Independent Sources See Through The Republicans Myths, Too
Media Matters Action Network compiles dozens of fact checks each week on the fear mongering conducted by conservatives. Here, you'll find fact checks from independent, nonpartisan groups that back up our claims.
FactCheck.org
FactCheck.org Is A Nonpartisan Organization. According to its website, FactCheck.org is "a nonpartisan, nonprofit 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding. The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania...The APPC accepts NO funding from business corporations, labor unions, political parties, lobbying organizations or individuals. It is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation." [FactCheck.org, accessed 8/11/09]
Surgery for Seniors vs. Abortions?
Family Research Council says abortions will trump care for the elderly in public plan.
"In fact, none of the health care overhaul measures that have made it through the committee level in Congress say that abortion will be covered, and one of them explicitly says that no public funds will be used to finance the procedure. Furthermore, none of the bills call explicitly for cuts in Medicare coverage, much less rationing, under a public plan."
England's and Canada's Health Care
Q: Is it true that persons older than 59 can't get heart surgery in England?
A: There's no such prohibition on heart operations in England, as a chain e-mail claims.
This widely forwarded e-mail, targeted to senior citizens and claiming that health care legislation could constitute "senior death warrants," is riddled with false claims.
The anonymous e-mail claims that "[i]n England anyone over 59 cannot receive heart repairs or stents or bypass because it is not covered as being too expensive and not needed." That's false.
We called the United Kingdom's Department of Health and a spokesman told us: "It is not true that anyone aged over 59 years cannot receive heart repairs, stents or bypass surgery on the basis of their age."
False Euthanasia Claims
The claim that the House health care bill pushes suicide is nonsense.
"In truth, that section of the bill would require Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling sessions helping seniors to plan for end-of-life medical care, including designating a health care proxy, choosing a hospice and making decisions about life-sustaining treatment. It would not require doctors to counsel that their patients refuse medical intervention."
Doctor's Orders?
Republicans claim that the new stimulus law says the government will tell physicians what procedures can and can't be performed. It doesn't.
"Conservative politicians have claimed that the stimulus bill requires that doctors follow government orders on what medical treatments can and can't be prescribed. But the bill doesn't say that...
Critics of comparative effectiveness research, which the government has been funding for decades, claim that it will lead to treatment being approved or denied based on costs. Proponents say it will improve the quality of care and can, in some cases, show that more costly treatments aren't as effective as less expensive alternatives. We can't predict what will happen in the future, but we can say that several claims being made about the impact of the bill are simply opinions being passed off as facts."
CPR Administers Bad Facts, Again
The group says premiums could nearly double for those who buy their own insurance. Experts we consulted disagree.
"The latest ad from the group Conservatives for Patients' Rights claims that 'new rules could hike your health insurance premiums 95 percent.' That's misleading...This ad puts forth a new claim, saying that 'new rules could hike your health insurance premiums 95 percent.' That's a startling statement. But it's contradicted by other experts that find premiums would actually go down under the leading proposals in Congress."
Government-Run Health Care?
A conservative group's ad implies Congress is on its way to instituting a British- or Canadian-style health system.
Conservatives for Patients Rights' "ad states that government-run health care systems, in particular those in Britain and Canada, take control away from patients and ration health care. CPR is certainly entitled to state its own view. But the ad implies that the U.S. Congress wants to implement a health system like those in Britain and Canada. That's contrary to what President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress have said."
More Health Care Scare
Could a public insurance plan spell the end of private insurance companies?
"A new ad from Conservatives for Patients' Rights says that a public health insurance plan now being proposed in Congress 'could crush all your other choices, driving them out of existence, resulting in 119 million off their current insurance coverage.'
That's misleading. The 119 million figure comes from an analysis of a plan that would mirror Medicare and be open to every individual and business that wanted it. But that's not the type of public plan President Obama has proposed. Nor is such a plan gaining acceptance on Capitol Hill...
The ad also falsely cites the New York Times as the source of a statement that what's being proposed would leave no consumer choices and 'government in control of your health care.' The Times didn't say that at all. The newspaper was just quoting claims made by insurance companies and members of Congress."
PolitiFact.com
PolitiFact.com Rates The Accuracy Of Political Statements. According to its website, "PolitiFact is a project of the St. Petersburg Times to help you find the truth in politics. Every day, reporters and researchers from the Times examine statements by members of Congress, the president, cabinet secretaries, lobbyists, people who testify before Congress and anyone else who speaks up in Washington. We research their statements and then rate the accuracy on our Truth-O-Meter - True, Mostly True, Half True, Barely True and False. The most ridiculous falsehoods get our lowest rating, Pants on Fire." [PolitiFact.com, accessed 8/11/09]
-
PolitiFact.com
Has Six Levels Of Truth. In regards
to its methods, PolitiFact reports: "When possible, we go to original sources
to verify the claims. We look for original government reports rather than news
stories. We interview impartial experts. We then decide which of our six
rulings should apply:
- TRUE - The statement is accurate and there's nothing significant missing.
- MOSTLY TRUE - The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.
- HALF TRUE - The statement is accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context.
- BARELY TRUE - The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.
- FALSE - The statement is not accurate.
- PANTS ON FIRE - The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim." [PolitiFact.com, accessed 8/11/09, emphasis original]
Seniors and the disabled "will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care." - Sarah Palin, via Facebook
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
Palin 'death panel' claim sets Truth-O-Meter ablaze
Sarah Palin "said that the Democratic plan will ration care and 'my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care.' Palin's statement sounds more like a science fiction movie (Soylent Green, anyone?) than part of an actual bill before Congress. We rate her statement Pants on Fire!"
"Page 992 of the health care bill will 'establish school-based 'health' clinics. Your children will be indoctrinated and your grandchildren may be aborted!'" - Liberty Counsel memo
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
School health clinics would not provide abortions
"We see no language in the three main versions of the bill that would allow school-based clinics, which have a long history of providing basic health services to underprivileged students, to provide abortions. Nor would the clinics even be new - they have been around for three decades. So we rate the claim Pants on Fire!"
"The Democrat-backed health care reform plan 'will require (Americans) to subsidize abortion with their hard-earned tax dollars.'" - John Boehner op-ed
PolitiFact Rating: False
Boehner says Democrats' health care plan would subsidize abortions
"In fact, in a key version of the bill - the one passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee - members went to great pains to include an amendment to ensure that federal money is not used for abortion coverage. Again, things could change as the health reform package works its way through Congress, but for now, we don't see anything to support Boehner's claim that taxpayers would subsidize abortions. And so we rule his statement False."
"The health care reform plan would set limits similar to the 'socialized' system in Britain, where people are allowed to die if their treatment would cost more than $22,000." - Club for Growth ad
PolitiFact Rating: False
Club for Growth's health care ad campaign is misleading
"Although our experts agree that it gets the NICE statistic correct about the British practice, the ad's main point about cost limits is incorrect. There is no such practice in the comparative effectiveness program, nor is it part of the current health reform proposals pending in Congress. The House and Senate bills under consideration would not require the government to decide how much a person's life is worth. As a result, we give the Club for Growth a False."
"President Barack Obama suggested on national TV that the Democratic health care bill 'will have government decide' that a healthy, 100-year-old woman in need of a pacemaker 'should take a pain pill' instead." - Rep. Dan Lungren, floor statement
PolitiFact Rating: False
Lungren says Obama would have government require a centenarian to get a pill, not a pacemaker
Looking at the full transcript, it's clear that Obama voluntarily brought up the example of having to choose between a surgery and a pill. But he did so as a hypothetical example of difficult decisions about medical treatment for older patients. He was not advocating, much less requiring, bureaucrats to make a potentially life-ending decision for a centenarian.
"I don't want bureaucracies making those decisions," Obama said.One can be skeptical about whether Obama's promises to keep the government out of doctor-patient decisionmaking will hold if health care legislation becomes a reality. But Lungren goes beyond that to distort what the president actually said. We rate Lungren's claim False.
The health care plan for Members of Congress "is no better than the janitor who cleans their offices." - Barack Obama
PolitiFact Rating: True
Obama is right on federal health care for janitors and senators
"We should note that while janitors and members of Congress can choose from the same menu of plans, members of Congress generally have more money to spend on, well, anything. Many members of Congress are millionaires.
But Obama is right that lawmakers and janitors are eligible for the same benefits, deductibles and co-pays. We rate his statement True."
Health care reform legislation is "likely to mandate free 'sex change' surgeries." - conservative bloggers
PolitiFact Rating: False
Conservative news release says health care bill "likely" to cover sex change surgery
"The news release cherry-picked a few fleeting references to 'gender' and 'sexual orientation' in completely unrelated contexts to argue that proposed health care legislation would mandate free sex-change surgeries (and allow them for illegal aliens, no less). To us, these bits of evidence are wholly unpersuasive. We find the claim False."
"All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services." - chain email
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
No free health care for illegal immigrants in the health bill
"Page 50, which the e-mail references, is part of Section 152, which includes a generic nondiscrimination clause saying that insurers may not discriminate with regard to 'personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.'
The section says nothing about 'non-US citizens' or immigrants, legal or otherwise. In fact, the legislation specifically states that "undocumented aliens" will not be eligible for credits to help them buy health insurance, in Section 246 on page 143.
The bottom line here is the e-mail is making things up. The bill does not say anything close to 'All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.' We rate this chain e-mail statement Pants on Fire!"
"In the health care bill, 'The 'Health Choices Commissioner' will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.'" - chain email
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
Health Choices Commissioner does not decide your health benefits
"The chain e-mail mentions page 42, which is part of Section 142. That section outlines the duties of the Health Choices commissioner and explains that the commissioner should seek insurers to offer different types of insurance, including basic, enhanced and premium. Again, individuals will be able to choose among competing insurers that are regulated via the exchange.
The e-mail is adamant that the Health Choices commissioner 'will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.' That is not what the bill says. The bill envisions an exchange with several different plans, and people choosing their own plan. We rate this claim Pants on Fire!"
The health care reform bill "would make it mandatory - absolutely require - that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner." - Betsy McCaughey
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
McCaughey claims end-of-life counseling will be required for Medicare patients
"For our ruling on this one, there's really no gray area here. McCaughey incorrectly states that the bill would require Medicare patients to have these counseling sessions and she is suggesting that the government is somehow trying to interfere with a very personal decision. And her claim that the sessions would 'tell [seniors] how to end their life sooner' is an outright distortion. Rather, the sessions are an option for elderly patients who want to learn more about living wills, health care proxies and other forms of end-of-life planning. McCaughey isn't just wrong, she's spreading a ridiculous falsehood. That's a Pants on Fire." [emphasis added]
The health care reform bill -- on Page 16 -- outlaws private insurance. - Investor's Business Daily editorial
PolitiFact Rating: Pants on Fire
Private health insurance not banned on page 16 of the House bill
"The original editorial said, 'Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.' That's not what the legislation says. When the error was pointed out, a subsequent editorial said it was still true. For perpetuating misinformation and then standing by it in the face of facts, we rate the Investor's Business Daily editorial Pants on Fire!"
Under a public health care option, 120 million Americans will "lose what they now get from private companies and be forced onto the government-run rolls as businesses decide it is more cost-effective for them to drop coverage." - Karl Rove op-ed
PolitiFact Rating: False
Rove's op-ed distorts health study
Rove "said, 'The Lewin Group estimates 70 percent of people with private insurance - 120 million Americans - will quickly lose what they now get from private companies and be forced onto the government-run rolls as businesses decide it is more cost-effective for them to drop coverage.' That's wrong. The report said that people would choose to leave private insurance if given a cheaper option, but the report provided smaller numbers for other options.
The debate in Congress over what a public option will look like is fierce and ongoing. So Rove is picking the worst-case scenario and then distorting the cause and effects. We rate Rove's statement False."
