Published on October 16th, 2012 | by Jeremy Bloom2
Debate fact-check: Romney trying to take credit for Obama’s green jobs growth.
There’s just one small problem with that: The claim is utterly and completely fraudulent. There is no actually Romney plan.
(Watch the debate here. Read the full transcript here. See our modest attempt to debunk as many as we could here.)
Glen Kessler, the Washington Post’s fact checker, took a look behind the Romney numbers (and isn’t it appalling that he’s the first actual journalist to bother doing that?). And he found… total flim-flam. When he asked the Romney campaign to back up their claim, this is what he got:
We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … with completely different timelines.
For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney tax plan is a ten-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.
This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.
For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted — including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.
Did you get that?
First, Romney attacks Obama’s green energy plans as being a boondoggle that won’t create any jobs (See: Romney’s $90 billion lie about green jobs and Solyndra)
Then, he takes a study that says Obama’s energy plans will create 3 million jobs over the next four years… and claims those jobs as something that his policies will create.
… Except that Romney has also said he’ll END those policies, from blocking renewal of the wind energy tax credit (which even Republicans want to keep – see: Mitt Romney hates wind energy. That hurts real families), and blocking fuel efficiency standards.
Hopefully, this will be talked about in tonight’s debate…
Like what you’re reading? Share it on your wall to spread the word, tweet it, and like us on Facebook for more updates!