Debunking Schrader’s misleading statements on Bruun

Debunking Schrader’s misleading statements on Bruun

Schrader was mentioned in this morning’s Wall Street Journal guest column “Democrats and ‘Poisoned’ Politics” by Karl Rove who said, “Many Democratic incumbents now routinely assert in their ads that Republicans who pledge not to raise taxes support shipping jobs overseas—a claim that the nonpartisan FactCheck.org has found to be false. Oregon Congressman Kurt Schrader featured a senior citizen saying that if Republican challenger Scott Bruun “had his way, I’d be out on the street.”

Below are the three recent false Bruun attacks by congressman Kurt Schrader

Schrader Claim: Scott Bruun “supports tax loopholes and policies that have outsourced 85,000 Oregon jobs.”

The facts: Scott Bruun wants to create jobs in Oregon, while Schrader allowed tax breaks that helped foreign companies create jobs in China rather than in the U.S. “The Department of Energy estimated that 82,000 jobs have been created and has acknowledged that as much as 80 percent of some green programs, including $2.3 billion of manufacturing tax credits, went to foreign firms that employed workers primarily in countries including China, South Korea and Spain, rather than in the United States.” (Patrice Hill, “‘Green’ jobs no longer golden in stimulus,” Washington Times, 09/09/2010)
Schrader Claim: Scott Bruun “opposed cracking down on Wall Street, saying that greed on Wall Street wasn’t the cause of the mess we’re in.”

The facts: Schrader conveniently omitted full context: “What the financial regulatory bill completely sidesteps is what truly caused the problem we are in now. And yes there was greed on Wall Street—guess what, news flash—there always has been greed on Wall Street. That’s not what caused the crisis—it fed on the crisis… The worst thing about this financial regulatory bill is that it doesn’t address at all the core fault of the financial problems we are in… it doesn’t address Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Plus, what it does is guarantee forever these bailouts—it just takes it off the front page and puts it in the back door.” (Scott Bruun, March 2010)

Scott Bruun wants to put a stop to Wall Street bailouts and reform Wall Street, while Kurt Schrader has only supported policies that have done little to change Wall Street or reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“Despite much rhetoric about ending bailouts, the bill does nothing to address Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two of the largest recipients of federal bailout money. These two government-sponsored enterprises, now in federal receivership, helped fuel the housing bubble. When it popped, taxpayers found themselves on the hook for some $150 billion in bailout money… The failure to address their future is a serious error and shows just how hollow are claims that this agreement will prevent future crises.” (David C. John and James Gattuso, “Financial Reform in Congress: A Disorderly Failure,” The Heritage Foundation, 06/28/2010)

Schrader Claim: Scott Bruun “supports privatizing Social Security and gambling it in the stock market.”

The facts: This claim has already been proven false.Bruun does not support privatization: “I do not support privatizing Social Security.” (Straight Talk, “August 7, 2010: Republican State Rep. Scott Bruun,” KGW, 08/07/2010)
“Schrader exaggerates, suggesting that Bruun wants to fully privatize the system.” (Charles Pope, “Kurt Schrader says Scott Bruun wants to privatize Social Security,” Politifact, 10/02/2010)

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 01:36 | Posted in Measure 37 | 6 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Rupert in Springfield

    >Schrader conveniently omitted full context

    What full context? No one serious is out there is claiming Wall Street caused the financial meltdown. This was all of two to three years ago and the language is screwed up on this already?

    What caused the problem was the sub prime mortgage market – that was the root cause.

    What caused that? Well, I am glad Bruun speaks up on this one.

    What put the Federal Government on the hook for all this nonsense was the ridiculous Fmae/Fmac lending practices.

    What was specifically left out of the recent financial reform bill?

    Any cracking down on Fmae and Fmac.

    This government goon squad currently owns roughly half of all outstanding mortgages. And yes, they are still losing money.

    Who is in charge of these money losing enterprises?

    Well, at the congressional level it would be Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

    Chris Dodd got a sweetheart deal from Countrywide mortgage and basically wound up having to retire because he is so corrupt its ridiculous.

    Barney Frank was the genius who was running around a few months before the financial collapse claiming that Fmae/Fmac were totally sound financially.

    With absolutely corrupt (Dodd) or incompetent (Frank) oversight at the congressional level leaving all of us on the hook for this mess its no wonder people are in revolt.

    Bruun should be front and center on this issue in his campaign. Having Dodd and Frank in charge of anything, much less with ten miles of writing the financial reform bill is outrageous.

  • Anonymous

    What about all of the untruths/half truths Scott Bruun’s campaign is spreading? (Look at what he is insinuating about Medicare, he is actually misleading people, the bill is for saving not cost cuts, and as I am sure you know Medicare benefits will continue to go up, the savings are created to make a more efficient way of doing this while providing better care for seniors) But as you are a reporter I am positive you researched all of the allegations you have made fully. An as I assume you must be an educated person you would never make a claim without making sure to take an objective look at both sides and analyze, rather than blindly follow what others tell you.

    I would find this piece much more believable if it was more bipartisan…. after all isn’t that what will move us forward? Tell one side of any issue no matter who it is will always be misleading.

    FYI you should do more research. Mr. Bruun changed his mind about privatizing social security “conveniently” when he decided to run for congress this term. Google: 1996, Scott Bruun, Privatizing Social Security. You may be surprised with what you find.

    I think both candidates are strong good people who truly want to help their community. Who else would want to be ripped apart, belittled, ridiculed and treated so horribly other than people who actually have faith that people are not sheep, are good, and will actually vote on the merits rather than by what jaded news media tells them.

  • Bob Tiernan

    *Anonymous:*

    Mr. Bruun changed his mind about privatizing social security “conveniently” when he decided to run for congress this term. Google: 1996, Scott Bruun, Privatizing Social Security. You may be surprised with what you find.

    *Bob T:*

    It would be surprising if what he advocated was actually “privatizing”, rather than a
    bastardized definition of the term used by people (Repubs and Dems alike) who
    wouldn’t know “privatization” if it had a big sign on its head and bit them on the ass.

    If the government says you can take a fraction of your paycheck’s SS deduction (heck,
    or even all of it) and put in government-approved investment choices (rather than
    keeping it as take-home pay, or investing it in something not on the list), then
    that’s about as “privatized” as Tri-Met.

    Bob Tiernan
    Portland

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)