McCain Talks Economy On CNN

John McCain appeared on today's CNN American Morning, ostensibly to talk economic policy with John Roberts. Over the course of the discussion, however, it was clear that McCain possessed more disputes than he did answers, continually dodging questions with either well-worn canards or topic-changes.

The central issue was how McCain could possibly keep the country's economic house in order with policies that would lead to escalating budget deficits. McCain's first response was to pooh-pooh the projections of the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which was too bad, considering their numbers -- deficits in the $439-445 billion range -- ended up being rosier than those of the more conservative Congressional Budget Office. That didn't deter McCain from repeating his famous diagnosis of economic woe: Congress has not restrained spending, and he would curb the profligacy. The only problem being that George W. Bush's White House took wasteful spending to unprecedented new heights, and, seeing how McCain would keep the country tied to Bush's policy priorities, it's hard to see how money would be saved. Maybe McCain's clipped some coupons or something!

Anyway, Roberts wasn't having it, telling McCain, "Senator, you can't get over the fact, though, that extending the Bush tax cuts, as you want to do, and adding in your tax cuts do take the deficit number -- we actually go from a $70 billion surplus to a $445 billion deficit." McCain responded that everything would be fine, because lowering taxes will increase revenue. Uhm...actually?. It will do no such thing.

Roberts came back with more mathematics: "It's just that I think some voters are legitimately asking the question that the amount of money that you need to save to get down to zero is the total amount of the nonsecurity discretionary budget now -- that the federal government operates on." McCain had no answer for this, except to mention that he goes to a lot of town hall meetings.

Of course, McCain's bete noire where government spending is concerned has been "earmarks" - a practice that McCain has vowed to end. But Roberts jumped him with an earmark of his own:

ROBERTS: Senator, on this issue of earmarks that you talk about frequently, you reiterated that you've never take an earmark. Can you clarify something? Back in 1992, you were trying to get $5 million for a wastewater treatment plans in Nogales. You tried to get it through Congress, they wouldn't put it through Congress, so you sent a letter to then-president George H.W. Bush, where you quote, "I would like to request that EPA either reprogram $5 million out of existing funds, or earmark the amount from an appropriate account, to meet the wastewater treatment needs at the Nogales plant." Was that an earmark?

MCCAIN: Of course, not. It was a request to have it put in the President's budget. And that's a very legitimate request that the administration will ask for. The definition of an earmark is a program that is put in, and money that is put in an unauthorized fashion in the middle of the night. So no, it's not that, and it's not the same.

Middle of the night, eh? Maybe that's why whenever McCain is pressed to name an earmark he might cut, he can never come up with an answer - it's too dark for McCain to find any! Hopefully, he'll leave enough money in the budget for a flashlight.

[WATCH.]

Story continues below

advertisement

ROBERTS: I checked the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan organization. They project that by extending the president's tax cuts, which you want to do, and adding in the tax cuts that you're proposing, the deficit for the year 2013 would be somewhere around $439 to $445 billion. So I think it is a fair question to ask, how would you get that number down to zero?

MCCAIN: First, I suggest you check in with other organizations. But the fact is there's a whole lot of economists, including Nobel laureates that agree with my plan. We're going to reach restrained spending, we're going to have the economy grow again and increase revenues. The problem is that spending got completely out of control. We grew government by some 40% since the Great Society. The spending got out of control, we restrained spending, we keep people's taxes low. We create jobs, 700,000 jobs by building new nuclear power plants, 20,000 new jobs by coal gasification, so that we have clean coal technologies, new automotive technologies, and we'll balance the budget. The same outfit said that we could never balance the budget in the past. We certainly have. It's spending that's out of control, my friend.

ROBERTS: I also checked with the Congressional Budget Office and the Center for Budget and Policy Priority's numbers were more conservative, they were lower than the CBO's numbers. The CBO's numbers are higher.

MCCAIN: Again, they're static numbers. Not saying that revenues will increase with a strong economy and with low taxes. That's the difference. and I respectfully disagree.

ROBERTS: Senator, you can't get over the fact, though, that extending the Bush tax cuts, as you want to do, and adding in your tax cuts do take the deficit number -- we actually go from a $70 billion surplus to a $445 billion deficit.

MCCAIN: You can't seem to get over the fact that it's spending that's out of control. And you restrain spending and also you can't get over the fact that historically when you raise people's taxes, guess what, revenue goes down. Every time we cut capital gains taxes, there has been an increase in revenue. I'm glad to have this discussion with you, and obviously you disagree, but the facts are that when you keep taxes low, when you restrain spending, as we did in 1982 when Ronald Reagan came to office, then the economy grows. We've created 46 million new jobs since 1982, because of lower taxes, but the spending got out of control, and that obviously caused the deficit, which then caused us to have to borrow money from China, et cetera, et cetera. And that's our problem that we have today, is spending and not keeping taxes low and stimulating the economy.

ROBERTS: Senator, with respect, I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just laying out some facts that some analytical organizations have put out there. The amount of money that you need to save--

MCCAIN: Actually, what you're laying out is a very different opinion. I have a large number of economists who agree with my point of view and I hope you'll consult with them as well. I'm sure you will, John.

ROBERTS: It's just that I think some voters are legitimately asking the question that the amount of money that you need to save to get down to zero is the total amount of the nonsecurity discretionary budget now -- that the federal government operates on.

MCCAIN: Actually, what I'm hearing from voters right now is that they're worried about keeping their job, they want to keep their taxes low, they're worried about health care, they're worried about staying in their home, and they want to us figure out -- that's what I'm hearing from voters all over America as I do town hall meetings everywhere. That's what I'm hearing from them, that's what I'm going to address. We can do it through growing our economy and creating new jobs.

ROBERTS: Senator, I'm sure you're also hearing from them about social security. Because part of this plan, if you're going to balance the budget, is to reform social security. You've talked about the idea of private accounts, as President Bush tried to get through and couldn't. What else would you do to reform social security?

MCCAIN: I would sit down with Democrats and Republicans the way Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did in 1983. And they said, okay, we've got everything on the table here, let's come to an agreement. The approval rating of congress right now is 12% last time I saw. I know how to work across the aisle, I've done it with Democrats and I've done it for many, many years. We'll sit down across the table with the backing of the American people.

ROBERTS: Do you have any idea --

MCCAIN: On the privatization of accounts, which you just mentioned, I would like to respond to that. I want young workers to be able to, if they choose, to take part of their own money, which is their taxes, and put it in an account which has their name on it. Now, that's a voluntary thing, it's for younger people, it would not affect any present-day retiree or the system as necessary. So let's describe it for what it is. They pay their taxes and right now their taxes are going to pay the retirement of president-day retirees. That's why it's broken, that's why we can fix it. We can do it together, Republicans and Democrats alike.

ROBERTS: Senator, on this issue of earmarks that you talk about frequently, you reiterated that you've never take an earmark. Can you clarify something? Back in 1992, you were trying to get $5 million for a wastewater treatment plans in Nogales. You tried to get it through Congress, they wouldn't put it through Congress, so you sent a letter to then-president George H.W. Bush, where you quote, "I would like to request that EPA either reprogram $5 million out of existing funds, or earmark the amount from an appropriate account, to meet the wastewater treatment needs at the Nogales plant." Was that an earmark?

MCCAIN: Of course, not. It was a request to have it put in the President's budget. And that's a very legitimate request that the administration will ask for. The definition of an earmark is a program that is put in, and money that is put in an unauthorized fashion in the middle of the night. So no, it's not that, and it's not the same.

Comments

[japobere]

McCain has to be the worst candidate I've ever seen. He's changed sides (sometimes more than once) on almost every major issue. He can't remember what he's said. He calls his wife (whom he cheated with on his first wife whom he left after she got into a car accident) terrible names due to his awful temper. His campaign is run by lobbyists. He (and his surrogates) are currently suspected of several illegal activities. He doesn't pay his taxes. Not to mention he's terribly boring. If you disagree with Obama, vote third party but don't vote for this clown.

[swift goat pet for truth]

I had no idea the old man could dance so well.

[swift goat pet for truth]

1- Earmarks. On an annual basis, all the earmarks together are less than $100 bil. Some of those earmarks we actually want to keep, like repairing bridges and roads. The annual Fed Deficit has been over $400 bil.

2- Go where the money is. The top 5 items on the Fed Budget are;
- Social Security, which has its own income and is in surplus.
- Defense Spending, which is greater than the rest of the world combined.
- Interest payments on the National Debt - Some $420 bil in 2006. Interest only. No principle. $130 bil or so due to Bush and the McSame GOP ONLY.
- Medicare, going into debt. But it has its own tax.
- Medicaid. Same as Medicare.

So, What can be cut here? Regarding the Defense budget, one might argue that the problem is not one of funds, but one of fiscal management. Getting rid of fraud and waste. But, DoD budgets are a third rail of politics.

[woodguru]

something that doesn't get addressed much is not only budgets, but the extreme money that can be saved with better oversight and accountability. The government should not be handing out hundreds of millions to any entity for any job or services, it should be managed on a pay as you go oversight that pays from the bottom up and scrutinizes completions and adherence to bids and timeframes. Instead of facing constant over budget and time deays we would then have the option of finding another contractor to finish as contracted. We have a government contractor machine that bids a job fairly, then goes for a $60 million override, then goes and gets another $60 or $80 million. The proposal justification is cumbersome and invariably lists more money for the same items all three times when there was plenty budgeted on the original bid. $180m that gets another $80m then yet another $60m is standard operating procedure for connected businesses that know how to work the system

[woodguru]

The excesses built into budgets and then run downhill in a constant allowance for extra is amazing. Government contractors literally subcontract out at multiples more that a business normally charges.

my brother does contract plumbing out at the army base in N Carolina. He was told to use a preferred supplier that wanted $1100 for a part that was $149 at the local home improvement store. Gary argued and was told to order it from who he was told to so he did. Two weeks later he had the same part he needed so he went to the hardware store and paid $149 for the part and took the two receipts to the base commander. heads were rolling and the preferred supplier is banned from government contracts.

Those excesses exist in every budget, the bigger it is the bigger they are. We can save monster amounts of money with comprehensive oversight and accountability. Let us build a requisition department that pays for what is done and needed from the real bottom prices as needed and as approved at each stage by someone who is guaranteeing that the prices are realistic and by the time a $300 million job is done there would be a hundred million left over. Done the other way the $300 is never enough because they know they can get more.

[brighterside]

Well whatever were doing now is not working due to the republican party's lack of oversight and overspending. Couple that with their tax breaks for the rich, we now have an overburdened, overtaxed middle class.

O-bama wants to cut taxes for the middle class and make the rich pay their share. Its about time the rich pay their share of taxes like all of us. Even Warren Buffet is in support of of O-bama's tax cuts for the middle class. He even said that his secretary pays more taxes than he does which I think is a travesty in our society. Why should the rich pay less taxes than the average citizen is beyond me. And most of these rich people didn't even work for their money like most of us do.

Sure we can cut these pork barrel spending. But I doubt that it will eat into the budget -- and McCain is going to have to either borrow money or raise taxes to build his multi-billion dollar nuclear power plant projects.

[Norsky]

I challenge him to name one "economist" that backs up his pseudo-economic theories. Just one.

[Bendersky]

Liked the part where he used Reagan as an example of someone for whom the economy did so wonderfully. Ronnie created what at the time was the biggest deficit in U.S. history...­until W. came along and kicked his Trickle-Downing ass.

I wish one of the dems would just come out and say what anybody with an iota of common sense already knows: You can't pay for a war (illegal or otherwise), cut taxes, and expect a balanced budget.. Can't work.

[Hector]

"Ronnie" included budget reduction plans in his initial budget proposal to Congress, including the reduction or absolution of the Dept. of Education, among other things. The Democratically controlled Congress at that time fought all of Reagan's budget reduction plans tooth-and-nail. "Ronnie's" economic policies were the progenitors of the Long Boom, an unrivaled era of economic growth that only started to show signs of stalling at the end of the Clinton reign.

There is no truth on the Progressive side of things.

[Hector]

"absolution" should read "absolving­."

[aztecdiva]

Hector,
I don't know how you can think Reagan had such a great position on the economy. Looks like you are reading some rewritten history. Which do you think was more important --- the concept of the Star Wars program or the maintaining the Department of Education? Why would a president try to remove the Department of Education if it were to help those on the receiving end of Trickle Down Economics? As for economic growth, I remember my family receiving government food because of the disparity between the working and middle class expanded under Ronnie. Ronnie was afflicted with bad judgment from the beginning.

As for the economic boom, the country was in recession before Bill Clinton took office. Hence the coin of "It's the economy, stupid!"

[whawha]

Okay...so we had Voodoo Economics. Now it's Grandpa Economics:

"You kids, you see...you, you take the pennies on the dresser drawer, you see, and you put 'em in a jar, you see. Soon, you got a whole mess of pennies. A whole mess. And then you go 'round the house and check the couch cushions, all sorts a places that money goes a-hidin.' And you put that in the jar, you see. Then, you cut down on your spending and them pennies will go a long way. You see."

"Now go run and play. Grandpa's got to finish his crossword.­" (Shakes head) "Kids today. Cute buggers but dim on them money matters."

[LeftLeanWing]

The onscreen presence of McCain v Obama is gonna be like a PTA President v Galactus respectively

[obamanation31]

This guy is so smug! He's smirking like the question s are stupid He has no answer.

[jOke]

i caught that too..

[researcher]

call it trickle down and promise to reduce taxes and balance the budget with reduced taxes

dumbed down americans have bought that line of crap since the reagan years

also promise 99 cent gasoline

the american voter will trip over themselves to vote for you

oh one more thing promise to bully the world that works well with an imperialistic country like america

ike warned us but no one listened

oh promise to bring unity to the country that should work

oh and dont forget promise to bomb iran for the zionists that really works if you want the evangel vote

ok one more thing if you want the red state vote promise wars and more wars they love using guns

but please do not mention we now borrow money from communists, socialists and kings to continue or style of capitalism

the have mores will sink you for that one they know when they have it good

ok one more thing promise to increase the size of the military americans love that one kind of a status super power thing

[mollysgran]

"Ching, ching, Little Man, sitting on a fence, trying to make a dollar out of fifteen cents.

[millertime]

the only reason that Congress's approval rating is so low is because they haven't had the ball to impeach that criminal of a president and vice-president. Period....­show some ball, Congress, do the right thing and impeach immediately

[swift goat pet for truth]

I second that motion.

[MargaretO]

Unfortunately, there isn't enough of a Dem majority to get it done. Perhaps in November.

[leftoflennon]

John put the smack down on this dumb math McLame ploy.

[econdr]

one word comes to mind:

YESTERDAY

[keepemhonest]

John McCain lies like a rug. He lies about quotes that he has made. McCain, like Bush & Rove, can NOT be trusted with his own resume.

January 24, 2008 - Presidential Debate
- Russert: Sen. McCain on Economic issues you said, "I still need to be educated."
- McCain: I don't know where you got that quote from, I'm very well versed in Economics.

January 27, 2008 - Meet the Press
- Russert: I will show you where I got that quote I got it from John McCain.
-McCain: laughing .. "Now I know where you got that quote from hee hee. Now I know where you got that quote from."

-Russert popped up the Wall Street Journal article: "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less economics ... I still need to be educated."

July 2, 2008
On Good Morning America:
- Robin Roberts: "You have admitted your not an expert on the economy"
- McCain: "I have not, I have not. Actually I have not."

Senator McCain, you did say those things.
Watch the video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QVVIw7oZEyk

[hartkid]

Is this what John is referring to: from Wiki "reaganomics"

The policies were derided by some as "Trickle-down economics," due to the facts that the combination of significant cuts in the upper tax brackets. There was a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending that caused large budget deficits, the U.S. trade deficit expansion, and contributed to the Savings and Loan crisis, as well as the stock market crash of 1987. In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation.[19­] Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

[aztecdiva]

Also the S&L crisis also involved McCain and the Keating 5. He should have been kicked out of the Senate then.