Issues: Taxes

American Crossroads: “Where”

adcheck •

Crossroads GPS relies on old distortions in an attempt to scare Florida seniors about the impact of the Affordable Care Act, including the false premise that Sen. Bill Nelson (D) “cast the deciding vote” on the bill. The ACA does not allow for “rationed” care, and its future Medicare savings do not cut seniors’ current benefits. In fact, Nelson’s opponent, Rep. Connie Mack (R), voted to preserve the health care law’s Medicare savings when he supported Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan in 2011. Furthermore, the Affordable Care Act includes important benefits for seniors, such as closing the prescription drug “donut” hole and providing free preventive care.

Read more after the jump.

Crossroads GPS: “Pressure”

adcheck •

Crossroads GPS attacks Rep. Joe Donnelly (D-IN) for supporting two “trillion-dollar” bills, citing his votes for the Affordable Care Act and the Recovery Act. But the health care law actually reduces deficits, while tax cuts accounted for about one-third of the Recovery Act’s price tag. In addition to creating jobs and helping prevent an even deeper recession, the recovery bill cut taxes for up to 95 percent of working Americans.

Read more after the jump.

Congressional Leadership Fund: “Look”

adcheck •

The Congressional Leadership Fund goes after Texas congressional candidate Pete Gallego for supporting the “job-killing” health care law “that cuts Medicare $716 billion,” but the claim that the Affordable Care Act will kill jobs has long been debunked, and the law doesn’t cut seniors’ benefits. Instead, it finds savings by reducing future Medicare spending – savings that Gallego’s opponent, Rep. Francisco Canseco (R), also voted for in the Ryan budget. The ad also attacks Gallego for voting to raise taxes as a state legislator, but Gallego voted actually voted against one of the tax bills CLF cites to prove their point.

Read more after the jump.

Congressional Leadership Fund: “Continued”

adcheck •

Congressional Leadership Fund seeks to damn Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH) by tying her to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Although Sutton has received an unremarkable $25,000 from Pelosi’s leadership PAC since 2006, the rest of the ad’s accusations are misleading. Sutton’s vote for the Affordable Care Act didn’t cut $700 out of current Medicare spending; it found future savings without cutting seniors’ benefits. The “failed” stimulus helped rescue the economy from an even greater recession, and the cap-and-trade bill Sutton supported would have boosted the economy at minimal cost to consumers.

Read more after the jump.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: “Tim Kaine – No On Energy”

adcheck •

In an ad attacking Gov. Tim Kaine’s (D-VA) positions on energy, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce suggests that Kaine opposes American energy exploration, is against the Keystone pipeline, and supports costly cap-and-trade policies. But Kaine has supported energy development plans, including offshore exploration, provided they are adequately reviewed for their impacts on Virginians and the environment. Meanwhile, Kaine’s stance on cap-and-trade – which would likely have little impact on family budgets — is that the threats climate change poses to Virginia’s families and businesses must be addressed.

Read more after the jump.

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce: “Martin Heinrich Has Gone Washington”

adcheck •

A U.S. Chamber of Commerce ad attacks Senate candidate Rep. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) over his votes against the Regulatory Accountability Act, against the Keystone Pipeline, for the American Clean Energy and Security Act, for Wall Street reform, and for the health care law. The Chamber implies that Heinrich’s votes killed jobs, created red tape, or harmed Medicare, misleading voters about the bills.

Read more after the jump.

Center for Individual Freedom: “Busy”

adcheck •

The Center for Individual Freedom attacks Kentucky Rep. Ben Chandler (D) for supporting the Recovery Act, bailouts, cap-and-trade, and “keeping the death tax.” The ad wrongly demonizes legislation that helped strengthen the economy (or, in the case of cap-and-trade, could have if it had passed). However, the ad’s most egregious distortion is that it ignores that Chandler recently voted with House Republicans to keep the estate tax limited.

Read more after the jump.

Center for Individual Freedom: “Burden”

adcheck •

An ad from the Center for Individual Freedom asks, “Don’t Nevadans already pay enough in taxes?” It then blasts State Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, who is now running for a seat in the U.S. House, for supporting several tax increases. The truth is, however, that Nevada’s tax structure is deeply reliant on revenue from gaming and sales, which plummeted during the recession. In an effort to close budget gaps, avoid devastating cuts to education and services, and address longer-term structural problems with Nevada’s tax code, Horsford has backed several revenue increases, each time has coupling them with spending cuts.

Read more after the jump.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: “Voted To Cut Medicare”

adcheck •

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which receives significant funding from health insurers, attacks Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) for voting to “cut” Medicare and for supporting the public insurance option. But the Affordable Care Act reduces future Medicare spending without cutting seniors’ benefits, and Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget actually preserved the law’s savings. Moreover, the Chamber’s description of the public option as “wildly unpopular” is absurd: Although it was dropped from the final legislation, 2009 polls consistently showed that a clear majority of Americans favored having the choice of a public plan.

Read more after the jump.

Center for Individual Freedom: “Three of Kind”

adcheck •

The Center for Individual Freedom mischaracterizes the effects of the Affordable Care Act to claim that Rep. Leonard Boswell’s (D-IA) voting record is bad for Iowa’s seniors. For example, the ad implies that savings included in the ACA, indeed over $700 billion, will reduce Medicare benefits. The truth, however, is that the ACA reduces future Medicare spending without cutting benefits and that seniors—in Iowa and across the country—will benefit from expanded care and reduced gaps in coverage, all without the imagined interference from government bureaucrats.

Read more after the jump.