This from the New Hampshire Newt Gingrich campaign website, "NewtHampshire!"
"ANSWERING THE ATTACKS: Setting the Record Straight on Newt’s Positions on the Issues and His Record"
"Now that our campaign to rebuild the America we love is gaining momentum, those who want to see us fail are on the attack, digging through Newt’s past to try and stop us. Newt, Callista and our campaign welcome the opportunity to tell the truth about Newt and set the record straight about Newt’s positions on the issues as well as his record in public life and as a private citizen.
We’ve set up this page to arm you with answers to the attacks. See an attack that is not answered? Let us know. This page will grow as we receive more feedback to help you answer the attacks.
Menu
Ryan Medicare Plan – Health Insurance Mandate – Ethanol – Fairness Doctrine – Global Warming/Cap and Trade – Immigration/DREAM Act – Agriculture Subsidies – TARP – Zero-Based Budgeting in Foreign Aid/Inclusion of Israel – Libya – Vote for Department of Education – Dede Scozzafava Endorsement – Government Shutdown – Ethics Investigation – Lobbying –Relationship with Freddie Mac – Personal Life
Newt is the only candidate in the race for the Republican nomination who has led a national movement to elect a Republican majority and then actually achieved substantial conservative reforms of the federal government, including welfare reform, balanced budgets, and tax cuts. These historic reforms liberated the American people to create 11 million new jobs in just four years. Read more about the remarkable Newt Gingrich record here.
No candidate in the race can match Newt Gingrich’s 35-year career as a public figure advocating, explaining and achieving conservative reforms in government.
With this vast amount of experience, however, comes over 7,000 votes, over 1,500 speeches, thousands of television and radio appearances, thousands of articles and opeds and 24 books to scrutinize.
The following are the most commonly asked questions about Newt’s record:
Paul Ryan (and the House GOP’s) Medicare Plan
Like Ryan and the House GOP, Newt supports a premium support model for Medicare. However, he wants seniors to have the choice to opt into the new system or to stay in traditional Medicare.
Newt agrees wholeheartedly with Rep. Ryan that we must give our seniors more choices than the current one-size-fits-all Medicare model. Both concur that creating the opportunity for seniors to buy private insurance is the key to both improving care and lowering costs.
The one key difference is that under Newt’s plan, as outlined in his 21st Century Contract with America, seniors will also have the choice to stay in the current Medicare system or choose a private insurance plan with support from the government to pay the premiums. The other difference is that Newt believes that seniors should have this option starting next year, not in ten years.
Q: So why did Newt use the term “right wing social engineering” on Meet the Press when discussing these proposed changes to Medicare?
Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter.
In response to the host’s hypothetical question of whether Republicans should change Medicare even if there is public opposition, Gingrich’s response was no you should not. One of Newt’s basic governing philosophies is that government should offer a better alternative to existing entitlement programs that seniors can freely choose. Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter. Newt regards Paul Ryan as one of the biggest innovators in Washington, D.C. and he deeply admires the seriousness and boldness of his historic Path to Prosperity budget.
Back to Menu
Mandate to Purchase health insurance
Newt opposes Governor Romney’s health insurance mandate, and Newt opposes President Obama’s health insurance mandate. Newt believes mandates to buy health insurance are wrong on principle, and in the case of the Obamacare health insurance mandate, unconstitutional as well.
With respect to President Obama’s health insurance mandate, Newt believes it is an unprecedented and unconstitutional expansion of federal power. If the federal government can coerce individuals—by threat of fines—to buy health insurance, there is no stopping the federal government from forcing Americans to buy any good or service. It is a serious and unconstitutional infringement of individual liberty.
With respect to Governor Romney’s mandate, we have observed that it doesn’t achieve its goal of providing low cost catastrophic coverage for the uninsured. The intractable problem we have learned from experience with health insurance mandates is this: once you have a mandate, the government has to specify exactly what coverage must be included in insurance for it to qualify. This introduces political considerations into determining these minimum standards, guaranteeing that nothing desired by the special interests will be left out.
In the 1990s, Newt and many other conservatives, such as the Heritage Foundation, proposed a mandate to purchase health insurance as the alternative to Hillarycare. However, the problems outlined above caused Newt to come to the principled conclusion that a mandate to purchase health insurance was unconstitutional, unworkable and counterproductive to lowering the cost of healthcare.
Today, Newt carries the banner in fighting for the repeal of Obamacare and advocates for a “patient power” replacement that will create a free market framework for healthcare, provide affordable, portable, and reliable healthcare coverage, and establish a healthcare safety net focused on those truly in need. This system moves us towards the goal of healthcare for all with no unconstitutional mandate of any kind.
Back to Menu
Ethanol
Newt supports an “all of the above” approach to achieving American energy independence by the aggressive development of American energy resources, including American oil, natural gas, coal, and biofuels like ethanol.
Newt’s position towards supporting American farmers, American energy, and American security has been consistent for over 25 years. He supported ethanol development since 1984 with Ronald Reagan, and supported it over objections of other Republicans as Speaker.
Newt’s American Energy Plan, part of his 21st Century Contract with America, will reverse Barack Obama’s assault on American energy. Every day, the Obama Administration continues to prevent unleashing new sources of American energy that will create thousands of new American jobs, make energy more affordable, and reduce our dependence on unfriendly nations.
Meanwhile, Obama tells foreign countries that we want to be one of their best customers for oil and natural gas.
Newt prefers that energy development happens here in America. If the choice is for the next job to be created in Iran or in Iowa, Newt prefers Iowa. If the next dollar is to go to Saudi Arabia or to South Dakota, Newt prefers South Dakota. Ethanol has been a 25-year success story of greater and greater productivity, which has kept money here at home, enriched rural communities, and made Americans safer by lowering our dependence on overseas sources of fuel.
Back to Menu
Fairness Doctrine
Newt opposes the left’s efforts to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and vocally supported Rep. Mike Pence’s 2007 bill that prohibited government censorship in radio.
Newt does not support the Fairness Doctrine and he has been vocally critical of the left’s efforts to reinstate the doctrine over the past decade, including supporting Mike Pence’s bill that prohibited government censorship in radio in 2007.
In 1987, the three left-wing networks plus PBS/NPR dominated media, and talk-radio was still nascent; many of America’s most influential conservative activists, including the American Conservative Union and Phyllis Schlafly, supported the Fairness Doctrine at this time.
The rapid growth of conservative viewpoints in the media in the last 25 years is a testament to the power and innovation of the conservative movement once power is taken out of the hands of the elite networks and put into the hand
s of consumers.
Back to Menu
Global Warming/Cap and Trade
Newt does not believe there is a settled scientific conclusion about whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere.
Newt absolutely opposes “cap and trade” as well as any system of taxing carbon emissions. He testified before Congress against it in 2009 and led a grassroots effort while the Chairman of American Solutions to block its passage in the House and Senate.
Newt believes that cap and trade would kill hundreds of thousands of American jobs, cause electricity and fuel prices to skyrocket, and make America poorer. In contrast, Gingrich believes the best way to protect the environment is through markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs, who quite often are deploying innovative new technologies.
As for the question of whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere, Newt has noted there is no settled scientific conclusion. Many scientists believe it is the case. Others do not. But this unsettled scientific question has nothing to do with the best approach to protecting our environment, which is always markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs creating better and more efficient products and services.
Q: So why did Newt do the ad with Nancy Pelosi in 2007 calling for action to address climate change?
Newt does not believe there is a settled scientific conclusion about whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere.
Through his entire career, Newt has supported pro-market, pro-entrepreneur, innovative solutions to our environmental challenges, which he believes are superior to the liberal pro-bureaucracy, pro-tax, pro-regulation approach to the environment.
Newt believes that conservatives cannot be absent from the conversation about the environment and instead that conservatives must offer and explain why conservative solutions are better. Unfortunately, the attempt to get that message out through the ad with Nancy Pelosi failed. On November 8, 2011, Newt told FOX News’ Bret Baier that doing that commercial with Pelosi was “probably the dumbest single thing I’ve ever done”.
Newt will continue to oppose the Democrats’ destructive cap-and-trade and carbon tax proposals, continue to support expanded domestic oil and gas drilling, and continue to fight for a fundamental replacement of the job-killing Environmental Protection Agency with an Environmental Solutions Agency.
Back to Menu
Immigration/DREAM Act
In his 21st Century Contract with America, Newt pledges to control the southern border by January 1, 2014, waiving any regulations and pushing aside any bureaucracies that get in the way.
Newt believes America must be a nation of laws. The first duty of the federal government is national defense, and it is inexcusable that we haven’t secured the border. In his 21st Century Contract with America, Newt pledges to control the southern border by January 1, 2014, waiving any regulations and pushing aside any bureaucracies that get in the way.
As we secure the border, we must make an aggressive and serious effort to deport all criminals, gang members, and any other threats to our society as quickly as possible. We must also tap into the ingenuity of the private sector to better validate who is in the United States legally.
Newt opposed the DREAM Act. However, he did agree with part of the legislation which allowed those who came to the United States illegally as children to serve in the U.S. Military to earn their citizenship, just as foreign nationals are today allowed to do the same.
Furthermore, Newt has proposed giving local communities the authority to allow those with long established roots in the neighborhood a legal residency status, but not citizenship. Newt believes local communities are at a better vantage point to determine if those there illegally should stay or go. Under this system, we will send home those with no family or community ties and quickly deport those who have committed criminal and other destructive acts, while providing minimal disruption to families and communities.
Back to Menu
Agriculture Subsidies
Newt supports maintaining components of existing federal policy that safeguard American farmers against inherently unpredictable weather and price volatility, including a strong crop insurance program, while also streamlining USDA bureaucracy so it better serves American farmers and consumers
Agriculture is critical to the economy and only becomes more important as the world’s population rapidly continues to grow beyond 7 billion people. Newt supports maintaining components of existing federal policy that safeguard American farmers against inherently unpredictable weather and price volatility, including a strong crop insurance program, while also streamlining USDA bureaucracy so it better serves American farmers and consumers.
Newt’s plan for prosperity for rural Americans in Iowa and across the country begins with an outright repeal of the death tax, which has inflicted disproportionate pain on family farms. Job-killing EPA regulations make it difficult for American farmers to earn a living, and the new threats to regulate carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act are downright destructive. Newt will replace the Washington-centric job killing EPA with a new Environmental Solutions Agency that will work with agriculture more closely and constructively. In addition, community banks provide a credit lifeline to American farmers, and Newt will work to repeal the Dodd-Frank regulatory bill that puts disproportionate strain on banks in rural America.
Back to Menu
TARP
Newt believes that the reckless, secretive and opaque way in which the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department administered the bailouts has been an affront to democracy.
Newt was appalled and disgusted at the amount of dictatorial power that Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson tried to grab for himself at the outset of the financial crisis. However, he reluctantly supported a scaled-down plan after Paulson told the country that the world financial system was going to collapse without this emergency support.
Newt believes that the reckless, secretive and opaque way in which the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department administered the bailouts has been an affront to democracy. The Fed was picking winners and losers, using several emergency lending facilities to make all types of loans to connected parties, including to a bank owned by the Libyan government.
This is why broadly scaling back the role of the Federal Reserve and repealing the Dodd-Frank bill are two of the central pillars of Newt’s 21st Century Contract with America. The Fed will be fully audited and made more transparent to ensure the events of 2008 are never repeated, and getting rid of Dodd-Frank will once and for all end the destructive policy of “too big to fail.”
Back to Menu
Zero-Based Budgeting in Foreign Aid/Inclusion of Israel
Newt believes that Israel is one of America’s closest friends and a key strategic ally in a dangerous part of the world. Newt fully expects that Israel will continue to receive a robust package of aid from the United States under a new merit-based approach to foreign aid.
Newt believes that zero-based budgeting is a good approach to apply all across the federal government, not just for foreign aid. Before we spend money every year in various areas of the federal budget, we should ask the right questions of whether we should continue to spend like we have the year before. We have to break the "baseline" mentality that just assumes that spending will automatically be in place and grow every year.
The question has been raised as to how this budget
ing approach applies to foreign aid to Israel.
At the moment, the United States has a multi-year aid agreement with Israel. Newt believes we must honor this agreement. And sometimes multi-year aid agreements will continue to be appropriate. But as a general matter, we should apply a zero-based budgeting approach to all recipients of foreign aid. Newt believes that Israel is one of America’s closest friends and a key strategic ally in a dangerous part of the world. Gingrich fully expects that Israel will continue to receive a robust package of aid from the United States under a new merit-based approach to foreign aid.
Back to Menu
Changing Position on Libya
Watch the video embedded here which puts Newt’s comments about Libya in the proper context to show that his position was consistent.
Newt does not think the use of force in Libya was necessary to remove Gaddafi from power. He advocated the use of covert measures, specifically reaching out to the leaders of the Libyan military to convince them it was in their best interests to remove Gaddafi themselves. This has been Newt’s consistent position.
However, once President Obama declared on March 3rd that “Gaddafi has to go,” he put the prestige of the United States on the line. At that point, Gingrich advocated swift and decisive action to remove Gaddafi. Watch the video embedded here which puts Newt’s comments about Libya in the proper context to show that his position was consistent.
Unfortunately, instead of decisive action, we only got dithering. Obama showed more concern for obtaining UN approval of our actions than Congress’s approval for our actions. Sometimes a Commander in Chief will have to act decisively and quickly. But if there was enough time to secure a UN resolution, then there was more than enough time to secure Congressional authorization first, which Obama never did. Now he has set the dangerous and unconstitutional precedent of asking the UN, not the US Congress, for permission to start hostilities.
Obama ended up putting American troops in harm’s way under the auspices of a UN resolution for a chiefly humanitarian mission – Newt believed and still believes that that was a mistake. Today, it is increasingly unclear whether Libya will turn into something far more dangerous to American interests than the Gaddafi regime was in its final years.
Back to Menu
Vote for Department of Education
As President, Newt will dramatically shrink the Department of Education to a research and reporting overview agency, and restore decision-making powers to states and communities.
When Newt voted for the creation of the Department of Education, the institution was only structured to provide research and collect data. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy ballooned, so while Speaker, Newt aggressively campaigned to pare down the Department back to its appropriate role and return power to the states.
As President, Newt will dramatically shrink the Department of Education to a research and reporting overview agency, and restore decision-making powers to states and communities. Most responsibilities and positions will be eliminated, and its new role will be to help find new and innovative approaches to then be adopted voluntarily at the local level. Newt will steadfastly oppose any national curriculum standards, and will reverse Barack Obama’s nationalization of the student loan industry.
Back to Menu
Dede Scozzafava Endorsement
Newt has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election.
Whether it was helping to build the Republican Party of Georgia back when Democrats controlled the entire state or leading the nationwide effort in 1994 to break 40 years of Democratic rule in the House, Newt has always tried to advance the cause of a truly conservative Republican party. This has always meant supporting the most conservative nominee possible as selected by Republican primary voters.
Therefore, Newt will almost always back the nominee of the Republican party and not back an independent candidate in a race against a Democratic candidate.
Newt still believes in this principle, however, he has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election. Although she was the Republican nominee, the problem was that Republican primary voters did not pick her, the local party leaders did, otherwise her liberal views would have prevented her from becoming the nominee. The Conservative Party candidate whom Scozzafava was running against, Doug Hoffman, recently remarked about Newt’s endorsement of his rival, "I would advise other conservative republicans: Don’t hold this against him."
Back to Menu
Government Shutdowns
Gingrich-led Republicans stuck to their principles. The result: 4 consecutive balanced budgets, over $400 billion of debt paid off, bipartisan welfare reform, 11 million new jobs, and unemployment falling to under 4%.
In February 2011, Newt wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post to set the record straight about the government shutdowns of 1995 and early 1996. Read it here. Excerpts:
The Washington media establishment believes that the government shutdowns of 1995 and early 1996 were disastrous mistakes that accomplished little and cost House Republicans politically. The facts are exactly the opposite.
While the shutdown produced some short-term pain, it set the stage for a budget deal in 1996 that led to the largest drop in federal discretionary spending since 1969. The discipline imposed by this 1996 budget let to a balanced-budget deal in 1997, the first of four consecutive balanced budgets – an achievement Congress and the White House had not achieved since the 1920s. Overall spending grew at an average of 2.9 percent a year while Newt was Speaker, the slowest rate in decades, and Americans created 11 million new jobs…
This process hardly damaged the Republicans politically: Americans rewarded House Republicans the following November, as they became the first Republican majority to be reelected to a second term since 1928. Republicans would go on to hold the House of Representatives for all but four years between 1995 and today…
This would all have been impossible had Republicans not stood firm in 1995 and shown the American people (and the White House) that we were serious about reducing spending.
Back to Menu
Ethics Investigation
In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
Eighty four politically motivated ethics charges were filed against Newt when he was Speaker of the House regarding the use of tax exempt funds for a college course he taught titled “Renewing American Civilization.” Eighty-three of the eighty-four charges were found to be without merit and dropped. The remaining charge had to do with contradictory documents prepared by Newt’s lawyer supplied during the course of the investigation. Newt took responsibility for the error and agreed to reimburse the committee the cost of the investigation into that discrepancy. In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton, nonetheless) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
Back to Menu
Lobbying – Newt has never engaged in lobbying, period. Newt made a decision after resigning that he would never be
a lobbyist so that nobody would ever question the genuine nature of his advice and perspectives.
Relationship with Freddie Mac
Recent reporting from Bloomberg News on the Gingrich Group’s consulting services for Freddie Mac confirms that Gingrich and his firm were not paid to lobby and that Gingrich never acted as an advocate to stop any legislation or regulation affecting Freddie Mac.
After leaving public office, Newt Gingrich founded a number of very successful small businesses. One of these small businesses, a consulting firm called The Gingrich Group, offered strategic advice on a wide variety of topics to a very wide range of clients. One of these clients was Freddie Mac. At no time did Gingrich lobby for Freddie Mac, or for any client, and neither did anyone in Gingrich’s firm. This prohibition against lobbying was made clear to all Gingrich Group clients. Nor did Gingrich ever advocate against pending legislation affecting Freddie Mac, as some articles have incorrectly alleged. In fact, recent reporting from Bloomberg News on the Gingrich Group’s consulting services for Freddie Mac confirms that Gingrich and his firm were not paid to lobby and that Gingrich never acted as an advocate to stop any legislation or regulation affecting Freddie Mac.
Newt is in favor of efforts to increase home ownership in America but as a conservative believes they must be within a context of learning how to budget and save in a responsible way, the opposite of the lending practices that led to the financial crisis. You can watch a video from March 2008 of Newt warning about the danger of politicized decision making in the housing crisis here.
As part of Newt’s Jobs and Prosperity Plan, Newt advocates breaking up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and moving their smaller successors off of government guarantees and into the free market.
Back to Menu
Personal Life
Newt has been honest and forthright about the fact that he has had moments in his life that he regrets, that he has had to seek reconciliation, and go to God for forgiveness.
Today, Newt and Callista have a very strong marriage. They produce movies, write books, and enjoy their time on the campaign trail together. They are also blessed to be very close to their family.
Newt believes that by continuing to be honest and forthright about his past failings, voters will come to understand the man that he is now and conclude they can trust him to represent the American people in the White House.
Furthermore, Newt welcomes the opportunity to clear up the many lies and misconceptions that persist about his past:
Extramarital Affair During Clinton Impeachment
The impeachment proceedings against President Clinton were due to the fact that the president committed perjury in front of a sitting federal judge, which is a felony.
Opponents often try to delegitimize Newt Gingrich by pointing out that he had admitted to having an extramarital affair during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. What these accusers are ignoring is that the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton were due to the fact that the president committed perjury in front of a sitting federal judge, which is a felony. As the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt felt that he had a duty to uphold the rule of law by pursuing impeachment. He stands by that decision today.
Asking Wife For Divorce While She Was In The Hospital Dying of Cancer
Newt’s daughter recently wrote a column to set the record straight about this smear.
This story is a vicious lie. It was first reported by a left wing magazine in the 1980s based on hearsay and has survived in left-wing chat rooms on the Internet until today. It is completely false.
Recently, Newt’s daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, wrote a column to set the record straight about this smear. The column reveals that 1) It was her mother that requested the divorce, not Newt, and it was months before the hospital visit in question; 2) Her mother was in the hospital to remove a tumor, but it was benign, and she is still alive today; 3) Newt visited the hospital for the purpose of taking his two children to see their mother, not to discuss a divorce. You can read it here.
