Newt Gingrich Robocall Claims Mitt Romney Took Kosher Food Away From Holocaust Survivors
Newt Gingrich is all but certain to lose today's Florida Primary, but he's not going out without a fight. In a last-ditch effort to secure the Jewish vote, Gingrich's campaign is running Robocalls in Florida claiming that as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney literally took Kosher food out of the mouths of Holocaust survivors and "forced" them to east non-Kosher to save money. Which isn't exactly true.
Here's the 30-second call from Huffington Post:
And here is the text:
As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney vetoed a bill paying for kosher food for our seniors in nursing homes. Holocaust survivors, who for the first time, were forced to eat non-kosher, because Romney thought $5 was too much to pay for our grandparents to eat kosher. Where is Mitt Romney's compassion for our seniors? Tuesday you can end Mitt Romney's hypocrisy on religious freedom, with a vote for Newt Gingrich. Paid for by Newt 2012
Those are mighty strong words and shocking claims, but, predictably, Newt's campaign is liberally misinterpreting the facts.
Back in 2003, some nursing homes in Massachusetts were considering eliminating their on-site Kosher kitchens, and instead would have had Kosher food delivered. So, no one would have been forced to eat non-Kosher food, they just would have had to eat less fresh Kosher food.
The Massachusetts Legislature then passed a bill that would have made $600,000 available to nursing homes in order to keep their Kosher kitchens open. Romney vetoed the bill, but the legislature ultimately overrode his veto.
"Romney's decision was not, as Gingrich claims, a choice to 'eliminate kosher food for elderly Jewish residents under Medicare,'" explains Commentary magazine. "First of all, it was a choice made by the nursing homes themselves, not the Massachusetts government. Second, it was never actually going to prevent kosher residents from accessing kosher food. And third, Romney's decision wouldn't have cut anything -- he simply vetoed additional funds, keeping funding at the status quo during a budget crisis year."