About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Doocy misrepresented FactCheck.org's verdict on McCain's claim about Obama's record on taxes

September 28, 2008 12:46 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On Fox News' Fox & Friends Saturday, Steve Doocy stated that FactCheck.org said it was "true" that Sen. Barack Obama voted for a "bill that ... would increase taxes on people earning as little as $42,000 a year." Doocy added: "[Sen.] John McCain said, 'That was true, you did.' " In fact, FactCheck.org stated that "McCain was correct -- with qualification," adding that the votes McCain has previously cited for the claim were on a measure that "actually would not have altered taxes without additional legislation. ... McCain is referring to the provision that would have allowed the 25 percent tax bracket to return to 28 percent. The tax plan Obama now proposes, however, would not raise the rate on that tax bracket."

15 Comments

During the September 27 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends Saturday, co-host Steve Doocy misrepresented FactCheck.org's verdict on Sen. John McCain's claim about Sen. Barack Obama's record on taxes, saying that the project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found it was "true" that Sen. Barack Obama voted for a "bill that ... would increase taxes on people earning as little as $42,000 a year." Doocy added: "John McCain said, 'That was true, you did.' Annenberg said that was true. John McCain was actually right, when it comes to single taxpayers. If you're married, goes up to 80-some thousand." In fact, FactCheck.org reported that the votes McCain has previously cited for the claim were on a measure that "actually would not have altered taxes without additional legislation. It called generally for allowing most of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire. McCain is referring to the provision that would have allowed the 25 percent tax bracket to return to 28 percent. The tax plan Obama now proposes, however, would not raise the rate on that tax bracket." FactCheck.org stated that "McCain was correct -- with qualification."

Indeed, the two votes McCain cited were both on the Fiscal Year 2009 budget resolution, a concurrent resolution that, as explained by the Senate website, is "not submitted to the President and thus do[es] not have the force of law."

As FactCheck.org previously reported on July 8, "[B]udget resolutions basically set targets for appropriations committees to use. They are more like guidelines than actual rules." FactCheck.org added: "The resolution does not contain a specific provision to raise tax rates, but rather assumes that most of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2011. It also bears no relation to Obama's proposed economic plan." Indeed, Obama has proposed cutting taxes for low- and middle-income families and raising taxes only on households earning more than $250,000 per year. McCain's own chief economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, has reportedly said it is inaccurate to say that "Barack Obama raises taxes."

From FactCheck.org's September 27 post on the first presidential debate:

McCain said -- and Obama denied -- that Obama had voted to increase taxes on "people who make as low as $42,000 a year." McCain was correct -- with qualification.

McCain: But, again, Senator Obama has shifted on a number of occasions. He has voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year.

Obama: That's not true, John. That's not true.

McCain: And that's just a fact. Again, you can look it up.

Obama: Look, it's just not true.

Yes, as we've said before, Obama did in fact vote for a budget resolution that called for higher federal income tax rates on a single, non-homeowner who earned as little as $42,000 per year. A couple filing jointly, however, would have had to earn at least $83,000 per year to be affected. A family of four with income up to $90,000 would not have been affected.

The resolution actually would not have altered taxes without additional legislation. It called generally for allowing most of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire. McCain is referring to the provision that would have allowed the 25 percent tax bracket to return to 28 percent. The tax plan Obama now proposes, however, would not raise the rate on that tax bracket.

From the September 27 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends Saturday:

DOOCY: The Annenberg Center at the University of Pennsylvania, which is non-partisan, looked at everything they said, and you should go to their website, FactCheck.org, to see what the discrepancies were, what people said last night as opposed to reality.

Couple of highlights: John McCain said that the earmarks had tripled in Washington, when, in fact, they had gone down. But Barack Obama, a couple of times I think, said 95 percent of Americans, if he were president, would get a tax -- taxes would stay the same -- in fact, 81 percent, not 95.

Also, Barack Obama denied voting for a bill that -- he would increase taxes on people earning as little as $42,000 a year. John McCain said, "That was true, you did." Annenberg said that was true. John McCain was actually right, when it comes to single taxpayers. If you're married, goes up to 80-some thousand.

BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): All right. So that was the --

GRETCHEN CARLSON (co-host): Isn't it scary that you have to actually go and fact-check, though, the two presidential candidates?

DOOCY: Well, you know, they're so used to saying stuff --

CARLSON: I know.

DOOCY: -- out on the stump, after a while you wonder if it is accurate.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by captfoster2 (September 28, 2008 1:22 pm ET)
         
      I get the feeling that Doocy... being the great journalist he thinks he is... quite possibly believes he did not misrepresent the Obama position that FactCheck.org did a wonderful job spelling out. Of course.... FoxNoise listeners are probably to slow to notice?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (September 28, 2008 2:06 pm ET)
           

        If this is an example of fox news listeners, we've got big problems...

        The LA Times reports:

        Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago -- about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct -- the teacher said.


        After conducting a college band and watching Palin deliver a commencement address to a small group of home-schooled students in June 1997, Wasilla resident Philip Munger said, he asked the young mayor about her religious beliefs.

        Palin told him that "dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time," Munger said. When he asked her about prehistoric fossils and tracks dating back millions of years, Palin said "she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks," recalled Munger, who teaches music at the University of Alaska in Anchorage and has regularly criticized Palin in recent years on his liberal political blog, called Progressive Alaska.

        The idea of a "young Earth" -- that God created the Earth about 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs and humans coexisted early on -- is a popular strain of creationism.

        Though in her race for governor she called for faith-based "intelligent design" to be taught along with evolution in Alaska's schools, Gov. Palin has not sought to require it, state educators say.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (September 28, 2008 4:20 pm ET)
             

          Something tells me you're a doubting Snoopy.

          Palin may have said "she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks," but here is an actual picture of a dinosaur attacking a man.

          Pictures don't lie.

          2464979081_af89e07f05.jpg

          Report Abuse
          • Author by worrierking (September 28, 2008 4:24 pm ET)
               

            Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (September 28, 2008 4:44 pm ET)
                 

              That's 0 for 2. If you get any worse at posting pictures I'm gonna start calling you Carlson Palmer! ;)

              Report Abuse
              • Author by worrierking (September 28, 2008 5:41 pm ET)
                   

                Don't know what happened. Both times it looked great in the window. I'm using a Mac. I was going to try it on my PC but figured the joke was already blown, so I decided to "cut and run".

                I miss the preview feature.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (September 28, 2008 5:50 pm ET)
                     

                  I have noticed not all web based pictures work anymore. I wonder why we can't cut and paste any picture?

                  Report Abuse
            • Author by princeofwheels (September 29, 2008 12:35 am ET)
                 

              Square   Circle    Triangle.....is this some sort of test. Can I get on the bus now and not be left behind? I am assuming I identified everything correctly. And Snoopy, the answer to your display is Square  Circle  Triangle and the square root of $700,000,000,000.00towall-street.

              Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (September 28, 2008 1:55 pm ET)
         

      This Fox hack named doochy misrepresented something?

      Hardly shocking... I'm sure that back when this doochy guy was selling used cars, he rolled back all the odometers...

      Or when he sold vacuum cleaners door to door, he sucked up all the loose jewelry that Granny had laying around...

      Or when he sold bundles of "mortage-backed securities" under the premise they would be high-yeilding once the third-year adjusted higher rates took effect, that when he sold those securities just waiting to go DOA in that third year, he properly kicked back a four or five or even six figure illegal sales commision, under the table, to the crooked WALL STREET financial services fund manager who bought those securities and put them on their company's books, and made off with the illegal under-the-table sales bribe, resulting in us the suckered American taxpayer ending up with that bad paper BUT MAYBE NOT...

      MAYBE NOT!

      Who gives a crap about what doochy at Fox misrepresented... there's a lot bigger fish to fry this weekend and this morning and today and tomorrow too, and in the week to come.

      There's just got to be some misinformation out there in the media on this truly all-important even earth-shaking U.S. Treasury theft scheme by the Bush Paulson WALL STREET administration of our Federal Government... there's got to be.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (September 28, 2008 4:55 pm ET)
         

      Hey, SNOOPY, I've seen them pitures of di-no-sars n' human beens in a MOVIE, once.  Hell, Ringo Starr wuz thar, fightin' that beast wid his bahr hans.  Now, I ax you, how cud they git them pitcures if it didn't happen?  I seen another one where this actress Rakel Welch was runnin' from a di-no-sar, but I wuddin payin' two much attension to the di-no-sar.  M'wife turned off the tee-vee before I cud see the endin'.  Guess that's war them footprints came from, ya reckin'?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (September 28, 2008 5:06 pm ET)
           

        This can all be traced back to a 1946 Batman Comic called "Dinosaur Island."

        Batman and Rubin get attacked by robot dinosaurs and cavemen on an island theme park. Gotta say though they made some fierce robots in 1946. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (September 28, 2008 5:33 pm ET)
             

          Rubin? Batman had a jewish side kick before dick grayson? Was it Lieberman?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by eweston8542983 (September 28, 2008 8:56 pm ET)
               

            It was a crossover using the Mad Magazine's Batboy and Rubin. Neat trick, it predating MM by a few years. Rubin was played by Lieberman though.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by steeve (September 28, 2008 5:11 pm ET)
         

      Notice how the efforts of Fox's enormous staff consisted of a quick glance at someone else's web site, rather than actually doing their own reporting.

      It is, however, possible that Fox is capable of doing its own reporting, but doesn't bother because they know nobody would believe it anyway.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by m_mccain2016 (September 29, 2008 7:51 am ET)
           

        they could do a intense survey of Fox viewers.

        "We have asked 200 Fox viewers what they know about the taxes. Two of these are high school graduates and one is a College Republican."

        It would be the same type of fine reporting I expect from our friends at Fox News.

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.