Mitt Romney needs to get his facts straight
Mitt Romney asserted that federal low-income programs are administered so inefficiently that 鈥渧ery little of the money that鈥檚 actually needed by those that really need help, those that can鈥檛 care for themselves, actually reaches them.鈥� But administrative costs only count for between 1 and 10 percent of these programs' spending.
Mitt Romney asserted that federal low-income programs are administered so inefficiently that 鈥渧ery little of the money that鈥檚 actually needed by those that really need help, those that can鈥檛 care for themselves, actually reaches them.鈥� But administrative costs only count for between 1 and 10 percent of these programs' spending.
鈥ut not to their own facts.
When Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney asserted that federal low-income programs are administered so inefficiently that 鈥渧ery little of the money that鈥檚 actually needed by those that really need help, those that can鈥檛 care for themselves, actually reaches them,鈥� my colleagues at the CBPP got to work on this graph.
It shows that 鈥渇ederal administrative costs range from less than 1 percent to 8 percent of total federal program spending.聽 Combined federal and state administrative costs range from 1 percent to 10 percent of total federal- and state-funded program spending.鈥�
Gov Romney is singing from the same playbook as Rep Paul Ryan along with a litany of conservatives whose goal for years has been for the Federal gov鈥檛 to shed the responsibility for Medicaid, food stamps (SNAP), low-income housing, and so on.聽 Once you 鈥渂lock grant鈥� these functions to the states, it鈥檚 easier to cut them.聽 And remember, this is from a candidate (and the same is true for the House R鈥檚 budget) that wants to cut taxes deeply for the richest households.
So he鈥檚 launching his attack based on inefficient administration鈥攖he claim that most of the dollars don鈥檛 reach the clients.聽 Trouble is, the facts got in the way.
Many people argue that Gov Romney is the reasonable R candidate鈥ou might not love his policies, they tell me, but he鈥檚 not known for making stuff up, for repeating outrageous statements with no basis in fact.
OK, let鈥檚 see鈥攊f he keeps repeating this falsehood, then they鈥檙e wrong.
I know these are dark times for substantive debate, but there are people out there to whom facts still matter and they need to know when someone asking for their vote is trying to mislead them.