RNC Ads Debunked

Bush's new attack ad says Kerry voted for higher taxes on Social Security benefits in 1993. That's true, but the proceeds went to shore up Medicare, and Bush didn't propose to repeal the increase in any of his own tax-cut bills.

The ad faults Kerry for voting against proposed tax credits for small businesses that buy health insurance for their workers, which he did. But Kerry has since proposed his own, larger tax credits for the same purpose.

The ad says Kerry supported a 50-cent-a-gallon increase in gasoline taxes, which is also true. But that was a decade ago and Kerry's support was lukewarm at best.

Bush's ad claims Kerry's "plan" will increase taxes by $900 billion, which Kerry denies.

The Bush-Cheney TV spot made public March 25 is a good example of why 30-second ads are a poor way to learn about complex policy matters such as taxes. What's left out is the context needed for understanding.

Bush-Cheney '04 Ad "Differences" Bush: I’m George W. Bush and I approve this message. Announcer: John Kerry’s economic record:  Troubling. Kerry voted to increase taxes on Social Security benefits. And, he voted against giving small businesses tax credits to buy health care for employees. Kerry even supported raising taxes on gasoline 50-cents a gallon. Now John Kerry’s plan will raise taxes by at least 900 billion dollars his first hundred days in office.  And that’s just his first 100 days.

Taxing Social Security

It's true as the ad states that Kerry voted to increase taxes on Social Security benefits, but that's far from the whole story. The vote was actually for a massive deficit-reduction package in 1993 that included tax increases falling almost exclusively on the highest-earning 1 percent of households.

Included was an increase in the amount of Social Security benefits subject to income taxation, true enough. But the increase was only for those with relatively high income -- over $44,000 a year for a married couple. The large majority of Social Security recipients are not affected. The Treasury Department estimates that 8.3 million taxpayers will be hit by the increases Social Security levy in 2004 -- and there are 47 million who get Social Security benefits.

Also not mentioned in the Bush ad is the fact that proceeds from the 1993 increase on Social Security benefits go exclusively to the Medicare trust fund -- $8.3 billion last year, according to the just-released report of the Medicare trustees. That's one reason neither party is itching to repeal the increase. Bush didn't propose a repeal in either his 2001 tax-cut bill or his 2003 tax-cut bill. And all but two Senate Republicans voted against repeal in 2003 when Democrats proposed it as an alternative to cutting the tax rate on stock dividends to 15%, and speeding up reductions in the top income-tax rates. Kerry voted for the repeal, which was defeated 49-51 on May 15, 2003.

Taxing Gasoline?

Kerry's support for a 50-cent-per-gallon increase in the federal tax on gasoline was so brief and lukewarm that it was barely noted at the time -- a decade ago. One Boston Globe news story from 1994 quotes Kerry as complaining that the Concord Coalition's scorecard had not rated him highly enough as a deficit-cutter: "It doesn’t reflect my $43 billion package of cuts or my support for a 50-cent increase in the gas tax," the Globe quoted Kerry as saying. But neither the Bush-Cheney campaign nor FactCheck.org turned up any direct report of how and when Kerry had actually backed the 50-cent increase. Kerry sponsored no such bill in the Senate, and did not add his name to a bill offered by Sen. Charles Robb in 1993, to increase the gasoline tax 10 cents per gallon each year for five years.

Health Insurance Incentive?

The Bush ad faults Kerry for voting against tax credits for small businesses to purchase health insurance for their employees. It's true that Kerry voted against such a measure in 2001, as did all other Senate Democrats except Georgia's Zell Miller, who's now backing Bush.

But the Bush ad fails to mention that Kerry now supports bigger tax incentives of his own, as part of his health-care plan. What he voted against in 2001 was a proposal by Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine to provide $70 billion over 10 years in tax credits to small business. But Kerry's own health-care plan says: "Refundable tax credits for up to 50%of the cost of coverage will be offered to small businesses and their employees to make health care more affordable." Emory University professor Kenneth Thorpe estimates that those tax credits alone amount to $79 billion over 10 years, and says other portions of Kerry's health plan would benefit small-business employees by even more.

A $900-billion Increase?

The Bush ad once again says Kerry will raise taxes $900 billion in his first 100 days in office, something Kerry denies. We've dealt with this before . Kerry has proposed no such increase. However, he has said he'd repeal Bush tax cuts for persons making more than $200,000 a year, but hasn't disclosed details of how he would do that or how much revenue he would expect to gain that way. Kerry has yet to explain how he can pay for his spending proposals, cut the deficit in half in four years as he has promised to do, and grant further tax cuts to middle-income taxpayers as he has also promised to do.

US Department of Health and Human Services, "2004 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds," Table I.C1.-Medicare Data for Calendar Year 2003 Washington DC 24 March 2004: p3.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 108th Congrees - 1st Session S.Amdt 556 to S. 1054 Vote #149 15 May 2003.

Jill Zuckman, “Deficit-Watch Group Gives High Marks To 7 N.E. Lawmakers,” The Boston Globe, 1 March 1994.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congrees - 1st Session S.Amdt. 349 to S.Amdt. 170 to H.Con.Res. 83 Vote #83 5 April 2001.

John Kerry, "JOHN KERRY’S PLAN TO MAKE HEALTH CARE AFFORDABLE TO EVERY AMERICAN" Undated.

Telephone interview with Prof. Kenneth Thorpe, Emory University, 26 March 2004.

A Bush ad that's been running heavily quotes various newspapers as saying Kerry engaged in "doublespeak" on Iraq, advocates tax increases that would "kill the recovery" and "waffled" on education reforms. The quotes are mostly accurate. Not mentioned, however, is that those statements are editorials -- not news reports. In other words they are opinions, not facts.

One bit of exaggeration in the ad: Kerry's stand on Bush's education reforms isn't the total flip-flop it portrays. The ad says Kerry now "opposes" the reforms he once voted for. In fact, Kerry says he still supports the goals of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act but wants some changes to improve it, and more money than Bush has provided.

One article quoted is not an editorial. The National Journal rated Kerry's voting record in 2003 the most liberal of any senator. The ad gets that right.

This ad was released April 21 but has been running heavily of late. We've had queries about it from our subscribers. It doesn't contain any blatant deceptions, but it does raise questions that call for elaboration and additional context.

Bush Cheney '04 Ad "Doublespeak"

Bush: I'm George W. Bush and I approve this message.

Announcer: John Kerry says, "A lot of people don't really know who I am."

Well, actually, a lot of people do.

Kerry's hometown paper says, "In his continuing effort to be all things to all voters . . . John Kerry is engaging in a level of doublespeak that makes most voters wince."

The Wall Street Journal said Kerry's tax plan "would mean increasing the tax burden again, which would likely kill the recovery."

On Iraq, The Washington Post said "Kerry's attempts to weave a thread connecting and justifying [his] positions are unconvincing."

The Union Leader says Kerry has "waffled" on historic education reforms he supported in 2001, but now opposes.

And the non-partisan National Journal magazine ranks Kerry the most liberal member of the Senate - more liberal than Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy.

John Kerry's problem is not that people don't know him. It's that people do.

"Kerry's Hometown Paper"

Not mentioned in the ad is that the "hometown paper" it quotes, the Boston Herald, endorsed Bush in the 2000 election, and that the same newspaper at other times has had glowing things to say about Kerry's leadership.

It is also a bit misleading to call the Herald "Kerry's hometown paper" in the first place. Actually, the Herald is the smaller of Boston's two daily newspapers. According to the Audit Bureau of Circulation, the Herald's average weekday circulation for the six months ended March 31 was 248,988. The larger Boston Globe's weekday circulation for the same period was 452,109. And on Sundays, the Globe outsells the Herald four-and-a-half to one.

The ad does quote the Herald editorial accurately and in context. The Herald was referring to Kerry's labored explanation of his vote against an $87-billion emergency supplemental appropriation for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. Kerry voted for a Democratic proposal, which was defeated, to fund the $87 billion by scaling back Bush's tax cuts. Then he voted against the appropriation itself.

Boston Herald editorial: (T)he Massachusetts senator slipped into Kerry-speak: "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it," he said. If that isn't enough to convince voters that Kerry is talking out of both sides of his mouth, we can't imagine what is.
In his continuing effort to be all things to all voters - for the Iraq war and against it; for providing support to the military and against it; for providing for an adequate defense and against it - John Kerry is engaging in a level of doublespeak that makes most voters wince.

Worth noting, however, is that even the Herald has had nice things to say about Kerry at times. It endorsed him last year for the Democratic nomination, saying:

Boston Herald editorial: Those of us in Massachusetts who know him best, have never doubted that Kerry is as capable a political leader as any who have sat in the U.S. Senate. . . . John Kerry as a presidential candidate remains a work in progress. But John Kerry as a solid, thoughtful political leader is a well-known commodity around these parts. It is that man, that leader, the Boston Herald is pleased to endorse for his party's presidential nomination.

Naturally, the Bush ad doesn't quote any of that editorial.

"Kill the Recovery?"

The statement that Kerry's tax plan "would likely kill the recovery" comes from the editoral page of the Wall Street Journal , which regularly expresses conservative, pro-Bush views and consistently opposes any tax increases. The editiorial is quoted accurately and in context. Here's a part of it:

Wall Street Journal editorial: The Clinton tax increases and the speculative fever drove government receipts to a peak of 20.8% of GDP. The Bush tax cuts and the bursting of the bubble have brought that figure down to about 16%. If rates are left as they are, as the economy accelerates revenues should stabilize near their postwar average of 18% of GDP.
Mr. Kerry's "fiscal responsibility" would mean increasing the tax burden again, which would likely kill the recovery. And by ruling out the reform of Social Security and Medicare, he makes it inevitable that the long-term fiscal situation will deteriorate rapidly after 2008, when baby boomers start to retire. At that, the call for tax hikes will become a roar.

Of course, it's a matter of opinion whether it would "kill the recovery" to repeal Bush's tax cuts for taxpayers earning over $200,000 a year, as Kerry proposes. The Journal gives no authority for that sweeping prediction. Another view is that continuing large deficits that have materialized under Bush now pose a threat to future economic growth. For example, in remarks May 6 to a banking conference, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan spoke of "our yawning federal deficit" and said it poses "a significant obstacle to long-term stability." Greenspan noted that the budget deficit is currently projected to equal more than 4% of US economic output, after being in surplus a few years ago. There was no mention of that in the Bush ad either, naturally.

Kerry's Iraq Position "Unconvincing?"

The Washington Post editorial criticizing Kerry's stands on Iraq is also quoted accurately in context. And this one comes from a newspaper that leans generally in favor of Democrats. The editorial appeared Feb. 15:

Washington Post editorial: The most important confusion surrounds Mr. Kerry's position on Iraq. In 1991 he voted against the first Persian Gulf War, saying more support was needed from Americans for a war that he believed would prove costly. In 1998, when President Clinton was considering military steps against Iraq, he strenuously argued for action, with or without allies. Four years later he voted for a resolution authorizing invasion but criticized Mr. Bush for not recruiting allies. Last fall he voted against funding for Iraqi reconstruction, but argued that the United States must support the establishment of a democratic government.

Mr. Kerry's attempts to weave a thread connecting and justifying all these positions are unconvincing. He would do better to offer a more honest accounting.

"Waffled" on Education?

The Bush ad relies on the Manchester, New Hampshire Union Leader -- one of the nation's most conservative newspapers -- for the charge that Kerry "waffled" and now "opposes" the education reforms he once supported. Actually, Kerry doesn't oppose Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, and states that he still supports its goals of greater accountability. What Kerry has often criticized is what he calls Bush's failure to provide enough money to fund the new requirements that the law places on states. Kerry also is calling for "changes" in the law that would rate school performance on "more than just test scores" and create "rewards" for states that set high standards to shoot for. Kerry says such states are now penalized if they fail to reach the standards, creating an incentive to set standards low.

The Union Leader did indeed accuse Kerry of having "waffled" to appease a large teachers union, but stopped short of accusing him of opposing the Bush reforms themselves, as the ad claims:

Manchester Union Leader editorial: Speaking before the New Hampshire chapter of the National Education Association last week, John Kerry waffled on his vote for the No Child Left Behind Act, which the teacher lobby hates. He can't pander to the group by bashing the bill because he voted for it. So he criticizes Bush for not fully funding it.

"Most Liberal?"

It is a fact as the ad states that the National Journal, a politically neutral periodical focusing on policy-makers in Washington, rated Kerry the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate based on his voting record in 2003. In fact, it was the fourth time in his Senate career that Kerry has been rated as having the most liberal voting record. The three other "most liberal" ratings came during his first Senate term, in 1986, 1988, and 1990. The National Journal has been rating members of both House and Senate on a liberal-conservative scale since 1981.

It's true that Kerry was absent (due to his presidential campaign schedule) for 37 of the 62 votes that the National Journal selected for their analysis. However, the publication said those missed votes were all in the areas of social policy and foreign policy, where Kerry "consistently took the liberal view within the Senate." On economic policy votes, the National Journal said Kerry earned a "perfect liberal score" last year.
Summing up: Overall, this ad rates fairly high for accuracy, in contrast with other Bush ads we've criticized as misleading. But it could lead voters to confuse editorial opinions with statements of fact.

Audit Bureau of Circulation, figures for Boston newspapers accessed from website on 24 May 2004.

Editorial; "How's that again, Senator?" Boston Herald 18 March 2004: A36.

Editorial: "Kerry as Fiscal Conservative," Wall Street Journal 9 April 2004: A8.

Alan Greenspan "Globalization and Innovation," remarks at the Conference on Bank Structure and Competition, sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 6 May 2004.

Editorial endorsement: "Sen. John Kerry Dems' best leader," Boston Herald 22 Jan 2004: A30.

Editorial: "Waffle house: Democrats pander to special interests," The Union Leader 11 Aug. 2003: A10.

John Kerry, "Detailed Plan to Strengthen Public Schools," statement of education policy on campaign website, accessed 24 May 2004.

Richard Cohen, "How They Measured Up," 2003 VOTE RATINGS, National Journal 28 Feb 2004.

The President misled voters and reporters in a March 20 speech when he claimed that Kerry “voted over 350 times for higher taxes on the American people” during his 20-year Senate career. Bush spoke of “yes” votes for “tax increases.”
But in fact, Kerry has not voted 350 times for tax increases, something Bush campaign officials have falsely accused Kerry of on several occasions. On close examination, the Bush campaign’s list of Kerry’s votes for “higher taxes” is padded. It includes votes Kerry cast to leave taxes unchanged (when Republicans proposed cuts), and even votes in favor of alternative Democratic tax cuts that Bush aides characterized as “watered down.”

To be sure, Kerry has cast votes to increase taxes, and he's clearly on record favoring raising taxes on persons making over $200,000 a year, if he's elected. It's a major difference between the two candidates. But Bush aides have been falsely accusing Kerry for weeks of casting far more votes for tax increases than is the case. And now the President himself has joined in the misleading attack.

Bush’s campaign manager Ken Mehlman told CNN’s Judy Woodruff on March 12 that “Senator Kerry . . . supported 350 tax increases over the course of his career.” And again on March 16 Mehlman told CNN’s Candy Crowley: “This is a senator who has voted 350 times to raise taxes during the course of his career.” Commerce Secretary Don Evans also said in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on March 10 that Kerry “has voted to increase taxes some 350 times.” And both Fox News and MSNBC quoted Bush’s campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt as saying March 11: "John Kerry has voted for higher taxes 350 times and his numbers for new spending don't add up."

The President chose his words somewhat more carefully than did his aides, but still clearly conveyed the idea that Kerry had voted 350 times to raise taxes above current levels. Here's what he said a political rally in Florida March 20:

Bush: Senator Kerry is one of the main opponents of tax relief in the United States Congress. However, when tax increases are proposed, it's a lot easier to get a "yes" vote out of him. Over the years, he's voted over 350 times for higher taxes on the American people --

Audience: Booo!

So it was no surprise when several news organizations quoted President Bush as saying just what his campaign spokesman and his campaign manager had been saying.

The Associated Press said Bush depicted Kerry "as a serial tax-raiser who has voted for tax increases 350 times.” United Press International said Bush "accused Kerry of voting over the past 20 years for tax increasing legislation some 350 times." The New York Times reported: Mr. Bush said Mr. Kerry had voted 350 times to raise taxes in his nearly two decades in the Senate," and The Palm Beach Post said: "The President accused the Massachusetts senator of voting to raise taxes more than 350 times."

So reporters were misled, as were probably many ordinary voters who listened to the President's speech. In fact, even the President's own campaign organization now admits Kerry didn't vote for tax increases 350 times, or anything close to it.

When pressed for a list of Kerry's 350 votes, the Bush campaign quickly supplied FactCheck.org with one document listing 352 votes and a second listing an additional 27 votes. But a campaign official cautioned: “It is important to note that these are votes for higher taxes, not necessarily tax increases , meaning it includes votes against tax cuts.” (Emphasis added by FactCheck.org). In other words, what the campaign's manager and chief spokesman had been saying was wrong. And even the President's phrasing -- saying Kerry voted for "higher taxes" 350 times -- is not only misleading but actually misled several news professionals. It's simply untrue that Kerry voted for tax increases 350 times.

The Bush lists of 379 votes is padded with scores of votes Kerry cast against tax decreases (which would leave taxes unchanged, not higher), votes to reduce the size of proposed tax cuts (which would leave taxes lower, though not as much lower as proposed), and “votes for watered-down, Democrat ‘tax cut’ substitutes” (which often proposed to distribute the benefits of tax cuts farther down the income scale than Republican proposals). Thus the Bush campaign counts some votes for tax cuts as votes for "higher taxes."

Among the votes the Bush campaign documents count as votes for “higher taxes” are the following:

• A 1985 vote to offset a proposed increase in Medicare premiums by preventing the tax on cigarettes from dropping to 8 cents a pack from 16 cents, as it was scheduled to do. Taxes would have remained at 16 cents a pack.


• A 1986 vote against a non-binding resolution to express the “sense of the Senate” that hazardous-waste “superfund” cleanup shouldn’t be paid for by a broad-based tax on manufacturers, but by some unspecified alternative source. Taxes would have remained the same.


• A 1987 vote against repealing a “windfall profits” tax on oil. Taxes would have remained the same.


• A 1989 vote to sustain a Democratic filibuster against a proposed cut in the capital-gains tax. Taxes would have remained the same.

None of these votes would have resulted in a tax increase, and most of the votes on the Bush lists are like that. Whether they would have resulted in "higher taxes" depends: higher than what? Bush campaign officials argue that in each of the votes they list, Kerry was presented with alternatives and chose the higher of the two. Perhaps the President should have said Kerry voted 350 times for "higher taxes than Republicans prefer."

George W. Bush “President Bush Energizes Florida Supporters at First Rally of the 2004 Campaign” Transcript of Campaign Speech at Orange County Convention Center, Orlando, Florida 20 March 2004.

Nancy Benac, “Bush, at 1st Voter Rally, Carps at Kerry” Associated Press 21 March 2004.

Richard W. Stevenson, “At Rally in Vital State, Bush Attacks Kerry on Economy,” The New York Times 21 March 2004: A18.

Brian E. Crowley, “Bush Brings it On: Thousands Cheer Views on Taxes, Security, Iraq,” Palm Beach Post 21 March 2004: A1.

Richard Tomkins, “Bush Rallies Florida Supporters,” United Press International 20 March 2004.

Mike Allen, “Bush Turns to Fla. To Set Aggressive Pace; Rally Kicks Off Intensive Grass-Roots Campaign,” Washington Post 21 March 2004: A5.

Ken Mehlman, interview, Judy Woodruff’s Inside Politics, Cable News Network 12 March 2004.

Ken Mehlman, interview, Judy Woodruff’s Inside Politics, Cable News Network, 16 March 2004.

Don Evans, interview, CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports, Cable News Network, 10 March 2004.

Kerry Comment Riles Bush Campaign, Fox News 11 March 2004.

Bush, Kerry Trade Jabs on Economy, MSNBC.com 11 March 2004.