jelun

TheWire
FactChecking the GOP Debate, Early Edition
Posted on August 6, 2015

The Republican presidential candidates who failed to make the cut for the Aug. 6 prime-time debate repeated a number of past false and misleading claims, while adding some new ones that we hadn’t heard before:
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said the U.S. sends “$300 billion overseas to buy oil from people who hate our guts.” But that’s spending on all oil imports, including from Canada and Mexico.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal claimed a study proved “expanding Medicaid does not improve health care outcomes.” The study he cited measured only three health indicators over a two-year period, and even then found some positive benefits.
Former New York Gov. George Pataki said when he left office, “there were over 1 million fewer people on welfare in New York state than when I took office.” True, but that decrease was part of a national trend after President Clinton signed the 1996 welfare overhaul legislation.
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum claimed that “almost all” immigrants in the past 20 years “are unskilled workers.” Not so. In 2010, 30 percent of working-age immigrants had a college degree while 28 percent lacked a high school diploma.
Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry claimed that under his tenure, and since the recession, Texas gained jobs while the rest of the country lost them. According to the job-growth measure used by most economists, the rest of the country gained 1.2 million jobs, while Texas gained the same.
Santorum also exaggerated in saying 74 percent of Americans lack a college degree. The number for those age 18 and older is 65 percent.
Jindal claimed President Obama said that “we don’t have leverage with China to get a better deal on Iran,” because the U.S. borrows money from China. Not exactly. Obama said economically cutting off the world’s largest banks, China and other countries would have consequences for the U.S.
The debate was held in Cleveland a few hours before the top 10 candidates took the stage.
Oil and Facts Don’t Mix

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said the U.S. sends “$300 billion overseas to buy oil from people who hate our guts.” But that amount represents all spending on oil imports, including huge amounts from countries such as Canada and Mexico, which, according to polls, do not “hate our guts.”
Graham: When it comes to fossil fuels, we’re going to find more here and use less. Over time, we’re going to become energy independent. I am tired of sending $300 billion overseas to buy oil from people who hate our guts.

According to the Energy Information Administration, the U.S. imported a total of 3.37 billion barrels of oil in 2014. The average cost of all that oil was $89.56 per barrel, again according to the EIA. That means that the total import cost in 2014 was just under $302 billion, close to the figure Graham cited.
But that oil comes from a variety of countries, and some of them do not appear to hate the United States. In fact, the U.S. imported the most oil — about 1.24 billion barrels — from Canada. Our neighbor to the north is generally not considered an American enemy, and polling bears that out: The Pew Research Center found in its most recent survey that the U.S. has a 68 percent favorability rating in Canada. (It is also, of course, not “overseas.”)
Saudi Arabia is the second biggest provider of oil to the United States, sending 425 million barrels in 2014; Pew does not have data on favorability in this country. Mexico is third with 307 million barrels, and 66 percent of that country sees the U.S. in a positive light. Venezuela is next, at 287 million barrels; according to Pew, 51 percent of Venezuela has a favorable opinion of the U.S. In fifth place is Iraq at 132 million barrels, again with no data from Pew on favorability.
In sixth place is Russia, at 119 million barrels of oil. At last count, only 15 percent of Russians surveyed see the U.S. favorably. Even if we allow that Russia, Iraq and Saudi Arabia may “hate our guts,” that represents less than $61 billion in oil imports. The other three countries in the top six represent about $164 billion of the total expenditures, meaning the U.S. spends more money importing fossil fuels from countries that do not actually hate our guts.
Jindal Overplays Medicaid Study

Explaining his opposition to Medicaid expansion through the Affordable Care Act, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said a study in Oregon showed that “simply expanding Medicaid does not improve health care outcomes.” But the Oregon study wasn’t as sweeping as Jindal claimed — for one, the study found that Medicaid expansion lowered rates of depression. And other studies have shown more positive health outcomes from Medicaid expansion.
We looked at this issue in depth in a story we wrote in July titled, “Is Medicaid Bad for Your Health?” At the heart of the issue is a study called the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on May 2, 2013. The study took advantage of a Medicaid expansion in Oregon that was based on lottery drawings and compared data from 6,387 adults who were able to apply for Medicaid coverage with 5,842 adults who were not selected.
The authors of the study concluded that, “Medicaid coverage generated no significant improvements in measured physical health outcomes in the first 2 years, but it did increase use of health care services, raise rates of diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce financial strain.”
The first part of that conclusion provides the basis for Jindal’s statement, “There is a better way to provide health care. The Oregon study showed this. Simply expanding Medicaid does not improve health care outcomes.” But he leaves out the second part that talks about lowering rates of depression, for example.
And as we noted in an article about the study in 2013, it had some limitations. For example, the study measured only three physical health indicators — blood pressure, cholesterol and glycated hemoglobin levels (which measure diabetic blood sugar control) — and only over a two-year period. There could be other improvements that the study didn’t attempt to measure, or that could show up once patients are covered for longer than two years.
In addition, other studies have shown more positive results for Medicaid expansion. For example, a study published on May 6, 2014, in the Annals of Internal Medicine found that after a health care overhaul in Massachusetts, mortality rates were improved compared with those in other states. Another study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2012 compared several states that substantially expanded Medicaid (before the ACA) to neighboring states that did not expand Medicaid and concluded, “State Medicaid expansions to cover low-income adults were significantly associated with reduced mortality as well as improved coverage, access to care, and self-reported health.”
A 2013 report from the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation looking at the breadth of academic study concluded that “[h]aving Medicaid is much better than being uninsured.”

More with the link...
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/08/factchecking-the-gop-debate-early-edition/

Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan

If a Republican opened their mouth: it's a lie. End of debate.

They are all elitists, squirming about in their own narcissistic fantiasies

She Wolf Loc: Currently Georgia

I really enjoyed Bernie Sanders' twitter responses to the Republican candidates. Apparently, so did many people. More people re-twittered Bernie's remarks than any of the Republicans. According to ABC news that makes Bernie the winner of the debate. I just love this man.