John Kerry Quote: "What kind of Justice Department you'll have, whether we'll enforce the law, will we have equal opportunity, will women's rights be protected, will we have equal pay for women, which is going backwards, will a women's right to choose be protected. These are our constitutional rights, and I want to make sure we have judges who interpret the constitution of the United States according to the law. "

BUSH HAS NOT PROTECTED CIVIL RIGHTS:

U.S. CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION SAYS BUSH HAS NOT LEAD ON CIVIL RIGHTS.

Bush's Leadership On Civil Rights Divides America. In a new report that analyzes four years of Bush policy and rhetoric regarding civil rights, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has found that the Bush Administration has failed "to build common ground" and "missed opportunities to build consensus on key civil rights issues. Instead it has "adopted policies that divide Americans." The Commission goes on to document that Bush has not prioritized or exhibited leadership on civil rights in three key areas: Bush "seldom speaks on civil rights*and when he does his words and deeds often conflict"; his nominees and appointees do not support civil rights protections, which may eventually weaken civil rights laws; and his funding for six major civil rights programs has been lower than past presidents and he cut funding for 2004-2005. ["Redefining Rights in America: The Civil Rights Record of the George W. Bush Administration", the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 9/04]

BUSH ROLLS BACK WOMEN'S RIGHTS

Women's Rights, Health and Economic Opportunities Have Been Attacked By The Bush Administration. Bush's rhetoric on women does not match the reality of his policies. Bush has failed women in regards to their civil rights. Under his watch: the DOL eliminated enforcement of equal pay laws and removed information regarding equal pay statistics from government websites; the Dept. of Ed. tried to weaken Title IX, the Dept. of Justice argued that women's medical records were not private and has weakened enforcement of workplace discrimination; and Bush's appointments and nominees have opposed civil rights laws and a woman's right to choose. In matters of health, Bush has claimed to support a culture of life but proposed cutting funding for breast and cervical cancer research in his first year in office, banned stem cell research, and has withheld funding for the United Nations Population Fund which fights maternal and infant mortalities worldwide. In the workplace, Bush's policies have made it more difficult for women to succeed. Bush's push for deregulation removes workplace protections for that protect women's safety; the federal government has not met its contracting goals for women's small businesses; Bush closed the White House Women's office which promoted women's legislative priorities; and he tried to close the DOL's regional women's offices which promoted women's economic opportunities. [NWLC, "Slip-sliding Away: The Erosion of Hard Won Gains for Women Under the Bush Administration and an Agenda for Moving Forward," www.nwlc.org]

BUSH CLAIMS:
“We've got to be right 100 percent of the time here at home, and they've got to be right once, and that's the reality.”

REALITY: Bush has not done enough to make us as safe as we need to be.

Two Years in A Row- News Organizations Able To Ship Uranium Into American Ports Undetected. For a second year, U.S. government screeners failed to detect shipment of uranium in a container sent from overseas as part of a test of security at American ports. The ABCNEWS project involved a shipment to Los Angeles of 5 pounds of depleted uranium, fitted inside a lead pipe, inside a suitcase. Homeland Security officials say the radiation pagers and X-ray scanners used by inspectors did not detect anything suspicious. [ABC NEWS, www.abcnews.com, 9/10/04]

Bush Has Allowed Airline Security Gaps To Persist. Currently, less than 5% of air cargo is ever screened for explosives and baggage screeners continue to use labor-intensive and error-prone approaches, and there continues to be a shortage of qualified screeners. The Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General, Clark Kent Ervin told lawmakers that the TSA screeners and privately contracted airport workers perform “about the same, which is to say, equally poorly.” [National Journal, 6/09/04; The Hill, 4/30/03;House Select Committee on Homeland Security; Dallas Morning News 9/9/04; The Telegraph, 7/23/04; The Union Leader, 4/23/04; AP, 6/01/04]

DHS says own “Ad hoc Approach to Counterterrorism” and the Watch List is not Integrated. “The manner through which the watch list consolidation has unfolded has not helped the nation break from its pattern of ad hoc approaches to counterterrorism. Specifically, in the years since the September 11 terrorist attacks, just as in the past, the government has continued to implement solutions in an uncoordinated manner." [Wall Street Journal, 10/1/04, DHS IG Report, 9/04]

Federal Air Marshals On Board Only 1% of All Flights. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the marshals, pilots and retired executive say there are fewer than 3,500 air marshals to protect 35,000 daily flights. Taking into consideration time off for sick leave, vacation and training, the sources say only 500 to 1,000 flights per day are protected. Daily flights average 35,000 in the summer and 25,000 in the winter. Some pilots and flight attendants say they rarely see marshals on board. "What good is it if [marshals] are only on 1 percent of the flights?" said a federal air marshal. Thomas Quinn, director of the Federal Air Marshal Service, attributed the gap in security to a tight budget and understaffing. "We haven't had the budget to sustain [full staffing] for a variety of reasons," [Washington Times, 8/16/04; LA Times, 9/15/04]

Bush Cuts Funding for State and Local Homeland Security Grants by $800 Million. Bush cut funding to the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Domestic Preparedness, which supplies a variety of first-responder grants to state and local governments, by $800 million, to $3.6 billion in 2005 from $4.4 billion in 2004. [Department of Homeland Security, 2005 Budget in Brief, www.dhs.gov; Congressional Quarterly, www.CQ.com]

Border Patrol Not Equipped Properly. “However, border inspectors today still do not have basic intelligence and operational training to aid them in detecting and preventing terrorist entry, or adequate access to databases important to determining admissibility, or even viable options to prevent documents known to be fraudulent from being returned to travelers denied entry into the United States.” [9/11 Commission Staff Report p. 164 as cited by Los Angeles Times, “Immigration Laws Might Have Stopped Sept. 11 Plot: New commission report backs recommendation that suspected terrorists travel be closely tracked. Los Angeles Times, 8/4/04.]

BUSH CLAIMS:
“We have tripled the homeland security budget from 10 to 30 billion dollars.”

REALITY:
Bush Overstates what He has Spent on Homeland Security: In reality, Homeland security spending did not come close to tripling under Bush. The Bush administration's own estimates show that the Department of Homeland Security itself did not even see its budget double: growing from $19.7 billion in FY 2001 to $36.5 billion in FY 2004. [CBO, "Federal Funding for Homeland Security," 4/30/2004 and OMB, Budget FY 2005, page 178]

BUSH CLAIMS:
“We're doing the best we possibly can to share information. That's why the Patriot Act was important. The Patriot Act is vital, by the way. A tool that law enforcement now uses to be able to talk between each other.”

REALITY:
The Homeland Security Act section 892 and 893 required the President to come out with a government wide information sharing strategy by November 2003. This is still not done. [Homeland Security Act of 2002, 11/02]

FBI Fails to Translate Wiretap Recordings from Al Qaeda Cases. According to a Department of Justice Inspector General Report reported in the New York Times and Washington Post, the FBI failed to translate more than 120,000 hours of wiretap recordings from counterterrorism and 370,000 hours from counterintelligence investigations since the September 11th attacks despite increases in funding for linguists and translation services. In 50 al Qaeda cases it took at least a month for translation and noted specifically the FBI “has not prioritized its workload nationwide to ensure a zero backlog …[in] counterterrorism cases and, in particular al Qaeda cases.”(Washington Post, 9/28/04; New York Times, 9/28/04)

Bush Provides No Dedicated Funding For Interoperable Communications. Bush’s 2005 budget failed to request funding for interoperable communications grants which are used to improve the technology, equipment, and communications systems of America’s first responders. Bush’s latest budget constitutes an $85 million reduction in funding from FY 2004. Bush proposed no funding for the operations of SAFECOM, the principal entity coordinating the federal government's interoperability initiatives. [President’s Budget FY 2005; Office of The House Democratic Leader, 02/05/04]

GAO says Info Sharing needs Vast improvement. "The Homeland Security Department and state and local governments must improve information sharing on potential terrorist threats...The Justice Department said the report "reaches sweeping and extraordinarily negative conclusions about the adequacy of the governmental sharing of information in order to prevent acts of terror. GAO said much work remained to strengthen information sharing to detect and prepare for a potential attack."[Federal Computer Weekly, 08/27/04]

ABC POLL: Who Won The Debate:
Kerry: 44%
Bush: 41%

KERRY WINS
Carlos Watson: “I think when all is said and done, John Kerry ultimately will be perceived as the winner of this debate.” [CNN, 10/8/04]

Bob Scheiffer: “Well, I think that John Kerry is very comfortable in this kind of a setting. He's a very good debater. He's able to marshall facts. He seems cool. He makes his arguments. The President does not seem as comfortable as a debater.” [CBS, 10/8/04]

Bob Scheiffer: “I thought that that John Kerry got off to a much better start as he did in the first debate tonight.” [CBS, 10/8/04]

KERRY’S STRONT POINTS
Jeff Greenfield: “I thought one of the senator’s strongest points was on reimportation of Canadian drugs.” [CNN, 10/8/04]

George Stephanopoulos: “You saw him [Kerry] putting those skills to work here tonight, addressing the audience members by their first name, working in Missouri in several answers, of course the citizens in St Louis, as you said, confronting President Bush, and also laying out his plans.” [ABC, 10/8/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “I would pick somebody who would not allow their personal opinion to get in the way of the law. I would pick somebody who would strictly interpret the constitution of the United States.” [President Bush, Presidential Debate, 10-8-03]

REALITY: GEORGE BUSH NOMINATES RIGHT WING CONSERVATIVE JUDGES.

Bush Has Promised to Pack the Courts with Right Wing Judges. Bush has pledged to continue to pack the courts with his right wing judicial nominees and has said that Antonin Scalia is his role model for Supreme Court judges. At a GOP fundraiser in March 2002, Bush said, “First, we’ve got to get good, conservative judges appointed to the bench and approved by the United States Senate.” Bush’s appointees so far have been radically anti-choice, anti-civil rights, and anti-women. Non-partisan studies have found that in civil rights and civil liberties cases – abortion, gay rights, freedom of speech, right to privacy, race relations, for example – Bush judges made liberal decision only 26.5% of the time. A few of Bush’s egregious nominees include: Charles Pickering a notoriously against civil rights; Leon Holmes who said that rape victims become pregnant as frequently as “snow falls in Miami;” Thomas Griffith who tried to weaken Title IX programs; William Pryor who ruled against voting rights for minorities and persons with disabilities; and scores of anti-choice judges who could overturn Roe vs. Wade. [Bush Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senatorial Candidate John Cornyn; 3/28/02; NARAL, “The Real Judicial Selection Crisis: The Bush Administration’s Bid to Force an Anti-Choice Majority,” http://www.naral.org; www.nwlc.org; Detroit Free Press, 6/19/00; Reuters, 9/9/04]

BUSH FALSELY CLAIMS THAT DEMOCRATS HAVE CREATED A JUDICIAL EMERGENCY BY BLOCKING HIS NOMINEES

Bush Grossly Exaggerates The Claim That His Nominees Have Been Blocked And That Country Is In A Judicial Emergency. Bush has nominated more judges, 201, in his first term than his father, who nominated 187 justices. Bush has also had his nominees confirmed at a much faster rate than Clinton. Clinton put 377 nominees into lifetime positions as judges during eight years in office; Bush has placed 198 judges in less than half the time or nearly 70% of his total nominees. None of Bush’s nominations have been rejected by the Senate, and only 3 nominees have been blocked. According to NPR’s Nina Totenberg: “The number of such judicial emergencies has, in fact, been cut by 60 percent since the Clinton years when the Republican-controlled Senate refused to hold hearings or vote on some 60 Clinton nominees. Today there are just 14 designated judicial emergencies.” [LA Times, 7/7/04; NPR, 7/19/04; Senate Judiciary Committee; USDOJ Office of Legal Policy; Office of Sen. Leahy, leahy.senate.gov ]

BUSH CLAIMS: “The truth of the matter is if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he were the President of the United States and the world would be better off.” [Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY: JOHN KERRY WANTS SADDAM HUSSEIN IN PRISON, NOT IN POWER.

John Kerry: “No Doubt” Iraqis are Better Off Without Saddam. “There's no doubt Iraqis are living better lives with Saddam Hussein behind bars," said Kerry. "We've seen the mass graves, heard from the victims of Saddam's reign of terror, and know too well what Saddam (and his sons) Uday, and Qusay did to their political opponents. Whether it was the denial of freedom decade after decade, or the way in which Saddam Hussein built himself ornate palaces while his people suffered in absolute poverty, this was a brutal dictator whose iron fist made life horrifically worse for the Iraqi people.” [Copley News Service, 1/25/2004]

Bush: Disarmed Iraq Would “Change the Nature of the Iraqi Regime.” “Saddam Hussein must disarm himself -- or, for the sake of peace, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. … the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. Taking these steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice.” [Bush, Speech at Cincinnati, 10/7/02]

The Duelfer Report Found Iraq Didn’t Have Weapons or Plans to Get Them. The Duelfer report showed “that Saddam Hussein posed a diminishing threat at the time the United States invaded and did not possess, or have concrete plans to develop, nuclear, chemical or biological weapons,” the Washington Post wrote. The report found no evidence that Iraq was using aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons, and “no evidence that Iraq tried to buy uranium overseas after 1991.” [Washington Post, 10/6/04; Knight Ridder, 10/7/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges years ago said that the constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights. That's a personal opinion. That's not what the constitution says. The constitution of the United States says we're all -- you know, it doesn't say that. It doesn't speak to the equality of America.

REALITY: Dred Scott was denied rights of citizenship because of African ancestry. The decision was read in March of 1857 by a pro-slavery Chief Justice, Roger B. Taney. [pbs.org]

If you missed last few minutes of debate, Bush was asked to name 3 bad descisions he had made. With record job-loss, increasing violence in Iraq, rising health care costs, you know the rest, this was his answer:

"BUSH: Now, you ask for mistakes. I made some mistakes in appointing people, but I don't want to name
them. I don't want to hurt their feelings on national TV, but history will look back, and I'm fully prepared to face any mistakes that is history judges to my administration, because the President makes the decisions, the President has to take the responsibility."

BUSH SAID: We're going to train troops, and we are. We'll have 125,000 trained by the end of December.

REALITY: Back in February, they said 200,000 and Interim Prime Minister Allawi recently told a joint session of Congress that only 50,000 are ready. And, according to documents provided by the Pentagon to Rep Obey, only 22,700 security personnel have enough training to be “minimally effective.” [Rumsfeld, Department of Defense Briefing, 9/7/04; Allawi, Address to Joint Session of Congress, 9/23/04; Appropriations Committee, Democratic Staff; Rep. Obey; Fact Sheet, 9/24/04]

BUSH SAID: That's an odd thing to say, since we have tripled the homeland security budget from 10 to 30 billion dollars.

REALITY: The Bush administration’s own estimates show that the Department of Homeland Security did not even double its budget. [OMB, Budget FY 2005, page 178]

Continue reading this entry...

BUSH CLAIMS: “Let me make sure you understand my decision. Those stem cell lines already existed.” [Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY: Bush-Approved Stem Cell Lines Unusable in Humans. The 19 viable stem cell lines that Bush approved for federal research were all grown on a “feeder layer” of mouse cells. Any attempt to transplant the cells into humans for treatment would create a danger of passing mouse-borne viruses into the recipient. [Boston Globe, 5/23/04; Rocky Mountain News, 4/27/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “I too hope that we'll discover cures from the stem cells, from the research derived, but I think we have to be very careful in balancing the ethics and the science…” [Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY: Stem Cell Research has the Potential to Save Lives and Cure Disease. Embryonic stem cell research has great potential to save lives and cure disease. Today, more than 100 million American children and adults suffer from incurable diseases like diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, heart disease, cancer, and spinal cord injuries. [Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research]

New Research Shows Compounds from Stem Cells Can Help Organs Repair Themselves. “Embryonic stem cells, valued by researchers for their ability to become any kind of tissue that a body might need, also produce druglike compounds that can help ailing organs repair themselves, scientists are reporting today. The new work offers the most definitive evidence yet that the versatile cells, derived from embryos, can help repair organs two ways: by filling in damaged areas -- the primary focus of stem cell research to date -- and also by secreting potent chemicals that can make tissues rejuvenate themselves. … ‘I think these [stem] cells are more powerful than people had originally imagined,’ said Robert Benezra, a molecular biologist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, who led the study with Diego Fraidenraich.” [Washington Post, 10/8/04]

Nancy Reagan Has Called for Expanding Stem Cell Lines, Saying We Can’t Lose Any More Time. In May 2004, Nancy Reagan told a fundraiser for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation that stem cell research must be pursued “to save families from the pain” of debilitating illnesses. “I don't see how we can turn our backs on this,” she said. “We have lost so much time. I just can't bear to lose any more.” [LA Times, 5/9/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “Yeah, he's got a record. He's been there for 20 years. You can run, but you can't hide. He voted 98 times to raise taxes. I mean, these aren't made-up figures.”

REALITY: BOGUS ATTACKS

Kerry has gone on the legislative record over 640 times for lower taxes. [CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY VOTES; CQ’S CONGRESS & THE NATION; CQ ALMANAC; SENATE REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE; CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE BILL SUMMARIES (VIA THOMAS.LOC.GOV), BILL TEXTS (VIA THOMAS.LOC.GOV)]
.

BUSH CLAIMS: “Now, he says he's only going to tax the rich. You realize 900,000 small businesses will be taxed under his plan, because most small businesses are Subchapter S Corp.S or limited partnerships and they pay tax at the individual income tax level. And so when you're running up the taxes like that, you're taxing job creators, and that's not how you keep jobs here.”

REALITY: “Undoing Tax Cuts Will Have Little Impact on Small Businesses” according to the Wall Street Journal and “Bush Assertion on Tax Cuts Is at Odds With IRS Data” according to the Washington Post. George Bush uses a misleading definition of small business, a definition that factcheck.org points out would include George Bush himself because “He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise.” The Wall Street Journal says that, “Few of them [small businesses] make enough money to be affected by Sen. Kerry's proposal to undo the Bush tax cuts on those with incomes above $200,000.” Finally, the Bush charges ignore the 35 million small businesses that pay lower taxes under the Kerry proposals – including tax cuts for small businesses that create jobs, provide health insurance, zero capital gains for startup investments in small businesses, and a 5 percent reduction in the corporate rate. [Wall Street Journal, “Undoing Tax Cuts Will Have Little Impact on Small Businesses,” 4/1/2004; Washington Post, “Bush Assertion on Tax Cuts Is at Odds With IRS Data,” 2/24/2004; factcheck.org, “A Bush-Cheney ad says Kerry would raise taxes for 900,000 ‘small businesses’ and ‘hurt jobs.’ It’s a big exaggeration,” 9/23/2004]

From http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@DocID=265.html:

“President Bush himself would have qualified as a "small business owner" under the Republican definition, based on his 2001 federal income tax returns. He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise. However, 99.99% of Bush's total income came from other sources that year. (Bush also qualified as a "small business owner" in 2000 based on $314 of "business income," but not in 2002 and 2003 when he reported his timber income as "royalties" on a different tax schedule.)”

Bush says that John Kerry will raise taxes on small businesses, but the Wall Street Journal said that “undoing tax cuts will have little impact on small businesses” and the Washington Post said “Bush assertion on tax cuts is at odds with IRS data”

George Bush uses a misleading definition of small business, a definition that factcheck.org points out would include George Bush himself because “He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise.” The Wall Street Journal says that, “Few of them [small businesses] make enough money to be affected by Sen. Kerry's proposal to undo the Bush tax cuts on those with incomes above $200,000.” Finally, the Bush charges ignore the 35 million small businesses that pay lower taxes under the Kerry proposals – including tax cuts for small businesses that create jobs, provide health insurance, zero capital gains for startup investments in small businesses, and a 5 percent reduction in the corporate rate. [Wall Street Journal, “Undoing Tax Cuts Will Have Little Impact on Small Businesses,” 4/1/2004; Washington Post, “Bush Assertion on Tax Cuts Is at Odds With IRS Data,” 2/24/2004; factcheck.org, “A Bush-Cheney ad says Kerry would raise taxes for 900,000 ‘small businesses’ and ‘hurt jobs.’ It’s a big exaggeration,” 9/23/2004]

President Bush has supported record increases in the debt limit. From 1998 to 2001, America paid off $453 billion of the debt. But then, from 2002 to 2004, the debt ceiling will have to be raised three times. First by $450 billion in 2002, then by a record $984 billion just one year later in 2003. Now, Secretary Snow is seeking a third increase in the debt limit by $690 billion. [House Budget Committee Democratic Staff, “Alarm on the Debt Limit,” 8/5/2004]

BUSH CLAIMS: That's why I'm a big proponent of clean coal technology to make sure we can use coal but in a clean way.

REALITY: Bush Broke Promise on Clean Coal. Four years ago, George Bush promised voters that he would increase jobs and spend $2 billion over 10 years on clean coal technologies. But George Bush has simply walked away from that pledge. In the meantime many coal communities have lost jobs. In his proposed budget for next year, George Bush cuts basic coal research by 30%, cuts the funds available for the Clean Coal Power Initiative solicitation by 70%, and pays for his FutureGen initiative with funds raided from these and other Clean Coal programs. [The Herald Dispatch, 10/3/00; Department of Energy Budget Request, FY2002-FY2005]

BUSH CLAIMS: “First he says he's for medical liability reform.” [Bush, 10/8/04]

RESPONSE: John Kerry has More Ambitious and Effective Medical Malpractice Plan. He will eliminate the special privileges that allow insurance companies to fix prices and collude in ways that increase medical malpractice premiums; require that individuals making medical malpractice claims first go before a qualified medical specialist to make sure a reasonable grievance exists; require states to ensure the availability of non-binding mediation in all malpractice claims before cases proceed trial; support sanctions against plaintiffs and lawyers who bring frivolous medical malpractice claims, including a “three strikes and you’re out” provision preventing lawyers who file three frivolous cases from bringing another suit for 10 years; and oppose punitive damages – unless intentional misconduct, gross negligence, or reckless indifference to life can be established. Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter wrote that the provisions of the Kerry-Edwards reform plan were more aggressive than Bush’s in terms of standing up to lawyers. Alter wrote that Edwards had “a tort-reform plan that goes beyond Bush’s in sanctioning lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits.” [www.johnkerry.com; Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, 2/16/04]

Bush’s Plan Will Not Reduce Costs and Will Only Benefit the Insurance Industry. The 2003 Weiss Report found that despite caps on economic damages in 19 states, “most insurers continued to increase premiums [for doctors] at a rapid pace, regardless of caps.” The report found that caps only slowed the increase in the size of awards insurers paid, and that insurers failed to pass along any savings to those physicians in states with caps by refusing to lower physicians’ insurance premiums. The Congressional Budget Office found malpractice caps would only reduce health insurance premiums by 0.4 to 0.5 percent. [Weiss Report, 6/3/03; Congressional Budget Office, 1/8/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “The reason I bring that up, is because he's proposed 2.3 trillion dollars in new spending.” [George W. Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY:

Washington Post Bush’s $3 Trillion of Spending “Far Eclipses” Kerry; Goldman Sachs Says Kerry is More “Credible” On The Budget. According to the Washington Post, “The expansive agenda President Bush laid out at the Republican National Convention was missing a price tag, but administration figures show the total is likely to be well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade… The cost of the new tax breaks and spending outlined by Bush at the GOP convention far eclipses that of the Kerry plan.” This is why Goldman Sachs says that, “on the budget, Senator Kerry is more credible.” [Washington Post, “$3 Trillion Price Tag Left Out as Bush Details His Agenda,” 9/14/2004; Goldman Sachs, “Bush vs. Kerry,” 9/10/2004]

Bush Has Failed To Balance a Single Budget: $5.6 Trillion Surplus Replaced With $2.3 Trillion Deficit. The $5.6 trillion ten-year surplus projected in January 2001 is gone, replaced with $2.3 trillion in deficits over the next ten years—a fiscal decline of $7.9 trillion in just three years. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the federal budget deficit will be a record $442 billion in 2004. [CBO, The Budget And Economic Outlook: An Update, 9/04]

Fiscal Conservatives Have Attacked Bush’s Irresponsible Policies. “Conservatives are angry,” including Dick Armey is upset about spending and says Republicans “own the town” on deficits, while the Heritage Foundation says the President isn’t doing “nearly enough.” Conservative Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform says spending is “growing too rapidly” and the American Spectator says Bush’s leadership has been “non-existent.” Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth said that “There's now not any pretense that Bush is committed to smaller government.” [Wall Street Journal, 1/30/04; Washington Post, 12/6/03; “The State of Spending,” Heritage Foundation, 1/21/04; “Supply-Side Economics,” American Spectator, 11/26/03; Washington Post, 12/6/03]

Even National Journal stated that use of their rating is, “Disconcerting because the shorthand used to describe our ratings of Kerry and Edwards is sometimes misleading -- or just plain wrong."
The National Journal, 8/3004

BUSH CLAIMS: KERRY’S HEALTH CARE PLAN WOULD LEAD TO RATIONING.

“Government-sponsored health care would lead to rationing. It would ruin the quality of health care in America.” [Bush, 10/8/04]

RESPONSE: Independent Analysts Agree That Kerry’s Plan Would Not Disrupt Coverage – But Would Actually Expand It. “Kerry's proposal avoids the usual pitfalls of Democratic health reform efforts. It is not overly prescriptive, and it wouldn't disrupt current health insurance. Some of Kerry's ideas -- including the use of the federal employees’ health system as a model and tax credits for low-income individuals -- are borrowed from conservative ideology…The Kerry proposal is very ambitious, but it would not dramatically change current coverage. For the most part, the Kerry plan would improve the health system using incentives, not dictates from Washington. New regulations would not be overly disruptive.” [Jeff Lemieux, Centrists.org, 8/25/04]

Bush’s Plan, Not Kerry’s, Will Force Health Care Rationing. “[Bush] wants to expand tax-favored plans called Health Savings Accounts that individuals can use, in conjunction with insurance policies to protect against catastrophic costs, to pay for healthcare expenses out of their pocket. More companies are examining that approach too. This might be an attractive option for many younger and healthier workers. But it risks leaving the traditional group plans with only the sickest and most expensive cases - forcing them to raise premiums in a spiral that would encourage relatively healthy workers to quit for a better deal in the individual market. Eventually, [Richard, director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research] Brown says, that might produce ‘price rationing of medical care,’ as comprehensive coverage grows too expensive for all but the wealthiest and healthiest.” [Los Angeles Times, 9/20/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “And finally he recollected says he's going to have a novel health care plan. You know what it is? The Federal Government is going to run it.” [Bush, 10/8/04]

RESPONSE: Bush’s Charge is “Not True … Far From It.” PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: “I'm running against a fellah who has got a massive, complicated blueprint to have our government take over the decision-making in health care.” . . . TERRY MORAN: (Off Camera) “But, but that's not true. John Kerry's plan does not call for a government takeover of the health care system. Far from it.” [ABC News World News Tonight, 9/13/04]

Kerry's Plan Relies on “Tax Breaks to Employers and Tax Credits to Individuals.” “Instead of offering a big government health care plan, the Kerry plan "studiously avoids any similarity to the one proposed in 1993 by the Clintons,” Knight Ridder reported. “It relies on existing agencies and on tax breaks to employers and tax credits to individuals to ensure access to the same health care program available to members of Congress and federal employees.” The New York Times wrote that “the strength of the Kerry approach is that it relies primarily on well-tested health-insurance arrangements.” [Knight Ridder, 9/14/04; New York Times editorial, 10/2/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “My opponent is right. We need good intelligence. It's also a curious thing or him to say since right after ’93 he voted to cut the intelligence budget by $7.5 billion.”

REALITY:

Porter Goss, Hand-Picked By Bush to Head CIA, Wanted to Cut Intel More Than Kerry. “The Bush reelection campaign has been blasting Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry as deeply irresponsible for proposing intelligence cuts at the same time. A Bush campaign ad released on Aug. 13 carried a headline: ‘John Kerry...proposed slashing Intelligence Budget 6 Billion Dollars.’ But the cuts Goss supported are larger than those proposed by Kerry and specifically targeted the ‘human intelligence’ that has recently been found lacking. The recent report by the commission probing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks called for more spending on human intelligence.” [Washington Post, 8/24/04]

In 1995, a Secret Billion Dollar Slush Fund was Found in the Intelligence Budget Which Served as a Opportunity To Cut Waste And Abuse. “The White House said yesterday it was "inexcusable" that the top secret agency that manages U.S. spy satellites had reportedly hoarded $ 1 billion in unspent funds…The unspent funds were discovered after the Senate intelligence committee questioned a luxurious $ 300 million headquarters the NRO was building in a Washington suburb.” Kerry was part of bipartisan effort to cut waste & abuse in the NRO. The $1.5 billion cut Kerry proposed represented about the same amount Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), then chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told the Senate that same day he wanted to cut from the intelligence spending bill based on unspent, secret funds that had been accumulated ‘without informing the Pentagon, CIA or Congress.’ [Washington Post, 3/12/04; Washington Post, 9/25/95]

Washington Post: Republican Criticism on Kerry Intel Record is Wrong. “President Bush, in his first major assault on Sen. John F. Kerry's legislative record, said this week that his Democratic opponent proposed a $1.5 billion cut in the intelligence budget, a proposal that would ‘gut the intelligence services,’ and one that had no co-sponsors because it was ‘deeply irresponsible’….In fact, the Republican-led Congress that year approved legislation that resulted in $3.8 billion being cut over five years from the budget of the National Reconnaissance Office -- the same program Kerry said he was targeting.” [Washington Post, 3/12/04]

Kerry Strongly Supports Increased Intelligence Funding – Including $250 Billion in the Previous 8 Years – A 50% Increase Since 1996 – John Kerry has strongly supported recent increases in Intelligence funding, and, in the wake of 9/11, has supported the bipartisan call for an even larger increase in intelligence funding. According to a report issued by the Center for Defense Information entitled “Intelligence Funding and the War on Terror” John Kerry has supported approximately $250 billion in Intelligence funding over the past eight years alone. The report concludes that Kerry has supported a 50% increase in intelligence funding since 1996. [Senate Intelligence Authorization Funding voice votes 9/25/02, 12/13/01, 12/6/00, 11/19/1999, 10/8/98 & 9/25/96; 1997, Senate Roll Call vote # 109; Jewish News Bulletin of Northern California, 4/5/02]

BUSH CLAIMS: “First, the national journal named Senator Kennedy one of the most liberal senators of all, and that's say saying something, that bunch.”

REALITY: Besides GETTING SENATOR KERRY’S NAME WRONG, The Liberal Label Is Misleading And Disingenuous: John Kerry Opposed His Party to Vote for Deficit-Reduction, Supported Landmark Welfare Reform, Supports Middle Class Tax Cuts, And Supports Increasing Our Military. These Attacks are False.

John Kerry Has Voted For Deficit-reduction Measures Sponsored by Conservatives: John Kerry was one of the first Democrats to sign onto the landmark Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill. He has also not shied away from politically difficult plans to cut wasteful spending, often joining with Republican John McCain to tackle government waste. [S1702, 99th Congress; [McCain press release, 10/24/95; Senate Vote #121, 7/10/91; Senate Vote #166, 8/3/92; Senate Vote #296, 9/30/93; Senate Vote #337, 10/27/93; cosponsor of S. 463 in 1993; cosponsor of SA 983 to HR2445 in 1993; Boston Globe, 10/8/85]

John Kerry Voted for Landmark Welfare Reform: John Kerry voted for the landmark 1996 Welfare Reform legislation that created time limits and work requirements on recipients of welfare. [Vote #232, 7/23/96, Welfare Reconciliation Bill (S. 1956) passed 74-24, Kerry: Yes]

John Kerry Supports Middle Class Tax Cuts: In his nearly 20 years in the Senate, John Kerry voted for 290 measures to cut taxes and sponsored or cosponsored another 352 measures – that’s a total of 642 times on the record supporting tax cuts. John Kerry’s Plan for American includes tax cuts and credits for middle-class earners and an increase in the size of the armed forces. Kerry has voted for middle class taxes. [CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY VOTES; CQ’S CONGRESS & THE NATION; CQ ALMANAC; SENATE REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE; CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE BILL SUMMARIES]

Centrist Democratic Leadership Council founder Al From Credits Kerry With the Reform of the Democratic Party: “Kerry was here and was an important part of the redefinition of the party.”[Washington Post, 7-19-04]

Liberal Ratings Create “Midleading Impressions”. Republicans have used ratings by National Journal and the ADA to call Kerry the most liberal senator. But even the groups themselves deem that the ratings can be distorted. “These organizations warn that their liberalism indexes can, for a variety of reasons, create misleading impressions.”[Washington Post, 7-19-04]

Washington Post Bush’s $3 trillion of Spending “Far Eclipses” Kerry; Goldman Sachs Says Kerry is More “Credible” On The Budget. According to the Washington Post, “The expansive agenda President Bush laid out at the Republican National Convention was missing a price tag, but administration figures show the total is likely to be well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade… The cost of the new tax breaks and spending outlined by Bush at the GOP convention far eclipses that of the Kerry plan.” This is why Goldman Sachs says that, “on the budget, Senator Kerry is more credible.” [Washington Post, “$3 Trillion Price Tag Left Out as Bush Details His Agenda,” 9/14/2004; Goldman Sachs, “Bush vs. Kerry,” 9/10/2004]

BUSH CLAIMS: “Saddam Hussein was a threat because he could have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist enemies.” [Bush Remarks, Second Presidential Debate, 10/8/04]

REALITY: Bush Admitted Yesterday That Iraq Did Not Have WMD. Bush: “Chief weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, has now issued a comprehensive report that confirms the earlier conclusion of David Kay that Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there.” [Bush Remarks, 10/7/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “Doctors practice defensive medicine because of all the frivolous lawsuits that cost our government $28 billion a year.” [George Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY: CBO Study Disputes Claim that Lawyers Cause Doctors to Practice Defensive Medicine. According to a 2004 CBO study: “Proponents of limiting malpractice liability have argued that much greater savings in health care costs would be possible through reductions in the practice of defensive medicine. However, some so-called defensive medicine may be motivated less by liability concerns than by the income it generates for physicians or by the positive (albeit small) benefits to patients. On the basis of existing studies and its own research, CBO believes that savings from reducing defensive medicine would be very small.” [Congressional Budget Office “Limiting Tort Liability for Malpractice,” 1/8/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “The reason I bring that up, is because he's proposed 2.3 trillion dollars in new spending.” [George W. Bush, 10/8/04]

REALITY: Kerry is “More Credible” on Fiscal Responsibility. The truth is that John Kerry is the candidate of fiscal responsibility in this race, which is why Goldman Sachs says that Kerry budget plan is “more credible” than Bush’s. Kerry was one of the first Democrats to sign onto the landmark Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill. Kerry also voted for the Clinton economic plan in 1993, which no Republicans supported, and which led the way to ending years of government deficits and massive economic growth, and he supported the 1997 Balanced Budget Act. [“US Economic Analysts,” Goldman Sachs & Co, Global Economic Research; Vote #209, 7/31/97; Vote #247, 8/6/1993]

Washington Post Bush’s $3 trillion of Spending “Far Eclipses” Kerry; Goldman Sachs Says Kerry is More “Credible” On The Budget. According to the Washington Post, “The expansive agenda President Bush laid out at the Republican National Convention was missing a price tag, but administration figures show the total is likely to be well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade… The cost of the new tax breaks and spending outlined by Bush at the GOP convention far eclipses that of the Kerry plan.” This is why Goldman Sachs says that, “on the budget, Senator Kerry is more credible.” [Washington Post, “$3 Trillion Price Tag Left Out as Bush Details His Agenda,” 9/14/2004; Goldman Sachs, “Bush vs. Kerry,” 9/10/2004]

Bush Has Failed To Balance a Single Budget: $5.6 Trillion Surplus Replaced With $2.3 Trillion Deficit. The $5.6 trillion ten-year surplus projected in January 2001 is gone, replaced with $2.3 trillion in deficits over the next ten years—a fiscal decline of $7.9 trillion in just three years. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the federal budget deficit will be a record $442 billion in 2004. [CBO, The Budget And Economic Outlook: An Update, 9/04]

Fiscal Conservatives Have Attacked Bush’s Irresponsible Policies. “Conservatives are angry,” including Dick Armey is upset about spending and says Republicans “own the town” on deficits, while the Heritage Foundation says the President isn’t doing “nearly enough.” Conservative Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform says spending is “growing too rapidly” and the American Spectator says Bush’s leadership has been “non-existent.” Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth said that “There's now not any pretense that Bush is committed to smaller government.” [Wall Street Journal, 1/30/04; Washington Post, 12/6/03; “The State of Spending,” Heritage Foundation, 1/21/04; “Supply-Side Economics,” American Spectator, 11/26/03; Washington Post, 12/6/03]

BUSH CLAIMS: “QUESTIONER: Why did you block the reimportation of safer and inexpensive drugs from Canada which would have cut 40 to 60 percent off of the costs? BUSH: I haven't yet. I just want to make sure they're safe. When a drug comes in from Canada, I want to make sure it cures you and doesn't kill you.”

REALITY: White House Strongly Opposed Drug Re-Importation Despite Congressional Research Service Reports Concluding Canadian Drugs Are Just as Safe as Those in the US. . In a Statement of Administration Principals issued by the White House Office of Management and Budget on July 23, 2003, Bush stated his strong opposition to drug re-importation. The SAP states, “H.R. 2427 [to allow the re-importation of prescription drugs] is dangerous legislation. It would expose Americans to greater potential risk of harm from unsafe or ineffective drugs, would be extremely costly to implement, and would overwhelm FDA's already heavily burdened regulatory system.” This despite the fact that the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of Congress, issued reports in 2001 and 2003, concluding both times that the Canadian drug supply was safe for importation to the US. The 2003 report stated, "The statutory requirements for approving and marketing pharmaceutical products in the United States and Canada are, in general, quite similar." It found that medications manufactured and distributed in Canada meet or surpass quality control guidelines set by the FDA. [Office of Management and Budget, SAP on HR 2472, 7/23/03, www.whitehouse.gov/omb; New York Times, 6/21/03; Knight Ridder, 11/27/03; USA Today, 8/12/03]

John Kerry Will Fight to Make Prescription Drugs More Affordable. John Kerry voted again and again to permit licensed pharmacists or wholesalers to import prescription drugs from Canada to help cut down on prescription drug costs. He has cosponsored legislation and voted to give states incentives to negotiate Medicaid prescription drug prices with manufacturers and require drug manufacturers to give Medicaid programs the same discounts they gave to HMOs and other preferred customers, and called for similar negotiating powers for Medicare. Kerry and Edwards will cut prescription drugs costs by allowing the federal government to negotiate better prices through the Medicare program; permitting the reimportation of safe, FDA-approved drugs; supporting incentives to allow generic drugs to get to market faster. [Vote #217, 7/19/00; Vote #200, 7/31/02; Vote #201, 7/31/02; Vote #232, 6/20/03; S. 2605, Kerry cosponsored 10/8/90; S. 3029, Kerry cosponsored 10/8/90; Vote #182, 7/18/02; Associated Press, 12/15/03; www.johnkerry.com]

REALITY: BUSH’S MEDICARE BILL WAS A BIG WIN FOR DRUG COMPANIES, A BIG LOSS FOR AMERICA’S SENIORS

Bush’s Medicare Drug Plan Does Nothing to Reduce Costs on Seniors. Seniors will not see cheaper prescription prices when the new Bush Medicare plan is fully implemented in 2006, because it does nothing to control the rising cost of drugs. It explicitly blocks price negotiation and re-importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. According to Consumers Union, “most beneficiaries will face higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs after full implementation, despite the benefit.” In addition, drug manufacturers have been raising prices in anticipation of a Medicare discount plan, negating potential savings from discount cards. [New York Times, 9/4/03; Office of Management and Budget, SAP on HR 2472, 7/23/03;Los Angeles Times, 9/17/04 Consumers Union, 11/17/03; AARP, Trends in Manufacturer Prices of Brand Name Prescription Drugs Used By Older Americans – First Quarter 2004 Update, June 2004; Wall Street Journal, 3/24/04]

Drug Companies Will Pocket $139 Billion in Profits From Bush’s Medicare Law. According to an independent study as a result of Bush's Medicare bill the drug industry will receive an additional $139.2 billion in profits over the next eight years. That will amount to 61 percent of the spending in the bill allocated to providing the new prescription drug benefit. [Alan Sager, Boston University School of Public Health, 4/12/04]

BUSH: I tripled homeland security.

REALITY: Homeland security spending did not come close to tripling under Bush. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), “Gross budget authority for those functions in that year, excluding supplemental appropriations enacted immediately after September 11, totaled about $17 billion. Adding the supplemental appropriations raises that figure by almost $4 billion, bringing total funding for 2001 to $21 billion. The Congress and the President increased that amount to… an estimated $41 billion for 2004.” These CBO estimates are for the homeland security function, as defined by the Office of Management and Budget. The Bush administration’s own estimates show that the Department of Homeland Security itself did not even see its budget double: growing from $19.7 billion in FY 2001 to $36.5 billion in FY 2004. [CBO, “Federal Funding for Homeland Security,” 4/30/2004 and OMB, Budget FY 2005, page 178]

Bush said he was concerned about terrorists coming into Iraq-- they are there now as result of war.

U.S. Naval War College Professor: "Terrorism Has Come to Iraq as a Result of the War." Ahmed Hashim, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College who studies the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, also attributed much of the violence to the porous borders and the fact that the U.S. presence has become a magnet for jihadists. "I think terrorism has come to Iraq as a result of the war," he said. "The country has unpatrolled and open borders, so all kinds of extremists who want to fight America have an excellent playing field to do so now." [International Herald Tribune, 6/22/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: KERRY FLIP-FLOPPED ON DIPLOMACY IN IRAQ

REALITY: Bush Rushed To War With No Plan To Win The Peace. In August 2003, the Joint Chiefs of Staff prepared a secret report assessing the post-war planning for Iraq. The report blamed “setbacks in Iraq on a flawed and rushed war-planning process.” It also said “planners were not given enough time” to plan for reconstruction. A New York Times report found that, “A yearlong State Department study predicted many of the problems that have plagued the American-led occupation of Iraq.” The study was produced by experts on Iraq from various fields, yet “several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials” until after the war. Several administration officials and Bush himself have admitted to a “miscalculation” of what postwar conditions would be. David Kay, former head of the Iraq Survey Group, believes the administration’s plans for locating and securing Iraqi WMD were “practically useless” and it was “not a task that the military planned to take on or gave a high priority to.” The Schlesinger Report, commissioned by the Pentagon, found that the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison were not just the failure of some individuals to follow known standards, and they are more than the failure of a few leaders to enforce proper discipline. There is both institutional and personal responsibility at higher levels” and said the administration had failed to plan for such a large population of prisoners. [Washington Times, 9/3/03, emphasis added; New York Times, 10/19/03; NYT, 8/27/04; Powell Interview, BBC Television, 6/24/04; Arms Control Today, 4/04; Schlesinger Report, August 2004, pg. 5 ]

BUSH CLAIMS: Let me talk about North Korea. It is naive and dangerous to take a policy that he suggested the other day, which is to have bilateral relations with North Korea.
REALITY:

North Korean Nuclear Capability Has Quadrupled Under Bush’s Watch While He Sat By and Failed to Do Anything. The Bush administration's erratic handling of the North Korean nuclear crisis has served only to create confusion and put North Korea's despotic leader, Kim Jong Il, in the driver's seat. Bush initially said he would “not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea,” yet since he took office, North Korea’s nuclear capability has “quadrupled,” with U.S. intelligence services estimating that Pyongyang now has fuel for up to eight nuclear weapons. According to Bush Administration officials, “The United States has determined that North Korea is working on new ballistic missile systems designed to deliver nuclear warheads and that it is testing the technology by proxy in Iran.” [ABC, “This Week, 9/12/04; Christian Science Monitor, 9/15/04; Associated Press, 8/5/04; NYT, 9/12/04]

Former Bush Special Envoy to North Korea Said Bush Lacked An Effective Strategy To Deal With North Korea. “Charles Pritchard, formerly Secretary of State Colin Powell's top official dealing with North Korea, has warned for months that "the White House lacks an effective strategy to dissuade North Korea from building up its nuclear arms." Under Bush's watch, "North Korea's nuclear arsenal, which was once thought to number one or two weapons, appears to be growing substantially." According to Pritchard, the situation has deteriorated because "the administration has neither offered much of a carrot nor wielded a stick." The administration has refused to engage North Korea in direct negotiations or "put the North Koreans on notice that further developments will trigger economic sanctions or perhaps even military actions." [United Press International, 9/21/04]

BUSH CLAIMS: “That's a great question about Iran. That's why in my speech to the Congress I said there's an axis of evil, Iraq, Iran and North Korea, and we're pay attention to it and we're making progress.” [Presidential Debate, 10/8/04]

REALITY: Under Cheney, Halliburton Subsidiaries Did Business In Iran. Under Cheney’s leadership, Halliburton bought out Dresser Industries in 1998 and, subsequently, acquired Dresser’s subsidiary Kellogg Iran. In response to questions from New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Halliburton gave the comptroller a “confidential” report, which Thompson posted on his website in October 2003. The report shows that Halliburton “had opened an office in Iran under the name Halliburton Products and Services Ltd., its Cayman Islands subsidiary, in February 2000.” According to company documents obtained by AP, Halliburton’s foreign subsidiaries do between $30 million and $40 million in business each year with Iran and did about $65 million in business with Iran last year. [AP, 10/8/04; Houston Chronicle, 12/15/03; Office of New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, 12/15/03; Halliburton Co. 10-Q, 5/7/04; Halliburton 10-K, 4/5/99; Russian Oil and Gas Report, 6/27/01; ABC, This Week, 7/30/00; NYT, 9/10/02]

BUSH CLAIMS: Kerry has flip flopped on his support for the Patriot Act.

REALITY: Kerry Supports Retaining More Than 95% of Patriot Act and Strengthening Key Provisions. John Kerry has said that he supports retaining more than 95% of the Patriot Act and would make some of the current provisions even stronger. For example, John Kerry helped to write the provisions of the Patriot Act governing money laundering. He would add new measures to crack down on money laundering, such as provisions to freeze the funds of terrorists and to stop the use of unregulated financial institutions such as hedge to hide terrorist funds. Kerry also supports improvements in information-sharing under the Act. [The National Journal, 1/31/04; S.398, Introduced 2/27/200; www.johnkerry.com]

Kerry and Republican Senators Are Calling For Modifications in Other Provisions to Prevent Abuses. Kerry and Republican Senators Larry Craig, Arlen Specter and others have recognized the need to fix the Patriot Act to improve its effectiveness as an anti-terrorism tool and prevent abuses that violate civil liberties. They have co-sponsored legislation to achieve this goal. This legislation would revise a handful of Patriot Act provisions to prevent abuses of the act. [S.1907, Introduced 10/2/2003]

Court Strikes Down Part of Patriot Act. “A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a part of the U.S. Patriot Act that allows the FBI to demand company records from businesses without court approval is unconstitutional.” [CNN, 9/29/04]

Key GOP Leaders and Lawmakers Have Called For Reform Of The Patriot Act To Prevent Violations Of Our Civil Liberties. Sen. Specter voted for the Patriot Act, then called for reforms, saying “I don’t think what people read is subject to inquiry. What difference does that make? It has a chilling effect on fundamental freedom of activity.” Former GOP House Majority Leader Dick Armey has also criticized the Patriot Act, saying “I told the President I thought his Justice Department was out of control… Are we going to save ourselves from international terrorism in order to deny the fundamental liberties we protect to ourselves?…It doesn’t make sense to me.” [USA Today, 10/16/02; H.R. 3162, Roll Call #398, 10/24/01], [AP, 8/1/03; H.R. 3162, Vote #313, 10/25/01]

Even Bush Campaign Chairman Said The Patriot Act Needed to Be Reformed. Marc Racicot, Chairman, Bush-Cheney ‘04: “And it’s my belief, based upon the comments of members of Congress, who presently have legislation pending to provide refinements to that act, to bring that balance even truer than it has been, so that it does not end up invading the civil rights of any American, to be a cause that will be undertaken, and ultimately finished by Congress. . . . I do sense that most Americans realize that this is going to be an ongoing dialogue and process of refinement.” [Marc Racicot, remarks news conference at Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference, Dearborn, Michigan 17 Oct 2003]

BUSH CLAIMS: John Kerry is Against Tax Cuts for the Middle Class. “He just brought up the tax cut. You remember, we increased that child credit by a thousand dollars. Reduced the marriage penalty. Created a 10% tax bracket for the low-income Americans. That's right at the middle class. He voted against it and yet he tells you he is for a middle class tax cut. You have to be consistent when you're the president.” [President Bush]

REALITY: John Kerry Supports Twice As Much In New Middle-Class Tax Cuts as George Bush. John Kerry supports twice as much in new middle class tax cuts as George Bush. In total, he is proposing $419 billion in new pro-family, pro-jobs tax cuts – more than twice as much as the new tax cuts George Bush is proposing. And all of Kerry’s tax cuts are fully paid for by rolling back the Bush tax cuts on families making over $200,000 and closing corporate loopholes. These tax cuts include: College Opportunity Tax Credit of up to $4,000 on college tuition costs, a childcare tax credit of up to $1,000 to help families pay for childcare expenses, $177 billion in tax credits to make health care more affordable, and a new jobs tax credit for any new jobs created in manufacturing, other businesses affected by outsourcing, and small businesses. [www.johnkerry.com]

Duelfer: “Growing Pressure” Forced Saddam to Accept Weapons Inspectors. “But the question -- you know, why did he accept the inspectors? I think, you know, to the best we understand, from what he has said, which is not always the truth, and -- but from those around him, was he took -- he recognized the growing pressure. I mean, it was clear that the military force buildup was taking place. You know, his advisers convinced him that, look, there has been a ground shift of the support in the Security Council away from Iraq. He was feeling isolation. Some of the revenues were tailing off. And he was, I think, getting advice also from some of his friends on the Security Council, who said, ‘Look, the world has changed. You've got some problems here.’” [Duelfer Testimony, Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, 10/6/04]

Blix: “A Few Months More” for Inspections Would Have Revealed Iraq’s Lack of WMD. Former Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix: “Had we had a few months more we would have been able to tell both the CIA and others that there were no weapons of mass destruction (at) all the sites that they had given to us.” [AP, 10/7/04]

John Kerry Believed Giving Inspections Time to Work Would Be a Critically-Important Enforcement Mechanism – And Would Help Bring Allies to Our Side. Writing in the New York Times in September 2002, John Kerry called for “a clear ultimatum to Iraq before the world: Accept rigorous inspections without negotiation or compromise.” Kerry argued that “arms inspections – and I believe ultimately Saddam's unwillingness to submit to fail-safe inspections – is absolutely critical in building international support for our case to the world,” and made clear that “the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.” [John Kerry Op-Ed, New York Times, 9/6/02; John Kerry Remarks on Authorization of the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, Congressional Record, October 9, 2002; p. S10170]

Bremer: “We Never Had Enough Troops.” In recent days, former Coalition Provisional Authority Adminstrator L. Paul Bremer 3rd has repeatedly criticized the Bush Administration for failing to send enough troops to keep order in Iraq. “We never had enough troops on the ground,” Bremer said. In mid-September, Bremer stated that “the single most important change -- the one thing that would have improved the situation -- would have been having more troops in Iraq at the beginning and throughout,” and said that “although I raised [the need for more troops] a number of times with our government, I should have been even more insistent.” [Associated Press, 10/5/04; Paul Bremer Remarks, DePaul University, 9/16/04]

Bremer’s Comments Echo Gen. Eric Shinseki’s Estimate that “Several Hundred Thousand” Troops Would Be Needed for a Postwar Occupation of Iraq; Shinseki Made “Lame Duck” For Criticizing Administration Iraq Policy. “More than a year ago then Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki told Congress the occupation of Iraq would require 'several hundred thousand' troops. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz called that estimate 'wildly off the mark.' The Pentagon leaked the name of Shinseki's replacement months before his scheduled retirement, rendering him a lame duck.” [UPI, 4/12/04]

Military Generals Criticize Bush's Failures In Iraq War. "The troops are paying the price for arrogant mismanagement and poor planning at the civilian policy level," said retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Merrilll 'Tony' McPeak. General Anthony Zinni said, "There has been poor operational planning and execution on the ground." "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure," retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East. Army Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, who spent much of the year in western Iraq, said he believes that at the tactical level at which fighting occurs. [Boston Globe, 7/1/04; CBS, "60 Minutes," 5/23/04; LA Times, 5/23/04; Washington Post, 5/9/04]

BUSH: Saddam hussein was a threat because he could have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist enemies.

REALITY: No, he couldnt have. He didnt have them.

The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.

Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had progressively decayed since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of concerted efforts to restart the program.

The findings were similar on biological and chemical weapons. While Hussein had long dreamed of developing an arsenal of biological agents, his stockpiles had been destroyed and research stopped years before the United States led the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Duelfer said Hussein hoped someday to resume a chemical weapons effort after U.N. sanctions ended, but had no stocks and had not researched making the weapons for a dozen years. [Washington Post, 10/7/04]

George Bush says Iraq is moving rapidly towards elections. But as King Abdullah of the neighboring country of Jordan said this week, elections are “impossible in the chaos we see in Iraq today.” [AP, 9/28/04; Washington Post, 9/29/04]

Bush says he has trained 100,000 Iraqi security forces. Back in February, they told us it was 200,000. Interim Prime Minister Allawi told a joint session of Congress two weeks ago that only 50,000 are ready. And, according to documents provided by the Pentagon to Rep . Obey, only 22,700 security personnel have enough training to be “minimally effective.” [Rumsfeld, Department of Defense Briefing, 9/7/04; Allawi, Address to Joint Session of Congress, 9/23/04; Appropriations Committee, Democratic Staff; Rep. Obey; Fact Sheet, 9/24/04]

John Kerry Has a Plan to Win the Peace in Iraq. John Kerry and John Edwards believe the following principles should guide American policy in Iraq right now: internationalize, because others must share the burden; train Iraqis, because they must be responsible for their own security; move forward with reconstruction because that's an important way to stop the spread of terror; and help Iraqis achieve a viable government, because it is up to them to run their own country. [www.johnkerry.com]

Bush Rushed To War With No Plan To Win The Peace. Bush told the country that the administration would “plan carefully” for a war in Iraq. Yet in August 2003, the Joint Chiefs of Staff prepared a secret report assessing the post-war planning for Iraq. The report blamed “setbacks in Iraq on a flawed and rushed war-planning process.” It also said “planners were not given enough time” to plan for reconstruction. A New York Times report found that, “A yearlong State Department study predicted many of the problems that have plagued the American-led occupation of Iraq.” The study was produced by experts on Iraq from various fields, yet “several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials” until after the war. [Bush Remarks, 10/7/02; Washington Times, 9/3/03, emphasis added; New York Times, 10/19/03]

George Bush’s Plan Shifts the Tax Burden to the Middle Class. In contrast, under the Bush plan the “Tax Burden Shifts to the Middle” according to a Washington Post headline, and “middle America - average annual income $75,600 - saw its share of the federal tax burden increase from 18.5 percent to 19.5 percent.” In addition, George Bush has imposed a tax of thousands of dollars on families through higher costs for health care, gasoline, college tuition, and state and local taxes. [Tax Policy Center, “Kerry Plan vs. Current-Law, Size of Individual Income Tax Change, 2005,” 9/16/2004 and Washington Post, 8/13/04]

Bush Flip-Flopped On Key National Security Issues. Bush first opposed
the creation of an independent 9-11 Commission, but buckled after
receiving pressure from Democrats and the families of 9-11 victims. Bush
also opposed the creation of a Department of a Homeland Security but
later backed down under pressure. Bush also flip-flopped on giving the
National Intelligence Direction full budgetary authority; after being
slow to accept the 9-11 Commission's recommendation, the White House
said it would not give the NID budgetary power but later caved to
political pressure. [NYT, 9/21/02; AP, 9/8/04; New York Times, 2/28/03]

Bush Threatened to Veto $87 Billion. The White House threatened to veto
funding for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan if Congress made
reconstruction aid for Iraqis a loan, rather than a grant as Bush
wanted. "'If this provision is not removed, the president's senior
advisers would recommend that he veto the bill,' Joshua B. Bolten, the
White House budget director, wrote in a letter to Congressional
leaders." [New York Times, 10/22/03]

The Kerry-Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee released their prebuttal to tonight’s debate. The prebuttal, attached, sheds light on George W. Bush’s propensity to view the world through rose colored glasses

To view the prebuttal, open the attachment or click here.

NOTE: Prebuttal enhanced when viewed through rose colored glasses. But then, what isn’t?