RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
More On That False Quote in the Obama TV Ad
May 06, 2008 10:42 AM
As we recently fact-checked, Sen. Barack Obama has been running a TV ad that falsely uses a quote from New York Times columnist Paul Krugman about Sen. John McCain's gas tax holiday plan and applies it to Sen. Hillary Clinton's plan.
Last night Krugman blogged on the matter.
"I did not say that the Clinton proposal would increase oil industry profits," Krugman writes. "If the ad implies that I did, it should be retracted. The Clinton proposal is financed by an excess profits tax. At worst, it sends money in a circle. In practice, it would probably reduce oil industry profits at least slightly, since the rise in the pre-tax price of gasoline probably wouldn’t wipe out all of the tax cut. I was very clear when I wrote about the Clinton proposal that while I didn’t think it was good policy, it was not the same as McCain’s, and relatively harmless. If the Obama people are suggesting otherwise, they’re being deliberately dishonest."
Meanwhile, Obama has launched another TV ad that uses a quote from Clinton-supporting North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley to bash the gas tax holiday idea.
In 2006, Easley opposed cutting the state gas tax, based on oil industry officials telling Tarheel State lawmakers months that such a cut would not cause an equal drop in price. Easley said cutting the gas tax would be "a subsidy for the oil companies."
A permanent cut in the state gas tax is of course not quite the same thing as a federal gas tax holiday, though economists would argue some of the same principles would apply -- that is, the law of supply and demand would mean that oil companies would raise the price regardless. (Especially if Sen. Clinton's "windfall profits tax" were also to become law and the oil companies passed on their new debt to the consumer.)
Last month Easley was asked about the notion again, and he said, "people need to be told the truth, and that is the price of gas is going to go up and up and up, and there's nothing that the state government can do to stop that."
That of course has not stopped Easley from touting Clinton's proposal in robocalls to voters.
Easley's office has insisted there's no contradiction. “The governor enthusiastically supports the proposal in Washington because it taxes the windfall profits of big oil to replace the taxes on the people,” Easley spokesman Seth Effron told the Greensboro News-Record “On the state level, there is not the ability to tax big oil, so North Carolina would have a deficit.”
- jpt
May 6, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (165)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Obama's solution to the high prices is to find ways to reduce our use of oil. He proposes higher gas efficiency, and renewable energy.
Hillary's circular proposal is so wrong NO economist will side with her, and only McCain is with her in the Congress.
One problem with her windfall tax is that she's already proposed using that for other things, she can't use it twice.
The other solution Hillary pushes is breaking Opec. When does she think about addressing our need to reduce the oil we use?
Obama is think solving the problem we have with using too much oil, and real solutions. His priority is to reduce our oil usage with better fuel efficency, and investing in research for alternative fuels.
Posted by: Kiku | May 6, 2008 4:33:09 PM
What organization is better run...Congress or Exxon?
Posted by: Robert | May 6, 2008 4:16:47 PM
A vote for John McCain is a death sentence for thousands of more U.S. troops and innocent Iraqi civilians (CHILDREN, women, and men). You vote for McCain, you will certainly have blood on your hands. When you meet your maker, you will not have the excuse that you didn’t know. You will not be able to hide behind Bush or McCain and blame them for it. With your vote you have sealed your fate. Don’t say you were not warned.
And don’t think that by voting for Hillary you’re clean either. She voted for the war and she’ll say anything to be the next president – she is a corrupt politician.
Posted by: Jack | May 6, 2008 4:10:16 PM
>"Big Oil profits are only a function of our consumption"
I wish that were true, but it's not. Stats released yesterday show gas consumption is way down, yet prices continue to go up. That proves this gas price spike is not supply & demand, but something else.
Posted by: JKT | May 6, 2008 4:06:21 PM
If 92% of any one ethnic group or race vote for one particular candidate, then you can rest assured issues such as depth of experience, range of knowledge, track record and personal accomplishments played little if any role in their selection. That kind of phenomenon is usually defined as a "mob" or "herd"... which is contrarian to the needs of the many.
Posted by: averagewhiteguy | May 6, 2008 4:03:15 PM
Hillary Clinton is a corrupt politician. She also covered for Bill while he was taking advantage of women (and that's putting it lightly). Don't think for minute the Republicans won't bring that up, and many other damaging accusations against the Clintons. Have you all forgotten the Clinton scandals already?
Posted by: Jack | May 6, 2008 3:58:07 PM
Much like George Bush, the false prophet Senator Obama, twists the truth to his liking.
Posted by: Mark | May 6, 2008 3:58:06 PM
For all those who complain about "Big Oil profits" it is only a function of our consumption! If you want to spend less on gasoline then you should!
Posted by: notxbad | May 6, 2008 3:57:03 PM
ABC would sell thier soul to add the O'Rielly-Hannity crowd to thier falling viewership. It seems that transaction is a done deal.
Posted by: dsmith | May 6, 2008 3:49:49 PM
It's not the questions I don't like, it's the comparative seriousness of the charges. I don't see anything substantive in many of the allegations against Obama.
Posted by: Mark McVay | May 6, 2008 3:49:35 PM
Katherineklein, you consider 1.84 Swiss Francs per liter (which is what I just paid a few hours ago at a Migros gas station outside of Winterthur) to be low gas prices? lol
Posted by: embrach | May 6, 2008 3:46:49 PM
Hi Soothsayer. We in Switzerland are not worried that Iran will point a nuclear against us. We get gas from them and thus support their economy. Maybe if you talked with people you would have low gas prices too!!
Posted by: Katherineklein | May 6, 2008 3:40:21 PM
ABC has a lot of nerve writing about integrity after the last Jerry Springer show.... I mean ...debate fiasco.
Good thing Hilary got her court appearance postponed last month so she could campaign in Indiana. Hilary just wants to get back to the white house to look for some more of her hidden documents that the FBI couldn't find the last time. I bet you Hilary is already working on her story for how she made a 1,000% profit on oil company stocks in 3 months because of a "hunch". Hey, it worked before...
Posted by: tired of abc | May 6, 2008 3:34:10 PM
Your litany of "lies" was quite lengthy, UT. And I don't beleive I used the word racist at all. What are your feelings on torture and illegal wars?
Posted by: Mark McVay | May 6, 2008 3:34:06 PM
Again Mark McVay,
A Obama supporter claim “racism” when he does not like the truth. Why are the people that post Obama’s own lies, as proof Obama is a liar “Racist”. Possibly it’s the pot calling the kettle black.
Posted by: Uncle Tom | May 6, 2008 3:30:38 PM
No kind of tax cut or holiday is going to fix anything. I think i would have to forget about all the canidates for president and still stick with bush on this issue. Why cant congress just pass the bill so we can do some horizontal drilling in The Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. We won't even have to set a foot on the refuge in theory. From what I understand there is plenty of oil to last this country a few years under there. A gas tax holiday will just make the oil companies alot more money. Instead of paying the tax to the government the oil companies will raise their prices and inturn we will be paying them instead. When it comes down to it it is not about politics it is about common sense.
Posted by: Chris | May 6, 2008 3:29:46 PM
Wow! Fact-checking! What a concept. Let's hope ABC News remembers how to do that when (or if) they ever decide to take a look at John McCain's statements.
Posted by: peglind | May 6, 2008 3:23:00 PM
"Uncle Tom doth protest too much, methinks.
Is there more to thine hate than meets the eye?"
Posted by: Mark McVay | May 6, 2008 3:22:25 PM
SEan wrote, "If the Gods intervene, Obama wins, goes on to win the white house, realigns America with the world, decreases global dislike of America, improves parity inside the country, invests in infrastructure, wins another term in the white house and leaves the white house as one of the greatest presidents in modern history."
Whoa, SEan. Way too much to ask of America, dude. Gimme another Bud and let's talk about lapel pins and the pledge of allegiance. God, guts, and guns, dude.
Posted by: Mark McVay | May 6, 2008 3:13:16 PM
hey Frank: The gas tax holiday is a bad idea if you are the oil company. Exxon Mobil continues to rake 10.9 billions of profit during the 1Q and you dont want to have a dent on it in order to offer some relief to some hard pressed families in just plain and simple greed to me. Don't be too greedy.
Posted by: Jerome | May 6, 2008 3:10:26 PM
Post a comment


