Response to a Friend

A friend of mine expressed some concern about what he sees as Obama's socialist tendencies by posting this article from Investors.com
Having read the article, I was compelled to respond. Here's what I said.


Hey, ________-
I appreciate your posted article and wanted to respond to it respectfully. I think that many of the items listed in the article can be boiled down to fundamental philosophical differences of opinion regarding the role of government in the lives of citizens (i.e., should the gov't match retirement contributions?) That being said, I do take issue with what I regard as over simplifying or misrepresenting Obama's positions.

For example, the plan that Investors.com called "Universal College Tuition" is actually more measured than that. The plan's actual title is the American Opportunity Tax Credit, and the description (from Obama's website) includes:
Barack Obama will make college affordable for all Americans by creating a new American Opportunity Tax
Credit. This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is
completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college
or university. And by making the tax credit fully refundable, Obama’s credit will help low-income families that
need it the most. Obama will also ensure that the tax credit is available to families at the time of enrollment by
using prior year’s tax data to deliver the credit at the time that tuition is due, rather than a year or more later
when tax returns are filed.

Not exactly Universal College Tuition. More like financial incentives for low income families which REQUIRES 100 hours of community service to receive.

Next is the Health Care policy. Obviously a lot of conflict around this issue, and I won't pretend to know anything about it. I will, however, direct you to an article in the Wall Street Journal that explains why Obama's plan is superior to McCain's.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122152292213639569.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Here's a quote:
Sustained growth thus requires successful health-care reform. Barack Obama and John McCain propose to lead us in opposite directions -- and the Obama direction is far superior.
Sen. Obama's proposal will modernize our current system of employer- and government-provided health care, keeping what works well, and making the investments now that will lead to a more efficient medical system. He does this in five ways:

National Service.
The article you posted would have us believe that Obama's plan is straight out of Castro's Cuba (a la Havana). In fact, it's a means of creating connections between students and their communities for their mutual gain.
Given that SERVICE is such a central theme in the McCain campaign, I was interested in this article from Politico,com:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11705.html
Quote:
John McCain, who’s predicated his presidential run in no small part on his distinguished military record, frequently exhorts Americans — and especially young Americans — to serve their country. Despite that appeal, he has yet to offer any proposals to expand or transform national service outside of the military.
Barack Obama, by contrast, has proposed dramatically expanding Americorps and the Peace Corps, adding 65,000 members to the military and creating an annual $4,000 tax credit for post-secondary education in exchange for 100 hours of community service.

Universal 401(k)
From Obama's site:
Obama will ensure savings incentives are fair to all workers by creating a generous savings match for low and middle-income Americans. His plan will match 50 percent of the first $1,000 of savings for families that earn less than $75,000. The savings match will be automatically deposited into designated personal accounts. Over 80 percent of these savings incentives will go to new savers.

Wage Insurance:
Here's an interesting passage from John McCain's speech tonight:
Government assistance for the unemployed workers was designed for the economy of the 1950s. That's going to change on my watch....For workers in industries that have been hard-hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one, while they receive re-training that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage.

McCain is talking here about "wage insurance," a proposal that's been bubbling around in neoliberal circles for over a decade and has considerable (though not unanimous) support among Democrats. McCain, I think, has mentioned wage insurance in passing a few times before, but as far as I know he's never really committed himself to it. And unless it's buried somewhere that I missed, it's not part of the economic plan on his website.

But tonight, in a speech with very few specific policy details, he committed himself firmly to supporting a wage insurance plan if he becomes president.

Global Poverty Act:
While it's difficult to argue with the moral/ethical impetus behind this policy, I understand that some may prefer NOT to invest so much into other countries. That being said, here's an article from the Washington Times that lauds W's efforts in Africa. So it seems Obama is not alone in attempting to fight global poverty.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/27/bushs-africa-legacy/
Quote:
While critics here at home, including many in the press, focused on attacking Mr. Bush at every turn, he steadfastly pushed for greater investments to help the families and businesses of Africa. It's the great untold story that has rarely made headlines here in America, but even so, it has truly changed the world for millions of Africans.

Finally, I want to address the socialism/communism charge, which is being thrown around a lot these days. What do you mean by it? Are you suggesting that Obama is going to implement government ownership of businesses? Or is it that you disagree with his notion of redistributing income to others? Or both? Do you argue that the markets don't need regulation? Or that government-sponsored organizations like NASA are unacceptable because they are "State owned"?
I tend to think government is often the problem and not the solution, but I also think that there are some major issues facing us now that need to be addressed frankly and with the full support and resources of the American people. How will we face the issues on Wall Street without more support from the Fed? How will we continue to compete globally when education costs are so huge and the average family income is shrinking? I am open to suggestions. So far, the one who seems to have the most ambitious and forward-looking ideas is Obama.