Subscribe by RSSVideo: McCain Lays Out Economic Plans
John McCain delivered a major speech today highlighting portions of his economic policies. Probably the most notable was his call for the federal gasoline tax to be remanded between Memorial Day and Labor Day. He says this would create an immediate economic stimulus.
Here’s a video report on it from ABC News:
Also, here’s a report from Breitbart:
PITTSBURGH (AP) - Republican Sen. John McCain on Tuesday called for a summer-long suspension of the federal gasoline tax and several tax cuts as the likely presidential nominee sought to stem the public’s pain from a troubled economy.
Timed for the day millions of Americans filed their tax returns, McCain offered some immediate steps as well as long-term proposals in a broad economic speech. The nation’s financial woes have replaced the Iraq war as the top concern for voters, and McCain, who has said economics is not his strongest suit, felt compelled to address the problems as he looks ahead to the November general election.
“In so many ways, we need to make a clean break from the worst excesses of both political parties,” McCain told an audience at Carnegie Mellon University. “Somewhere along the way, too many Republicans in Congress became indistinguishable from the big-spending Democrats they used to oppose.”
To help people weather the downturn immediately, McCain urged Congress to institute a “gas-tax holiday” by suspending the 18.4 cent federal gas tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day. By some estimates, the government would lose about $10 billion in revenue. He also renewed his call for the United States to stop adding to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and thus lessen to some extent the worldwide demand for oil.
Combined, he said, the two proposals would reduce gas prices, which would have a trickle-down effect, and “help to spread relief across the American economy.”
I’m glad he brings this up. Everyone knows oil companies have made billions in profit but politicians fail to acknowledge or admit the federal government has also made billions off gasoline for many years. Nobody complains about the government gouging yet politicians feel the need to parade oil executives around congress like they’ve done something wrong.
I’ll support McCain’s “gas-tax holiday” as a much better means to deliver economic “stimulus” than sending out checks like the Bush administration.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Visit the You Decide 2008 Store »
Loading ...
I’m glad to hear it, Nate, what you’ve just said you’ll support is a McCain proprosal that is NOT “another Bush”. Hurray, somebody’s finally getting it! McCain is NOT another Bush!
The first argument I heard against the gas tax holiday was how did he intend to make up the $10 billion loss in the budget. That’s an easy one - 2007 earmarks (pork barrel spending) totaled 13.2 billion. So if you look at those figures from a very simple point of view, it’s easy to see how much of a priority ending earmark spending should be in this election, isn’t it?
Update: 2008 earmark (pork barrel) figures total $17.2 billion, with Hillary Clinton ranking 13th out 100, weighing in with 281 pet projects totaling $296.2 million. Obama hits the ranking 70th with $97.4 million and 53 pet projects. McCain weighs in at the bottom with $0 along with Coburn, DeMint, Feingold, and McCaskill - all with $0 special interest dollars.
If we could clean up congressional spending, we could probably balance the budget. Geez Louise.
Thankyou that is the type of plan we need in this day and age. This is no Bush plan this is a McCain plan and i know this would get passed because every class of america is getting something and demcrats also will see ti is not just right-wing it is very much in the middle which is why we need McCain as president. HE wokrs with bothsides something Barack Obama does not do.
This is a step in the right direction. Illinois did this back in 2000 or so an it was a great idea. However, when the tax kicks back in…and it will, it’s quite a shock, especially if gas continues to rise during that time. I hope he also plans to the reduce the 20 some odd boutique gas blends that the refineries have to produce.
Babs, since when does having 30 registered lobbyists working for you and accepting millions from lobbies such as big oil and big pharma amount to “0 special interest dollars”?
Josh, special interest dollars refers to pork barrel spending. Pork barrel spending is something McCain has fought against for years, and is totally unrelated to campaign contributions, which I think is what you’re referring to. HOWEVER, if you’d like to see the real figures on the candidates who accept money from lobbyists/lawyers (they are grouped together), then go here:
http://www.opensecrets.or......asp?sec=K
If “lawyers/lobbyists” is not showing in the drop down menu at the top, select it. Take a look.
For a definition and information on pork barrel spending go here:
http://www.cagw.org/site/.....igbook2008
Fighting Pork barrel spending is a major issue for McCain. Keeping it is a major issue for the democrats. Please get informed before you vote!
Stalin, Alabama and Georgia also did this in the wake of Hurricane Katrina when the offshore rigs were damaged and price gouging on gas began. Some are saying this measure is not enough to even affect a family (a “financial advisor” on FoxNews for one), but I’d say $10 billion is a dent by any stretch of the imagination. Alabama and Georgia also did something else very interesting post Katrina that resulted in a shocking result to me. They parked the school buses state wide for one day - who knew how much diesel fuel that would save. It was millions of gallons. Do the math. These types of things do make a difference, and I support them 100%.
Babs,
The real problem we have here in Chicago is the Cook County tax on gas. Chicago now has the highest gas prices and highest sales tax in the country. What do we have to show for it? Well, we have some nice parks…or maybe all the money went to pay for Rev. Wrights 10,000 square foot mansion.
So this is that maverick syle they keep talking about with McCain. Any contingent plan that will lead to lower gas prices definitely sparks my interest, and I think it’s a great talking point for McCain, especially right now since the opposition isn’t focused on him as much as each other. Throw in a timetable for leaving Iraq and I may be sold as a McCain voter.
However, it is really hard to support McCain (or any politican) when they promise, promise, promise about things. Bush promised much – No Child Left Behind, Uniter not Divider , etc. If the last Republican did it, why wouldn’t the next one? He’ll say whatever he needs to, get in office, and then be a do nothing politician, riding out a war he obviously supports.
From what research I’ve done, the war in Iraq is the focal point of our problem. It’s costing us a huge sum of money, which takes from our economy. It also ruins our standing with the Middle East, where we get a substantial amount of our oil from, raising gas prices and further crushing our economy. It is killing our soldiers, and the veterans who do not die come home dismembered, wrought with mental trauma, and a good portion have suffered negative side effects from the uranium from bomb explosions.
This is why I support the Democratic platform. They are focused on leaving Iraq, and furthermore on energy independence. This will reduce our demand for oil, which will in turn lower our gas prices in accordance to the laws of supply and demand.
I’m open to rebuttals, preferrably civil ones *.~
Michelle, you’re an intelligent voter that does her homework, do a little more research on McCain. He is NOT another Bush, in fact CG calls him a democrat. *L* One of the reason’s he’s considered a Maverick is because he will go head to head with either party, democrat or his own. McCain has a long history of not just promising, but standing up and being counted, sometimes not too popularly. Do a little more reading before you close the door on him as a candidate. In the days to come, as he begins his campaign in earnest against one or the other nominee, I think you’ll see him evolve as a candidate of the issues, and that he will outshine the democrats.
Michelle,
I have to take issue with your statements about energy independence and the Democrats.
The democrats have made every effort to prevent the United States from achieving energy independence. Here are a few examples:
1) They won’t allow additional nuclear power plants
2) They won’t allow offshore oil drilling
3) They won’t allow drilling in ANWR
The Demoracts talk energy independence but they don’t have a realistic plan to do it.
Babs…I don’t know where you get your information, but millionaire lobbyists are as much special interests as “pork projects”. I’d much rather my tax dollars support poor people in inner cities, local infrastructure projects, and the like than go to fund the defense industry and corporate welfare for huge corporations with sleazy business practices. You’re such a token conservative…
BTW, Stalin, are you aware that OPEC has repeatedly announced that they will cut production to make up for any gains in supply the U.S. makes using ANWR and off-shore resources? Unless there’s a whole lot more oil in ANWR and off-shore, then I can’t see how the added supply is going to help, except deplete supplies that we will likely need in the future. No amount of government intervention will negate the effects of peak oil, unless we look more toward other sources. As such, I agree with the point you made about Nuclear Power, although I disagree with your assumption that the lack of nuclear power is caused by the liberals.
I’m not a conservative at all, Josh.
Josh,
The argument was regarding energy independence. Regarding OPEC, we have allowed ourselves to be put in a situation that threatens our national security. I would rather develop existing known sources now, rather than wait for an emergency.
I am in total agreement that we need to develop new sources…not just nuclear. With regards to nuclear power, it has only been recently that democrats have considered expanding the number of plants. In general they have been much less open to nuclear power as an alternative source of energy.
Babs,
Firstly, thank you and I’m definitely not closed-minded; I am ready for anything within the next months. As I said, if McCain can sell me on a Iraq timetable, he may just have my vote. It’s probably the hugest factor for me, as I stated in my previous post.
Stalin,
I get where you are coming from, but consider this: nuclear power is a dangerous card to play. I’m sure no one can forget the devastating effects seen from the Chernobyl incident. Also, the main standpoint with the Democratic platform is independence from oil, thus solar, wind, and other technologies are being actively considered. Lastly, our country gets most of its oil from two places: Canada and Saudi Arabia. Oil is in demand everywhere, so the best plan is to lower the demand for oil within our area by means of deterring our dependence on it.
I would much rather spend time talking about this than flag pins! *.~
Michelle, if you’ll go back to the tapes of the Patreus questioning, and listen to the entire portion of McCain’s question and answer session with him, it might give you some insite there. McCain has made it clear that he thought the first 4 years of Iraq was a failure because of the military leadership and bad decisions, and that progress has only been made with the change in strategy. I think - and its just my personal conclusions here - that while he supported the original invasion, he has been as disappointed in the results as all of us has been. Not until the strategy change did he feel we were on the right track, and we can debate this in more detail if you’d like. But on his questioning, he was clearly not happy with some of the recent decisions and results, but also he asked very pointed questions as to what Patreus intended to do to correct the problems and move forward. I think it’s a bit naive for any of us to set a time table when we can only predict what WE will do, and of course war is an “action and reaction” situation. If the military leaders make the right guess as to what the reaction will be, we’re home sooner. If they make the wrong guess, we back up ten and punt, which is what we’ve already seen happen last year. But with McCain’s military leadership credentials, I’m just personally more comfortable with him overseeing this conflict than I am with either democrat.