Would Leutkemeyer Really Risk Your Social Security in This Market?

This Week on The Watchdogs we’re taking a trip down memory lane in the way back machine! We’re taking a look at a popular series of ads that the democrats pull out nearly every election. With minor changes of course! These ads focus on social security and they state that republican (name here) supports risking your retirement funds in the marketplace. While these ads have not been run yet this election cycle, they have been run in nearly every election since Bush proposed allowing citizens to put social security money into privately held funds in 2005. So, without further ado, here’s the ad that the Democratic National Party ran against Leutkemeyer last election cycle.




As you can see these ads can have a huge impact on elderly voters, especially during the recession, but let’s look at the facts. First question: Does Leutkemeyer really support “privatizing Social Security, risking your retirement on the Wall Street roller coaster?” According to FactCheck.org this is untrue. In fact the Bush proposal made creating personal investment accounts an option, not a requirement. Not only did this bill fail, but had it passed it would not have affected current senior citizens, because it did not apply to people born before 1950. The Watchdogs find this ad and ads like it to be patently untrue! Democrats better not bring these ads back this election, or else they’re going to have The Watchdogs barking at them and howling “foul play!”

This has been a trip on The Watchdog way back machine! Look out for more trips in the future. Here at The Watchdogs we don’t just watch current events; we look at history too, because The Watchdogs aren’t reactive, and neither are you! So, as always, liars watch out, or you’ll feel the very real bite of The Watchdogs!

"Wrong Way Robin" Claims Examined

The mud-slinging is heating up in the U.S. Senate race between Roy Blunt and Robin Carnahan. On September 21st, Missouri Republican Representative Roy Blunt launched a new advertisement aimed at Carnahan. The advertisement, titled, “Wrong Way Robin” attempts to further highlight the “Obama-heavy” agenda of Carnahan.
The advertisement claims, “Carnahan supports the $814 billion failed stimulus spending.” According to the News Tribune, “Carnahan contends that the $814 billion economic stimulus act has helped.” However, as a Republican Watchdog, I had to dig a little deeper. Roy Blunt is not as clean as he may seem on this claim. According to PoliticMo, “Before Blunt was against it, Blunt was for a 2008 bill authorizing up to $700 billion to shore up banks and other institutions.” Thus, Carnahan does support the stimulus package, but at one time, so did Blunt. The next claim made by Blunt’s advertisement points to Carnahan’s “support for Government run healthcare and $500 billion in Medicare cuts.” According to an article from Politicalcorrection, “Obamas plan leaves in place the private healthcare system, but seeks to expand it to the uninsured.” Another article by mediamattersaction explains that, “In reality, the health care bill strengthens Medicare without cutting seniors’ benefits and premiums will go down or stay the same for the majority of Americans.” Thus, Carnahan supports a bill that does not favor “government-run healthcare” and will not make $500 billion in cuts. The Watchdogs find this claim by Blunt to be false and misleading. The last claim made by the advertisement states that Carnahan supports an energy plan that will “double your utility bill.” Blunt is speaking to Carnahan supporting a “cap-and-trade energy tax” which would place fees on carbon emissions. In fact-checking this last statement, an article from the Washington Examiner explained how Carnahan did say that “she could support some kind of cap-and-trade energy policy, so long as it didn’t unduly penalize consumers.” Thus, Carnahan did put support behind a cap-and-trade energy tax, but never made a solid statement. She never put support into a system that would “double the utility bill” or cost “32,000 Missouri jobs”. It appears that Blunt may have stretched the truth for this statement.

Is There Really a "Stain" on Luetkemeyer's Record?

For the first time in years, Missourians will not be given the choice between a Republican and Democratic candidate for Missouri’s 9th Congressional district. Instead, voters will have to choose between Republican Blaine Luetkemeyer and Libertarian Christopher Dwyer. While conventional wisdom dictates that Missourians are a two party state; according to the Columbia Missourian, Libertarian candidate Christopher Dwyer thinks he has a chance in this election because: “What you may see is Democrats who will by no means vote Republican, and might take a chance on a Libertarian.”

All of this is a rather roundabout way of saying that even though third party candidates don’t usually have a chance at winning Missouri elections, and therefore spend much less money in advertising,  Libertarians are thinking this year might be different, which is why we’ve already seen an ad campaign launched against Luetkemeyer by the Sierra club, under the guise “The league of Conservation Voters.”

 

According to “Stain” special interests gave Luetkemeyer over 28,000 dollars in campaign cash. Open Secrets confirmed that Luetkemeyer received $12,000 from BASF Global “The World’s Leading Chemical Company,” $8,000 from Ameren UE, the Utilities company, and $8,400 from Emerson Electric Company. The Watchdogs find this statement to be based in fact. The Ad states that Luetkemeyer voted no on The American Clean Energy and Security Act, which, according to The Washington Post, is true. While Luetkemeyer voted No on the bill, the bill still passed.

The last series of attacks is more Nebulous: “Luetkemeyer said No to 1.9 million new jobs. No to less carbon pollution. And no to more energy independence for America.” While the Sierra club has based these statements on estimates by studies in support of The American Clean Energy and Securities Act they are still just estimates. Another factor to consider is that Luetkemeyer does not believe in Global Warming, which means he sees carbon pollution as carbon emission, which he doesn’t deem a problem. He also supports American energy independence, but instead of green energy he supports traditional fossil fuel harvesting, which would also increase our energy independence and add new jobs. So, while the statements are not false, they are not as hardline fact as the first two assertions made by the ad.

The Watchdogs are excited to watch this race start to heat up, and are up to the task of keeping ads for and against the Republican party in check.

Roy Blunt's Recent Media Inspected

One of Roy Blunt’s latest press release explains how his opponent, Robin Carnahan, is “making hypocritical acts by appealing to donations from lobbyists in Washington.” According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, Carnahan has gone to great lengths to slam Blunt’s connections with lobbyists. However, on September 21^st, Carnahan held a “$2,500 per plate fundraiser at Quinn Gillespie & Associates, a lobbying firm in Washington D.C.” Thus, Carnahan is attempting to bash Blunt for his lobbyist connections yet is holding a dinner with lobbyists herself! Clearly Blunt’s latest attack of Carnahan is truthful.

In one of Blunt’s newest advertisements, he attacks Carnahan for “supporting the largest increase in income tax in history.” When looking into this statement, it does not seem to be accurate. According to Politifact, the Democrats are not planning on letting all the Bush tax cuts expire; they are only looking at letting tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans expire. These are the people making $250,000 or more a year. However, even if all of the Bush tax cuts expired, it would still not represent the largest tax raise in history. If they all expired, it would result in about 2.2% of GDP. This would be smaller than the Revenue Act of 1942 which is estimated at 5.04% of GDP. Clearly this statement by Blunt is not truthful. The watchdogs will leave no lie uncovered!