Question 2:
(From The Rev. Elizabeth Sandy Ross | County  pastor of Bainbridge Presbyterian Church)
"John McCain's policies seem to be from the top down, including tax cuts. They're not for the lady or man working at Wal-Mart. What would he do to help all the people to have a voice and some dignity?"

Answer:
The rhetoric from Democrats on the campaign trail has been clear: Republican John McCain's tax plan favors the rich and corporations at the expense of the middle class.

That's true in the sense that McCain proposes to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, while also preserving the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, even for the wealthiest Americans. Otherwise, those reductions are scheduled to expire in 2010.

But the so-called "trickle-down" philosophy, of course, is that making the corporate tax more competitive and allowing people to keep more of their money promotes investment and the creation of jobs for all classes -- and that raising taxes discourages job creation.

The tax cuts that McCain wants to continue would apply to all taxpayers, not just the rich, and he has proposed targeted tax relief that could benefit low- to middle-income taxpayers, experts say.

The Arizona senator has proposed a $5,000 refundable tax credit for each family to help pay for health-care insurance, for example. There's an entirely separate debate about that plan.

But for the Wal-Mart workers and others who have limited or no health insurance and are basically healthy, the credit would help, said Len Burman, director of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute.

If someone isn't healthy, the $5,000 credit probably wouldn't be enough to cover the premium, he said.

McCain also has touted, as part of his efforts to help the middle class, a plan to "double" the exemption all taxpayers can claim for children, from $3,500 a year to $7,000 by 2016.

The exemption already is adjusted each year for inflation, but McCain would accelerate that increase. It's a bit unclear how many low- or middle-income people would benefit.

That's because an estimated 45.6 million American taxpayers -- or about one-third of all filers -- don't have any federal income-tax liability right now after credits and deductions, the Tax Foundation says.

The nonprofit group calculated that if all provisions of Democrat Barack Obama's tax plan were enacted next year, an additional 16 million would see their tax liability drop to zero -- but that the number under McCain's plan would be 15 million.

McCain also touts his proposed Homeownership Resurgence Plan to have the federal government buy distressed home mortgages, saying it would help struggling homeowners avoid foreclosure.

Experts say Obama would target more tax benefits to the middle class than McCain, through proposals to eliminate income taxes for seniors earning $50,000 or less and create an income-tax credit of up to $1,000 per family making less than $150,000 a year, and other targeted tax cuts.

Obama also would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 a year or families earning $250,000 annually, following a "bottom-up" philosophy that aiding the middle class helps keep businesses and the economy afloat.

But William A. Raabe, a tax professor at Ohio State University's Fisher College of Business, argued that the candidates aren't really talking about something that could have the largest effect on average workers: Social Security and Medicare.

Realistically addressing the long-term solvency problems of both entitlement programs could mean an increase in taxes or reduction in benefits, Raabe said. He also argued that the Wal-Mart worker is more likely to be affected by state and local taxes than changes in federal policy.

Serious questions also remain about how much discretionary spending will be available for either McCain or Obama to pursue his agenda, with the financial markets in turmoil and the government's $700 billion Wall Street bailout to be enacted.

There also are broader philosophical questions raised by tax policy and the issue of what is fair, depending on which class benefits and your point of view.

Under McCain's plan, is it fair to have the wealthiest enjoy such a large share of the tax cuts in dollars, while lower-income groups struggle with rising prices?

Under Obama's plan, is it fair for the rich to pay a higher percentage than anyone else? And is it right that such a relatively small slice of Americans shoulders so much tax burden, with many people paying little for services?

mniquette@dispatch.com