Dean foggy on "Clear Skies" (7/1)

By Ben Fritz

Former Vermont governor and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean has been repeating a deceptive tale about the Bush administration over and over on the campaign trail.

In speeches and in interviews, Dean frequently implies that a Bush administration environmental policy called "Clear Skies" would actually lead to increases in pollution from current levels. "This country's in a lot of trouble," he said last week on NBC's "Meet the Press." "It's in trouble because we have a radical right administration that are dismantling the New Deal and it is not telling the truth about a lot of things that they say. The Clear Skies Initiative ... basically allows you to put more pollution into the air."

Dean made similar statements in his speech last week officially announcing his candidacy for president and numerous other interviews and statements.

While some environmental activists are upset about "Clear Skies," it's not because the plan would actually lead to increases in pollution beyond current levels. Instead, as The New Republic's Gregg Easterbrook has pointed out, the plan reduces planned pollution reductions in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury emissions scheduled for future years under the Clean Air Act. In a fact sheet, the White House touts the magnitude of the reductions proposed in "Clear Skies" versus current pollution levels, while the environmental group Clear The Air compares them unfavorably to the reductions scheduled under current law. Both make clear, however, that the plan would not lead to actual increases in pollution over current levels, which is what Dean has been implying.

Unfortunately, the former Vermont governor is not the only one to spread this canard. The liberal journal TomPaine.com accused Bush of implementing "a 'Clear Skies' plan that leads to more pollution" in one of its "op-ads" that ran in major newspapers. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution made a similar accusation in a June 8 editorial.

As the 2004 campaign heats up, misleading accusations like these, which distort the truth for an easy attack based on existing partisan narratives, will likely increase. The press will need to be watchful and hold candidates and commentators to high standards.

[Email this to a friend] [Subscribe to our email list]

Related links:
-Democratic candidates spin each other (Bryan Keefer, 5/1/03)
-Myths and misconceptions about Iraq (Bryan Keefer, Ben Fritz and Brendan Nyhan, 3/20/03)
-Dems keep up inflammatory anti-Bush rhetoric (Ben Fritz, 1/28/03)

7/1/2003 12:52:19 PM EST |

Screed (6/30)

With Treason, Ann Coulter once again defines a new low in America's political debate
By Brendan Nyhan

With her new book Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, syndicated pundit Ann Coulter has driven the national discourse to a new low. No longer content to merely smear liberals and the media with sweeping generalizations and fraudulent evidence, she has now upped the ante, accusing the entire Democratic Party as well as liberals and leftists nationwide of treason, a crime of disloyalty against the United States. But, as in her syndicated columns (many of which are adapted in the book) and her previous book Slander: Liberal Lies Against the American Right, Coulter's case relies in large part on irrational rhetoric and pervasive factual errors and deceptions. Regardless of your opinions about Democrats, liberals or the left, her work should not be taken at face value. (Read the whole column.)

6/30/2003 05:42:44 PM EST |

This website is copyright (c) 2001-2005 by Ben Fritz, Bryan Keefer and Brendan Nyhan. Please send letters to the editor for publication to letters@spinsanity.org and private questions or comments to feedback@spinsanity.org.

Comments by YACCS