This is the year we elect a president, and the advertising campaigns have already begun.

Here's some advice.

Don't believe what the politicians say in their 30-second spots on primetime television. A lot of the time they're twisting or misrepresenting the facts. Sometimes they're just lying to you.

It would be nice if somebody, either the national media or the politicians themselves, would just tell us the facts surrounding any given issue. Then, armed with facts, we could determine whose position we like the best.

But that never happens.

Instead of telling us the facts surrounding Medicare, for example, the media tell us what Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich and David Bonior say about Medicare.

And they all spin it to make their position sound good. They don't let facts get in the way of a good soundbite.

A classic example is an ad airing right now, sponsored by the AFL-CIO.

The topic of the ad happens to be Medicare, but you could pick just about any topic and the same formula applies. Simply twist the facts to make the opponent sound like the bad guy while simultaneously making yourself sound like some sort of savior.

The ad accuses Republican members of Congress of voting to cut Medicare. The ad says Republicans were trying to push "drastic cuts" and that they were going to use the money saved to "pay for tax cuts for the wealthy."

The ad then asks the viewer to call the targeted congressman and "tell him not to destroy Medicare."

Of course, for even more shock value, there is an elderly couple depicted in the ad. They look at each other, bewildered, and talk about how they simply "couldn't make it" without their Medicare. The implication, of course, is that the Republican budget would have ended Medicare benefits for senior citizens.

And now the real story.

Currently, Medicare spending is somewhere around $160 billion. The Republican budget called for that spending to grow to $234 billion in 2002.

Another way to look at it is that the average Medicare recipient costs the government somewhere around $4,700 per year. That amount would rise to $6,600 in 2002.

And the tax breaks for the wealthy thing.

The Republican budget plan called for 80 percent of $245 billion in tax relief for people making less than $100,000 per household.

Sixty-one percent of the tax relief was aimed at people making between $30,000 and $75,000.

I suppose some folks would call those people "wealthy," but why not give us the facts and let us decide?

The ad is an obvious attempt to frighten senior citizens.

You know. Scare them into voting for Democrats.

Sad thing is, the debate is all about getting elected and not what is best for Medicare. I think Medicare is a good idea. Older Americans, who have worked and paid taxes all those years, deserve a break from spiraling medical costs.

But guess what?

Medicare is going broke. By all estimates it will be bankrupt in seven years without reform.

But any time there is an attempt at reform, demagoguery takes over. It happens all the time - on all kinds of issues - on both sides of the political aisle.

But if there is an issue that is perceived in Washington as popular, both sides clamor to claim it as their own.

Tax cuts are a good example of that phenomenon.

Of course when Republicans propose tax cuts, Democrats say tax cuts are bad. And when Democrats propose tax cuts, Republicans say tax cuts are bad.

And while they're out there in Washington beating each other up in the hope of gaining votes, we're paying the bills. Would anyone argue that we are taxed too little?

Despite all those taxes we pay, the goverment has spent it all away and managed to amass a huge, back-breaking debt.

This is leadership? This is statesmanship?

Our "leaders" are concerned first and foremost with getting re-elected.

What's best for our country doesn't seem to matter much to them.

*****

There will be no News Views column for the next two Saturdays. The column will return on Aug. 3. [[In-content Ad]]