McCain Plans Federal Health Cuts

Medicare, Medicaid Spending Would Be Reduced to Offset Proposed Tax Credit

John McCain would pay for his health plan with major reductions to Medicare and Medicaid, a top aide said, in a move that independent analysts estimate could result in cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years to the government programs.

The Republican presidential nominee has said little about the proposed cuts, but they are needed to keep his health-care plan "budget neutral," as he has promised. The McCain campaign hasn't given a specific figure for the cuts, but didn't dispute the analysts' estimate.

In the months since Sen. McCain introduced his health plan, statements made by his campaign have implied that the new tax credits he is proposing to help Americans buy health insurance would be paid for with other tax increases.

But Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Sen. McCain's senior policy adviser, said Sunday that the campaign has always planned to fund the tax credits, in part, with savings from Medicare and Medicaid. Those government health-care programs serve seniors, poor families and the disabled. Medicare spending for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30 is estimated at $457.5 billion.

Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the Medicare and Medicaid changes would improve the programs and eliminate fraud, but he didn't detail where the cuts would come from. "It's about giving them the benefit package that has been promised to them by law at lower cost," he said.

Both Sen. McCain and his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, have recently sought to refocus on health care. The issue once ranked at the top of voters' domestic concerns, but has in recent months been eclipsed by energy and the economy.

Sen. McCain charges that the Obama plan, which would create a government-run marketplace in which people could buy coverage, would lead to government-run health care. Sen. Obama charges that Sen. McCain's plan would leave many people unable to get insurance.

Sen. Obama's campaign turned up the volume in a major push on health care over the weekend with two days of attacks from the stump, four new television advertisements, a series of health-care events across the country and fliers to voters' homes in swing states.

Sen. Obama is focused on Sen. McCain's plan to offer a new tax credit of $2,500 per person and $5,000 per family toward insurance premiums. This would allow people to buy health coverage on the open market, where they may have more choices and might look for a better bargain.

In exchange, the government would begin taxing the value of health benefits people get through work. If an employer spends $10,000 to buy a worker health insurance, the worker would pay taxes on that money.

"It's a shell game," Sen. Obama told an outdoor rally of 28,000 people Sunday in Wilson, N.C. "Sen. McCain gives you a tax credit with one hand -- but raises your taxes with the other."

Sen. McCain's plan actually would lower taxes for most people. But that means the plan wouldn't pay for itself, because it cuts certain taxes more than it raises others.

The federal government imposes two taxes on wages, generally: an income tax, which funds the government's general operations, and the payroll tax, paid for by employers and employees, which funds Social Security and Medicare. If Sen. McCain were to apply both of these to the value of health benefits, he could fully pay for his new tax credits. That is what aides have in the past suggested he would do.

In April, when Sen. McCain gave a major speech about his health plan, Mr. Holtz-Eakin, the senior policy adviser, said the tax provisions alone were budget neutral -- meaning that health benefits would have to be subject to both income and payroll taxes.

Campaign officials have regularly implied since then that the tax plan was a wash. In the vice-presidential debate last week, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin described Sen. McCain's proposed tax credits and said: "That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything, as opposed to Barack Obama's plan to mandate health-care coverage and have this universal, government-run program."

Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the campaign never intended to apply the payroll tax to health benefits. That means that most people would see a net tax cut, contrary to Sen. Obama's assertions. Only those with very rich benefits packages are likely to see a net increase in taxes. But it also means that Sen. McCain must fill a huge budget hole -- which the campaign says will come from cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.

The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank, estimates that the McCain plan would cost the government $1.3 trillion over 10 years. The plan would allow as many as five million more people to have insurance, it estimates.

Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the plan is accurately described as budget neutral because it assumes enough savings in Medicare and Medicaid spending to make up the difference. He said the savings would come from eliminating Medicare fraud and by reforming payment policies to lower the overall cost of care. He said the new tax credits will help some low-income people avoid joining Medicaid. The campaign also proposes increasing Medicare premiums for wealthier seniors.

Sen. Obama also would rely on some Medicare savings to pay for his health-care plan, which would offer subsidies to help consumers pay for premiums. The Tax Policy Center estimates that his plan would cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years and cover 34 million more people.

By: Laura Meckler
Wall Street Journal; October 6, 2008

Gap Hopes to Win Sales in Election

Gap Inc. is the latest marketer to try to profit from the presidential election.

As part of a campaign it will announce Wednesday, Gap's namesake chain and Web site will sell white T-shirts that say "Vote For _____" for $15 each and store windows will feature images of 70 real people who filled in the blanks on their T-shirts at Gap events over the summer.

Gap has also posted online (at Gap.com/votefor) videos of actresses and other famous people talking about how they would fill in the blank. Viewers at the site have a chance to send virtual "Vote For _" buttons to Facebook users.

Select Gap stores will sell limited-edition "Vote for ____" buttons designed by 10 artists, with $1 from each button purchase going to Declare Yourself, a nonpartisan group aimed at encouraging Americans to register to vote.

The campaign, Gap's first with an election theme, was developed in-house. It's part of the San Francisco retailer's effort to refocus on core customers in the 25 to 35 age range after trying unsuccessfully to skew younger.

"There is an enormous amount of enthusiasm and passion for this year's election" among people under 30, said Marka Hansen, president of Gap North America, who wouldn't disclose the cost of the campaign.

Other similar campaigns encouraging young people to vote have been launched by American Eagle Outfitters Inc., which this summer started selling "Vote" T-shirts, and Lucky Brand, which in late August partnered with Nickelodeon and Viacom to offer election-themed kids' T-shirts.

Marketers pursuing election themes has reached fever pitch this year, ramping up earlier than usual during the primary races.

"Younger target audiences are impassioned and involved at an unprecedented level and brands want to tap into that," said Mark DiMassimo, chief executive and creative director of New York advertising agency DiMassimo Goldstein.
—Jennifer Saranow

Campaigns Pressure Stations Over '527' Ads

In Alaska earlier this month, radio ads hit the airwaves trumpeting the allegation that Sen. Ted Stevens received a sweetheart trade-in deal on a new Land Rover. An Alaska law firm representing the Republican senator quickly fired off letters to stations around the state demanding they stop running an ad it said was "factually incorrect and a gross distortion of the real facts."

Had the ad been paid for by Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, Mr. Stevens's Democratic opponent in the race, lawyers almost certainly wouldn't have bothered trying to pull the ad, since stations must accept advertising from political candidates. But the ad in question was bought by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, a third-party group. Since stations aren't obligated to run third-party ads, those spots are more vulnerable to efforts to get them kicked off airwaves.

Candidates are taking action to stop provocative ads by third-party groups known as 527 political organizations.

While no one tracks the number of legal notices broadcasters receive on political ads, station managers and lawyers say attempts to block ads are growing both in number and intensity, particularly in states with closely contested elections. "If you're these affiliates, you're under siege," says Michael Toner, former chairman of the Federal Election Commission and now an attorney at Bryan Cave LLC in Washington.

While some stations buckle under the pressure and drop the ads, most refuse. "I think candidates want us to become the censors," says Mike Burgess, general manager of KOB, the NBC affiliate in Albuquerque. "I don't think that's our job." The station has already received a handful of letters requesting ad takedowns this political season.

Spending on political advertising -- which includes candidates' as well as third-party ads -- is expected to reach about $3 billion this year, compared with $1 billion in 2000, estimates Evan Tracey at TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG, a tracking firm. Attempts to push some ads off the air have "become more of a standard move for campaigns," says Ezra Reese, an attorney at Perkins Coie in Washington, who has both sent letters on behalf of candidates and defended groups that place the ads.

Not everyone agrees legal agitating is on the upswing. Mark Prak, a Raleigh, N.C., lawyer at Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard who represents 200 television stations around the country, including Hearst-Argyle Television Inc. stations, says candidates have always been quick to enlist lawyers to fight ads they don't like.

Third-party groups known as 527 political organizations -- named after the section of tax law that governs them -- are often seen as purveyors of more-provocative ads. Compared with individual campaigns, the 527s have looser rules on financing and can take unlimited donations from individuals, with many substantial donors not known until well after the election has passed. Thus, they essentially "are not accountable to voters for what they say," says John Zakhem, a Republican election lawyer in Denver who has been involved in several cease-and-desist actions against broadcasters. Moreover, he argues, the groups have been emboldened by seeing how effective other 527 groups' ads have been, such as the messages from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which many observers say hurt John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign.

Station managers acknowledge there is a fine line between what is misleading and what is incorrect. For example, a late-summer ad paid for by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce attacked New Hampshire former governor and senatorial candidate Jeanne Shaheen for being a "taxing machine." The ad cited some taxes that rose under Ms. Shaheen's tenure as governor, but her campaign says that during those years she fought hard against a statewide income tax.

Campaign lawyers asked stations to stop running it; the move got the ad off at least one station temporarily while the station scrutinized the ad's veracity, but it soon popped back onto that station's airwaves, says campaign spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield.

Lawyers rarely succeed in yanking an ad for more than a few hours or days, but even that can pay off, especially as the election draws closer. "If you can get the ad pulled for a couple of days with 40 days to go, it's worth it," says Mr. Tracey of TNS.

When MCC Radio LLC's Dennis Bookey received a letter earlier this month from Sen. Stevens's lawyers about the ad airing on the Alaska radio stations he manages, he says he made a decision without getting his own lawyers involved. "Common sense would prevail about whether you have a blatant mistruth or something that is more common in advertising -- something that pushes the envelope," he says. The ads stayed on Mr. Bookey's air waves.

By: Sarah McBride
Wall Street Journal; September 26, 2008

Candidates Pitch on Sports Networks

In a recent football matchup between the University of Minnesota and Ohio State, two other tough rivals are set to face each other: John McCain and Barack Obama.

The Gopher-Buckeye showdown is airing on Big Ten Network, where the two candidates are regular advertisers. With a main footprint that reaches seven political battleground states, Big Ten is one of several regional sports networks that have been attracting more political ads as the campaigns jockey to reach swing voters.

As the Boston Red Sox battle their baseball rivals at Fenway Park, presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama are battling each other in advertising on the New England Sports Network.

Fans of baseball's Philadelphia Phillies are seeing the Democratic and Republican nominees on Comcast SportsNet Philadelphia. On Fox Sports Florida, the Tampa Bay Rays' race to their first American League East pennant is being brought to you, in part, by Sens. Obama and McCain.

"It's a great concentration, a great way to buy men," says Brad Mont, president of political-ad-time buyer Media Ad Ventures Inc., which has placed ads for the McCain campaign. Although the ads on regional-sports networks rarely mention sports, they project "a local involvement, and some people will interpret that as supporting the team, which doesn't hurt," Mr. Mont says.

In the Big Ten, where home-team loyalty is practiced with cultlike fervor, that effect is multiplied by the electoral stakes. Since Sept. 1, Big Ten Network, which is available in 22 million homes within the Big Ten states, has been responsible for approximately 20% of the political ads Fox Sports Net says it has sold on more than a dozen regional sports networks.

"It's an attractive demographic -- in this case it's both a sports niche and a regional niche," says Charles Franklin, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and co-director of the new Big Ten Battleground Poll. Although the poll isn't directly connected with the network, its first batch of results was announced last week in a 90-minute program on the channel's air.

"It's a fortunate accident of political geography that so many of the eight states that happen to be in the Big Ten are competitive states in the election," Mr. Franklin says, adding "it's probably not that our football teams caused us to be competitive in politics." The seven states thought to be in contention are Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Indiana; the exception is Sen. Obama's home state of Illinois.

The amounts the campaigns are spending on regional sports networks are still tiny when compared with the hundreds of millions of dollars being dedicated to TV advertising across the board. It's likely regional sports networks have pulled in well under $10 million in election ads, according to estimates from people familiar with their political sales.

Nevertheless, regional sports networks offer unusually ardent audiences. Their viewers usually watch live so they don't zap commercials. Most of them are men, a difficult demographic for any marketer to reach. And they may be swing voters, too. More viewers of Fox Sports Net, for instance, are "middle of the road" politically compared with most other cable networks, according to Mediamark Research & Intelligence.

"I've been doing this a long time, and this is the first time I've seen political spending really gravitate toward the regional sports network sector," says John McGuinness, senior vice president and general sales manager of the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network. Both campaigns have been buying ads during Washington Nationals and Baltimore Orioles games, Mr. McGuinness says, because his network's footprint includes the battleground state of Virginia.

Fox Sports Net, which owns 16 regional sports networks and handles national sales for 19 others, hasn't traditionally pursued political advertising, according to Kyle Sherman, who heads its ad sales. But this year, he specifically sought out political media buyers to offer multistate buys. The group even split its feed for Fox Sports Arizona to allow the campaigns to buy Arizona Diamondbacks ads that air only in New Mexico -- allowing both campaigns to sidestep Sen. McCain's home state of Arizona, which is solidly Republican.

Representatives of Sens. Obama and McCain declined to discuss the specifics of their ad strategies. "We are making sure voters see our ads in many creative ways and places," Obama campaign spokesman Nick Shapiro wrote in an email, saying they are only one part of a "voter outreach strategy" that includes online organizing and "neighbors talking to neighbors." McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said, "We believe that our candidate's fanaticism for baseball, boxing, football, as a lifelong sports fan, positions us uniquely to court American voters that are also sports fans."

With baseball's regular season ending this weekend -- and baseball games heading to national TV -- some regional sports nets are looking to hockey and basketball to draw political dollars. Altitude Sports & Entertainment -- the network of Denver Nuggets and Colorado Avalanche owner Stan Kroenke -- is actively pursuing political ads now that Colorado is a battleground, says Tom Philand, head of sales and marketing: "We'd love to be able to tap into some of that spending."

By: Same Schechner
Wall Street Journal; September 24, 2008

Homeownership Push Is Rethought

Both Candidates Weigh the Best Path To American Dream

The government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is forcing John McCain and Barack Obama to consider the proper fix for the companies' long-term structure. A key question in that effort: How aggressively should a new administration promote homeownership?

Most of the discussion from the candidates has been about how to stem rising foreclosure rates. Both tout homeownership as a central pillar of the American dream. But with many borrowers defaulting on loans and housing prices plummeting in some areas, both also are rethinking how best to achieve that goal.

"This is something the next administration will have to deal with: Are they going to be pushing people into homeownership?" said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington and a critic of the government's advocacy of homeownership.

Government policies have promoted homeownership for decades, from Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, which paved the way for the 30-year mortgage, to postwar policies that explicitly ensconced it as a federal goal.

During the 1990s, Washington pushed Fannie and Freddie to expand their role providing loans for low- and middle-income borrowers. In 2002, the Bush administration charted a more aggressive course by pushing for lower down payments and touting vouchers that would allow public-housing tenants to one day own homes.

Neither candidate has suggested that the government's basic goal of expanded homeownership is a mistake. Sen. Obama has proposed a 10% mortgage interest tax credit for homeowners who don't itemize. The goal is to give more low- and middle-income Americans an existing tax subsidy, as two-thirds of taxpayers don't itemize on their returns, according to the Internal Revenue Service. The campaign estimates that the provision would provide an average $500 each to 10 million homeowners.

Both candidates are challenging the way the U.S. has pushed for homeownership, however. "It doesn't mean the goal was flawed. It means that the Bush administration went around it the wrong way," said Jason Furman, an Obama economic adviser. The Democratic platform calls affordable rental housing "more critical than ever," while the Republicans call for a housing policy that recognizes the "needs of renters."

In 2004, President George W. Bush campaigned on lower barriers to homeownership as part of the domestic agenda for his second term. The Republican Party platform that year singled out the down payment as the "most significant barrier to homeownership."

This year's Republican platform makes no mention of that plank, instead warning that "government action must not implicitly encourage anyone to borrow more than they can afford to repay."

Sen. McCain was a leading advocate of raising down-payment requirements on loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration and has warned against lending to homeowners who don't have enough of their own capital in the investment.

The Fannie-Freddie rescue has revealed differences between the campaigns over how they believe the next president should approach long-term reforms. Sen. McCain supports downsizing the companies, then selling them off, severing all ties to the government. His advisers have called for the FHA or other government agencies to make mortgages available to borrowers who otherwise might not qualify.

Sen. Obama's advisers have argued against privatization. "If your only plan is privatization, that is reckless and ideological and risks affordable housing in this country," said Mr. Furman. While parts of the institutions may need to be privatized, he said, the failure of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. is an example that "a private structure is no guarantee that you avoid problems."

Both candidates have urged stiffer measures to stem mortgage fraud and called for greater transparency in the loan process, so homeowners can better understand their mortgage terms.

Sen. McCain offered his most detailed response to the liquidity crisis in March, when he rejected the use of taxpayer money to bail out speculators or financial institutions and warned against rescuing irresponsible players, from big banks to small borrowers.

Sen. Obama has called for amending the federal bankruptcy code to allow judges to force mortgage lenders to take a loss on their loans as part of a Chapter 13 settlement. He has criticized Sen. McCain for voting in favor of a 2005 bankruptcy bill that critics say made it harder for lower- and middle-class consumers to file for bankruptcy. The bill had the support of Sen. Obama's running mate, Joe Biden.

The Illinois senator also has called for restoring public-housing funding cuts made by the Bush administration, and supports efforts to create an affordable-housing trust fund, which would provide a dedicated source of funding for low- and middle-income housing.

By: Nick Timiaos
Wall Street Journal; September 12, 2008

Economic Woes Seen Greeting President

The next U.S. president will be confronted with slow growth, high unemployment and an economy teetering toward recession, say 51 private economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal.

If they are correct, pumping up the economy will the first challenge facing either Democrat Barack Obama or Republican John McCain. That is likely to place tax cuts and government spending high on Washington's agenda, and push back costly measures such as reforming health care and fighting global warming.

The Wall Street Journal's latest monthly survey paints a gloomy picture of the outlook through the first half of 2009. The economy is on course to post four straight quarters of annualized economic growth below 2%, the longest stretch of subpar growth since the 2001 recession.

The respondents saw a 60% chance of an outright recession, expect the economy to shed 19,000 jobs a month for a year, and say the jobless rate, which jumped in August to 6.1%, will keep rising, to 6.4% by midyear, passing the 6.3% seen after the last recession.

The worst stretch will be the next few months, the economists say, coming as elections shift into high gear. Annualized growth in the gross domestic product is projected at 0.7% in the fourth quarter. A few months ago, forecasters thought the economy would be growing at a much faster clip by then.

By inauguration day, Jan. 20, the situation won't have improved much, they say. Growth in the first quarter is projected at a 1.3% annual rate.
Charts and Full Results

See and download forecasts for growth, unemployment, housing and more. Plus, views on another stimulus package, a consumption slowdown, where the economy will be on election day. Survey conducted Sept. 5-8.

"Rapidly rising unemployment, rebates behind us, falling house prices, falling stock prices, general loss of confidence and much tighter credit conditions. None of it looks good," said Paul Ashworth of Capital Economics.

Not all the news is bad. Inflation is expected to moderate. Economists forecast oil prices to be down to about $102 a barrel by the end of this year, and below $100 a barrel by June, potentially helping to take pressure off stretched households.

Even so, consumers are likely to be hurting. They have been stung not only by rising food and energy prices, but also by a deteriorating job market, tighter credit and falling home prices.

Yvette Perera, 39 years old, of Vallejo, Calif., was laid off in January from her job handling help-wanted ads for a small local paper, and has since been unable to find work. Her unemployment benefits end Nov. 1. "I'm looking for anything," she said. "Anything." On supermarket runs, she tries to limit herself to spending $40.

Sen. McCain has proposed cutting corporate taxes to 25% from 35%, and retaining all the Bush tax cuts on individuals, figuring that would give a boost to business. Sen. Obama would increase tax rates for those making more than $250,000 and use the proceeds for tax cuts aimed at moderate-income workers. Helping them would pump up the economy through consumer spending, his advisers argue.
About the Survey

The Wall Street Journal surveys a group of 56 economists throughout the year. Broad surveys on more than 10 major economic indicators are conducted every month. Once a year, economists are ranked on how well their forecasts have fared. For prior installments of the surveys, see: WSJ.com/Economists.

On average, the survey respondents expect a 0.1% contraction in consumer spending during the third quarter. It would mark the first such retrenchment by consumers in 17 years. Consumers kept spending during the last recession, to the surprise of many economists. The respondents expect 0.1% growth in consumer spending in the fourth quarter as the holiday shopping season kicks into gear.

Retailers posted weak August same-store sales -- sales at stores open at least a year -- amid a disappointing back-to-school season. On Friday, the Commerce Department is set to release official retail sales numbers for August. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires expect an anemic monthly advance.

Nearly one-third of economists surveyed said the consumer retrenchment may not be reversed for years, a problem that could quickly rise to the top of the next president's agenda.

The Federal Reserve already has cut interest rates sharply, meaning any future stimulus might need to be driven by the White House. But choosing a fiscal-policy course will be tricky. A rising budget deficit could constrain the next administration. Meantime, tax rebates proved to be only a fleeting help.

Two-thirds of economists said a second stimulus package, currently being debated in Congress and supported by Sen. Obama, isn't the right move. Most support extending or making permanent President George W. Bush's tax cuts, as does Sen. McCain.

Among the economists who support a new stimulus, none said it should primarily be based on rebates to individuals, as Sen. Obama would do. His $115 billion plan includes $65 billion in rebates and $50 billion split between aid to state and local governments, and infrastructure spending. He would pay for the rebates by taxing oil-company profits. Sen. McCain has said he is open to a stimulus plan, but hasn't committed to any specific proposal.

Thirteen percent of the economists who support a stimulus plan said it should include infrastructure spending, which some argue carries more bang for the buck, while 2% said it should focus on extending unemployment insurance and food stamps. Nineteen percent said it should include some mix of rebates, infrastructure spending and benefits.

"You can't afford to bail out the financial system and the real economy at the same time," said Mr. Ashworth.

By: Phil Izzo and Kelly Evans
Wall Street Journal; September 12, 2008

Is Palin a Good Choice?

Yes: Governor is Young and Real

Let's face it. John McCain needs Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin, who will connect with voters as an American folk hero. First, as a governor she passes the competence test. American voters have shown again and again they will vote governors into the White House.
But more important, she's the governor of the state that captures the imagination and embodies the authentic American folk narrative. Alaska is our last frontier.

Palin is as continental west as west can be; Alaska is a nice contrast to Obama's Hawaiian roots. Even better, Palin carries a gun! She hunts! I'll bet she can skin and process a deer in under 10 minutes. Take that, Al Qaeda! She might be able to hunt down Osama bin Laden.

There's the obvious fact that she's a woman. If McCain was going to pull from the Democratic, middle-age female base that fueled Hillary Clinton's candidacy, he needed to look beyond the white male.

Think of all the voters who supported Clinton because they thought she could crack the highest glass ceiling. Palin will attract these disaffected voters who are looking for someone to vote for other than Obama. And then Palin has five kids. Five. Including one who has Down syndrome. That shows voters that she's for real and can relate to the lives of real voters.

It was important for McCain to pick a running mate who makes people feel better. Palin is as compelling, youthful and charismatic as McCain is not.

No: She has Very Little Experience

For months, the Republican Party and its presidential nominee, John McCain, have been absolutely hammering Democratic nominee Barack Obama as inexperienced and unready to be president.

The theme at their counter-convention tent in Denver last week was “A Mile High, an Inch Deep,” a clever but nasty allusion to Obama's scant government experience.

But not comes Sarah Palin.

For 20 months, she has been governor of a state with a population less than the city of Detroit's. Prior to that, she was may of Wasilla, Alaska, a town whose population is about 8,500 – about two-thirds the size of Berkley, Mich. Before that, she was on the Wasilla City Council for four years.

That's it.

On what planet is that pick not an example of a stunning – and galling – hypocrisy? By McCain's own terms, Palin is an indefensible choice.

And this is the problem with modern politics. Politicians say what they think they need to say to win votes, exploiting any advantage they can in the polls, and then they turn around and do exactly the thing they've criticized others for doing if it works, again, to their political advantage.

The most disappointing aspect of this is that it comes from McCain, whose reputation in Washington has been that of a straight shooter, someone who says what he means and does what he says.

Perhaps his judgment suffers when confronted with political opportunity.

By: Nanette Everson
Detroit Free Press; August 30, 2008

Michigan Connection: Hockey Brought Palin's Son To State for a Stay

Sarah Palin made an impression on Michiganders while her son played midget major hockey in Kalamazoo.

Her oldest son, Track, lived in Portage, where he spent about six months of his senior year at Central High School in 2006 and 2007 while he played in a hockey development program.

"I can't say enough about Sarah Palin and the family," S2 Hockey coach Steve Lowe told the Free Press shortly after the announcement Friday that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., had selected her as his running mate.

While the Alaska governor never visited the Kalamazoo area, Lowe said she attended tournaments elsewhere to watch her son.

"She loves her hockey. She loves to watch Track play," Lowe said.

"She was extremely intelligent," he recalled. "We never talked about economics or balance sheets or anything. We talked about her son Track and the family business. ... They're very much a hard-working, middle-class family."

Track Palin's playing ended soon after he injured his shoulder, and he returned to Alaska for surgery, the coach said.

Palin now is in the Army and headed for Iraq in September.

During an interview at the National Governors Association conference in 2007, Sarah Palin told a Free Press reporter that she didn't know much about Michigan until the weekend she spent at the conference last summer, but was impressed with the Traverse City area.

"What a stinker," she said of her son. "He never told me how wonderful it is."

By: Tim Higgins & Chris Christoff
Detroit Free Press; August 30, 2008

Sarah Palin's Life: History Maker is Also Hunter, Hockey Mom

Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin is just a pretty face never looked at her resume. Or run against her - or gone hunting with her.

The former beauty pageant contestant and first-term Alaska governor has a reputation for knocking heads in the state Legislature while pushing through political reforms.

As she has worked her way up from the Wasilla City Council to the governor's mansion in Juneau, she has challenged heavy spending and fought to reduce taxes.

At 44, she is the youngest and first female governor of Alaska and now the first woman on a GOP presidential ticket.

"She knows where she comes from, and she knows who she works for," John McCain said in introducing her Friday at an Ohio rally. "She stands up for what's right, and she doesn't let anyone tell her to sit down."

Said Palin: "I didn't get into government to do the safe and easy things. A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not why the ship is built."

Before she got into politics, Palin described herself as "just your average hockey mom in Alaska."

She and her husband, Todd Palin, have five children, ranging from a 19-year-old son, Track, who is to deploy to Iraq with the Army in September, to a baby son, Trig, born in April with Down syndrome. They have three daughters in between.

From Juneau to Vogue

Palin lives in Wasilla, a town of 8,500 about 30 miles north of Anchorage, with her husband, a blue-collar North Slope oil worker who won the 2007 Iron Dog, a 1,900-mile snowmobile race. He is part Yup'ik Eskimo. The two have spent summers fishing commercially for salmon, an enterprise that once left her with broken fingers aboard their boat.

Palin typically walks the state Capitol halls in black or red power suits while reading text messages on a BlackBerry screen in each hand. She made a recent appearance in fashion magazine Vogue.

"At first they had me in a bunch of furs," she said of the December photo shoot. "Yeah, I have furs on my wall, but I don't wear furs. I had to show them my bunny boots and North Face clothing."

Palin, who led the Fellowship of Christian Athletes chapter at her high school, could help McCain's standing with social conservatives who have been skeptical of him.

After serving on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996, she defeated the town's incumbent mayor by campaigning against wasteful spending and high taxes.

She won the governorship in 2006 by beating incumbent Frank Murkowski, a former senator, in the Republican primary, then toppling a former two-term Democratic governor in the general election.

For fun, Palin hunts, ice-fishes and rides snowmobiles.

Palin was born Feb. 11, 1964, in Sandpoint, Idaho. Her father, Chuck Heath, taught elementary school science and coached track; her mother, Sally, worked as a school secretary. They're retired now. When she was 3 months old, the family moved to Alaska, where moose hunting and distance running filled her weekends.

(On Friday, Chuck Heath said he would have missed the news about his daughter except that flooding kept him and his wife from getting to the remote camp they use to hunt caribou.)

At Wasilla High School, Sarah Palin was captain of the basketball team in 1982 when it won the state small-school championship. Her tough play - once on a stress-fractured ankle - earned her the nickname Sarah Barracuda.

In 1984, she was first runner-up in the Miss Alaska beauty pageant.

"She's obviously an attractive lady," said Jed Babbin, editor of Human Events, a conservative newspaper and Web site. "But she's tough and smart. She could be a real game changer for McCain."

Palin opposes abortion and is a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.

She holds a bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Idaho. She did a brief stint as a TV sports reporter and currently enjoys Sandpoint vacation rentals in her birthplace, Sandpoint, Idaho.

She eloped with her husband in 1988 to save on an expensive wedding.

***
Quick Facts:

NAME: Sarah Heath Palin

AGE: 44; born Feb. 11, 1964, in Sandpoint, Idaho.

EDUCATION: Bachelor's degree in journalism, University of Idaho.

EXPERIENCE:

*Government: Alaska governor since December 2006; chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-2004; served two terms as Wasilla mayor and two terms on City Council.

*Business: Worked as sports reporter for two Anchorage TV stations; owned with her husband a snowmobile, watercraft and ATV business in 1994-97.

FAMILY: Husband, Todd, an oil field worker; five children, sons Track, 19, and Trig, 4 months; daughters Bristol, 17, Willow, 14, and Piper, 7.

PERSONAL:

*Nicknamed Sarah Barracuda in high school.

*Runner-up in Miss Alaska contest.

*She and Todd eloped in 1988.

Ticket credentials

*She's an independent figure similar to John McCain.

*Favors offshore oil drilling and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but has taken on Alaska's oil industry.

*She's three years younger than Barack Obama, 47, and a generation younger than McCain, 72.

*A Washington outsider.

*Brings a strong anti-abortion stance to the ticket.


By: Dawson Bell & Kathleen Gray
Detroit Free Press; August 30, 2008

Tough Neighbor For Wall Street

Biden Raps Hedge Funds, Millionaire Tax Breaks; Foreign Investors Get Pass

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama has picked Delaware Sen. Joe Biden to be his running mate. Mr. Biden's foreign-policy experience made him Mr. Obama's choice, according to news reports. But what of Mr. Biden's views on deal making and Wall Street? Here is a quick look.

Not a fan of hedge funds: In a Democratic debate on "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" last year, Mr. Biden blamed hedge funds and private-equity funds for the credit crunch: "We need more transparency, particularly with regard to hedge funds and private-equity funds. They are the ones that are causing this thing to go under. And there's no transparency, no accountability. We don't know how deep this problem is."

A stable capital-gains tax: Mr. Biden voted against cutting the 15% capital-gains tax rate in 2005 and 2006. He has said he believes raising taxes on dividends will raise $195 billion a year.

Caution over, but not rejection of, sovereign-wealth funds: Mr. Biden led Senate hearings in June on sovereign-wealth funds and urged caution when accepting investments from the investment arms of foreign countries, but credited such funds with helping bolster several U.S. banks. Mr. Biden said greater transparency would make sovereign-wealth funds appear no less a threat to U.S. national-security interests but that "punitive defensive regulation could be self-defeating, depriving us of potential benefits out of the fear of potential harm."

No tax breaks for anyone earning more than $1 million: Sorry, Wall Street. Those deal makers who are still employed will surely pay higher taxes if an Obama-Biden administration has its way. Mr. Biden has said he supports the elimination of tax cuts for anyone earning more than $1 million a year, which he says would raise $85 billion a year for the government.

By: Heidi Moore
Wall Street Journal; August 26, 2008

Changes in Fast-Growing States May Sway Election

More Younger Voters Favor Democrats In Colorado, Nevada


Some of the nation's fastest-growing states are undergoing demographic changes that could transform Republican strongholds into swing states in 2008 -- and even trend toward Democrats in the long run.

Many of the new voters in these states -- younger, with a higher mix of minorities -- typically lean toward Democrats, polls and voting statistics show. "The youthful, new minority populations of the fast-growing battlegrounds reflect much of America's future," says William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

The shifts are particularly noteworthy in Colorado and Nevada, both of which President Bush carried in 2004. They are high on the target list this year for Barack Obama's campaign. A similar population shift has been seen in New Hampshire, the North's fastest-growing swing state, which President Bush won in 2000 but narrowly lost in 2004.

Both presidential candidates are reacting to the shift, making these fast-growing states key battlegrounds this year. The campaign of Illinois Sen. Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has outlined a strategy that involves competing in a handful of southern states that usually lean Republican, including Georgia and North Carolina. Meanwhile, Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, has been visiting Nevada in a bid to keep what once was a reliably red state from turning blue.

Demographics, of course, aren't destiny; they're just one ingredient in a cocktail of factors that could tip an election one way or the other. Issues like the war in Iraq or the ailing economy and high gas prices will be among the driving factors for voters in swing states and elsewhere. Also, the decades-long migration of Americans to fast-growing states in the Sunbelt and Mountain West has slowed as a slumping housing market discourages many from moving.

Even so, the number of Democratic newcomers is now large enough to challenge the Republican status quo in some areas. "The Sunbelt in the West is probably quite competitive," says Mark Gersh, a voter analyst for the Democrats. Democrats are "probably going to focus more on New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado" -- their best chances in the region -- to capitalize on minorities and young voters energized by Sen. Obama.

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed that, nationwide, likely voters between 18 and 34 prefer Sen. Obama to Sen. McCain, 53% to 40%. That dynamic is making Colorado, once staunchly Republican, increasingly friendly territory for Sen. Obama -- a big reason why the upcoming Democratic National Convention will be held in Denver.

Since 2000, Colorado's voting-eligible population has increased 13%, the fifth-largest increase in the country. The under-35 population has increased about 9%, while the share of white residents has declined 3.5 percentage points since 2000. In 2004, George W. Bush won 52% of the votes while John Kerry took 47%. But also that year, Democrat Ken Salazar was elected to the U.S. Senate, becoming the first Democratic senator elected in Colorado since 1992, and the Democrats swept to control of the state legislature. Two years later Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat, succeeded a retiring Republican governor in a landslide victory.

Nevada, another long-time Republican stronghold, has been among the fastest-growing states of the past decade. Between 2000 and 2007, about 350,000 people moved to Nevada from another state, including unemployed manufacturing workers from the North and neighboring Californians pushed out by rising real-estate prices in the late 1990s and first half of this decade. Many of the newcomers are Democrats. As of June, the state had 559,814 registered Democrats and 487,685 registered Republicans. Eight years ago, the state was almost evenly split, with 386,202 Democrats and 384,459 Republicans, according to the Nevada Secretary of State.

While some of the fastest-growing states are attracting minorities, that doesn't automatically translate into a boon for Democrats. Many Hispanics, for example, can't vote because they are too young or aren't citizens. Others don't vote even though they're eligible to do so. If past patterns hold, in 2008 only 19 out of 100 Hispanics will vote, compared with 40 blacks out of 100 and 52 whites, according to an analysis of Census data by Mr. Frey.

Still, over the long run, a growing Hispanic population bodes well for Democrats. Voter participation remains low in states that have only recently started adding large numbers of immigrants, including Georgia and North Carolina. But it's rising in states where the immigrant populations are long-established. In New Mexico, for example, Hispanics make up 40% of the population and 30% of the voting population.

New Hampshire is the only fast-growing swing state in the North, and much of its population rise is a result of Boston's sprawl, which has reached over the border. The state has seen a massive population turnover, as natives leave and newcomers move in. Roughly six out of 10 New Hampshire residents were born in another state; about a quarter of the people who are eligible to vote this year weren't New Hampshire voters in 2001, according to an analysis by Kenneth Johnson, senior demographer at the University of New Hampshire's Carsey Institute.

Demographic changes also are occurring in slow-growing swing states such as Ohio and Michigan, which are losing young people to other states and not attracting as many immigrants. But it's harder to gauge the political impact. Many of these states' older populations were reliably Republican in the 1980s and 1990s. But with the economy stumbling and voter dissatisfaction rising, some of these voters may move to Sen. Obama.

President Bush won Ohio in 2000 and 2004 with 50% and 51% of the vote, respectively. Meantime, Michigan, beset by economic woes, went Democratic. Former Vice President Al Gore won in Michigan in 2000 and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry prevailed in 2004, each with 51% of the vote.

By: Conor Dougherty and Sara Murray
Wall Street Journal; July 12, 2008

Does the Web Deserve The Power It Gained To Influence Politics?

Considering how Barack Obama is one of YouTube's biggest stars -- the video of his Philadelphia speech on race is just the latest involving the senator that, by Web metrics, went platinum -- you'd think he would be one of the site's most unalloyed fans. The other day, though, he was vigorously ambivalent.

Those enlessly played clips showing Rev. Jeremiah Wright making controversial racial statements, Sen. Obama told an interviewer, aren't representative of the man. "I don't want to suggest that somehow, the loops you have been seeing typifies the services all the time," Sen. Obama said. "That is the danger of the YouTube era. It doesn't excuse what he said. But it gives it some perspective."

As with Nixon going to China, it might take an Obama, with solid youth-tech cred, to suggest any downside to the online world. Considering the rapidly growing number of Americans who rely on the Web to follow the election and judge its players -- even if mostly via mainstream-media sites -- it's a good time to look at all the Web does very well with politics, and at what it messes up.

Web videos, especially on YouTube, are a good place to start. They have been called the death of the TV sound bite, for the way voters can experience lengthy realities without the filters of a news show constrained by time limits and commercials. The 37 minutes of Sen. Obama's race speech quickly became one of the most widely downloaded.

Less clear is whether YouTube will be just as bad, or worse, at blurring the line between a fair point and a cheap shot than newspapers or TV ever were.

Elected officials, especially those in small communities, have complained since the invention of the camera that one sure way to get their picture into the paper is to fall asleep at some legislative event, even one that has lasted all night. But if a dozing politician thinks being in the day's newspaper or the night's newscast was a problem, wait until the clip gets viewed eternally online.

Montana Republican Sen. Conrad Burns had plenty of other problems when he ran for re-election in 2006, but the campaign wasn't helped when he was caught shutting his eyes for a few seconds at a Senate hearing on a farm bill.

Videos like these may enjoy the popularity they do because they confirm ideas already held about the politicians involved, in which case blaming YouTube confuses cause and effect. But there is a danger that our politics might be shaped by insignificant events that assume an importance merely by having been caught on tape.

It's not just video that is being refashioned in the Internet age, but words, too, through blogs and other widely democratized forms of expression. Blogs are enormously useful, if only because of the way they allow communities with similar politics to follow the ups and down of a campaign as a group.

When Hillary Clinton or John McCain give major policy speeches, commentators feel compelled to have their thoughts online within a few hours -- even those who work for weekly newsmagazines. And, in keeping with the conventions of blog posts, which rarely go on for more than a screenload of type, they were often expressed in just a few hundred words.

Blogs then, make possible an amazing diversity of lucid ideas, but those ideas tend to be quickly considered and briefly expressed before everyone moves on to the next topic du jour.

Discussion such as this one about the Web and politics usually involve the newest and most glamorous parts of the Internet: the participatory, Web 2.0 neighborhoods, like blogs and YouTube.

One of the biggest electoral impacts of the Web involves one of its earliest applications: email. It's an easy and effective way for people to share ideas with friends about what might be going on with the candidates. By operating person-to-person and under the radar, email can have an enormous and injurious influence before anyone even notices.

The Obama camp learned this earlier this year when emails making false statements about the candidate's religion started showing up in millions of in-boxes. Old-fashioned whispering campaigns usually work only in relatively small, cohesive communities. With email, though, they can be national and nearly instantaneous.

Suggesting that there is both good and bad with the Web and politics isn't to say they exist in equal amounts. Say what one will about the shortcomings of blogs, I can't imagine going back in time to a world where a relatively small number of newspapers and magazines -- even though by and large they were very good ones -- had an effective monopoly on what did and didn't get printed about a campaign.

The Web isn't going away, and so its boosters should no longer feel defensive when its inanities are pointed out. The YouTube political debates where voters submitted video questions, from January, for example, were described as a singular chance for citizens to question candidates directly, which sounded good until one of the questioners presented himself as a snowman.

Because it's such a vastly powerful network, the Internet has the ability either to elevate or to debase the political discussion. Both will be occurring between now and November, though with a little luck, not in equal amounts.

By Lee Gomes
Wall Street Journal; March 26, 2008