Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Fact check: 5 facts about the fourth Democratic debate of 2019
Fact check: 5 facts about the fourth Democratic debate of 2019
Oct 30, 2026 3:08 AM

The largest number of candidates to date filled the stage at Otterbein University in Westerville, Ohio, for the fourth Democratic presidential debate last night. They offered a number of statements and assessments that bear further scrutiny.

1. Which will benefit workers more: A Universal Basic e or $15 minimum wage?

Senator Cory Booker: Ihope that my friend, Andrew Yang, e out for this – doing more for workers than UBI [Universal Basic e] would actually be just raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. It would put more money in people’s pockets than giving them $1,000 a month.

The Congressional Budget Office’sanalysisfound that the raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would give impoverished Americans who keep their jobs an extra $600 a year. It would also cost the wealthiest Americans $700 a year. The “Raise the Wage” Act would also cost an estimated 1.3 to 3.7 million American jobs, reducing those workers’ e to zero, the CBO found.

However, it’s not clear that a UBI does “more for workers.” An experiment in Finland concluded that a UBI failed to stimulate employment among those who received a check.

2. Trade destroyed more U.S. jobs than automation

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The data show that we’ve had a lot of problems with losing jobs, but the principal reason has been bad trade policy. The principal reason has been a bunch of corporations, giant multinational corporations who’ve been calling the shots on trade.

Warren had previously written that blaming automation for U.S. job losses is “a good story, except it’s not really true.”

Automation accounts for almost 88 percent of all manufacturing job losses between 2000 and 2010, according to a report from Ball State University. The remaining 13 percent of job losses came from trade.

3. Will Bernie Sanders create 35 million new jobs?

Sen. Bernie Sanders: We could put 15 million people to work rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our water systems, our wastewater plants, airports, et cetera. Furthermore — and I hope we will discuss it at length tonight — this planet faces the greatest threat in its history from climate change. And the Green New Deal that I have advocated will create up to 20 million jobs as we move away from fossil fuel to energy efficiency and sustainable energy.

The Green New Deal would have a net negative impact on U.S. jobs.

The 20 million “new” jobs produced e at the price of private sector jobs. Nicholas Loris of the Heritage Foundation explained the Green New Deal’s impact on employment best:

Granted, a massive tax-and-spend program will “create” jobs by building wind turbines, installing solar panels and building electric vehicles. Yet government spending does not actually create jobs; it merely shifts resources to politically connected sectors of the economy and away from more productive uses. Overall, the number of jobs destroyed would far outweigh any subsidized jobs created.

Sanders’ estimate does not include jobs directly destroyed by the Green New Deal. The GND would end all air travel and shutter the fossil fuel industry. Estimated job losses vary. “Most if not all of the $1.5 trillion in annual U.S. economic activity directly or indirectly attributable to the airline industry would disappear,” writes Dan Reed at Forbes. “Airlines For America, the airline industry’s lobby group claims that U.S. airlines are directly or indirectly responsible for more than 10 million jobs.” Similarly, Wayne Wingarden of the Pacific Research Institute writes, “Oil and gas firms support over 10 million jobs across the country — the Green New Deal would eliminate nearly all these positions.” The Chamber of Commerce estimates that eliminating fracking alone would cost 14.8 million jobs.

Nor does Sanders’ estimate take into account jobs destroyed through the proposal’s inordinate cost. The Green New Deal would cost $93 trillion over 10 years, according to the American Action Forum. The GND would demand 35 percent of GDP, in addition to existing federal spending, which demands another 20 percent of GDP. Together with state and local government spending, government already consumes more than 35 percent of GDP.

A Green New Deal would in which the government demands 70 cents of every dollar produced in the United States cannot help but negatively impact investment and private-sector growth.

4. Bernie Sanders more than doubled the number of homeless on U.S. streets.

Sen. Bernie Sanders: You have a half-a-million Americans sleeping out on the street today.

Sen. Sanders well overstated the number of people living on the street. While the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s single-night survey found that 552,830 people could be “counted as homeless in the United States” in January 2019, only “194,467 (35 percent) were unsheltered” – or living on the streets. The remaining 358,363 (65 percent) “were sheltered” in temporary housing. (For more facts on homelessness in America, see this article.)

5. The president shouldn’t choose big corporations to break up.

Beto O’Rourke: [W]e will be unafraid to break up big businesses if we have to do that, but I don’t think it is the role of a president or a candidate for the presidency to specifically call out panies will be broken up. That’s something that Donald Trump has done, in part because he sees enemies in the press and wants to diminish their power. It’s not something that we should do.

True.The Constitution – in Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 – prohibits the government from passing a Bill of Attainder, which would declare someone guilty of breaking a law without a trial. Then again, “Antitrust doctrine is not embodied in constitutional text,” as Alden Abbott, who now serves as general counsel of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), has written.

Related:

Fact check: 5 facts about the third Democratic debate of 2019.

This photo has been cropped. CC BY 2.0.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Shane Claiborne’s Budget Babbling
Writing for the Huffington Post, Shane Claiborne is also asking “What Would Jesus Cut?” I’m still opposed to the whole notion of reducing Christ to budget director, as my earlier post points out. But Jesus as Secretary of Defense of the United States or rather, Jesus as secretary of peace as proposed by Congressman Dennis Kucinich is equally unhelpful. Mark Tooley, president of IRD, has already weighed in on Shane Claiborne’s not so brilliant drafting of Jesus for president. As...
Unintended Consequences and Wind Turbines
With the surge in oil prices, there’s renewed interest in alternative energy options. Numerous countries have gradually taken steps to promoting renewable or clean energy technologies, and it seems the United States is drifting more towards favoring alternative energy options as the Obama Administration is looking at banning off shore drilling along the continental shelf until 2012 and beyond. However, before we move farther down this road, a critical analysis of the pros and cons is a must. A more...
Abortion and Intergenerational Justice
I’m not sure I have ever really encountered the term intergenerational justice before this discussion over “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” at least in any substantive way. This unfamiliarity is what lay behind my initial caveat regarding the term, my concern that it not be understood as “code for something else.” The Call itself provides a decent definition of the concept, or at least of its implications: “…that one generation must not benefit or suffer unfairly at the cost of...
Jeff Jacoby: Jesus won’t tell them what to cut
Writing in the Boston Globe, columnist Jeff Jacoby says that a “more fundamental problem with the “What Would Jesus Cut?’’ campaign is its planted axiom that Jesus would want Congress to do anything at all.” As a believing Jew and a conservative, I don’t share the religious outlook or political priorities of Wallis and his co-signers. But you don’t have to be Christian or liberal to believe that in God’s eyes, a society is judged above all by its concern...
Budgets, the Church, and the Welfare State
In this mentary, which will appear tomorrow, I summarize and explore a bit more fully some of the discussion surrounding evangelical and religious engagement of the budget battles in Washington. One of my core concerns is that the approaches seem to assume too much ongoing and primary responsibility on the part of the federal government for providing direct material assistance to the poor. As “A Call for Intergenerational Justice” puts it, “To reduce our federal debt at the expense of...
Review: Defending Constantine
We’ll have the Winter 2011 issue of Religion & Liberty online later this week and you won’t want to miss it. Subscribe here. We’re previewing the issue on the PowerBlog with a book review that, because of space limitations, had to be shortened. This post publishes it in full. Constantine and the Great Transformation Defending Constantine by Peter J. Leithart (IVP Academic, 2010) Reviewed by Johannes L. Jacobse The argument that the lifting of the persecutions of early Christians and...
Taking His Name in Vain: What Would Jesus Cut?
Ray’s post pointed to something that’s been bugging me about Jim Wallis’ “What Would Jesus Cut?” campaign. As with the “What Would Jesus Drive?” campaign (“Transportation is a moral issue.” What isn’t these days?), Wallis’ campaign assumes the moral high ground by appropriating the Holy Name of Jesus Christ to advance his highly politicized, partisan advocacy. Jesus es an advertising slogan. And what is implicit here is that those who oppose Wallis are somehow at odds with the Gospel of...
Opposing Views: America’s Debt Crisis and ‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’
Last week’s issuance of “A Call for Intergenerational Justice: A Christian Proposal on the American Debt Crisis” has occasioned a good bit of discussion on the topic, both here at the PowerBlog and around various other blogs and social media sites. It has been interesting to see the reaction that ments about the Call have generated. Many have said that I simply misunderstood or misread the document. I have taken the time to reread the document and do some reassessment...
Archbishop Chaput: The American experience and global religious liberty
A brilliant assessment of where we are. (HT: American Orthodox Institute Observer). Subject to the governor of the universe: The American experience and global religious liberty March 1, 2011 – Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver, addressed the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs at Georgetown University. A friend once said – I think shrewdly — that if people want to understand the United States, they need to read two documents. Neither one is...
‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’ and the Question of Economic Growth
While there is much to applaud in the Center for Public Justice and Evangelicals for Social Action’s “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” the lack of discussion of the problem of economic growth is troubling. I believe Don Peck is correct when he writes in The Atlantic: If it persists much longer, this era of high joblessness will likely change the life course and character of a generation of young adults—and quite possibly those of the children behind them as well....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved