close
close

Fact Checking Kamala Harris at the Democratic Convention on Day 4

Posted on by Vaseline
Fact Checking Kamala Harris at the Democratic Convention on Day 4

Glenn Kessler
| Washington Post

Vice President Kamala Harris’ acceptance speech on the final night of the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago was heavy on rhetoric but short on easily verifiable facts. Here are five claims Harris made that caught our attention, in the order in which they were made.

As usual, we do not award Pinocchios for summarizing statements made at conferences.

“We are not going back to the days when Donald Trump tried to cut Social Security and Medicare.”

This is largely false. We awarded the Harris-Walz campaign three Pinocchios for a version of this claim, but that hasn’t stopped Democrats from making it all week.

As for Medicare, virtually all of the anticipated savings Trump sought would have been squeezed from health care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries, as a way to keep costs down and improve the solvency of the elder care program. Trump, in effect, borrowed many of the proposals from Barack Obama, who had failed to get them through Congress.

Marc Goldwein, senior vice chairman of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which aims to reduce the budget deficit, has studied Trump’s proposals closely every year.

“The basic argument here is just ridiculous,” he said of a Harris-Walz campaign tweet that made a similar claim. Goldwein noted that the Inflation Reduction Act, which Harris cast the deciding vote to secure passage of, also reduced Medicare health care costs, such as through inflation caps. “By the same logic, you could say Joe Biden cut Medicare.”

On Social Security, Trump kept his promise not to touch retirement benefits, ignoring longstanding Republican efforts to raise the retirement age. But Trump did try, unsuccessfully, to cut spending on Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income, which is administered by the Social Security Administration.

Trump has insisted he will not cut Medicare and Social Security benefits if he is re-elected president.

“He’s not really fighting for the middle class. Instead, he’s fighting for himself and his billionaire friends, and he’s going to give them another round of tax breaks that will add $5 trillion to the national debt.”

The numbers don’t tell the whole story. Harris’s $5 trillion figure reflects the cost of extending the 2017 tax cuts. (The Congressional Budget Office estimated $4.6 trillion.) Because of the way the law is written, the tax cuts expire in 2027 and, unless Congress acts, Americans will face a significant tax increase.

But Harris, like President Joe Biden, has said she would keep the tax cuts in place for people making under $400,000, about 98 percent of taxpayers. Delivering on that promise without raising taxes would likely add between $1.5 trillion and $2.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years. The Biden White House has said higher taxes on the wealthy would help pay for some of the costs, but has never fully explained how that would happen.

By seeking to extend some tax cuts, Harris acknowledges that a large portion — perhaps half — of Trump’s tax cuts benefited the middle class.

“He plans to implement a national sales tax. Call it a Trump tax that would raise prices for middle-class families by almost $4,000 a year.”

That’s a high estimate. Trump has suggested he wants to impose a 10 percent tax on every imported good entering the United States and a 60 percent tax on every good imported from China. The Peterson Institute for International Economics has estimated that this would cost a typical American household in the middle of the income distribution about $1,700 in net income. That’s because tariffs are typically passed on to consumers by importers — a standard economics concept that Trump rejects.

But in recent campaign rallies, Trump has mused that he would impose a 20 percent tariff. Peterson ran the numbers again, estimating that it would cost the household more than $2,600 a year.

But Harris is basing his estimate on an estimate from the left-leaning Center for American Progress Action Fund, which puts the cost at $3,900.

“As commander in chief, I will ensure that America always has the strongest and deadliest military in the world.”

Biden proposed cuts. Harris, who has suddenly become the Democratic presidential nominee, has yet to present detailed policy documents, but it’s worth noting that Biden has repeatedly proposed budgets that failed to keep military spending above inflation.

“He encouraged (Russian President Vladimir) Putin to invade our allies, saying that Russia, I quote, could do whatever they wanted.”

This needs context. Harris is careful to use the word “encouraged” in this passage. Trump did not invite Russia to invade U.S. allies, but (by his own admission) he informed the leader of a NATO member state that he would not defend that country from a Russian attack if Trump judged the country to be in default on payments to the military alliance.

At a rally in February, Trump said that “one of the presidents of a great country” had asked him at one point whether the United States would still defend the country if it were invaded by Russia, even if it “didn’t pay.”

“No, I wouldn’t protect you,” Trump claimed he told that leader. “I would encourage them to do whatever they want. You have to pay. You have to pay your bills.”

One problem with Trump’s narrative is that Trump has demonstrated throughout the 2016 campaign, his presidency, and now this 2024 campaign that he has little understanding of how NATO is funded and functions. He repeatedly claimed that other members of the alliance “owed” the United States money and were defaulting on their payments. He then claimed credit for the money that “flowed in” as a result of his cackling, even though much of the increase in those countries’ contributions was set under guidelines established during the Obama administration.

Since 2006, NATO guidelines have called for each country to spend at least 2 percent of its gross domestic product on defense. In 2014, NATO decided to increase its spending in response to Russia’s seizure of Ukraine’s Crimea region, with a pledge to reach 2 percent in each country by 2024. This money does not end up in NATO coffers, as Trump often claims. (Direct funding, for military operations, maintenance and headquarters activities, is based on gross national income—the total domestic and foreign output claimed by a country’s residents—and is adjusted regularly.)

NATO figures show that defense spending by NATO countries, with the exception of the United States, has been rising steadily since 2014. As we noted, NATO decided to increase spending in response to Russia’s seizure of Crimea.

– – –

The Fact Checker is a verified signatory of the International Fact-Checking Network Code of Conduct

Related Posts