Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Fact check: 5 facts about the fourth Democratic debate of 2019
Fact check: 5 facts about the fourth Democratic debate of 2019
Jan 24, 2026 9:08 PM

The largest number of candidates to date filled the stage at Otterbein University in Westerville, Ohio, for the fourth Democratic presidential debate last night. They offered a number of statements and assessments that bear further scrutiny.

1. Which will benefit workers more: A Universal Basic e or $15 minimum wage?

Senator Cory Booker: Ihope that my friend, Andrew Yang, e out for this – doing more for workers than UBI [Universal Basic e] would actually be just raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. It would put more money in people’s pockets than giving them $1,000 a month.

The Congressional Budget Office’sanalysisfound that the raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would give impoverished Americans who keep their jobs an extra $600 a year. It would also cost the wealthiest Americans $700 a year. The “Raise the Wage” Act would also cost an estimated 1.3 to 3.7 million American jobs, reducing those workers’ e to zero, the CBO found.

However, it’s not clear that a UBI does “more for workers.” An experiment in Finland concluded that a UBI failed to stimulate employment among those who received a check.

2. Trade destroyed more U.S. jobs than automation

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The data show that we’ve had a lot of problems with losing jobs, but the principal reason has been bad trade policy. The principal reason has been a bunch of corporations, giant multinational corporations who’ve been calling the shots on trade.

Warren had previously written that blaming automation for U.S. job losses is “a good story, except it’s not really true.”

Automation accounts for almost 88 percent of all manufacturing job losses between 2000 and 2010, according to a report from Ball State University. The remaining 13 percent of job losses came from trade.

3. Will Bernie Sanders create 35 million new jobs?

Sen. Bernie Sanders: We could put 15 million people to work rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our water systems, our wastewater plants, airports, et cetera. Furthermore — and I hope we will discuss it at length tonight — this planet faces the greatest threat in its history from climate change. And the Green New Deal that I have advocated will create up to 20 million jobs as we move away from fossil fuel to energy efficiency and sustainable energy.

The Green New Deal would have a net negative impact on U.S. jobs.

The 20 million “new” jobs produced e at the price of private sector jobs. Nicholas Loris of the Heritage Foundation explained the Green New Deal’s impact on employment best:

Granted, a massive tax-and-spend program will “create” jobs by building wind turbines, installing solar panels and building electric vehicles. Yet government spending does not actually create jobs; it merely shifts resources to politically connected sectors of the economy and away from more productive uses. Overall, the number of jobs destroyed would far outweigh any subsidized jobs created.

Sanders’ estimate does not include jobs directly destroyed by the Green New Deal. The GND would end all air travel and shutter the fossil fuel industry. Estimated job losses vary. “Most if not all of the $1.5 trillion in annual U.S. economic activity directly or indirectly attributable to the airline industry would disappear,” writes Dan Reed at Forbes. “Airlines For America, the airline industry’s lobby group claims that U.S. airlines are directly or indirectly responsible for more than 10 million jobs.” Similarly, Wayne Wingarden of the Pacific Research Institute writes, “Oil and gas firms support over 10 million jobs across the country — the Green New Deal would eliminate nearly all these positions.” The Chamber of Commerce estimates that eliminating fracking alone would cost 14.8 million jobs.

Nor does Sanders’ estimate take into account jobs destroyed through the proposal’s inordinate cost. The Green New Deal would cost $93 trillion over 10 years, according to the American Action Forum. The GND would demand 35 percent of GDP, in addition to existing federal spending, which demands another 20 percent of GDP. Together with state and local government spending, government already consumes more than 35 percent of GDP.

A Green New Deal would in which the government demands 70 cents of every dollar produced in the United States cannot help but negatively impact investment and private-sector growth.

4. Bernie Sanders more than doubled the number of homeless on U.S. streets.

Sen. Bernie Sanders: You have a half-a-million Americans sleeping out on the street today.

Sen. Sanders well overstated the number of people living on the street. While the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s single-night survey found that 552,830 people could be “counted as homeless in the United States” in January 2019, only “194,467 (35 percent) were unsheltered” – or living on the streets. The remaining 358,363 (65 percent) “were sheltered” in temporary housing. (For more facts on homelessness in America, see this article.)

5. The president shouldn’t choose big corporations to break up.

Beto O’Rourke: [W]e will be unafraid to break up big businesses if we have to do that, but I don’t think it is the role of a president or a candidate for the presidency to specifically call out panies will be broken up. That’s something that Donald Trump has done, in part because he sees enemies in the press and wants to diminish their power. It’s not something that we should do.

True.The Constitution – in Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 – prohibits the government from passing a Bill of Attainder, which would declare someone guilty of breaking a law without a trial. Then again, “Antitrust doctrine is not embodied in constitutional text,” as Alden Abbott, who now serves as general counsel of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), has written.

Related:

Fact check: 5 facts about the third Democratic debate of 2019.

This photo has been cropped. CC BY 2.0.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Humans care about economic fairness, not economic inequality
A new study published in the science journal Nature Human Behaviour finds that in most situation people are unconcerned about economic inequality as long as distributions of wealth are fair: There is immense concern about economic inequality, both among the munity and in the general public, and many insist that equality is an important social goal. However, when people are asked about the ideal distribution of wealth in their country, they actually prefer unequal societies. We suggest that these two...
Why J.D. Vance is bringing venture capital to the Rust Belt
As Americans continue to face the disruptive effects of economic change, whether from technology, trade, or globalization, many have wondered how we might preserve or revivethe regions that have suffered most. For progressives and populists alike, the solutions are predictably focused on a menu of government interventions, from trade barriers to wage minimums to salary caps to a range of regulatory constraints. For conservatives and libertarians, the debate has less to do with policy and more to do with the...
Audio: Victor Claar on whether Trump’s budget is un-Christian
Victor Claar speaks at Acton University On Saturday, Victor Claar, Professor of Economics at Henderson State University and Affiliate Scholar at the Acton Institute, joins host Julie Roys and Jenny Eaton Dyer of Hope Through Healing Hands on Moody Radio’sUp For Debateto discuss how Christians should respond to President Trump’s first budget proposal, especially as it relates to proposed cuts in US foreign aid. Dyer argues that Christians should be deeply concerned about the proposed cuts, while Claar argues that...
Samuel Gregg on the fracturing of France
With the first round of the French election results in, and no major candidates even managing to get a quarter of the total votes, two candidates remain: Marine Le Pen of the National Front, a populist and nationalist party, and Emmanuel Macron, the center-Left candidate of the “En Marche!” (“On Our Way”) political party. Samuel Gregg covers the current politically disjointed state of Francein a new article for First Things. He maintains an attitude of skepticism and uncertainty towards France’s...
Taxes on unhealthy food do nothing but hurt the poor
Throughout history, societies have found peculiar ways to reinforce social hierarchies and class-based discrimination. mon way is to prohibit certain social classes from being able to purchase a good. These types of laws that regulate permitted consumption of particular goods and services are known as sumptuary laws. A prime example is the 16th-century French law that banned anyone but princes from wearing velvet. Modern America is mitted to the appearance of egalitarianism to make laws that directly ban poor people...
Remembering Kate O’Beirne
Longtime Acton Institute friend and supporter Kate O’Beirne passed away this past weekend. Below are Father Robert Sirico’s thoughts on this plished woman: I feel like I have always known Kate O’Beirne, so the passing of this woman of keen intellect, sharp wit and fearless rhetoric in confronting the nostrums of our day leaves me feeling very, very sad. It is painfully sad to think that the occasions of sharing National Review cruises or panel discussions with her or having...
Marine Le Pen’s economics unite populist Right and far-Left
Emmanuel Macron may have won the first round of the French presidential elections on Sunday, but Marine Le Pen won a political victory of her own. The statist undercurrent running through her nationalist and populist policies successfully bridged the gap between France’s “far-Right” and socialist Left, according to Marco Respinti in a new essay for Religion & Liberty Transatlantic. Mainstream French politicians have sought bine disparate ideological strands since at least Charles de Gaulle, who presented his foreign policy as...
Acton books distributed to schools by Theological Book Network
The Acton Institute recently donated a number of titles on faith, work, and economics to the Theological Book Network which will distribute them to its partner institutions in what it calls the ‘Majority World’ (‘Majority World’ is a term coined to replace earlier sometimes anachronistic or misleading terms like ‘Third World’ or ‘Developing World’). The Theological Book Network is a Grand Rapids based non-profit, mitted to the creation and development of Majority World leaders by providing access to educational resources...
Price Controls and Communism
Note: This is post #30 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. What happens when price controls are used munist countries? As Alex Tabarrok explains, all of the effects of price controls e amplified: there are even more shortages or surpluses of goods, lower product quality, longer lines and more search costs, more losses in gains from trade, and more misallocation of resources. (If you find the pace of the videos too slow, I’d mend watching them at 1.5...
More than compassion needed for Europe’s refugees
“Irrespective of the political forces at play,” says Trey Dimsdale in this week’s Acton Commentary, “there is no arguing with the fact that such a large number of displaced immigrants presents a monumental humanitarian crisis in which survival es the initial, but not final, concern.” Prior to 2014, fewer than 300,000 refugees and migrants arrived in the European Union each year. Due to war and unrest in the Middle East and North Africa, that relatively slow trickle more than quadrupled...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved