Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

Politicians Will Keep Lying as Long as We Don't Punish Them

Matt Welch | 10.9.2012 6:14 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

As a nice companion piece to the horror-chart of debt-to-GDP ratio below, read this cheerfully gloomy Reuters column by Jack Shafer on "Why we vote for liars." Excerpt:

The one presidential candidate in recent memory to win the White House posing as a truth teller was Jimmy Carter, who famously promised early in his campaign: "I'll never tell a lie" and "I'll never knowingly make a misstatement of fact" as president. These promises drew instant fire from the press, most notably Steven Brill, who flayed him in a March 1976 Harper's piece titled "Jimmy Carter's Pathetic Lies" (subscription required). Carter, who told no fewer lies than the average candidate, paid a political price for his promise, as everyone turned up their radar. "By saying that he would never tell a lie, Carter decided for himself that that's going to be his standard," said Alan Baron, George McGovern's press secretary. "Well, fine, let's hold him to it." […]

Some of the lies the candidates tell are innocuous and are not held against them, as Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman write in their 2003 book, The Press Effect: Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World. For example, "It's great to be in Kansas City" is a completely acceptable lie, as is the platitude, "Nothing is more important to me than the future of our children," Jamieson and Waldman write. Nor do voters care much if candidates claim to have "led the fight" for a piece of legislation if all they did was vote for it or sign it. Moving up the ladder of lying, candidates rarely are forced to pay a political price when they butcher the truth, even in presidential debates. "You can say anything you want during a debate and 80 million people hear it," said Vice President George H.W. Bush's press secretary Peter Teeley in 1984, adding a "so what?" to the fact that reporters might document a candidate's debate lies. "Maybe 200 people read it or 2,000 or 20,000."

Campaigns can survive the most blatant political lies, but candidates must be careful not to lie about themselves – or even appear to lie about themselves[.]

Shafer's depressing, if obvious, kicker:

The pervasiveness of campaign lies tells us something we'd rather not acknowledge, at least not publicly: On many issues, voters prefer lies to the truth. That's because the truth about the economy, the future of Social Security and Medicare, immigration, the war in Afghanistan, taxes, the budget, the deficit and the national debt is too dismal to contemplate. As long as voters cast their votes for candidates who make them feel better, candidates will continue to lie. And to win.

Related content from me: "Obama and the L-Word," and "Obama, Democrats, and the Media: You Can't Handle the 'Truth.'"

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Entrepreneurs Escape Many Taxes, and That's Unlikely To Change

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

PoliticsCultureElection 2012Barack ObamaMitt Romney
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (21)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Pro Libertate   13 years ago

    Precisely. What we need to do is to behaviorally condition politicians. Truth gets rewarded; its opposite gets punished. I suggest shock collars for the negative reinforcement.

    This can be applied to other areas as well, but let's start with the lies and work our way up.

    1. Paul.   13 years ago

      That picture of Mittens is kind of horrible.

      Truth gets rewarded; its opposite gets punished.

      If only there were a system for that. Something where they could lose their jobs if they lied to the people who voted for them.

      I guess that would presume the people voting for them were rational in some basic way.

      1. Pro Libertate   13 years ago

        With all of the technology in place these days, we should come up with something more timely than merely voting someone out of office. Maybe pay suspensions, instant recalls, that sort of thing?

        1. Greg   13 years ago

          What is Damon Killian doing these days? That's something we could try.

    2. Aresen   13 years ago

      I favor the Robespierre approach:

      1) Require them to make specific promises as to what they actually can deliver prior to the election.
      2) At the end of their term, check whether said promises were fulfilled.
      3) If the fulfillment is less than 50%, give them an extremely close shave in front of the Capitol building just before their successor is sworn in.

      1. Pro Libertate   13 years ago

        Maybe that's what's wrong with the Constitution--it lacks a death penalty for violating the Constitution while holding office.

        1. OldMexican   13 years ago

          Re: Pro Libertate,

          it lacks a death penalty for violating the Constitution while holding office.

          Uh, no, it doesn't:

          Article 3 Sect 3,

          "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

          The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

          You can argue that using the power of the Federal government to plunder and kill the citizens of the States (think: forfeiture laws and drug war killings) is waging war against the United States.

          1. Pro Libertate   13 years ago

            Too unclear and indirect. I want something more like, "Bust a deal, face the wheel."

  2. DK   13 years ago

    Here's a simple rule of thumb:

    If a candidate is supporting a statist position, he's telling the truth; if he's supporting a libertarian position, he's lying.

    1. Hyperion   13 years ago

      That doesn't exactly explain Ron Paul so much. Also, there are no Dems supporting Libertarian positions even with their rhetoric, so how do we tell when they are lying? If you want to tell me when their mouth moves, I can buy into that.

      1. DK   13 years ago

        Democrats have long campaigned as anti-war (despite continual, overwhelming evidence to the contrary). Same goes for civil liberties. So, when Obama says he's going to raise taxes, believe him. When he says he's going to close Guantanamo, don't believe him.

        You're right, it doesn't explain Ron Paul, but, alas, he didn't win. Nor does it explain Rand Paul and a select few others in Congress. But, I'll stick by my rule when I can choose between most of the 435+100+2 others.

  3. JeremyR   13 years ago

    Although it was a tongue in cheek novel, H. Beam Piper has a perfect way of dealing with politicians in A Planet for Texans.

  4. tengfow   13 years ago

    One thing is for sure, if a politicians mouth is moving, they are lying!

    http://www.PrivacyTool.tk

  5. Anonymous Coward   13 years ago

    On many issues, voters prefer lies to the truth. That's because the truth about the economy, the future of Social Security and Medicare, immigration, the war in Afghanistan, taxes, the budget, the deficit and the national debt is too dismal to contemplate. As long as voters cast their votes for candidates who make them feel better, candidates will continue to lie. And to win.

    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." - H.L. Mencken

  6. darius404   13 years ago

    Isn't that a clause in the Constitution now? The Good and Hard clause?

    The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be, by the estimation of Congress, what the common people want, and that Execution of the newly formed Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution, or interpreted into it, shall be given hard to the common people, by the Government of the United States, or by any Department or Officer thereof.

    1. darius404   13 years ago

      This was supposed to be a reply to Coward.

  7. ant1sthenes   13 years ago

    As a gimmick for the next two debates, they should hook the candidates up to polygraphs.

  8. Troy muy grande boner   13 years ago

    On many issues, voters prefer lies to the truth. That's because the truth about the economy, the future of Social Security and Medicare, immigration, the war in Afghanistan, taxes, the budget, the deficit and the national debt is too dismal to contemplate.

    I don't think it is just voters but the whole human race. This is why we still have religion. Because contemplating a finite life would require us to acknowledge that we are alone and responsible for our way through this life. It isn't dismallness. It's that these issues don't fit neatly in the Team Blue/Red narrative. These are hard issues. Too hard for the number of stupid people who have irresponsibly been granted the right of suffrage to contemplate let alone solve. It is easier to say "Team red evil." than to acknowledge that social security reform, for example, means not everyone can ride the gravy train.

  9. toolkien   13 years ago

    The idea that voting just makes people feel better is an under estimate. The people who vote actively vote for Force. It's not just the lies that make them feel better, but that they are voting for someone who is "doing something about "it". The 'mailing of fists' against 'Them' that makes them feel better. It's those who will vote for column A or column B, so that some peaceful or productive person will get their wagon fixed but good - for thinking or acting in a way that makes Voter X uneasy - that is the problem. "Punishing" politicians is the wrong place to start. If people get the government they deserve, the place for punishment is at the root, not the leaves on the tree.

  10. PapayaSF   13 years ago

    I am a bit dismayed that the standard for what constitutes "lying" seems to be being rapidly dropping, and now often means "something I don't agree with" or "he did not fully qualify his statement" or whatever.

    Immediately after the debate, the Democratic spin was "Romney won because he's a lying liar who said nothing but lies." I researched two of these "lies." One was that Obamacare could cause up to (IIRC) 20 million people to lose their employer-provided health insurance. The "fact checker" reported that, indeed, the CBO did give that figure as the highest estimate, and Romney did say "up to," but rated the statement as "mostly untrue" because that was just the highest of the CBO estimates. I mean, WTF? Basically quoting the CBO counts as a "lie" these days? Sure, the CBO might well be wrong, but the statement was in no way a "lie."

    The other was Romney saying that (IIRC) 40-something percent of our GDP goes to government. This was rated a lie because the federal government only consumes 20-something percent of GDP. But I think Romney meant federal + state + local government.

    No wonder some Republicans sneer at "fact-checking" like that.

  11. OldMexican   13 years ago

    Politicians Will Keep Lying as Long as We Don't Punish Them

    So now it's OUR fault we keep voting for them same lyin', two-timin' sons o'bitches!

    Talk about blaming the victim! For shame!

    [Tongue squarely in the cheek]

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Las Vegas Police Arrest TikTok Livestreamers and Tell Them 'You Should've Shut Your Mouth'

C.J. Ciaramella | 6.16.2025 5:41 PM

Virginia Man Faces 12 Months in Jail, $2,500 Fine for Drawing a Crosswalk With Chalk

Autumn Billings | 6.16.2025 4:34 PM

Whether or Not Trump Invokes It, the Insurrection Act Is Antiquated and Dangerously Broad

Jacob Sullum | 6.16.2025 3:55 PM

Trump Is Slapping a 50 Percent Tariff on Home Appliances

Jack Nicastro | 6.16.2025 3:30 PM

Josh Hawley Wants To Raise the Minimum Wage

Jared Dillian | 6.16.2025 12:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!