claimID stringlengths 10 10 | claim stringlengths 4 8.61k ⌀ | label stringclasses 116 values | claimURL stringlengths 10 303 | reason stringlengths 3 31.1k ⌀ | categories stringclasses 611 values | speaker stringlengths 3 168 ⌀ | checker stringclasses 167 values | tags stringlengths 3 315 ⌀ | article title stringlengths 2 226 ⌀ | publish date stringlengths 1 64 ⌀ | climate stringlengths 5 154 ⌀ | entities stringlengths 6 332 ⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
snes-01569 | President Obama Awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Weinstein, Weiner, Clinton, and Cosby? | mostly false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-medal-of-freedom-weinstein-clinton-cosby-weiner/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | President Obama Awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Weinstein, Weiner, Clinton, and Cosby? | 17 October 2017 | null | ['Bill_Clinton', 'Barack_Obama', 'Presidential_Medal_of_Freedom'] |
tron-01374 | KFC Served a Fried Rat to Customer | unproven! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/kfc-served-a-fried-rat-to-customer/ | null | food | null | null | null | KFC Served a Fried Rat to Customer | Jun 19, 2015 | null | ['None'] |
wast-00116 | Paul Cassel and Richard Fowles of the University of Utah analyzed the dramatic surge in Chicago homicides in 2016. ... They concluded the 58 percent increase was caused by the abrupt decline in \xe2\x80\x98stop and frisks' in 2015. There had been a horrific police shooting, protests and an ACLU lawsuit. The settlement of that lawsuit resulted in a decline in stops from 40,000 per month to 10,000 per month. Arrests fell also. In sum, they conclude that these actions in late 2016, conservatively calculated, resulted in approximately 236 additional victims killed and over 1,100 additional shootings in 2016 alone. The scholars call it the \xe2\x80\x98ACLU effect.'" | 3 pinnochios | ERROR: type should be string, got " https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/05/14/jeff-sessionss-claim-that-an-aclu-settlement-with-chicago-caused-murders-to-spike/" | null | null | Jeff Sessions | Salvador Rizzo | null | Jeff Sessions's claim that an ACLU settlement with Chicago caused murders to spike | May 14 | null | ['Chicago', 'University_of_Utah'] |
pomt-14597 | We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown. | mostly true | /florida/statements/2016/feb/04/rick-scott/scott-credits-tax-cuts-floridas-growing-tax-revenu/ | Gov. Rick Scott’s $1 billion tax-cut request is giving the Florida Legislature plenty to chew on, especially after state economists warned that revenues won’t be as high as once thought. Scott wants a range of cuts, including a reduction in the sales tax on commercial rents and a $770 million break for manufacturers and retailers by getting rid of their corporate income tax. Despite concerns over how the size of his request will affect the budget, Scott was confident the math makes it an easy decision for lawmakers. "We have plenty of money to be able to do tax cuts," Scott said Jan. 20, 2016, after state economists warned tax revenues would be less than previously estimated. "Let's look at history. We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown." Scott has used this line repeatedly in recent weeks. We wondered whether revenues have continued to grow even as Tallahassee has passed tax changes over recent years. Revenue roundup Scott’s line about 50 tax cuts is a talking point that just keeps on growing. We have rated claims about him cutting 24 tax cuts, 40 tax cuts, and more than 40 tax cuts, Half True, because Scott counted many small tax changes for specific industries as overall tax cuts. What’s new this time around, in a nutshell, are 16 provisions passed in 2015, most of which were part of a $429 million tax-cut package. The full list is largely comprised of esoteric tax credits (mostly for businesses), changes in unemployment compensation and sales tax holidays. There also was a rate reduction on the Communications Services Tax on cellphone and cable service that amounts to about $21 per $100 on a bill and a $60,000 cap on taxes for boat repairs. Several of those may help businesses, but really don’t often do much for everyday Floridians, especially if they needed to collect unemployment. Many times, local governments may raise taxes to make up for their own lost revenue. In short, it’s arguable whether all of those qualify as tax cuts, but they did have an impact on how many tax dollars the state brought in. Economists told us, however, that while you can project how much year-over-year revenues may be changed from cuts, it’s tough to attribute any concrete economic growth to those changes. Because of overall economic growth, tax revenues have been rising since Scott became governor as the state was climbing out of the Great Recession. We surveyed several years of general revenue, which is funded by taxes and fees and can be used by the Legislature for any purpose, alongside the state's rate of economic growth. Fiscal year General revenue Growth rate 2008-09 $21 billion -12.8 percent 2009-10 $21.5 billion 2.4 percent 2010-11 $22.55 billion 4.8 percent 2011-12* $23.6 billion 4.7 percent 2012-13 $25.3 billion 7.2 percent 2013-14 $26.2 billion 3.5 percent 2014-15 $27.7 billion 5.7 percent 2015-16 $28.4 billion 2.1 percent (*Scott’s first full fiscal year in office) Source: Florida Office of Economic & Demographic Research State economist Amy Baker noted that even with Florida’s economy growing, that growth rate is currently below the state’s historical average, and the cumulative effects of prior tax changes are eating into revenues more than expected. State budget forecasters have announced that tax revenues will come in at $400 million less than previously expected. Scott’s office has rejected those figures in pursuit of his biggest round of tax cuts, saying the Legislature has plenty of money to play with. But while it’s apparent that revenues have gone up even as Scott’s tax changes have been implemented, experts said it’s tough to directly link them. They said there are three main reasons Florida’s revenues have grown during the nationwide recovery: Population growth, rising property values and overall inflation. More than 1 million people have moved to Florida since 2010, property values are recovering from the housing bust, and inflation makes tax collections go up as costs go up. Basically, more people are paying more taxes on things that cost more. Norton Francis, senior research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said that despite being the third-largest state, the growth rate for Florida’s tax revenues has started to lag behind the national average. "What you need to look at is, are (tax revenues) growing more than they used to?" Norton asked. "It could be that it’s come back as a whole, but it’s hard to pin that to a tax cut." Our ruling Scott said, "We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown." Scott has a debatable definition of tax cuts, but the state’s tax revenues have increased since he took office. Economists told us it would be difficult to attribute growth specifically to tax changes. The national economic recovery, population growth, higher property values and inflation are the major factors for the state’s growth. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. We rate it Mostly True. | null | Rick Scott | null | null | null | 2016-02-04T17:36:51 | 2016-01-20 | ['None'] |
pomt-03004 | Neville Chamberlain told the British people: ‘Accept the Nazis. Yes, they will dominate the continent of Europe, but that is not our problem. Let's appease them. Why? Because it can't be done. We cannot possibly stand against them.’ | mostly false | /texas/statements/2013/oct/16/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-airs-popular-and-flawed-impression-britis/ | In his September 2013 day-night-and-day U.S. Senate floor speech challenging the Obamacare law, Ted Cruz of Texas suggested that anyone saying the 2010 law could not be defunded was, well, being un-American. Brave colonists rebelled against the British, the Houston Republican said, when pundits of the age said it could not be done. Unionists later fought to preserve the nation, he said, even though "a lot of voices" said it could not be done. Cruz continued: "If we go to the 1940s, Nazi Germany — look, we saw it in Britain," Cruz said, as transcribed by the Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper. "Neville Chamberlain told the British people: ‘Accept the Nazis. Yes, they will dominate the continent of Europe, but that is not our problem. Let's appease them. Why? Because it can't be done. We cannot possibly stand against them.’ "In America," Cruz said, "there were voices who listened to that, I suspect the same pundits who said it couldn't be done. If this had happened in the 1940s, we would have been listening to them. Even then they would have made television. They would have gotten beyond the carrier pigeons and letters and they would have been on TV saying: ‘You cannot defeat the Germans.’" Did Chamberlain declare his country should give way in Europe because it couldn’t withstand or defeat the Germans? We wondered. Senator's statement initially resonates Cruz offered no backup when we asked how he reached his characterization, which initially resonated because Chamberlain was unequivocally disinclined to war with Germany; he spent more than a year hoping diplomacy combined with rearmament would head off a showdown. Historians have written that he was hewing to a strategy of "appeasement," a concept subsequently disparaged along with Chamberlain, who has been characterized as a failed leader who nearly let the Nazis overrun his country. A Chamberlain biographical web page from the BBC touches on the basics: "Like many in Britain who had lived through World War One, Chamberlain was determined to avert another war. His policy of appeasement towards Adolf Hitler culminated in the Munich Agreement in which Britain and France accepted that the Czech region of the Sudetenland should be ceded to Germany. Chamberlain left Munich believing that by appeasing Hitler he had assured 'peace for our time'. However, in March 1939 Hitler annexed the rest of the Czech lands of Bohemia and Moravia, with Slovakia becoming a puppet state of Germany. Five months later in September 1939 Hitler's forces invaded Poland. Chamberlain responded with a British declaration of war on Germany. Historians say it didn't happen Still, four historians (including three based in England) uniformly told us Cruz’s claim was inaccurate in that it’s not correct that Chamberlain told the British people to accept Nazi domination of the continent because Britain couldn’t possibly stand against them. Cruz’s statement is "skewed," William Roger Louis, a University of Texas history professor whose specialties include the history and politics of 20th century Britain, said by telephone. "It’s a very distorted view." On Chamberlain’s embrace of "appeasement," Louis said: "What Chamberlain meant was a reasoned solution to the problem… In retrospect," the term "has come to mean a kind of defeatist view. That wasn’t the case at the time." By email, Chamberlain biographer Nick Smart, who teaches at England’s Plymouth University, said Chamberlain did not say anything about giving in to the Nazis "to anyone, let alone ‘the British people.’ There’s nothing like it in his diaries, speeches, or in any of the biographical treatments I have read." British historian and journalist Andrew Roberts said by email: "Of course" Chamberlain "didn't say that… He guaranteed" the protection of "Poland in 1939 and we were allied to France, so of course he didn't say Europe was not our problem. He declared wa(r) in Sept. 1939 sooner than have the Nazis in Poland and under Chamberlain we put troops into Belgium." Checking Chamberlain biographies Next, we dipped into books on Chamberlain for indications of what he told the British people about letting the Nazis control the continent across the English Channel. Chamberlain became prime minister in May 1937 amid national wariness of another international conflict less than two decades after World War I, what was then called the Great War. Italy’s Mussolini and Germany’s Hitler both showed signs of bellicosity. Chamberlain was mindful, too, that British forces needed time to rebuild, making it necessary for him to exploit diplomacy toward slowing or stopping aggressive moves by the other countries, Smart wrote in his 2010 book, "Neville Chamberlain." Chamberlain, Smart wrote, agreed that Britain "could not hope to meet simultaneously the threats of Germany, Japan and… Italy. It would therefore be necessary, as he saw it, to seek to confine and even isolate the German threat by using diplomacy to keep on friendly terms with Italy and Japan, whatever the provocation." Meantime, Smart wrote, the prime minister accelerated rearmament. Chamberlain’s approach: Hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. Chamberlain also said the country should "show our determination not to be bullied," Smart wrote. As noted by biographer Robert Self, Chamberlain said to the House of Commons in 1938: "It is perfectly evident surely now that force is the only argument Germany understands," going on to stress the import of showing a "visible force of overwhelming strength backed by the determination to use it." Chamberlain acceded on taking of Sudetenland Still, Britain did not object when Hitler occupied German-speaking parts of Czechoslovakia, the Sudetenland, that had been carved by treaty after World War I from what had been the Austro-Hungarian Empire. But later, when Hitler pushed beyond the Sudetenland to Prague, Britain delivered a "guarantee" of Polish independence, followed by similar vows to protect Greece, Romania and Turkey, Smart wrote. Thrice, Chamberlain personally conferred with Hitler, most famously (or infamously) in Munich in September 1938, after which he told the British people to acclaim that he believed he had secured "peace in our time." This was before Hitler pushed farther into Czechoslovakia and, through the summer of 1939, built up forces along Germany’s border with Poland. By email, Chamberlain biographer David Dutton, a professor at the University of Liverpool, told us "Chamberlain did not think the Nazis could be left to get on with what they wanted to do in continental Europe. If this had been the case, he would never have got involved in the 1938 Czechoslovakian crisis in the first place." Dutton also wrote: "What Chamberlain did understand was that Britain was in no position to resist Germany in the 1930s, not least because we could not look to reliable allies," including the isolationist United States. "He justly feared war, especially from the air… but he knew that it might eventually come and that Britain had to prepare for it as best she could," Dutton said. Generally, Dutton called Cruz’s claim "superficial and misleading." Chamberlain in charge when war was declared In the end, Chamberlain was prime minister when Great Britain and France declared war on Germany on Sept. 3, 1939, two days after he told the House of Commons that the British government had made it "crystal clear" to Germany that if it invaded Poland, "we were resolved to oppose them by force." He added that the responsibility belonged to Germany’s leader, Adolf Hitler, "who has not hesitated to plunge the world into misery in order to serve his own senseless ambitions." Noting that German troops had crossed into Poland and bombs were landing on defenseless towns, Chamberlain said: "In these circumstances there is only one course open to us." Chamberlain that day did not indicate the British couldn’t defeat the Nazis. Rather, he said British armed forces were better prepared than they had been for World War I. Chamberlain also indicated he had lost his patience with Germany in Europe. "It now only remains for us to set our teeth and to enter upon this struggle, which we ourselves earnestly endeavored to avoid, with determination to see it through to the end," he said. Otherwise, he said, "we shall merely pass from one crisis to another, and see one country after another attacked by methods which have now become familiar to us in their sickening technique. We are resolved that these methods must come to an end." Our ruling Cruz said Chamberlain "told the British people: ‘Accept the Nazis. Yes, they will dominate the continent of Europe, but that is not our problem. Let's appease them. Why? Because it can't be done. We cannot possibly stand against them.’ " We see an element of truth in this claim; Chamberlain invested repeatedly in diplomacy in hopes of heading off war and he bowed to some German objectives on the continent. But he simultaneously committed to British rearmament and also made it clear, publicly, that his nation would not sit back should Germany invade Poland. We rate this statement as Mostly False. MOSTLY FALSE – The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. Click here for more on the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. | null | Ted Cruz | null | null | null | 2013-10-16T15:02:53 | 2013-09-24 | ['Europe', 'United_Kingdom', 'Neville_Chamberlain', 'Nazism'] |
vogo-00479 | Statement: There are bodies buried underneath a park that used to be a cemetery in Mission Hills, according to San Diego urban legend. | determination: true | https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/neighborhoods/fact-check-the-bodies-beneath-a-san-diego-park/ | Analysis: Last week, we asked readers to share the urban legends that they’ve heard over the years about San Diego. They responded with a bunch of tales, including this seeming whopper: There’s a graveyard-turned-park in Mission Hills where kids unknowingly play over the bodies of long-dead people just about every day. | null | null | null | null | Fact Check: The Bodies Beneath a San Diego Park | November 24, 2010 | null | ['San_Diego'] |
pomt-13542 | Says "Donald Trump himself contributed $100,000" to the Clinton Foundation. | mostly true | /punditfact/statements/2016/aug/28/david-plouffe/yes-donald-trump-donated-100000-clinton-foundation/ | As Donald Trump amps up attacks on the Clinton Foundation, Democrats are pointing out that Trump himself has given to the nonprofit he now calls a pay-to-play operation. Recently released emails between Hillary Clinton’s aides when she was secretary of state and officials at the Clinton Foundation have demonstrated that some foundation donors did get access to Clinton, though there’s no evidence of direct favors. Addressing the topic on NBC’s Meet the Press, Barack Obama’s former campaign manager David Plouffe noted the Clinton Foundation’s work on HIV/AIDS and malaria and Trump’s own ties to the charity. "The Clinton Foundation, I think it’s a universal agreement, has done remarkable work around the world. I think Donald Trump himself contributed $100,000 to the foundation," he said. Plouffe is right that Trump gave at least $100,000 to the foundation, a fact that Trump and his campaign readily admit. One caveat: It appears that the money came through Trump’s own foundation, not directly from Trump. The Clinton Foundation lists Donald J. Trump as a contributor with a cumulative lifetime donation amount between $100,001 to $250,000. It’s not clear if Trump himself made a personal contribution, but tax forms show that the Donald J. Trump Foundation (which Trump controls) donated $100,000 to the foundation in 2009 and reserved a table at the Clinton Foundation gala for $10,000 in 2010. Trump’s daughter Ivanka is also listed as a donor who gave between $5,001 and $10,000 and her father-in-law, Charles Kushner, gave between $250,001 and $500,000. Trump’s gift amount places him in the top 0.2 percent of the foundation’s donors. Most of its 300,000 donors (85.5 percent) gave less than $250. Breaking it down by dollar amount, however, Trump’s total contribution isn’t that big. We estimated that the foundation has received at least $800 million in donations, over 70 percent of which came from gifts of $1 million or more. In 2009, the Trump Foundation gave $926,750 to some 40 organizations (page 18). The Clinton Foundation received one of the largest gifts that year, matched or surpassed only by the Arnold Palmer Medical Center Foundation ($100,000), the New York Presbyterian Hospital ($125,000) and the Police Athletic League ($156,000). Altogether, the Trump Foundation has donated $5.5 million to 298 charities between 2009 and 2013 according to the nonprofit’s tax forms, Forbes found. Trump did not make any personal contributions to his foundations during this time. (Money for the Trump Foundation in these years came from others and from investment income.) Trump doesn’t deny that he donated to the Clinton Foundation that he now calls a criminal enterprise. During the first GOP primary debate in August 2015, Trump voluntarily brought up his giving to the Clinton Foundation when asked about his previous donations to Hillary Clinton. "When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me," Trump said. "With Hillary Clinton, I said be at my wedding, and she came to my wedding. You know why? She didn’t have a choice, because I gave. I gave to a foundation that, frankly, that foundation is supposed to do good. I didn’t know her money would be used on private jets going all over the world." For the record, the Clintons did attend Trump’s third wedding to Melania Knauss, but that occurred in 2005, four years before the $100,000 donation. A few months later, Trump gave pretty similar answers when he was asked to explain the Forbes article on his charitable giving record in late January. "I did give to the Clinton Foundation. What I didn't know is they'd be using it for private aircraft and things like that. The Clinton Foundation was helping with Haiti and with lots of other things and I thought it was going to do some good work. So, it didn't make any difference to me," he said on Jan. 31’s Fox News Sunday. "Again, I was a businessman and it was my obligation to get along with everybody, including the Clintons, including Democrats and liberals and Republicans and conservatives." Our ruling Plouffe said, "Donald Trump himself gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation." Tax records show the Donald J. Trump Foundation gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation in 2009, and spent an additional $10,000 for a table at a Clinton Foundation gala the following year. The Clinton Foundation also lists Donald J. Trump (as well his daughter Ivanka and Ivanka’s father-in-law) as a contributor. It’s important to note that Trump made the donation through his foundation, not out of his personal income. But Trump himself acknowledges the donation. We rate Plouffe’s statement Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/552526f7-e5b8-4ccb-9206-517f0a5819f7 | null | David Plouffe | null | null | null | 2016-08-28T16:46:25 | 2016-08-28 | ['Clinton_Foundation', 'Donald_Trump'] |
snes-01227 | Animated series "The Boondocks" had a scene about Oprah Winfrey's becoming president in 2020. | true | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-the-boondocks-forecast-oprah-winfrey-becoming-president/ | null | Politics | null | Arturo Garcia | null | Did ‘The Boondocks’ Forecast Oprah Winfrey’s Becoming President? | 10 January 2018 | null | ['Oprah_Winfrey'] |
pomt-14501 | Says he cured Charlie Sheen and the island of Comoros of HIV with "milk from goats, which had arthritis." | pants on fire! | /global-news/statements/2016/feb/23/samir-chachoua/no-arthritic-goat-milk-cannot-cure-hiv/ | An Australian doctor says he cured Charlie Sheen and the island nation of Comoros of HIV with a curious treatment — specifically, arthritic goat’s milk. Samir Chachoua first made headlines in January, when he became the subject of a Dr. Oz intervention. Sheen told Oz that he stopped taking conventional HIV medication for about a month after Chachoua’s treatment made HIV "undetectable" in his blood. Oz pointed out that Chachoua was not licensed to practice medicine in the United States and his method of convincing Sheen — by injecting himself with Sheen’s blood — was not only unorthodox, but highly inappropriate. Sheen agreed to take his medicine again. It gets weirder. A few weeks later, Chachoua expressed his disappointment in Sheen and touted his treatment on Jan. 29’s Real Time with Bill Maher. "I found a place in Mexico with all these IV drug users, prostitutes, all the high profile things that are necessary for AIDS but I didn’t find AIDS," he said. "What I found was, their people were drinking milk from goats, which had arthritis. These goats have a virus called CAEV, and this virus destroys HIV and protects people who drink it for life." This treatment, says Chachoua, not only cured Sheen but helped eradicate HIV in Comoros, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, in 2006. Let’s state off the bat that Chachoua has been, as Maher noted, "called a quack a million times." His claims that he eradicated HIV in Comoros in 2006 and cured Sheen are profoundly untrue. "We have no cure for AIDS and it’s certainly not going to be anything related to goat’s milk," said Jeffrey Laurence, the senior scientific consultant for programs at amfAR, the Foundation for AIDS Research. The facts on CAEV As its name suggests, the caprine arthritis encephalitis virus or CAEV — which is part of the same genus of viruses as HIV — causes arthritis and encephalitis in goats. Some research shows that infected goats may develop antibodies that will "cross react" with HIV. What does this mean? If you remember the lock-and-key model from your biology textbook, you’ll know that your body produces antibodies that are specific to an antigen. Some CAEV antibodies, in addition to flagging CAEV, can also identify HIV. Simply put, they recognize HIV as an antigen. That’s it. There is no evidence these antibodies "destroy" or protect against HIV, said Brian Murphy, a professor of pathology at the University of California Davis’ School of Veterinary Medicine, who’s studied CAEV. Scientists have actually known about this cross-reactivity for decades, but in the grand scheme of AIDS research, it’s meaningless, according to Laurence of amfAR. "It wouldn’t make my list of 100 things to consider in the search for a cure," he said. "There are so many more interesting things to look into without having to look into cross-reactions with goats." Nonetheless, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases did support research into CAEV’s vaccine potential in the 2000s before determining that it wasn’t viable. Currently, there’s a team of scientists at Joseph Fourier University in Grenoble, France, working on a CAEV-based HIV vaccine. Yahia Chebloune, one of the immunologists on the team, explained the concept to us. The team’s vaccine prototype combines CAEV with HIV and SIV (simian immunodeficiency virus). Unlike HIV, CAEV doesn’t destroy T helper cells — the white blood cells essential to the immune system — nor does it replicate as aggressively and indefinitely or create an AIDS-like disease in goats. So when the vaccine was tested on mice, macaques and llamas, their T helper cells weren’t destroyed and the animals could produce antibodies, suggesting that the vaccine was effective in stopping the HIV strains from replicating. Got goat milk None of this suggests that Chachoua has successfully cured Sheen or the 780,000 inhabitants of Comoros against HIV. Simply "drinking milk from goats with arthritis" cannot protect anyone from the virus. CAEV is not transmittable to humans, so Charlie Sheen couldn’t have developed CAEV antibodies — even if they did "destroy" HIV (again, they don't). "This is the craziest story I’ve ever heard," said Chebloune. "The claims of Dr. Sam Chachoua are not scientifically serious." Is it possible that Chachoua inoculated Sheen with a homemade CAEV-based vaccine like Chebloune’s? Our multiple requests for comment went unanswered so we’ll never know for sure. But the one CAEV vaccine prototype we found triggered an immune response in animals and has yet to be tested on humans. What’s more, as Lawrence of amfAR noted, vaccinating someone against a disease is not the same thing as curing it. Then there’s the most damning evidence against Chachou: Sheen is still HIV-positive, while there were 7,900 HIV cases in Comoros in 2012. "I’m not cured, no," Sheen said on Feb. 11’s Dr. Oz. Salvator Niyonzima, who directs the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS in Comoros, told Oz that he and his colleagues "have never heard of Dr. Samir Chachoua." Our ruling Chachoua said he cured Charlie Sheen and Comoros of HIV with "milk from goats which had arthritis." Chachoua is taking a nugget of science and twisting into an absurd claim. There is no proof that CAEV — a relative of HIV that’s studied for its vaccine potential — neutralizes HIV. Sheen and people on the island of Comoros both have HIV. We rate Chachoua’s claim Pants on Fire. | null | Samir Chachoua | null | null | null | 2016-02-23T10:00:00 | 2016-01-29 | ['None'] |
goop-02259 | Brad Pitt “Doubtful” Angelina Jolie Can Have “Successful Fourth Marriage,” | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/angelina-jolie-fourth-new-marriage-brad-pitt-not-successful/ | null | null | null | Andrew Shuster | null | Brad Pitt NOT “Doubtful” Angelina Jolie Can Have “Successful Fourth Marriage,” Despite Report | 9:46 am, November 3, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-03133 | Newark is "now home to one-third of all commercial and multi-family development." | half-true | /new-jersey/statements/2013/sep/15/cory-booker/cory-booker-claims-newark-represents-third-real-es/ | Editor’s Note: On March 14, 2013, PolitiFact New Jersey rated as Mostly True a statement by Newark Mayor Cory Booker that "More than 30 percent of all commercial and multifamily development in the entire state is happening in Newark." We based that ruling on building permit and square footage data provided by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs, a real-estate development firm that compiled numbers for the Booker administration and experts in the real-estate development industry. Booker, now a candidate in an Oct. 16 special election for the late Frank Lautenberg’s U.S. Senate seat, made the claim again in a form e-mail campaign letter distributed last week. In reanalyzing the claim, we realized that our first ruling didn’t take fully into account how Newark compares statewide in terms of building permits and value of new construction. This fact-check adds that analysis and consequently changes the ruling to Half True. With about a month to go before a special election for a vacant U.S. Senate seat, Democrat Cory Booker is using a Newark statistic to bolster support for his campaign. Booker, Newark’s mayor, cited the Brick City’s real estate growth in a Senate campaign form e-mail received last week by PolitiFact.com. Newark is "now home to one-third of all commercial and multi-family development," said Booker, whose challenger in the Oct. 16 special election is Republican Steve Lonegan, a former mayor of Bogota. That’s quite a claim to make, considering New Jersey has 21 counties and 566 municipalities. But after analyzing this claim, it’s clear the statistic only holds up when measured a particular way. First, let’s explain how real estate growth is measured before we delve into Newark’s numbers. Generally speaking, experts have told PolitiFact New Jersey that the real estate industry standard is to measure residential growth in building permits issued and commercial development in square footage. Why? The barometer for growth in residential real estate is number of units, which is tracked by building permits. That shows demand for households, said Rosemary Scanlon, divisional dean at the New York University Schack Institute of Real Estate and a former chief economist for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. But size matters more in commercial real estate because space can be made to fit the needs of firms moving in, and it’s also an economic indicator of business activity in the community, said Ken Danter, CEO of the Danter Company, a real estate research and consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio. New Jersey’s Department of Community Affairs, however, tracks data by building permits because permits show "the beginning of the process," said John Lago, the DCA’s housing research manager. "If you’re mixing standards, it’s like mixing centigrade and fahrenheit," Lago said. There’s nothing technically wrong with using one measure for all real estate growth, but it’s not exactly conventional, Scanlon explained. Danter said he wouldn’t mix the two. So it’s clear that there are differing opinions about mixing building permits with square footage to measure growth. Now let’s look at Newark’s numbers. Booker’s city administration shared with us numbers crunched for the mayor by real estate development firm Jones Lang LaSalle, which used a database known as CoStar. Adam Zipkin, Booker’s deputy mayor for economic development, said those developments were measured in square footage. For 2012, New Jersey had projects under construction totaling 3,306,551 square feet. Of that, Newark was responsible for projects totaling 1,168,793 square feet – or 35.3 percent of the state real estate development total, according to the data. So based strictly on square footage, Booker is correct that Newark represents 30 percent of the real estate development going on statewide. But the number is significantly different if we look at building permits and the value of new construction for every municipality in the state. In that case, Newark ranked second for 2012, at $276,225,281, according to DCA data. Jersey City ranked first, at $391,016,932. The total value of new construction statewide in 2012, including state buildings, was $10,941,709,996. By that measure, Newark accounted for just 3 percent of the value of new construction statewide. Our ruling Booker said in a campaign e-mail, Newark is "now home to one-third of all commercial and multi-family development." Data from a real estate development firm compiling statistics for Booker showed that in terms of square footage, Newark accounted for 35 percent – or a bit more than a third -- of the residential and commercial real estate growth last year in New Jersey. So he’s right on that point. But in terms of building permits and value of new construction, Newark can claim just 3 percent of that total. Given that point, the ruling is Half True. To comment on this story, go to NJ.com. | null | Cory Booker | null | null | null | 2013-09-15T07:30:00 | 2013-09-10 | ['None'] |
hoer-00266 | Facebook 'No Swearing Campain' | facebook scams | https://www.hoax-slayer.com/no-swearing-facebook-warning.shtml | null | null | null | Brett M. Christensen | null | HOAX - Facebook 'No Swearing Campain' | March 4, 2014 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-01157 | The federal budget bill "reauthorizes the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, which provides taxpayer dollars so that the Four Seasons hotel can build a resort in Turkey." | mostly true | /punditfact/statements/2014/dec/15/michael-needham/cromnibus-includes-taxpayer-funding-four-seasons-h/ | Saturday night, Congress approved a $1.1 trillion spending bill to fund the government through September. It passed with bipartisan support, but not without criticism from both Democrats and Republicans. On Fox News Sunday Dec. 14, Michael Needham, CEO of conservative activist group Heritage Action, said he was disappointed that Congress approved such a massive spending bill, with what he sees as irresponsible provisions. "They put forth one of the worst pieces of legislation," Needham said. "A $1.1 trillion spending bill that has a carve out for Blue Cross Blue Shield, has a carve out for Wall Street. Reauthorizes something called the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, which provides taxpayer-backed loans so that the Four Seasons Hotel can build a resort in Turkey." We were curious about the last part of Needham’s claim -- that the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), a government institution, financed a Four Seasons hotel in Turkey. When we reached out to Needham, his communications team told us that he misspoke -- he meant to say Ritz-Carlton, not the Four Seasons. We consider that to be a minor error that doesn’t distort Needham’s point because both are luxury hotels. That flub aside, we found that Needham’s claim is on target. It is, however, a narrow portrayal of what OPIC does. The hotel in Istanbul (not Constantinople) What’s OPIC? It’s a finance institution run by the federal government. Like a bank, it finances loans with interest and offers political risk insurance. What separates OPIC from other finance institutions, though, is that it helps American businesses break into developing economies -- places where a business might struggle to find private investment locally. For example, OPIC likely wouldn’t back a project in a wealthy country like Austria, where there is plenty of capital available. They would be much more likely to back a project in sub-Saharan Africa. In 2013, OPIC lent $3.75 billion, according to a press release. For 37 consecutive years, the agency has generated a net income for the United States Treasury by collecting interest off its loans and insurance premiums. Supporters say OPIC fosters economic growth in developing nations and benefits American businesses. Opponents, such as Needham, see OPIC as corporate welfare and misuse of tax dollars. In 2000, OPIC gave the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company a $50 million loan to open a hotel in Turkey, which is the project Needham was talking about. (The Four Seasons, we should note, does have a luxury hotel in Istanbul, but OPIC did not finance it.) According to annual reports, OPIC regularly finances hotels and tourism -- in addition to an array of other industries such as manufacturing, renewable energy and agriculture. In 2013, OPIC financed construction of a hotel in South Sudan, as well as hotel expansions in Armenia and the nation of Georgia. Since 2000, the organization has also financed hotels in Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Liberia, Guatemala, South Africa and more. OPIC spokesman Charles Stadtlander told PolitiFact that the Ritz-Carlton in Turkey is "well on its way to paying its loan back with interest." Stadtlander said, though, that Needham mischaracterized the hotel by calling it a "resort." He said it is a business-oriented hotel that was built with the idea in mind of bringing CEOs, foreign ministers and investors to Turkey, keeping with OPIC’s economic development mission. The hotel is an "essential piece of business infrastructure," Stadtlander said. Our ruling Needham said OPIC "provides taxpayer-backed loans so that the Four Seasons hotel can build a resort in Turkey." The Ritz-Carlton, not the Four Seasons, received a $50 million OPIC loan to build a hotel in Istanbul in 2000. While Needham got the name of the hotel chain wrong, we think most people would forgive mixing up two high-end hoteliers. That said, talking about building hotels overseas doesn’t give the full picture of what OPIC does. We rate his claim Mostly True. | null | Michael Needham | null | null | null | 2014-12-15T14:45:17 | 2014-12-14 | ['None'] |
pose-00534 | Will cut taxes for small business. "In the first special session I call, I would seek tax cuts for small businesses with 50 employees or less." | compromise | https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/promises/walk-o-meter/promise/557/cut-small-business-taxes/ | null | walk-o-meter | Scott Walker | null | null | Cut small-business taxes | 2010-12-20T23:16:36 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-06069 | We haven't had any legislation which took away one gun in the past 20 years from anybody in this country--not one. | half-true | /new-jersey/statements/2012/jan/09/bill-pascrell/bill-pascrell-claims-no-legislation-has-taken-guns/ | There’s another gun battle heating up in Congress that not only divides politicians on the right to bear arms, but to carry them across state lines without penalty. And New Jersey Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-8th Dist.) doesn’t want that to happen. During a Nov. 16 House hearing, Pascrell spoke against the proposed National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. If H.R. 822 becomes law, states that allow people to carry concealed weapons would be required to recognize other states’ valid concealed carry permits. At least 40 states already have some form of reciprocity for out-of-state concealed carry permits. The bill has been referred in the Senate to the Committee on the Judiciary. In opposing the bill, Pascrell said, "We haven't had any legislation which took away one gun in the past 20 years from anybody in this country -- not one." Pascrell’s spokesman, Paul Brubaker said the congressman was specifically referring to federal legislation, noting that his "point would have beeen clearer had he specified that he was referring to nonviolent, law-abiding gun owners." PolitiFact New Jersey found Pascrell’s argument somewhat on target. But two gun-rights organizations we spoke with say two laws do take guns from people. Larry Pratt, executive director of Virginia-based Gun Owners of America, and Joe Waldron, legislative director for the Washington state-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, both said a provision of The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 banned semiautomatic weapons with detachable devices. That, in effect, takes a weapon away from someone who wants it, they said. Brubaker disagreed. "The 1994 federal assault weapons ban prohibited for 10 years the possession, transfer, and manufacturing of semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices," Brubaker said in an email. "However, there was a grandfather clause in the bill, and semiautomatic assault weapons that were legally-owned before the ban went into effect were NOT restricted. Those weapons could be transferred and sold within the confines of federal and state laws. … Neither the assault weapons ban, nor any federal prohibition of particular guns from being imported, resulted in the federal government taking legally-owned guns away from Americans." Waldron also pointed to The Domestic Violence Gun Ban, more commonly called the Lautenberg Amendment for its author, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). The amendment to the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 bans anyone convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense from owning or possessing a firearm, even if the person had it before the conviction. The law requires that person to immediately surrender the weapon – but not necessarily to law enforcement. That person’s gun and ammunition should be transferred to a "third party who may lawfully receive and possess them, such as their attorney, a local police agency, or a federal firearms dealer. In addition, such firearms and ammunition are subject to seizure and forfeiture," according to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives website. The result of the Lautenberg Amendment "is that people have been disarmed of weapons within the past 20 years and they’ve been sent to prison when they’ve been caught in possession," Waldron said. The consequences of one’s actions are central to the issue, according to ATF spokesperson Ginger Colbrun. As an example, she said that if a gun owner is convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, the person’s actions are to blame for him no longer being allowed to possess a weapon -- not the law. "It really is semantics when you look at it," she said. But the person still has to give up the gun and to some, that's taking it away. Our ruling Pascrell said there hasn’t been any legislation in the past 20 years that took a gun from anyone in the United States. Gun advocates disagree, pointing to the federal crime bill and the Lautenberg Amendment as examples. But the facts are a gun can't be taken from someone who never had it, and having to surrender a gun because of a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction can be construed as it being taken away. We rate Pascrell’s claim Half True. To comment on this story, go to NJ.com. Editor's Note: This story was initially published by accident with a Mostly True ruling. The correct ruling is Half True. | null | Bill Pascrell | null | null | null | 2012-01-09T07:30:00 | 2011-11-16 | ['None'] |
snes-02962 | Decorated Vermont state trooper Arcot Ramathorn, an Iraqi Muslim, would be denied entry under proposed U.S. travel restrictions. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/arcot-ramathorn-restriction/ | null | Humor | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Would Decorated Vermont State Trooper Arcot Ramathorn Be Affected by U.S. Entry Restrictions? | 10 February 2017 | null | ['United_States'] |
vogo-00132 | Statement: “An article in the Union Tribune said from 1990 to 2010, there were 3,300 businesses that went from California to Texas. Over 20 years, that gives us 3.17 corporations leaving for Texas every week,” said Hector Gastelum, a Republican candidate for the 40th District state Senate seat. | determination: misleading | https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/texas-messing-with-california-businesses-fact-check/ | Analysis: Early this year, Texas Gov. Rick Perry launched a public campaign to lure businesses from California to what he hailed as the lower tax environment of his home state. | null | null | null | null | Texas Messing With California Businesses: Fact Check | March 11, 2013 | null | ['California', 'Texas', 'Republican_Party_(United_States)', 'U-T_San_Diego'] |
pomt-05639 | The RESTORE Act started as an "effort to dedicate as much BP fine money as possible towards Gulf Coast restoration" but now "could steer money to places like the Great Lakes and West Coast." | half-true | /florida/statements/2012/mar/22/marco-rubio/marco-rubio-oil-spill-fine-money-great-lakes/ | A year after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Florida’s two senators -- Republican Marco Rubio and Democrat Bill Nelson -- joined forces to support the RESTORE Act, a bipartisan effort to direct money from BP fines to Florida and other Gulf states affected by the 2010 oil spill. But when the bill reached the Senate floor March 8 for a key vote, Rubio voted "no." Why the change of heart? Rubio said the bill that passed the Senate was "far different" than the one he supported in July. "What started as a genuine bipartisan effort to dedicate as much BP fine money as possible towards Gulf Coast restoration has now turned into a raw deal that increases taxes, creates a new environmental bureaucracy, and could steer money to places like the Great Lakes and West Coast that had nothing to do with the oil spill," Rubio said. "This is no longer a Gulf Coast restoration bill, it’s a federal power grab that exploits the BP spill to pay for special interest projects driven by the usual 'what's in it for me' Washington mentality," he said. "I will not support raising taxes to pay for BP’s mess or to pay for new spending projects across the country that have nothing to do with Gulf Coast restoration." Rubio’s vote attracted attention because he was the only Gulf Coast senator to oppose the bill, and because a poll showed the vast majority of Floridians -- including Republicans and tea party supporters -- were in favor of the RESTORE Act. Was Rubio correct to imply that states such as Michigan or California could get money related to the oil spill across the country? We decided to check it out. The RESTORE Act The RESTORE Act stands for the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourism Opportunities and Revived Economies. It was introduced in July 2011 by Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and was cosponsored by Rubio, Nelson and other senators. The legislation directs 80 percent of the fines in connection with the Deepwater Horizon explosion to go to Gulf Coast projects, and the remainder to the U.S. Treasury. In the Gulf, the money could be used for mitigating damage to wildlife, monitoring fisheries, promoting tourism and job creation. The fines could hit $20 billion. On Sept. 21, the Senate’s committee on Environment and Public Works agreed to add an amendment that would create the National Endowment for the Oceans, a separate project which had stalled after being proposed in July 2010. Rubio is not a member of that committee. As the title suggests, the endowment is a national program with money available for coastal areas including -- you guessed it -- the Great Lakes and West Coast among other places. Environmentalists applauded that addition. "We had the largest ecosystem damaging disaster we ever had," said Brian Moore, legislative director at National Audubon. "Wouldn’t it be a good idea to divert a small portion of that to study the health of all our oceans and large bodies of water?" That "small portion" for the ocean endowment refers to half of the interest from the oil spill fine, not the fine itself. It’s impossible to predict what portion could go to the Great Lakes or West Coast, said Emily Woglom, director of government relations at the Ocean Conservancy. "It will be driven by merits of proposals, and regardless, we are likely talking about millions of dollars for ocean endowment as compared to billions of dollars for the gulf restoration fund," she said. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the RESTORE Act could fund an endowment of $138 million by 2021 for both the ocean endowment and the Gulf of Mexico. On Feb. 15, 2012, Nelson submitted an amendment to the transportation bill in the Senate that included the version of the RESTORE Act with the oceans provision. Rubio was a cosponsor. On March 7, Nelson submitted the amendment again, but Rubio was no longer a cosponsor. On March 8, the Senate passed the amendment 76-22, prompting Rubio’s protest. The Senate passed the full transportation bill March 14 again by 76-22 with Rubio again voting "no." Rubio’s "no" vote on the RESTORE Act puzzled some its supporters: Why didn’t he speak up publicly earlier? Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said that on the original bill that "we made clear on a staff level that Sen. Rubio wouldn’t support the National Endowment for Oceans. … We were hoping the final bill would not include that and (Rubio would) be able to support it." The ocean endowment wasn’t the only part that bothered Rubio. He explained his vote in more detail in an editorial, and he included criticism of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, an existing fund that uses fees from oil and gas leasing in federal waters to purchase and protect land. Language was added to the RESTORE Act to allow the conservation fund to get a boost in money. Woglom of the Ocean Conservancy said that technically the conservation fund isn’t getting BP fine money, but that the RESTORE Act and the Conservation Fund are sharing an offset to cover the increase in spending. Under pay-go budget rules, any change has to be accounted as new spending even if it comes from fines, and therefore needs an offset. The offset comes out of money generated by a delay in an interest rate adjustment for business investment. Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist called that a tax increase. Rubio signed Norquist’s tax pledge in 2009, and if Rubio had voted for the RESTORE Act, Norquist could make the case that Rubio had violated his pledge. Moore, who favors the Land and Conservation Fund, said that isn’t a tax increase -- it extends an existing statute that makes businesses that make a profit overseas continue to pay a tax. RESTORE had not made it into law as of March 20, 2012, because the House had not passed a full transportation bill. The House version of RESTORE doesn’t include the oceans endowment, so the two chambers will need to resolve their differences. Our ruling Rubio said the RESTORE Act started as an "effort to dedicate as much BP fine money as possible towards Gulf Coast restoration" but now "could steer money to places like the Great Lakes and West Coast." It's not the fine money itself that could go to other bodies of water, but interest from the fines. Half the interest could go to an ocean endowment for coastal regions nationwide, including the Great Lakes and West Coast. The bulk of the fines themselves will still go to the Gulf Coast. The small amount was set aside to attract votes from non-Gulf senators. And in fact, the legislation passed the Senate by a wide enough margin to guarantee that Rubio’s home state will get the money and still allow him to say he voted against tax increases. Publicly, Rubio was quiet about the provision to protect other bodies of water for months, though we are rating him here on the truthfulness of his words, not the timing of his protest. Some money from the RESTORE Act could go to the Great Lakes and the West Coast, but the bulk of the money -- particularly the fines themselves -- would still go to the Gulf Coast. We rate his claim Half True. | null | Marco Rubio | null | null | null | 2012-03-22T18:04:30 | 2012-03-08 | ['Gulf_Coast_of_the_United_States', 'BP'] |
pomt-07484 | A Republican proposal changes Medicare for those under age 55 so that they will "participate in the same kind of health plan that members of Congress do." | mostly false | /truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/13/mike-pence/mike-pence-said-republican-medicare-proposal-will-/ | Correction: This item was originally published at about noon on April 13, 2011, based on ABC's transcript of "This Week With Christiane Amanpour." Shortly afterward, Pence's press office notified us that the transcript text was wrong -- leaving out the words "kind of." Listening to the exchange on video, we confirmed the error in our original ruling. As a result, we are republishing this item at about 6 p.m. on April 13 with the correct quote from Pence and have upgraded the ruling from False to Barely True. Republicans have better proposals than Democrats to rein in future federal spending, said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., in an appearance on ABC's This Week with Christiane Amanpour. "House Republicans under Paul Ryan's leadership have offered a vision to put America back on a pathway toward a balanced budget," Pence said. "It deals with issues in entitlements. It reduces the national debt. For Americans 55 or older, we're not proposing a single change in Medicare... What we want to do for Americans under the age of 55 is make sure they can participate in the same kind of health plan that members of Congress do." Pence’s final claim about Medicare drew a response from Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., who was also on the show. "That is not accurate," Van Hollen said. "Members of Congress have what is called a fair-share deal. We do not bear the entire risk of increased costs. They are asking seniors to bear risks (that) they are not asking themselves." Pence replied, "Members of Congress have the same premium support system, Chris knows that." We decided to see who was right by fact-checking Pence’s statement that future Medicare beneficiaries will be able to "participate in the same kind of health plan that members of Congress do." The Medicare proposal Pence and Van Hollen mentioned comes from Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., chair of the House Budget Committee. His 2012 budget proposal, called The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America’s Promise, lays out many ways to reduce federal spending, including changes to entitlement programs including Medicare, the government-run health insurance program for Americans 65 or older. Right now, Medicare is a single-payer plan: The government pays doctors and hospitals set fees for the care Medicare beneficiaries receive. (Beneficiaries contribute premiums, and active workers contribute payroll taxes.) Under Ryan’s plan, people who are not yet 55 would not receive traditional Medicare, but would instead qualify for government "premium support" to help them buy health insurance from a private company starting in 2022. (Ryan’s plan specifically says this is not a "voucher" program, since the government will pay the insurance companies directly.) Premium supports would be higher for people who require more health care. Here’s how Ryan’s plan explains it: "When younger workers become eligible for Medicare, they will be able to choose from a list of guaranteed coverage options, enjoying the same kind of choices in their plans that members of Congress enjoy today. Medicare would then provide a payment to subsidize the cost of the plan. In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance for lower-income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks." Ryan’s proposal requires the private insurance companies to accept all comers and to charge the same rate for people who are the same age. The plans would have to comply with a standard for benefits set by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which administers the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which is how members of Congress buy their insurance. Additionally, Ryan’s plan gradually raises the Medicare eligibility age to 67, and it provides smaller premium supports to high earners. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analyzed Ryan’s proposal and found that it will save the government money. But it does so by asking future Medicare beneficiaries to pay more to buy insurance. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare," the CBO concluded. Now let’s look at how whether proposal looks like what members of Congress can buy. • How the plan is like what members of Congress get. We contacted Pence’s office to ask about how the Ryan proposal is like what members of Congress get, and they pointed us to the fact that Medicare plans from private insurers will be required to comply with a benefits standard set by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, as do plans that cover members of Congress. We should also note that seniors would be able to compare different plans and select from different insurance options, as members of Congress do. The government would pay part of premiums, as it does for members of Congress. • How the plan is not like what members of Congress get. First, the plans would be created specifically for Medicare beneficiaries on newly created Medicare health insurance exchanges. (Exchanges are virtual marketplaces where people can shop for insurance.) Second, as Van Hollen pointed out, members of Congress are protected somewhat when health insurance companies raise their rates, through a formula he mentioned known as "Fair Share." Generally speaking, the government pays for 75 percent of the average of the health insurance plans it offers. If the overall plans increase in price, the government still pays 75 percent. Federal support for premiums in Ryan’s plan, though, would not keep pace with medical inflation. Premium support instead would be pegged to the consumer price index, which historically lags health care costs. Our final point on how the plans differ may seem obvious to some, but we feel it’s important to mention: Members of Congress receive employer-based insurance. By definition, that means they receive a salary to help pay for their insurance. The base pay for members of Congress is currently $174,000. Medicare beneficiaries, on the other hand, tend to make a lot less money, because most of them are retired. The median income for Medicare beneficiaries was $20,644 in 2010. And only 5 percent had incomes exceeding $82,695, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation. "As policymakers consider options for decreasing federal Medicare spending and addressing the federal debt and deficit, this analysis raises questions about the extent to which the next generation of Medicare beneficiaries will be able to bear a larger share of costs," the foundation concluded in an April 2011 report. Our ruling We should emphasize that Ryan’s Medicare proposal is only a broad outline right now, and there are many unanswered questions about it. But what we do know about it strikes us as fundamentally different from the kind of employer-provided health insurance that members of Congress receive. At a minimum, the premium supports will not keep pace with the historic record of rapidly increasing health care costs. Additionally, seniors make significantly less income than members of Congress and will likely not have the same options to buy more expensive plans. And, finally, they will not the same protection against rising costs that "Fair Share" provides members of Congress. We rate Pence’s statement Barely True. Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to Mostly False. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/1cb004d0-c238-4451-80ba-373db17dc6f7 | null | Mike Pence | null | null | null | 2011-04-13T17:49:36 | 2011-04-10 | ['United_States_Congress', 'Republican_Party_(United_States)', 'Medicare_(United_States)'] |
goop-02473 | Katie Holmes Furious Over Jamie Foxx, Charlize Theron Flirting? | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/jamie-foxx-charlize-theron-flirting-katie-holmes-furious/ | null | null | null | Andrew Shuster | null | Katie Holmes Furious Over Jamie Foxx, Charlize Theron Flirting? | 11:23 am, September 12, 2017 | null | ['Jamie_Foxx'] |
pose-01249 | I will collaborate with our community colleges and businesses to standardize the criteria for a work readiness certificate so that employers can easily assess a job seeker’s skill level prior to hiring. | not yet rated | https://www.politifact.com/north-carolina/promises/coop-o-meter/promise/1340/streamline-job-training/ | null | coop-o-meter | Roy Cooper | null | null | Streamline job training | 2017-01-06T10:37:46 | null | ['None'] |
snes-05374 | Does a Photograph Show Pigs Forced Into Tiny Cages? | mixture | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pig-cage-photo/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | Does a Photograph Show Pigs Forced Into Tiny Cages? | 13 January 2016 | null | ['None'] |
goop-01001 | Did Kristen Stewart Walking Barefoot On Cannes Red Carpet Break Film Festival’s Rules? | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/kristen-stewart-cannes-film-festival-barefoot-red-carpet-rules-high-heels/ | null | null | null | Michael Lewittes | null | Did Kristen Stewart Walking Barefoot On Cannes Red Carpet Break Film Festival’s Rules? | 7:32 pm, May 14, 2018 | null | ['None'] |
snes-03493 | The Department of Justice (DOJ)'s switchboard is tallying "Audit the Vote" calls and if enough people call, 2016 election results can be overturned. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/audit-the-vote/ | null | Conspiracy Theories | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Audit the Vote | 22 November 2016 | null | ['None'] |
tron-00585 | Anthony Bourdain Had Information on Hillary Clinton, Sex Trafficking Ring Before His Death | fiction! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/anthony-bourdain-tweets-hillary-clinton/ | null | celebrities | null | null | ['celebrities', 'conspiracy', 'donald trump', 'hillary clinton'] | Anthony Bourdain Had Information on Hillary Clinton, Sex Trafficking Ring | Jun 11, 2018 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-07284 | The U.S. has "over $62 trillion in unfunded liabilities." | mostly false | /virginia/statements/2011/may/23/frank-wolf/rep-frank-wolf-says-us-has-over-62-trillion-unfund/ | Weeks ago, when credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded its outlook for U.S. debt from "stable" to "negative," Rep. Frank R. Wolf, R-10th, was not surprised. "The warning flags are flying as we move closer and closer to the edge of the financial cliff," Wolf said in a statement on his website, pointing to his own previous alerts that the the nation’s mighty Triple-A credit rating was in jeopardy. Wolf called the downgrade a "predictable warning," adding: "I've been sounding a similar one for almost five years as I've tried to get the attention of Congress and the past and present administrations that America cannot continue on its current debt and deficit track, with over $14 trillion of debt, over $62 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and over one trillion dollar deficits projected for years to come," Wolf added. There’s one number in there that failed to ring a bell. We know the national debt is more than $14 trillion; in fact, we recently reached the debt limit of $14.3 trillion. It’s also true that future deficit projections -- under the current budget plan -- exceed $1 trillion annually. But is it true that the U.S. has more than $62 trillion in unfunded liabilities? We thought it was worth a look. For a source, Wolf’s office pointed to a 2010 report from the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, an organization devoted to public awareness of fiscal issues. The study contains a table entitled "Major Fiscal Exposure." A sum of $61.9 trillion is calculated for 2009, adding "explicit liabilities" (public debt, pensions, etc.) "commitments and contingencies" and "social insurance promises" (future social security benefits and future Medicare benefits). Predictably, the biggest driver of the staggering total is social insurance promises, which accounts for $45.8 trillion -- $38.2 trillion of which is future Medicare benefits. Social Security benefits account for the rest. As noted in fine print, the projections come from the Social Security and Medicare Trustees reports dated Jan. 1, 2009, and estimate benefits over the next 75 years. The rest of the data comes from the U.S. Treasury’s 2009 report. First, there’s an issue of terminology. "Technically, Mr. Wolf is in error because he calls the shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare ‘unfunded liabilities’" said J.D. Foster, an economist with the right-leaning Heritage Foundation. "Legally, they are not liabilities. They can be referred to accurately as promises or obligations." Foster said the benefits do not qualify as liabilities because "Congress can at any time reduce or alter them. In contrast, state pension plans are contractual labor arrangements that are liabilities because they are legally enforceable." Gary Burtless, an economist with the left-leaning Brookings Institution, agreed, calling the idea that the government "owes" trillions of dollars to future citizens from a variety of programs under rules that are currently in effect "ridiculous." "The Supreme Court has ruled that the U.S.A. does not have a contractual obligation to pay Social Security and Medicare under rules that Congress has no power to change," Burtless said in an email. "No citizen can expect to win a lawsuit that demands that benefits be paid that are as generous as the benefits that were ‘promised’ under some old, presumably more generous set of rules." Nevertheless, we’ll limit the Truth-O-Meter point reductions on this point because the Peterson Foundation report and media reports we found refer to the future Social Security and Medicare benefits as "liabilities" rather than "obligations." The next problem is less debatable: the information is outdated. According to the latest Medicare and Social Security trustees reports, the numbers have changed significantly since 2009. Promised Medicare benefits for the next 75 years now total $24.6 trillion, according to 2011 numbers, and Social Security benefits have increased to $9.2 trillion. So Medicare obligations are now $13.6 trillion less than the data upon which Wolf based his claim , largely due to the health care reform act passed last year. Social Security obligations are $1.5 trillion trillion more. The net effect of those changes is that projections for future obligations are $12 trillion less than the 2009 data Wolf uses. But the trustees reports for this year hadn’t been released when Wolf made his claim, so we must look at the 2010 reports. Last year’s projections showed Medicare obligations to be $22.78 trillion over the 75 years and Social Security at $7.95 trillion for a total of $30.73 trillion. Using that comparison, Wolf’s off by even more, $15 trillion. And of course the debt has also changed. In the report Wolf cites, the publicly-held debt -- U.S. bonds held by individuals, institutions and foreign nations -- is listed as $7.6 trillion. On the day he issued his statement, it was $9.7 trillion. So add $2.1 trillion back and he’s off by almost $13 trillion. Other numbers have changed, too, but you get the point: The 2009 estimate was not a safe number in April 2011. Others argue that estimating unfunded obligations 75 years into the future is never safe. "One can certainly come up with all kinds of scary – but essentially meaningless – estimates of the ‘unfunded liability’ of the federal government’s programs," Burtless, the Brookings economist, said. "As a general rule of thumb, the bigger the estimate, the more meaningless it is." Burtless noted that the numbers change wildly based on annual policy decisions and a 75-year measure was is arbitrary because obligation don’t end then. "It is impossible to predict 25 years into the future with much accuracy, let alone 75 years or all of eternity," he said. So let’s review. Wolf claims that the U.S. faces "over $62 trillion in unfunded liabilities." First, he and many others misuse the term "unfunded liabilities" to describe the future costs of government promises. Unlike a home mortgage, the U.S. is not locked into paying a certain amount based on existing terms. In fact, Congress changes the terms all the time. Secondly, the numbers Wolf based his claim on are badly outdated. In fact, using the 75-year estimates he cites, the figure would be significantly lower than $62 trillion based on 2011 figures. So, while Wolf’s claim is based on an actual figure, it’s an old one that was shaky to begin with given the distant projection and likelihood of change. We rate his claim Barely True. Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to Mostly False. | null | Frank Wolf | null | null | null | 2011-05-23T08:00:00 | 2011-04-19 | ['United_States'] |
pomt-04827 | Says Paul Ryan "wants to cut Pell Grant scholarships for nearly 10 million students." | half-true | /wisconsin/statements/2012/aug/16/eva-longoria/desperate-housewives-actress-obama-activist-says-p/ | On the day Mitt Romney named U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate, actress Eva Longoria fired off a series of Twitter attacks on the presumptive Republican presidential ticket. The Aug. 11, 2012 tweets by Longoria, who describes herself as an activist as well as an actress, included this one: "Today Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan, who wants to cut Pell Grant scholarships for nearly 10 million students!" Longoria is no politician, but she is political, serving as a national co-chair of President Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. Known for her role as Gabrielle Solis on the TV series "Desperate Housewives," Longoria has appeared at Obama campaign events since being chosen to one of the 35 largely ceremonial co-chair posts. At a Denver rally in July 2012, she told Obama supporters: "We have to get out there and tell (others) ‘If you’re a woman, there is no way you can vote Republican.’" But what about financially needy college students? How would Ryan’s plan affect them? Longoria’s evidence Longoria’s tweet about Ryan and student aid included a link to a page on Obama’s campaign website focused on Romney and Ryan. (So did a tweet nearly identical to Longoria’s made the same day by actress Ashley Judd.) The page slams a budget proposal Ryan made as chairman of the House Budget Committee. "To pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest," the Ryan plan would, among other things, cut "Pell Grant scholarships for nearly 10 million students," the Obama campaign says. So, we know where Longoria got the information for her tweet. But the site doesn’t provide any evidence that would back the claim. Fortunately, our colleagues at PolitiFact National evaluated a similar statement made by Obama himself in April 2012, a few days after the GOP-controlled House approved Ryan’s budget resolution. (The plan didn't pass in the Democratic-controlled Senate.) Obama said that if spending reductions in the resolution "were to be spread out evenly," nearly 10 million college students would see their financial aid cut by an average of more than $1,000 each. The White House told our colleagues the president was referring to the Pell Grant program. So, Ryan's plan does not specify cuts to Pell Grants. Obama is simply applying the total spending cuts in the plan evenly across the overall budget to derive a Pell Grant number. Dissecting Obama’s claim Let’s look at what PolitiFact National found in evaluating Obama’s statement: Federal Pell Grants provide the largest source of grant funding for needy college students (although Ryan contends the grants should be targeted more to lower-income students). More than 9.7 million students are expected to get grants in 2013, according to the U.S. Education Department. By the president’s calculation, applying the Ryan budget cuts evenly would reduce the maximum Pell grant -- $5,500 for the 2011-2012 school year -- to $4,595, leaving some students with nothing at all and cutting grants for nearly 10 million students by an average of more than $1,000 per student. Budget experts said that because the Ryan spending cuts lacked detail, it was fair for Obama to assume the cuts would be applied evenly. But Obama himself acknowledged that Republicans hadn’t specified the Pell cuts themselves and that they might apply cuts in ways other than he assumed. Indeed, the Ryan plan budget resolution -- which is a guidance document, not a line-by-line budget -- doesn’t mention Pell grant funding; and any funding cuts would be made by House committees. Moreover, a House Budget Committee report accompanying Ryan’s budget resolution suggested the maximum Pell grant remain at $5,500, contradictory to Obama’s claim. Our colleagues concluded that Obama’s statement was accurate using his set of assumptions, but his assumptions ignored what House Republicans said was a preference that Pell grant maximums not be reduced. Obama’s claim was rated Half True. FactCheck.org also looked at Pell Grants and Ryan’s plan. The University of Pennsylvania-based fact checkers concluded"it is certainly true that Ryan’s budget would require deep spending cuts," but "it is hard to know what impact Ryan’s budget would have on specific programs because the plan contains so few details." We also sought input from Gillian Morris, spokeswoman for Obama’s campaign in Wisconsin, and Kevin Seifert, campaign manager for Ryan, who remains on the November 2012 ballot for his House seat. Obama’s campaign cited an April 2012 opinion column by The New York Times’ Paul Krugman, which claims without evidence that 1 million students would lose Pell grants altogether. But that wasn’t Obama’s or Longoria’s claim. The campaign also provided a March 2012 blog post by Obama’s Office of Management and Budget director, but it uses the same assumptions the president did in his claim. Ryan’s plan would make fewer students eligible for Pell money, according to an article in the conservative National Review cited by Ryan’s spokesman. But while bringing Pell spending "under control," the budget would nevertheless maintain the maximum Pell grant at $5,500, Ryan wrote in response to criticism of his plan. Our rating Longoria said Ryan "wants to cut Pell Grant scholarships for nearly 10 million students." Her claim is slightly different than one made by Obama, who arrived at his 10 million figure by assuming spending cuts called for in Ryan's budget plan would be made uniformly across federal programs. Nevertheless, she uses Obama's methodology in making her claim. We’re giving Longoria the same rating Obama got for making a claim that is partially accurate but leaves out important details -- Half True. | null | Eva Longoria | null | null | null | 2012-08-16T09:00:00 | 2012-08-11 | ['None'] |
pomt-00001 | Nearly 200,000 Florida voters may not be citizens. | false | /florida/statements/2018/nov/13/donald-trump-jr/donald-trump-jrs-misleading-tweet-about-noncitizen/ | As President Donald Trump floated baseless claims about fraud in the counting of ballots in Florida, his son chimed in on Twitter to imply that the state had a huge number of noncitizen voters. "Amazing, but not shocking at all anymore. Nearly 200,000 Florida Voters May Not Be Citizens https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Nearly-200000-Florida-Voters-May-Not-Be-Citizens-151212725.html … via @nbc6," Donald Trump Jr. tweeted on Nov. 12. See Figure 2 on PolitiFact.com The tweet drew more than 28,000 likes in less than 24 hours. But it isn't accurate. It is based on a cherry-picked number from a headline that didn’t tell the full story back in 2012. At the outset of the state’s effort to purge noncitizens from the voter rolls, state officials came up with the list of about 182,000 names. But Trump Jr. omits that the final number of noncitizens purged was a tiny speck of that original number. When examined in the context of all the registered voters — or even ballots cast — in Florida or the nation, proven voter fraud by noncitizens is rare. History of noncitizen purge Florida engaged in a controversial attempt to search for noncitizen voters leading up to the 2012 election. The search was rife with errors, and was ultimately dropped after few were found. Shortly after Republican Gov. Rick Scott took office in 2011, he asked his top election official at the time to look into removing noncitizens from the voter rolls. By 2012, the Division of Elections put together a list of potential noncitizens based on driver’s license data. Trump cited a headline from early in that process. He linked to a May 2012 story on NBC Miami’s website headlined: "2012Election: Nearly 200,000 Florida Voters May Not Be Citizens." The story was written by the Associated Press. Why was the president’s son sharing a six-year-old story? Matthew Gertz of the liberal Media Matters website noted that before Trump Jr.’s tweet, conservative pundits publicized the 2012 story. David Wohl, the father of conspiracy theorist Jacob Wohl, tweeted a link to the story on Nov. 10, as did Harlan Hill and Charlie Kirk. On Nov. 12 before Trump Jr.’s tweet, NBC Miami included an editor’s note on top of the original story. First, it reminded readers that the story was published in 2012. Then, it went over the history lesson of how the state’s list contained errors: See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com The AP had reported that the initial list turned up nearly 182,000 people who may not be U.S. citizens, based on the driver’s license data. Of that group, the state sent an initial list of more than 2,600 voters’ names to county election supervisors. As we have reported and the NBC editor’s note points out, the state ultimately whitted the list and removed 85 voters because they were "not a U.S. citizen." Supervisors had noted all sorts of errors and later used words such as "sloppy" and "embarrassing" to describe the state initiative, PolitiFact found. One of the problems was that the driver’s license data doesn’t get updated when a legal resident later becomes a citizen. By September 2012, when the Division of Elections produced a new list of about 200 ineligible voters, supervisors were fed up, and the effort appeared to fizzle as the presidential election drew near. The state said it would launch yet another effort to purge noncitizens from the voter rolls almost a year later, but scrapped it. We were unable to find any other sort of comprehensive data on noncitizen voters removed in Florida. We reached out to the state Division of Elections but did not hear back by deadline. Jason Snead tracks proven instances of election fraud in the U.S. for the conservative Heritage Foundation, which includes cases that resulted in criminal convictions, fines or an official finding of fraud. He said the database shows 13 entries from Florida involving a noncitizen who successfully registered and/or voted in an election. These cases were from 2003-06. A May 2017 report by New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice found that election officials in 42 jurisdictions referred an estimated 30 incidents of suspected noncitizen voting for further investigation or prosecution out of more than 23 million votes. "The kind of instances in which an individual voter tries to pretend to be somebody else or votes when he or she isn’t eligible are not the statistically meaningful events that we need to be worried about," Myrna Pérez, director of the center’s Voting Rights and Elections project and co-author of the study, said to the Austin American-Statesman. Our ruling As Florida underwent a recount of three key races, Trump Jr. tweeted a headline that said "nearly 200,000 Florida voters may not be citizens." He said it was "amazing, but not shocking at all anymore." It’s actually not true, and years old. The story itself provides a more complete picture — and an editor’s note with clarifications that Trump overlooked. The state’s 2012 voter purge started with a list of potentially 182,000 noncitizens on the voter rolls. State officials whittled that list to more than 2,600 names sent to county election supervisors. Ultimately 85 noncitizens were removed. We rate this claim False. See Figure 3 on PolitiFact.com | null | Donald Trump Jr. | null | null | null | 2018-11-13T17:06:23 | 2018-11-12 | ['None'] |
snes-02031 | A photograph shows a woman who mistakenly used expanding foam insulation on her hair instead of hair mousse. | unproven | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/builders-foam-hair/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Woman Confuses Spray Foam Insulation for Mousse? | 30 September 2015 | null | ['None'] |
afck-00025 | “Nigeria has over 10 million out-of-school children, the highest number in the world.” | incorrect | https://africacheck.org/reports/crisis-in-nigerian-schooling-grading-three-claims-by-presidential-hopeful/ | null | null | null | null | null | Crisis in Nigerian schooling? Grading three claims by presidential hopeful | 2018-07-31 09:43 | null | ['Nigeria'] |
snes-02992 | A video shows Anderson Cooper laughing uncontrollably after Kellyanne Conway used the phrase "alternative facts." | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/anderson-cooper-laughing-at-kellyanne-conway/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | Is Anderson Cooper Laughing at Kellyanne Conway? | 6 February 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-06689 | Says the federal government is "the largest energy user in the country." | true | /ohio/statements/2011/sep/07/rob-portman/sen-rob-portman-says-us-government-nations-largest/ | Ohio's Sen. Rob Portman is co-sponsor of the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, introduced in May, which aims to promote energy savings in residential and commercial buildings and industry through the use of energy-efficient technology, building codes and financial incentives. Portman says the bipartisan measure will help the economy, among other benefits, by increasing productivity and creating jobs. In an article written for the Toledo Blade, the first-term Republican said the legislation will also save millions of tax dollars because "it will require the federal government — the largest energy user in the country — to adopt energy-saving techniques." That stirred the curiosity of PolitiFact Ohio, if not our skepticism. Is the federal government really the country's biggest energy user? And -- drum roll -- how big is it? We asked Portman's office for background. Highlighting the bill's bipartisan support, they reached across the aisle and down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House. President Obama, they noted, announced last year that the federal government would reduce its greenhouse gas pollution 28 percent by 2020, to "lead by example in building the clean energy economy." "As the largest energy consumer in the United States," the president said, "we have a responsibility to American citizens to reduce our energy use and become more efficient. Our goal is to lower costs, reduce pollution, and shift Federal energy expenses away from oil and towards local, clean energy." Showing how large a consumer it is, the White House said the government spent more than $24.5 billion on electricity and fuel in 2008 alone. Keep in mind, that does not pay simply for heating and cooling buildings in Washington. It includes the costs of fueling military jets, ships and vehicles. The Defense Department is the single biggest energy user in government. Kateri Callahan, president of the Alliance to Save Energy -- a coalition of business, government, environmental, and consumer leaders -- gave testimony to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in support of Portman's bill in June. "Without the energy efficiency improvements we’ve made since 1973, we would need about 50 percent more energy to power today’s economy than we are currently using," she said, citing earlier federal efforts to reduce energy use and pollution. "As the nation's largest energy consumer," Callahan said, "it is critically important that the federal government lead by example." How large is largest? Callahan said the government accounted for 1.6 quadrillion BTUs of energy use in fiscal 2008, costing $24.5 billion. That use represented about 1.6 percent of the nation's energy consumption for the year, she said. The Alliance to Save Energy told us her source was the Federal Energy Management Program's annual report to Congress in January 2010. Portman's office provided the same report, which is based on data submitted by federal agencies to the Department of Energy. Its website has figures dating back to 1949. On the Truth-O-Meter, Portman’s statement rates as True. | null | Rob Portman | null | null | null | 2011-09-07T06:00:00 | 2011-08-28 | ['None'] |
pomt-08147 | In 2009, Jim Doyle and the Democrats rushed through a budget repair bill with billions in tax increases and held no public hearings. | mostly false | /wisconsin/statements/2010/dec/05/jeff-fitzgerald/jeff-fitzgerald-says-gov-jim-doyle-and-democrats-r/ | One of the Republican leaders at the new-look Wisconsin statehouse thinks he knows exactly why voters ushered Democrats out the door in November -- they operated in secret and were careless with your tax dollars. So says state Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon), the incoming Assembly speaker. In a Nov. 29, 2010 news release under the headline "Democrats continue closed-door deals," Fitzgerald warned against a possible December special session to approve labor deals with state employee unions before Republicans take control in January. He then reached back a year to portray a pattern of bad conduct: "In 2009, (Gov.) Jim Doyle and the Democrats rushed through a budget repair bill with billions in tax increases and held no public hearings." As devoted Madison watchers, that raised a few obvious questions: Were there really no hearings, not a one? And "billions" of tax hikes slipped into a bill meant to fix a mid-budget shortfall? In short: Is Fitzgerald rewriting history? When we asked Fitzgerald spokesman Jim Bender about the tax figure, he told us he erred in using "billions." Oops. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the official scorekeeper, estimated the repair bill would raise $290 million from tax changes. The main source was "combined reporting," in which lawmakers closed what some viewed as a loophole that allowed corporations to shuffle profits to subsidiaries in states that don’t tax them. If a new fee on hospital revenue was included, the new revenue total was $1.2 billion over three years, according to the fiscal bureau. That element features its own mini debate: The fiscal bureau calls the hospital assessment a fee. Media reports commonly referred to it as a tax. Hospitals backed the fee because it allowed the state to tap a large new stream of federal money that boosts Medicaid reimbursement to hospitals; Republicans derided it as a "sick tax" that would raise costs to patients. Bender told us he counted the hospital fees as a tax -- but mistakenly used "billions." "Normally, I use specifics, but in this instance generalized," he said. So, the underlying math in the statement is off -- by either $800 million or $1.71 billion, depending on how you view the hospital fee. But what about the way the bill was passed? It was pushed through the Legislature at warp speed -- two days -- when compared with four previous repair bills dating to 2002. The range on those was from 21 to 150 days. The speed was partly a function of the Democrats controlling both houses and the governor’s office. As for the lack of public hearings, Fitzgerald is right -- there were none. But a look into the past shows a spotty record on such hearings when it comes to budget repair bills -- with Republicans and Democrats both on the hook for blame or credit. We looked back at four such bills -- one in 2002 offered by Republican Gov. Scott McCallum -- and three earlier fixes under Doyle, a Democrat. Budget repair bills have become much more common in recent years as the economy sagged. On the earlier Doyle bills, the Legislature twice held public hearings. In one case, Republicans controlled both chambers; the parties shared control in the other. But in 2007, another year with split control, no public hearing accompanied the action. Under McCallum in 2002, lawmakers convened two such hearings on a highly contentious plan. The two parties split control at that time as well. Let’s consign this discussion to the dustbin of history. No matter how you add it up, Fitzgerald misfired badly on the tax figure he used in his news release slamming Democrats. His own aide admitted it. He is correct on the rushed nature of the 2009 budget fix. On the question of public hearings, Fitzgerald is right there were none -- but his rhetoric skipped past the fact such hearings have not always been held. Indeed, both parties have had a hand in that fact. We rate his claim Barely True. Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to Mostly False. | null | Jeff Fitzgerald | null | null | null | 2010-12-05T09:00:00 | 2010-11-29 | ['Democratic_Party_(United_States)', 'Jim_Doyle'] |
pomt-13430 | Says that Republican Darryl Glenn has described Democrats as "evil" and has said he's "tired of hearing about Republicans reaching across the aisle." | true | /colorado/statements/2016/sep/19/michael-bennet/bennet-glenn-said-democrats-are-evil-and-hes-tired/ | During a U.S. Senate debate in Colorado, Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet said his Republican opponent, Darryl Glenn, has said that Democrats are "evil" and he's "tired of hearing about Republicans reaching across the aisle." The confrontation happened at the end of a Sept. 10 debate at the Club 20 forum in Grand Junction, where three opponents -- Bennett, Glenn and Libertarian candidate Lily Tang Williams -- were allowed to question opponents for three minutes. Bennet, who went last, saved his fire for Glenn, an El Paso County commissioner. "Over the course of this campaign you said, 'I don't know any elected Democrats I get along with.’ You said, 'I'm running against Democrats, I'm running against evil.’ And you said you're 'tired of hearing about Republicans reaching across the aisle,'" Bennet told Glenn. "Your policies and views, like privatizing the V.A. and calling for the elimination and defunding of all agencies like the Department of Education and also EPA and Energy, are far to the right of many Colorado Republicans. "How exactly would you get anything done (in Congress) and live up to your own standards?" Bennet asked. Glenn didn’t answer the question. Instead he countered that Bennet’s "idea of reaching across the aisle is supporting the Iran nuclear deal. His idea of reaching across the aisle is having Republicans support the Affordable Care Act when we already know the devastating impact that's happening to people. His idea of reaching across the aisle is supporting EPA standards that are going to result in over 1,200 jobs that are being lost here." (Watch the exchange at 01:07:00 in the video) In his rebuttal, Bennet said Glenn was wrong and highlighted his bipartisan collaboration on the No Child Left Behind education law and the 2013 immigration bill. In this fact-check, we examine Bennet’s claim that Glenn has described his fight against Democrats as "running against evil" and complained about fellow Republicans "reaching across the aisle." While Colorado -- like the rest of country -- has passionate political divisions, voters also want their elected leaders to work together for the betterment of the Centennial State. There are more registered independent voters in the state than Republicans or Democrats. Yet, with little money and a shoe-string campaign, Glenn won a surprise upset in a crowded Republican primary. Glenn has repeatedly said that Republicans and Democrats working together is what’s wrong with Congress. The Denver Post reported that a growing number of Republican strategists are concerned about Glenn's campaign strategy against Bennet and his apparent inability to reach beyond Republican voters. PolitiFact confirmed that Glenn made all the comments quoted by Bennet at the debate -- often repeating his disdain for Republicans who work with Democrats. The Bennet campaign turned a montage of Glenn’s edgy remarks into a video ad called, "Across the Aisle." Here's a sampling: "I'm running against the Democrats. I'm running against evil" -- Glenn at a North JeffCo Tea Party event, April 16, 2015. "I don't know any elected Democrats that I get along with" -- Glenn during a Republican U.S. Senate candidates debate on KUSA-TV, April 5, 2016. "I'm tired of Republicans complaining. I'm tired of Republicans wanting to just reach across the aisle. We need to stand up and lead" -- Glenn on KLZ-560 AM on April 11, 2016. Listen to his comments at 2:20 in the interview During a May 25 Republican Senate candidate primary debate on Colorado Public Television, Glenn rebuked a moderator who asked how he'd "work across party lines and try to find some consensus and some compromise" and "get something done" in a polarized Congress. "I think your question exemplifies what’s wrong with America and the frustration that's out there. You don't get it," Glenn replied. "The bottom line is it’s not about reaching across the aisle. The bottom line is...leadership. You need to actually have a leader to stand up there and represent the values of what's going on in this country." (Watch the exchange at 44:30 in this debate video.) We asked the Glenn campaign if he disputed the accuracy of the quotes cited by Bennet. They did not respond. Our ruling Bennet said that Republican Darryl Glenn has described Democrats as "evil" and has said he's "tired of hearing about Republicans reaching across the aisle." Glenn doesn't back away from his disdain for bipartisanship. He told a debate moderator who asked how he’d worked with Democrats to get something done in the Senate that "your question exemplifies what’s wrong with America." We rate the claim True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/b98c08e5-9243-4da4-8104-dda8b40b9f62 | null | Michael Bennet | null | null | null | 2016-09-19T16:41:14 | 2016-09-10 | ['Republican_Party_(United_States)', 'Democratic_Party_(United_States)'] |
snes-01840 | Mariah Carey recorded a cover of Dead Kennedys song "Nazi Punks Fuck Off," with proceeds going to support Antifa. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mariah-carey-dead-kennedys-antifa/ | null | Junk News | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Did Mariah Carey Cover a Dead Kennedys Song to Support Antifa? | 25 August 2017 | null | ['Anti-fascism', 'Dead_Kennedys', 'Mariah_Carey'] |
vees-00456 | The President’s “story”: | none | http://verafiles.org/articles/vera-files-fact-check-was-dutertes-chest-pain-check-just-sto | Cardinal Santos Medical Center's website lists Dr. Agnes del Rosario as among its cardiologists. She is the only del Rosario in the hospital’s list of cardiologists. Duterte had referred to his doctor as a “she.” | null | null | null | Duterte,fact-check,Fact check,health,andanar | VERA FILES FACT CHECK: Was Duterte’s chest pain checkup ‘just a story’? | February 10, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-14196 | Pennsylvania has lost 35 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001 and "Harrisburg has lost 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001." | mostly true | /pennsylvania/statements/2016/apr/22/donald-trump/donald-trump-and-number-manufacturing-jobs-pennsyl/ | Donald Trump focused a campaign rally in Harrisburg Thursday on bringing back manufacturing jobs to a state that’s lost more than many others in the past decade. The presidential frontrunner bolstered his point by telling thousands of supporters at the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex: "Pennsylvania has lost 35 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001" and later added that Harrisburg, the state capital, "has lost 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001." That seemed like a large percentage of jobs lost. So we decided to check the claim. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Pennsylvania lost nearly 300,000 manufacturing jobs since January 2001, decreasing from 856,200 to 564,900 in the span of 15 years. That correlates with a 34 percent decrease in jobs lost -- quite close to Trump’s 35 percent claim. However, the job loss in Harrisburg is off. The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the Harrisburg metropolitan area had 30,500 manufacturing jobs in January 2001 and now is home to 21,400. That’s a decrease of 30 percent, not 40 percent as Trump claimed Thursday. His campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment. Trump was right when he told supporters in Harrisburg that Pennsylvania has been among the hardest hit in the country by a loss in manufacturing jobs. The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank based in Washington, D.C., reported last year that eight states lost more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs since 1998 -- Pennsylvania came in seventh behind California, Ohio, North Carolina, New York, Michigan and Illinois. That job loss is significant for a state that, in 2013, employed 10 percent of its job force in the manufacturing sector and made 12 percent of its gross domestic product from the industry. Major hubs of manufacturing the state were, at one point, steel mills in western Pennsylvania, Bethlehem, and the shipyard in South Philadelphia. The size of those industries has largely decreased since their heyday. Kevin L. Kearns, president of the United States Business and Industry Council, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that represents mid-sized manufacturing companies, said manufacturing job loss since 2001 can be chalked up to globalization and the proliferation of the use of robotics in manufacturing. He said thousands of jobs were lost in the manufacturing sector to technology. But the companies his organization represented that shut down in the last decade didn’t do so because of technology -- they did it because other companies in their supply chain had outsourced to other countries. Kearns said the impact of manufacturing job loss has an impact on every corner of the Pennsylvania economy, as people who were once middle class are now either jobless or in other industries that may not pay as well, causing them to spend less in other ways. "In a generalized way, it means that people in Pennsylvania are earning less money," he said. "It has a massive footprint and a massive ripple effect." Our ruling In an attempt to show Pennsylvanians he would work to bring back jobs, Trump said "Pennsylvania has lost 35 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001" and "Harrisburg has lost 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001." The figure about the statewide manufacturing job loss checks out, but his claim about Harrisburg losing 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001 is off by about 10 percent. We rate the claim Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/839cc7a1-e2d7-42ab-99bd-6922ca16af39 | null | Donald Trump | null | null | null | 2016-04-22T12:21:38 | 2016-04-21 | ['Pennsylvania', 'Harrisburg,_Pennsylvania'] |
snes-04985 | A video shows a 10-year-old Amy Winehouse singing "What A Difference A Day Makes." | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/amy-winehouse-angelina-jordan/ | null | Viral Phenomena | null | Dan Evon | null | Video Shows Amy Winehouse Singing at Age 10? | 30 March 2016 | null | ['Amy_Winehouse'] |
tron-00866 | Turbo Clean PC Free Download Offer | virus! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/turbo-clean-pc-free-download-offer/ | null | computers | null | null | null | Turbo Clean PC Free Download Offer | Jan 26, 2016 | null | ['None'] |
abbc-00260 | Liberal MP Craig Kelly has claimed that poorly heated homes cause more deaths in Australia than in Sweden, despite our milder winters. | in-between | http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-09/fact-check-australia-sweden-winter-fatalities-heating/8780588 | Mr Kelly's claim is overstated. The evidence supports the claim that more Australians than Swedes die in cold temperatures, and these deaths relate to moderate – rather than extreme – cold. But while temperature is a factor, lifestyle and general health risks also play a role, making it hard to attribute winter deaths to moderate cold alone. Deaths peak every winter in Australia, with cardiovascular disease contributing significantly to the rise. And although winter increases the risks associated with circulatory diseases, this could be due to the cold or alternatively, to infections. Cold temperatures can raise blood pressure and increase cardiovascular strain, so people living in cold houses are at added risk. This would appear to support Mr Kelly's claim. But it is a stretch to say deaths are "simply" the result of inadequate heating. Our habits also play a part in keeping warm. Experts are split on the best way to address the effect of indoor cold on winter mortality. We could improve indoor temperatures through insulating or heating homes, or we could address the health problems exacerbated by the cold. | ['electricity-energy-and-utilities', 'health', 'heart-disease', 'liberals', 'australia', 'sweden'] | null | null | ['electricity-energy-and-utilities', 'health', 'heart-disease', 'liberals', 'australia', 'sweden'] | Fact check: Do more people die in Australia than Sweden due to poorly heated homes? | Mon 16 Jul 2018, 2:28am | null | ['Sweden', 'Australia'] |
thet-00026 | Fact check: Scottish Labour’s party political broadcast | none | https://theferret.scot/scottish-labour-party-political-broadcast/ | null | Fact check Politics | null | null | null | Fact check: Scottish Labour’s party political broadcast | February 16, 2018 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-10565 | I'm the only Republican who has gotten endorsements in this presidential race from major labor unions... | true | /truth-o-meter/statements/2008/feb/08/mike-huckabee/unions-gave-huck-their-gop-nod/ | It's not often that we hear a Republican presidential candidate crowing about support from unions. "I'm the only Republican who has gotten endorsements in this presidential race from major labor unions, the international painters union as well as the machinists and aerospace workers — first time in over 100 years from either union," Huckabee said in a TV interview the day after Super Tuesday. Huckabee is correct on a few points here. Unions don't usually endorse Republican candidates, and they support Democratic candidates with contributions by margins of roughly 9 to 1, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. But this year, two unions decided to endorse candidates in the primaries for both parties: The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades with 160,000 members, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers with 720,000 members. In the Democratic race, both unions endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton, and in the Republican race, both endorsed Mike Huckabee. We called both unions and they confirmed the "100 years" statement because it's the first time they've endorsed Republican candidates since they formed more than 100 years ago. James Williams, head of the International Painters, said the union decided to endorse Republicans this year as a way of reflecting the sentiments of their Republican members, who make up about 30 percent of the union. The painters mailed out a ballot to more than 160,000 members and asked them to vote in each race and Huckabee was the GOP choice. Add to that the fact that some members live in heavily Republican areas and are represented by Republican elected officials, he said. The endorsement is a way of reaching out beyond the unions' usual Democratic allies. "The reality is that we have to work across the aisle with both Democrats and Republicans," Williams said. "It hasn't been done in the last seven years. But hopefully whoever is elected next will realize we can't have this polarization." Huckabee may have won the endorsements because he actively campaigned for them. He was the only Republican to attend the national convention of the machinists' union in August 2007. He also speaks regularly on the need for fair trade agreements and the problems of working men and women. Critics and supporters alike have described him as an "economic populist." Not that Huckabee's union record is flawless: Unions have criticized him for crossing picket lines of the Writers Guild of America to appear on late-night television shows, among other things. We searched for major union endorsements of any other Republican candidates and were unable to find one. A spokesperson with the AFL-CIO said the Huckabee endorsements were the only ones they knew of. There are a lot of unusual things about Huckabee, a bass guitar-playing, Chuck Norris-approved preacher. Add Republican and union-endorsed to that list. We find his statement True. | null | Mike Huckabee | null | null | null | 2008-02-08T00:00:00 | 2008-02-06 | ['Republican_Party_(United_States)'] |
snes-03941 | An image depicts a Tiffany-made slave collar on display at the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C. | mostly false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tiffany-chokers-slave-collars/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Did Tiffany Chokers Originate as Slave Collars? | 27 September 2016 | null | ['Washington,_D.C.'] |
snes-00953 | Senator Marco Rubio said both that felons should not be allowed to vote and that they should be allowed to own guns. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/marco-rubio-said-felons-get-guns-back-not-voting-rights/ | null | Junk News | null | Dan Evon | null | Does Marco Rubio Want to Give Felons Right to Own Guns, But Not to Vote? | 27 February 2018 | null | ['Marco_Rubio'] |
hoer-00317 | Advance Fee Scammers Using Cloned FB Accounts To Gain Victims | facebook scams | https://www.hoax-slayer.com/cloned-fb-advance-fee-scam.shtml | null | null | null | Brett M. Christensen | null | Advance Fee Scammers Using Cloned FB Accounts To Gain Victims | July 3, 2013 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-11942 | Grandparents must pickup up all their grandchildren every weekend no matter what or they will be fined $5,000. | pants on fire! | /punditfact/statements/2017/oct/11/blog-posting/no-obama-did-not-mandate-grandparent-visits/ | A fake news article falsely claimed that former President Barack Obama signed a law requiring grandparents to pick up their grandchildren every weekend. The only sentence of the article says, ungrammatically, "Grandparents must pickup up all their grandchildren every weekend no matter what or they will be fined 5000$ or 35 days in jail pickup must start this Friday and if not parents must call the local police station.." This article as of Oct. 11 has 596,208 shares. This article was posted on the website www.react365.com. At the bottom of the website, in its "about" section, it has a disclaimer that says, "This website is an entertainment website, news are created by users. These are humourous news, fantasy, fictional, that should not be seriously taken or as a source of information." This website is identical to other fake news sites we have fact-checked, such as www.breakingnews365.net and www.breakingnews247.net. All these sites have identical home pages that allow users to create their own fake news articles, enticing users to come up with "catchy titles" that "make your friends curious." Even if you did not scroll to the bottom of the page to see the disclaimer, there are other ways to figure out that the article is false. If you are a grandparent and you are not picking up your grandkids every weekend, you have not been jailed or fined. That’s one way to tell. Another way to check is to go on the website GovTrack.us. They have compiled a database with all of the bills considered, voted on and enacted. Using this database, we searched all bills enacted during Obama’s administration related to grandparents. There was no law that mandated grandparents to pick up their grandchildren every weekend. The unknown author of this article made up the statement that said Obama signed a law that grandparents have to spend time with their grandchildren on the weekend, so we rate the statement as Pants on Fire! | null | Bloggers | null | null | null | 2017-10-11T16:09:59 | 2017-10-11 | ['None'] |
pomt-04110 | Says if you are on your bike in a crosswalk, all you have to do is dip your wheel into the road and cars must legally stop. | true | /oregon/statements/2013/jan/11/bikeportlandorg/must-cars-stop-if-cyclist-dips-wheel-crosswalk/ | During the 2011 legislative session, lawmakers were hard at work passing a law they said would make Oregon streets safer -- by changing crosswalk rules. Legislators decided to make it clear in Oregon law that a pedestrian was crossing the street -- and that cars should safely stop -- when any part of the pedestrian moved into a crosswalk with an intent to cross. That rule became law in summer 2011. Jonathan Maus, who runs the blog BikePortland.org, announced recently on Twitter that the new law applied to cyclists as well. After some research he concluded that, "If on your bike on sidewalk, all u have to do is dip wheel into road and cars must legally stop." Maus was specifically referring to crosswalks -- not just anywhere in the road. That becomes clear as you review his tweets and a blog post he wrote on the subject. "I was super confused," he said about the law when we called to ask about the tweets. "It's hard to tease out exactly ... especially on a bike. It's like a mutant vehicle." We wondered if that was an accurate reading of the relatively new law, so we called Sheila Lyons, the Oregon Department of Transportation’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Program manager. She pointed us toward ORS 811.028, the section affected by the new law. Specifically: "For the purposes of this section, a pedestrian is crossing the roadway in a crosswalk when any part or extension of the pedestrian, including but not limited to any part of the pedestrians [sic] body, wheelchair, cane, crutch or bicycle, moves onto the roadway in a crosswalk with the intent to proceed." Based on that, Maus seemed to be right, but we weren’t completely sold. We wondered whether it was legal for a bicyclist to ride a bike through a crosswalk. It seemed to us that they’d probably have to walk it. We asked Lyons about that, too. The answer was, it turned out, that cyclists can bike on sidewalks and in crosswalks. But there are caveats. Some urban cores prohibit cyclists from riding on sidewalks, so it’s important to note local rules. Perhaps more importantly, ORS 814.410says mounted cyclists are operating a bicycle unsafely on a sidewalk if they are moving "at a speed greater than an ordinary walk when approaching or entering a crosswalk." Basically, cyclists can ride in a crosswalk so long as they’re not moving faster than an ordinary walker. And yes, dipping a wheel into the crosswalk is enough for a person riding a bike to signal intent to cross. We called Ray Thomas, a Portland personal injury attorney who specializes in bike laws, to make sure we had this right. He said our reading of the laws was exactly as he understood them. He called the recent change "the Oregon pedestrian revolution" in that, legally speaking, pedestrians no longer need to enter the roadway completely to get a car to stop. Finally, we also talked to Oregon Sens. Jackie Dingfelder and Ginny Burdick, both of whom helped pass the crosswalk law. The Portland legislators confirmed that it was always their intent that the new law apply to slow-moving cyclists as well as pedestrians. Maus tweeted that the new law meant a cyclist could dip a tire into a crosswalk and cars would legally have to stop to permit crossing. We checked the laws ourselves, spoke with a lawyer and the legislators involved and found that Maus is correct. We rate this statement True. | null | BikePortland.org | null | null | null | 2013-01-11T14:49:08 | 2013-01-04 | ['None'] |
snes-04724 | A white teen girl claimed she was entitled to tribal benefits because she identifies as a Native American elder. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/white-teen-girl-identifies-as-indian-chief-demands-tribal-benefits/ | null | Junk News | null | Kim LaCapria | null | White Teen Girl Identifies as Indian Chief, Demands Tribal Benefits | 24 May 2016 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-05414 | Says the stimulus bill sent tax credits overseas, such as "$1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico." | pants on fire! | /truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/02/americans-prosperity/ad-says-stimulus-tax-credits-funded-solar-company-/ | A TV ad running in eight states blames President Barack Obama for sending stimulus money overseas while Americans are out of work. "Tell President Obama, American tax dollars should help American taxpayers," the narrator says. Instead, $2.3 billion in tax credits funded jobs in Mexico, Finland and China, the ad claims. We checked all three examples — and found the ad incorrectly describes them all. (We've also checked many other exaggerations about the stimulus.) Americans for Prosperity, a group dedicated to "educating citizens about economic policy" that works closely with tea party activists and has been funded by the conservative Koch family, released the ad April 26, 2012. Here’s the string of claims, starting with an image of the president signing a bill: Washington promised to create American jobs. We passed their stimulus. But that's not what happened. Fact: Billions of taxpayer dollars spent on green energy went to jobs in foreign countries. The Obama administration admitted the truth, that $2.3 billion of tax credits went overseas, while millions of Americans can't find a job. $1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico. Half a billion to an electric car company that created hundreds of jobs in Finland. And tens of millions of dollars to build traffic lights in China. Sounds like a scandal and an outrage. Is that what happened? For this fact-check, we’re focusing on whether "tax credits" that "went overseas" included "$1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico." (In other fact-checks, we found the Finland claim False, and the China claim Mostly False.) The ad listed two sources for its Mexico claim, the Energy Department and PV Magazine. We tracked those down, then chatted with the companies involved. Two programs, two projects We’ll start with what’s true: An American solar company, SunPower, was approved for federal stimulus money. It also opened a solar panel plant in Mexico. (Or, rather, it moved its Mexican manufacturing from Chihuahua to a building it’s leasing in Mexicali, said company spokeswoman Natalie Wymer.) That’s where the claim’s relationship to the truth ends. • The company didn’t get tax credits, but a $1.2 billion loan guarantee. What’s the difference? The Energy Department expects the loan to be paid back — with interest. • That loan guarantee wasn’t for the Mexico plant — a separate project with its own funding — but to build the California Valley Solar Ranch in San Luis Obispo, Calif. Construction on the California project has already started, with the Energy Department projecting 350 construction jobs and 15 permanent ones. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., the state’s largest utility, will ultimately buy the power. • Most of the solar panels for the California project will come from SunPower’s California manufacturing facility in Milpitas, though given the size of the project, they’ll also come from the company’s plants in Mexico and Asia, Wymer said. • SunPower no longer owns the California Valley Solar Ranch project. The solar project — and the loan guarantee — belong to New Jersey company NRG Energy. That’s the company that will get the federal loan money, and be responsible for repaying taxpayers. Our ruling A TV ad from Americans for Prosperity says billions of tax dollars spent on green energy went to jobs in foreign countries. It claims that stimulus bill tax credits went overseas, such as "$1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico." The ad even cites sources for its claim. But those same sources, plus a few phone calls, quickly bring down the ad’s house of cards. Sure, taxpayer money was originally approved for a California solar company that also happened to open a plant in Mexico. But that loan — not tax credits, as the ad claims — will go to a New Jersey company for a solar project in California, employing construction workers in the state, using mostly California-built solar panels, to create solar power that’ll be purchased by a California utility. That’s a completely different story. The ad strings together alarming-sounding tidbits about actual stimulus projects to create the impression of something else entirely — in a way that’s ultimately ridiculous. And that earns our lowest rating, Pants on Fire. | null | Americans for Prosperity | null | null | null | 2012-05-02T11:31:30 | 2012-04-26 | ['Mexico'] |
tron-02686 | Claims about 2015 Tax Rates | fiction! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/2015-tax-rates/ | null | money-financial | null | null | null | Claims about 2015 Tax Rates – Fiction! | Mar 17, 2015 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-11691 | Julia Roberts claims ‘Michelle Obama isn’t fit to clean Melania’s toilet’ | pants on fire! | /punditfact/statements/2017/dec/28/usa-daily-portal/fake-news-julia/ | A phony story on Facebook says American actress Julia Roberts insulted former first lady Michelle Obama after a visit to Roberts’ New York film production studio. "Julia Roberts claims ‘Michelle Obama isn’t fit to clean Melania’s toilet,’ " stated a Dec. 14 headline on USA Daily Portal, which linked to the full story on yet another website, brightstars.me. Facebook users flagged the post as being potentially fabricated, as part of the social network’s efforts to combat fake news. The story is the same as one on yournewswire.com and was previously debunked by Snopes. These articles are fake news and appear to be a riff on a USA Today editorial that criticized Trump after his tweet Dec. 12 calling U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand "a lightweight senator ... who would come to my office ‘begging’ for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them." Some interpreted Trump’s tweet as veiled language that Gillibrand would trade sexual favors for campaign cash, although White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders dismissed that characterization because she said he used similar language about men. USA Today’s editorial board reacted to Trump’s tweet: "A president who’d all but call a senator a whore is unfit to clean toilets in Obama’s presidential library or to shine George W. Bush’s shoes." The fake news story about Roberts and Michelle Obama mimicked the toilet cleaning theme. USA Daily Portal stated that after Obama left the set of Roberts’ film, Roberts commented about the differences between America’s most recent first ladies. The post accuses Roberts of saying Melania Trump has been "looked down upon and disrespected by sneering liberals across the country" while "doing a brilliant job," and Michelle Obama "isn’t fit to clean to clean her toilet." The statements followed a fictitious pattern, with more made-up quotes from Roberts attacking singer Celine Dion for criticizing Trump. We found no evidence Roberts made any of those statements about the Obamas, Melania Trump or Celine Dion. In fact, Roberts has supported national Democrats in recent years including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In October 2016, Roberts was one of several Hollywood and Broadway stars to team up to hold a fundraiser for Clinton at the St. James Theatre in New York. Wearing a "Hill Yeah" t-shirt, Roberts read from the play Red Hot Patriot: The Kick-Ass Wit of Molly Ivins. Roberts also appeared at Democratic fundraisers hosted by Obama, including a Santa Monica fundraiser on in April 2016 and one at Gwyneth Paltrow’s home in 2014. We were unable to find contact information for the USA Daily Portal website. We sent an email to the Your News Wire website that previously posted the article and did not get a reply. A fake news story stated that Roberts claimed "‘Michelle Obama isn’t fit to clean Melania’s toilet." We rate this headline Pants on Fire. See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com Correction: An earlier version of this fact-check stated that Roberts read one of Molly Ivins’ columns. Allison Engel, co-author of the play Red Hot Patriot: The Kick-Ass Wit of Molly Ivins, contacted PolitiFact after our fact-check published to tell us that the excerpt that Roberts read was from the play. Engel said she supplied the text to the producer of the fundraiser. | null | USA Daily Portal | null | null | null | 2017-12-28T09:40:09 | 2017-12-14 | ['Julia_Roberts', 'Michelle_Obama'] |
snes-05719 | A species of cephalopod known as the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus, that can live on both land and water, is endangered. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tree-octopus/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Snopes Staff | null | Is the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus Endangered? | 16 October 2014 | null | ['None'] |
pose-00975 | The McDonnell/Bolling administration will increase the state average for spending in the classroom by 4 percent over the course of their administration. | in the works | https://www.politifact.com/virginia/promises/bob-o-meter/promise/1010/increase-classroom-share-of-education-spending/ | null | bob-o-meter | Bob McDonnell | null | null | Increase classroom share of education spending | 2011-09-09T12:56:22 | null | ['None'] |
snes-01106 | A woman posing as a "sex robot" became pregnant and filed a child support claim against her unsuspecting customer. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/robot-child-support/ | null | Junk News | null | David Mikkelson | null | Did a Woman Pretending to Be a Sex Robot File for Child Support? | 29 January 2018 | null | ['None'] |
chct-00263 | FACT CHECK: Do Federal Charges In The Kate Steinle Case Count As Double Jeopardy? | verdict: false | http://checkyourfact.com/2017/12/05/fact-check-do-federal-charges-in-the-kate-steinle-case-count-as-double-jeopardy/ | null | null | null | Emily Larsen | Fact Check Reporter | null | null | 9:26 AM 12/05/2017 | null | ['None'] |
snes-05507 | Atheists are trying to ban Bibles from all hotel rooms. | mixture | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/angry-atheists-ban-bible/ | null | Politics | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Angry Atheists Ban the Bible? | 10 December 2015 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-14832 | The federal government is "making the decision, whether we like it or not, to send 425 refugees to our state" from Syria. | half-true | /florida/statements/2015/nov/20/rick-scott/do-federal-officials-plan-send-425-syrian-refugees/ | Florida Gov. Rick Scott has joined dozens of governors who say they don’t want to take Syrian refugees following the terrorist attacks in Paris. He criticized the federal government’s plans to take 10,000 Syrian refugees during an interview with Fox News’ Stuart Varney on Nov. 17. "This is something that they are making the decision, whether we like it or not, to send 425 refugees to our state without giving us any information." Is Scott right that the feds have decided to send 425 Syrian refugees to Florida with no input from the state? We decided to check it out. Do the feds decide on the number of refugees for Florida? Americans have zeroed in on Syrian refugees following the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, because a supposed Syrian passport was found near the body of one of the terrorists.We should note that is not confirmed; the passport may have been fake, and investigations are underway. The six Paris attackers identified so far were French and Belgian nationals. For the most recent year ending in September, Florida took in 48,816 refugees, with the largest group from Cuba. That number included 104 people from Syria, which has been in a civil war since 2011. Most of the Syrians settled in Duval, Hillsborough, Miami-Dade and Pinellas counties. (We explained the process of extensive background checks in our PolitiFact Sheet.) President Barack Obama announced in September that the federal government would accept an additional 10,000 refugees from Syria for the next year, for a total of 85,000 refugees from all countries. So who decides how many come to Florida? Scott said that the federal government made the decision to send 425. While the federal government is in charge of resettlement, the actual number comes from agencies within local communities in Florida. (Politico also noted this in a report on Scott's comments.) At the beginning of each federal fiscal year, the State Department works with nine national volunteer agencies to allocate the number of refugees per agency. They take into account factors such as whether the refugees have family members in certain states, their employment and educational backgrounds, and if they have any health concerns, according to Mark Hetfield, the president and CEO of HIAS, formerly known as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society. In Florida, there are 25 local affiliates that are a part of those national groups. The local affiliates in Miami, Tampa, Clearwater and other cities inform the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF) and the U.S. State Department how many refugees from across the globe the affiliates can handle for the fiscal year. For the current year, the total added up to 3,942, according to DCF. And that’s the number that the federal government signed off on for Florida. Recently, the government asked states if they could accept more refugees. On Nov. 9, Lawrence Bartlett, a State Department official, wrote a letter to DCF noting that Obama increased the maximum number of Syrian refugees and would ask the nonprofit groups how many additional refugees they could take. Local affiliates told state and federal officials they could take an additional 425 refugees. Technically, those 425 aren’t all guaranteed to be Syrians, according to DCF, but the Syrian crisis is what prompted the request. So far, federal officials haven’t approved any particular number for Florida. "We don’t know how many Syrians will be resettled into any one state or city at this point," Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman, told PolitiFact Florida. "Regarding the local agencies' letter saying they can take an additional 425 refugees, it is likely that we can expect there will be a similar letter approving that number as well. Those 425 refugees will come from all over the world." That means that officially, the federal government hasn’t decided yet to send 425 refugees to Florida, but it appears possible that that will end up being the number -- although they may not all be Syrians. When we asked Scott’s office about his media appearances quoting the 425 figures, it pointed us to more cautious wording that Scott used in a Nov. 16 letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell asking them to cut off funding for the resettlement: "Please be aware that several organizations have requested that our state Department of Children and Families support the relocation of possible 425 Syrian refugees to Florida, as they receive federal funding to house those refugees in our state." Scott spokeswoman Jackie Schutz told PolitiFact Florida that "in his letter he was very clear to say ‘possible 425.’ ... The governor is very concerned -- it could be 425. All we know is it is possibly 425." Scott has a point when he says the refugees get sent to the states "whether we like it or not." The Refugee Act of 1980 says the federal government is expected "to the maximum extent possible" to take states’ concerns into account, but there are no legal consequences if federal officials ignore governors such as Scott. State officials don’t have veto power, because the federal government has the sole authority over immigration decisions, including refugees. Our ruling Rick Scott says the federal government is "making the decision, whether we like it or not, to send 425 refugees to our state" from Syria. Scott’s statement makes it sound like federal officials came up with a number of refugees and dictated that Florida must take them in. That’s misleading, because the number came from local resettlement agencies, which reported to the federal government how many additional refugees they could handle within the next year. Those refugees might or might not all be Syrians, though it seems likely they would be. Scott has a point that the power to resettle refugees lies with the federal government, and he can’t halt the refugees from coming to Florida. We rate this statement Half True. | null | Rick Scott | null | null | null | 2015-11-20T14:24:06 | 2015-11-17 | ['Syria'] |
tron-03477 | Planet X or Planet 9 Threatens to Destroy Earth | fiction! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/planet-x-planet-9-threatens-destroy-earth/ | null | space-aviation | null | null | null | Planet X or Planet 9 Threatens to Destroy Earth | Apr 11, 2016 | null | ['None'] |
snes-04387 | A woman who grabbed a baseball away from a child at an Astros game was identified as child psychologist Grennele Brashkowitz. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/baseball-stealing-woman-identified/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | Was the Identity of a Baseball-Stealing Woman Revealed? | 24 July 2016 | null | ['None'] |
pose-00085 | As president, Barack Obama will renew America's leadership by making the United States a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; the first human rights treaty approved by the UN in the 21st century and a vital foundation for respecting the rights of people with disabilities worldwide He will urge the U.S. Senate to ratify the Convention expeditiously. | promise broken | https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/88/sign-the-un-convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-wi/ | null | obameter | Barack Obama | null | null | Sign the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities | 2010-01-07T13:26:47 | null | ['United_States', 'Barack_Obama', 'United_Nations'] |
pomt-04759 | Says Paul Ryan "tried to change the whole game" for Social Security | half-true | /florida/statements/2012/aug/28/barack-obama/radio-ad-barack-obama-says-paul-ryan-tried-change-/ | A radio ad from the Barack Obama campaign attacks vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan by bringing up Ryan’s record of attempting to reform entitlement programs. In the ad, a man and a woman are heard talking about how the GOP candidates would replace Medicare with a voucher program and increase healthcare costs. But it also implicates past ideas Ryan has proposed to reform Social Security. "Now Mitt Romney picks a vice presidential candidate like Paul Ryan, who tried to change the whole game when it comes to Medicare and Social Security," the woman in the ad says. We’ve checked many claims on Republican plans for Medicare, but what’s Ryan’s record on Social Security reform? Did he really try to change the whole game? Ryan’s first attempts at Social Security legislation Five years after being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, Ryan proposed the Social Security Personal Savings Guarantee and Prosperity Act of 2004. It was the first of essentially three different plans Ryan has advanced in the last eight years. Ryan’s plan was a response to projected shortfalls in the Social Security program. In 2033 or so, payouts would drop to about 75 percent of current benefits if nothing if changed. (Interestingly, Ryan is himself has received Social Security: He received two years of survivor’s benefits after his father’s death when Ryan was 16.) His plan suggested revamping the Social Security Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance program by allowing workers younger than 55 to divert some of their contributions from Social Security to voluntary personal savings accounts. The money in the accounts would be invested, overseen by the government, instead of paying for current retiree benefits. The plan allowed workers to invest about half of their payroll taxes in their personal accounts, based on a progressive formula. At retirement, the account would convert into an annuity that paid benefits at least equal to Social Security, and potentially more, depending on how the investments performed. Workers who never invested in a personal savings account would be provided current-level benefits, but the proposal assumed everyone would switch, since the personal accounts would give the same benefits with no risk of a reduction in payouts. The selling point of this plan was that current benefits could be maintained through 2077 without raising taxes. But the plan required more than $2 trillion for the first 10 years of transitional funding. With people moving contributions out of the traditional Social Security program, shortfalls in traditional Social Security payouts would have to be made up by borrowing from general revenue, which is collected through income taxes. The government would also have to make up for ups and downs in the stock market, which could affect how much the investment accounts were able to pay. This plan died in committee in 2004. Ryan reintroduced it in 2005, but it failed to move forward again. That same year, President George W. Bush introduced a similar plan that used personal savings accounts, but the Bush proposal also proved largely unpopular both with the public and on Capitol Hill. Ryan became ranking member of the House Budget Committee in 2007, and tried again the next year. The new plan made a number of changes to lower the costs to the government, raising retirement ages and cutting benefits for middle- and high-income workers, but protecting payments to low-wage workers. It also made employer contributions to health insurance policies taxable as a source of revenue for the program. The 2008 plan, known as the Roadmap to America’s Future, also recommended switching Medicare to a premium support plan, giving states control of Medicaid and scaling back the amount of payroll taxes that could be invested in the accounts from one-half to one-third. It met the same fate as its predecessors, and died in committee, as it did after being reintroduced in 2010. Ryan’s plans with a Republican majority Ryan became chairman of the House Budget Committee in 2011. His current Path to Prosperity budget resolution, which was introduced in 2011 and again in 2012, jettisons all mention of potential privatization, choosing instead to focus on overhauling Medicare and cutting taxes and expenditures. He has said subsequently this was to minimize political grandstanding on the part of Democrats. "If we put a Social Security plan out there it’d be too tempting for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to demagogue it just like they’re doing on Medicare, running all these ‘Mediscare’ campaigns," Ryan said at a discussion during the Peter G. Peterson Foundation 2011 fiscal summit. "We figured they would do that on Social Security and make it harder to get a Social Security agreement." The resolution suggests only that "in the event that the Social Security program is not sustainable, the President, in conjunction with the Board of Trustees, must submit a plan for restoring balance to the fund." This would also require the U.S. House and Senate to provide ideas for potential solutions, as well. The House passed the non-binding budget resolution for fiscal year 2012, but it was voted down in the Democrat-controlled Senate. The current fiscal year 2013 plan, which aims to further reduce the deficit and take down Obamacare, also passed the House but not the Senate, and now serves as one of the flashpoints of the presidential campaign. The Romney-Ryan plan for Social Security So now that he’s a vice presidential candidate, what would a potential Romney-Ryan administration do about Social Security? Romney has previously endorsed the Path to Prosperity, but when PolitiFact asked Romney spokesman Ryan Williams about the candidate’s plan for Social Security, he directed us to Romney’s website, which contained two points: "First, for future generations of seniors, Mitt believes that the retirement age should be slowly increased to account for increases in longevity. "Second, for future generations of seniors, Mitt believes that benefits should continue to grow but that the growth rate should be lower for those with higher incomes." The site also noted it plans "no change in benefits for those at or near retirement." Romney mentions private savings accounts in his 2010 book, No Apology: The Case For American Greatness, but notes the Great Recession likely has shelved that idea for now. "Given the volatility of investment values that we have just experienced, I would prefer that individual accounts were added to Social Security, not diverted from it, and that they were voluntary," he wrote. The add-on accounts Romney mentions are a key difference from Ryan’s plan. Romney wrote he wanted the accounts to be in addition to current benefits, while Ryan has stated he wanted the accounts, which were always slated to be voluntary, to replace drawing benefits from the current Social Security Trust Fund. Now, neither Republican candidate seems to be addressing them in the campaign at all. The ruling So are the Democrats correct that Paul Ryan tried to "change the whole game" of Social Security? It depends on how you’re scoring. He did indeed propose a sweeping change to Social Security in 2004 and several times since. But we find it’s not quite true that he "changed the whole game." Even at its most ambitious, his plan did not affect people who were older than 55 and, for younger workers, the plans were voluntary and allowed workers to stay within the traditional Social Security system. At no time has he proposed ending Social Security altogether, but that’s not exactly what the radio ad is alleging. His most recent plan is limited to a demand that the White House and Congress fix it at some unspecified point in the future. We rate this statement Half True. | null | Barack Obama | null | null | null | 2012-08-28T18:50:59 | 2012-08-20 | ['None'] |
tron-02284 | “John Is My Heart” Essay Written By Frank Schaeffer for the Washington Post | correct attribution! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/john-heart-essay-by-frank-schaeffer/ | null | military | null | null | ['iraq', 'patriotism', 'troops'] | “John Is My Heart” Essay Written By Frank Schaeffer for the Washington Post | Apr 25, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
snes-00033 | A photograph captures Donald Trump hanging out with musician Tupac Shakur. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-tupac-photo/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | Is This a Photograph of Donald Trump with Tupac Shakur? | 1 October 2018 | null | ['Tupac_Shakur', 'Donald_Trump'] |
goop-01843 | Kim Kardashian Ringing In 2018 With “Happy New Rear”? | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/kim-kardashian-ringing-in-happy-new-rear-2018/ | null | null | null | Gossip Cop Staff | null | Kim Kardashian Ringing In 2018 With “Happy New Rear”? | 7:00 pm, January 12, 2018 | null | ['None'] |
tron-01656 | Trey Gowdy’s Tough Questions for the Media | truth! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/trey-gowdy-conference/ | null | government | null | null | null | Trey Gowdy’s Tough Questions for the Media | Mar 17, 2015 | null | ['None'] |
wast-00012 | The Iran deal was a windfall for Iran's leaders. In the years since the deal was reached, Iran's military budget grew nearly 40 percent. | false | ERROR: type should be string, got " https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/26/fact-checking-president-trumps-speech-un-general-assembly/" | null | null | Donald Trump | Glenn Kessler | null | Fact-checking President Trump's speech to the U.N. General Assembly | September 26 | null | ['Iran'] |
snes-00592 | Fisher-Price manufactured a "Tiny Toker" toyset featuring a toy bong and other marijuana paraphernalia. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-fisher-price-release-tiny-toker/ | null | Fauxtography | null | Dan Evon | null | Did Fisher-Price Release a ‘Tiny Toker’ Toy? | 15 May 2018 | null | ['None'] |
goop-02716 | George Clooney Retiring After Birth Of Twins, | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/george-clooney-not-retiring-acting-twins-fake-news/ | null | null | null | Michael Lewittes | null | George Clooney NOT Retiring After Birth Of Twins, Despite Report | 10:30 am, June 25, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-06797 | The weight of the evidence (on global warming) is that most of it, maybe all of it, is because of natural causes ... it’s fair to say the science is in dispute. | false | /truth-o-meter/statements/2011/aug/14/tim-pawlenty/do-scientists-disagree-about-global-warming/ | Climate change has become a touchy subject in the Republican primary. Though some candidates once supported plans to reduce carbon emissions, such strategies have fallen out of favor with Republicans in recent years. Even acknowledging that human beings are causing climate change can be politically problematic for some Republicans. Our colleagues at the Miami Herald asked Republican presidential candidate and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty about his views on climate change in an interview on Aug. 3, 2011. His response piqued our interest: "Well, there’s definitely climate change. The more interesting question is how much is a result of natural causes and how much, if any, is attributable to human behavior. And that’s what the scientific dispute is about," said Pawlenty. "It’s something we have to look to the science on. The weight of the evidence is that most of it, maybe all of it, is because of natural causes... There’s lots of layers to it. But at least as to any potential man-made contribution to it, it’s fair to say the science is in dispute." We divided Pawlenty’s answer into his two essential claims: • Evidence points toward climate change being primarily a natural, rather than man-made, phenomenon. • The science about the causes of global climate change is in dispute. To check the first claim, we turned to the most recent report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a scientific body considered the leading international organization on climate science. "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations," the 2007 report states. "The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that it is not due to known natural causes alone." (External forcing refers to anything that changes the climate that is outside of the normal climate system.) In the United States, the U.S. Global Change Research Program coordinates and integrates federal research on climate. Its 2009 report mirrored the IPCC’s conclusions: "Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities." The IPCC report states that the period from 1995 to 2006 contains 11 of the 12 warmest years on record since instrumental measurement began in 1850. It concluded that global surface temperature rose 0.76 degrees Celsius from the end of the 19th century (1850-1899) to the beginning of the 21st (2001-2005). The U.S. Global Change Research Program’s report similarly found that the average global temperature increase by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1900. While these temperature changes may sound small, keep in mind that these are averages. The rise in temperature, and its visible effects, are more pronounced in certain parts of the world than in others. The polar ice sheets are particularly vulnerable to temperature increases. Greenland lost 36 to 60 cubic miles of ice from 2002 to 2006 while Antarctica lost 36 cubic miles of ice during roughly the same time period. Brian Soden, a professor of meteorology and physical oceanography at the University of Miami, was one of the many scientific contributors to the 2007 IPCC report. "The rise in global mean temperature since the 19th century may seem small, and projections of global mean warming over the next century range from 2 to 5 degrees Celsius," Soden said. "One way to put these numbers into perspective is to realize that the current climate is now only about 5 degrees Celsius warmer than it was during the last ‘glacial maximum’ (approximately 20,000 years ago) when ice covered much of North America extending all the way down to St Louis." If you’ve been following the debate recently, you may remember that climate research on temperature was called into question in 2009 when stolen e-mails from the Climatic Research United at the University of East Anglia were released on the Internet. Global warming skeptics said the e-mails showed climate researchers were manipulating data. But several inquiries debunked those allegations, including those conducted by the British Parliament, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Pennsylvania State University, and the InterAcademy Council. The inquiries found that while the scientists had made rude remarks about people who questioned climate change, they were not falsifying data. A few reports recommended greater transparency and sharing of climatic data, but the independent investigations exonerated the researchers of falsifying data. We looked into the work of the most prominent and best credentialed people who have questioned the IPCC’s conclusions on global warming. Generally speaking, even these scientists do not claim that humans are making no contribution at all to rising temperatures. Rather, they tend to make more nuanced points. They question whether carbon emissions alone are driving up temperatures, or whether other human activities contribute as well. They question whether extreme weather events such as storms or floods can be conclusively linked to rising temperatures. And, they question whether significant changes to public policy are necessary as a means of coping with rising temperatures. For Pawlenty’s second claim -- that there is dispute about the causes of climate change -- we decided to look at the opinions of world scientists about the issue. Several studies have attempted to quantify how much agreement there is among scientists when it comes to climate change. A 2010 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - the official publication of the United States National Academy of Sciences - found that out of 1,372 climate researchers surveyed, approximately 97 to 98 percent of those actively publishing in the field said they believe human beings are causing the climate change, which they term anthropogenic (i.e., man-made) climate change. It also concluded that "the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence" of the researchers unconvinced of man-made climate change are "substantially below that of the convinced researchers." An earlier survey published in the 2009 issue of Eos -- a publication of the American Geophysical Union -- surveyed scientists from a wide range of disciplines (approximately 3,146) and asked: "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" Approximately 82 percent of the surveyed scientists answered yes to this question. Of those climate change specialists surveyed, 97.4 percent answered yes to this question. Climate change skeptics have their own petition, commonly called the Oregon petition, that has been endorsed by 31,000 signers opposing restrictions on carbon emissions. But that petition has been criticized for not checking the credentials of its signatories or proving that the signatories exist. To be clear, we’re not saying that no scientists dispute man-made climate change. When we contacted the Pawlenty campaign, they pointed us to several published pieces, such as writings by John R. Christy, who was counted as a dissenting researcher as part of the 2010 study from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. But these skeptics seem to be a small -- even tiny -- minority, in contrast to Pawlenty’s comments suggesting significant disagreement. Many of the skeptics agree that climate change is occurring and that human activities play a part. But they disagree with some of the conclusions formulated in mainstream climate science. To summarize: Based on our research, there is very little dispute in the scientific community, especially among climate specialists, on whether climate change is primarily caused by natural or man-made forces. The overwhelming majority of scientists polled feel that human activity is the primary driver of climate change. Also, based on scientific studies by the IPCC and others, global warming over the past 50 years has been primarily driven by human activity. Based upon the preponderance of evidence we conclude that Tim Pawlenty’s claims are both incorrect and misleading to the public, who may not be familiar with the science behind climate change. It is not "fair to say the science is in dispute," as if there are good arguments on both sides. Rather, there is significant scientific consensus that human beings are contributing to global warming. We rate his statement False. Editor's Note: Pawlenty announced he was dropping out of the presidential race on Aug. 14. Also, this report was changed to reflect a more expansive definition of external forcing. | null | Tim Pawlenty | null | null | null | 2011-08-14T09:34:58 | 2011-08-11 | ['None'] |
snes-00620 | In May 2018, the Colorado House of Representatives passed a "gun confiscation" bill. | mixture | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/colorado-gun-confiscation/ | null | Politics | null | Dan MacGuill | null | Did Colorado Democrats Pass a ‘Gun Confiscation’ Bill? | 9 May 2018 | null | ['Colorado_House_of_Representatives'] |
pomt-03919 | New Jersey has lost over half of our pharmaceutical jobs to states you know, not low-tax states like in the South, but high-tax states like New York. | mostly true | /new-jersey/statements/2013/feb/24/barbara-buono/barbara-buono-claims-new-jersey-has-lost-half-its-/ | New Jersey’s pharmaceutical industry is suffering from some aches and pains. Thousands of industry jobs have disappeared from the Garden State, according to state Sen. Barbara Buono, who discussed the issue during her Jan. 28 appearance on NJTV’s NJToday. "New Jersey has lost over half of our pharmaceutical jobs to states you know, not low-tax states like in the South, but high-tax states like New York," said Buono (D-Middlesex), who also is running for governor. Buono’s claim is largely correct. Let’s look at what’s going on here before addressing where any jobs have gone. Buono spokesman David Turner said Buono’s statement refers to New Jersey’s percentage of pharma jobs nationwide lost since 1990. Accordingly, we reviewed U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data to compare state and national numbers from December 1990 to December 2012. New Jersey had 42,300 pharma jobs in December 1990. The nation had 210,400. So New Jersey’s share was 20.1 percent. In December 2012 New Jersey had 28,100 pharma jobs, compared with 275,100 nationally. That means the state’s share was 10.2 percent. So Buono is close to her claim that New Jersey lost "more than half" its pharma jobs. Next, let’s review where the lost New Jersey pharma jobs are going. James W. Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, said New Jersey has lost life sceinces jobs largely because the industry has a new business model for a new type of research and drug development. "Pharma is putting its cutting edge facilities near university centers of excellence in the life sciences, such as Cambridge, Bay Area, San Diego, etc.," Hughes said in an e-mail. "They want to be in interactive environments, not in insulated suburban facilities. This is the new business model for bio-based drug development. NJ specialized in chemical based drug development. The environments that pharma now wants are all high tax and high cost environments. They are willing to pay any price to be near centers of research excellence, leading scientists, and the leading hospitals for clinical trials." Dean J. Paranicas, president and CEO of the HealthCare Institute of New Jersey, a trade association that represents the life sciences industry, said infrastructure, government support and high-tech capabilities at higher education institutions also are factors. "New Jersey is in competition with every state regardless of its tax structure because the life sciences industry is a highly coveted one," Paranicas said. Mergers among major pharma companies are another reason for the smaller workforce in life sciences. Within the past few years, Manhattan-based Pfizer bought Madison-based Wyeth; Merck merged with Schering-Plough and cut 15 percent of its workforce; and Roche has moved some jobs to both California and New York City. A 2011 report from the state Labor Department points out that the recession, cost-cutting measures and expiration of patents also factored into industry job losses. "Senator Buono attributes this trend to many factors including the Governor’s unwillingness to fully fund our education system and lack of leadership in creating research partnerships similar to other states," Turner said in an e-mail. "Pharmaceutical companies are moving to states with equally high taxes but provide more funding for research and development. In places such as California, Massachusetts, and New York, companies are clearly attracted to the concentration of well-regarded universities that have forged partnerships with private industry." Hughes and Paranicas said the merger of Rutgers, Rowan and the University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey is important for the industry’s needs in high-tech research. Our ruling Buono said during a recent appearance on NJToday that "New Jersey has lost over half of our pharmaceutical jobs to states you know, not low-tax states like in the South, but high-tax states like New York." She’s correct that New Jersey has lost pharma jobs, but it’s not the "more than half" that she claimed. Jobs have been lost for a variety of reasons, from the industry’s new business model to wanting to be near universities and hospitals of excellence, and more. We rate this claim Mostly True. To comment on this story, go to NJ.com. | null | Barbara Buono | null | null | null | 2013-02-24T07:30:00 | 2013-01-28 | ['New_York_City', 'New_Jersey'] |
hoer-00477 | Man Found With 30 Cow Eyeballs in Anus | statirical reports | https://www.hoax-slayer.com/man-found-30-cow-eyeballs-anus-fake-news.shtml | null | null | null | Brett M. Christensen | null | Fake-News Report Claims Man Found With 30 Cow Eyeballs in Anus | July 27, 2015 | null | ['None'] |
goop-00971 | Kim Kardashian Leaving Kanye West, “Escape Plan” In Place? | 1 | https://www.gossipcop.com/kim-kardashian-leaving-kanye-west-escape-exit-plan-divorce/ | null | null | null | Shari Weiss | null | Kim Kardashian Leaving Kanye West, “Escape Plan” In Place? | 3:59 pm, May 19, 2018 | null | ['None'] |
snes-05104 | Police in Collin County, Texas have quietly warned of serial kidnappings at local Target and Walmart locations. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/collin-county-serial-kidnapping/ | null | Crime | null | Kim LaCapria | null | Collin County Serial Kidnapping Warning | 8 March 2016 | null | ['Texas', 'Collin_County,_Texas', 'Walmart', 'Target_Corporation'] |
snes-01685 | A July 1990 comic strip in Heavy Metal magazine featured a controversial wall in New York City, built by Donald Trump, and a populist "rise to power" by the future president. | true | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-wall-comic-strip/ | null | Politics | null | Dan MacGuill | null | Did a 1990 Comic Depict Trump Coming to Power and Building a Wall? | 22 September 2017 | null | ['New_York_City', 'Donald_Trump'] |
pomt-05224 | Says PolitiFact "listed Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin as the Governor who told the most lies" and "our own ‘untruthful’ Governor Chris Christie made it into Politifact's top five of ‘Lie - en Governors’." | false | /new-jersey/statements/2012/jun/07/loretta-weinberg/loretta-weinberg-claims-politifact-listed-chris-ch/ | Politicians take heed: when attacking your rivals for not telling the truth, make certain you have your facts straight. Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) wrote a post on the liberal blog Blue Jersey on Monday criticizing Christie and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, both Republicans, for their lack of truthfulness. But in the process, she distorted some facts of her own. "Politifact listed Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin as the Governor who told the most lies," Weinberg wrote. "Well not to be [outdone], our own ‘untruthful’ Governor Chris Christie made it into Politifact's top five of ‘Lie - en Governors.’ We’re so proud Mr. Christie. You should really put that accolade right under your ‘Jersey Comeback’ banner." This claim surprised us: PolitiFact New Jersey never compiled such a list -- and neither did any of our fact-checking colleagues. So what is Weinberg talking about? The state senator’s statement was based on a list posted on the liberal blog Uppity Wisconsin. The list ranked governors fact-checked at least five times by PolitiFact by the percentage of True and Mostly True ratings they received. Walker had the lowest combined percentage of those two rulings, according to the June 1 blog post. The post concluded that "Walker is the #1 most dishonest governor in America." Christie took fourth place among the "top five most dishonest governors in America" with 38 percent of his PolitiFact rulings earning True or Mostly True. The blog’s tally of percentages of True and Mostly True rulings for governors in its top five list was mostly accurate at the time, but there’s several problems with the conclusions made from that data. PolitiFact Editor Bill Adair called suggestions that a governor is "in the top five" for falsehoods "inaccurate -- and meaningless." Overall, PolitiFact has checked 22 sitting governors. Only 10 of those governors have faced the Truth-O-Meter at least five times. In a pool of 10, it’s not difficult to land a spot in the top five. "It's fine if people want to use our report cards to compare the records of people we fact-check. But it's important to be accurate about what those report cards say and what they don't," Adair said. "The report cards provide a tally of the claims we chose to check. But it's not accurate to say the report cards indicate who ‘told the most lies.’ We are journalists who choose our fact-checks based on what is newsworthy. We are not social scientists and are not using any kind of random sample to select statements to check." Jason Butkowski, a spokesman for the New Jersey Senate Democrats, acknowledged Weinberg erred in citing PolitiFact as the source of the ranking, but, he said in an e-mail, "that does not take away from the larger issue – that Governor Christie, who prides himself on his straight-talking Jersey guy demeanor, only scored truthful or mostly truthful an abysmal 38% of the time in the 37 statements analyzed by PolitiFact." Obviously, PolitiFact doesn’t track every statement, nor do they track every Governor on an even playing field, so issuing any kind of quantitative ranking of public officials based on PolitiFact’s information doesn’t work. However, the people of New Jersey can, and should, expect more from Governor Christie when it comes to leveling with them on the big issues that matter most to our State." Our ruling Weinberg claimed PolitiFact listed Walker as the governor "who told the most lies" and Christie made it into PolitiFact’s "top five of ‘Lie - en Governors’." Weinberg is wrong on both counts. PolitiFact never ranked governors by their falsehoods. Though PolitiFact breaks down ratings by percentages, those figures represent how an individual’s statements have fared on the Truth-O-Meter. They do not show who "told the most lies." We rate Weinberg’s claim False. To comment on this ruling, go to NJ.com. | null | Loretta Weinberg | null | null | null | 2012-06-07T07:30:00 | 2012-06-04 | ['Chris_Christie', 'Wisconsin'] |
goop-02379 | Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez Getting Plastic Surgery Together? | 0 | https://www.gossipcop.com/jennifer-lopez-plastic-surgery-alex-rodriguez/ | null | null | null | Shari Weiss | null | Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez Getting Plastic Surgery Together? | 3:13 pm, October 5, 2017 | null | ['Jennifer_Lopez'] |
snes-00492 | Pope Francis was part of a group condemned in an international court of killing and trafficking children. | false | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-pope-guilty-trafficking-murder/ | null | Junk News | null | Arturo Garcia | null | Was Pope Francis ‘Found Guilty’ of Child Trafficking and Murder? | 8 June 2018 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-08537 | The federal government can tell General Motors what to charge for its automobiles. | false | /georgia/statements/2010/oct/04/phil-gingrey/gingrey-says-gm-deal-sign-federal-overreach/ | Congressman Phil Gingrey was recently on CNN arguing in favor of repealing the federal health care legislation passed earlier this year when he steered the conversation to another area of what he considered government overreach. The Marietta Republican used the federal government's bailout of General Motors as an example of Uncle Sam being too involved in the private sector. "We're concerned with a powerful government who is telling General Motors now, maybe, what they can charge for their automobiles," said Gingrey, a physician. "Indeed, if the government owns 61 percent, they can do that." Does the federal government have that type of influence? "It's false," GM spokesman Greg Martin said. So who's right here? Let's begin with some background about the federal government's role in the automaker's management. In December 2008, during the final days of the presidency of George W. Bush, the government approved a $17.4 billion loan to GM and Chrysler to keep the companies running. GM received $13.4 billion, but a few months later, the company said it needed more money. GM produced a survival plan that included cutting 47,000 jobs worldwide and closing five U.S. factories. In June 2009, President Barack Obama approved a bankruptcy deal that gave GM $30 billion. In exchange, the government took a 60 percent controlling stake in the company. As of late September, GM had repaid $6.7 billion. The remaining money was converted to a 61 percent ownership stake in GM plus $2.1 billion worth of preferred stock, The Associated Press reported. AJC PolitiFact Georgia looked at several contracts between the federal government and GM, and we didn't see any specific language that suggested Uncle Sam would have any influence over pricing. We spoke with Gingrey's office and discussed our review of the contracts. The congressman's spokeswoman, Meredith Griffanti, said the federal government's stake in GM gives it the power to have some say on pricing. "GM repaid the government $6.7 billion," Griffanti said in a statement. "The remaining money was converted to a 61 percent ownership stake in GM plus $2.1 billion worth of preferred stock. Based on that, the government does in fact have a 61 percent stake in GM. Clearly that number makes the federal government the majority stakeholder, which undoubtedly allows 'big government' enormous influence over the direction of the company." A Treasury Department spokesman forwarded us testimony in December from Assistant Secretary Herbert Allison, who said government involvement in the day-to-day management of GM is not its goal. "Government involvement in the day-to-day management of a company might actually reduce the value of these investments, impede the ability of the companies to return fully to being privately owned," Allison said. Obama has said "the United States government has no interest in running GM." Most members of the 12-member GM board of directors have been appointed since the bankruptcy agreement. The board includes former Coca-Cola Chairman E. Neville Isdell and University System of Georgia Chancellor Errol Davis Jr. Records show the board has control over executive compensation and has a public policy committee. Martin, the GM spokesman, said that committee looks at regulatory issues concerning energy, the environment, trade and taxes. It also reviews GM's philanthropic activities. The board, Martin said, does not deal with day-to-day activities and pricing. David Zaring, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business, said "it's possible" for the federal government to have some influence over policy matters such as automobile pricing through its board appointments. However, Zaring said he has watched closely to see whether that has happened and, so far, it hasn't. "It's easy to overstate how overinterventionist the government is being," Zaring said. There's no written language in the GM contract with the federal government that states Uncle Sam has any control over vehicle pricing. The board has not gotten involved in such matters, according to GM and others who have paid attention. We found no evidence that the federal government could influence pricing, aside from Zaring's suggestion that "it's possible" that board members could involve themselves in such matters. Therefore, we rate Gingrey's statement that the federal government could tell GM what to charge for its automobiles as False. | null | Phil Gingrey | null | null | null | 2010-10-04T06:00:00 | 2010-09-25 | ['None'] |
hoer-00748 | French Millau Viaduct - Amazing Bridge | true messages | https://www.hoax-slayer.com/millau-viaduct.html | null | null | null | Brett M. Christensen | null | French Millau Viaduct - Amazing Bridge | December 2009 | null | ['France', 'Millau_Viaduct'] |
pose-01210 | “Every new council member should lead the entire council for a day in their district, allowing from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. They decide where we go, what we see, and who we talk with in their district." | promise broken | https://www.politifact.com/texas/promises/adler-o-meter/promise/1301/give-each-council-member-day-austin-city-council-v/ | null | adler-o-meter | Steve Adler | null | null | Give each council member a day for Austin City Council to visit their district | 2015-10-15T17:45:03 | null | ['None'] |
goop-02678 | Emmy Snubs 2017: Who Got Robbed Of Emmy Awards Nominations? | 10 | https://www.gossipcop.com/emmy-snubs-2017-nominations-emmy-awards-nominees/ | null | null | null | Andrew Shuster | null | Emmy Snubs 2017: Who Got Robbed Of Emmy Awards Nominations? | 12:38 pm, July 13, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-15166 | Planned Parenthood is "not actually doing women’s health issues." | pants on fire! | /truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/26/jeb-bush/jeb-bush-planned-parenthood-isnt-involved-womens-h/ | Planned Parenthood is not involved in women’s health issues, said Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush. At a town hall in Englewood, Colo., Aug. 25, an audience member asked Bush about his record on women’s health, as well as what he would do for women’s health, particularly for veterans, as president. "When I was governor, we expanded those programs through community-based organizations, and that’s something I think the federal government needs to continue to do," Bush said. "I, for one, don’t think Planned Parenthood ought to get a penny, though. And that’s the difference because they’re not actually doing women’s health issues. They're involved in something way different than that." Bush, who cut off state funding for Planned Parenthood as governor, then pivoted to talk about veterans affairs. Bush’s claim that the organization is not involved in women’s health caught our attention. Setting aside the issue of abortion, Planned Parenthood offers many other medical services -- most of which seem obviously related to women’s health. We reached out to Bush’s campaign, and it directed us to a tweet that Bush posted, after Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton criticized his Aug. 25 remarks. Bush’s tweet said, "PP (Planned Parenthood) treatment of unborn has been horrifying. Let's support quality women's health programs instead." The National Library of Medicine defines "women’s health" as "the branch of medicine that focuses on the treatment and diagnosis of diseases and conditions that affect a woman's physical and emotional well-being." While "women’s health" encompasses all health issues as they pertain to women, reproductive health in particular is Planned Parenthood’s primary focus. The organization offers contraception, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, pregnancy testing, prenatal services and cancer screenings, including breast exams. (No, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms, but it conducts breast exams and refers women to other clinics for mammograms.) In total, Planned Parenthood saw 2.7 million individual patients in 2013, and it provided nearly 11 million services, according to its most recent annual report. About 12 percent of patients received an abortion, (assuming one procedure per abortion patient), so the remaining 88 percent of patients received other health services. Here’s the section of the report breaking down services provided in 2013: Our friends at the Washington Post's Fact Checker also looked at Bush's claim and gave it four pinocchios, their lowest rating. Our ruling Bush said, Planned Parenthood is "not actually doing women’s health issues." It’s hard to reconcile Bush’s statement with the fact that -- setting abortion procedures aside -- Planned Parenthood offered more than 10 million services in 2013. Those services included contraception, breast exams, pregnancy tests, pap tests and STI testing and treatment. Bush is opposed to abortion, but it doesn’t make sense to say that Planned Parenthood isn’t addressing women’s health issues. We rate Bush’s claim Pants on Fire. | null | Jeb Bush | null | null | null | 2015-08-26T15:43:19 | 2015-08-25 | ['None'] |
pomt-09972 | Pay-as-you-go "is the principle that helped transform large deficits into surpluses in the 1990s." | half-true | /truth-o-meter/statements/2009/may/07/barack-obama/obama-exaggerates-role-pay-you-go-balancing-federa/ | President Barack Obama has been singing the praises of "pay as you go," a budget approach that is supposed to force lawmakers to offset new spending with an equal amount of revenue or budget cuts. In his April 25, 2009, radio and video address, Obama said, "We need to adhere to the basic principle that new tax or entitlement policies should be paid for. This principle— known as PAYGO — helped transform large deficits into surpluses in the 1990s. Now, we must restore that sense of fiscal discipline." He repeated the claim on May 7, 2009, in a speech at the White House when he unveiled the details of 2010 budget. "One important step is restoring the "pay as you go" rule — and I've called on Congress to do exactly that," he said. "This rule says, very simply, that Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere. This is the principle that guides responsible families managing a budget. This is the principle that helped transform large deficits into surpluses in the 1990s." We wondered if he was correct about PAYGO's role in balancing the federal budget in the 1990s. We found that Obama is correct that Congress operated under a PAYGO law that was in effect from 1990 until it expired in 2002. When the Democrats took control of Congress after the 2006 elections, they established a PAYGO rule, but it has been waived for some of the most expensive bills, such as the economic stimulus bill. Fiscal hawks are urging Congress to replace that rule with a new law that would have more impact and be more binding. Obama is also right, of course, that the federal budget was balanced by 1998 and ran four years of surpluses before plunging back into deficit. The question is how much to credit PAYGO for those surpluses. To find the answer, we interviewed budget analysts and examined reports on the deficit and the impact of PAYGO. We found a general consensus that PAYGO was a factor that reduced the deficit, but most said it was not as important as the two biggest forces that led to a balanced budget— the increase in tax receipts from the booming economy and defense cuts made possible by the end of the Cold War. Still, there was a range of opinion on how much the rule helped. Alice Rivlin, budget chief under President Bill Clinton, characterized PAYGO as a significant factor. She said in a recent interview on PBS's Frontline that PAYGO and other budget rules "made it easier for the Clinton administration to work on the budget deficit." She said the PAYGO rule provided discipline so policymakers could resist tempting but expensive programs. The rule "meant that the president could say no, and the Congress could say no to a lot of good-sounding ideas, including Medicare prescription drugs" that would have made it difficult to balance the budget. That's backed up by a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that said, "Between 1991 and 1997, most new revenue and mandatory spending laws that were enacted were consistent with the PAYGO requirement to be deficit neutral; end-of-session balances on the PAYGO scorecard consistently showed zero or net reductions in the deficit." Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition, a group that advocates fiscal responsibility and was founded in the midst of the PAYGO movement in 1992, said PAYGO provided some important discipline for members of Congress even if it was not as big a factor as the booming economy and the defense cuts. "There always needs to be a check on irresponsibility in Congress and PAYGO provides that," he said. But Brian Riedl, a budget analyst for the conservative Heritage Foundation, said PAYGO's importance has been exaggerated. "There is this grand myth that we passed PAYGO and then we got this balanced budget. But we got the balanced budget because the Cold War ended and a bubble temporarily pushed revenues through the roof." He said that PAYGO didn't provide as much discipline as some claim because Congress repeatedly used gimmicks or took steps to ignore it. So back to Obama's claim. He said the PAYGO "is the principle that helped transform large deficits into surpluses in the 1990s." He is correct that it is a basic principle behind the effort to balance the budget, but his statement leaves the impression that it was the biggest factor. It wasn't. Yes, PAYGO rules provided some discipline that might have restrained Congress from adding more spending or new tax cuts, but the economy and the defense cuts were the biggest factors that led to the balanced budget. So we find his statement Half True. | null | Barack Obama | null | null | null | 2009-05-07T16:32:40 | 2009-05-07 | ['None'] |
pomt-04587 | James Langevin "has received almost $20 million from taxpayers and special interests to use at his own discretion to supposedly champion Rhode Island’s needs." | mostly false | /rhode-island/statements/2012/sep/23/michael-riley/michael-riley-says-us-rep-jim-langevin-has-receive/ | Michael Riley, the Republican businessman who wants to end Democrat U.S. Rep. James Langevin’s six-term run as congressman from Rhode Island’s 2nd District, unleashed new television and radio commercials last week, ripping into Langevin as a ravenous devourer of taxpayer money. The radio ad opens with the menacing music from the movie "Jaws" in the background, as the narrator says Langevin has "received almost $20 million from taxpayers and special interests while in office to use at his own discretion to supposedly champion Rhode Island’s needs. " The ad recites a list of problems, from high gas prices to unemployment, and claims Langevin has few policy accomplishments to show for the money he’s received. "Beware Rhode Island!" the narrator warns. "There’s a shark in the water, circling the Ocean State and looking to feast on your hard-earned tax dollars! That shark’s name is Jim Langevin." We’ll pass on the value of Langevin’s policy achievements; one party’s success is another’s crime against the Constitution. But there is an objective element of Riley’s claim that can be examined: Has Langevin gotten nearly $20 million "from taxpayers and special interests ... to use at his own discretion" in his congressional career? We called the Riley campaign for their backup. Spokesman Nicholas Tsimortos told us the number is the sum of three elements: The almost $2 million Langevin has been paid in salary during his 12 years in Congress. The more than $6 million that’s been donated to Langevin’s campaigns since he first ran in 2000. The $11 million spent to pay the staffers who have worked for him over those 12 years. Add them up and they come to more than $18 million, hence "almost $20 million." Step one is figuring out if Riley’s numbers are right. For Langevin’s campaign contribution totals, we went to Opensecrets.org, a campaign-finance database compiled by the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. According to its records, Langevin has raised $6,253,061 over his six previous campaigns and in his current one, through Aug. 22. So Riley’s campaign got that number right. How about the $2 million in cumulative salary? When Langevin took office in January 2001, U.S. representatives got $145,100 annually; it’s up to $174,000 now. Add up Langevin’s total salary over those years and it’s $1,965,700, close enough to call it almost "$2 million." Last, and not least, is the $11 million that Riley’s campaign says Langevin has spent on staff salaries. For that, we went to Legistorm.com, which tracks congressional office spending. According to that site, $11,021,686 was paid to the 63 people who have worked on Langevin’s federally financed staff over his congressional career. That’s in line with Tsimortos’ $11-million estimate. So the numbers add up. But accurate information can be put in a misleading context. And the context of Riley’s claim -- portraying the congressman as a shark devouring taxpayer dollars -- is highly misleading. The first course of this alleged fiscal buffet is Langevin’s nearly $2 million in congressional pay. Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution requires that representatives be paid. Langevin may have discretion on how he spends his salary, but there’s nothing sinister about his accepting the same compensation every other congressman receives -- and the same salary Riley would receive if he wins. What about the $6 million in campaign contributions? Riley’s campaign says all that money comes from "special interests." Even if we were to agree with that characterization -- and most independent analysts don’t -- federal law limits what candidates can do with contributions. They can be used for commercials, polling and campaign staff, for example, but not a candidate’s personal expenses. (According to his most recent filings, Riley has given $440,200 to his campaign and accepted $69,363 in contributions.) Finally, what about the $11 million Langevin’s office has spent in staff salaries? According to the U.S. House of Representatives’ House Administration Committee website, each congressman gets an annual allowance for office salaries and expenses. It fluctuates from year to year, but has hovered at about $1 million recently. Staffers spend much of their time helping constituents having problems with, say the Social Security Administration or the Veterans Administration. And they research issues, providing representatives with the information they need to decide how to vote. Maybe Langevin could have decided not to have a staff and saved the taxpayers $11 million, but it would have meant Rhode Island’s 2nd District constituents would be less efficiently represented. Our ruling Michael Riley’s campaign ad says Rep. James Langevin "has received almost $20 million from taxpayers and special interests to use at his own discretion to supposedly champion Rhode Island’s needs." When you add Langevin’s salary, his staff salaries and his campaign contributions, you do get nearly $20 million. But Riley’s claim -- and the ad’s portrayal of Langevin as a shark looking to "feast" on taxpayers’ dollars -- suggests he has a slush fund and has used it improperly. That’s a gross distortion of very common practices allowed by law and the U.S. Constitution. We rule his statement Mostly False. | null | Michael Riley | null | null | null | 2012-09-23T00:01:00 | 2012-09-18 | ['None'] |
pomt-08241 | Says Fort Hood near Killeen, Texas, is "the largest military installation in the free world." | half-true | /texas/statements/2010/nov/15/john-cornyn/sen-john-cornyn-says-fort-hood-largest-military-in/ | Honoring those who died a year ago during a mass shooting at Fort Hood, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn expressed condolences for 13 who were killed on the military base near Killeen and their surviving families and friends. "As the largest military installation in the free world, Fort Hood has long been a source of pride for Texans and all Americans," Cornyn said in a Nov. 4 statement. Media accounts often put Fort Hood and "largest" in the same sentence. But we wondered if they — and Cornyn — have that right. Cornyn spokesman Drew Brandewie sent us a November 2009 Reuters news story that says as much: "Occupying 339 square miles (878 square km) in Central Texas and home to more than 65,000 soldiers, civilian personnel and family members, Fort Hood ranks as the world's largest military installation. It is the largest single employer in Texas and the only military post in the United States capable of supporting two full armored divisions — 1st Calvary Division and the 4th Infantry Division." A quick Google search for "Fort Hood" and "largest military installation" turns up varying descriptions from other news organizations. ABC News dubbed it the largest military facility in the world, the Telegraph called it the largest U.S. military base in the world, and the Austin American-Statesman has referred to it as both the nation's largest military installation and one of the world's largest military installations. The Army's Fort Hood website says that "like the state of Texas, Fort Hood is big and boasts of being the largest active-duty armored post in the United States Armed Services." According to a fact sheet issued Aug. 19, 2009 by the Fort Hood Public Affairs Office: "Fort Hood is the largest single site employer in Texas, directly inserting nearly $3 billion annually into the Texas economy." And "the largest combat aviation training area in the free world, comprised of 15,900 square miles, begins on Fort Hood and continues west from Bell and Coryell counties to Runnels and Tom Green counties." Fort Hood spokeswoman Nancy Bourget told us that Fort Hood is the world's largest military post in the world at 214,895 acres. Approximately 52,000 soldiers are at Fort Hood, she said, but she said she didn't know whether that's the most soldiers stationed at a military installation in "the free world." Also, that number fluctuates: According to the August 2009 fact sheet, Fort Hood had 45,414 enlisted personnel and 8,909 civilian employees. Next, we contacted Wendy Synder, a spokeswoman at the U.S. Department of Defense, who advised caution when talking about the largest military installation in the world. "There are different installations that support various services, based on their mission and the number of people there," she said. "Are you looking at largest in terms of acreage, people assigned?" Snyder pointed us to a 2009 department report that sizes up military installations by different criteria. The Naval Station in Pearl Harbor would cost the most to replace. The Nellis Air Force Range in Nevada has the most acreage. Hawthorne Army Depot in Nevada has the most buildings. "But if you look at the size of the buildings, Fort Bragg (in North Carolina) has the largest square footage," said Snyder. We also called John Pike, director at GlobalSecurity.org, a nonpartisan Virginia-based company that specializes in information about defense and the military. His yardstick: The number of service members assigned to each installation. Pike pointed to California's Fort Irwin as an example of why you shouldn't gauge the size of an installation by acreage: it spans 642,000 acres, but functions primarily as a training ground for soldiers from elsewhere, he said. "They've only got a few thousand people stationed there, but the facility is gigantic because the brigades have to go and play army," he said. So we wondered which installation has the largest military population. Air Force spokesman Dan Elkins told us that Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio is the largest with 8,479 enlisted personnel and officers, followed by Ramstein Air Base in Germany (7,673) and Langley Air Force Base in Virginia (7,314). Lt. Gregory Wolf told us that Camp Lejeune in North Carolina and Camp Pendleton in California have the most Marine Corps personnel, with approximately 40,000-45,000 Marines and sailors stationed at each. A Navy lieutenant didn't respond to our query of the largest Naval station in the world as we were finishing this story, but according to GlobalSecurity.org Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia is the largest military station in the world "based on supported military population." The 2009 Department of Defense report shows that as of September 2008, Norfolk had 39,636 miltary personnel, though the report cautions that its personnel data "may not reflect the actual population at a particular site." Lt. Col. Alayne Conway, a spokeswoman with the Army, told us that Fort Bragg and Fort Hood are the Army's largest installations, but that their numbers fluctuate, meaning that one day Bragg could have more personnel than Hood, and another day, Hood more than Bragg. The Defense Department report shows that as of September 2008, Fort Bragg had 50,178 military personnel versus Fort Hood's 52,301. Tom McCollum, another spokesman at Fort Bragg, told us that the current population at Fort Bragg is about 55,000 soldiers. Count in civilian employees and families and the installation's population kicks up to about 99,000, he said. So, what about Fort Hood's bragging rights? In terms of its total acreage, Fort Hood isn't the largest military installation in the world. By a more meaningful gauge — the size of the military population stationed there — Fort Hood is currently second only to Fort Bragg. However, the exact number of soldiers at both posts is always fluctuating, and at times Fort Hood is the largest. We rate Cornyn's statement as Half True. | null | John Cornyn | null | null | null | 2010-11-15T06:00:00 | 2010-11-04 | ['Texas', 'Killeen,_Texas'] |
pomt-03321 | The Senate immigration bill is … filled with things like rewards for au pair agencies, Alaskan seafood processors and Vegas casinos. | true | /georgia/statements/2013/jul/26/karen-handel/immigration-bill-includes-several-nods-industries/ | Congress still hasn’t passed a comprehensive overhaul of immigration policy, and the outlook does not look good for any timely action. Last month the U.S. Senate approved its immigration bill, but a plan from the House could be delayed until September. Georgia’s Capitol Hill crew of lawmakers has weighed in on the issue. And so have those running for office. Last week, Karen Handel, one of the major candidates seeking the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate, entered the fray. In an email and Twitter post, Handel denounced the legislation. "The Senate immigration bill is over 1,000 pages long; filled with things like: rewards for au pair agencies, Alaskan seafood processors and Vegas casinos; and does not even secure the border." Lawmakers are not known for their brevity, and we knew the final Senate bill was more than 1,000 pages. What piqued our interest was Handel’s claims about the rewards included for various industries. Those industries didn’t seem like key immigration components to us. We dug for more details. Handel further criticizes the Senate bill in a longer statement posted on her campaign website. "The bill is equivalent to the amnesty measures passed in the '80s that, in large part, got us into this mess in the first place," part of the message states. "It is heavy on rewarding illegal immigrants, light on border enforcement, and it's as loaded with pork as a rib cook off!" Handel spokesman Dan McLagan pointed us to several news reports of the provisions written into the Senate amendment. A USA Today article provided the most detail. These provisions, or "rewards" as Handel calls them, are part of a compromise amendment to the Senate bill. We’ll look at them individually: Au pair agencies This part of Handel’s claim centers on the J-1 cultural-exchange visitor visa program, which allows foreigners to enter the United States under a variety of categories ranging from camp counselors to professor and research scholars. About 350,000 people enter the U.S. under J-1 visas each year, including about 20,000 au pairs. The Senate bill initially included language eliminating fees that recruiters charge foreign students to work in the U.S. But au pair agencies -- and other employee recruiting and placement agencies -- say the fees were necessary to cover administrative and travel costs for the au pairs. A compromise included in the Senate amendment still allows the fees but requires them to be set and regulated by the State Department. (Sec. 3911 of the bill) Alaskan seafood processors The final bill also includes a provision that would help the seafood industry in Alaska by allowing processors to bring in seasonal seafood workers under the summer work travel visa program. The Obama administration banned this practice last year to protect foreign exchange students from jobs the government considered dangerous. The Senate bill also includes a provision designating seafood processing as a shortage occupation, thus making it eligible for longer-term guest workers under a new visa program. (Sec. 4408) Vegas casinos This item is included in a provision of the bill that effectively extends the Corporation for Travel Promotion forever. The CTP, which has been renamed Brand USA, is a federal program designed to promote U.S. tourism abroad. It is funded by a tax on international visitors and receives up to $100 million in federal funds to match funds raised from the private sector. That federal funding would have expired in 2015, but it was extended with no end date. (Sec. 1102) When the Travel Promotion Act was passed in 2009 establishing the tourism promotion program, the hotels along the Las Vegas strip, which would benefit from the extra visitors, thanked Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., for his help in getting the bill passed. We checked with immigration experts about the Senate bill and Handel’s statement. The general thrust of the statement is accurate, the experts said, but they noted that "rewards" is a subjective word choice. To sum up, Handel said that the Senate immigration bill contains "rewards" for au pair agencies, Alaskan seafood processors and Vegas casinos.The provisions cited for the three industries are included in the legislation, along with several others. The items were part of deals fought for by industry lobbyists and included to garner support for the bill. Whether that classifies them as "rewards" is a matter of opinion -- in this case, Handel’s opinion. Handel spokesman McLagan argued for a "super true," but we’re content with a True rating. | null | Karen Handel | null | null | null | 2013-07-26T00:00:00 | 2013-07-18 | ['Las_Vegas', 'Alaska'] |
tron-00768 | Cameron Lyle Ended His Athletic Career to Save the Life of a Young Man with Leukemia | truth! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/lyle/ | null | celebrities | null | null | null | Cameron Lyle Ended His Athletic Career to Save the Life of a Young Man with Leukemia | Mar 17, 2015 | null | ['None'] |
afck-00254 | “Between 1996 and 2011 total black disposable income grew 370% from R161 million to R756 million.” | unproven | https://africacheck.org/reports/more-claims-of-south-africas-spectacular-transformation-fact-checked/ | null | null | null | null | null | More claims of S. Africa’s ‘spectacular transformation’ fact-checked | 2015-11-19 11:28 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-00189 | Washington Heidi supports sanctuary cities, where illegal immigrants can be released on our streets, like this criminal, who was let go and then sexually assaulted a child. | mostly false | /truth-o-meter/statements/2018/oct/19/senate-leadership-fund/heidi-heitkamps-record-immigration-sanctuary-citie/ | An ad released by the Senate Leadership Fund in the North Dakota Senate race paints incumbent Heidi Heitkamp as two-faced when it comes to immigration. "There are two Heidi Heitkamps. One in North Dakota, the other siding with liberals in Washington. Washington Heidi supports sanctuary cities, where illegal immigrants can be released on our streets, like this criminal, who was let go and then sexually assaulted a child. The same Heidi who is funded by Washington liberals who want to abolish ICE," the voiceover says. Heitkamp has voted against bills that would defund sanctuary cities, but that’s not the same as voting to protect criminals, as the ad suggests. The Senate Leadership Fund declined to provide evidence for its ad. Heitkamp’s campaign said she opposed bills to punish sanctuary cities because they end up punishing law enforcement for a political decision made by a municipality. Her campaign highlighted her vote in favor of Kate’s Law, a bill that would have increased penalties for unauthorized immigrants, and her support of Trump’s 2018 immigration proposal, which included $25 billion for border security, tougher enforcement and new limits on legal immigration. Heitkamp has called the movement to abolish ICE, "crazy town," and said that criticizing law enforcement for doing their job does not "sit well" with her as a former attorney general. ‘Sanctuary cities’ A sanctuary city can be a town, county or other jurisdiction. There isn’t a federal law defining sanctuary locations, but the term is generally applied to places that have policies or ordinances limiting the assistance that local police provide to federal immigration authorities. "The one common theme to sanctuary areas is not that they release criminals onto the streets, but that they will not do the work that is the responsibility of the federal enforcement agencies," said Elizabeth Cohen, a political science professor at Syracuse University. There are no sanctuary cities in North Dakota, according to research by the Federation of American Immigration Reform, which favors reduced immigration. The Senate Leadership Fund cited four Heitkamp "nay" votes in the text of their ad. The bills sought to compel cities to honor ICE detainer requests on local law enforcement agencies by withholding federal grants. They gave local authorities legal immunity to do so. The idea behind limiting cooperation between local and federal authorities is to encourage crime reporting and witnesses from the immigrant community to come forward, according to Hiroshi Motomura, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. But sanctuary policies are not absolute, allowing cooperation when immigrants meet a certain threshold for criminal convictions. "Even San Francisco policies, which are probably the most liberal in the country, require the police to cooperate when the person has a serious criminal history," said Huyen Pham, a law professor at Texas A&M University. Sexual assault case So what happened in the sexual assault case the ad mentions? We tracked down the man in the mugshot through a reverse image search. He is Juan Ramon Vasquez, an undocumented immigrant who was charged with raping a 5-year-old family member following his 2014 release from a Philadelphia jail. (He previously used the name Ramon Aguirre-Ochoa.) He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to eight to 20 years in prison for the rape. President Donald Trump and other opponents of sanctuary cities have used his case as a rallying point. Vasquez was originally arrested for an unrelated aggravated assault, but was released when the prosecutors declined to pursue the charges. ICE requested that he be held for possible deportation proceedings. The city did not honor the detainer request. Philadelphia’s sanctuary city policy states that a person cannot be detained after their release unless they are convicted of a first- or second-degree felony involving violence, and that detainer is supported by a judicial warrant. There was no conviction or warrant in Vasquez’s case. The sanctuary city bills would have forced locales to honor detainers or lose federal funding for law enforcement and other programs. However, even that may not have ensured Vasquez stayed off the streets, as he would have had the chance to ask for bond in front of an immigration judge, according to Linus Chan, a law professor at the University of Minnesota. In other words, the bills Heitkamp voted against would not necessarily have prevented the case the ad calls attention to. Our ruling The Senate Leadership Fund said, "Washington Heidi supports sanctuary cities, where illegal immigrants can be released on our streets, like this criminal, who was let go and then sexually assaulted a child." Heitkamp voted against bills that blocked law enforcement grants for sanctuary cities, because she said she didn't want to punish law enforcement agencies. She also voted in favor of other bills that ramped up immigration law enforcement. The ad suggests that Heitkamp sympathizes with abolishing ICE, when she called the idea "crazy town." The ad also suggests sanctuary cities allow violent criminals to roam the streets, but that's a skewed interpretation. We rate this statement Mostly False. See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com | null | Senate Leadership Fund | null | null | null | 2018-10-19T12:01:25 | 2018-10-11 | ['None'] |
pomt-06149 | Says President Obama "helped more than half a million veterans and military family members go to college through the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill." | half-true | /truth-o-meter/statements/2011/dec/19/michelle-obama/michelle-obama-credits-president-new-gi-bill/ | To mark the end of combat in Iraq and the return of U.S. troops in time for the holidays, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama spoke at Fort Bragg, N.C., on Dec. 14, 2011. Michelle Obama thanked service members and their families for their sacrifices and touted her husband’s work in supporting returning veterans. She mentioned improved mental health care for veterans and tax cuts for businesses that hire veterans. She also said this of her husband: "He's helped more than half a million veterans and military family members go to college through the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill." That makes it sound like the G.I. Bill was a major initiative of President Obama. But it was actually signed into law by his predecessor. The new GI Bill The bill, officially called the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, was introduced by Sen. Jim Webb, a Democrat from Virginia and Vietnam War veteran. It paid for veterans who served at least three years after Sept. 11, 2001, to attend a public college or university for free for four years, provided a monthly housing stipend and covered up to $1,000 a year for books. Service members who agreed to serve four more years in the military had the option of transferring the benefit to their spouses or children. With the backing of numerous veterans groups, the bill was hailed as the most comprehensive educational benefits program since the original G.I. Bill was enacted in the World War II era. Obama, then a senator campaigning for president, supported the bill, along with most other members of Congress. It was opposed by President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, who feared the generous education perk might hurt military retention. Obama voted for it when it came up in the Senate in May 2008, McCain was absent, and Bush ended up signing it into law. The benefits kicked in Aug. 1, 2009, after Obama had moved into the White House. As expected, tens of thousands of service members took advantage, and the Department of Veterans Affairs quickly fell behind in covering payments. Veterans reported having to take out loans to cover education costs while they waited for their checks from the government. According to news reports, the VA had mostly cleared the backlog by February of 2010. The expansion In December 2010, Congress passed another bill that enhanced the benefits of the new G.I. Bill. Dubbed "G.I. Bill 2.0," it expanded eligibility for reserve members and National Guard members who were activated after 9/11, allowed tuition benefits to be used beyond college campuses at vocational and on-the-job training programs and expanded the housing allowance to distance learners. The bill, the Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, was signed by Obama on Jan. 4, 2011. When we contacted the White House for documentation of Michelle Obama’s statement, a spokesman provided us statistics on the 2008 law: * Approximately $15.02 billion in Post-9/11 GI Bill benefit payments. * 649,573 individuals have received benefits since August 1, 2009. * Fall enrollment is 428,870 individuals. Who gets the credit? Our key question about this claim is not whether veterans have been helped by the law, but whether Obama is the chief helper, as the First Lady's speech implied. We contacted veterans groups for their input. All agreed with the 500,000-plus figure Mrs. Obama mentioned. "In general, the numbers have gone up dramatically," said Robert Norton, a retired Army colonel and deputy director of government relations for the Military Officers Association of America. He noted that the legislation had broad bipartisan support in Congress and that Bush ended up supporting it because of the provision allowing benefits to be transferred to family members. But at that time, Obama was just one vote. Michael Dakduk, executive director of Student Veterans of America, said Obama "can take as much credit as every other politician in Congress in ‘07. (The new G.I. Bill) was supported by virtually everyone." He said it's a stretch to suggest Obama was the driving force. "It’s not appropriate. He doesn’t deserve that," Dakduk said. Tom Tarantino, senior legislative associate for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, focused on the 2011 law. He said "it is fair to say that the president has been supportive of expanding benefits." Tarantino also credited the Obama administration with helping clear the backlog at the VA that left veterans waiting for their money. "When VA checks were late in the first semester, it was the White House that pressured (or directed) the VA to provide advances to veterans waiting for their living stipend. The White House has also been a driving force behind modernizing the VA benefits process that has resulted in an automated NGIB process that has had little to no late payments this school year," Tarantino said. Our ruling Michelle Obama said her husband has "helped more than half a million veterans and military family members go to college through the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill." Michelle Obama made it sound like the bill was a major legislative priority for him, but it was signed by his predecessor. Senator Obama voted for the new G.I. Bill. (And he wasn’t exactly going out on a political limb by favoring a law that enhanced benefits for military service members in the midst of two wars.) However, Obama did sign another bill in 2011 expanding benefits. The two laws together have helped more than 600,000 men and women returning from war find their way toward new careers, according to the VA. Obama deserves some credit for that achievement, but he's just one of many. We rate Michelle Obama's statement Half True. | null | Michelle Obama | null | null | null | 2011-12-19T15:20:17 | 2011-12-14 | ['Barack_Obama'] |
pomt-12392 | President Donald Trump "announced that he would reinstate a national day of remembrance for fallen officers that the traitor before him had done away with." | pants on fire! | /punditfact/statements/2017/may/30/blog-posting/pants-fire-bloggers-claim-obama-canceled-trump-rev/ | A fake news story is tricking people into thinking that President Barack Obama canceled a national day of remembrance for fallen police officers. "Obama didn’t want to offend anyone, so our country’s heroes were shut out. Not anymore," reads a post on theexaminer.site that we also found on guerilla.news. "President Trump made Barack Obama look like a complete fool this morning in front of more than 10,000 police veterans when he announced that he would reinstate a national day of remembrance for fallen officers that the traitor before him had done away with," the story continues. The story then allegedly quotes Trump as saying, "Police officers in this country will no longer be treated like criminals. Obama decided your fallen didn’t deserve to be honored. That changes today. Americans will remember those that keep our streets safe big time." However, the Trump quote is fabricated, as is the premise of the story. The national day of remembrance for police officers killed in the line of the duty currently falls on May 15 each year. It is called Peace Officers Memorial Day. Obama did not cancel the day, and Trump did not reinstate it. It was started in 1962 by President John F. Kennedy as part of "police week." It has been celebrated by presidents -- including Obama and Trump -- ever since. Obama made remarks at a memorial service in May 2013, honoring the death of Jupiter, Fla., motorcycle police officer Bruce St. Laurent, who was struck and killed as part of a presidential motorcade in September 2012. "I have the privilege of working with some of the nation’s finest law enforcement officers and professionals every day," Obama said. "And I’m perpetually mindful of the sacrifices they make for me and for my family, and for other leaders and visiting dignitaries, but never more so than when I was told that Officer St. Laurent was struck and killed by another vehicle while driving his motorcycle as part of my motorcade." Obama also spoke at a memorial service in May 2015. "We are here to honor heroes who lost their lives in the line of duty -- men and women who put themselves in the way of danger, so that the rest of us could live in safety," Obama said in 2015. "They were beat cops, deputies, detectives, correctional and forest service officers, federal agents and tribal police. But to many here today, they went by different titles: caring husband, loving wife, my son, my daughter, Mom, Dad. We also found electronic copies of the proclamations Obama signed designating "police week" in 2014, 2015 and 2016. Trump, like other presidents, continued the tradition in 2017. He spoke at a memorial service but did not mention Obama. "America as a nation must always have the clarity to know the difference between good and evil, between right and wrong, and between those who uphold our laws and those who so easily break them," Trump said. "We owe it to the fallen to act according to our best and highest ideals. We owe it to their memory to put truth before politics, justice before agendas, and to put the safety and security of the American people above everything else." Theexaminer.site, where we saw this fake news story appear, includes no "about us" page. The post includes a disclaimer at the bottom referencing a different website, "Note: We at uspostman cannot make any warranties about the completeness, reliability and accuracy of this information." Uspostman has been known to share fake news stories before, including a false tale of how Obama’s mother-in-law Marian Robinson was getting a $160,000 a year government pension. Our ruling Bloggers claimed that Trump reinstated "a national day of remembrance for fallen officers that the traitor before him had done away with." The national day of remembrance for police officers killed in the line of the duty currently falls on May 15 each year. It is called Peace Officers Memorial Day. Obama did not cancel the day, and Trump did not reinstate it. We rate this claim Pants on Fire. See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com | null | Bloggers | null | null | null | 2017-05-30T10:23:48 | 2017-05-29 | ['None'] |
abbc-00213 | A panel of eminent economists has agreed to advise ABC Fact Check on its work on economic issues. | in-the-green | http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-21/rudd-tax-to-gdp-ratio/4892178 | A panel of eminent economists has agreed to advise ABC Fact Check on its work on economic issues. | ['tax', 'rudd-kevin', 'alp', 'federal-elections', 'federal-government', 'australia'] | null | null | ['tax', 'rudd-kevin', 'alp', 'federal-elections', 'federal-government', 'australia'] | Kevin Rudd's claim that Labor has been a lower taxing government checks out | Fri 23 Aug 2013, 7:43am | null | ['None'] |
pomt-07241 | If you look at the benefits and wages of recorded federal employees, they far outstrip the market rates of the private sector. | true | /virginia/statements/2011/may/31/eric-cantor/eric-cantor-says-benefits-and-salary-public-employ/ | During a break from Congress last week, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor came home to hear from local business leaders. He got an earful, not all of it from the business community. As the forum wrapped up, Cantor was confronted by a few angry women, one of them shouting as she approached. They peppered Cantor with questions, and not liking the answers, one of them, a liberal activist with MoveOn.org, hurled insults. Another woman took a different tack. She explained to Cantor that a friend of hers had recently taken a government job in Washington and was receiving fuel subsidies for the commute. With the high price of gas, the woman asked why shouldn’t she be also receiving fuel subsidies. Cantor replied that there is an injustice between federal government and private sector employees that he is determined to correct. "If you look at the benefits and wages of recorded federal employees, they far outstrip the market rates of the private sector," he said. Do they? We thought it was worth a look. To substantiate the claim, Cantor’s office sent over a few sources including a widely referenced 2010 investigation of federal versus private pay from USA Today. The newspaper probe relied on 2009 data (still the most current available) from the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. It showed that federal civil servants received average pay and benefits of $123,049 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation. According to USA Today, federal civilian employees received an average salary of $81,258 and benefits worth $41,791. Private-sector workers got $50,462 in pay and $10,589 in benefits. Officials from public employee unions and some economists dismiss the compensation comparisons. They say the gap reflects the increasingly high level of skill and education required for most federal jobs and the government contracting out many lower-paying jobs to the private sector. Another report by USA Today focused on salaries alone. It compared the 2008 pay for 40 occupations that exist in both the federal government and private sector, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Federal employees earned an average salary of $67,691 while private workers, in the same mix of jobs were paid an average $60,046. That’s a difference of $7,645. There are arguments on the other side when it comes to pay alone, however. Late last year, an annual report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to the Federal Salary Council concluded that federal civilian workers on average are paid 2.1 percent less than private workers. But as a piece from our friends at FactCheck.org pointed out late last year, experts say there are flaws in the methodology there that prevent a true apples-to-apples comparison. Howard Risher, the managing consultant on a detailed 1990 report on pay differences recently recently wrote in Government Executive magazine, there’s no way of truly knowing which sector receives higher salaries because "neither has detailed job-to-job comparisons to support their arguments." All of that is well and fine, but it still doesn’t put a dent in Cantor’s claim, which looks at wages and benefits together. All parties agree that federal benefits are far more generous than those in the private sector. Gary Burtless, a labor economist with the left-leaning Brookings Institution, says there are good reasons why federal employees are better compensated the private-sector workers. Federal employees typically to do more specialized work that requires more education and responsibility than their private-sector peers, he said. Federal workers also often have served longer in their positions than private employees, he added. "To be surprised that federal workers receive average higher compensation than average private-sector workers is like being surprised when informed that school teachers are paid more than McDonalds’ employees," Burtless said. Still, as the USA Today study found, federal pay was higher than private-sector pay in four out of every five job categories that existed in both sectors. These included accountants, nurses, chemists, public relations specialists, surveyors, cooks, clerks and janitors. And, as Chris Edwards, an economist at the libertarian Cato Institute notes, federal pay has risen faster than private-sector pay in recent years, despite the recession. "BEA data show that average federal salaries rose 58 percent between 2000 and 2009, which was much faster than the 30 percent increase in the private sector," Edwards writes. So let’s look back. Cantor claims that the "benefits and wages" of federal employees far outstrips those of the private sector. On average, that’s true; total compensation for federal workers is nearly double the private sector average. Looking at salary alone narrows the divide a bit, and some argues private pay even exceeds federal pay, but Cantor played it safe by avoiding specific numbers and including benefits. As some suggest, there may be solid reasons for the disparity -- expertise, education requirements, responsibility, seniority -- but that doesn’t change the facts. We rate the claim True. | null | Eric Cantor | null | null | null | 2011-05-31T06:00:00 | 2011-05-18 | ['None'] |
vogo-00069 | Statement: “The result? Years of legal battles and millions in taxpayer dollars wasted.” | determination: huckster propaganda | https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/city-council/fact-check-peters-role-in-the-cross-controversy/ | Analysis: The second part of DeMaio’s claim is more troublesome. | null | null | null | null | Fact Check: Peters' Role in the Cross Controversy | December 18, 2013 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-03426 | Under Republican-backed state budget, the state education agency estimates expansion of Wisconsin’s school voucher program "could cost nearly $2 billion annually" | pants on fire! | /wisconsin/statements/2013/jun/26/peter-barca/nearly-2-billion-year-expand-school-vouchers-state/ | As Republican Wisconsin lawmakers crafted the 2013-15 state budget, outraged Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca sent out a fund-raising plea. Seeking contributions to the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee, which works to elect Democrats to the Assembly, Barca blasted the work of the GOP-controlled Joint Finance Committee on the two-year tax-and-spending plan. In a June 5, 2013 email, the Kenosha Democrat decried the proposed creation of a private bail bond system and a $651 million income tax cut. Then he turned to a proposed expansion of the private school voucher program. Citing a figure from the state Department of Public Instruction, Barca said the budget included: "An expansion of taxpayer-funded, unaccountable private school vouchers across the state, which DPI estimated could cost nearly $2 billion annually." That’s a lot of money. The figure caught our attention because Barca’s email was on the 2013-15 budget; the $651 million income tax cut, for example, refers to how much income taxes will be reduced over the two-year period. On the school voucher expansion Barca criticized, the budget awaiting Gov. Scott Walker’s signature limits to 1,500 the number of students who could be added to the program during the two-year cycle. Could that expansion really cost taxpayers nearly $2 billion per year? Not even close. Barca’s evidence Long a subject of controversy, the voucher program, also known as school choice, was launched in 1990 in Milwaukee and was extended to the Racine area in 2011. It is intended to improve results for poor city children in public schools by allowing them to attend private or religious schools with publicly funded vouchers. Barca spokeswoman Melanie Conklin told us her boss based his nearly $2 billion claim on an email that state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Evers sent to school district superintendents and other educators six days before Barca's fund-raising email. Evers, who opposes the voucher expansion, wrote: "While the current proposal includes an initial enrollment cap, past history clearly demonstrates those are temporary at best. We estimate that vouchers on a statewide scale could ultimately cost up to $1.9 billion annually,further diverting scarce resources away from public schools and increasing local property taxes." To be clear, the $1.9 billion-per-year estimate applies to the total cost of the voucher program, not the limited expansion that would take place over the next two years with the new budget. Moreover, Evers' use of ultimately dooms Barca’s claim. While Barca's fund-raising email was about the 2013-15 budget, the $1.9 billion cost estimate is for some time in the future. Barca's spokeswoman also forwarded us another Evers email, which referenced a detailed DPI estimate. It says the voucher expansion cost could reach $1.9 billion per year if 20 percent of students statewide -- nearly 193,000 students -- enrolled in the voucher program. That's far more than the 25,000 voucher students currently in the program and the 1,500 that would be added in the next two years. DPI spokesman John Johnson told us that with the expansion provided for in the 2013-15 budget, the voucher program will cost about $385 million over the two years. That's an average of about $192.5 million per year. A far cry from what Barca led the recipients of his email to believe. A footnote before we close: A little noticed provision in the budget could potentially allow for expansion beyond the 1,500 students. But even if that expansion occurs, the additional cost is estimated at only $4 million in the 2013-15 budget, Johnson said. Moreover, the disclosure didn’t come until two weeks after Barca’s email. Our rating Criticizing a Republican-backed expansion of the school voucher program in the 2013-15 state budget, Barca said the state Department of Public Instruction estimated that the expansion "could cost nearly $2 billion annually." But the cost of the entire voucher program -- not just the expansion -- averages $192.5 million per year for the 2013-15 budget cycle. DPI's $1.9 billion-per-year estimate is not based on the 2013-15 expansion; it would only apply if the voucher program expands dramatically years down the road. The money exaggeration may make for good copy when it comes to raising money. But when it comes to math, it’s a major failure. We rate Barca's statement Pants on Fire. | null | Peter Barca | null | null | null | 2013-06-26T05:00:00 | 2013-06-05 | ['Wisconsin'] |
pomt-08268 | I had five of my citizens that were killed last week because of border security problems. | half-true | /texas/statements/2010/nov/10/rick-perry/gov-rick-perry-said-five-his-citizens-were-killed-/ | Which has been Gov. Rick Perry's favorite fight — flicking off Democratic challenger Bill White or saving the states from Washington? He has talked more about states' rights lately, in part via a busy campaign to promote his new book, Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington. On Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" Monday night, host Jon Stewart wondered whether Perry would be "more comfortable with the United States under the Articles of the Confederation," a reference to the first constitution of the United States. Perry responded: "What I'm really comfortable with is Washington understanding that they're doing too much. I'd like for them to do their basic responsibilities like secure our border with Mexico. I had five of my citizens that were killed last week. I've asked two administrations to put the boots on the ground, to secure that border." Perry has often talked up his requests for more National Guard troops on the Texas border. In a February 2009 letter to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, he asked for an "additional 1,000 Title 32 National Guard positions." And in April, we rated Half True Perry's claim that "we've got a 1,000 National Guard troop request that's been in front of this president for over a year and no response." But the governor's mention of slain Texans to bolster his calls for more border security was new to us, and we wondered which citizens Perry was citing. Responding to our request for elaboration, Perry spokeswoman Catherine Frazier sent us a link to a Nov. 5 article on CNN.com naming six U.S. citizens who were killed last week on the Mexico side of the border near El Paso. CNN reported that Eder Diaz Sotero and Manuel Acosta, both American students at the University of Texas at El Paso, were killed in Ciudad Juarez on Nov. 2, according to the U.S. Consulate in that city. CNN reported that the two students were "gunned down in a hail of more than 30 bullets while driving in Chihuahua State." Four more U.S. citizens were shot to death in Ciudad Juarez (adjoining El Paso) the weekend of Oct. 29, according to CNN and other news reports: a woman who was shot inside a tortilla shop; a man and woman who were shot in a car near the Zaragoza International Bridge connecting Juarez to El Paso; and a man who died of multiple gunshot wounds outside a house. It was the deadliest weekend for Americans in Mexico since February, according to a Nov. 2 Associated Press story published in the Austin American-Statesman. Separately, we reviewed other news reports indicating that six U.S. citizens have been killed in Juarez since Oct. 30. The St. Petersburg Times reported that they were from El Paso. As we completed this article, Nicole Thompson, a spokeswoman at the U.S. Department of State, confirmed to us that six U.S. citizens have been killed recently in Juarez. Summing up: Perry was one short in recounting the six Americans from El Paso killed in Ciudad Juarez since little over a week ago — presumably missing the sixth because there was a delay before the U.S. Consulate confirmed the American identity of one of the slain students. But Perry made his claim in the context of arguing for tougher border security in the U.S. without mentioning that his citizens, as he put it, were killed in a foreign country, not the U.S. Nor did he say how securing the border on the U.S. side would prevent shootings in Mexico. Those are important details to omit. We rate his statement as Half True. | null | Rick Perry | null | null | null | 2010-11-10T06:00:00 | 2010-11-08 | ['None'] |
vogo-00147 | Statement: “Mira Mesa High is one of our highest-achieving high schools and the elementary and middle schools also win honors. Mira Mesa schools are neighborhood schools. The overwhelming majority of Mira Mesa families stay in Mira Mesa schools,” San Diego Unified School District board president John Lee Evans said in a Dec. 24 U-T San Diego story. | determination: true | https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/education/grading-neighborhood-schools-fact-check/ | Analysis: If the San Diego Unified School District had its way, most students would attend schools in their own neighborhoods. | null | null | null | null | Grading Neighborhood Schools: Fact Check | January 22, 2013 | null | ['Mira_Mesa,_San_Diego', 'U-T_San_Diego', 'San_Diego_Unified_School_District'] |
tron-00055 | CIA Agent Confesses on Deathbed: We Blew Up World Trade Center 7 on 9/11 | fiction! | https://www.truthorfiction.com/cia-agent-confesses-wtc7/ | null | 9-11-attack | null | null | ['9/11', 'CIA', 'conspiracy', 'terrorism'] | CIA Agent Confesses on Death Bead: We Blew Up World Trade Center on 9/11 | Jul 17, 2017 | null | ['None'] |
pomt-11970 | Las Vegas shooting witnesses report multiple gunmen dressed as security guards. | pants on fire! | /punditfact/statements/2017/oct/03/blog-posting/blog-peddles-fake-story-saying-security-guards-idd/ | An online website that describes itself as "free independent news" is pushing a false story that a Las Vegas shooting victim saw multiple gunmen dressed as security guards at Mandalay Bay. One of the more pervasive conspiracy-minded claims spinning around the Internet is that the Las Vegas shooting was some type of staged attack or that there were multiple gunmen. As of this writing, there is no evidence any of that is true. However, the website Neon Nettle claimed that an eyewitness to the shooting reported "multiple gunmen dressed as security guards." "As the mainstream media in the US attempts to lock down the ‘crazy lone wolf gunman’ narrative for the devastating shooting attack in Las Vegas, the truth has started to seep through foreign news outlets who don't follow the same political agenda as the American MSM," the post, dated Oct. 3, 2017, reads. The post goes on to tell the story of Brian Hodge, an Australian who was reportedly staying on the 32nd floor of Mandalay Bay, the same floor as the shooter. The story talks about an Oct. 2 interview Hodge gave to the Courier Mail, an Australian tabloid. In that article, Hodge said he hid in the bushes outside the casino hotel until police arrived. "There were multiple people dead and multiple shooters. I was just hiding waiting for police to come get us," Hodge is quoted as saying. Later, Hodge said: "My floor is a crime scene. They killed a security guard on my floor." While there are some reports a security guard was shot, we are unable to confirm if that’s accurate. And while Hodge is quoted as saying shooters plural, there is no evidence he’d have any way of knowing. In fact, Hodge gave an interview to the Sydney Morning Herald in which he more fully describes what he saw. Hodge told that newspaper that he never made it to his room on the 32nd floor and after hearing the bullets he first went to a casino kitchen before hiding in a bush outside. "I was just laying on the ground. It was like a scene from a movie. The shooter was up above, we didn't know where they were... I didn't want anyone to know where I was, so I just curled up and hid. It was the most terrifying moment of my life." Hodge also posted on Facebook, "There is a live shooter with a gun in my hotel in Vegas right now, but I got outside safely and hiding in bushes." See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com More importantly for this fact-check, it’s clear to us the Neon Nettle post puts words in Hodge’s mouth. Hodge never said in the Courier Mail article nor in any other article or social media post that the security guard was a shooter. And he also disputed saying shooters. See Figure 2 on PolitiFact.com Our ruling An online blog claims, "Las Vegas shooting witnesses report multiple gunmen dressed as security guards." The story tracks back to real interviews given by a person who says he was at Mandalay Bay. But beyond that, this story doesn’t hold up. The witness didn’t say what the blog claims. We rate this claim Pants on Fire! See Figure 3 on PolitiFact.com | null | Bloggers | null | null | null | 2017-10-03T13:38:31 | 2017-10-03 | ['None'] |
Subsets and Splits
SQL Console for pszemraj/multi_fc
Filters dataset entries containing 'law' in categories, tags, or reason fields, providing basic topic classification but offering limited analytical insight beyond simple keyword matching.
Healthcare Related Entries
Retrieves sample records containing healthcare-related keywords but doesn't provide meaningful analysis or patterns beyond basic filtering.