Here's a look at some of the claims from Thursday's GOP debate in Iowa.
FORMER GOV. MITT ROMNEY
The claim: "Back in the days of John F. Kennedy, the federal government took up, along with the state and local governments, 27 percent of the economy. Today, government consumes 37 percent of the economy. We're inches away from no longer having a free economy."
The facts: He gets his statistics essentially right, according to White House records, but the numbers are missing context. In 1961, there was no Medicare, and Social Security only made up about 2 percent of the overall economy. Excluding other payments to individuals and national defense, overall federal spending was also just 2 percent of the economy. (State and local spending was nearly 9 percent of the economy.) Today, Social Security and Medicare are more than 8 percent of the economy. National defense has fallen in half, to 5 percent of the economy. The other functions of the federal government (i.e., excluding payments to individuals and defense) has fallen to just 1.6 percent of GDP. So the federal government in many ways is actually smaller.
According to the conservative Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, the United States ranks ninth out of 179 countries in the free economy list. That's a long way to go before the nation catches up with North Korea.
REP. RON PAUL
The claim: "The country's bankrupt and nobody wanted to admit it."
The facts: Under no definition is the United States "bankrupt." The nation has a large debt as a percentage of its economy, and that is an issue of concern. But it is able to pay its debts and its bonds are still regarded as the gold standard in the financial markets.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN
The claim: "In the last two months, I was leading on the issue of not increasing the debt ceiling."
The facts: She does not play a leadership role in Congress and had virtually no involvement in the debt ceiling discussions, except rhetorically.
FORMER GOV. TIM PAWLENTY
The claim: "Where's Barack Obama on these issues? You can't find his plans on some of the pressing financial issues of our country. For example, where is Barack Obama's plan on Social Security reform, Medicare reform, Medicaid reform? In fact, I'll offer a prize tonight ... if you can find Barack Obama's specific plan on any of those items, I will come to your house and cook you dinner."
The facts: Funny pledge, but factually incorrect. Obama's health-care law was filled with Medicare reforms, designed to rein in costs. One can disagree whether those reforms will be effective, but the law is a plan.
PAWLENTY
The claim about Bachmann: "In Congress, her record of accomplishment and results is nonexistent."
The facts: As only a three-term member of Congress, Bachmann has few legislative achievements to her credit. So Pawlenty's right, but that is to be expected given how new she is to Congress.
MICHELE BACHMANN
The claim about Pawlenty: "The policies that the governor advocated for were cap-and-trade. ... I was very vocal against that tax, and I fought against that tax" imposed by Pawlenty on cigarettes.
The facts: Pawlenty in 2007 supported efforts to curb greenhouse emissions with a sort of cap-and-trade plan. He has since backed away from that stance. He noted that she voted for what he called a 75-cent-a-pack "health impact fee" -- she said it was because of an unrelated abortion provision attached to the bill -- but she quickly proposed a bill to repeal the tax.
BACHMANN
The claim: "Congress gave Barack Obama a blank check for $2.4 trillion. What did the American people get in return? Twenty-one billion [dollars] in illusory cuts. .... We just heard from Standard & Poor's, when they dropped our credit rating. What they said is, we don't have an ability to repay our debt."
The facts: Bachmann once again mischaracterizes what S&P said. S&P never said the United States could not repay its debts -- otherwise the country would be bankrupt -- but it downgraded Treasury bonds because it felt the political environment in Washington was too toxic to make progress on a package to substantially reduce the deficit. Her reference to $21 billion in "illusory cuts" refers only to the impact on the deficit in the 2012 fiscal year. But over 10 years, the specific deficit reduction would amount to $917 billion -- and as much as $2.1 trillion if a deal to cut another $1.2 trillion via a special congressional committee is effective.
By the way, a blank check means there is no dollar amount. In any case, Congress has already committed to spend much of this money, under budgets passed in previous years. Lifting the debt ceiling merely means that the Treasury now has the authority to make good on bills that are coming due.
WASHINGTON POST
