Professional Documents
Culture Documents
doc Page 1 of 4
Clinton: I have the most aggressive measures to reduce costs and improve quality. And
time and time again, people who have compared our two approaches have concluded
that.
Obama: I mean, it is just not accurate to say that Senator Clinton does more to control
costs than mine. That is not the case. There are many experts who have concluded that
she does not.
Of course, they can’t both be right. And in fact, experts we consulted said there is little to choose
between the two plans, and that neither is likely to produce the big savings that the candidates
claim.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor Jonathan Gruber told FactCheck.org,
“There is absolutely no evidence to suggest which candidate’s plan would be better at cutting
costs. ... They both have a great set of ideas and I heartily endorse what they proposed. But there’s
very little evidence to suggest that either would make a major dent in health care costs and certainly
no evidence as to one person’s plan is better than another’s."
John Sheils, senior vice president of the health care research organization The Lewin Group, also says
both candidates are being unrealistic about how much their proposed measures will do to reduce costs.
"I don’t think anyone seriously expects that they would start generating those savings," he told us.
Kenneth E. Thorpe, professor of health policy at Emory University, is one expert who believes either
candidate could achieve substantial cost savings with their plans. But he also told us they are “virtually
identical” on big-picture cost-reduction issues like chronic disease management and electronic health
records, so neither candidate is justified in claiming theirs is superior in that regard.
Other Health Care Bobbles
Obama again accused Clinton of being a supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and
she said she wasn't. Both were being misleading.
53414149.doc Page 3 of 4
Clinton: You know, I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning. I didn't have a
public position on it, because I was part of the administration, but when I started running
for the Senate, I have been a critic. I've said it was flawed.
Obama: Well, I think that it is inaccurate for Senator Clinton to say that she's always
opposed NAFTA. In her campaign for Senate, she said that NAFTA, on balance, had been
good for New York and good for America.
We've been over this in detail in two recent articles, on Feb. 24 (updated on Feb. 26 with additional
information) and on Feb. 25. So we'll just summarize briefly here.
Both candidates have positions on NAFTA that are practically indistinguishable. Both stated, when
questioned during the debate, that they would threaten to withdraw from NAFTA unless Mexico and
Canada agree to negotiate better terms. Both have expressed general support for free trade and its
economic benefits, and both have said that NAFTA is a flawed agreement that needs to be
renegotiated and, in the meantime, better enforced. Both have sent mailings to Ohio voters that use
selective quotes (and in the case of an Obama mailer, a false quote) in an attempt to paint their
opponent falsely as a NAFTA cheerleader. Both did it again during the debate.
Clinton was correct to say that she had been "a critic" of NAFTA during her time as first lady, at least
according to her biographers. But that was in private; publicly she expressed qualified support for the
trade deal, and she didn't publicly criticize it until after leaving the White House.
Obama was also correct, but only up to a point, in quoting Clinton as saying something positive about
NAFTA even long after the Clinton administration was over. She did say at a 2004 news teleconference
that "I think on balance NAFTA has been good for New York and good for America," which by the way is
what many economists also say. What Obama left out, as we noted before, is that Clinton also said at
the same event that "I've always thought" that past trade deals should be revisited, that "I think that
we need a re-thinking of our trade policies," that "we have a really important stake in trying to make
sure that labor and environmental standards become global," and that "I think we have to enforce the
trade rules that are inherent in both NAFTA and GATT."
Bombs Away!
Clinton claimed, "Last summer [Obama] basically threatened to bomb Pakistan." Obama denied that:
"I never said I would bomb Pakistan."
He's right. What he really said on Aug. 1, 2007, was this: "It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when
we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence
about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."
Furthermore, as Obama also noted, that's pretty much what the U.S. did recently. On Feb. 1, several
news organizations quoted official sources saying that a CIA airstrike in Pakistan killed Abu Laith al-Libi,
who once was 4th on the "most wanted" list of a military anti-terrorism task force. The strike,
incidentally, was by a remote-controlled Predator drone using missiles, not by crewed bombers.
Obama’s War Flip-Flop?
Clinton claimed that in 2004 Obama "was saying that he basically agreed with the way George Bush
was conducting the war."
She is referencing a July 27, 2004, quote in the Chicago Tribune, in which Obama did indeed say of the
Iraq war that "[t]here’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at
this stage" (our emphasis). But Clinton quoted him selectively. In that same interview, Obama also
reiterated that he would not have voted for the war, and he offered serious criticism of Bush’s handling
of it, saying, "I don't see them having the credibility to be able to execute." And in a New York Times
interview given the day before, Obama said that "from my vantage point, the case was not made" for
the war, and he rebuked Democratic leaders for "the degree to which Congress gave the president a
pass" on proving the case for the war.
53414149.doc Page 4 of 4
As Clinton herself pointed out during the debate, the two candidates have identical voting records on
the war since they both have been in the Senate. Furthermore, Obama's views about how to conduct
the war are not significantly different from hers, and they have proposed very similar plans for ending
it.
About That 100-year "War"
Obama twisted the words of John McCain, the likely Republican nominee:
Obama: We are bogged down in a war that John McCain now suggests might go on for
another 100 years.
Actually, McCain suggested no such thing. Obama is referring to a statement that McCain made at a
New Hampshire town hall meeting on Jan. 3. As we said before when the Democratic National
Committee made a similar statement about McCain, the Arizona senator said that he would be "fine"
staying in Iraq for 100 years "as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or
killed." You can view the whole exchange below:
*
Furthermore, McCain elaborated on that statement at a campaign event in Ohio, saying the "war" will
end "soon":
McCain, Feb. 25: My friends, the war will be over soon. The war for all intents and
purposes, although the insurgency will go on for years and years and years, but it'll be
handled by the Iraqis not by us.
Obama was more careful in the previous Democratic debate on Feb. 21, when he stated – accurately –
that McCain "has said that he is willing to have these troops over there for 100 years."
– by Brooks Jackson, with Jess Henig, Emi Kolawole, Joe Miller and Lori Robertson
Sources
Benson, Pam et. al. "U.S. Officials: CIA kills top al Qaeda terrorist in Pakistan." CNN, 1 Feb. 2008.
Aigner-Treworgy, Adam. "McCain: War "Will Be Over Soon." 25 February 2008. MSNBC, 27 February 2008.
FDCH Political Transcripts. "U.S. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) Holds a News Teleconference on Job
Training Fund Cuts," 5 Jan. 2004.
Hornbeck, J. F. “NAFTA at Ten: Lessons from Recent Studies.” Congressional Research Service, 13 Feb. 2004.
Kumar, Anil. “Did NAFTA Spur Texas Exports?” Southwest Economy, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, March/April
2006
Reich, Robert. “Why is HRC stooping So Low?” Robert Reich’s Blog, 3 Dec. 2007.
Reich, Robert. “Democrats Should Stop Squabbling Over Healthcare Mandates.” Robert Reich’s Blog, 13 Jan. 2008.
Kass, John. "Obama's a Star Who Doesn't Stick to the Script." 27 July 2004. Chicago Tribune, 27 Feb. 2008.
Davey, Monica. "A Surprise Senate Contender Reaches His Biggest Stage Yet." 26 July 2004. New York Times, 27
Feb 2008.