Fact check: GOP debate's history flubs
Republican presidential candidates, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, during the Republican presidential candidate debate at the North Charleston Coliseum in Charleston, S.C., Jan. 19, 2012. / AP
WASHINGTON - Mitt Romney perpetuated one unsubstantiated claim, about his record at Bain Capital, and more or less corrected himself on another, about President Obama's health care law, in the latest Republican presidential debate.
His rivals flubbed history, Newt Gingrich blaming a Democratic president for a jobless rate he never had, and Ron Paul painting an idyllic picture of life before Medicare that did not reflect deprivations of that time.
S. Carolina debate: Winners and Losers
Gingrich slams CNN for asking about ex-wife
Romney vows to release tax returns in April
A look at some of the claims in the debate Thursday night and how they compare with the facts:
—-
ROMNEY: "We started a number of businesses; four in particular created 120,000 jobs, as of today. We started them years ago. They've grown — grown well beyond the time I was there to 120,000 people that have been employed by those enterprises. ... Those that have been documented to have lost jobs, lost about 10,000 jobs. So (120,000 less 10,000) means that we created something over 100,000 jobs."
THE FACTS: Romney now has acknowledged the negative side of the ledger from his years with Bain Capital, but hardly laid out the full story. His claim to have created more than 100,000 jobs in the private sector as a venture capitalist remains unsupported.
Romney mentioned four successful investments in companies that now employ some 120,000 people, having grown since he was involved in them a decade or ago or longer. From that, he subtracted the number of jobs that he said are known to have been lost at certain other companies.
What's missing is anything close to a complete list of winners and losers — and the bottom line on jobs. Bain under Romney invested in scores of private companies that don't have the obligation of big publicly traded corporations to disclose finances. Romney acknowledged that he was using current employment figures for the four companies, not the number of jobs they had when he left Bain Capital, yet took credit for them in his analysis.
—-
GINGRICH: "Under Jimmy Carter, we had the wrong laws, the wrong regulations, the wrong leadership, and we killed jobs. We had inflation. We went to 10.8 percent unemployment. Under Ronald Reagan, we had the right job — the right laws, the right regulators, the right leadership. We created 16 million new jobs."
FACT CHECK: Sure, inflation was bad and gas lines long, but under Carter's presidency unemployment never topped 7.8 percent. The unemployment rate did reach 10.8 percent, but not until November 1982, nearly two years into Reagan's first term.
Most economists attribute the jobless increase to a sharp rise in interest rates engineered by then-Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker in an ultimately successful effort to choke off inflation. Unemployment began to fall in 1983 and dropped to 7.2 percent in November 1984, when Reagan easily won re-election.
The economy did add 16 million jobs during Reagan's 1981-1989 presidency. Gingrich's assertion that "we created" them may have left the impression that he was a key figure in that growth. Although Gingrich was first elected to the House in 1978, his first Republican leadership position, as minority whip, began when Reagan left office, in 1989.
—-
PAUL: "I had the privilege of practicing medicine in the early '60s, before we had any government (health care). It worked rather well, and there was nobody on the street suffering with no medical care. But Medicare and Medicaid came in and it just expanded."
THE FACTS: Before Medicare was created in the mid-1960s, only about half of the elderly had private insurance for hospital care, and they were facing rising costs for those policies on their fixed incomes. Medicare was hugely contentious at the time, seen by many doctors as a socialist takeover, but few argued that the status quo could be maintained.
A Health, Education and Welfare Department report to Congress in 1959, during the Republican administration of Dwight Eisenhower, took no position on what the federal government should do but stated "a larger proportion of the aged than of other persons must turn to public assistance for payment of their medical bills or rely on 'free' care from hospitals and physicians."
Paul advocates a return to an era when doctors would treat the needy for free. But even in the old days, charity came with a cost. Research from the pre-Medicare era shows that the cost of free care was transferred to paying customers and the insurance industry.
—-
ROMNEY: "I could have stayed in Detroit, like him, and gotten pulled up in the car company. I went off on my own. I didn't inherit money from my parents. What I have, I earned. I worked hard, the American way."
THE FACTS: It's true there's no evidence Romney's wealthy family gave him a trust fund, or helped him secure a job at Bain Capital, where he would ultimately make his fortune. But it's not entirely the case that his success is wholly the result of his own hard work.
Romney's father, George, was an automobile industry CEO and a Michigan governor. He paid for Mitt to attend the Cranbrook School, a private boarding school in the Detroit area. The education didn't hurt Romney's ability to get into Harvard, where he earned law and business degrees in 1975.
While Romney appears to have gotten a job at Bain out of college on his own, the Boston Globe book "The Real Romney" reports that Romney's parents helped him and his wife buy their first home when he was in his early 20s.
On Thursday night, the Romney campaign did not dispute the finding that Romney's parents helped pay for that house, in the Boston suburb of Belmont.
—-
ROMNEY: "The executive order is a beginning process. It's one thing, but it doesn't completely eliminate Obamacare. ... We have to go after a complete repeal. And that's going to have to have to happen with a House and a Senate, hopefully, that are Republican."
THE FACTS: With that statement, Romney essentially corrected his repeated suggestions in early debates and speeches that he would eliminate President Obama's health care law with a stroke of the pen on his first day in office — a power no president has.
In one variation of the claim, he had vowed in a Sept. 7 debate that on Day One, he would sign an executive order "granting a waiver from Obamacare to all 50 states." This, despite the fact that the law lays out an onerous process for letting individual states off the hook from its requirements, and that process cannot begin until 2017.
Now he acknowledges the political reality that a Republican president would need Republican control of Congress to have a strong shot at repealing the law.
Popular in Politics
- Obama prom pictures surface 122 Comments
- Is President Obama ending the war on terror? 269 Comments
- Now, some unions upset over Obamacare
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen. 89 Comments
- IRS official Lois Lerner placed on leave 130 Comments
- Rand Paul uses 2016 bully pulpit to push Obama on drones
- GOP Rep.: Obama elected because of Reagan's immigration reforms
- Obama forgets to salute while boarding Marine One Play Video
occupy_cbs: "Yes, I'm quite appalled as well, especially when willard romney couldn't address his 'less than middle class' tax rates, after his corporate raiding offshored thousands of jobs, or his Cayman Island offshore accounts that the top 1% use to bypass paying their fair share!"
=====
dillonce: "So are you accusing him of tax evasion, i.e. criminal activity?"
=====
Are you here just to "read between the lines" as well as stuffing words into other peoples' mouths, or just be combative with every poster?
You are the epitome of our toxic political environment today, and apparently only want to make false accusations against other posters.
Sorry, but an ultra-wealthy person like willard romney, hiding his millions in offshore Cayman Islands after destroying middle class jobs and middle class lives as a vulture capitalist, can no more relate to the average American, than the average American can relate to the ultra-wealthy born with a golden spoon stuck up their nether region!
The continuing decline of our country will only be hastened by electing ultra-wealthy people that call corporations, "people."
They do, but it should be totally illegal for congresscritters to invest in anything with insider trading information as well as pushing legislation with a tremendous conflict of interest!
According to speaker boehner's financial disclosure forms, he invested $10,000 to $50,000 each in seven firms that had a stake in Canada's oil sands, the region that produces the oil the pipeline would transport. The firms include six oil companies -- BP, Canadian Natural Resources, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, Devon Energy and Exxon -- along with Emerson Electric, which has a contract to provide the digital automation for the first phase of a $9.4 billion Horizon Oil Sands Project in Canada.
Since his investment is public knowledge, he knows he would profit. The idea that that isn't a conflict of interest is laughable.
Tea-Bagger-Bozos, should have to be factual.
=====
dillonce: "He didn't say during Carter".
=====
Reading comprehension appears to be your biggest problem, since he certainly did attack Carter for everything under the sun including, "We went to 10.8 percent unemployment."
Even the AP writer understood that, and posted the truth, that unemployment was NEVER above 7.8% during the Carter years, but went to 10.8% AFTER the saint ronnie "supply-side economic insanity" of 1981, and remained at 7% or ABOVE for the entire first 6 years under raygun!
Horsefeathers......your need to read between the lines is idiotic!
No wonder he and the house republicans keep pushing for the Keystone EXPORT pipeline, since Americans will not benefit, but BIG OIL and all their investors like speaker boehner will make out like bandits!
=====
louiville12: "maybe because all the company's that manufacture stuff out of oil like these would have to close without a reliable source of oil."
=====
Your SPAMMING is getting very old, just like your fossilized ideas, and I must repeat, that the Keystone EXPORT pipeline will not help America at all either decrease our need to import more OIL or lower the price of our GASoline, but will help insider investors like speaker boehner make more MONEY just like the BIG OIL companies EXPORTING more fuel for tax free profits.
In a first, gas and other fuels are top U.S. export
Dec. 31, 2011
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/story/2011-12-31/united-states-export/52298812/1
Then Canada better start spending that chinese oil money on their defense and not rely on the U.S. to protect them.
Yes, I'm quite appalled as well, especially when willard romney couldn't address his "less than middle class" tax rates, after his corporate raiding offshored thousands of jobs, or his Cayman Island offshore accounts that the top 1% use to bypass paying their fair share!
If you are sincerely upset about "fair share" you should be lobbying for changes to the tax laws. Sniping at people who are legally and ethically working within the current laws gives the impression you are just partisan.
He got a little flustered, but how would this answer have sold?
"I'll release my Income Tax records the day AFTER President Obama releases his college transcripts and his college Admission applications."
The republicans hate FACTS, especially when it comes to insider trading like speaker boehner, since he "invested $10,000 to $50,000 each in seven firms that had a stake in Canada's oil sands, the region that produces the oil the pipeline would transport."
No wonder he and the house republicans keep pushing for the Keystone EXPORT pipeline, since Americans will not benefit, but BIG OIL and all their investors like speaker boehner will make out like bandits!
This article is such a joke.
your comment is.
This president knows poverty firsthand.