ABC's Ali Weinberg, Luis Martinez, Justin Fishel, Mike Levine, Alex Mallin, Katherine Faulders, Ben Siegel, Katelyn Marmon and Christopher Mudd report:
Fact Check 1 -- Economic Growth
Fact Check 2 -- Gas Prices
Fact Check 3 -- The War on ISIS
What Obama said: "So the verdict is clear. Middle-class economics works. Expanding opportunity works. And these policies will continue to work, as long as politics don't get in the way."
It's complicated. The verdict isn't exactly that clear.
To be sure, nearly 3 million jobs were added to the economy last year, making 2014 the best for job creation this century. Non-farm payrolls have returned to pre-recession levels, but a greater share of those new jobs are in low-paying industries, according to a recent report from the National Employment Law Project.
The national unemployment rate was 5.6 percent in December, lower than at any other point in Obama's presidency. But the December figure is closer to 11 percent when factoring in "marginally attached workers," including discouraged and part-time workers who would prefer full-time work. That rate, known as the U-6, is still higher than pre-recession levels.
Another key measure of the economy's strength, the labor force participation rate, stood at 62.7 percent at the last job report -- down from 65.8 percent at the same point six years ago.
Attitudes are shifting upward. Americans are feeling better about the economy, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Forty-one percent of respondents believe the economy is in good shape, the most since April of 2007. Taking in the sixth consecutive year of gains for the stock market, and decreasing gas prices around the country, it's easy to see why Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky tried taking credit for the improved economy on behalf of the new Republican-led Congress.
But economic inequality -- the sense that the divide between rich and poor Americans is growing -- is still a resonant theme in American public life, so much so that Republicans and Democrats alike expect it to be a main focus on the next presidential race.
So while the economy, by many measures, has bounced back since the recession, it hasn't returned in the same condition. And it's not clear how much credit the president deserves for the good and bad elements of the recovery, says Jeffrey Miron, the director of economic studies at the Cato Institute who directs undergraduate economics department at Harvard University.
"There's no question the economy has improved over the past five years," Miron says. "But that doesn't tell us whether it is better or worse than if someone else had been president." GAS PRICES
What Obama said: “Thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump.”
Mostly True. According to the most recent short-term energy outlook from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, “the average household is now expected to spend about $750 less for gasoline in 2015 compared with last year because of lower prices.”
What the forecast doesn’t thank for that figure is “higher fuel standards,” instead saying that the recent drop in fuel prices is thanks to “U.S. tight oil production, strong global supply, and weakening outlooks for the global economy and oil demand growth.”
It’s an alluring figure that Deborah Gordon, the Director for the Energy and Climate Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said actually casts a dark shadow over the outlook for further initiatives addressing climate change that the President also pushed for in his address.
“The problem is that lower gas prices make trucks and SUVs more attractive,” Gordon told ABC News. “So maintaining fuel economy when gas prices are low is very challenging.”
What Obama said: “Instead of getting dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, we are leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations, to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group.”
Mostly true. At issue is the President’s claim that the US is not being drawn into another ground war in the Middle East. He’s said repeatedly he wants no “US boots on the ground,” but since the war against ISIS started last August the US has deployed 2,357 American troops to Iraq, according to the Pentagon. And they all have boots.
The White House has said “no boots” translates to “no combat troops.” And so far those 2,357 Americans have managed to avoid ground combat and stick to their role of training Iraqi troops. But the same cannot be said for every member of the coalition.
ABC News reported today that earlier this week a Canadian Special Forces unit embedded with Iraqi forces out near the enemy line were drawn into a firefight with ISIS. It marked the first time a member of the coalition actually engaged in ground combat with ISIS… and it may not be the last.
The President’s most senior military adviser, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey, has said he won’t rule out putting U.S. forces in combat roles. He said he might want to use them as “forward air controllers,” essentially ground forces who can get an eye on potential targets for airstrikes. That also happens to be the same role those Canadians were playing when they were attacked.
What Obama said: "In Iraq and Syria, American leadership – including our military power – is stopping ISIL’s advance... we are leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations, to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group.”
Mostly true. The U.S. and its coalition partners have had successes halting ISIS in parts of Iraq, but there’s a much murkier picture in neighboring Syria.
U.S. officials have said that the airstrikes in Iraq have halted ISIS’s momentum there, and Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby has stated that Iraqi forces have retaken 700 square kilometers of territory from ISIS. The Pentagon has also pointed to limited Iraqi offensives at Mosul Dam and near Mount Sinjar that have blunted ISIS advances. But U.S. officials say it could be later this year before the Iraqi military is capable of beginning an offensive to retake Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, from ISIS’s control.
But the question will be sustaining those Iraqi military successes. ISIS is adapting to airstrikes by no longer operating in large formations and covering their movements from surveillance drones overhead. And they have also maintained their freedom of movement over large areas of northwestern Iraq.
The situation is much different inside Syria, where the majority of almost 800 U.S. airstrikes have occurred near the key border town of Kobani. While airstrikes there have halted the ISIS attempt to capture the city, ISIS has continued to expand its control of much of the eastern desert regions of Syria that border Iraq.
The U.S. heads a coalition of 60 countries that have pledged financial, technical and military support to take on ISIS. Some countries have chosen to conduct airstrikes in training only inside Iraq, while five Arab nations (Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar) have chosen to participate in the airstrike campaign inside Syria.
And this offensive could last well beyond Obama’s term. U.S. officials have said that the strategy to defeat ISIS may take as long as three years.
What Obama said: “We’re also supporting a moderate opposition in Syria that can help us in this effort”
True. The United States has just begun to roll out a training program scheduled to begin this spring that will train and equip 5,400 moderate Syrian opposition forces over the next year.
The training for these fighters will take place at a staggered pace at training sites in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
Moderate Syrian opposition leader have criticized the U.S. for not providing lethal assistance and training before this year. Assistance they say could have helped them in their fight against more Islamic extremist groups like the al Nusrah Front and ISIS.
U.S. officials say the training effort is intended to train Syrian fighters to fight ISIS. Plans call for vetted Syrian fighters to be trained for six to eight weeks before being reinserted into Syria as unified fighting forces. The idea is that they will return to their home areas to provide security and stability and push back ISIS. After that Pentagon officials expect that this force of moderate fighters will be able to undertake offensive operations against ISIS. But even Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has acknowledged that it could take a force of 15,000 to 18,000 moderate fighters to have an impact against ISIS in Syria, which would require continuing the training program for several more years.
And there are no guarantees that the fighters the U.S. trains will choose to only fight ISIS instead of the forces of Syrian President Assad. Turkey has agreed to host the training program with the expectation that any forces trained inside its territory will be able to fight the Assad regime.
Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1Jbmu4Z
0 comments:
Post a Comment