Posted on 01/31/2008 1:47:07 PM PST by paltz
WASHINGTON (AP) - Republican John McCain says he opposed President Bush's tax cuts because they didn't come with spending cuts. That is not what he said at the time.
In a presidential debate on Wednesday, McCain said he voted against the Bush tax cuts because he wanted to rein in spending.
"I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint," the Arizona senator said.
The explanation fits with his history of railing against wasteful federal spending. But it does not fit with McCain's comments when he opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003.
In 2001, McCain said the tax cuts favored the wealthy at the expense of the middle class. In 2003, he said there should be no tax cuts until the Iraq war costs were known.
His aversion to the Bush tax cuts is just another reason McCain gives heartburn to many in the conservative GOP base. Besides taxes, there is also his more forgiving attitude toward illegal immigration, his effort to limit money in politics and his long-running feuds with leaders of the Christian right.
The debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., came on the heels of Tuesday's Florida primary, when McCain defeated former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, gaining an advantage going into next week's Super Tuesday primary.
---
THE SPIN:
In Wednesday's debate, McCain suggested he opposed tax cuts because they were not accompanied by cuts in spending.
Challenged on his changing story, McCain said he does think lower and middle income people need help. But then he said he opposed tax cuts that were not accompanied by spending restraints. He meant the Bush tax cuts.
"I made it very clear when I ran in 2000 that I had a package of tax cuts which were very important and very impactful, but I also had restraints in spending," he said.
"And I disagreed when spending got out of control. And I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint," McCain said.
He added: "And guess what? Spending got out of control. Republicans lost the 2006 election not over the war in Iraq, (but) over spending. Our base became disenchanted.
"If we had done what I wanted to do, we would not only have had the spending restraint, but we'd be talking about additional tax cuts today."
---
THE FACTS:
Spending was not why McCain said he opposed President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003.
In 2001, McCain said the $1.35 trillion tax cut benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.
"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief," McCain said then.
McCain tried but failed to amend the bill to reduce income tax cuts for the wealthiest and give greater benefits to those earning less. He and Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island were the only Republicans to oppose the 2001 tax cuts.
At the time, McCain was still at odds with Bush, who had dealt McCain a stinging defeat in the race for the GOP presidential nomination just one year before.
In 2003, McCain opposed a $350 billion tax cut sought by Bush, this time arguing there should be no tax relief while the cost of the Iraq war and its aftermath were still unknown.
"The tax cut is not appropriate until we find out the cost of the war and the cost of reconstruction," McCain said then.
One more Republican senator, Olympia Snowe of Maine, teamed with McCain and Chafee to oppose the 2003 tax cuts. They and Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio teamed to limit the size of the tax cut to $350 billion, half the size of what Bush originally wanted.
Incidentally, public opinion surveys do not back up McCain's claim that Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006 over the issue of spending.
Associated Press-Ipsos polling that tracks what people consider the most important issues facing the country picked up hardly anyone citing government spending or the federal deficit as an important problem in 2006. Rather, polling said the economy, Iraq, terrorism and scandals and corruption in government rated highly in 2006.
---
By Libby Quaid
You mean he lied?
The internet way back machine is a bitch...ain’t it, McLame?
Must be a “wide stance”.............
Geez, besides being crazy he’s a lyin’ scumball. But we knew that.
Can you say President Hillary Clinton?
The way I have it figured, McCain and Hillary have a total of 88 YEARS suckling at the public teat.
Anyone with a REAL job (private sector) is...f*****...
...as usual.
I hate McCain...I hate the Clintons..and country is going straight to hell.
This goes right up there with saying Putin is the president of Germany.
“I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint,” 2008
I don’t see the big deal here. What he is saying now fits with what he said in 2003- spending restraint because of the war costs. So right there AP is full of crap.
You have to go all the way back to 2001 to get close to a supposed disparity and even then concern for the middle class does not exclude concern about government spending.
If anything what this all shows is consistent concern for the economy. Something the anti-McCain press tries to make us believe McCain knows nothing about.
Which is it? Either McCain thinks about the economy or he doesn’t.
Actually, when AP has to bend-over backwards like this to attack McCain during a close race, it punches holes in the constant charges that the media is pumping him up.
If AP wanted to do a story about a man that changed his position, I think Romney is the expert on that.
“I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint,” 2008
I don’t see the big deal here. What he is saying now fits with what he said in 2003- spending restraint because of the war costs. So right there AP is full of crap.
THOMAS SOWELL ARTICLE CIRCA 2000 ON MCCAIN FIGHTING BUSH TAX CUTS
Here's an article from 2000 reporting McLame saying he didn't support Bush's tax cuts because it favored "the rich". It's no AP article either...It's Thomas Sowell:
{SNIP} Then there is the McCain approach to taxes. Here again he buys into the liberal notion that it is somehow wrong to cut taxes across the board, for fear that "the wealthy" will benefit. Are taxes to be cut because they are too high or are tax cuts to be used to redistribute income?{SNIP}
My thoughts exactly! I will never vote for him--out of pure spite! I feel that he has never listened to me, why should I endorse what he has done with a vote.
He won't be getting Teddy's vote either, and I love that!
Su castillo de naipes esta a punto de venirse abajo.
Thanks for that....
I am thunderstruck that the AP would run a negative McCain article. This must mean that the MSM wants the Republican race to drag out longer.
What do you think Obama or Hillary are going to do with those statements once McCain says that he favors keeping the Bush tax cuts?
That's right, they're going to run Ads using just those words and poof; one of the few good issues the GOP has working for it in this election is gone.
McCain's nomination takes ever potential strong issue but the war off the table for the Republicans.
TAX THE RICH! They’re not patriotic enought to work for the government.
No. They think Romney can’t beat Clinton or Obama but that McCain can. However conservatives main concern with McCain s he’ll damage the GOP for a long time to come...consequences more severe than the ‘08 elections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.