Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Tax Hike’

Today, Sen. McCain called for an economic stimulus because the economy “is in some difficulty.”  But, only a week ago, Sen. McCain said “the fundamentals of this economy are strong, and I believe they will remain strong.” And, today, Sen. McCain says corporate tax cuts will stimulate the economy.  But, in the past, Sen. McCain has mocked corporate tax relief as stimulus.

“So after almost three decades spent on Capitol Hill and after joining with Democrats to vote against the Bush tax-relief plans not once but twice, Senator McCain all of a sudden wants to try and help the economy work?”

 “Job creation and economic growth require a unique understanding of global economic challenges and require experience developing and implementing a vision of transforming the economy.  Senator McCain’s votes against pro-growth economic policies and his pessimism about the future of our economy are typical of his Washington-centric approach.”

Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., ...“No one believes that if Ford Motor Co. received a $1 billion check from the federal government that they’d spend it immediately.” – Sen. John McCain On Corporate Tax Cut Stimulus In 2001 (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Today, Sen. McCain Called For An Economic Stimulus Because The Economy “Is In Some Difficulty”:

Sen. McCain, January 17, 2008: ”I Know The Economy Is In Some Difficulty … Particularly In South Carolina.” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

But, Only A Week Ago Sen. McCain Called The Economy Strong And Said It Will Remain Strong:

Sen. McCain, January 10, 2008: “And By The Way, I Don’t Believe We’re Headed Into A Recession. I Believe The Fundamentals Of This Economy Are Strong, And I Believe They Will Remain Strong.” (Fox News, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Myrtle Beach, SC, 1/10/08)

Today, The McCain Campaign Says Corporate Tax Cuts Will Stimulate The Economy:

Sen. McCain New Economic Stimulus Plan Calls For Lower Corporate Income Tax Rates. “Republican presidential candidate John McCain proposed an economic stimulus plan on Thursday that would lower the corporate income tax rate and provide a host of other tax breaks for business.” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

  • Sen. McCain: ”Now Is The Time To Act To Stimulate Our Economy …” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

But In The Past, Sen. McCain Has Attacked Stimulus Via Corporate Tax Cuts:

In 2001, Sen. McCain Opposed A Plan To Cut Corporate Taxes To Help Stimulate The Economy. “Southern Arizona’s representatives in Congress are split on how to break a deadlock over an economic stimulus proposal called for by President Bush. … McCain, a Republican, criticized a part of the GOP-backed House bill that would repeal the corporate alternative minimum tax and refund 15 years’ worth of revenue collected from major corporations under that law.” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Sen. McCain Mocked Corporate Tax Relief As Stimulus: “No One Believes That If Ford Motor Co. Received A $1 Billion Check From The Federal Government That They’d Spend It Immediately.” “‘The House bill would give billions of dollars in tax money to big corporations’ without creating much benefit for the economy, McCain said. ‘No one believes that if Ford Motor Co. received a $1 billion check from the federal government that they’d spend it immediately.'” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Today, The McCain Campaign Says Tax Cuts For Consumers Are Not Needed To Stimulate The Economy:

The McCain 2008 Campaign Says Tax Rebates For Consumers Are Not Needed To Stimulate The Economy. “What about putting money directly in the hands of consumers, something some economists and Democratic candidates are proposing? ‘Don’t go for any gimmicks like a rebate or subsidies to people. They don’t need subsidies. They need lower taxes on the factors of production,’ [McCain adviser Jack] Kemp says.” (Alex Frangos, “Jack Kemp Previews McCain-onomics,” The Wall Street Journal, 1/17/08)

But In The Past, Sen. McCain Said Lower Income Tax Rebates Were The Way To Stimulate The Economy:

Sen. McCain, 2001: “A Good Package Would Be One That Gives Relief To Low- And Middle- Income Taxpayers.” “‘A good package would be one that gives relief to low- and middle- income taxpayers, one that extends unemployment and health-care benefits to the unemployed and offers some tax breaks that would take effect quickly,’ [Sen. McCain] said.” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain Is Pushing An Energy Tax Hike That Would Harm Michigan

McCain For Energy Tax Hike“What do John McCain, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Pew Center on Climate Change have in common? They have united to support a massive new tax increase on energy – which will raise costs throughout the economy and threaten the vitality of, among others, the oil and automobile industries I suspect that many who would be significantly harmed by McCain’s wrongheaded tax plan –  say, blue-collar workers in Michigan – have never heard of it.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)


Sen. McCain Is Pushing For A Massive New Energy Tax Which Would Especially Harm Michigan:

Sen. McCain’s Legislation Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels. “What is not widely understood is that he is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Energy Policy Could Devastate The Auto Industry. “Higher energy costs will, among other things, raise the cost of manufacturing big-ticket items in American factories. And higher gas prices will likely raise demand for those classes of automobiles that tend to be manufactured overseas. Somehow, I think Michigan voters will be less than thrilled about this, should anyone bother to inform them.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Send Gas Taxes Sky High And Would Harm The National Economy:

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Hike Gas Taxes By 68 Cents Per Gallon. “The EPA has estimated what the McCain energy tax would mean to consumers. Since the bill’s provisions are phased in, the full cost of the tax would not be felt for a number of years. But in a letter to Senator McCain dated July 2007, the EPA estimated that the tax will be about $.26 cents in current dollars per gallon of gasoline by 2030 and $.68 cents per gallon by 2050.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Reduce United States GDP By As Much As $5.2 Trillion. “The effect on the economy of the McCain tax would be similar to any other broad-based tax. In the EPA’s own words: ‘The present value of the cumulative reduction in real GDP for the 2012-2030 period ranges from $660 billion to $2.1 trillion…the cumulative reduction in the present value of real GDP for the 2012-2050 period ranges from about $1.6 trillion to $5.2 trillion.'”  (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Has Repeatedly Teamed Up With Sen. Joe Lieberman To Push Radical Climate Change Legislation:

McCain-Lieberman Would Have Capped Carbon Dioxide Emissions. “The latest bill rejected by the Senate, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., would have mandated caps on carbon dioxide and a market-oriented system for trading them. Those who needed more energy could theoretically buy credits from those who could make do with less. But government would still have to establish the overall cap on energy use.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

  • McCain-Lieberman Would Have Hiked Gas Prices. “The increases in gasoline prices projected to occur (is) 9 percent in 2010 and 19 percent in 2025.” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

The American Council For Capital Formation’s Margo Thorning Said That McCain-Lieberman Would “Significantly Hurt Michigan’s Economy.” “Imposing the McCain/Lieberman bill… would also significantly hurt Michigan’s economy. Residential electricity prices are projected to rise by 12 to 30 percent, household income falls by up to $791 and there would be up to 33,000 fewer jobs in by 2010 compared with the baseline forecast, according to an analysis by CRA International.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

  • Thorning Said McCain-Lieberman “Would Seriously Harm Detroit’s Auto Industry.” “Proposals like McCain/Lieberman would seriously harm Detroit’s auto industry, as both union and management leaders noted earlier this month in a joint appearance before Congress. So profits would sink and jobs would vanish. That’s a high price to pay for a negligible benefit to the environment.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

Detroit News Columnist Thomas Bray Said That The McCain-Lieberman Plan Would Ultimately Result In A Huge Indirect Tax On The American People.  “Aside from the crucial question of whether a government bureaucracy is smart enough to do so, even environmentalists confess that Kyoto or McLieberman measures would have been a small first step in clamping a huge indirect tax on the American and world economy.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

The U.S. Energy Information Administration Estimated That McCain’s Global Warming Legislation Would Have Decreased U.S. GDP By $776 Billion. “The cumulative losses in actual GDP are about $776 billion (1996 dollars) in the SA.2028 (McCain-Lieberman)…. The peak, single-year impact on actual GDP under SA.2028 occurs in 2025, with a loss of $76 billion (1996 dollars), or about 0.4 percent of GDP. The largest percentage change in actual GDP, 0.5 percent, occurs in 2011, where the estimated loss in actual GDP that year is $57 billion…” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

“Impact Of McCain-Lieberman * If The Climate Stewardship Act Passes, It Would Increase:

  • Energy Costs By 30 To 50 Percent.
  • Unemployment By Nine Percent.
  • Electricity Costs By 46 Percent.
  • Fuel Oil Prices By 33 Percent.
  • Inflation By 27 Percent.” (Editorial, “Climate Stewardship Bill Would Starve U.S. Economy,” The Detroit News, 10/30/03)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) Said McCain-Lieberman Was “The Right Thing To Do.” “Continuing his fight for environmental protection and energy security, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) today joined a bipartisan group of Senators in offering an amendment to the Energy Bill that would ensure that America takes a leadership role in addressing the effects of global climate change. … Kerry said. ‘It is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.'” (Sen. John Kerry, “Kerry Joins Bipartisan Group In Offering Climate Change Amendment To Energy Bill,” Press Release, 6/22/05)

Sens. McCain, Kerry And Lieberman Voted For Global Warming Legislation That Was Soundly Rejected By Senate Republicans And Democrats. 49 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted against McCain’s “greenhouse gas” amendment to the energy bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #148: Rejected 38-60: R 6-49; D 31-11; I 1-0, 6/22/05, McCain, Kerry and Lieberman Voted Yea)

Read Full Post »