Obama or McCain: Who's Better for Retirees?

If you're going to vote on the basis of where each candidate stands on issues like gay marriage or abortion rights, then you've made your choice. However, if you're a retiree or wannabe who's not a single issue voter, you might wonder which candidate will be better for retiree's pocketbooks.

Here's what I've found.

On the health care front McCain is no friend of retirees. He voted for a bill that reduced spending on Medicare by $6.4 billion by cutting payments to home health care providers and requiring that beneficiaries purchase certain medical equipment. He missed a vote which would have allowed Medicare Part D to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, just like the Department of Veterans Affairs does. He voted for increases in Medicare premiums and voted to raise medicare eligibility age.

On the other hand, McCain is in favor of keeping capital gains taxes at the current 15% rate, which would allow retirees to buy and sell the stocks, bonds and other investments that compose their retirement nest egg with a lower tax impact.

On health care Obama seems to be more friendly to retirees. He proposes making a new national health plan available to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, which will allow them to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. Under Obama's proposal, no one can be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions. Further, according to Obama the plan will have affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles.

This sounds good for anyone, like me, who buys health insurance in the private market (at very high cost). I do have a question about the "national" part of his health care plan which may mean a government bureaucracy will run the show.

However, on the tax front, Obama is a mixed bag. He supports returning the capital gains tax to where it was before the Bush tax cuts. This may have an effect on the stock market and will increase your taxes when you sell stocks, bonds and other investments that compose your retirement nest egg. On the other hand he wants to eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000.

What I worry about from either candidate is their willingness to tax so-called "weathier" retirees. My concern is what they mean by wealthy. Are those who saved and scrimped during their working lives to save up a nest egg to live off of in retirement considered "wealthy?" Are those who spent every dime they had and then some during their working lives and now have nothing for retirement the poor people that Washington wants to help?

So there it is. Neither candidate is perfect. Your comments on this subject are welcome.