Home > Blogs > Ohio politics > Archives > 2008 > October > 06 > Entry
Eye on Ohio: “Spending Spree” ad for Obama
The ad: “Spending Spree,” 30 seconds
Producer: Obama campaign
Where to see it: It’s airing nationally.
Script: Barack Obama: “I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message.”
John McCain voice-over: “I can’t wait to introduce her … to the big spenders in Washington, D.C.”
Announcer: “Big spenders … like John McCain. McCain’s tax plan means another three trillion in debt. His plan to privatize Social Security — another trillion. Tax credits sent to insurance companies, yet another trillion. So as we borrow from China to fund his spending spree, ask yourself. Can we afford John McCain?”
Video: The ad begins with Obama at a picnic, then shows shots of McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin, then cuts to a shot of McCain and his wife, Cindy, then back to McCain. Then there are shots of McCain smiling with the words “John McCain’s Plan: Over $3 Trillion in Debt,” then the words “John McCain’s Plan: Social Security Privatization $1.4 trillion.” Next, the words “Tax Credits Sent to Insurance Companies $1.3 trillion.” It then cuts to shots of China, closing on a shot of McCain and George W. Bush. The words on the screen: “Can we afford John McCain?”
Analysis: Here’s a counter punch to the long-tried GOP attack that Democrats are big spenders. In this one, Obama throws it back in McCain’s face, suggesting that he is the true big spender.
The Tax Policy Center, whose data the campaign uses, actually says Obama has it wrong: According to its most recent analysis of the candidates’ tax plans, McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion on top of the $2.3 trillion increase that the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next decade.
That’s far higher than the $3 trillion cited in the ad.
The center says that Obama’s plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018.
These estimates assume, however, that there aren’t substantial cuts in spending. Both McCain and Obama have vowed to do just that.
In the most recent presidential debate, McCain floated the idea of freezing spending except on defense, veterans and a few other vital programs that he didn’t elaborate on. Obama opposed the idea, saying some programs are worthy investments.
The second number — estimating McCain’s plan to privatize Social Security would cost $1.4 trillion — comes from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. It estimates the cost of privatizing Social Security under President Bush’s plan at $1.4 trillion over the first 10 years.
McCain voted in favor of creating Social Security accounts in the past, but has not spoken about privatization much during the general election. According to factcheck.org, however, he said on March 3 that he is “totally in favor of personal savings account, and I think they are an important opportunity for young workers.”
Finally, on the $1.3 trillion in tax credits sent to insurance companies: McCain wants to change how people get their health insurance by shifting from job-based coverage to an open market where people would chose from competing policies. McCain would offer families a $5,000 tax credit to help buy insurance policies. Everyone would get the credit, regardless of whether they kept a policy through an employer or shopped for a new one.
Jessica Wehrman is a reporter for the Dayton Daily News. E-mail: jwehrman@coxnews.com.
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Eye on Ohio
Comments
By Alice
October 7, 2008 8:14 PM | Link to this
“The argument for Sen Obama’s healthcare sounds very much like the one made for “affordable housing” (TRS) The reason you guys aren’t convincing regarding the housing crisis and healthcare is because you continue to blame poor people, lazy people, unemployed looking for a handout. Are there people looking for a handout? Absolutely. But there are far more regular folks that work full-time jobs that should be able to afford a home and medical care that still are left behind. How do you explain to an independent middle class voter that only people who couldn’t afford homes took risky loans when the people losing their homes are their neighbors and their friends and even themselves who are “middle-class” and who have worked very hard? How do you explain to people that under the current system, if you are responsible and work hard you can afford healthcare when the very people you are explaining this to have been denied over and over for medical needs that legally shouldn’t have been denied and that don’t have the money to fight it? How do you tell the woman whose baby has died from an emergency because her insurance company wouldn’t pay for care at the hospital the child was taken to? How do you explain to me, someone making above the poverty line, someone who has worked for the same employer for seven years, someone who pays her fair share in premiums and that had to cancel her employer-provided insurance because I couldn’t afford to pay both the high monthly costs and the medical bills not being payed by the insurance company for bogus reasons? We can’t continue to pay something for nothing. And why should we hand over more of our taxpayers money to insurance companies that find ways to avoid paying out just to meet their outrageous costs. I will debate universal healthcare with you when you come up with a better alternative that will bring healthcare costs down so that I can afford it on my average wages. I’m not asking for a handout and I’m not interested in making these insurance companies and HMOs richer than they already are off the backs of Americans.By Alice
October 7, 2008 7:55 PM | Link to this
“one can see the handwriting on the wall for health care as well.” (TRS) TRS, that is the one essential difference in our beliefs. We both agree that government is broken; the difference is that I believe government can be fixed given the right people running things (and I don’t mean one party vs. another party and also I tend to be one of the most pessimistic people I know) - you seem to believe that government can’t be fixed at all, that by default government = corruption. Whether we are talking about big government or small government, how can it possibly work if the people running it don’t believe it can work in the first place? Ethel and Leslie, I have been reading your posts for some time and you are so radical, how do you ever expect to win independents with your arguments? You continue to spout half-truths on everything you post and you have nothing to back your accusations up except with some crazy story written by another crazy on some obsure website that no one in this world can possibly back up all because the crazies tell you to believe them because the rest of the world is conspiring against you. You really need to start making sense on why your candidate is right based on truth, not on what you dig up on the opponent.By Ethel S.
October 7, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this
Why is it OK for Sen. Obama to link Sen. McCain with GWB and not OK for Sen. McCain to link Sen. Obama to his many questionable associations? Not only is it a matter of experience, but it is a matter of leadership and judgment which Sen. Obama shows very weak record including little successful legislation and oversight of any of his own party’s legislation. Sen. McCain was so right about Sen. Obama has shown leadership for not taking his party to task for their mistakes . Sen. McCain believes we should have a Social Security Commission just like the VERY successful one that President Reagen had in 1983. Sen. McCain is on record to say that the Medicare drug program needs to be like the competitive bidding one at the VA. Sen. Obama’s solution is the usual one, raise the FICA taxes. Not only is Sen. Obama a taxocat, he will be a spender and a borrower if he plans to keep his promises. So far, breaking his pledge on FISA and Campaign Finance Reform will include many more broken promises by Sen. Obama. Vote McCain/PalinBy TRS
October 7, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this
The argument for Sen Obama’s healthcare sounds very much like the one made for “affordable housing”. Just as involving government in that venue, one can see the handwriting on the wall for health care as well. Rationed healthcare, shortages, and a slow waltz to universal healthcare. What can be expected when 47M new people hit the healthcare system? Perhaps they will all slide into the current government employees system and then those folks can pay the additional premiums and receive the reduced benefits that will ultimately result. As for privatizing SSN, 1st it was totally voluntary, 2nd, such investments would not be open to high risk investments but certainly provide a better return than SSN does. The biggest mistake this country could make at this point seems to be a direction the Dems are pointed toward - increasing the size of government and continuing to demonize the private sector. Certainly some deserve scrutiny and perhaps even criminal and civil prosecution; but, the vast majority of the private sector seek to do the right thing, only to be seen by Democrats as another target of class warfare and another opportunity for the government to step in and “make it better”. Checkout out your 401 or IRA recently? See how well the government’s involvement via Fannie and Freddie have worked?By Leslie
October 7, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this
News Flash we are in an Economic Crisis. Obama, Barney Frank, Pelosi, Chris Dodd are all responsible for this housing crisis. Yet you people still think Obama can solve the Economic problems, yeah right. So the people that made the mess are going to fix the mess to our benefit?, yeah right! In case you missed it the first bill Bush put through went to the democrats who then tried to add 600 million for LaRaza, ACORN, and some Urban Develpment leaque. Yeah they were thinking of the middle class. The democrats including Obama are a bunch or rich snobs that keep telling you you are bad off and they care about you and want to help you, they want you to continuously feel like a victim. They don’t want you to pick yourself up by your boots and get moving. That’s how they control the masses. With the current crisis how can you even still believe that he can cut taxes and give you all of these social programs. We have no money!!! China owns 51% of the US.By Leslie
October 7, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this
Obama is the one that is going to raise taxes on business, not McCain. Obama is going to raise the social security tax, the medicare tax, the unemployment tax. Now that all sounds good because they are programs we all want and need, since that is all we have right now. But that hurts business. That causes businesses to look for ways to reduce how many employees they have. The more you tax business the harder it is for them to make the money to stay operational. Obama wants to give us national healthcare, that is government controlled healthcare, that means the government makes all the decisions. Obama spots he wants to help the middle class and keeps telling you how bad off you are I guess you all just keep believing it. No matter how bad it is right now and I’ve been through a lot worse times I am still better off in America than any other country. I do not want a government like they have in the other countries. Obama’s supporters the people he really listens to are anti-America and want to take America down!By Alice
October 7, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this
Leslie, he may not promote privatizing social security on his website, but look at his voting record. THAT’S the experience you guys keep talking about: In 2006, McCain voted for the Social Security Reserve Fund. The proposal would shift Social Security’s annual surpluses into a reserve account that would be converted into private accounts. [SCR 83, Vote #68, 3/16/06; SCR 83, Vote #68, 3/16/06] The Wall Street Journal reported that “[a] centerpiece of a McCain presidential bid in 2000 was a plan to divert a portion of Social Security payroll taxes to fund private accounts, much as President Bush proposed unsuccessfully.” The plan would put workers’ retirement money into the risky market and reduce the amount of Social Security payments they would receive from the government. The plan would undermine the Social Security system. “I’m totally in favor of personal savings accounts… As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it—along the lines that President Bush proposed,” McCain told the Journal.[Wall Street Journal, 3/3/08] If you want social security privatized, vote McCain. If you support it, then defend your argument, but don’t misrepresent McCain’s stance.By Alice
October 7, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this
When he takes away tax breaks from employers who provide insurance to employees, that is essentially a tax hike. Your employer will have to pay more in taxes to pay for giving you a 5,000 tax break. Obama’s plan is UNMANDATED which means you, Leslie, can keep the crappy insurance you now pay through the nose for and get nothing in return (or not). You do have a choice under Obama’s plan. The problem with our healthcare system is not that we can’t afford it, but that the costs are too high to begin with. Don’t give me $5000 so that I can maybe meet their outrageous costs and continue to make insurance companies and HMOs rich. Make healthcare affordable so that we can afford it on a reasonable pay. Anyone who is happy with their current healthcare plan has been lucky, plain and simple. Are there people who want a free handout? Yes, there always will be and oversight can keep that to a minimum (as Palin keeps touting). But there are many more who work full-time jobs and make a decent living but still can either not afford insurance or have insurance and can’t afford to pay for both their insurance and the medical bills that inevitably insurance doesn’t pay for. How many people reading this have been wrongfully denied a claim? How many people have successfully contested that denial? How many people couldn’t afford a lawyer to fight them? How many people have had to make a choice between paying for insurance that is not adequate and having no insurance at all?By Leslie
October 7, 2008 8:28 AM | Link to this
McCain never in his campaign said he would privatize social security, that was Bush. McCain will send $5,000 directly to your insurance provider how is that being taxed? Then if you want more insurance than what the $5,000 covers you can add some of your money to the coverage. What I see there is choice for my insurance and choice for my healthcare. Obama says he will give you healthcare and you will do as he says. Since he is giving you - you have no choice in your healthcare. You don’t pick your doctor, you have no say so in your treatment. He decides what you get and what you don’t get. I prefer choice. I am capable of making my own decisions. McCain has to attack Obama on his association so he can get people to wake up and realize that a vote for Obama is loss of liberty, loss of choice. Don’t like McCain fine, but a vote for Obama is loss of freedom.By jneill7854
October 6, 2008 8:28 PM | Link to this
I can’t afford John McCain. I see McCain and Palin have resorted to trash talk. Is this the best they can come up with? Its the same old rehash from the primary. Boy McCain and Palin are desperate. Why don’t they just say “We don’t want to talk about the economy because we don’t have a plan. We don’t want to talk about health insurance because we want to tax you and your employer on it and when the take it away we will give you a $5000 tax credit to put down on a $12,000 policy. We don’t want to talk about the Iraq war because we don’t want it to end.” Well if they can’t talk about issues I guess all the have left is attack ads. I am sick and tired of negative ads. These are serious times and if McCain can’t run a serious campaign, then I want him out of my state and off of my TV.