Thus far, only Cain and Perry have revealed the most detailed plans, and because women are disproportionately likely to be single parents and to have lower wages, smaller pensions and more medical problems, they are expected to fare worse under these plans than their male counterparts.

The gender-wage gap and its relevancy to tax-policy discussions

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (PDF), in 2010, women who were full-time wage and salary workers earned 81 percent of what men earned (median weekly earnings for women were $669, and $824 for men). The female-to-male earnings ratio has hovered around 80 to 81 percent since 2004, up from 62 percent in 1979.

Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report (PDF) showing women make up 49 percent of the total workforce but represent 59 percent of low-wage workers–this despite the fact that more women than men finish high school and earn bachelor’s degrees. And according to a new report (PDF) by the Martin Prosperity Institute, women hold 52.3 percent of “creative class” jobs–engineers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, teachers–but in these jobs, earn an average of $48,007, while men earn an average of $82,009. Controlling for hours worked and education, creative class men out-earn creative class women by 49.2 percent.

According to the 2008-2010 American Community Survey, about 29.2 percent of families whose income in the past 12 months was below the federal poverty level were families headed by single women. It gets worse depending on the presence of young children: 38.1 percent of women-run households with children under 18 were below poverty; 46.1 percent of households with children under 5 were below poverty. In comparison, only 10.5 percent of all American families—and only 5.1 percent of married-couple families—in this survey were making below the poverty level. The aforementioned GAO report found single women with children had an average household income of about $27,000.

Income disparities do not stop at wages, however. Women tend to live longer, they are more likely to outlive their savings and less likely to have significant retirement plans or to have the type of jobs that incur significant pensions. Thus, they disproportionately benefit from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), women represent about 57 percent of all Social Security beneficiaries age 62 and older and about 69 percent of beneficiaries over 85. In 2008, women 65 and older received an average of $11,377, compared with $14,822 for men.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation (PDF), about 56 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries are women, and women are more likely than men to report having three or more chronic conditions.

How do women fare under ‘9-9-9’?

THE PLAN: ‘9-9-9’

With the nation’s attention focused on Cain’s old sexual harassment charges, scrutiny of Cain’s infamous “9-9-9″ Plan is stalled for the moment. According to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, Cain’s plan would make those earning under $50,000 pay a few thousand dollars more in taxes, while those making between half a million and $1 million would pay nearly $100,000 less in taxes. According to an analysis by the left-leaningCitizens for Tax Justice (PDF), if Cain’s plan were to go into effect today, the richest 1 percent of taxpayers would pay $210,000 less in annual taxes, while the poorest 60 percent of taxpayers would pay $2,000 more in annual taxes.

At the same time, Cain’s proposed plan is expected to raise about the same–or potentially less–revenue as the current tax system. Still, a recent poll of likely Iowa Caucus-goers conducted last month shows the average American making under $50,000 annually doesn’t understand the plan and believes he or she would fare better under “9-9-9.”

Cain’s plan is actually a complicated three-step process. Replacing the current tax code with a 9-percent business flat tax (or value-added tax), a 9-percent individual flat tax and a 9-percent national sales tax is only the second step in the process. And as the Tax Policy Center summarizes, combined, the three taxes are equivalent to a 25.4-percent national sales tax, with adjustments for dividends paid to tax-exempt entities and charitable contributions.

The first step in Cain’s plan, explained by The Washington Post, would actually be to cut individual and corporate tax rates to a top-25-percent rate, down from the current high of 35 percent. The third step would be to replace all federal taxes with a national sales tax.

Cain claims under “9-9-9,” Americans who fall under the federal government’s poverty level would be exempt from paying the individual income tax; however, he would eliminate the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), designed to help the working poor, and the Child Tax Credit (CTC). Additionally, he would eliminate payroll tax deductions for employers (except in unspecified “Opportunity Zones”), which currently serve as a hiring incentive. Helping out the wealthy, Cain would get rid of the estate tax and capital gains taxes. His plan, according to Edward D. Kleinbard of the Gould University of Southern California School of Law, involves a “disguised one-time 9 percent tax on existing wealth.”

More from TaxVox, the Tax Policy Center blog:

A middle income household making between about $64,000 and $110,000 would get hit with an average tax increase of about $4,300, lowering its after-tax income by more than 6 percent and increasing its average federal tax rate (including income, payroll, estate and its share of the corporate income tax) from 18.8 percent to 23.7 percent. … In Cain’s world, a typical household making more than $2.7 million would pay a smaller share of its income in federal taxes than one making less than $18,000. This would give Warren Buffet severe heartburn.

EFFECT ON WOMEN

Cain’s plan would eliminate the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which is a refundable credit designed to offset federal payroll and income taxes for low- and moderate-income working people.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), this year, working families with children with annual incomes below $36,000 to $49,000 (depending on marital status and dependents) may be eligible for the EITC. Single individuals without children who make less than $13,600 annually and married couples making less than $18,700 annually would qualify for a small EITC. In 2009, the average EITC was $2,770 for a household with children and $259 for a childless household. According to CBPP, families mostly use this tax credit to pay for necessities, home and vehicle repairs and, sometimes, additional education.

Cain would also kill the Child Tax Credit (CTC), which helps working families pay for child care costs.

According to the Urban Institute, high-working, low-income families spend $3,135 annually, or 12 percent of their income. The Institute estimates that 69 percent of children under 5 with low-income working mothers are cared for regularly by someone other than a parent, and 39 percent of these children are in child care for at least 35 hours per week.

“It would be horrifying to lose [the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit],” said Elizabeth Lower-Basch, a senior policy analyst for the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP). “That would particularly affect women.

“We have a basically progressive tax code,” she told TAI. “If we go to a flat code, it would significantly hurt low-income workers.”

Joan Entmacher, vice president for Family Economic Security at the National Women’s Law Center, where she works at promoting policies aimed at improving the economic security of low-income women and their families, told TAI that Cain’s tax proposal appears to affect women worse than the other candidates because his plan is “much harder on lower-income Americans” in the way it would raise taxes on low- and middle-income earners.

Under Cain’s plan, millionaires would get a 17.9-percent tax rate, or a 22-percent boost after taxes. But a single mother earning between $20,000 and $30,000? Her tax rate would be 24.9 percent. In other words, a single mom making $25,000 a year will have to give 25 percent of her income, or $6,250, to taxes.

Cain has proposed creating tax benefits to certain geographic areas in what he calls “Opportunity Zones” (PDF), but he has not been specific about where these zones would be or how they would work.

“Overall, you’re going to be better off if you’re making over $1 million in income, better than single mom trying to raise kids on $25,000 per year,” Entmacher said.

Terry O’Neill, an attorney and professor who is the president of the National Organization for Women(NOW), told TAI that Cain is turning his back on women, many whom depend on the tax programs he wants to eliminate.

“When Mr. Cain wants to take away the Earned Income Tax Credit, he is punishing women who sometimes work two jobs full-time, minimum-wage jobs, just to pay for food and rent,” O’Neill said.

Perry’s postcard proposal cuts more than it balances

During his speech at the Corner Stone Action Dinner in Manchester, N.H., on Oct. 28, Perry repeatedly waved a blank postcard in explaining his tax and economic-policy plan. Like Cain’s plan, Perry’s plan (PDF) is more complicated than he lets on in speeches. Where they differ is in Perry’s explicit details in how Americans would pay for the substantial tax breaks on the highest earners — by eliminating deductions and cutting specific entitlement programs that especially benefit lower-income earners, and women.

THE PLAN: ‘Cut, Balance & Grow’

Taxpayers would be able to choose whether to file their taxes under the current tax code or under a new 20-percent “flat tax.” What Perry has not emphasized is that taxpayers will have to spend time—and potentially money—calculating which plan benefits them more.

Like Cain, Perry has countered claims his plan will result in disproportionately higher taxes for lower and middle-income families. As an example, Perry points to the provision in his 20-percent flat-tax plan, where families will be eligible for “generous” exemptions of $12,500.

In his proposal, Perry takes a dig at Cain’s proposal to introduce a federal sales tax and a business value-added tax, which he calls “highly regressive,” and uses the working poor to make his case:

When added to existing federal income taxes and state and local income sales taxes, a national sales tax would be highly regressive. Low-income families spend a much higher percentage of their incomes on food and gas than do those with considerable wealth. For example, a household earning $25,000 each year would spend roughly 40% of its income on food, utilities, and health care, while a household earning $130,000 each year would pay less than 15% of its income on those three items.

But because Perry would eliminate the EITC, lower- and middle-income earners would still pay more under his plan than they do now. Using calculations made by the Tax Policy Center, The New York Times estimates single parents with two children making $9,700 annually would pay no income taxes under Perry’s plan but would not receive the $4,885 tax credit they receive under current tax law.

Perry, like Cain, would eliminate the capital gains tax.

EFFECT ON WOMEN

To pay for the plan, Perry has suggested cuts in education and nutritional programs for poor children. He has offered various suggestions for reforming Medicare, which include gradually raising the age of Medicare eligibility, alongside a gradual retirement-age increase under Social Security; paying Medicare benefits on a sliding scale based on income; or by creating bundled premium support payments that would go directly to the individual. He has also proposed block-granting Medicaid payments.

Entmacher told TAI that under Perry’s plan, taxes would go up for the working poor and what she calls the “true middle class” — households making no more than $75,000 per year.

“The Perry plan is particularly hard on single heads of households,” Entmacher said. “They do worse than the working poor.”

The others

As for the remaining GOP candidates in the pack, the one expected to win the nomination, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, has a vague plan. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) have stated support for a flat tax, and all the candidates support eliminating the estate tax.

Romney’s main tax proposal is to end taxes on interest and dividend income for people who earn less than $200,000 a year, but otherwise keep the existing tax system in place. Romney does not support a flat tax or a national sales tax, stating they would largely hurt the middle class. He supports extending most, if not all, of the Bush-era tax cuts.

All of the experts TAI spoke with agreed the tax code needs reforming. With GOP candidates vying for shorter rules in the name of simplicity, Lower-Basch thinks what the tax code actually needs is more tiers and brackets to be more fair, reasoning that households making $250,000 a year should not be taxed the same as those making $1 or $2 million a year.

For the past eight months, a group of volunteer Iowa activists have been contributing to these Power Rankings and attempting to answer what GOP candidate is positioned to capture caucus gold if the event was tonight.

The panelists have watched as candidates entered the race, surged to the top and then were found to be lacking the necessities that lead to a caucus win: consistent messaging, grassroots organization and activist energy and loyalty.

Since only 57 days remain before Iowans gather at their caucus sites and recent polling has shown nearly 75 percent of all likely caucus-goers to have only soft support for a specific candidate, the snapshots being provided become even more important. On caucus night, it comes down to momentum and organization — who has it, who has honed it and who is ready to exploit it.

And with that, here’s how our panelists think the Iowa Caucuses would end if they were held tonight.

1. Ron Paul — The Texas congressman remains at the top of our rankings for the second week because our panelists generally see him as the GOP candidate who currently has both an energized base and grassroots organization.

   “Once again, baggage is creeping up on everyone else, but Paul is traveling lightly. When there’s so much negative coverage floating around, voters are going to turn to a guy like Paul who is seen as genuine, even among people who don’t agree with him on all the issues,” said one panelist.

   Another added, “I don’t think polls accurately show his support, especially with young people, and he’s been advertising quite a bit. Plus I think he draws a different base of support than the anti-Romney, evangelical crowd.”

   Although nearly all of our panelists placed Paul in their top three finishers, it remains clear that the scope of the Power Rankings — the fact that we try to determine how the caucuses would end if they were held tonight, and not necessarily gauging placement on the actual caucus date of Jan. 3, 2012 — benefits Paul the most.

   “He remains the candidate in the race with the best combination of an excited base and quality organization, which is the best in the state. I personally saw his organization pull in over 500 people on a Saturday morning to a National Federation of Republican Assemblies event, and he was the only candidate with any real support there. However, the January 3rd Caucus date does not work in his favor.”

   Given the excitement Paul has generated at Iowa appearances and given his campaign’s outreach through both paid advertisements and constituent groups, there is no denying that he would have a very strong showing if the caucuses were held tonight. He also benefits from a fractured Iowa GOP, which hasn’t yet launched a solid rally around a specific candidate. But if that happens in advance of Jan. 3, it remains unlikely that Paul could survive the onslaught.

   “I’m not disparaging Paul’s youthful base when I say that historically those young people have not been reliable caucusgoers. Yes, Paul can draw a large crowd at the University of Iowa during homecoming and relatively good weather. But what happens to Paul’s turnout on a likely very miserable Monday night in January when students remain on holiday?”

   “If the caucuses were held today, the various student groups on the college campuses would likely be able to do a good job of turning out their supporters. Given the general lack of enthusiasm shown for the rest of the field, his current level of support might push Paul’s tally up. Unfortunately, when the caucuses are held on January 3 school won’t be in session and it will be harder to achieve the turnout he needs for a top three finish.”

2. Herman Cain — The former chief executive for Godfather’s Pizza continues to surge ahead in Iowa, and our panelists came very close to providing him a high slot in our rankings. But, while giving a nod to Cain’s momentum, there’s also very little evidence of a strong ground game in the Hawkeye State.

   In addition, while the rest of the nation continues to buzz about allegations of former sexual harassment by Cain, Iowans aren’t. This isn’t to say that they are necessarily ignoring the story line, but more that they are taking a wait-and-see approach to how it all plays out. And, some Iowans also view the controversy as a silver lining for Cain, who has received much more national attention due to this story than he’s received in months prior.

   “The sexual-harassment allegations against Cain aren’t likely to do him in — true believers in ‘non-politicians’ will follow people like him anywhere. But the Republicans sense they have a chance to beat Obama a year from now, and they’re not likely to squander it on candidates with baggage who will make independent voters recoil.”

   “The sexual harassment allegations are a double-edge sword for Cain: It’s baggage that’s going to turn off a lot of family voters but it’s also given him more national exposure than he’s seen. That he’s on the networks each day and on cable most hours of the day means his recognition is exploding.”

   “I think it’s too early to judge the impact of the harassment allegations … I think he will be hurt long-term simply because of his campaign’s inability to effectively land on a strategy to respond to the allegations. In fact, insiders continue to tell me that Cain’s campaign is completely disorganized and has no cohesive strategy.”

   Iowans have previously proven they aren’t willing to simply accept whatever candidate happens to hold national popularity, and that they are willing to ignore national distractions for a candidate that has a strong presence on the ground in the state. But the fact remains that Cain isn’t providing Iowans much of a reason to give him a second chance.

   Cain hasn’t been a frequent fixture in the state, and he only recently began pushing for more grassroots organization and strategy in the Hawkeye State. What happens over the next 2 weeks will be critical in determining if Cain continues to rise, or takes another dip courtesy of the 2012 roller coaster.

   “If the caucuses were held today I think the intensity of Cain’s supporters would help him carry the day. My best guess, however, is that the rally effect will fade, but other questions about his positions and general readiness for high political office will remain and his support in the polls will fade.”

3. Mitt Romney — It’s been said here before and it’s worth saying again: Romney has strong hold-over support in Iowa from 2008. And although much is made of the fact that most members of the Iowa GOP are predominantly selecting candidates based on social conservative stances, there are still many Republicans who are looking more closely at perceived electability than at conservative purity.

   That being said, Iowa continues to hold a risk for Romney, who continues to poll in the low-to-mid 20s. If he takes the extra step and tries to build on his current core, he runs the risk of raising expectations in the Hawkeye State — an situation he has already experienced and is unlikely to want to repeat. If he continues to ignore Iowa, he leave the door open for caucusgoers to solidify around one of his opponents and select a candidate that could also perform well among similar-minded voters in South Carolina.

   “Given that the not-Romney vote is still split among several candidates, it provides an opening for Romney to come in and win the caucuses. … On the other hand, if Romney doesn’t compete in Iowa any more than he has, then the candidate who wins here might get enough of a boost to mount a significant challenge to Romney in South Carolina (if not in New Hampshire). A candidate who wins in Iowa and South Carolina would have significant momentum going into Florida. Basically, Romney needs to find a way to compete in Iowa to hold off his competitors without raising expectations for himself.”

   “Whatever he says, he’s playing in Iowa, which is smart — a second place here and a win in NH could really lock things up for him early. It’s worth the risk even if he finishes third, because Paul is not a national contender.”

   “I’ve come to believe that the Iowa Caucus campaign is a war of attrition. Numerous alternatives have enjoyed their moment in the sun as the ‘not-Romney’ candidate, and have withered under the increased exposure. Romney, despite not investing a lot of time or money in Iowa, continues to look like the candidate that can win the general election.”

4. Rick Santorum — The former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania finally seems to have established a bit of traction among our panelists.

   Santorum, more than any other 2012 candidate, is betting on an Iowa victory. He’s visited all 99 counties in the state, and has positioned himself well as a social conservative dark horse. His messaging has been consistent — first telling Iowans he planned to “out-conservative all other conservatives, and then, most recently, rolling out a faith/policy platform. Where Santorum hasn’t made strides is in the realm of electability.

   “He’s a second choice, but unless my first choice implodes between now and Jan. 3, it isn’t going to matter,” a panelist said. “Republicans don’t caucus the same way Democrats do and second-choices often get left on the floor or without a vote.”

   “Every time he’s on the brink of a breakthrough someone else steals his thunder. Prior to the Straw Poll it was Michele Bachmann. Now it’s Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich overshadowing him. However, he’s definitely a candidate a lot of former Mike Huckabee supporters are considering, so he will be a factor.”

   “Though Santorum hasn’t gotten the spotlight after touring all 99 counties, he’s probably well positioned by having spent time here and made allies in communities.”

   There is also one more worry for the Santorum campaign: money.

   “Along with Gingrich, Santorum may be one to benefit if Cain fades in the polls. He’s put in a lot of time in Iowa, and managed to visit all of Iowa’s 99 counties, but that effort still isn’t registering in the polls. He may be the “under the radar” candidate of this cycle, but even to the extent people may begin to take a second look at him, he doesn’t have the organization in place to take advantage of a late surge.”

5. Newt Gingrich — The former U.S. House Speaker continues to impress in Iowa, and appears to be positioning himself as a viable alternative to those currently sitting with Romney, but not yet 100 percent comfortable at that table.

   “He could be on the brink of a surge here down the stretch, and the way he is running his campaign by being substantive on issues and taking the high road allows him to appeal to Branstad and Vander Plaats types alike. If he can stay disciplined the rest of the way, and with Gingrich that is always a big if, he will be formidable.”

   “Gingrich has done consistently well in the debates. Rather than throwing elbows at the other candidates he’s kept his focus on policies and Obama. Although he can come off as too wonkish at times, most agree that he seems the one most likely to be able to go toe-to-toe with Obama in the general election debates. Gingrich had a terrible campaign rollout, and has had little or no ground game in Iowa, but that may be changing. Results of the latest Iowa Poll suggest that he may be one of two candidates who would gain the most if Cain’s support fades. Press reports suggest that Gingrich is planning to open as many as five offices in Iowa. Gingrich turned in a strong performance at the Reagan Dinner and now may be his opportunity to capitalize on those who are still searching for the not-Romney candidate who can beat Obama.”

   “Many people are now giving Newt another serious look. Sometimes you have to let the smartest guy in the room solve the problem as painful as it is to do so.”

   “Gingrich seems positioned to do well if Cain does fall out of the lead.”

   “In my war of attrition scenerio, it’s now time for Newt to get a new look. He had his major troubles early, so it gave him time to recover and present himself to voters as the alternative to the other candidates who have not handled ‘front-runner’ status very well.”

   “Anyone who has grown tired of the bickering between the candidates is going land on Gingrich or Jon Huntsman. Huntsman is seen as too soft so Gingrich benefits.”

Two former Iowa front-runners, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, didn’t garner enough support from the panel for entry into our top five finishers, but the news isn’t all bad for Perry.

“Perry seems to have stopped his downward spiral in the polls.”

Inasmuch as Perry’s debate performances were lackluster, his retail politics shine. Perry also has the luxury of good fundraising, which has allowed him to purchase time on Iowa airwaves.

“The saying goes that you never get a second chance to make a first impression, but Perry has the resources to allow caucus-goers to take a second look at him.”

The panelists are having a much more difficult time evaluating a Bachmann campaign that seems to have all the right pieces for Iowa, but continues to flounder.

“Bachmann was known prior to this presidential race as a real stand-out for the GOP and the tea party. And while she continues to find support in both groups, and especially with social conservatives, she hasn’t lived up to expectations when it comes to raising funds or small group politicking.”

While recent reports of Bachmann’s New Hampshire staff quitting weren’t high on the radar of Iowans, they did pay attention the response of the campaign. At first, the campaign didn’t acknowledge or didn’t know what had taken place.

“It was a bad moment for Bachmann because it showed the vast disconnect between her grassroots and national strategies. In other words, it fed into the perception that she is one thing here and another thing there, or saying one thing here and another thing there. It brought up the reliability question and Bachmann didn’t answer.”

“She’s working harder in Iowa, but my folks in the field continue to tell me that she sweeps in and quickly out of events without doing much glad-handing or giving voters any personal time. This is a major tactical error on the part of her campaign, because she wins votes when she’s given face time with the voters. Her campaign is not the first to completely misunderstand how to win the Iowa caucuses — Hillary, anyone?”

Source: Gage Skidmore, Flickr

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul launched the Minnesota portion of his presidential campaign with a spirited rally at the St. Cloud Civic Center Saturday.

Paul’s speech in St. Cloud touched on issues like domestic economic policy, the drug war and foreign interventions.

“The country and the world is in a mess today, and I’m quite convinced that we know exactly how we get here and exactly what to do,” Paul told the crowd, “and one thing’s for sure is we don’t need more government.”

Paul blamed the Federal Reserve for helping to bring about the speculative bubbles that sunk the nation’s economy.

“It’s the Federal Reserve that by interfering in the monetary system, monkeying around with interest rates, they create the bubbles,” Paul said. “For a while they can create one bubble and patch it up again, but eventually the big bubble bursts.”

He also condemned government bailouts of big banks and companies.

“They said if we don’t bail out the system there would be a depression,” Paul said. “Guess where the depression would have been? It would have been on those who were receiving our money. Instead the depression was dealt to the people, the middle class, they lost their jobs and they lost their houses and we the taxpayer absorbed the debt.”

Paul also voiced support for abolishing the Department of Education and the federal income tax, condemned the drug war as a tragedy and worried about creation of a worldwide monetary currency.

He told supporters that the country is increasingly in agreement with their libertarian economic views.

“We’re witnessing the end of an economic era,” Paul said. “This is a tremendous opportunity for those of us who believe in liberty to get this message out.”

Paul’s foreign policy stances have drawn jeers from some Republican crowds at debates, but he continues to advocate for neutrality and condemn the United States’ assassination of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, saying that ”what we must worry about is the rule of law because the rule of law protects us.”

Organizers put the turnout for the Republican candidate at about 2,500. Paul has trailed in most polls, but has captured a number of high-profile straw poll victories.

“You can not stop an idea whose time has come and the idea of liberty’s time has returned,” Paul said of his supporters. “We don’t have to understand each little issue, all we have to do is legalize freedom.”

MPR reports that the current host of Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura said he plans to refer to the United States as the “Fascist States of America.”

“The only way that I could change it I guess would be to run for president and win it,” Ventura said. “Is that what it will take?” When asked if he’s running for the White House, Ventura said “I’m thinking about it. That’s all though.”

Ventura has suggested before that he might have an interest in again running for higher office. In April, Ventura told Good Morning America that he’d consider running as Rep. Ron Paul’s vice president if he ran for an independent party.

Ventura also said that he and his wife plan to pursue their Mexican citizenship, according to Politics in Minnesota.

Ventura has dabbled in the 9/11 truther movement and other conspiracy theories, partly for his television show, since leaving office. The camera crew was present at today’s press conference, according to media reports.

Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich leveled particularly harsh criticism at Obama, saying he’s personally hurt the economy by attacking job creators.

“This country has been maniacally anti-jobs,” Gingrich said. “Obama is a left-wing radical who believes in class warfare and then he’s surprised that everybody who he’s attacking doesn’t create jobs.”

Gingrich then asked, “what did he think was going to happen?”

“You can’t go around the country and blame everybody who creates jobs and then say now gee, why didn’t you go out and take risk with your capital and spend the next five years of your lives creating jobs so I can attack you even more?” Gingrich said.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry offered a similar evaluation, saying people have lost confidence in the federal government and are not willing to risk capital to invest in potential job-creating ventures.

“Let’s quit penalizing Americans for making money, quit fighting this fight that we’re fighting on divisions between those that have money and those that don’t,” he said. “I want everybody to have more money.”

And Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.) also stuck the country’s economic woes on Obama, saying repealing federal health care reform legislation he championed would be a major step toward recovery.

“I think one of the biggest things we can do is repeal Obamacare,” he said. “That is a job crusher that is creating all sorts of uncertainty.”

Santorum called for eliminating the corporate income tax and allowing for tax-free repatriation of corporate profits being held overseas – estimated at more than $1 trillion – if the money is used to invest in job creation.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) also called for no taxes on repatriated profits, but said companies should be able to use them however they want.

Bachmann said the biggest problem businesses have right now is uncertainty. She wants a moratorium on regulations, and to see health care reform repealed.

“That’s the biggest problem business has right now,” Bachmann said. “They have no idea what’s going to come out of Washington, D.C. when they wake up in the morning. And that’s why we need to have an immediate moratorium on regulations. It’s killing us.”

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said he’d like to see no taxes on repatriated profits and a 15 percent corporate tax rate.

“I want it very low because in many ways, they think…if you lower corporate taxes only the executive is going to benefit,” Paul said. “But the consumer benefits too. Corporate taxes are a form of a sales tax, and if they’re competitive they have to pass this on.”

But Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee, says the Republican candidates have it wrong. The group claims Obama has worked hard to get rid of undue regulations, and the regulations that have been put in place are meant to protect taxpayers and close loopholes.

A recent review from Bloomberg found Obama has put in place fewer regulations than former President George W. Bush had at this point in his tenure.

National frontrunners Herman Cain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney did not attend the forum, held in Pella.

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul reiterated his fiscal message in Carroll Saturday and made clear that he would only seek the White House a member of the GOP. (Photo: Douglas Burns)

CARROLL, Ia. — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul says the country is finally catching up to his brand of politics and economic thinking.

For three decades, the libertarian-leaning Texan has preached limited government, a smaller role not only domestically in the form of lower taxes but also abroad, with a less adventurous foreign policy.

“Right now your biggest threat comes from your own government,” Paul said.

More than 100 people turned out Saturday morning in Carroll to hear Paul speak at Santa Maria Winery. Paul delivered opening remarks and then turned the event into a town-hall-style meeting, fielding audience questions.

Paul finished third at 12 percent behind businessman Herman Cain (23 percent) and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (22 percent) in a Des Moines Register Iowa Poll of likely Republican caucus-goers released Sunday.

On Saturday, Paul, a former Libertarian Party White House candidate, said he’s in a strong position as a Republican in the 2012 field and dismissed any speculation of a third-party candidacy.

“I have no intentions of running in a third party,” Paul said.

In his remarks Paul said that government reaction to crisis should to be pull back, grow smaller and allow free will and the marketplace to work.

“With each crisis it seems like the government grows,” Paul said. “It just has led to all this debt and all these problems we’ve had.”

Paul called for the immediate withdrawal of American troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan, noting that the United States has been involved in Afghanistan twice as long as the duration of World War II. The two wars are costing the United States $4 billion a month, he said.

Removal of troops would not only correct an entry into the conflicts on what Paul called “false pretense,” but also spur the American economy.

America’s largest defense concern now should be the nation’s economy, the Texan said.

“If we’re in the wrong places at the wrong time, it doesn’t serve our defense,” Paul said.

Paul also calls for cuts in military spending.

“How many weapons do we need?” he said. “Who is going to invade us?”

Paul said his foreign policy positioning should not be interpreted as isolationism. He would use diplomacy, not force, to advance U.S. interests.

“Using force doesn’t work and it’s very costly,” Paul said.

And Paul said he would be consistent.

“We were on the side of bin Laden,” he said. “We were on the side of Saddam Hussein.”

One audience member questioned Paul about farm subsidies. Paul noted that he has represented farming areas of Texas but opposes subsidies.

“I’ve not supported farm subsidies,” Paul said. “I think it distorts the marketplace.”

He added, “Subsidies tend to make people soft.”

Paul said Americans demonstrating now, either in the tea party movements or Occupy Wall Street groups, appear to break into two categories: people who are scared they won’t get their government handouts and those who are tired of paying for big government.

Paul said he is firmly in the latter category.

“To me, liberty is one clear package,” Paul said.

GOP presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) ran away with the National Federation of Republican Assemblies Straw Poll on Saturday in Des Moines, garnering 82 percent of the vote among Iowans.

Businessman Herman Cain came in second with 14 percent. Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann and Texas Gov. Rick Perry each got 1 percent or less. Former Utah Gov. Jon Hunstman and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney received no votes.

It was clear from the beginning of the event the majority of attendees came to see Paul, who spoke first. Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum also spoke at the event, while former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich addressed the crowd briefly by video.

Paul got a warm reception from the audience of several hundred, saying what the country needs is less government intrusion, more openness in government, a focus on dealing with the national debt and a foreign policy overhaul.

The federal government has invaded peoples’ lives, Paul said, especially through the Patriot Act. He called for repealing the law put in place following 9/11, saying it undermines liberty.

He also wants investigations into the federal reserve, the war in Iraq, the Fast and Furious operation and government loans to Solyndra.

“If there’s any one thing that would benefit us, it is to get more openness in government,” Paul said.

On foreign policy Paul delivered a strong anti-war message, calling United States foreign policy “deeply flawed” and saying “it’s time for us to come home and mind our own business.”

And on the economy, Paul said lowering the national debt, cutting the budget and auditing the federal reserve would go a long way toward putting the country back on track.

“This country needs to wake up and quit lying to itself, whether it’s on the economics or the foreign policy,” he said. “What we need is a healthy dose of renewal of the spirit of liberty.”

A small crowd of about 50 remained by the time Santorum spoke about an hour later. He said the 2012 election is about “the heart and soul of America,” and described himself as a candidate that can win, can govern and can be trusted. He also attacked President Obama on a number of fronts, saying he’s hurt America’s security, expanded government and undermined the family.

“It is an election about whether we’re going to be a free people who believe in limited government, who believe in the free enterprise system, who believe in the dignity of human life, who believe in the central building block of our society which is the family,” he said.

President Rod Martin described the NFRA as believing in “a more libertarian strand” of conservatism than the Republican Party as a whole. The tagline for the group is “the Republican wing of the Republican Party.”

“We believe our country has been overrun by people who don’t share those values, and we think it’s time to give them the pink slips they’ve been giving all of us,” Martin said.

The three — along with Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and U.S. Rep. Ron — spoke to about 1,000 people at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition’s 11th annual fall banquet in Des Moines. Tickets were $55.

Santorum perhaps outdid everyone, recounting the story of his political battle for a “partial-birth abortion” ban in the U.S. Senate and his family’s personal battle to save their unborn child when doctors recommended an abortion.

“You’ve heard a lot of policy up here from a lot of people and the choice for you is whether the folks delivering this are authentic,” he said. “Can they be trusted? Are they people that stood up when they had the opportunity and did what was called to be done?”

Santorum also said candidates should be willing to fight at the state level to stop same-sex marriage, as he did in Iowa.

“You’ll hear most everybody say they support traditional marriage and they support a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage,” he said. “But you’ll also hear if you listen to debates, people say that while they may support a Constitutional amendment they don’t support getting involved in the states and making sure states don’t pass either through legislation or judicial fiat marriage different than one man, one woman. And that is all the difference.”

Perry also pushed hard for support from the evangelical electorate at the event, saying in order for America to maintain its moral authority abroad it must set a high moral standard at home.

“That starts with protecting our most innocent and vulnerable, unborn children,” he said. “Fifty million have died because America has not guaranteed the right to life expressly stated in the Declaration of Independence.”

Perry said he’s “taken an unwavering stand in defense of life,” and railed off a number of accomplishments in Texas: requiring parental consent for minors seeking an abortion; passing a prenatal protection act and informed consent law; requiring a sonogram before abortion; and defunding Planned Parenthood.

Perry also said his stance against abortion is “not a matter of campaign convenience, it is a core conviction,” and called for activist citizens to rally against activist judges.

“It is a liberal canard to say I am personally pro-life but government should stay out of that decision,” he said. “If that is your view you are not pro-life, you are pro-having your cake and eating it too.”

And Bachmann said she’s “watched the destruction that has come on our nation” since Obama took office and it’s time for a very different president.

“This is the year when social conservatives can have it all, because in my experience a social conservative is a fiscal conservative,” she said. “A social conservative is a national security conservative. We can have it all this year.”

Bachmann also attacked Obama for not taking a stronger stand against abortion, and promised she would support a Constitutional amendment to protect life from conception.

“He said that he personally does not believe in abortion,” Bachmann said. “But he also believes the government should not intervene when it comes to the issue of abortion.”

Cain, Gingrich and Paul took strong stands against abortion and same-sex marriage as well, but their rhetoric was not as fiery.

He also promised to turn down any legislation that allowed for government funding of abortions, and said he’d work to strengthen laws that prevent abortion, get rid of activist judges and bureaucrats and defund Planned Parenthood.

On same-sex marriage, he said a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing traditional marriage is necessary.

Gingrich said he would defund Planned Parenthood and devote those funds to adoption services. He also promised to sign an executive order ensuring that no doctor or nurse can be compelled to perform any activity against their will, and railed against activist judges.

“Most of our major crises in our culture are driven by radical judges who violate the American Constitution, violate American history and do things that are fundamentally destructive,” he said.

Paul said “the family is in serious trouble” but claimed changing laws won’t mean fewer divorces or children born out of wedlock. He said morality “has to come from our heart,” and instead hit on his familiar small-government theme.

“If a government gets too big the family is undermined,” Paul said. “If we resort to the government taking over family responsibilities, whether it’s education, medical care, whatever, then the family is diminished.”

But Paul also noted he supported the Defense of Marriage Act, and said as a doctor he understands life.

“I know when life begins, I know when I assume responsibility for two people because if I do harm to the fetus I can be sued,” Paul said. “So there’s no doubt about the morality or the legality of it.”

Please join Minnesota Independent reporters at 7 p.m. this evening for a live tweet of the Republican presidential debate in Las Vegas, Nev.

Previous debates have included gaffes, accusations and outright inaccuracies. We’ll be here, along with our colleagues nationwide at the American Independent News Network, to offer context and analysis.

Our Twitter feed will be updated live on this page during the debate. Please don’t hesitate to engage with us, we’ll retweet you! The Twitter hashtag for the debate is #CNNDebate, and you can follow the Twitter account of the Minnesota Independent’s reporters @MnIndyLive (also, feel free to follow our story publishing account @MnIndy).

A major disconnect is underway that makes it difficult to know exactly how the caucuses would play out if they were held tonight. That is, the candidates who are surging in polling are those who aren’t spending time in Iowa, a state that values its grassroots, retail politics.

So while the field itself became clearer with the final announcements by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin that they would not seek the nomination, the path out of the caucuses has become more muddy. Social conservatives are rumored to make up 60 percent of GOP caucus-goers in Iowa, and we’ve yet to see them coalesce around a single candidate. Republicans who focus more on fiscal issues also have yet to find a home within the current field.

The situation, according to our group of assembled panelists, has opened a door for individuals previously expected to do “just enough” in the Iowa caucuses due to assembled core support to grab the golden ring of victory.

Here’s how our panel, comprised of grassroots activists, state political reporters, consultants, academics and strategists, believe the caucuses would play out if they were held tonight:

1. Ron Paul — The Texas congressman surges to the top of our rankings for the first time, but not without caution.

   “If the caucuses were held today, [Paul] would win because he’s the only candidate with an excited base and an excellent organization,” a panelist noted.

   “However, the caucuses being held January 3 could hurt him because a lot of his young voters will still be on Christmas break.”

   The panelists have given props to the Paul organization for some time, and there is no denying that the Texan has a core group of supporters that are incredibly loyal and excited. The question, at least for our panelists, has always been if there were enough supporters to compete against a candidate that drew large swaths of social conservatives (i.e., Huckabee in 2008).

   But, in this 15th edition of our rankings, our panelists now see a social conservative base so fractured in the Hawkeye State as to allow Paul’s seemingly limited base — that is, a base that doesn’t appear to be drawing vast numbers of new supporters — to exit Iowa with a victory.

   “Paul has been back in the state, and he is drawing good crowds. But, from what I’ve seen, these are the same people who have been showing up at Paul’s events for ages. There’s not much new blood here, which made a difference in 2008, but may not really matter in 2012.”

   Paul was given an opportunity to shine in the last presidential debate in New Hampshire due to its focus on the economy. The format also, as one of the panelists noted, didn’t lend itself to Paul’s past problems where his differences with others in the field were a focus.

   “He’s also started airing TV ads. The two I’ve seen focus mostly on core Republican issues as one is pro-life and the other concerns national security. These should help him with the Republican base and he might pick up some supporters who are ambivalent about the other candidates. Then again, I don’t think he’ll pick up many. Those who don’t want to go with Romney will be looking mostly at other choices. Like Romney, Paul has been through this before and is a known quantity for most likely caucusgoers. As such, it’s unlikely that we would see any surge for him.”

2. Mitt Romney — Speaking of the former Massachusetts governor, he and Paul are separated in this edition by less than two percent. Our panelists believe that Romney’s long-standing core support in Iowa, combined with the inability thus far of the “anti-Romney contingent” to find a suitable home with a specific candidate would allow him to exit Iowa in very good shape if the caucuses were held tonight.

   “The biggest problem Romney has had in Iowa is the group of social conservatives that find him uniquely undesirable,” wrote a panelist. “Whether that is because of his religion or for other reasons, it doesn’t really matter because these are individuals who won’t simply not support him, but individuals who will actively pursue a strategy to prevent him from exiting Iowa with a victory. In the past that has meant some supporting a candidate they otherwise would not, just because they see an opportunity to elevate someone ahead of Romney.

   “I think we saw that in 2008 with the Arkansas governor. Yes, Huckabee had good support, but there were some who viewed his candidacy as the anti-Romney campaign, even when they knew Huckabee was not likely to go the distance.”

   And that last point of electability might be the one place where Romney bests Paul and other members of the GOP field.

   “His support has been steady. He has had good debate performances and is generally well versed on the issues. He isn’t great at retail politics, but isn’t horrible either. People know his weaknesses and may be willing to look past them if they believe he has the best chance to beat Obama, which is the key factor for most Republicans. To the extent that the ‘not Romney’ candidates continue to split the support of both social conservatives and tea partiers, Romney could be the caucus winner.”

   Another panelists put it even more bluntly, “Regardless of how hard Romney is working Iowa, he still looks like the candidate most likely to defeat the President due to his message discipline.”

3. Herman Cain — The Atlanta businessman is seeing a national surge, which didn’t go unnoticed by our panelists. But it is also difficult to see a path to a Cain victory in Iowa due to lack of organization.

   “Each of the candidates have come to Iowa, stood up and presented themselves as ‘not Romney,’ but that can only take you so far — as they’ve all hopefully realized by now. Cain was one of many and found to be lacking shortly after coming on the scene. Iowans are willing to take another look, but there had better be some substance there this time around or it will be a very short look.”

   Cain has another big problem in the Hawkeye State: visibility. He hasn’t returned to Iowa since the Straw Poll, which makes is rather difficult for grassroots activists to kick the tires. He does, however, plan to return to the state this weekend and those stops will likely provide a clearer picture of his caucus hopes.

   “I do love to hear Cain speak. I like his passion and the energy he leaves behind in the room. But if he isn’t going to be in Iowa building that energy, building an organization that will push people to their caucus site, he isn’t going to do well in Iowa. He has got to be on the ground, and he’s got to be serious. We’ve already got the ‘teleprompter president’ and Iowans don’t want another person who can speak well but accomplish nothing. He’s got to show us more than a good speech.”

   Another panelists agrees. “Cain could argue that he’s managed to increase his popularity in Iowa despite not having been here in over two months. That’s true, but there’s a big difference between telling a pollster that you like Cain and whether you would go out to caucus for him on a January evening. Like Bachmann and Perry before him, Cain is — and I hate to use this phrase, but I suppose it fits — the flavor of the month. In other words, the candidate that many are looking to at the moment to fill the not-Romney slot. … Right now, there are probably enough supporters who would turn out for Cain that he would finish in the top five, but I think he has a lot of work to do to seal the deal, and it doesn’t seem that he’s planning on doing it.”

4. Rick Perry — The honeymoon has officially come to an end for the Texas governor.

   There is one aspect of Perry’s candidacy in which our panelists all agree: horrible, horrible, horrible debate performances. While national debates typically aren’t enough to toss someone out of the running, especially in retail-heavy Iowa, they do make an impression.

   “Perry remains on a downward slide, with no end in sight until he finds a game-changer.”

   Perry has been back in Iowa and has emphasized his successes in meeting one-on-one. He has reached out to Iowa supporters and potential supporters in the wake of his dismal debate performances. But it might be too little, too late.

   “There was a rocky start for Perry in Iowa to begin with because of the way his announcement seemed to step on the Ames Straw Poll. It was good that he came into the state right after that announcement and began retail politics here — something he seems to be pretty good at doing. But no matter how much I like him as a person, no matter how much I think he might be a good leader, all I have to do is imagine him on a national stage with Obama and I cringe. We can’t afford another four years of Obama, and the general election isn’t a retail contest.”

5. Rick Santorum — After many months of beating the Iowa bushes, it appears that the former senator from Pennsylvania is finally beginning to gain traction in Iowa.

   “Santorum continues to put in the most effort in Iowa. He raised less than a million dollars for the third quarter, but he is keeping his spending low. Santorum may very well be the ‘under-the-radar’ candidate of this caucus season. Because of his lack of finances he’s been relying on grassroots campaigning. Moreover, he’s bee going to many of the smaller counties that other candidates have not. At last count Santorum has been to nearly 70 of Iowa’s 99 counties. That effort may not be showing up in the polls, but it might do well for him on caucus night.”

   “We know that some Iowans have been sampling the candidates and hopping around quite frequently. First they were with Huckabee, then moved to Bachmann and then to Perry. As each of those campaigns have fallen off — at least Huckabee was by his own design — those tepid supporters are looking for a home. Some have gravitated to Cain, but others are moving toward Santorum. All Santorum needs to do is keep them, and not make any big mistakes. His base will grow.”

   It’s difficult for our panelists to predict if a compressed caucus season helps or hinders Santorum, who is mostly considered a “slow burn” candidate. Obviously, he doesn’t have the support to win the caucuses if they were held tonight, but the vast majority of our panelists view him as someone who’s going to stick around and gather up the stragglers left behind when when the aforementioned ‘flavor of the month’ isn’t quite as tasty.

   “Each day that Bachmann fails to go on offense, and Perry continues to implode, increases the chances he will be the surprise of these caucuses.”

For the first time in weeks, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann failed to garner enough support to be listed in our top five. She came in sixth for this edition, only a hair behind Santorum.

Bachmann appears to also be suffering from the syndrome of electability and, interestingly enough, her messaging in Iowa for caucus-goers not to “settle” seems to be somewhat backfiring.

“When [Bachmann] told us to support our values, I understood what she was saying. She wants us to support what we believe in our hearts, to vote and caucus based on our principles. But we already tried that with Huckabee and that got us McCain and we lost the White House. So if the choice is between supporting someone who is 100 percent in alignment with my values or someone who is 70 percent there, but the lesser candidate has a better chance of winning the White House, why wouldn’t I support that other candidate? When everything is said and done, I have to think that 70 percent is better than nothing.”

The panelists agree that Bachmann has a good ground organization in Iowa, but also that she has faltered in overall messaging and by making some big mistakes on the national stage. Retail politics has long been a hit-and-miss game for the Bachmann campaign in Iowa, with the team doing excellent at one event and being plagued by missteps at another. If there was a time for her to rise up, meet the challenge that she’s been presented, this is it.

“I don’t care about flowery speeches. I don’t care about what color her clothes are or if her make-up is perfect. I care about her passion, and I’ve not been seeing it lately. She was hit hard when Perry entered the race, but she has an opportunity to not only win those supporters back, but to show that titanium spine. But if she doesn’t really put herself out there over the next month, this campaign is a loss.”