Posted by: Theo Francis on September 04
![]()
After spending much of the early part of his campaign emphasizing national security, John McCain used a good chunk of his acceptance speech Thursday night to draw stark contrasts with his opponent on economic policy and emphasize his concern for Americans struggling in a weak economy.
At times understated and at times vehement, McCain set out a simple creed to, as he put it, get the Republican party “back to basics” after it had lost its way in Washington: “We believe in low taxes; spending discipline, and open markets. We believe in rewarding hard work and risk takers and letting people keep the fruits of their labor.”
After three days of sharp partisan attacks from supporters during the convention, he took measured swipes at Obama's policies: "My tax cuts will create jobs. His tax increases will eliminate them," McCain said. "My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor."
Among his economic commitments: doubling the child tax exemption to $7,000, "getting rid of failed programs" to reduce government spending, and reforming unemployment insurance, a program he decried as "designed for the economy of the 1950s."
To help workers displaced from jobs "that won't come back," he promised to "help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one while they receive retraining..." He derided Obama's jobs proposal as promising "to bring back old jobs by wishing away the global economy."
And, of course, he hit hard on energy policy, an area in which McCain's advisers believe he has an edge.
A promise to drill for oil offshore drew a chant of "drill, baby, drill" from the crowd (though much of the Florida delegation reportedly sat out a similar chat during Sarah Palin's speech). He pledged to build nuclear plants, "develop clean-coal technology" and increase the use of "wind, tide, solar and natural gas" for energy, saying the initiative would be "the most ambitious national project in decades," and one that "will create millions of new jobs, many in industries that will be the engine of our future prosperity; jobs that will be there when your children enter the workforce."
One surprising note came when, promising to fight for ordinary Americans and naming families he has presumably encountered on the trail, he started with a Michigan couple that had to take on extra jobs -- not because they lost their home, but because, in part, they "lost their real estate investments in the bad housing market."
So will it be enough to move more voters into his camp? McCain and Obama have each ramped up the rhetoric aimed at convincing struggling working and lower-middle class Americans that he, not his rival, can best improve their lives. Both know those voters will decide the election, and neither candidate has yet made the sale. But after sharply contrasting speeches laying out sharply contrasting visions of how to get the economy working again, they've laid the foundation for the tough final fight ahead.
McCain, Obama, and Biden are ALL SENATORS. If they have ideas for fixing the economy, why aren't they sponsoring bills NOW???
I admire and respect John McCain but is his economic policy really possible?
We have heard for years about job training for new jobs but where are these jobs ---in what industries? We've lost so many of our big industries that used to supply jobs for the people.
Most of our big multi-national corporations ship their work out of the country to maximize their profits. Will the new Green Incentive really solve the problem of the lack of good jobs in this country?
The government has held up the job numbers with franchise statistics these past many years. Franchise jobs are not good jobs with benefits or a future for employees or for the owners. Franchise jobs are just a subsidy for big business who avoid the expense of operating physical units, and the expense of being employers who are subject to the employment laws of our country. And yet, government is pushing "franchising" to our VETS and their families.
We see the results today of the "service" economy and the effects of globalization of big business and money. Who was it who said that the economies of countries cannot survive without a healthy manufacturing base to provide jobs for the citizens?
Obama faces the same problem.
How about some straight talk about these new jobs and new job training for these jobs in the GREEN economy. We heard the same thing about the Computer Industry, and all of those jobs were shipped out of the country.
Who can best make the American Corporations earn their citizenship by putting America first?
I for one would be more than happy to pay more for alot of merchandise and have it made in the USA. Why can't our gov give incentives to get companies to stay and pentalize or tax those who don't? Why is it so hard to see that to much import and not enough export is killing our economy? I know it is not as easy as my simple ideas,but we have to go back to basic common sense!
Success is all in the execution. McCain & Palin hold rock-solid philosophies about fiscal responsibility. However, consider this: The entire country has been downsizing, suffering wage deflation, losing good jobs and such for years. The federal government never took a hit. Thus in order to be true to their words, McCain must tell congress right now that the first budget he signs will be five percent less than last years budget. Only when the government tightens its spending like the typical American household has can we truly consider McCain as intellectually honest.
Jo Anne, American corporations have made the decision that they will not produce widgets and clothing for less than a certain percent of profit. The only things that can, and will bring some back are the quickly escalating cost of labor in third world countries, and the spiralling cost of shipping.
JBM is right. This state of affairs in our economy has been building up for years and will not be fixed by the rhetoric of the two political parties.
Whomever wins this election will have problems that will require the best business minds and the best economists we have and the best Congress we have ever had. The pain cannot be avoided.
We cannot afford eight more years of the same VOO DOO economics that have been disclosed by the sub-prime mortgage scandal and Enron.
With the event of the Global Economy and global investing, the business men of the world are concerned with maximizing their profits out in the world, and they can use the threat of leaving the country to do business to have their way with our government legislators.
JBM is right --the esculating cost of labor in third world countries and the spiralling cost of shipping might bring some of the US Corporations back home from their "cheap labor" harbors.
Maybe, as the middle class grows in countries like India and China, our middle class will not be sacrificed to their growth to the great extent that exists today.
But, our Congress will have to be in charge and right now, they aren't in charge. It is the government-corporate alliance that dictates our trade policies and immigration policies and while citizens have their "one vote" they cannot compete with those who only have "one vote" but lots of money.
What party will give our country back to us?
As a registered Republican after seeing the fruits of the Bush Administration i will gladly vote for Obama this time. Change is needed not the same old slogan that a tax cut will cure all ills and drill baby drill?
The economy has consistently fared better under Democratic administrations, and worse under Republican administrations.
I think we overestimate what one man can do. Their philosophies are different, as they each subscribe to their party's ideas.
"Trickle Down" finally results in "Trickle Down and Out" for many Americans. When "investment" itself becomes the goal to achieve "product" and financial houses are looking for and producing investment vehicles to sell in the market place to maximize their profits, look who pays the price!
While the Republicans would like to think that SS could be abolished because 401's would offer a better opportunity to save for retirement, they miscalulated, didn't they? At least, in terms of those who were looking forward to retiring in the next year or so.
The multi-national companies have moved many of their operations and jobs out of the country -- even Hershey Chocolate --the great American Kiss --known throughout the world. Only about one quarter of Americans have 401's or 403's(the one-quarter that work for Corporations) and look at what Enron did to their employees. Company Retirement plans will soon be a thing of the past. Not everybody can work for government.
The Republicans use the job numbers that come out of the Franchise Industry to hide the real dearth of good jobs in our economy. Retail franchise jobs are not good jobs with benefits and with long term promise. Franchising allows the corporate franchisors to avoid the expense of becoming employers who have to comply with employment laws that protect the people.
The government subsidy of franchising will cost the tax payers more as more and more jobs in our economy are produced in this sector. Public resources will be neeeded to prevent more and more people from falling through the safety net.
The Republicans and the Democrats vision of the small business person as being the savior of the American economy has some real problems, doesn't it?
Is it going to be harder and harder for democracy and capitalism to co-exist in global economies where "big money" and big "global corporations" unite to maximize their profits?
Whoever gets elected will have to deal with jobs and the economy NOW, otherwise all the unemployed people may vote to go communist like Venezuela. V's gov't is corrupt as anything, but as long as people are poor, votes can be bought. Is that what we want for our democracy?
I agree! they will have to deal with the jobs and the economy NOW! But, HOW?
We have heard before this talk about "job training" etc.. but no straight talk about the JOBS themselves that will require the job training. Where are the new jobs that the Republicans created these last eight years and where exactly are the new jobs going to come from?
I think Senator McCain faulted Senator Obama for talking about the "old" jobs that have been lost (and that Senator McCain has accepted will not return to our economy.
I hope Senator McCain is not pushing "franchising" as the answer to jobs for middle class Americans. I think the franchise job numbers have diverted the attention of government from the real problem of where Americans are going to work in the future.
Can we survive as a "service" economy?
Washington Bureau Chief Jane Sasseen and other BusinessWeek writers cover the run-up to the Nov. 4 presidential election, paying close attention to how the candidates will handle issues such as housing, the economy, unemployment, and immigration.