http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/2015-state-of-the-union-fact-check-114422.html?hp=t2_r2015 State of the Union fact check
With such high political stakes comes the allure to stretch the facts.
By Darren Samuelsohn, Philip Ewing and David Perera
1/20/15 9:52 PM EST
Updated 1/20/15 11:25 PM EST
President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address provided a prime-time opportunity to contrast his lame duck vision for the economy, terrorism and foreign policy against a new Republican-led Congress eager to prevent any big victories.
But with such high political stakes — and a television audience of tens of millions — also comes the allure to stretch the facts for even a small boost in public opinion polls.
Here’s POLITICO’s look at some of the key parts of Obama’s speech, and where he made some of his edgiest claims:
What’s the definition of ‘combat’?
Obama: “Tonight, for the first time since 9/11, our combat mission in Afghanistan is over.”
Actually, the bullets are still flying in Afghanistan.
Administration officials stress they’ve been given two “narrow” tasks: help train the Afghan National Security Forces and continue to go after al Qaeda and other terror groups so they can’t use Afghanistan as a base from which to launch attacks on the U.S.
But there’s little doubt those missions will involve what almost anyone would consider “combat” — American forces coming into contact with the enemy. In fact, Obama late last year issued an order explicitly authorizing U.S. commanders in Afghanistan to order air strikes if U.S. or allied troops are threatened by the Taliban. And the “counterterrorism” mandate Obama has cited in past could include raids by special operations troops on terrorist hideouts.
Republicans wasted no time Tuesday night pouncing on Obama’s “combat mission” claim: House Speaker John Boehner has long argued Obama’s policy of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan is only setting the stage for a second Iraq-style collapse. The Afghan force isn’t ready to stand on its own without its American mentors, Boehner and others argue, so Obama’s plan to continue cutting U.S. troops there by the time he leaves office is a disaster in the making.
“President Obama is more interested in keeping arbitrary, political deadlines than defeating the terrorist threat in Afghanistan,” Boehner’s office said in an email blasted out just minutes after Obama’s speech started.
Economy improving? Not for everyone
Obama: “The shadow of crisis has passed, and the State of the Union is strong.”
This was perhaps the key line of the speech, with Obama declaring the effects of the financial crisis and Great Recession over and the economy moving into a period of renewed strength.
But it still might take a little while longer.
Median family income dropped nearly 4 percent to $51,939 in 2013 from when Obama took office in 2009, according to Census data. And while the jobless rate is in fact nearly half the 10 percent peak of October 2009, the size of the labor force has also continued to shrink through the Obama presidency. That reflects some baby boomer retirements but also the frustration of workers giving up on ever finding a decent paying job. The labor force participation rate is now 62.7 percent, the lowest level since 1978. Wages are not really growing much either. Over the last year wages rose just 40 cents, or 1.65 percent, to $24.57 an hour.
The economy is certainly better, but the shadow of the crisis is likely to be with the U.S. for at least a couple more years.
America’s allies against ISIL
Obama: “We’re also supporting a moderate opposition in Syria that can help us in this effort, and assisting people everywhere who stand up to the bankrupt ideology of violent extremism.”
There’s little risk for Obama to use his speech to go hard after the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
But in making the claim that American leadership “is stopping ISIL’s advance” with aid to future Middle East fighters, the president left out the fact that U.S. forces have not yet begun “vetting” or training the very “moderate opposition” that he eventually wants fighting in Iraq and Syria.
Sure, Obama acknowledged that “this effort will take time.” And the Pentagon has said as many as 1,000 American trainers and support troops could begin deploying this month to Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia to begin arming and training the Syrian fighters.
But Defense officials have also confirmed they haven’t cleared or recruited any of those fighters. In a best case scenario, defense officials say, the first Syrian fighters could begin training by March and they could be back in the fight by the beginning of 2016.
Obama wants to train about 5,400 “moderate” Syrian opposition fighters in the first year, then deploy them in units that could defend their homes and villages against ISIL. Eventually the U.S. hopes these groups can take the offense against ISIL and then be part of a negotiated, political settlement to end the Syrian civil war — a deal in which President Bashar al-Assad would leave power.
It’s been widely reported that Obama’s top national security aides have clashed behind the scenes over this strategy. In particular, outgoing Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel asked pointed questions of National Security Advisor Susan Rice about what happens when U.S.-backed fighters get into direct contact with Assad’s military. To what degree, Hagel asked, would American troops or warplanes support them? There are also open questions about whether the U.S.-backed fighters would actually follow Washington’s “ISIL-first” strategy — or whether they’d immediately go after Assad.
Ultimatum on cybersecurity legislation
Obama: “If we don’t act, we’ll leave our nation and our economy vulnerable. If we do, we can continue to protect the technologies that have unleashed untold opportunities for people around the globe.”
Talk about setting himself up for failure.
For starters, there are no guarantees, even with the best-written bill, that hackers can be stopped from wreaking havoc on government departments or private companies. Cyber-attackers don’t need to be all that sophisticated to succeed – sometimes it’s enough to be lucky, or to pick a weak target.
Privacy activists are also far from enthusiastic about Obama’s proposals, including one that would expand information sharing between the government and private sector. Mindful of what Edward Snowden exposed in 2013 about the National Security Agency, they are concerned about private information making its way from the Department of Homeland Security Department into the hands of government surveillance or law enforcement agencies.
White House officials insist they would have privacy protections in place. But Snowden’s revelations haven’t exactly left much goodwill and faith in such assurances.
There are also plenty of questions about whether the information sharing is really necessary.
Obama’s proposed Computer Fraud and Abuse Act may very well make things much worse for hackers — a good thing if you happen to be a federal prosecutor confident in government law enforcement and who wants an even larger stick. But it’s a frightening thing for many in the security community who say innocent behavior would be criminalized as a result.
‘Charlie Hebdo’ condemnation
Obama: “As Americans, we respect human dignity, even when we’re threatened. … It’s why we continue to reject offensive stereotypes of Muslims — the vast majority of whom share our commitment to peace.”
The White House has spoken out against anti-Muslim messages in the past, but its voice wavered recently in the wake of the deadly attack on the satirical French publication “Charlie Hebdo.” The magazine published a raft of cartoons in recent years mocking Mohammed, the central prophet in Islam.
Back in 2011, then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney questioned the wisdom and perhaps the taste of sketches of Mohammed in the same magazine.
“Obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory,” Carney said at the time. “We don’t question the right of something like this to be published. We just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it.”
Obama said nothing about anti-Muslim stereotyping in his public remarks right after the Paris attacks. And current White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest talked in general terms about the duties of publishers, but he did not repeat Carney’s earlier, direct criticism of “Charlie Hebdo.”
“It would not be the first time that there has been a discussion in this country about the kinds of responsibilities that go along with exercising the right to freedom of speech,” Earnest said a couple of days after the attacks. “In the circumstances in which my predecessor was talking about this issue, there was a genuine concern that the publication of some of those materials could put Americans abroad at risk, including American soldiers at risk.”
Obama did try to couple the expression of concern for Muslims on Tuesday with a comment aimed at those more concerned about free expression, quickly adding that part of American values is to “defend free speech.”
What’s your definition of ‘advanced economies’?
Obama: “Since 2010, America has put more people back to work than Europe, Japan, and all advanced economies combined?.”
Hate to be technical here, but Obama’s choice of words here makes a difference.
According to PolitiFact, the International Monetary Fund classifies 36 countries as advanced economies, and seven of those — the G7 — as major advanced economies. The number of people employed in the U.S. has grown by roughly 6 million people since 2009. That’s much more than the other G7 countries — Canada, France, Germany Italy, Japan and the UK combined.
But the president didn’t say “major advanced economies.” He said “advanced economies.” U.S. job growth exceeds the combined job growth of the 36 advanced economies, but only if you exclude Hong Kong and Taiwan.
And remember, job growth since 2009 would be greater than job growth since 2010.
Blowing in the wind
Obama: “America is number one in wind power.”
We’re No. 1! Or No. 2 — depending on how the wind blows.
The U.S. gets more electricity from wind power than China, at least in 2013. The U.S. produced 167 billion kilowatt-hours from wind power in 2013, significantly more than China’s 138 billion kilowatt-hours of wind electricity that year, according to the American Wind Energy Association.
For the first three quarters of 2014, the U.S. got 133.5 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity from wind power, according to the most recent data available from the Energy Information Administration. That’s 7.7 percent more than the 124 billion kilowatt-hours of wind electricity produced over the same period of 2013.
But China leads on total installed capacity, according to the Global Wind Energy Council.
As of the end of 2013, China had a total of 91,412 megawatts of wind power capacity installed, more than a quarter of the entire world’s installed wind capacity. The U.S. trailed in second place with 61,091 megawatts installed, just over 19 percent of the world’s total.
China may have added as much as 20,000 new megawatts of wind power in 2014, which would be a record, according to an October Bloomberg report.
The American Wind Energy Association has not yet released full-year 2014 data, but in the first three quarters of last year the U.S. added only 1,254 megawatts, bringing total U.S. capacity to around 62,300 megawatts. U.S. installations peaked in 2012, but have been significantly less since then because of uncertainty over the production tax credit.
Obama can gloat that the U.S. does beat out Germany (34,250 megawatts of capacity), Spain (22,959 megawatts) and India (20,150 megawatts).
An understatement on the newly insured
Obama: “In the past year alone, about 10 million uninsured Americans finally gained the security of health coverage.”
There are a lot of surveys — and disputes — about how many people got covered because of the Affordable Care Act but the 10 million newly insured may well be an understatement.
The president’s figures are supported by a New England Journal of Medicine study published in July. Using Health and Human Services data and Gallup polling, the researchers calculated that about 10.3 million previously uninsured people had gained coverage through the exchanges and Medicaid. That doesn’t include people who began signing up in the second enrollment season, which began in November and runs through Feb. 15.
Other studies that came out during the summer offered similar estimates, including a Commonwealth Fund report pegging the newly insured at 9.5 million. A Gallup poll estimated the national uninsured rate dropped to 12.9 percent in the fourth quarter of 2014.
