The
Whoppers Continue: Gore Distorts Facts About Bush Tax Plan, Drug
Companies
WASHINGTON- During Tuesday nights
debate between Vice President Al Gore (D-Tenn.) and Gov. George
W. Bush (R-Tex.), the vice president made many claims on topics
ranging from Gov. Bushs tax plan to how much pharmaceutical
companies spent on advertising.
Below are a few of the more egregious
statements made by Gore, followed by the facts to set the record
straight on the issue.
Pharmaceutical Companies
Gore Statement: But
they are now spending more money on advertising and promotion you
see all these ads than they are on research and development.
Fact: In 1999, direct to
consumer advertising accounted for 27 percent of the $6.6 billion
pharmaceutical companies spent directly promoting their products
to doctors and consumers increase in retail drug spending in 1999.
(National Institute for Health Care Management Research and Education
Foundation, http://www.nihcm.org/dtcbrief.pdf)
Fact: In 2000, the industry
was expected to spend a record $26.4 billion on research and development,
up from $24 billion in 1999. (PhRMA, PhRMA Annual Report 2000-2001)
Gov. George W. Bushs Tax
Plan
Gore statement: He
proposes spending more money for a tax cut just for the wealthiest
one percent than all of the new money than he budgets for education,
health care, and national defense combined.
Fact:
one cannot
truthfully say the plan benefits the wealthy at the expense of the
middle class or poor. In fact, an objective reading of the plan
comes closer to revealing just the opposite.
the lower a familys
income, the bigger its percentage tax cut. Furthermore, the national
share of federal taxes paid by people earning more than $100,000
would increase to 64 percent, from 62 percent. Thats perhaps
not much of a shift (unless you are the one paying), but it clearly
goes in the opposite direction from what Gore would have you believe.
But still Gore continues to misrepresent the truth. (editorial,
Ignoring the Numbers: Gores Tactics Divisive,
(Atlanta Journal-Constitution, September 8, 2000)
Government Spending
Gore Statement: When asked
if he was proposing the largest federal spending in years, Gore
replied Absolutely not.
Fact: These are very,
very, very large spending increases. The vice president really has
proposed a dramatic expansion in the role and cost of the federal
government, said Carol Cox Wait, president of the Committee
for a Responsible Federal Budget. Theres really nothing
like it until you go back to the spending programs of LBJs
Great Society social-welfare spending
(Donald
Lambro, Federal Role Big in Gore Proposal; Spending Increase
Largest Since LBJ, The Washington Times, September 20, 2000)
Gores Targeted
Tax Cuts Leaves out Half of Working Americans
Gore Statement: Gov. Bush
asserts that 50 million Americans get no tax relief under Gores
tax plan. Gore responds: Thats not right
And that
50 million figure, again, the newspapers I said you said
forget the journalists, but they are the keepers of the scorecard
and whether or not you are using facts that arent right, and
that fact is just not right.
Fact: Mr. Gores
plan has an income ceiling and pivots on certain conditions, about
50 percent of taxpayers about 50 million people would
not see their taxes lowered. (Frank Bruni, Bush Says
Rivals Tax-Cut Plan Fails Middle Class, The New York
Times, August 2, 2000)
Fact: In fact, more
than 50 million taxpayers fail tests and thus more than half of
the current 94 million taxpayers do not qualify for Mr. Gores
tax cuts. If the devil is in the details, Mr. Gores tax proposals
were crafted with a pitchfork. (editorial, Truth on
Tax Cuts, The Wall Street Journal, September 5, 2000)
The Death Tax
Gore Statement: Im
for a massive reform of the estate tax or the death tax. And under
the plan that Ive proposed, 80 percent of all family farms
will be completely exempt from the estate tax and the vast majority
of all family businesses would be completely exempt and all of the
others would have sharply reduced.
Fact: As for estate
tax relief, the Gore plan is so complicated and restrictive that
less than 1% of current heirs would qualify. Essentially, the estate
has to qualify as a small business in which the decedent has to
have materially participated in the business in five
out of eight years preceding death, and the beneficiary must materially
participate in the business five out of eight years following
the owners death for the next 10 years or the IRS could demand
tax payment. (Truth on Tax Cuts, The Wall Street
Journal, September 5, 2000)