The Truth Test: Inhofe Versus Rice

By Dan Bewley and Terry Hood, The News On 6

TULSA, OK -- Many have seen the political ad U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe is running against his opponent, Oklahoma Senator Andrew Rice.  The commercial uses Rice's voting record and calls him "too liberal for Oklahoma."  The News On 6 wants to know if the ad passes the truth test.

It's 49 days until the November election and political ads are hitting the homestretch.  The News On 6 Truth Test examines claims made by Republican Senator Jim Inhofe against Democrat Andrew Rice.

Jim Inhofe uses a 30-second television commercial to call out competitor Andrew Rice.

"Maybe he thinks we won't approve the group he founded that opposed Oklahoma's traditional marriage amendment," Inhofe's commercial claims.

That's true; Rice did found the Progressive Alliance Foundation in Oklahoma and worked with the ACLU to fight a state initiative that led to the banning of same-sex marriages.

"Or his seven votes for higher taxes," Inhofe's commercial claims.

At that point, the commercial gets a little murky.

The records cited in the ad are correct.  But, what the ad doesn't tell you is four of those votes are for one issue where Rice supported a plan to create a revolving fund that would help employers train their workers.

Another vote was against the tax-free shopping weekend, not necessarily a tax increase, but Inhofe's campaign says it's clear Rice was opposed to giving shoppers a tax cut.

"His seven votes for taxpayer funded abortions," Inhofe's commercial claims.

Similar to the situation with taxes, all seven votes were for the same issue and the ad is correct.  Rice opposed a bill that would prohibit public money, employees, or facilities from being used for abortions.

The Inhofe campaign is so confident of the ad; it has offered to give $5,000 to any Andrew Rice supported organization if the claims are proven to be wrong.

Andrew Rice's campaign defends his record saying he has supported a number of tax cuts and says he voted against the abortion legislation because it compromised health care for the poor.