truth squad :

Titus ad connects Porter to Bush fiscal policies

The Sun examines the political commercials to determine what’s fair and what’s not.

Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2008 | 2 a.m.

Truth Squad

Democratic state Sen. Dina Titus is running an ad attacking her opponent, Republican Rep. Jon Porter, for his support of the president’s policies.

The Script: “Had enough? Enough lost jobs. Enough foreclosures. Enough lost savings. Jon Porter is part of the problem. He sided with Bush to give corporations tax breaks to send jobs overseas, to let big oil keep gas prices high, and for lax regulations that created our financial crisis. Every election Jon Porter smears his opponent and then returns to Washington to do more of the same.”

The Video: Opens with a montage of darkly obscured images — two women, a man in a hard hat, a mother and child outside a house with a bank-owned-for-sale sign and an elderly couple — and the word “enough.” Next is a photo of Porter smiling and waving next to George Bush and the text: “90% with Bush” and “jobs overseas.” Then, a photo of Bush pointing to Porter and the phrases: “high gas prices” and “financial crisis.” Next is another photo of Porter and Bush and the camera zooms in on Porter’s face and the word “enough.”

The Reality: One goal of the ad is to link Porter with the current economic crisis, which was caused by a variety of factors that cannot fairly be pinned on one congressman.

The claim about corporate taxes is a reference to the 2004 American Jobs Creation Act, a sweeping bill that repealed a law the World Trade Organization had ruled was an illegal export subsidy. Although the bill gave substantial tax breaks to U.S. corporations with overseas operations, whether this led to a loss of American jobs is debatable, and it is unfair to claim Porter voted for the act “to send jobs overseas.” The bill was a response to European trade sanctions imposed on American exports.

The ad makes a vague claim that Porter supported high gas prices. The campaign cites Porter’s votes against measures that would have made diesel and gasoline fuel price gouging a federal crime, but that is not the same as voting “to let big oil keep gas prices high.” Economists on both side of the aisle have said these kinds of bills would do little to reduce fuel prices.

Holding Porter responsible for the regulatory standards of the financial industry is also unfair. For starters, the major deregulation acts being blamed for the crisis — the Commodities Futures Modernization Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act — were signed into law before Porter was elected to Congress.

Discussion: 6 comments so far…

By LasVegasRocks

10/8/08 at 11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Jon Porter is part of the problem, not part of the solution. In his short career, he has become a Washington insider who does not represent the best interests of his constituents.

My hope is that Titus wins and brings a semblance of decency to Nevada's 3rd Congressional District.
By jfnance32

10/8/08 at 1:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12221294...
By Johnathan_Abbinett

10/8/08 at 1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Gee, Megan, is Porter responsible for anything?

Porter has voted AGAINST the best interests of OUR TROOPS, time and time again - and AGAINST our MILTIARY FAMILIES!

Porter has voted AGAINST the needs of our DISABLED VETERANS, time and time again - TOO!

Every Military and Military Family Member and every Disabled Veterans should take a good, long hard look at Porter's dispicable voting record - and VOTE FOR DINA TITUS!
By bremskraft

10/8/08 at 1:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Titus' ad doesn't connect Porter to Bush policies. Porter's voting record connects Porter to Bush policies. It's all in record.

P.S. Don't forget Porter voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Act - which would have secured equal pay for women.
By LasVegasRocks

10/8/08 at 8:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

As for the Wall Street Journal article: "Mr. Calomiris is a professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School and a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Wallison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, was GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT IN THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION."

I'm sure the deregulation from the Reagan to the Bush II administrations has just pleased Mr. Calomiris to no end. He must be very happy that without regulations, the financial industry is in turmoil. Besides, he's like the grandfather of deregulation, what else would he say?

After all, wasn't it Reagan who started this whole mess by favoring trickle down and deregulation over everything else? It was probably Mr. Calomiris gave Reagan the idea from the start.
By LasVegasRocks

10/8/08 at 9 p.m.

Suggest removal

For good measure read the following:

http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/...