Romney's attacks on Obama and welfare deemed false by fact checkers

Romney says Obama lifted a provision that required people receiving welfare to work. Independent fact checkers have found the premise of the ad to be false.

Evan Vucci/AP
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney walks to his car to attend a fundraising event, on Aug. 18, in Nantucket, Mass.

Republican Mitt Romney is renewing his criticism of President Barack Obama'swelfare policy, accusing him in a new ad of "gutting welfare reform." The ad says Romney would "put work back in welfare."

Romney says Obama lifted a provision that required people receiving welfare to work. Independent fact checkers have found the premise of the ad to be false.

Last month, Obama moved to allow states to seek waivers from some welfare rules. To get a waiver, states must show their plans would move at least 20 percent more people to work.

Conservatives say waivers will lead to an end of the work requirement. Romney was among several Republican governors who signed a letter in 2005 asking for more flexibility.

The Obama campaign, noting the work of fact-checking organizations, said Monday the ads are "not true." Campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith said in fact the rule changes strengthen welfare's work requirement, not weaken it. "Just one week after pledging to run a substantive campaign, and whining about the negativity in this race, it's clear Mitt Romney has absolutely no intention of living up to that pledge," she said.

The Romney campaign did not say in which states the ad would run. The campaign says Romney will press thewelfare issue during a town hall in New Hampshire Monday.

Are you more (or less) conservative than Mitt Romney? Take our quiz!

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.