DXPG

Total Pageviews

Friday, October 5, 2012

New Star on the Stump: Big Bird

By MARK LANDLER

CLEVELAND â€" Big Bird, who made an unexpected appearance in Wednesday's debate when Mitt Romney cited him as a likely victim of his budgetary ax, has become a recurring feature character in the campaign, thanks to President Obama.

On Friday, the president repeated his ridicule of Mr. Romney's threat to cut federal funding for the Public Broadcasting System, which would doom the beloved “Sesame Street” character (he also threatened to put the moderator, PBS's Jim Lehrer, into permanent retirement).

“For all you moms and kids out there, don't worry: someone is finally getting tough on Big Bird,” Mr. Obama said to whoops. “Elmo, you better make a run for it.”

But Big Bird is more than a reliable laugh line. It is also a way for the Obama campaign to enshrine Mr. Romney's wisecrack as the only genuinely memorable moment of the debate, which could dispel the perception that he was the lopsided winner of the evening. An Obama campaign official pointed out that the entertainment news media covered only two things in Denver: Mr. Obama's anniversary shout-out to his wife, and Mr. Romney's threat to kill off Big Bird. Protecting “Sesame Street” also plays well with female voters, she said.

“Governor Romney is going to let Wall Street run wild,” the president said, “but he's going to bring down the hammer on Sesame Street.”

In case anyone missed the point, the Obama campaign also dispatched a person in a Big Bird costume to Mr. Romney's rally in Abingdon, Va. The yellow-feathered fellow hovered at the entrance to the rally, carrying a sign that said, “Crack down on Wall Street, not Sesame Street.”



Fact Check: An 11 Percent Unemployment Rate?

By CATHERINE RAMPELL

In Virginia on Friday, Mitt Romney said that “if the same share of people were participating in the work force today as on the day the president got elected, our unemployment rate would be around 11 percent.”

Is it true?

Yes, but you'd have to assume that all of the growth in the number of labor force dropouts is a result of discouragement about the job market, as opposed to other factors like the wave of baby boomers now hitting retirement age.

A closer look at big issues facing the country in the 2012 election.

If you had the same labor force participation today as you did in January 2009 (65.7 percent, instead of today's 63.6 percent), that would bring the total number of people in the labor force up to about 160 million, instead of about 155 million.

Then if you assumed that those five million people you added into the labor force didn't get jobs, that would bring the total number of unemployed people up by five million, to a total of about 17 million. That would bring the overall unemployment rate to 10.7 percent.

This exercise, though, assumes that the entire drop in the labor force participation rate from January 2009 to the present is a result of discouraged people giving up on looking for work. It ignores the fact that the baby boomers are hitting retirement age, meaning that demographics would probably bring down the labor force participation rate even if the economy were booming. Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, estimates that half of the decline in the labor force participation rate “can be traced to an aging population.” The calculation above also ignores the fact that a higher share of young people are going to college, and are staying out of the work force temporarily while they improve their skills.

Because of these factors, it's hard to know what the “right” labor force participation rate should be right now. It should probably be higher than the 63.6 percent recorded for September - since there are indeed a lot of discouraged workers out there who want to work but have given up looking - but we don't know precisely how much higher.



Romney\'s Attack on Big Bird Sows Confusion Abroad

By ROBERT MACKEY
Video from Le Monde of Mitt Romney's promise to cut the federal subsidy for public broadcasting during Wednesday's debate.

Mitt Romney's promise, during Wednesday debate, to cut into America's debt by ending the federal subsidy for public broadcasting generated an Internet backlash, and at least one popular new Twitter account, largely because the former management consultant appeared to suggest that the beloved “Sesame Street” character Big Bird was surplus to requirements.

Mr. Romney's decision to run against Big Bird gladdened American conservatives, who have long complained of a liberal bias on public television and radio channels, but puzzled many viewers abroad, where local versions of the educational program are po pular and well respected. In France, Le Monde reported that the slight against le Gros Oiseau threatened to spiral into “l'affaire Big Bird,” after President Obama - experiencing a certain esprit d'escalier - came up, a day late, with the retort: “Thank goodness somebody is finally getting tough on Big Bird. It's about time. We didn't know that Big Bird was driving the federal deficit.”

The German magazine Der Spiegel explained to readers that Mr. Romney's threat to the character that viewers of “Sesamstrasse” know as Bibo generated a Twitter-Sturm during the debate that reached maximum intensity in just 20 minutes.

A sad day for Bibo, the German version of Big Bird.

In a useful roundup of the comic images of an unemployed Big Bird circulating on social networks, the Brazilian newspaper O Globo reported, somewhat inaccurately, that Mr. Romney had tried to soften the blow by first telling viewers, “I love Garibaldo,” which is the name the character goes by in “Vila Sésamo.”

Garibaldo, star of the funkier Brazilian version of “Sesame Street.”

At least some of the confusion among viewers watching the debate from outside the United States centered on the question of how Mr. Romney expected to get votes by pledging to eliminate state support for televised educational programming, and news, which is taken for granted in much of the developed world.

As Joshua Keating explained in a post for Foreign Policy, scholars at New York University reported last year that Americans spend far less per capita on public broadcasting than a representative sample of 13 other na tions, including France, Britain, Germany, Japan, Australia and Canada.

Even factoring in money provided by states and local governments, Americans pay less than $4 a year for the television and radio programming they get from PBS and NPR. Canadians and Australians pay about 8 times more per capita, the French and Japanese 14 times more, Britons 24 times more and Germans 41 times more.

In a statement decrying Mr. Romney's comments, PBS noted, “The federal investment in public broadcasting,” about $500 million a year, “equals about one one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget.”

In the context of the debate, though, what is probably more important than the fact that Americans actually pay a relatively small amount of money for public broadcasting is evidence that they a re convinced that they are paying a lot more.

As Politico reported, “Most Americans think public broadcasting receives a much larger share of the federal budget than it actually does,” according to a poll conducted for CNN last year. The results of that survey, which asked respondents to estimate what share of the federal budget was spent on certain programs, found that just 27 percent of Americans knew that the money for PBS and NPR was less than 1 percent of government spending. Remarkably, 40 percent guessed that the share was between 1 and 5 percent and 30 percent said it was in excess of 5 percent - including 7 percent who said that more than half of the federal budget was spent on television and radio broadcasts.

Asked if the spending on PBS and NPR should change, 53 percent called for it to be increased or stay the same, while just 16 percent said it should be eliminated entirely.

It might seem strange for anyone who knows that the federal govern ment spends so little on PBS to begin a discussion of necessary cuts there, but perhaps Mr. Romney has calculated that the undecided voters he is chasing might be among the three-quarters of the American population that thinks the subsidy is far larger than it is.

A spokeswoman for PBS, Anne Bentley, told USA Today that the Congressional subsidy does not go to PBS or NPR, but to local stations around the United States that pay fees in exchange for broadcast rights to their programs, which are produced with donations and revenue from other sources. Ms. Bentley added that Congressional support accounts for up to 50 percent of the operating budgets for some local stations in rural areas. “They're really in jeopardy of going dark if they don't receive funding,” Ms. Bentley said.

The producers of “Sesame Street” offered a comic tweet in the voice of Big Bird the morning after the debate, and a statement explaining that while they are “a nonpartisan, nonprofit, educational organization,” they are also “dependent on PBS to distribute our commercial-free educational programming to all children in the United States.”

Without support from the public, educational programming would be interrupted by commercials and need to take the concerns of advertisers for higher ratings into account.

As Alyssa Rosenberg noted on the liberal Web site Think Progress, Mr. Romney has been talking about Big Bird on the campaign trail. In an exchange with a voter concerned about the federal debt caught on camera by CNN in Iowa last December, he said: “I'm going to see PBS is going to have to have advertisement. We're not going to kill Big Bird, but Big Bird's going to have advertisements.”



Early Voting Is Restored in Ohio

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR

Early voting in Ohio for all residents was restored on Friday by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, giving President Obama's campaign another victory in its legal battles with Republicans over voting issues.

The state's Republican-led administration had imposed a measure that allowed early voting only for members of the military and people living overseas, arguing that the state had to reduce the strain on the election system from statewide early balloting.

Democrats - and Mr. Obama's campaign - cried foul, arguing that the measure unfairly disenfranchised minorities and other voters. Those voters are more likely to back the Democratic candidates.

A district judge in August blocked the measure, saying that the state of Ohio had a duty to offer equal voting opportunities to all of its residents. On Friday, the appeals court affirmed the judge's decision.

“Defendants' legi timate regulatory interests do not outweigh the burden on voters whose right to vote in the upcoming election would be burdened by the joint effect of the statute and the directive,” Judge Eric Clay wrote for the court.

The decision is a victory for Mr. Obama's campaign, which has been fighting legal battles in several states over the question of access to the ballot box in next month's election.

Ohio election officials, including Attorney General Mike DeWine, could appeal the ruling.

Ohio is a critical state in the presidential campaign. No Republican has won the presidency without winning Ohio for more than 100 years. Mr. Obama currently holds a lead in the state over Mitt Romney in most public polls.



Underestimating Health Care Costs in Retirement

By BUCKS EDITORS

Paul Sullivan writes this week in his Wealth Matters column about an often-overlooked expense in retirement: the cost of health care. One study Paul mentions, by Nationwide Financial, found that people near retirement routinely overestimated the percent of health care costs covered by Medicare.

Financial experts told Paul that people nearing retirement should take a hard look at their retirement savings and consider whether those savings would be enough to pay for health services.

For those of you already retired, what has been your experience with health care costs? Have you found that Medicare and other insurance cover less of the expense than you expected? How have you dealt with that? And do you have advice for other Bucks readers?



In New Madison Square Garden Exhibit, It\'s All About the Presidents

By KEN BELSON

New Yorkers might be forgiven for feeling left out of the presidential campaign. With the state considered firmly in President Obama's column, the candidates have spent little time campaigning in the city, other than attending the occasional fund-raiser or making a speech at the United Nations.

But there was a day when New York was very much at the center of presidential politics because of the state's relatively large population and the city's outsize role in the economy. New York produced presidents, too, like Theodore and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as well as presidential candidates including Alfred E. Smith and Thomas Dewey.

Over the years, Madison Square Garden has been where most presidents and aspiring presidents have spoken because the arena was large and centrally located. In addition to hosting political conventions in 1924, 1976, 1980, 1992 and 2004, the Garden has been the stage for presidential speeches and e ven birthday celebrations, the most famous of which came in 1962, when John F. Kennedy held a fund-raiser that featured Marilyn Monroe singing “Happy Birthday to You” to him.

The Madison Square Garden Company, which runs the building, will honor these presidential visits as part of its continuing renovation of the arena. Next week, the first of the building's 20 “Defining Moments” will be unveiled, complete with special exhibits on the sixth-floor concourse. Two of the first 10 moments include Monroe's salute to J.F.K. and Bill Clinton's presidential nomination in 1992.

The Garden will also install 366 smaller displays commemorating a special event from each day of the year chosen from among the 132 years of events since the first Garden opened.

“This phase of the transformation will preserve and celebrate the great history that has made the Garden such a special place for the more than four million people who walk thr ough our doors annually,” said Hank Ratner, chief executive of the Madison Square Garden Company.

There were plenty of other big moments, including in 1924, when the Democrats held a 16-day convention, the longest ever, that ended with the nomination of John W. Davis. Days before the election in 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt held a rally at the Garden, which was then on Eighth Avenue between 49th and 50th Streets. In 1940, Mayor Fiorello La Guardia endorsed Roosevelt for a third term at the Garden.

Wendell Wilkie, who lost to Roosevelt in 1940, held a civil rights rally at the Garden in 1943. Five years later, President Harry S. Truman spoke there days before upsetting Thomas E. Dewey, who was then the governor of New York. In 1976 and 1980, Jimmy Carter won the Democratic nomination at the Garden, where he fended off challenges from Ted Kennedy and others.

In 2004, the Republicans held their first and only convention in New York, where the city w as chosen partly to remind voters of George W. Bush's response to the terrorist attacks three years before.

Alas, presidential visits to the Garden are more intermittent these days. The electoral landscape has changed and New York is rarely up for grabs, at least in presidential elections. Still, the Garden's place in presidential history remains firm.

“It was a different time, when New York mattered on the political stage,” said Nick Ragone, who has written several books about presidents. “Now, it's simply about what media market you need to saturate to win. The conventions are less about the venue and more about the state.”



In New Madison Square Garden Exhibit, It\'s All About the Presidents

By KEN BELSON

New Yorkers might be forgiven for feeling left out of the presidential campaign. With the state considered firmly in President Obama's column, the candidates have spent little time campaigning in the city, other than attending the occasional fund-raiser or making a speech at the United Nations.

But there was a day when New York was very much at the center of presidential politics because of the state's relatively large population and the city's outsize role in the economy. New York produced presidents, too, like Theodore and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as well as presidential candidates including Alfred E. Smith and Thomas Dewey.

Over the years, Madison Square Garden has been where most presidents and aspiring presidents have spoken because the arena was large and centrally located. In addition to hosting political conventions in 1924, 1976, 1980, 1992 and 2004, the Garden has been the stage for presidential speeches and e ven birthday celebrations, the most famous of which came in 1962, when John F. Kennedy held a fund-raiser that featured Marilyn Monroe singing “Happy Birthday to You” to him.

The Madison Square Garden Company, which runs the building, will honor these presidential visits as part of its continuing renovation of the arena. Next week, the first of the building's 20 “Defining Moments” will be unveiled, complete with special exhibits on the sixth-floor concourse. Two of the first 10 moments include Monroe's salute to J.F.K. and Bill Clinton's presidential nomination in 1992.

The Garden will also install 366 smaller displays commemorating a special event from each day of the year chosen from among the 132 years of events since the first Garden opened.

“This phase of the transformation will preserve and celebrate the great history that has made the Garden such a special place for the more than four million people who walk thr ough our doors annually,” said Hank Ratner, chief executive of the Madison Square Garden Company.

There were plenty of other big moments, including in 1924, when the Democrats held a 16-day convention, the longest ever, that ended with the nomination of John W. Davis. Days before the election in 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt held a rally at the Garden, which was then on Eighth Avenue between 49th and 50th Streets. In 1940, Mayor Fiorello La Guardia endorsed Roosevelt for a third term at the Garden.

Wendell Wilkie, who lost to Roosevelt in 1940, held a civil rights rally at the Garden in 1943. Five years later, President Harry S. Truman spoke there days before upsetting Thomas E. Dewey, who was then the governor of New York. In 1976 and 1980, Jimmy Carter won the Democratic nomination at the Garden, where he fended off challenges from Ted Kennedy and others.

In 2004, the Republicans held their first and only convention in New York, where the city w as chosen partly to remind voters of George W. Bush's response to the terrorist attacks three years before.

Alas, presidential visits to the Garden are more intermittent these days. The electoral landscape has changed and New York is rarely up for grabs, at least in presidential elections. Still, the Garden's place in presidential history remains firm.

“It was a different time, when New York mattered on the political stage,” said Nick Ragone, who has written several books about presidents. “Now, it's simply about what media market you need to saturate to win. The conventions are less about the venue and more about the state.”



D.C. May Have to Decide Between Pastimes

By NICK CORASANITI

With the Major League Baseball playoffs finally set, Washington could be forced to make a tough choice in 2012, but not the one everyone has been talking about for the past 18 months.

The Washington Nationals, the National League East champions, could be playing elimination games during the vice-presidential debate on Thursday and during the final presidential debate on Oct. 22, leaving the newly die-hard Beltway crowds to chose between their old muse and new.

Neither game has a set time - or is even guaranteed to be played (the Nationals could sweep their series, or be swept). It is also possible the potential conflict with the vice-presidential debate will be a day game, allowing for a best-of-both-worlds situation that would certainly please those in Washington who have dedicated a good part of their summer to the Nationals' season.

Ben S. Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, is a season ticket-holder, and Senators Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid have found that a love for the Nationals is one of the few things they can agree on. Mr. Reid memorably quoted the Nationals' star rookie, Bryce Harper, in a news conference, responding to a reporter, “That's a clown question, bro.”

The political media contingent is also swept up in the “Natitude” craze. When the Nats clinched the division on Monday night, ABC's Jonathan Karl and CNN's Wolf Blitzer were spotted on the field after the game. Mr. Blitzer has been known to have producers report game scores and updates into his earpiece during breaks in “The Situation Room.”

Even The Times's own Carl Hulse has acknowledged “cheating” on his Chicago Cubs with the Nats.

Should the playoff game pose a direct conflict with either debate, a few options are available for those who won't be in a filing center. Major League Baseball's At Bat mobile app provides live updates and live radio broadcasts, and it is available on almost all platforms. And bars around Washington plan to show both the game and the debate, although a fight for the house audio may depend on who's winning.



Commission on Presidential Debates Defends Jim Lehrer

By JIM RUTENBERG

Just about everyone has weighed in against Jim Lehrer's performance as presidential debate moderator on Wednesday night - Democrats, political commentators, and even on Thursday night, Jimmy Fallon.

Now, the Commission on Presidential Debates is coming to his defense, arguing that the criticism that Mr. Lehrer did not do enough to corral the filibustering candidates misses the point: It was his job to get them talking, not to insert himself into their dialogue.

In a statement, the commission's executive director, Janet Brown, said: “The format for the first and fourth presidential debates calls for six 15-minute segments on topics selected and announced in advance by the moderators. After the moderator asks a question, the candidates each have two minutes to answer. After their answers, the moderator's job is to facilitate a conversation on the topic for approximately 9 minutes before moving to the next topic. The Co mmission on Presidential Debates' goal in selecting this format was to have a serious discussion of the major domestic and foreign policy issues with minimal interference by the moderator or timing signals. Jim Lehrer implemented the format exactly as it was designed by the CPD and announced in July.”



The Best Financial Move You Made for Your Special Needs Relative

By RON LIEBER

In this weekend's Your Money column, I turned to financial advisers and lawyers who were themselves parents to or siblings of people with special needs and asked them to offer basic advice for families who are getting started with their own financial planning in this area.

If you have a close family member with who is disabled, how does their advice square with your experience? And what is the best tip you'd offer to people who are starting the process?



Romney Says Jobs Numbers Are Not True Sign of Growth

By ASHLEY PARKER

ABINGDON, Va. - Mitt Romney sought to play down the latest jobs numbers - a 7.8 percent unemployment rate, the lowest since 2009 - at stop in coal country here, telling the crowd that the rate had come down “very, very slowly.” The improving employment numbers, he said, were the result of people dropping out of the work force and not a true sign of job growth.

“The reason it's come down this year is primarily due to the fact that more and more people have just stopped looking for work,” Mr. Romney said. “The truth is, if the same share of people were participating in the work force today as on the day the president got elected, our unemployment rate would be around 11 percent.”

An unemployment rate of 8 percent had become something of Mr. Romney's economic “red line” on the campaign trail, where he liked to remind voters how many months it had been since the rate had fallen below that mark, and attack P resident Obama over his promise that, with the stimulus, he would get the rate below 8 percent. But on Friday, as the unemployment rate dropped from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent - the first time in nearly four years - Mr. Romney refused to cede any ground to the president.

“The reason it's come down this year is primarily due to the fact that more and more people have just stopped looking for work,” he said. “And if you just dropped out of the work force, if you just give up and say, ‘Look, I can't go back to work, I'm just going to stay home,' if you just drop out all together, why you're no longer part of the employment statistics, so it looks like unemployment is getting better.”

He added: “When I'm president of the United states - when I'm president of the United States - that unemployment rate is going to come down not because people are giving up and dropping out of the work force but because we're creating more jobs.”

The Obama campaign was quick to hit back.

“At his Virginia event today, Mitt Romney talked down the economic progress we're making, but the truth is that businesses have added 5.2 million jobs over the past two and a half years, and the unemployment rate is now at its lowest levels since January 2009,” said Lis Smith, an Obama campaign spokeswoman, in an e-mail statement. “Romney won't tell the truth because he knows his plans would pummel the middle class, taking us back to the same failed policies that caused the collapse and record job losses in the first place. In fact, independent economists say his plans would not create jobs, could slow the recovery, and could actually cost us two million jobs over the next two years.”



Jobs Report Brings Unexpected Good News for Obama

By DAVID LEONHARDT

After a lackluster debate, President Obama faced the prospect of a second piece of bad political news with Friday morning's jobs report. Instead, Mr. Obama â€" and the economy â€" received some unexpected good news.

Economists will spend the rest of the day parsing the numbers and arguing over exactly the best way to describe the report, but there is little question about its overall thrust: positive.

The unemployment rate dropped sharply, to 7.8 percent from 8.1 percent, because the Labor Department's survey of households showed a large gain in the number of employed people in September. The survey of businesses showed a smaller gain, but the survey also showed that hiring gains in July and August were larger than expected.

In a note to clients, Jim O'Sullivan, the chief United States economist at High Frequency Economics, a research firm, called it “a much stronger report than expected.”

At this poi nt in the presidential race, any single unemployment report is unlikely to have a major effect on the campaign. Friday's report does not change the basic storyline about the economy: it remains weak, and it continues to grow at a modest pace. The recovery from the financial crisis continues, but it will take a long time before the economy feels healthy.

For Mr. Obama, however, a fundamental change in the contours of the race is not the goal. Polls have consistently shown him with a small lead. The worry among his campaign advisers is that Mitt Romney's strong performance in Wednesday's debate and Mr. Obama's weak one have the potential to be a watershed.

That concern no doubt remains, but it would have been all the stronger if the jobs report had been weaker.



Friday Reading: Letting Patients Read the Doctor\'s Notes

By ANN CARRNS

A variety of consumer-focused articles appears daily in The New York Times and on our blogs. Each weekday morning, we gather them together here so you can quickly scan the news that could hit you in your wallet.



Romney Takes Liberties With Claims About a Bipartisan Past

By MICHAEL WINES

When Mitt Romney accused President Obama in their debate Wednesday night of refusing to work with Republicans, he held up his own record as the Massachusetts governor as an example of what political cooperation can achieve.

As a Republican governor whose legislature was 87 percent Democrats, he said, “I figured out from Day 1 I had to get along, and I had to work across the aisle to get anything done.” The result, he said, was that “we drove our schools to be No. 1 in the nation. We cut taxes 19 times.”

Mr. Romney and the legislature did at times get along, Massachusetts schools were often top-rated, and some taxes did drop during Mr. Romney's four years as governor, from 2003 through 2006. But a comparison of his claims to the factual record suggests that all three take liberties with the truth.

While the governor and the legislature came together to produce balanced budgets and enact a signature health care reform bill, much of those four years were characterized by conflict and tensions. In the opening months of his tenure, Mr. Romney vetoed a Massachusetts House plan to create new committees and raise staff members' pay, and the legislators rejected his flagship proposal, a nearly 600-page plan to overhaul the state bureaucracy.

Mr. Romney proved to have a taste for vetoes, killing legislative initiatives in his first two years at more than twice the rate of his more popular Republican predecessor, William F. Weld, The Boston Globe reported in 2004. The lawmakers responded in kind by overriding his vetoes at a rapid pace.

By 2004, the second year of his term, Mr. Romney was provoked enough to mount an unprecedented campaign to unseat Democratic legislators, spending $3 million in Republican party money and hiring a nationally known political strategist, Michael Murphy.

The effort failed spectacularly. Republicans lost seats, leaving them with their s mallest legislative delegation since 1867. Democratic legislators were reported at the time to have been deeply angered by the campaign's tactics.

“They had a deteriorating relationship during the first two years,” Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor and expert on state politics at Tufts University, said in an interview. The campaign “was designed to demonstrate that he could make life difficult for them if he chose to do so. It did not endear him to them.”

Mr. Romney quickly initiated a charm offensive, inviting Democratic leaders to dinners at his home for the first time since taking office two years earlier. But the legislators were soon “infuriated,” Mr. Berry said, when Mr. Romney, testing the presidential waters, began traveling outside the state and casting brickbats at Massachusetts's traditionally liberal values before crowds of potential supporters.

On education, Mr. Romney was factually correct in stating that Massachusetts students were ranked first in the nation during his tenure. Massachusetts students in grades four and eight took top honors or tied for first in reading and mathematics on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress, a federal Department of Education test often called the nation's report card.

However, educators largely agree that the state's rise to first place was a result of a wholesale reform of state schools enacted 10 years earlier under Governor Weld. The reforms, carried out over eight years, doubled state spending on schools and brought standards and accountability to both administrators and students.

“Governor Romney does not get to take the credit for achieving that No. 1 ranking,” said Mike Gilbert, the field director for the nonprofit Massachusetts Association of School Committees, “but it did happen while he was in office.”

Under Mr. Romney, neither the governor nor the legislature enjoyed notable successes in education, although Mr. Romney is credited with battling successfully against efforts to dismantle some of the 1993 reforms.

Mr. Romney and the legislature cut deeply into state grants to local governments in 2003 amid a state budget crisis, forcing many school districts to raise property taxes. In 2006, Mr Romney vetoed a bill passed unanimously by the legislature that established standards for preschool education and set long-term plans to make it universal. He said the programs would cost too much at a time of budget austerity.

Mr. Romney's claim that he was responsible for 19 separate tax cuts is also technically accurate. But here, too, the complete story paints a very different picture.

Perhaps the most substantial tax reduction occurred in 2005, when Mr. Romney's administration wrote legislation refunding $250 million in capital gains taxes to 145,000 investors. But the legislation carried out a court ruling finding that the taxes had been illegally withheld in 2002; the court gave the state the option of refunding the taxes or rewriting the law to correct the illegality.

Mr Romney proposed the latter, and the legislature agreed.

Of the remaining 18 tax cuts, many were proposed by the legislature, not Mr. Romney, and others were routine extensions of existing tax reductions that were due to expire. One was a change in the Massachusetts tax code to make it conform to changes in the federal code. Two were one-day sales-tax holidays.

Mr. Romney's critics note that his administration was also responsible for revenue-raising measures which, under that loose definition, might well be called tax increases. In his first year, Mr. Romney closed business tax loopholes and increased fees on an array of services, from marriage licenses to home purchases.

“Our numbers on revenue are that he raised about $750 million annually - $375 million from fees and $375 million from corporate taxes,” said Michael Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

In 2004, Mr. Romney signed legislation allowing local officials to collect an additional $100 million in commercial property taxes from businesses.



The Early Word: Intensity

By EMMARIE HUETTEMAN

In Today's Times:

  • The presidential race received a surge of intensity Thursday after the candidates' first debate, with President Obama striking back against Mitt Romney to try to make up for a listless debate showing and Mr. Romney's aides saying that the contest isn't in the bag yet, Jim Rutenberg and Peter Baker report.
  • With an antipiracy force of mercenaries abandoned by its sponsors, Somalia is offering a case study in the dangers of outsourcing war, Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt report.
  • Tea Party favorites like Representative Steve King of Iowa are facing some new challenges this election, campaigning in districts far less hospitable than they once were, Jennifer Steinhauer reports. Mr. King is defending his seat against a well-known, well-financed  Democrat in a tough race that highlights the liability of building a national profile on Tea Party credentials and incendiary r emarks.
  • F.B.I. agents visited the ruins of the American diplomatic compound in Libya on Thursday, escorted by Special Operations soldiers to allay security concerns as they collected evidence and sifted through the wreckage, Elisabeth Bumiller and Michael S. Schmidt report.
  • As political analysts expected, Mr. Romney moved to the center in Wednesday's debate, offering perspectives to appeal to more moderate voters - but possibly sowing confusion about how he would actually govern, Michael Cooper, David Kocieniewski and Jackie Calmes report.

Happenings in Washington:

  • September's job numbers are out Friday.
  • Mr. Obama holds campaign events at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., and Cleveland State University in Cleveland, Ohio.