than we were before the Republicans stole the W.H.? Do we really need any more of that failed policy?
Report thisBy Louise, June 19 at 6:55 am #
Purple Girl, June 19 at 2:23 am:
Thanks for the valuable insight.
There are rumors running across the internet that McCain will withdraw his candidacy for health reasons and the candidate will be selected by the republican convention. [Giving new meaning to the “voice of the people” ... even for republicans] So while we are speculating about who Obama’s running mate will be, they are speculating about who their candidate will be.
But then this rumor could have been started by mainstreammedia, looking for a story even if they have to manufacture it.
As far as McCain doing a double flip flop, that really shouldn’t surprise anyone. If he still has all his faculty’s, he knows better than anyone who owns the republican party. And if he wants the top-dog job, he has to please them. It really has little if anything to do with the loyal mom and pop party base, because it has long been established [by republicans] they cant remember anything for more than three months and can very easily be persuaded to believe the current line, whatever it may be.
The upside of that is they’re not ALL that dumb. Just a small minority. And since they are really tired of being taken for granted and viewed as just one cut above totally retarded, they will not vote for McCain, or anyone that looks and sounds and smells like the administration of the past seven plus years. They will send the message, “We are sick and tired of being called stupid!”
As far as ever liking McCain goes, I have to say since he’s a republican my prejudice has led me to pay attention only when he reiterates the republican line. And even when he sounds contrary, reading between the lines always leads to a qualifyer that keeps him safely in the republican fold. So I never could buy the “maverick” label, and his apparent flip-flopping doesn’t surprise me at all.
When someone says to me, well I like McCain for president, the only thing I do is ask, “Why?” Kinda fun trying to watch people come up with an answer to that question. OK, I know, that’s mean, but it is a valid question. Amazing how many times the answer comes, “Because it’s his turn.”
Oh duh - duh - duh. How deeply some delve into the why and how and who will continue leading them over the cliff. Do you think they’ll realize before they hit the bottom they should scream?
Report thisBy Purple Girl, June 19 at 2:23 am #
I used to like Mac -thought he was one of the few across the aisle with integrity.Even gave him a pass as a victim of circumstances in the S&L;Scandal of the ‘80’s. I was Not thrilled with Gore in ‘00 (hindsight being 20/20 -Reeked of the DLC- the Neo Cons in Blue, like Kerry & the Clintons)but I held my nose a voted for him anyway.there was However the thought , for once in my voting life, to cross over and Vote for Mac, if he got the Nomination, passed through my mind.
Report thisNo Doubt he has since been Bought Off by the Corp run Neo Con machine.But what could have caused such a change in his personality. Perhaps it is not a change, just less able to hide the Real McCain Now.Age does seem to make people become more of who they are- set in their ways or because they no longer give a rat’s ass what anyone thinks, Loss of impulse control and community mindness.
But what has struck me over the last few years is the mental and Physical changes. Having Worked with the Elderly I have first hand knowledge & experience with Strokes and Alheimers. I saw Reagans mental ‘glitch’ when he stated he couldn’t remember what he had for breakfast when discussing the Iran Contra Scandal- I knew then he was having Problems.
Mac Stikes that same cord. The way he ‘released’ his medical records and the limits he put on their review (time & Only Media) tells me there was something buried with in those 1000 pages- A CVA?Forgetfulness? Inablity to control Impulsive behavior esp in the Afternoon (Sun Downing Behaviors). His body mechanics alone signal some type of recent Rehab therapy. He appears to need to move Both arms together- and Stiffer upper body movements- Conscious attempts at mechanical Fluidity,he has to think about it.
It is Not Mac’s Age that is My concern- it is his new found Politics and the liklihood of some serious physical condition which makes him Unfit for Duty any longer.