John McCain’s single biggest problem as a presidential candidate is that he’s effectively offering the public four more years of Bush/Cheney. His second biggest problem as a presidential candidate is a consistent habit of saying whatever random thought pops into his head, which he invariably contradicts shortly thereafter.
Two weeks ago, for example, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked McCain if he were a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. “But under circumstances would you increase taxes?” Stephanopoulos continued. “No,” McCain answered.
Yesterday, however, McCain sat down with the Wall Street Journal for his “most-detailed account to date of his thinking on economic issues.” Asked about his “no new taxes” pledge on national television two weeks ago, McCain walked his comments back. “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes,” he said. “But I’m not saying I can envision a scenario where I would, OK?”
Brilliant. Two weeks ago, McCain offered an unambiguous pledge, and said there were no circumstances in which he would raise taxes. Two weeks later, his comments are no longer operative.
But for real entertainment, consider the fact that McCain rejected his own campaign’s Social Security policy.
On Social Security, the Arizona senator says he still backs a system of private retirement accounts that President Bush pushed unsuccessfully, and disowned details of a Social Security proposal on his campaign Web site.
This one’s really embarrassing.
In 2000, McCain touted a Social Security privatization scheme, not unlike the proposal Bush made in 2005. Eight years later, his campaign decided to go in a different direction.
Sen. McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign Web site takes a different view, proposing “supplementing” the existing full Social Security system with personally managed accounts. Such accounts wouldn’t substitute for guaranteed payments, and they wouldn’t be financed by diverting a portion of Social Security payroll taxes.
Mr. McCain’s chief economic aide, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former head of the Congressional Budget Office, says economic circumstances forced changes concerning Social Security policy. Vast budget surpluses projected in 2000 evaporated with a recession, the Bush tax cuts and the cost of responding to Sept. 11.
As a result, the McCain campaign says the candidate intends to keep Social Security solvent by reducing the growth in benefits over the coming decades to match projected growth in payroll tax revenues. Among the options are extending the retirement age to 68 and reducing cost-of-living adjustments, but the campaign hasn’t made any final decisions.
“You can’t keep promises made to retirees,” says Mr. Holtz-Eakin, referring to the level of benefits the government is supposed to pay future retirees. “But you can pay future retirees more than current retirees.”
Asked about the apparent change in position in the interview, Sen. McCain said he hadn’t made one. “I’m totally in favor of personal savings accounts,” he says. When reminded that his Web site says something different, he says he will change the Web site. (As of Sunday night, he hadn’t.) “As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it — along the lines that President Bush proposed.”
Good lord. It’s one thing for McCain to flip-flop from his position from 2000; that was eight years ago. But for the candidate to reject his own campaign’s policy position — after a year of campaigning — is just remarkable. For McCain to embrace Bush’s biggest domestic policy debacle might be even dumber.
As for taxes, McCain wants to make Bush’s cuts permanent, and slash the corporate income-tax rate from 35% to 25%. In all, according to the McCain campaign and the Congressional Budget Office, McCain’s plan would cost about $400 billion a year (at a time of already huge budget deficits), while the senator is also vowing to balance the budget by the end of his first term.
The campaign can’t even begin to figure out how to pay for any of this.
To pay for the cut in corporate tax rates, Sen. McCain is considering eliminating some corporate tax breaks listed by a bipartisan tax reform panel appointed by President Bush, who ignored its report. The panel outlined different ways to change the tax code to spur U.S. competitiveness.
Among the candidates for elimination are a 2004 break for manufacturers — written so broadly that it includes computer software makers, construction firms and architects — a low-income housing credit, and tax breaks for life-insurance companies, credit unions and exporters. Undoing those breaks would raise a maximum of around $45 billion a year, still leaving a big hole.
Just a couple of months ago, McCain acknowledged, “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He certainly wasn’t kidding.
He’s confused about the relationship between taxes and revenues; he’s confused about whether he thinks our economy is strong or not; and he’s confused about why interest rates even exist.
And now he’s confused about his own no-new-taxes pledge, his own Social Security policy, and how he’ll pay for yet another round of reckless tax cuts.
After a quarter-century in Congress, when it comes to the economy, the poor guy sounds like he has no idea what he’s talking about.
Maybe the senator could take a few weeks off, read a book or two, and get back to us?