This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/us/politics/debate-fact-check.html
The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Debate Fact Check: What Are They Talking About, and What Is True? | Debate Fact Check: What Are They Talking About, and What Is True? |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| The second round of Democratic debates is underway in Detroit, with 10 candidates onstage for the second of two back-to-back nights. The other 10 candidates who qualified for the debates appeared on the same stage on Tuesday. | The second round of Democratic debates is underway in Detroit, with 10 candidates onstage for the second of two back-to-back nights. The other 10 candidates who qualified for the debates appeared on the same stage on Tuesday. |
| Our reporters are following all of the exchanges. They will be fact-checking the candidates and providing context and explanation for the policy debates. | Our reporters are following all of the exchanges. They will be fact-checking the candidates and providing context and explanation for the policy debates. |
| What the facts are | What the facts are |
| What was said: | What was said: |
| Ms. Harris: “Your plan, by contrast, leaves out almost 10 million Americans.” | Ms. Harris: “Your plan, by contrast, leaves out almost 10 million Americans.” |
| Mr. Biden: “Your plan, no matter how you cut it, costs $3 trillion when it is in fact employed.” | Mr. Biden: “Your plan, no matter how you cut it, costs $3 trillion when it is in fact employed.” |
| These statements are mostly true. Neither Ms. Harris nor Mr. Biden are backing the Medicare for all plan being promoted by Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, which would replace all private insurance coverage with a government plan. Mr. Biden wants to expand Obamacare by offering a public option. He says his plan would cover 97 percent of Americans — a figure that Ms. Harris appeared to seize on to justify her statement that his plan would leave 10 million people uncovered. | |
| Ms. Harris did not dispute Mr. Biden’s assertion that her plan would cost $3 trillion but said the cost to the nation would be even greater if her plan was not enacted. | Ms. Harris did not dispute Mr. Biden’s assertion that her plan would cost $3 trillion but said the cost to the nation would be even greater if her plan was not enacted. |
| What the fact are | |
| What Mr. Biden said: | |
| “What happened? Along came a federal judge and said enough is enough and he freed 1,000 of these people.” | |
| This is exaggerated. The vice president appeared to be talking about a Daily Beast story that recounted how lawyers in Ms. Harris’ office argued that moving certain parolees out of prison would deprive the state of the use of prisoners to help combat wildfires in the state. The state had been ordered to reduce the prison population in its overcrowded jails, and Mr. Biden attacked Ms. Harris for having to be forced by a federal judge to let the prisoners out. | |
| Ms. Gabbard piled on, accusing Ms. Harris of keeping “people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.” The accusation was leveled directly against Ms. Harris. But the website reported that Ms. Harris said she was unaware that the lawyers in her office were arguing to keep the parolees in office. | |
| Her campaign gave the following statement to the Daily Beast: “Senator Harris was shocked and troubled by the use of this argument. She looked into it and directed the department’s attorneys not to make that argument again.” In response to the attacks Wednesday night, Ms. Harris did not directly respond to the accusation but said to Mr. Biden: “I am proud of the work we did. Work that has received national recognition for what has been the important work of reforming a criminal justice system and cleaning up the consequences of the bills that you passed when you were in the United States Senate for decades.” | |
| What the facts are | |
| What Mr. Biden said: | |
| “Since 2007, I, for example, tried to get the crack powder cocaine disparity eliminated.” | |
| This is misleading. It is true that in 2007 Mr. Biden called for reducing the longstanding disparity in which crack cocaine offenders — most of whom were black — received much harsher sentences than those arrested for possession of crack cocaine. But what Mr. Biden failed to mention is that he was the architect of the disparity. | |
| The disparity grew out of a 1986 law, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, championed by Mr. Biden, that set a minimum of five years for 5 grams of crack or 500 grams of powder cocaine. It took more than 20 years for Mr. Biden to move to undo that provision; in 2007, Mr. Biden called the disparity “arbitrary, unnecessary and unjust” and acknowledged his own role in creating it. | |
| “I am part of the problem that I have been trying to solve since then,” he said in 2008, “because I think the disparity is way out of line.” | |
| Mr. Biden’s reversal on the sentencing disparity is not the only aspect of his record on criminal justice that he is trying to undo. He mentioned during the debate that he wants to give prisoners access to educational Pell Grants – a move that would directly repudiate provisions of the 1994 crime bill, which he also spearheaded in the Senate. | |
| what they’re talking about | what they’re talking about |
| What Mr. Biden said: | What Mr. Biden said: |
| “The fact of the matter is, if you cross the border illegally, you should be able to be sent back. It’s a crime.” | “The fact of the matter is, if you cross the border illegally, you should be able to be sent back. It’s a crime.” |
| The debate about how to punish border-crossers is a reaction to Mr. Trump’s use of criminal statutes to imprison violators and deter future migration. But the sharp exchanges on the stage over decriminalization reflects a deep disagreement about whether making border-crossing a crime actually prevents more illegal immigration. Mr. Biden insisted that it does, while Mr. Castro and others have argued that civil violations will allow the border to be secured while treating migrants more humanely. | The debate about how to punish border-crossers is a reaction to Mr. Trump’s use of criminal statutes to imprison violators and deter future migration. But the sharp exchanges on the stage over decriminalization reflects a deep disagreement about whether making border-crossing a crime actually prevents more illegal immigration. Mr. Biden insisted that it does, while Mr. Castro and others have argued that civil violations will allow the border to be secured while treating migrants more humanely. |
| The debate also has the effect of shifting the focus away from the Trump administration’s most controversial enforcement action: taking children away from parents so that the adults could be imprisoned for crossing the border illegally. Some of the candidates mentioned the family separation issue Wednesday night, but the bigger clash was over whether border crossing should be a crime. That plays into the hands of Mr. Trump and Stephen Miller, the chief architect of his immigration policies. Both have repeatedly accused Democrats of being the party of open borders, an attack that is certain to be at the center of the president’s 2020 election campaign. | The debate also has the effect of shifting the focus away from the Trump administration’s most controversial enforcement action: taking children away from parents so that the adults could be imprisoned for crossing the border illegally. Some of the candidates mentioned the family separation issue Wednesday night, but the bigger clash was over whether border crossing should be a crime. That plays into the hands of Mr. Trump and Stephen Miller, the chief architect of his immigration policies. Both have repeatedly accused Democrats of being the party of open borders, an attack that is certain to be at the center of the president’s 2020 election campaign. |
| What the facts are | What the facts are |
| What Ms. Harris said: | What Ms. Harris said: |
| “There is a syringe that costs $4,000 that will save their life. It is immoral, it is untenable and it must change with Medicare For all.” | “There is a syringe that costs $4,000 that will save their life. It is immoral, it is untenable and it must change with Medicare For all.” |
| This is misleading. A product called Evzio, an auto-injector that contains the anti-overdose medicine naloxone, does cost about $4,000 for a two-dose kit. But at the end of last year, the manufacturer, Kaléo, said it would soon come out with a cheaper generic alternative that will cost $178. In addition, the price of a different, syringe form version of naloxone currently retails for about $80. | This is misleading. A product called Evzio, an auto-injector that contains the anti-overdose medicine naloxone, does cost about $4,000 for a two-dose kit. But at the end of last year, the manufacturer, Kaléo, said it would soon come out with a cheaper generic alternative that will cost $178. In addition, the price of a different, syringe form version of naloxone currently retails for about $80. |
| What the facts are | What the facts are |
| What Mr. Yang said: | What Mr. Yang said: |
| “Amazon is closing 30 percent of America’s stores and malls.” | “Amazon is closing 30 percent of America’s stores and malls.” |
| This is false. The number of retail establishments — stores — in the United States is growing, not shrinking. There are more than 1 million such establishments, according to the Labor Department. About 75,000 of them closed in 2017, which is the most recent full year in the department’s statistics. There is no evidence that Amazon, or e-commerce broadly, is responsible for all of those closures, but even so, they don’t come anywhere close to a 30 percent closure rate. | This is false. The number of retail establishments — stores — in the United States is growing, not shrinking. There are more than 1 million such establishments, according to the Labor Department. About 75,000 of them closed in 2017, which is the most recent full year in the department’s statistics. There is no evidence that Amazon, or e-commerce broadly, is responsible for all of those closures, but even so, they don’t come anywhere close to a 30 percent closure rate. |
| Fact checks and explainers by Jim Tankersley, Katie Thomas, Reed Abelson, Michael D. Shear and Sheryl Gay Stolberg. |