A vote for Allen will fatten your wallet
10/31/08 | 8 comments
guest column

A vote for Allen will fatten your wallet


Ken Paigen

Maine is not exactly flush with millionaires. On a per capita basis we must rank pretty low among the states. Which means that most of us are middle class, or even further down the income scale (think Washington County). With the present economic turmoil likely to last for at least a few, if not many, years, this election means a lot to our pocketbooks and wallets.

Beyond the question of who to vote for as president, we have two candidates vying to represent us in the Senate. Both Susan Collins and Tom Allen are seasoned, respected members of Congress. Each has a record as a faithful member of their own party, Allen as a liberal Democrat and Collins as a stalwart supporter of President Bush. So how do we choose?

Setting aside the usual campaign distortions, which this year seem to be particularly ripe, all we really have to go on are the past records. Our only reliable gauge of the future is looking at how the policies and votes of the two parties and the two candidates have affected our household budgets in the past.

As to the parties, the differences are pretty clear. A Princeton economist recently analyzed the past 60 years, which have been nearly equally divided between Republican and Democratic administrations. Surprisingly, although we usually think of the Republicans as the party of business, in reality our country has grown economically almost twice as fast under Democrats. Whatever the speechmakers may say, the fact is that Democratic administrations have been better for business.

They have also been much better for middle-class incomes, and what is dramatically different is what has happened to those in the bottom fifth of the income pile. They have barely stayed afloat under Republicans and grown substantially better off under Democrats.

So much for the parties and their philosophies, what about our two candidates? Truth is, they have pretty much stuck to their parties values. Collins voted for the Bush tax plan that shifted much of our tax burden from the rich to the poor. That tax cut was worth an average of a thousand dollars a week to those at the top and not much more than one dollar to those in the bottom fifth. Allen voted against it. Same with the tax break for the oil companies (as though they weren’t making enough already), and the same with the provision in the prescription drug bill that prevented the government from bargaining with the big drug companies to get lower prices for the rest of us on the drugs we need.

So if the past is any guide to the future, unless you are a millionaire, your pocketbook or wallet would much prefer that you vote for Allen.

Ken Paigen of Bar Harbor was director of the Jackson Laboratory from 1989 to 2002.

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
8 comments on this item
On 10/31/08 at 11:34 AM, kleban wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Nice article, Ken Paigen. Another point that I think needs to be made: If you are voting for Obama, remember that he will need all the help he can get to pass legislation to help the middle class and clean up all the other messes left behind by Bush (with the help of Collins, among others). The Senate is especially important, since the Democrats should be close to 60 votes, which would allow them to stop Republican vetoes. One more Senator could make an enormous difference. So a vote for Allen is support for Obama.

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 4:01 PM, dirigodad wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Great points! Another example is the wonderful economic climate created by the Democrat-led legislature over the past few decades. Maine truly is a leader in economic development with our pro-business, anti-regulatory approach, both hallmarks of the Democrat party.

Wow...what a load of bull. I had to break out my shovel just to be able to read the final paragraph...

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 4:55 PM, kleban wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

dirigodad: Maybe you should stop listening to Rush and Fox News. Doing away with regulation in the banking and finance sectors, thanks to the Repubs (and with the ready assistance of Susan Collins), is what got us (and a good part of the rest of the world) into the current economic mess. You better hope that it doesn't turn into another depression (it's unfortunately not unlikely).

As far as Maine goes, our economy hasn't been strong since the mid 1800's, under any kind of state government--but that's another story.

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 7:26 PM, dirigodad wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Earth to kleban: I very seldom, if ever, have the opportunity to listen to Rush. Strike 1! I don't have Fox News as part of my cable TV package. Strike 2! I actually think for myself and don't get my talking points from either the MSM or dailykos (not that there's much difference between the two). And Democrat pressure on banks to lend to those who aren't credit-worthy had EVERYTHING to do with the collapse of the banking industry. Strike 3!

Great job! You're wrong almost as often as Anny!

And, borrowing a line from the Messiah, don't you think it's time for CHANGE in the state of Maine? Or should we continue to allow the Democrat party to continue to run our state into the ground?

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 7:36 PM, kleban wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

dirigodad: Glad you don't listen to Rush or FN. But where did you get this idea that "Democrat pressure on banks to lend to those who aren't credit-worthy had EVERYTHING to do with the collapse of the banking industry." That's ridiculous, no serious economist believes it. Basically, the crash was due to unregulated greed, even Alan Greenspan (one of the culprits) admits that. But keep thinking, your condition isn't terminal. you'll get there sooner or later :-)

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 10:13 PM, dirigodad wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Kleban, I work in the financial services industry...I'm well aware of the danger of subprime lending...whether mortgages or credit cards...and this lending is indeed shaped, molded and regulated by those who oversee the banking industry. Witness UDAP, which, under the guise of protecting the consumer, is going to severly limit the banks' ability to make loans at lower rates available and will restrict loans to even credit-worthy customers.

Report abuse
On 10/31/08 at 10:39 PM, kleban wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

dirigodad, I hope that your job is not in danger--I know things are not looking very good right now.

Report abuse
On 11/1/08 at 12:58 PM, dirigodad wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Thanks...so far, so good. God is good!

Report abuse
You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.