Accuracy of Bush, Clinton Accusations Varies : Politics: Some charges stick, but both sides are guilty of stretching the truth on some issues.

Over the next nine days, as the presidential and vice presidential candidates debate, Americans will be treated to a barrage of charges and countercharges about Bill Clinton’s record, President Bush’s stewardship of the economy and each man’s reputation for truthfulness and integrity.

As one might expect, in the process of preparing attacks, truth and accuracy often go by the wayside. Both Bush and Clinton have been preparing the ground for the debates by trying out their accusations ahead of time. What follows is an attempt to analyze the accuracy of their principal attack lines--statements that those who watch the debates almost certainly will hear repeated several times before the marathon finishes.

The quotations from Bush and Clinton each come from a recent speech. There are more Bush accusations about Clinton than the other way around because Bush has tried to attack Clinton on numerous fronts, while Clinton has concentrated his fire on the issue of the economy.

The third candidate in the race, Ross Perot, so far has steered clear of attacks on the other two.

CLINTON ON THE ATTACK

JOBS

Clinton: Since he’s been President and I’ve been governor, my state has created 72,000 private-sector jobs, while America has lost 40,000.

Analysis: True. The Bush campaign falsely claims that under the President, 1.5 million private-sector jobs have been created, a number derived by adding figures from two different government statistical tables. In fact, the total number of private-sector jobs is now lower than when Bush was sworn in. Total employment in the United States has increased by just over 1 million jobs in the Bush years, but the increase has all come in the ranks of government employees. Private-sector employment in Arkansas has gained slightly during Clinton’s tenure, with most of the gains coming in the last few years.

RICH AND POOR

Clinton: Almost all the economic gains of the 12 years have gone to the upper 20% of our people and most of that to the upper 1%. Indeed, for the first time since the Roaring ‘20s, the top 1% of our people now control more wealth than the bottom 90%.

Analysis: True, but incomplete. Both inequality of income and of wealth increased during the 1980s, but precisely how much remains in dispute. Clinton bases his assertion on a study by MIT economist Paul Krugman. Conservatives have challenged some of Krugman’s numbers, and they argue that overall growth of the economy is more important than income distribution. But even this year’s Economic Report of the President concedes that inequality increased in the last decade.

Precisely how much of the economic gains of the 1980s went to the top income groups, however, remains in dispute because many different ways exist to measure income distribution. One set of numbers show the top 1% absorbed 70% of the income gains of the 1980s. By another measure, the top 1% took less--44% of the total gains. Those in the lowest income groups lost ground. As of last year, the top 20% of families were those with incomes above $62,991.

As for distribution of wealth, Bush aides concede that the top 1% have more assets than most other people, but they insist that if pension funds are taken into account, the disparity is not as great as Clinton maintains. Moreover, Bush argues, the divisions are not static--many people move from one income group to another during their lifetimes.

FAMILY INCOME

Clinton: He’s having to run on the worst economic performance of the past 50 years. In the past two years alone, average family income has declined almost $1,600.

Analysis: Incomplete. The verdict on Bush’s economic record depends on what one looks at. Inflation, for example, has been quite low in Bush’s term--much lower than during the last Democratic presidency, that of Jimmy Carter.

But most voters seem to have focused on the number Clinton points to--family income. Median family income, adjusted for inflation, fell from $31,750 in 1989 to $30,126 in 1991, a decline of $1,624.

Overall, economic growth statistics for Bush’s presidency are the worst for any President since Herbert Hoover.

The Bush campaign prefers to focus on a specific number--real per capita disposable personal income, which has remained stable since Bush took office, going from $13,996 in the fourth quarter of 1988, when Bush was elected, to $14,006 in the second quarter of 1992.

That number, although slightly better than family income, is still bad news for Bush, since real per capita disposable income has steadily increased during most other four-year periods this century.

BANKRUPTCIES

Clinton: And while Mr. Bush has been in the White House, three people have gone bankrupt for every one person who has gone to work.

Analysis: Slightly exaggerated. Through the end of June--the most recent statistics available--roughly 2.8 million bankruptcy claims have been filed in the United States, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

Through the end of July, 1.04 million new jobs have been created, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ seasonally adjusted figures.

WAGES

Clinton: Ten years ago, our nation was first in the world in wages. Now we’re 13th and dropping.

Analysis: True, but incomplete. Clinton’s statistic refers only to wages in manufacturing, not to other sectors of the economy, where U.S. wages remain higher. Bush aides point to figures that show that if white-collar and professional workers are included in the averages, U.S. wages remain the highest.

Clinton: The United States census itself, concluded during the Bush Administration, shows us that two-thirds of our people are working harder for lower wages when adjusted for inflation than they were making 10 years ago.

Analysis: True, but the picture again depends on which workers one looks at. Clinton relies on a variety of studies for the assertion that most Americans work harder than they used to, a point that government statistics do not measure well.

As for wages being lower, hourly wages, adjusted for inflation, have fallen for most American workers. Salaries for people in the top income groups, however, did go up during the 1980s.

BUSH ON THE ATTACK

CIVIL RIGHTS

Bush: Forty-eight states have basic civil rights laws that ban discrimination and guarantee equal opportunity, but not Arkansas. . . . That’s right, Arkansas is only one of two states in America without a civil rights statute. . . . Even though his party enjoys overwhelming control of the Arkansas Legislature, Gov. Clinton has still not brought a civil rights bill to the people of Arkansas.

Analysis: True. Clinton has proposed civil rights laws in each of the state’s last two legislative sessions but has been unable to gain approval from the state’s conservative Legislature.

Whether that makes much difference for Arkansans is another question. In nearly all of the states that do have civil rights laws, the statutes merely copy federal laws and give citizens no additional rights.

Bush: In 1968, when I was a congressman from Texas, I supported the Fair Housing Act, and it wasn’t popular with some of my constituents.

Analysis: True, but incomplete. Bush did support the 1968 law and took considerable heat from some constituents. He does not note, however, that he opposed several other civil rights laws, including the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

ECONOMIC GROWTH

Bush: According to candidate Clinton, the last 10 years have been a nightmare. Well, I’ve got news for him. It is not true. The Urban Institute back in Washington is not usually sympathetic to me, but listen to what they had to say about the 1980s: “When one follows individuals rather than statistical groups defined by income, one finds that, on average, the rich got a little richer and the poor got much richer.” Now, that’s the truth. Our policies of cutting taxes have spurred growth for all Americans.

Analysis: Misleading. The Urban Institute report looked at income trends from 1977-86--the Jimmy Carter Administration and part of Ronald Reagan’s term. “The Bush years, per se, would look terrible,” said the report’s author, Isabelle Sawhill.

Second, the quotation concerns a dispute among economists about how best to study poverty. “Some of the people who were in the poorest 20% were there because they were young people just getting started on their careers or farmers or small businessmen who had a bad year,” Sawhill explained. Over time, the Urban Institute study showed, those people ended up much richer. But the study also showed that “the poor are not doing well,” and the rich got notably richer during the 1980s.

ARKANSAS SPENDING, TAXES

Bush: Clinton has more than doubled Arkansas state spending since 1983.

Analysis: Misleading. About two-thirds of that growth results from inflation. Arkansas state spending has increased since 1983 from $1.024 billion to $1.935 billion, an 89% increase. Federal spending has increased from $796 billion to $1.5 trillion over the same period, an 88% increase.

Bush criticizes Clinton for spending too much overall but also criticizes him for spending too little on specific programs. Overall, Arkansas spends less per capita than almost any other state.

Bush: Let me quote from an article in the Arkansas Gazette on all of this. “In the Clinton era,” it says, “the state tax system has become more and more regressive. It has become, step by step, a pretty bad system stacked against the ordinary taxpayer and consumer, stacked for the rich and special interests.”

Analysis: True. The statement Bush quotes is from a guest editorial, not a news article, in the Gazette. Nonetheless, Arkansas taxes have become more regressive during Clinton’s tenure because of increases in the state sales tax.

Clinton allies argue that the governor had no choice because under the state constitution other taxes--including income and property taxes--can only be increased with a three-fourths vote of the Legislature, a hurdle that has proven almost impossible to conquer. In the last legislative session, however, Clinton did win several tax law changes that made Arkansas taxes somewhat less regressive.

Bush: The per capita income, for example, that’s the bottom line for working men and women, how much income on average each of them have. Well, at the end of the 1980s, Arkansas ranked 48th in the nation in per capita income--only about 73% of the national average, and that was even lower than the 75% in 1980. The poor people have been going backwards under this man.

Analysis: True but incomplete. Bush cites only statistics from the 1980s, when Arkansas income was stagnant. During the 1990s, however, Arkansas’ income has grown faster than the national average, according to the federal Commerce Department. Arkansas’ per capita income rose 4.4% from 1990-1991, one of only six states where income at least kept pace with inflation. Nationally, income rose only 2.4%, well below the 4.4% inflation rate.

Bush: And what about all those good manufacturing jobs that candidate Clinton talks about? Well, average hourly earnings for Arkansas’ manufacturing workers ranked 47th in 1980, and by 1989, they had dropped to 50th.

Analysis: True. As with most income statistics, Arkansas ranked poorly during the 1980s. Clinton aides point out that the number of manufacturing jobs grew faster in Arkansas than almost any other state during the last several years.

During the period Bush cited, the nation as a whole lost manufacturing jobs while Arkansas gained new manufacturing jobs at a rate of 12%, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

FEDERAL TAXES

Bush: Candidate Clinton wants the biggest tax increase in history.

Analysis: False. The biggest federal tax increase in history was signed by Reagan in 1982--a net $214 billion over five years. The tax increase Clinton has proposed--$150 billion over four years--would be smaller. Clinton has also proposed $104 billion in offsetting tax cuts. If those are taken into account, his $46-billion net tax proposal would be smaller than the one Bush signed in 1990, which amounted to $137 billion over five years.

ENVIRONMENT

Bush: Last year, the Institute for Southern Studies released an extraordinarily detailed state-by-state study of environmental quality and progress. And let me quote the institute’s research director: “In the areas of policy, laws passed, not task forces or commissions set up to study a problem, Arkansas was 50th--the worst in the nation.”

Analysis: In mid-September, the director of the institute issued a statement saying Bush’s use of the study was misleading and criticizing Bush’s own environmental record. The statement reiterated the institute’s criticism of Arkansas’ environmental record.

Bush: The (poultry) industry is the ultimate source of . . . fecal coliform bacteria, which pollutes hundreds of miles of Arkansas rivers. Gov. Clinton did create an Animal Waste Task Force to deal with the issue (of water pollution caused by chicken feces), but the task force subcommittee was headed by a chicken executive, and they decided that controls on what they call “chicken litter” should be purely voluntary.

Analysis: True, but incomplete. Hundreds of miles of Arkansas rivers are polluted, but the state has thousands of miles of rivers, and more than 85% are clean, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency. That gives Arkansas one of the country’s best ratings.

The state task force did propose only voluntary controls on chicken waste but so has Bush’s Administration. Despite years of complaints by environmental groups, which have also criticized Clinton, Bush has refused to propose any mandatory controls on agricultural runoff under the federal Clean Water Act.

Clinton’s Administration this spring did propose some mandatory controls, although environmental groups criticized them as inadequate.

EDUCATION

Bush: During the 1980s, Arkansas fell from 47th to 48th place in the percentage of adults with a high school diploma. Arkansas’ ranking on its primary college entrance exam, known as the ACT, have declined overall. Twenty-eight states use the ACT as their primary college entrance test. . . . In 1979, Arkansas ranked 20 out of those 28. The state’s latest available ranking is down to 25th out of the 28, and we know that more than three-quarters of Arkansas high school graduates require remedial instruction when they get to college. And when it comes to the percentage of adults with a college degree, Gov. Clinton’s Arkansas still ranks 50th.

Analysis: True, but incomplete. One of the reasons test scores have gone down is that a larger percentage of Arkansas students now take the college entrance tests, including a large increase in minority students, many of them from poor schools.

The percentages of adults with college degrees and high school diplomas tell little about the current state of Arkansas schools because that statistic measures people who already have finished schooling. Since 1983, the state’s dropout rate has declined from 5.1% to 3.6%, according to state figures. The percentage of high school students going on to college also has increased.

CRIME

Bush: During the 1980s, the nation’s overall crime rate during the ‘80s actually declined, but not in Arkansas. In fact, Gov. Clinton’s state had the biggest increase in overall crime rate in the entire nation--nearly 28%.

Analysis: True. As with other statistics, the Bush camp cites statistics from the 1980s while the Clinton camp cites more recent figures from the last few years. In either case, however, the statistics show that Arkansas shared in the national trend of crime spreading from large urban states to smaller, rural ones.

From 1982 to 1992, violent crime nationally increased 33% while violent crime in Arkansas increased 66%. But in 1992, Arkansas’ violent-crime rates dropped.

HEALTH

Bush: More than 42% of Arkansas workers, the second-highest percentage in the entire nation, don’t even have employer-paid health insurance.

Analysis: Misleading. Arkansas’ rate of workers without health insurance is higher than the national average, a fact the state shares with other Southern states that have low levels of unionized employment. Arkansas does have the second-lowest percentage of workers with employer-paid health plans.

According to the census, however, the difference between the percentage of Arkansans without health insurance and the national figure is small. Nationally, 14.1% of the population has no insurance. In Arkansas, the figure dropped from 17.4% to 15.7% between 1990 and 1991, the census figures show.

CHILDREN

Bush: During the 1980s, the death rate for American children 14 and under improved dramatically across the country, but in Arkansas it got worse. The state ranked 49th in 1989. . . . Over the decade, child abuse reports shot up 130%.

Analysis: Unclear. Arkansas state officials dispute Bush’s count on childhood deaths, saying death certificates show a rate only one-fourth of that cited by Bush. As for child abuse, the two sides prefer to look at different time periods. Bush cites 1979-1989 for his 130% increase. Clinton aides cite 1988-1991, during which child abuse reports increased more slowly in Arkansas than nationally--2% per year in Arkansas versus 6.3% nationwide.

In any case, those numbers mean little. Experts say that in the past child abuse was seldom reported, so the increase in reports--either statewide or nationwide--have far more to do with increased awareness than with any increase in abuse.

Times staff writer Douglas Jehl contributed to this story.