Fact-checking the first presidential debate of the 2024 race

The first debate of the 2024 presidential race, among eight Republicans, featured some claims that were false or "misleading at best," CNN reports.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said the federal government locked down the economy during the pandemic while Florida "kept our state free and open," when in fact he "imposed significant restrictions" at the start of the pandemic, CNN's Daniel Dale said on the cable channel's post-debate report. The restrictions were imposed by states, not by the then-President Trump.

Former Vice President Mike Pence said the Trump-Pence administration spent money "to backfill on the military cuts of the Obama administration," but that's misleading, CNN’s Haley Britzky writes: "While military spending decreased under the Obama administration, it was largely due to the 2011 Budget Control Act, which received Republican support and resulted in automatic spending cuts to the defense budget." Pence, an Indiana congressman at the time, voted for the law.

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said Trump, who did not participate in the debate, added $8 trillion to the national debt. The figure is accurate, but "The increase in the debt during any president’s tenure is not the fault of that president alone," CNN notes. "A significant amount of spending under any president is the result of decisions made by their predecessors – such as the creation of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid decades ago – and by circumstances out of a president’s control, notably including the global Covid-19 pandemic under Trump."

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina said the Biden administration is calling “parents that show up at school board meetings . . .  domestic terrorists.” That is false, CNN’s Hannah Rabinowitz writes: "The claim stems from a 2021 letter from the National School Boards Association asking the Justice Department to 'deal with' the uptick in threats against education officials and saying that 'acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials' could be classified as 'the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes'." Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo encouraging federal and local authorities to work together against such harassment campaigns "but never endorsed the 'domestic terrorism' notion," Rabinowitz writes.

Trump, who counter-programmed the debate with an online interview, "did not receive any pushback from pundit Tucker Carlson after promoting false statements about the 2020 election," reports Dominic Mastrangelo of The Hill.

House Republicans consider making Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) part of debt-limit fight

House Republicans are "considering new work requirements or general cuts to federal food assistance in the brewing debt limit fight," Politico reports. That could complicate work on the new five-year Farm Bill, in which the big ticket is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

House Appropriations Committeee Chair Kay Granger confirmed to Politico's Weekly Agriculture that the ideas are being considered. “We're still looking at it. Haven't made a decision yet,” Granger said when asked if food assistance spending cuts or new SNAP work requirements are on the table.

"Some Republicans think they’ll have a better chance of pursuing their yearslong effort to cut back on SNAP spending and add work requirements in debt negotiations rather than in the Farm Bill, where Democrats are likely to strip it out," Meredith Lee Hill and Garrett Downs report.

But Agriculture Committee Chair G.T. Thompson told Politico that he would be “shocked” if SNAP is touched in the debt-ceiling battle. "He wants to leave any SNAP discussions for the Farm Bill talks," Hill and Downs report. "Emergency pandemic-era SNAP benefits are ending this month. And, work requirements that had been paused during the pandemic are returning as well as the public health emergency is set to end in May."

Thompson, who was on food stamps (now SNAP) as a young adult, said, “I don't think it's appropriate, especially given the fact that so many families are struggling under this Biden inflation . . . which makes it tough.”

But the talk of work requirements "is sure to bring back congressional debate over able-bodied adults without dependents," Hill and Downs write. "ABAWDs are usually the target of imposed work requirements, but vulnerable populations might not be able to verify their work."

Fact checkers say Trump off base on issues such as Iran deal, Syrian refugees, cost of regulation

During his speech Thursday at the Republican National Convention, presidential nominee Donald Trump said, "I will present the facts plainly and honestly. The carefully-crafted lies, and the media myths the Democrats are holding their convention next week. But here, at our convention, there will be no lies. We will honor the American people with the truth, and nothing else." (Post photo by Ricky Carioti)

According to the Fact Checker column of The Washington Post, Trump followed that statement with a lengthy list of incorrect assertions. Politifact, NBC News, The New York Times and FactCheck.org offered similar reviews of Trump's presentation.

Trump said the nuclear deal with Iran “gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us absolutely nothing." Kessler and Lee write, "Trump frequently misstates the facts about the Iran deal, making it sound like the United States simply shipped $150 billion of taxpayers’ funds to Iran. This was always Iran’s money, frozen in banks around the world, but $150 billion is the high estimate of the money that could be received."

"The Treasury Department says the figure is in the range of $100 to $125 billion, but the usual liquid assets would only be about $50 billion, as the rest of the assets are either obligated in illiquid projects (such as over 50 projects with China) that cannot be monetized quickly, if at all, or are composed of outstanding loans to Iranian entities that cannot repay them," Kessler and Lee write. "For its part, the Central Bank of Iran said the number was actually $32 billion. Reasonable people can disagree on the merits of the Iran deal, but it’s a stretch to say 'nothing' was received. Iran’s nuclear program was certainly put on ice for at least a decade."

Speaking of Syrian refugees, Trump said, "there’s no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from," Kessler and Lee write, "The process of vetting refugees starts with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and then continues with checks by U.S. intelligence and security agencies. It takes one to two years, or longer in some cases." Politifact has a detailed description of the process.

Trump said, "Excessive regulation is costing our country as much as $2 trillion a year." Kessler and Lee write, "Trump presents an unbalanced figure here. Various organizations, such as the Small Business Administration, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Competitive Enterprise Institute have come up with similar estimates on the cost of regulations. But there is one huge element missing—the benefit side of the analysis. Every regulation has costs—but also benefits. Look at cars, for example. Seat belts are a regulation, but they also result in fewer deaths, which is presumably a benefit. Higher fuel-economy standards raise the initial cost of a car, but also result in savings on gasoline over time." (Read more)

Beyond the fact checkers, other journalists took issue with Trump. NYT columnist David Brooks said the nominee's focus on law and order was "based on a falsehood. Crime rates have been falling almost without fail for 25 years. Murder rates have been rising just recently among gangs in certain cities, but America is much safer than it was a decade ago. In the first half of 2015, for example, the number of shootings in New York and Washington hit historic lows." In his speech, Trump said the Obama adminstration had failed inner cities on crime.

"Trump dwells on illegal aliens killing our children," Brooks wrote. Between 2010 and 2014, only 121 people released from immigration custody later committed murder; that’s about 25 a year. Every death is a horror, but the number of police officers killed each year as a result of a crime is about 55, in a nation of over 320 million people. The number of police deaths decreased by 24 percent between 2005 and 2015."

Next week we will share what fact-checkers have to say about the Democratic convention. These reports excerpt only a small part of what they have to offer.

Fact-checking convention claims on national debt, taxes, Benghazi

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, vice presidential nominee
(Photo from The Detroit News)

The Republican National Convention has completed its third day, and we take a look at what fact-checkers are saying about Wednesday's speeches. The Rural Blog will be providing excerpts from both conventions. If you want to re-publish them, we encourage you to look at The Washington Post's Fact Checker, FactCheck.org or Politifact for full context and things you may want to add. The fact-checkers looked at a lot more assertions yesterday than we have room to publish here.

Donald Trump's running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, "said that Hillary Clinton’s 'only answer' to the debt 'is to keep borrowing and spending,'" Lori Robertson writes for FactCheck. "But the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that Trump’s tax and spending plan would cause a 'massive increase' in the debt, while Clinton’s plan would result in a 'relatively small' increase."

Trump's son Eric "claimed that the U.S. is 'one of the highest-taxed nations in the world,' but U.S. personal taxes aren’t even in the top 10 among industrialized nations," Robertson writes. The U.S. does has one of the highest business-tax rates. "Florida Gov. Rick Scott claimed the U.S. has 'world-record high debt'— it actually ranks 39th out of 178 nations in terms of debt as a percentage of GDP. And he said the U.S. economy is 'not growing,' when it is."

Pence took out of context a Clinton quote about the Benghazi terrorist attacks, which left four Americans dead, report Glenn Kessler and Michelle Ye Hee Lee of the Fact Checker. At a congressional hearing, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) "pressed Clinton repeatedly why she did not directly speak to survivors of the attacks to find out if it had been prompted by a protest, as initial media reports indicated. Her answer was an FBI investigation into the attacks had been launched and that it would have been inappropriate to speak to people who were being interviewed by professionals."

"Johnson called that 'a good excuse' and asserted the administration misled Americans about whether the attacks were preceded by a protest," Kessler and Lee write. Clinton replied: “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”

Pence said Indiana has "a $2 billion surplus, the highest credit rating in the nation, even though we've cut taxes every year since I became governor four years ago." Actually, it's tied with 14 other states for highest, Allison Graves and Neelesh Moorthy write for Politifact.

Trump energy plan doesn't add up, experts say

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump wants to relax the rules on oil and gas drilling, otherwise encourage energy development and cancel the recent multinational agreement to fight climate change.

Speaking in North Dakota last week, Trump also promised to revive the Keystone XL pipeline and restore lost jobs in coal mining, but his claims on that and other points "essentially defy free-market forces," Coral Davenport reports for The New York Times.

In a follow-up story citing several energy experts, Davenport notes that encouraging more gas production would lower prices and further depress demand for coal. She also says Trump's vow to increase oil and gas production runs into some inconvenient facts: U.S. gas production is at a historic high, and oil production "is already higher than it has been in 40 years. . . . At a certain point, production of oil and gas will push prices too low to justify even more production."

Trump also said more oil and gas production from federal lands would substantially reduce the $19 trillion federal debt, but energy economists dismissed that idea, too. Such royalties now net the government less than $10 billion a year in a budget of $3.8 trillion, and "experts say it is difficult to predict a new revenue stream at the scale envisioned by Mr. Trump."

Farm policy writer says GOP leader is delaying Farm Bill for use in talks on budget and debt ceiling

Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va. 

"House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has been instrumental this month in dividing the Farm Bill, stalling the naming of conferees and taking an active role in finding some sort of nutrition sweet spot for his caucus to 'eventually' come to terms on cuts to programs such as food stamps," Chris Clayton writes for DTN The Progressive Farmer. "In the process, he's completely undermined more than two years of work by one of his own chairmen, Agriculture Committee Chair Frank Lucas." 

"Nutrition programs, and the final conference talks on the farm bill, are going to be held hostage this fall for the debt-ceiling debate," Clayton predicts. "Only in the 11th hour, when it looks like those debt-ceiling talks are moving to the brink of another government shutdown, will Cantor decide it's time to advance his pawn. Official conference talks on the farm bill won't happen until the latest debt-ceiling deal determines just what the dollar figure is going to be on nutrition spending."

"Right now, everyone knows the White House and Senate Democrats aren't going to accept the level of cuts the House GOP wants for nutrition programs," Clayton writes. "Thus, there is no point trying to advance a bill if House leaders want to go beyond the $20.5 billion in cuts to food stamps, not negotiate down from that level." (Read more)

Politico examines the impact of mandatory cuts to the federal budget

Officially known as sequestration, the $1.2 trillion in mandatory budget cuts, left as a result of the failed 'supercommittee,' are on track to start in January 2013. Jonathan Allen of Politico has compiled a guide explaining the impact of these cuts on different areas of federal spending.

The $1.2 trillion in cuts will be spread out from 2013 to 2021. Tax increases, the presidential salary and Congressional benefits are off the table in the cuts, Allen reports. The cuts will be split equally among defense and nondefense programs. The result, $984 billion in cuts and $216 billion in savings from interest payments, averages "roughly $54.5 billion per year" for defense and nondefense functions.

The cuts will be divided between mandatory spending, ongoing government programs funded based on qualified participants, and discretionary spending, programs Congress approves each year, Allen reports. Both mandatory and discretionary spending will see a percentage reduction for each program during the first year, but in subsequent years discretionary spending will be further reduced until 2021 leaving Congress deciding which additional programs to cut.

What about health care and farm programs, two areas of specific interest to rural residents? While Medicaid and most of Medicare, except Part B premiums, have been spared with the supercommittee's failure, several provisions in the president's health care law are possible future targets. Click here to read a detailed review of possible health care cuts by Brian Depew of The Center for Rural Affairs.

Agricultural programs are not so lucky, since most subsidies are defined as mandatory spending. With spending cuts looming, "farm-state lawmakers in both chambers and both parties" are scrambling "to come up with a bipartisan plan for deficit reduction in areas under their jurisdiction," Allen writes.

Politico's guide was compiled from interviews and analyses by think tanks, the Congressional Budget Office, the Congressional Research Service and Capitol Hill aides

What is rural impact of supercommittee's failure?

Yesterday the congressional "supercommittee" on deficit reduction failed to reach a deal before its Nov. 23 deadline, meaning sequestration or automatic $1.2 trillion cuts in defense and domestic programs is set to start in 2013. The question remains whether another congressional agreement can be reached before then and if not what programs are likely to get the automatic cuts.

The failure spared Medicaid and Medicare temporarily until the 2 percent automatic cuts designated for health care and defense take effect in 2013, David Nather of Politico reports. Social Security, a disproportionally rural program, is also safe temporarily as the supercommittee's new consumer-price-index model that would have reduced payments to seniors is now off the table, John Allen of Politico reports.

The military did not fare so well, since the debt-ceiling deal creating the supercommittee requires half the cuts to come from defense. The defense industry's chances of blocking the cuts are slim, Allen reports. To read his summary of the winners and losers in the supercommittee failure, click here. To read Bob Cusack of The Hill's breakdown of winners and losers, click here.

The agriculture industry, safe for the moment, must wait as Farm Bill negotiators focus on producing their own legislation before the current authorization expires next September, David Rogers of Politico reports. The agricultural committees proposed $16.7 billion in "outlay savings," or a 27 percent reduction, which would include an end to direct payments and the related Average Cost Revenue Election program giving farmers three options instead. (Read more)

Click here to read The Washington Post's guide to the deficit-and debt rhetoric, by Glenn Kessler.

Obama, Boehner both fudged facts in speeches; FactCheck calls them out and explains reality

The crisis over raising the national debt ceiling has become so dire that it should be of interest even to locally focused news media, which should help readers, listeners and viewers sort out the facts. Last night's dueling speeches by President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner often strayed from the facts or lacked proper context, reports FactCheck, a non-partisan, non-profit service of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

"Obama described raising the debt ceiling as historically 'routine'," FactCheck says, "but this request is the largest in history, even in inflation-adjusted dollars. The president also accused Republicans of favoring tax breaks for oil companies and private jet owners at the expense of Medicare beneficiaries. But those populist tax hikes would not reduce the deficit by even 1 percent."

On the other hand, "Boehner claimed Obama is adamantly against 'fundamental changes' to entitlement programs. In fact, the president has proposed $650 billion in cuts to the future growth of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Similarly, Boehner said Obama 'wants a blank check today' just as the president did six months ago [when he asked Congress to raise the ceiling] but the president has now offered spending cuts of between $1.5 trillion and $1.7 trillion over 10 years, including the entitlement cuts."

For the full report, click here. More to the substance of the debate, FactCheck recently posted an article answering the question "Does Washington have a spending problem or an income problem?" To read it, click here.