Giuliani’s Definition of Sanctuary City is Shaky

by Emily Schettler

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani has been under fire since the recent YouTube Republican Presidential Candidate Debate.

The first question of the night was directed at Giuliani, accusing him of running New York City as a “sanctuary city.” Ever since that night, Giuliani has been trying to shake the idea that he supports illegal immigration.

The debate question was posed by Ernie Nardy, a resident of Brooklyn, New York:

“Under your administration as well as others, New York City was operated as a sanctuary city, aiding and abetting illegal aliens. I would like to know, if you become president of the United States, will you continue to aid and abet the flight of illegal aliens into this country?”

Giuliani said that New York City was not a sanctuary city. Is he right?

The heart of Giuliani's debate reply was that there were three narrow exceptions where he (and the city) gave illegal immigrants a break:

“New York City allowed the children of illegal immigrants to go to school. If we didn’t allow the children of illegal immigrants to go to school, we would have had 70,000 children on the streets at a time in which New York City was going through a massive crime wave, averaging 2000 murders a year, 10,000 felonies a week…Emergency care in the hospital and being able to report crimes. If we didn’t allow illegals to report crimes, a lot of criminals would have gone free because they’re the ones who had the information.”

Giuliani now defends his record, claiming that “we reported thousands and thousands of names of illegal immigrants who committed crimes to the immigration service.”

So, what constitutes a sanctuary city? Did aiding undocumented immigrants to enroll in school and receive health care establish New York City as a safe haven for those who are here illegally?

A Congressional Research Service Report from August 2006 defined a sanctuary city as a place that has “utilized various mechanisms to ensure that unauthorized aliens who may present in their jurisdiction illegally are not turned in to federal authorities.” New York was one of 31 cities listed in the report.

A 2003 article from the New York Times reported that Michael Bloomberg changed the city’s longstanding immigration policy. That policy, which was in place when Giuliani was in office, prohibited city agencies from reporting a person’s immigration status to federal authorities, an approach that was meant to protect undocumented but otherwise law-abiding immigrants who need police aid, medical treatment, or other services.

In 1996 Congress put into place the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which made it illegal for states to take action to prevent reporting illegal immigrants to federal authorities. The policies in place in New York City while Giuliani was mayor did just that. By refusing to take any information, city employees could not determine if those they were working with were here legally.

While Mayor of New York City, Giuliani clearly stated that he welcomed even illegal immigrants, saying: "If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city."

It is understandable that Giuliani would want to maintain good relations with immigrants in his city. According to a New York Times article, immigrants account for 37 percent of the city's population, and 14 percent of families have at least one undocumented person. Ruining relations with a group that large could certainly end anyone’s political career.

However, sanctuary cities have created several problems for cities like New York, and the nation as a whole. According to the American Medical Association, illegal immigrants dry up billions of tax dollars in medical treatments, including child birth and emergency room trips.

As mayor, Giuliani opposed welfare reform, because it would require government employees to document the immigration status of those who applied for aid.

Lesson: When Giuliani was Mayor of New York, his constituency was made up of many immigrants and people close to them. Now that he’s running nationally, Giuliani’s immigration position has "morphed" to fit with conservative Republicans, who are a large share of primary voters.

Read More...

Summary only...

Edwards Gets His Facts Straight on Poverty

by Blair Boyd and David Albrecht

At the Democratic Debate in Las Vegas on November 15th, former Senator John Edwards presented several statistics involving hunger, poverty, and health care in the United States. His claim:

“Thirty-five million Americans last year went hungry. Thirty-seven million people in this country live in poverty every day. Forty-seven million Americans have no health care coverage.”

Is Edwards exaggerating the problem, or is he entirely correct?
Statistics from reliable sources back up Edwards’ claim, beginning with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The USDA said that in 2006, a total of 12.65 million households suffered from “food insecurity”. These 12.65 million households include 35.52 million people, 12.63 million of them children. The USDA measures “food insecurity” as “having difficulty acquiring enough food for the household throughout the year.” This survey conducted represented 294 million people. With the government's estimate of the 2006 population just shy of 300 million, the survey from which Edwards draws his statement gains credibility and accuracy.

According to the Institute for Research on Poverty, in 2006it was measured in that 36.5 million people (12.3 percent of the total U.S. population) lived in poverty. Poverty is measured by comparing pretax income with the poverty threshold, which is determined by family size and composition. These thresholds were developed by taking the cost of a minimum adequate diet for families of different sizes and multiplying the cost by three to allow for other expenses. Families that fall below that threshold are then considered poor.

The U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent data on those without health care puts figures at an estimated 47 million. This number has risen from 2005, putting it at an all time high.

Lesson: Presidential candidates need to make sure the facts they are presenting to the public are the correct information. Edwards has done a good job here of presenting the correct facts on this important issue. He has done the research to present accurate figures, lending credibility to his experience on povery issues.

Read More...

Summary only...

Biden Paints Bleak Picture on Retirement Income

by Ali Jepsen

Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden, went straight for the jugular a few weeks ago when proposing a plan for the current issue of retirement savings. The topic has been especially prevalent in this campaign since the current administration is now experiencing the first influx of retiring Baby Boomers, with millions to go in the next 20 years. The senator from Delaware cited dismal statistics about our current workforce and left much doubt as to whether the nation can handle such a huge amount of retirees. In hopes that these statistics were incorrect, this "fact check" looked into them further.

In an effort to alert the public to the severity of the problem, Biden claimed that, currently, only 20% of workers have pension plans. This contrasts with an earlier statement that over 80% of Americans in the workplace had these plans in the 1980s. While the source for the latter statistic is still unknown, an article in CNN Money (quoting the Bureau of Labor Statistics) does show that only 21% of workers are currently covered by defined-benefit plans. If you choose to forgive Biden the 1% difference, his claim istrue. With only 21% of workers covered, this does not account for the millions of Baby Boomers, let alone those in the workforce who will retire after them.

If these statistics aren’t disheartening enough, Biden went on to comment on retirement plans, or the lack thereof, in the U.S. According to Biden, half of the American workforce is without such a plan. This claim in supported by an article on the Retirement Security Project’s web site.

Finally, Biden explained that part of America’s problem with retirement savings is a result of a lack of savings in general. He claimed that the average savings rate in the United States is less than 1%. While this number seems shockingly low, the current data (provided by the Bureau of Economic Analysis) speak volumes about the short-term perspective of many U.S. consumers.

Lesson: Biden seems to be somewhat lost in the present muddle of the Democratic race, but his numbers on retirement security are on track. His policies and plans to reverse these depressing trends are what will define his success in the caucus.

Read More...

Summary only...

Rudy Takes Iran's Ahmadinejad to Task

by Molly Mishler and Katie Thielen

In an interview with a Maine television station WMTW on Monday September 24, 2007, Rudy Giuliani said of Iranian President Ahmadinejad:

“He’s the leader of one of the governments that’s one of the biggest supporters of terrorism in the world. He denied the Holocaust; he’s threatened the future survival of Israel. I believe he’s even threatened at various times American interests and he keeps threatening to develop nuclear capacity.”

The subject was brought about after Ahmadinejad was invited by Columbia University to speak to the college. Many Americans (and their leaders) were outraged that the university would invite such a controversial figure to campus to openly promote his views. In his speech, Ahmadinejad defended his controversial remarks over Holocaust and Israel, saying he’s an academic who just posed questions.

Are Giuliani’s claims about Ahmadinejad “on target”?


“He’s the leader of one of the governments that’s one of the biggest supporters of terrorism in the world.”

In a testimony before the U.S.-Israeli Joint Parliamentary Committee, Paula A. DeSutter, Assistant Secretary for Verification and Compliance for the U.S. State Department testified,

“Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism. Its Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and Ministry of Intelligence and Security continue to be involved in the planning and support of terrorist acts and continue to support a variety of groups that use terrorism to pursue their goals. Iran's support includes funding, providing safe haven, training, and weapons to a wide variety of terrorist groups including Lebanese Hizballah, HAMAS, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Liberation Front for Palestine-General Command. Its support of HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad is of particular concern, as both groups continue their deliberate policies of attacking Israeli citizens with suicide bombings.”

“He’s threatened the future survival of Israel.”

In a recent speech discussing Israel’s possible attack on Lebanon, Ahmadinejad said,

“If this year you repeat the same mistake of the last year, the ocean of nations of the region will get angry and will cut the root of the Zionist regime from its stem.”

Ahmadinejad warned Israel that “60 years of invasion and assassination is enough. If you do not cease invasion and massacre, soon the hand of power of the nations of the region will rub you criminals with earth.”

Ahmadinejad’s views are part of his extreme religious and ideological beliefs. He evidently believes that his government must prepare for the Imam’s imminent return and that it is his duty to trigger a period of chaos, war, and bloodshed that will lead to the coming of the Mahdi.

“I believe he’s even threatened at various times American interests.”

In an article in the New York Daily Times, staff writer, Adam Nichols, stated:

“On the eve of his trip to New York City, Iranian President Ahmadinejad stood before a banner blaring ‘Death to America,’ showed off his military might and declared his extremist regime will not bow to Western pressure.”

In addition, Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said of Iran in a recent interview:

"We view Iran's efforts to further develop its missile capabilities as a threat to the region and to the United States' interests."

Ereli made the remarks after Iran announced on Tuesday that it has the power to launch a missile with a 2,000 km range.

Lesson: The claim by Rudy Giuliani about Amhadinejad is well within the realm of factual information, based on statements by Amhadinejad and intelligence sources.

Read More...

Summary only...

Richardson Laments Science & Math Education

by Jamie Corey and Amanda Yanchury

In a debate on ABC news on August 19th, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said the following:

“…you know we are 29th in the world in math and science. We need to have 100,000 new math and science teachers. We have to be number one again.”

Is he correct that the U.S. lags far behind other nations in math and science education?

From our research, we found no study for K-12 education that encompasses all countries; this is not surprising, given that some nations do not have full secondary education systems, and others do not test or keep records in the same way developed nations do. We found a fairly comprehensive, authoritative source in the “Trends in Mathematics and Science Study” by the National Center for Education Statistics. All of the studies on the group’s web site include limited numbers of countries for their collection of data.
According to an NPR article on how the U.S. measures up in math and science, the data do not match up with Richardson’s claims. The article explained that a team of experts compared American students’ rates of success in math and science to that of students in other countries. According to the study, in math and science, “American students are no worse, and often score better, than students from many leading countries.”

Another report on how the United States measures up in math and science, this one written by the Urban Institute, reaches a similar conclusion. The two researchers, Salzman and Lowell, found that, “the United States is one of only a handful of nations that maintained or improved test performance in all subjects, grades, and years tested.”

Lesson: We found statistics that conflict with Gov. Richardson’s claim about education in the U.S. We tried to contact the campaign for information on where Richardson obtained his data, but the campaign did not respond to repeated inquiries. For now, the evidence for his claim mixed and inconclusive.

Update: FactCheck has posted an article on Richardson's claim that the U.S. is 29th in the world in math and science. The claim is debunked in the article, with ample evidence. Check it out!

Read More...

Summary only...

Giuliani Plays Up NYC Tax Cuts and Crime Drop

by Alex Bardole

In a television ad (“Leadership”) that ran in Iowa recently, Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani makes claims about his record as mayor of New York City. The context of the ad is the voice of Giuliani, with text on the screen reinforcing his various claims. Are his claims accurate?

The first claim Rudy made was the following: “I cut taxes dramatically…” (TEXT ON SCREEN: “cut taxes 23 times”). Upon further inspection, the non-partisan group FactCheck.org ran an article about this very same statistic in recent weeks. According to FactCheck, eight of the 23 tax cuts came either from the city council or from the state government.

In a recent New York Daily News article, former councilman Peter Vallone weighed in on the claim: “The correct nomenclature would be ‘we cut taxes’ instead of ‘I cut taxes’”.

It seems Giuliani is taking credit for what was, in some cases, a collective effort. This helps him win points among voters as a fiscal conservative, or as he puts it in his ad, “a candidate that has fiscal discipline.”

Another claim in his ad is that he “cut crime in half” in New York City. According to the Citizens Budget Commission, a civilian budget watchdog, this claim is correct. From the time Giuliani took office to the time he left, violent crimes in New York City decreased by more than 50%. Just to add context to that record, however, it is important to note that the national crime rate decreased by 32%. In addition, whereas the crime rate decreased, the rate of civilian complaints against New York Police Department officers increased by 41%.

Lesson: Giuliani, like many other candidates, is selectively highlighting his record as mayor of New York City to play up his strengths and gloss over weaknesses. We leave it up the voters to decide whether it is right for him to claim credit for tax cuts proposed and pushed by other players in local government.

Read More...

Summary only...

Romney Defines His Record on Taxes/Fees

by Blair Boyd and David Albrecht

At a Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan, former governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney got into a heated discussion with former mayor of New York City Rudolph W. Giuliani. The controversy centered on the issue of the handling taxes during each candidate’s time in office. Giuliani criticized Romney, saying that per capita taxes and spending under Mr. Romney had increased while per capita taxes and spending under him as mayor had fallen. Romney responded by saying,

“It’s a nice line, but it’s baloney. I did not increase taxes in Massachusetts. I lowered taxes.”

So who is right in this squabble? We look at the context of taxes and fees in Massachusetts.

While this statement is literally true in the sense that he did not “raise taxes”, he did take other measures which can be interpreted as an increase in taxes. These measures included: raising fees upwards of $400 million by increasing costs for getting married, buying a house, bringing a case to court, and using a public golf course. Romney also quintupled the per gallon delivery charge for gasoline.

In addition to raising multiple fees, Romney also raised more than $300 million by closing so-called corporate loopholes, what the business community considers the same as a tax increase.
According to John Berthoud, president of the National Tax Payers Union, “Closing tax loopholes and not cutting rates concurrently—that’s a tax increase.”

Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesperson for Governor Romney countered this concept of closing loopholes by stating that they were more about tax enforcement than tax increases. He goes on to define one of those loopholes by saying,

"The biggest loophole closing involved banks that were calling themselves real estate companies in order to avoid bank taxes. Those were the types of abuses we stopped. That's called tax enforcement."

Steven Slivinski, director of budget studies at Cato agrees with the business side of the loophole concept.

“Romney’s people are trying to spin this by saying he kept his ‘No new taxes’ pledge. I guess if you consider only personal income taxes and sales taxes, he’s within bounds. If you take a broader view, he is not.”

Lesson: Former governor Romney has sugarcoated his record a bit, only presenting one angle to how he handled taxes in the state. He approved of policies that in the public eye might not be considered the same as tax increases, but anti-tax groups beg to differ. We leave it up to your judgment whether closing loopholes equates to raising taxes.

Read More...

Summary only...

Gov. Richardson Points to Home State Job Growth

by Casey Johnson

On his website, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson boasts that he has overseen the creation of 80,000 jobs in New Mexico, many of them good, high-paying jobs. Is it true?

FactCheck.org, a respected political “watchdog” group, offers this summary of Bill Richardson’s claim:

“Democratic presidential contender Bill Richardson boasts of creating 80,000 jobs since becoming governor of New Mexico. Not yet, he hasn't. The state has gained fewer than 76,000 payroll jobs since he took office, and official figures showed a mere 68,100 gain when he first started making his inflated boast last year.”

The Albuquerque Tribune recently ran an article on their website that was critical of Richardson’s jobs claim. In the article, “Richardson's people dispute that his numbers are off and apparently have different numbers and a different definition of ‘jobs.’”

And according to the popular website, politifact.com (an affiliate of the St. Petersburg Times),

“the latest employment report from the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions, a group that tracks job data, said the state ranked 14th for job growth in August 2007. The state hasn't ranked sixth since August 2006.”

Lesson: It is clear that Richardson’s claim is mostly true. New Mexico has, undoubtedly, not fared as well as Richardson has claimed (according to the most recent data), but the state has experienced a substantial amount of job growth in recent years.

Read More...

Summary only...

Tancredo's Basic Immigration Facts are Correct

by Katherine Hanson

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) makes the following statement about immigration on his web site:

“There is no doubt that America is facing an illegal immigration crisis. Currently, there are at least 12 million illegal aliens living in America. I am absolutely opposed to amnesty. In addition to rewarding those who broke our laws, amnesties simply do not solve the problem of illegal immigration. The only realistic solution to the problem of illegal immigration is a strategy of attrition, which seeks to reduce the flow of the illegal alien population over time by cutting off the incentives for coming to and staying in America - most importantly by eliminating the jobs magnet. America must also reexamine its legal immigration policies. Since 1990, that number has been roughly one million yearly - and that doesn't count illegal aliens. America should reduce legal immigration to 250,000 people a year, which will allow the newcomers to assimilate.”

Is Tancredo factually correct in the statements he has made about illegal immigration? This fact check takes a closer look.

“Currently, there are at least 12 millions illegal aliens living in America.”

Estimates on the amount of illegal immigrants are hard to calculate because there isn’t a way to track them; they are, after all, undocumented. Several sources provide different numbers, but Tancredo’s 12 million figure is reasonably accurate given the range of current U.S. estimates.

According to the United States International Information Programs in a 2003 article,

“the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that some 5 million people are living in the United States without permission, and the number is growing by about 275,000 a year.”

For more information click here. Other resources give numbers that are closer to Tancredo’s. For example, a popular public policy textbook (Issues for Debate in American Public Policy) states, “more than 10 million immigrants are living illegally in the United States.” Also, an article on the National Public Radio website concludes there is an estimated range of 8 to 20 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., and that the number most commonly cited is between 11 million and 12 million.

“I am absolutely opposed to amnesty.”

Looking at his voting record via the Washington Post congressional database, it seems that he supported House Resolution 4437, a bill to clamp down on illegal immigration and toughen border security. It did not include any new avenue for current illegal immigrants to gain legal status.

Project VoteSmart has a list of other Tancredo votes on stopping immigration; there are no votes for so-called “amnesty” or anything like it. For example, he voted yes to HR 6095, which affirmed the inherent authority of State and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of immigration laws, to provide for effective prosecution of alien smugglers, and to reform immigration litigation procedures. To view other bills Tancredo voted for dealing with immigration and other issues, visit Project VoteSmart.

“America must also reexamine its legal immigration policies. Since 1990, that number has been roughly one million yearly – and that doesn’t count illegal aliens.”

Tancredo effectively used the word "roughly" to describe the one million of legal immigrants coming into America. According to the Department of Homeland Security (2006 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics), only two years show legal immigration at over one million, three years show over 900,000 and two years show about 800,000. Tancredo’s statement here is mostly true, depending on how you define “roughly.”

Lesson: Tancredo is right of the specific facts, according to groups and agencies with the recent numbers, and he accurately pitches his opposition to "amnesty" policies.

Read More...

Summary only...

Romney Accurate on Illegal Immigrants and Tuition

by Desiree Jackson

On November 13, 2007, while campaigning in Sioux City, Iowa, Mitt Romney accused opponents Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee of supporting tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants.
According to the Des Moines Register,

“Romney contended that Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, fought for tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants in his state, while Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, provided tuition breaks at City University for illegal immigrants.”

Romney also claimed that as governor he vetoed legislation to give a tuition break at state schools to children of illegal immigrants. Is Romney telling the whole truth in this matter?

According to The Chronicle of Higher Education,

“The City University of New York will raise tuition next semester for students who are illegal immigrants, ending a 12-year-old policy of allowing foreigners who have attended New York State high schools to pay lower in-state tuition. Until now, such students have been allowed to pay in-state tuition rates at CUNY as long as they could prove that they had attended high school in New York for at least a year before enrolling in college.”

The article was published in 2001 and Rudy Giuliani was elected as Mayor of New York in 1993. The policy of allowing illegal immigrants was in place before Giuliani took office but it did continue under his leadership as well. Students who had graduated from a New York State high school at least one year before entering college were allowed to attend New York state colleges at the in-state tuition rate, rather than paying more for out-of-state tuition.

According The Deseret News,

“Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee tried -- and failed -- this spring to extend state-funded scholarships to the children of illegal immigrants. His spokesman Rex Nelson said the proposal recognized that immigrants' children are likely to remain in the state and that Arkansas needs a well-educated work force.”

As recently as November, Huckabee defended his position on illegal immigration. At the CNN-YouTube Debate held on November 28, 2007, Huckabee defended his support of providing state-funded scholarships to children of illegal immigrants.

“I supported the bill that would've allowed those children who had been in our schools their entire school life the opportunity to have the same scholarship that their peers had, who had also gone to high school with them and sat in the same classrooms. They couldn't just move in in their senior year and go to college. It wasn't about out of state tuition. It was an academic, meritorious scholarship called the Academic Challenge Scholarship. This bill would've said that if you came here, not because you made the choice but because your parents did, that we're not going to punish a child because the parent committed a crime. That’s not what we typically do in this country....It accomplished two things that we knew we wanted to do, and that is, number one, bring people from illegal status to legal status. And the second thing, we wanted people to be taxpayers, not tax- takers. And that's what that provision did.”

Mitt Romney also claims that he vetoed similar legislation when he was serving as Massachusetts Governor. According to the Boston Globe,

“A bill currently being considered by the Legislature would provide in-state tuition at our public colleges and university to individuals who are in the United States illegally. Governor Romney vetoed a similar provision last June, and he is prepared to do so again.”

Lesson: Giuliani supported illegal immigrants paying in-state tuition at state colleges for students who graduated from a New York State high school. Huckabee supported state-funded scholarships for children of illegal immigrants. Mitt Romney did not allow tuition breaks for illegal immigrants while he was governor of Massachusetts. Romney’s claims are correct.

Read More...

Summary only...