On economy, GOP chair prefers McCain
Mike Sigler / Guest Column
Ithaca Journal, 4/2/08

 

A lot of hay has been made over an offhand remark by John McCain that economics was not his strongest suit. That would carry some weight with me if Democrats Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama were well versed in economic policy, but they're not. So it's curious that they're making it a talking point in their campaigns. Just from their positions and votes, I hope it's clear to everyone that McCain has a better grasp of economics than his opponents.

First, when the economy is struggling, you don't raise taxes, something both Obama and Clinton voted for in March in the Democratic budget blueprint. They promised to only raise taxes on the rich and yet voted to raise the 25 percent tax bracket for singles making at least $31,850 and couples making $63,700 a year to 28 percent, according to the Associated Press. That's the Democrats' definition of rich? By voting for Clinton or Obama, voters are taking almost $1,000 out of the vast majority of taxpayers' pockets, most likely their own, and limiting their own ability to help the economy grow. I know it's counter-intuitive, but lowering some taxes actually results in collecting more revenue, which is exactly what happened with the Bush tax cuts. It wasn't hard to guess that's what would happen since it happened before with the Reagan tax cuts and in Ireland when they cut their corporate tax rate to encourage growth. Now Ireland has one of the strongest economies in Europe and has seen its tax collections rise with lower rates.

The Democrats, Clinton and Obama included, also want the inheritance tax to go back to 55 percent. For some, it's easy to say Bill Gates' children should be taxed 55 percent of their inheritance upon his death, but it is not easy to say that to the family of the small business owner or family farmer, who want to keep the business going but have to sell it to pay the taxes on money the deceased has already paid taxes on.

Second, both Clinton and Obama, although Obama more stridently, have come out against NAFTA and free trade despite nine in 10 economists supporting the elimination of tariffs and trade barriers, according to a recent New York Times article. Canada and Mexico are two of our largest trading partners, and it's hard to imagine a president trying to renegotiate a trade deal with our largest oil supplier, Canada, when it's been largely beneficial to the United States, or did Obama just mean Mexico? If he did mean just Mexico, it runs counter to his pledge to help improve the economy of Mexico to decrease the number of Mexicans looking to come to the U.S. illegally for work.

 

Third, Medicare basically runs out of money this year, with more money going out than coming in. Social Security runs out in the next 10 years and yet the Democrats in Congress, including Clinton and Obama, have been largely silent on the fiscal solvency of these two critical programs. Many didn't agree with some of President Bush's ideas on Social Security, but disagreeing doesn't make the problem go away, and simply raising taxes to cover the added costs could lead to a decrease in actual dollars collected.

McCain is the only presidential candidate who seems to understand the depth and seriousness of this problem. He's stood against adding entitlements, not because they're not potentially good programs, but because Congress has shown an unwillingness to lay out how they'll pay for these new entitlements or make the current programs solvent. There's no silver bullet to solving these crises, an overused word in politics today but apt here. I believe McCain has shown he can work with the other side of the aisle to implement the policies needed to save both programs. It will take courage, not just in life and death situations, but in politics, which McCain has shown time and again.

Lastly, gas prices are a large part of the economic problem we face today. While John McCain has vowed to embrace alternative energy, he also sees that today our economy revolves around oil, and increased supply, coupled with conservation, is needed. From the other side, we only have talk about alternatives like wind and solar, which, while beneficial long term, do not help tomorrow or even in the next six months. I'd rather have a president who at least has identified the problem and the long- and short-term solutions than one who has not. I prefer John McCain.

Mike Sigler is the chairman of the Tompkins County Republican Party.