VP Debate: Fact-Checking Claims Made by Vance and Walz

 

On Tuesday night, vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Walz engaged in a policy-driven debate, hoping to sway voters and shift stagnant polls. The discussion covered a range of critical issues, including climate change, energy production, and the impact of immigration on housing prices. *Newsweek* conducted a fact-check on several key statements made by both candidates, evaluating the accuracy of their claims.

Vance questioned the role of carbon emissions in climate change, suggesting that while the link may be accepted for argument’s sake, it’s not definitive. However, the overwhelming scientific consensus holds that carbon emissions are the primary driver of global warming. The United Nations and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have both confirmed that carbon dioxide, largely from burning fossil fuels, is the leading contributor to climate change. Vance’s statement, therefore, is misleading as it downplays established scientific facts.

Vance also claimed that the U.S. has "the cleanest economy in the world" and should ramp up energy production. Yet, data from the 2024 Environmental Performance Index shows that the U.S. ranks 17th in environmental health. Additionally, the U.S. emitted far more CO2 per person in 2022 compared to many other countries, undermining Vance’s assertion that the U.S. is a global leader in clean energy. This claim is not supported by current international data.

Regarding U.S. energy production, Vance argued that Vice President Kamala Harris’ policies have increased energy output in China, resulting in more global emissions. While China does dominate clean energy technology manufacturing, the Biden-Harris administration has actively worked to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., particularly through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA has incentivized domestic production of clean energy technologies, though China still leads globally. This claim requires context, as the administration’s efforts to reduce dependence on China are ongoing.

Walz claimed that the IRA has created 200,000 jobs, primarily in clean energy sectors like electric vehicles and solar panel manufacturing. While the IRA has indeed spurred job growth, the 200,000 figure includes both existing and promised jobs. Various sources report different numbers, with some estimates higher and others lower. While the act has generated significant employment opportunities, the exact figure depends on the source and methodology, requiring further clarification in Walz’s claim.

Another point of contention was Walz’s statement that Minnesota houses the largest solar manufacturing plant in North America. He was likely referring to a large facility in Mountain Iron, Minnesota, but it is not the largest. That distinction belongs to Hanwha Qcells in Georgia. Therefore, while Minnesota has a significant solar production plant, Walz’s claim is incorrect.

Vance also claimed that the U.S. has built only one nuclear facility in the past 40 years. While the country did experience a long pause in nuclear construction, there have been two recent projects, with reactors coming online in Tennessee and Georgia. This claim is false, as more than one nuclear facility has been built in the past four decades.

On oil and natural gas, Walz asserted that the U.S. is producing more than ever before. This is largely accurate, as 2023 saw record-high production levels for both oil and natural gas. Although a slight dip in natural gas output is expected in 2024 due to market conditions, production is forecasted to rebound to record levels by 2025. Walz’s statement holds true based on current data.

Finally, Vance suggested that a Federal Reserve study links immigration, particularly illegal immigration, to higher housing prices. While Fed officials have commented on the potential impact of immigration on housing demand, no formal study has directly linked illegal immigration to rising housing costs. Vance’s claim is therefore false, as no such study exists.

Walz also claimed that Minnesota ranks first in health care affordability, accessibility, and quality. While a WalletHub report ranked Minnesota highly in these categories, other sources, like Forbes and U.S. News, place the state lower in affordability rankings. Walz’s statement is misleading, as it depends on which report is referenced, and Minnesota is not consistently ranked first across all categories.