FACT CHECK: Mourdock Trying to Cover Up Positions Dangerous to Hoosier Seniors

0 Comments | Posted

Indianapolis, Ind.--Today, Joe Donnelly’s campaign for U.S. Senate responded to Richard Mourdock’s latest ad misleading Hoosier voters about his record.

“Richard Mourdock is the only candidate in this race who will say anything to get elected,” said Paul Tencher, campaign manager.  “First, he questioned the constitutionality of Medicare and Social Security.  Then, he said he it was acceptable for businesses to drop cancer coverage to save money. Now, Hoosiers are rejecting these extreme TEA Party ideas so he is trying to etch-a-sketch his long record of positions he wants to inflict on Hoosiers. Only in his ‘my way or the highway’ campaign would Mr. Mourdock criticize his opponent for Medicare savings he also supports. The truth is Mr. Mourdock would essentially end Medicare and force seniors into a voucher program--raising their out-of-pocket costs by more than $6,000 per year.”

Script

The Truth

David Mourdock:  Such garbage on television today Mourdock and his allies have out-spent Joe Donnelly and his allies by nearly $1 Million since September 1st.
Joe Donnelly will say anything to get elected Indiana Media on Mourdock’s Campaign:  “King of No Compromise” Claims Otherwise “Utterly Fictional.”  Indianapolis Star columnist Matthew Tully wrote, “The king of no-compromise, the man who insisted ‘we need less bipartisanship in Congress’ is now airing an utterly fictional commercial that portrays Mourdock as a bipartisan problem-solver. The candidate who has drawn national attention for taking his embrace of ideological stalemates to nearly unprecedented levels now hopes voters are so naive that they will forget his past.” [Indianapolis Star, 9/8/12]
V/O:  Joe Donnelly is lying about Richard Mourdock.    Video Doesn’t Lie:  Mourdock Challenged The Constitutionality Of Social Security, Medicare, And Medicaid. In April 2011, Mourdock spoke at a Madison Tea Party event and stated “Sixty percent of our budget, sixty percent of our budget this year, will be for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. I challenge you in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution where those so-called enumerated powers are listed. I challenge you to find words that talk about Medicare or Medicaid or, yes, even Social Security. You know, Article I, Section 8 says the U.S. government shall have the power to tax to pay off its debts, to pay for its defense, and then it says to provide for the general welfare.” [Madison IN Tea Party 4/16/11 event transcription, youtube.com, accessed 5/20/11]
Donnelly doesn’t want to talk about his vote to cut Medicare by $700 Billion to pay for Obamacare. Health care reform does not cut Medicare.  This claim has repeatedly been found to be false. The Washington Post called it “misleading,” and found that the health care bill “actually puts Medicare on a more solid financial footing.” Other independent fact checkers agree and stressed that “time and again” they've pointed out exactly how misleading this claim is.  [Washington Post, 6/14/11; FactCheck.org, 9/17/10, 8/20/10, 3/19/10, 6/13/12]

Mourdock supports the Ryan Budget, which would have repealed all the benefits of health care reform, but adopted all but "$10 billion of the nearly $500 [now $716B] billion in Medicare savings."  "It’s rather rich for Republicans to complain about $500 billion in supposed cuts to Medicare that they themselves would retain."  Mourdock’s plan would also raise health care costs for seniors by over $6,000.  [Washington Post, 6/14/11; CBPP,4/15/11; Senate Vote 77, 5/25/11; House Vote 277, 4/15/11]
Richard Mourdock will protect Social Security and Medicare. Mourdock’s Plan Would End Medicare Guarantee... Mourdock bases his budget on a plan that would dismantle Medicare and instead force seniors to accept vouchers to purchase health care coverage in the private market but says it “doesn’t go far enough.”  Under the Mourdock’s Plan, seniors would pay over $6,000 more a year in health care costs.  [Purdue University Appearance, 3/21/12; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 4/2011 ; Senate Vote 77, 5/25/11; House Vote 277, 4/15/11, Vote 151, 3/29/12]

...and Increase Out-of-Pocket Costs For Seniors By Over $6,000 Per Year.  Experts note that this plan would shift costs to beneficiaries and undermine traditional Medicare while generating few budgetary savings.  [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/21/11]

Mourdock Supports Privatizing Social Security, Handing Over Seniors’ Hard-Earned Money to Wall Street. [OnTheIssues.org, accessed 8/13/12]

Mourdock-supported Bill Would Force Massive Cuts to Social Security.  Republicans voted to force massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other crucial benefits.  The so-called “Cut, Cap, and Balance” bill contains a constitutional amendment which would set a spending cap of 18% of GDP and would make it virtually impossible for Congress to raise revenues.  As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded, “reaching and maintaining a balanced budget in the decade ahead while barring any tax increases would necessitate deep cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.”  [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/16/11; Senate Vote 116, 7/22/11;  House Vote 606, 7/19/11; Crawfordsville Journal Review 7/22/11]
David Mourdock:  Richard Mourdock cares about Seniors, and he won’t let us down.  I should know.  I’m his Father.  

###

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Leave a Comment