|
Presidential
Election 2008:
Misleading Facts & Vague Opinions
by
Alan Shapiro
To
the Teacher:
At
some point in the presidential campaign most Americans choose
a candidate to support. Ideally, their choice is based, at least
in part, on the candidate's positions on issues, gleaned from
speeches, website statements, and answers to questions. It's worthwhile
to consider how factual, reasoned, and clear a candidate's opinions
are.
The
student reading below offers specifics from statements from four
candidates on major campaign issues. Discussions questions, an
exercise on recognizing factual statements and opinions, and suggestions
for student inquiry follow.
Student
Reading
"As governor, I cut spending in my first year, our budget
actually went down," claimed Mitt Romney, a former
governor of Massachusetts, in a debate among Republican presidential
candidates just before the New Hampshire primary.
This
is a statement of fact. It does not include opinion words and
can be verified. A nonpartisan group called FactCheck.Org
did some checking and found that Romney is correct. But note that
he spoke about his first year. He was governor for four years.
Over that period, FactCheck found, Romney proposed spending increases
of 7.5 percent, so he was factually accurate but selective in
his choice of facts and left a misleading impression.
Government
spending and taxes are important issues for many voters. So it
is not surprising that presidential candidates frequently attempt
to emphasize that they are very stingy with and very responsible
about spending taxpayer money. In that same New Hampshire debate,
former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, winner of the Iowa
Republican caucus, said, "I know that I cut taxes 94 times,
and the taxes we cut helped families."
The
first part of his statement is factual and verifiable. But FactCheck
said that while as governor Huckabee did lower some taxes, he
also signed bills resulting in a net increase in taxes of $500
million. Did that also help families? Like Romney, he did not
mention this fact. Once again, omission of facts and a misleading
impression.
Candidates
also use facts selectively and at times misleadingly in print
and TV ads. Just before the Iowa caucus, Barack Obama's
campaign ran an ad quoting the Washington Post as declaring
that Obama's health plan would save families $2,500. The ad asserted
that "experts" say his plan is "the best"
and "guarantees coverage for all Americans."
FactCheck
pointed out that the Post was citing an Obama campaign
statement about saving families money and did not analyze it independently.
The "experts" were the editorial writers at the Iowa
City Press-Citizen. The guarantee of "coverage for all
Americans" was asserted in the St. Paul Pioneer Press
and, like the ad, omitted mention that while the Clinton and
Edwards health plans require coverage for all Americans, the Obama
plan allows individuals to buy into coverage if they want to.
(www.factcheck.org)
These
examples demonstrate, among other things, that a factual statement
can be accurate--if cherry-picked--but may come from a tree of
sour cherries.
Many
Americans want the troops to come home from Iraq. On Iraq policy,
Hillary Clinton offered her opinion: "So it's time
to bring our troops home and to bring them home as quickly and
responsibly as possible and…I don't see any reason why they
should remain beyond, you know, today. I think George Bush doesn't
intend to bring them home, but certainly I have said when I'm
president I will. Within 60 days, I'll start that withdrawal."
(1/5/08)
This
response is sprinkled with opinions: "time to bring our troops
home"; "bring them home as quickly and responsibly as
possible"; and "I don't see any reason why they should
remain beyond, you know, today" all contain opinions. Opinion
words represent a judgment that may or may not be supported with
factual evidence and may also be vague. What does Clinton mean
by "quickly"? What would bringing the troops home "responsibly"
look like?
Questions:
-
If Clinton becomes president, how soon will she bring the troops
home from Iraq? (a) As quickly and responsibly as possible?
(b) Today? (c) Beginning within 60 days?
- If
the withdrawal starts within 60 days, how many more days will
it take?
- Is
she talking about withdrawing (a) all troops? (b) most troops?
(c) some troops?
Clinton
has said in the recent past that some (how many?) troops will
need to stay to train Iraqi troops, to protect the American embassy,
to prevent terrorist attacks, to prevent Iranian infiltration,
to help the Kurds in northern Iraq.
[Note
to the teacher: You might consider assigning students an essay
question: If Hillary Clinton becomes president, how soon will
how many troops come home and what makes you think so?]
Presidential
candidates must answer many questions daily. Usually, and even
in debates, they don't have enough time to discuss them in detail--assuming
they could if they had the time. One result is a swift recitation
of unsupported opinions from "talking points"--that
is, a collection of brief statements of views on many issues they
know they will be asked about. Because some of these issues are
complicated, candidates often make fuzzy utterances, like Clinton's
on Iraq.
In
developing your own opinion about a candidate's remark, consider
its factuality. Several websites offer help. FactCheck
Org describes itself as "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."
The website is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center
of the University of Pennsylvania
Other,
similar efforts include a project of the St. Petersburg Times
and the Congressional Quarterly (www.politifact.com)
and a Washington Post blog (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/).
All three sites are updated regularly.
Consider
also the candidates' opinions. How clearly does a candidate state
his or her opinion? Is the opinion supported with facts-at least
on the candidate's websites, if not in brief public remarks? Does
the candidate present facts selectively, omitting those that are
inconvenient?
For
discussion
1.
What questions do students have about the reading? How might
they be answered?
2.
How does the reading demonstrate that statements of fact may not
necessarily be accurate?
3.
What differences are there between a factual statement and a statement
of opinion?
4.
Why do you suppose that a candidate's comment on an issue may
be vague?
Exercise
Mark each of the following statements either F for fact or O for
opinion.
1.
There are 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
2. The U.S. economy is sinking into recession.
3. The "surge" in Iraq is working.
4. The "surge" in Iraq is not working.
5. The U.S. needs a national health care program.
6. The U.S. currently spends more money on health care
than any other nation.
7. Americans get better health care than people in other
countries.
8. The richest Americans profited most from the Bush tax
cuts.
9. Middle class Americans profited most from the Bush tax
cuts.
For
inquiry and writing
1.
Have students access one of the websites monitoring the factual
accuracy of candidate statements, take notes on three items, and
write a report on their findings, taking into consideration the
accuracy and clarity of factual and opinion statements.
2. Have students select a presidential campaign issue of
particular interest to them, investigate how, in terms of factual
and opinion statements, one candidate discusses this issue, and
write a report of findings.
This
lesson was written for TeachableMoment.Org, a project of Morningside
Center for Teaching Social Responsibility. We
welcome
your comments. Please email author Alan Shapiro at: ashapiro7@comcast.net.
|
