The Facts: Watchdogs find false and misleading claims by both parties

Published: October 24, 2004

An analysis by factcheck.org shows that both major parties in the presidential campaign run television commercials making false or misleading claims.

A Republican party ad twists a Kerry quote about terrorism. A Kerry ad implies middle-income taxpayers are paying more taxes than ??the wealthiest," which isn?t true. A Bush ad repeats a baseless claim that Kerry?s health-care plan will wrench medical decisions from doctors and patients. Another Kerry ad blames Bush for long-standing tax incentives for companies keeping capital overseas.

Detailed reports and video clips of the commercials are available at www.factcheck.org, which is operated by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Here are synopses of the Web site?s analysis of some specific television commercials:

??WHO KNOWS??

By the Republican National Committee

Announcer: ??John Kerry says we have to get back to the place where terrorists are a nuisance, like gambling and prostitution."

(On Screen: Picture of Kerry. ??Terrorists are a nuisance.")

Announcer: ??Terrorists a nuisance? Terrorists have declared war on America, brutally murdering Americans. Against terrorism, is John Kerry too weak? He voted against funding our troops, denying them the safety of body armor. What would John Kerry do as president? No one knows. John Kerry doesn?t even know. The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."

Analysis:

Terrorism a nuisance?

A Republican party ad appeared last week, inviting viewers to think Kerry considers terrorism a ??nuisance" and suggests he?s too ??weak."

Kerry never said he considered terrorism to be a nuisance. He said Americans would feel safe once terrorism was reduced to a nuisance. (The announcer correctly paraphrases Kerry as saying ??we have to get back" to such a condition, but the visual images in the ad will overpower the announcer?s spoken words for many viewers, and the announcer goes on as though Kerry actually had said terrorism isn?t much of a threat at present.)

Kerry?s words are taken from a New York Times Magazine interview published Oct. 10. When asked what it would take to make Americans feel safe again, Kerry actually said this:

??We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they?re a nuisance....Asaformer lawenforcement person, I know we?re never going to end prostitution. We?re never going to end illegal gambling. But we?re going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn?t on the rise. It isn?t threatening people?s lives every day, and fundamentally, it?s something that you continue to fight, but it?s not threatening the fabric of your life."

That?s not much different from what Bush said Aug. 30 on the NBC Today Show when asked whether the war on terror could be won:

??I don?t think you can win it, but I think you can create conditions so that . . . those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world, let?s put it that way."

Both men were attacked by partisan opponents for expressing these sentiments and have since grown less candid about the prospects for eradicating terrorism entirely. Both have hardened their words. Bush says he will ??win" the war on terror. Kerry says he ??will kill the terrorists."

??THE TRUTH ABOUT TAXES??

By the Kerry-Edwards campaign

Kerry: ??Here?s the truth about taxes. After nearly four years under George Bush, the middle class is paying the bigger share of America?s tax burden and the wealthiest are paying less. It?s wrong. We need to cut taxes on the middle class, not raise them. We also need to get health-care costs under control and lower our nation?s deficit. I don?t believe the wealthy need another tax cut. I believe ordinary Americans need someone who will fight for them. I?m John Kerry, and I approved this message."

Analysis:

The bigger share of taxes?

Actually, all income groups have seen their burden reduced. Kerry?s wording in the commercial that appeared last week could lead some to think middle-income taxpayers are paying more of the tax burden than upper-income taxpayers, which is false.

Figures from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center show that even after Bush?s tax cuts, the most affluent 20 percent of taxpayers still pay 63 percent of all U.S. taxes, including income, payroll and excise taxes. Those in the middle 20 percent pay 10.5 percent, a much smaller share. So, strictly speaking, the highest-income taxpayers still pay the larger share of taxes than the other 80 percent.

What Kerry has said previously is that middleincome taxpayers pay a larger share - meaning a larger share than they did before, and not a larger share than more affluent groups. And it?s true that people in the middle 20 percent have seen their share of the tax burden go up - by .002 percent - even as their taxes have come down. Those between the top and middle groups have seen their share of the burden go up 0.7 percent. On the other hand, those in the lowest two groups have seen very slight declines in the share of all taxes they pay, as well as in the amount of taxes they pay, something Kerry doesn?t mention when talking about the burden on the ??middle."

??YOUR DOCTOR??

By the Bush-Cheney campaign

Announcer: ??John Kerry and liberals in Congress have a health-care plan. It includes the IRS, Treasury Department and several massive, new government agencies. Your doctor? In there somewhere, but not in charge. This $1.5 trillion government program puts bureaucrats - not your doctor - in charge of your health-care decisions. One more reason we can?t risk the liberals in Congress and John Kerry."

Bush: I?m George W. Bush, and I approved this message.

Analysis:

There is no evidence to support the claim that bureaucrats will replace doctors in guiding an individual?s health care. Kerry?s plan would expand existing programs, such as Medicaid, to millions who aren?t covered by any insurance, and it would create expensive federal subsidies to bring down the cost of private insurance by paying for 75 percent of ??catastrophic" costs exceeding $30,000 per patient in any given year.

Republicans have argued that this would inevitably lead to increased federal oversight and even ??rationing" of health care, but neutral experts don?t agree. The Lewin Group, an independent firm that is often hired both by Republicans and Democrats to analyze health-care issues, estimates that under Kerry?s plan, 97 percent of all those who currently have insurance will simply keep the coverage they already have.

??INCENTIVES??

By the Kerry-Edwards campaign

??The president has made a choice of a policy that actually uses your tax money to reward the company that goes overseas. You explain the common sense of that to me, ladies and gentlemen. You?re giving an incentive to a company to go overseas. And when I?m president, my choice, we?re closing those tax loopholes, and we?re using the money to invest in companies that make jobs here. I?m John Kerry, and I approve this message."

Analysis:

Bush?s ??choice" has been to maintain the status quo, opposing a Kerry proposal to change the law.

In the ad that ran heavily two weeks ago, Kerry is referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that has existed through both Democratic and Republican administrations since the corporate income tax was first adopted. Economists say it is a relatively minor factor in the decisions companies make to locate jobs overseas. Even Kerry admits his own tax-change proposal won?t end the ??outsourcing" of jobs overseas.