Political Debates Need a Candidate-Shaming Feature

Candidate for the U.S. Senate, Tom Cotton (R)

Under our old student loan system, the government gave money to the banks.  The banks made the loans and kept the interest, essentially making profits on federal money that was gifted to them.  If a student defaulted on their loan, the federal government paid that amount back to the bank, replenishing their supply of risk free money.

In 2010, the Obama administration removed the middle man.  The federal government now makes student loans directly and the interest goes into federal government coffers.

Last week during a televised debate, U.S. Representative Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) who is currently running for the U.S. Senate claimed that  "Obamacare nationalized the student loan industry.  That's right, Obamacare grabbed money to pay for its own programs and took that choice away from you."

Washington Post's fact-checker noted that the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act that was passed alongside the Affordable Care Act was a money saving measure and the money saved was spread over several programs, only one of which was the ACA.  

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that eliminating the banks will save $58 billion over ten years.  Only $8.7 billion of that is scheduled to fund ACA programs. $36 billion is budgeted for Pell grants to lower-income students, $3 billion goes to minority-serving colleges and $10.3 billion is to be used to reduce the national deficit.

what eye thynk:  Tom Cotton isn't exactly a poster child for the truth. 

1. He told supporters that Arkansas is in danger of being invaded by Mexican drug cartels who have joined forces with ISIS though the only evidence of this exists in his own imagination.   
2. He claims that healthcare costs in Arkansas are expected to climb 138% thanks to "Obamacare." Independent analysis says they will probably decline slightly.  
3. He said that he voted against the farm bill because President Obama  had hijacked it and "turned it into a food stamp bill" apparently willing to ignore the historical truth: that farm aide and nutritional assistance have been linked in one bill since the 1930s. 

The problem with Mr. Cotton is that, when confronted with the truth, he simply shrugs and goes his merry way perpetuating lies. He knows he is lying, but as long as it plays to the fears and prejudices of his audience, he just doesn't care.  If it is what his supporters want to hear, he'll say it for them, no matter how outrageous or untrue.

Really, this is no way to run a campaign...or a country.  There are so many voters who will not check facts, who will believe whatever they hear--if their pet politician says it, then it must be the truth, period.  If the other party cites opposing facts, then they must be lying. And this is not a completely Republican problem, though I have to say, members of the GOP seem to be better at the art of lying with a straight face than any other modern-day organization I can think of.

Debates could be greatly improved by the introduction of immediate fact checking. After each exchange, we should pause for an organization like Politi-Fact or the Washington Post to check what each speaker has said and then post the number of lies and truths on the front of each candidate's podium.

I would call this process "Candidate Shaming." Afterwards, we could hang signs around the loser's neck and post their picture on Facebook.  At least it would be entertaining.