This will be a short diary, but one that highlights an article of great joy regarding our desire to turn the Hoosier State Blue for the first time since 1964. The following article excerpts come straight from the largest newspaper in Indiana, The Indianapolis Star, and they seem to slam the door on McCain's final argument to the voters of this state.
In its Sunday paper this morning, The Star ran a piece detailing the differences between the two candidates:
Taxes
McCain: Would continue President Bush's tax cuts and make other cuts that would mainly affect upper-income families and corporations. Would pay for them by overhauling programs such as Medicare, eliminating earmarks and implementing a spending freeze. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates a tax break of $325 for the middle 20 percent of taxpayers, or those making $37,600 to $66,400, The Associated Press reports.
Obama: Would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire for households earning more than $250,000. Would give a $500 tax credit to households earning less than $150,000. People older than 65 who earn less than $50,000 would not have to pay income taxes. Would raise corporate taxes. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates a tax break of $1,118 for the middle 20 percent of taxpayers, or those making $37,600 to $66,400, The Associated Press reports.
Notice how The Star correctly highlighted McCain's desire to benefit "upper-income" families, while they maintain that Obama's cuts will benefit middle-income Hoosiers. Being a lifelong Indiana resident, I can tell you with certainty that these differences will speak to many working-class White voters who may have been tempted to vote for McCain - particularly in rural areas.
Health care
McCain: Would cut regulations and allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. Would tax employer-provided health insurance but give tax credits ($2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families) to help offset the cost of insurance. Would give subsidies to lower-income patients with pre-existing medical conditions to help them obtain insurance. Would not mandate universal coverage.
Obama: Would create an agency to regulate the private insurance market. Consumers could choose to buy private insurance through the agency or the federal government. Would require providers to sell coverage to those who are already sick. Would require large businesses to provide employees insurance or contribute to the cost. Would provide subsidies for lower-income patients and mandate coverage for children.
You have to love how The Star couldn't resist pointing out that McCain will tax employer-provided health insurance and fail to mandate coverage (the senior citizens in Indiana will LOVE that) - while Obama will require providers to sell coverage to those who are already sick.
I could go on all day about the differences The Star pointed out between McCain and Obama, but the fact is they were extremely favorable to Obama with their article two days before the election. Keep in mind that this is traditionally a fairly conservative newspaper that didn't endorse either candidate.
As a cherry on top, The Indianapolis Star includes an AP article titled "State Colors: Red, Blue, or Purple?" that describes in very clear details how grim the reality for McCain is in battleground states (I'm still searching for the link to this, and I will update the diary when it becomes available). Here are a few:
Ohio (20): Obama ahead in late polls in a state that McCain must win
Michigan (17): McCain conceded this state to Obama weeks ago (isn't that CLASSIC?)
Georgia (15): McCain favored, but big early turnout gives Obama hope
Let's take the momentum of yesterday's terrific polls and push to the finish. Cheers from the ground of The Hoosier State!
Here is the link to the original article:
http://www.indystar.com/...