List date(s) this work was published or aired.
Aug. 22, 2012
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
Political campaigns have long included bogus claims designed to scare seniors and influence their votes. But the 2012 presidential election was by far the worst we’ve seen. President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney pushed a flurry of attack ads and accusations claiming the other would gut Medicare or end it completely. Neither side was being honest. The truth, as we told voters in this story, was that both campaigns wanted to slow the growth of Medicare spending, a necessary step to prolong the life of the program. But they disagreed vehemently on how exactly to do that. Instead of an informed, insightful debate on the future of Medicare, voters were treated to misleading and false statements, with each campaign saying the other would cut benefits or force seniors to pay more. In this story, we explained the status of Medicare and its financial challenges, and we debunked the overheated claims from Obama and Romney — and explained the approach each campaign had proposed to solve Medicare’s long-term funding problem. As David Walker, a former head of the Government Accountability Office, told us: “There’s too much spinning and mud-slinging going on, and not enough focus on substance and solutions.” In this story, we provided substance and sorted through the spin in what had become “A Campaign Full of Mediscare.”
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
We used various reports from the Medicare boards of trustees, Medicare chief actuary, the Congressional Budget Office and the Congressional Research Service. No FOI requests were required.
Explain types of human sources used.
We interviewed several experts, including Alice Rivlin, the founding director of the CBO and an economist with the Brookings Institution; Gail Wilensky, head of Medicare under President George H.W. Bush; and David Walker, a former head of the Government Accountability Office and now founder of a fiscal-responsibility initiative.
Results:
It’s difficult to quantify results of articles that aim to beat back political falsehoods. But we believe we helped voters sort through the spin and mixed messages of the campaign. Also, we do know that the author, Lori Robertson, was interviewed by CNN on this topic as a result of the story. We hope we helped other reporters covering this complicated issue.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
We encourage other journalists to fact-check claims made by politicians, and we hope there are more efforts to expose this “senior scare” tactic often employed by campaigns. Our advice: Ask the campaigns to back up the claims that they’re making, take advantage of the wealth of government reports that are available online — specifically revenue and expenditure figures, and interview experts in this field.