Raising the national minimum wage to $15 per hour would destroy up to 3.7 million jobs.
Would raising the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour destroy up to 3.7 million jobs in the United States? Thats what GOP House Minority Leader and California Rep. Kevin McCarthy claimed in the headline of apress releaseon Tuesday as Democrats in Congress began debating the move. On Twitter the same day,McCarthy wrotethe wage hike could put nearly 4 million Americans out of work. This is a screen shot of the headline from McCarthys press release. The Biden Administration last month proposed raising the federal minimum hourly pay from $7.25 to $15, with increases of about $1.50 every year for five years. To make that happen, Congressional Democrats introduced theRaise the Wage Act of 2021last month and began considering the legislation in the House Committee on Education and Labor this week. Heres what McCarthy said in the body of the press release: At this critical point, the Democrats big, creative response is to raise the federal national wage to $15 an hour  a move the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office previouslyfoundcould cost nearly 4 million workers their jobs. President Joe Biden initially included the proposal to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour in his $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill. But he predicted last week it would be left out due to opposition from Republicans and centrist Democrats. Given the debate over raising the wage and its impact on jobs, we decided to take a closer look at McCarthys claim in this fact check. Our Research In his press release and tweet, McCarthy linked to ananalysisof the wage proposal by the Congressional Budget Office published on Monday. The CBO, a nonpartisan research service, predicted the wage hike would eliminate jobs, but would also raise wages for an estimated 17 million people and lift 900,000 people out of poverty. It doesnt say anything about destroying an estimated 3.7 million positions as McCarthy claimed. Instead, the CBO said the average estimate is that employment would be reduced by 1.4 million workers. The report goes on to say theres a one-third chance the loss will be between 1 million and 2.7 million workers, still far less than McCarthys number. Young, less educated people would account for a disproportionate share of those reductions in employment, the report adds. A spokesperson for McCarthy did not respond to questions. Deborah Kilroe, a spokesperson for the CBO, said McCarthy likely got his figure from aJuly 2019 CBO reportthat also examined raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour. That older analysis predicted the median estimate for job losses would be 1.3 million. Meanwhile, it said there is a two thirds chance that the change in employment would be between about zero and a decrease of 3.7 million workers. That last figure lines up with McCarthys statement of nearly 4 million workers, but it comes from the high-end of an old report and ignores what the CBO published this week. Last month,FactCheck.org found Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul also distorted the facts on this topic. The senator told Fox News that the government estimates are close to 4 million people will lose their jobs, if the minimum wage hike goes through. FactCheck.org examined the July 2019 CBO report [the current report had yet to be published] and found Paul cherry-picked the high-end of that report. Our Ruling Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy claimed raising the national minimum wage to $15 per hour would destroy up to 3.7 million jobs. McCarthy appears to be citing a Congressional Budget Office analysis from 2019 that said, at the high-end, 3.7 million jobs could be lost from the wage hike. But in his statement, he linked to the CBOs new analysis published this week which found an average estimate of 1.4 million jobs would be lost, a figure he omitted. The new CBO report added theres a one-third chance the loss will be between 1 million and 2.7 million workers, still far less than McCarthys claim. In the end, we found McCarthy cherry-picked a figure from an old report while ignoring current data on the topic that tells a different story. We rated his claim False. FALSE The statement is not accurate.
Claim:  E-petitions urge Americans to buy/not buy Citgo brand gasoline.  OF AND  INFORMATION Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Looking for an easy way to protest Bush foreign policy week after week? And an easy way to help alleviate global poverty? Buy your gasoline at Citgo stations. And tell your friends. Of the top oil producing countries in the world, only one is a democracy with a president who was elected on a platform of using his nation's oil revenue to benefit the poor. The country is Venezuela. The President is Hugo Chavez. Call him "the Anti-Bush." Citgo is a U.S. refining and marketing firm that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's state-owned oil company. Money you pay to Citgo goes primarily to Venezuela  not Saudi Arabia or the Middle East. There are 14,000 Citgo gas stations in the US. (Click here to find one near you.) By buying your gasoline at Citgo, you are contributing to the billions of dollars that Venezuela's democratic government is using to provide health care, literacy and education, and subsidized food for the majority of Venezuelans. here Instead of using government to help the rich and the corporate, as Bush does, Chavez is using the resources and oil revenue of his government to help the poor in Venezuela. A country with so much oil wealth shouldn't have 60 percent of its people living in poverty, earning less than $2 per day. With a mass movement behind him, Chavez is confronting poverty inVenezuela. That's why large majorities have consistently backed him in democratic elections. And why the Bush administration supported an attempted military coup in 2002 that sought to overthrow Chavez. So this is the opposite of a boycott. Call it a BUYcott. Spread the word.  Of course, if you can take mass transit or bike or walk to your job, you should do so. And we should all work for political changes that move our country toward a cleaner environment based on renewable energy. The BUYcott is for those of us who don't have a practical alternative to filling up our cars. So get your gas at Citgo. And help fuel a democratic revolution in Venezuela.  Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo Gasoline Company Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S. government. Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience: "Enough of imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century." The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world." Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is using our money to achieve his goal! The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, is the sole owner of Citgo gas company. Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government. Why should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to take down our government? Very important. Please forward this to your friends and family. Most of them don't know that Citgo is owned by the Venezuela government. Origins:  Dueling Citgo e-mails reached our inbox in early 2006, one urging Americans to buy only Citgo brand gasoline in order to support "Venezuela's democratic government" and avoid sending more U.S. dollars to Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, and the other urging Americans to boycott Citgo over remarks by Venezuelan president Hugo Chvez. Hugo Chvez The television incident referenced in the second message occurred on 29 January 2006, when anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan appeared on Chvez's weekly TV broadcast, following a similar recent meeting between the Venezuelan president and entertainer Harry Belafonte: Cindy Sheehan, who gained international fame when she camped outside President Bush's ranch in an anti-war protest, plans to pitch her tent again, Venezuela's president said Sunday as he urged activists worldwide to help bring down "the U.S. empire." Hugo Chvez, an arm around Sheehan's shoulders, told a group of activists that she had told him "she is going to put up her tent again in front of Mr. Danger's ranch." In some of his strongest recent comments aimed at Washington, Chvez condemned the Bush administration and said his audience should work toward ending U.S. dominance. "Enough already with the imperialist aggression!" Chvez said, listing countries from Panama to Iraq where the U.S. military has intervened. "Down with the U.S. empire! It must be said, in the entire world: Down with the empire!" Sheehan also noted that singer and activist Harry Belafonte recently called Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world," and said, "I agree with him. George Bush is responsible for killing tens of thousands of innocent people." Hugo Chvez, the president of Venezuela, is certainly no fan of the U.S., and his trading rhetorical political barbs with U.S. government officials (and others) has been common news fodder for several years now.  (Chvez was elected president of Venezuela in 1998, and after a failed coup in 2002, he won a referendum over whether he should serve out the remainder of his term.  The war of words reached a  coup  new peak in August 2005, when Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested to viewers that the U.S. should assassinate Chvez.) Pat Robertson In 2006 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeled Chvez a "challenge for democracy" and a danger to Latin America and announced the establishment of contacts with government officials in other South American countries for the purpose of creating a united front to oppose Venezuela. Chvez responded to Rice's comments in a television appearance by blowing her a screen kiss and announcing, "Don't mess with me, girl," as well as warning that he would consider suspending Venezuela's oil exports if the U.S. went "too far with the Venezuelan government."  (Venezuela is the fourth-largest supplier of crude oil to the U.S., sending the states about 1.5 million barrels daily.)  Chvez also denounced President George W. Bush as "the devil" in a September 2006 speech before the U.N. General Assembly and called Bush an "alcoholic" during a visit to Harlem the following day. U.S. attitudes towards President Chvez in early 2006 tended to be polarized along political lines, with one side declaring him a dangerous dictator who supported America's enemies, while the other side defended him as a democratically-elected leader who was the target of the Bush administration's enmity primarily because he dared to stand up to the U.S.  Excerpts from two U.S. newspaper Op-Ed pieces of that period illustrated this dichotomy: [Corrales, 2006] Hugo Chvez [was] elected president of Venezuela in December 1998. The lieutenant colonel had attempted a coup six years earlier. When that failed, he won power at the ballot box and is now approaching a decade in office. In that time, he has concentrated power, harassed opponents, punished reporters, persecuted civic organizations and increased state control of the economy.  [W]hen it comes to accountability and limits on presidential power, the picture grows dark. Mr. Chvez has achieved absolute power over all state institutions that might check his power. He controls the legislature, the Supreme Court, two armed forces, the gigantic state-owned oil company PDVSA  the only important source of state revenue, which comes in handy at election time  and the institution that monitors electoral rules. As if that weren't enough, a new media law allows the state to supervise media content, and a revised criminal code permits the state to imprison any citizen for showing "disrespect" toward government officials.  By compiling and posting on the Internet lists of voters and their political tendencies  including whether they signed a petition for a recall referendum in 2004  Venezuela has achieved reverse accountability. The state is watching and punishing citizens for political actions it disapproves of rather than the other way around. If democracy requires checks on the power of incumbents, Venezuela doesn't come close.  [Weisbrot, 2006] Venezuela is a democracy  despite the best efforts of the Bush team to use President Hugo Chvez's close relations with Cuba's Fidel Castro as evidence to the contrary. Its elections are transparent and have been certified by observers from the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and the European Union. Freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of association prevail, at least as compared with the rest of the hemisphere.  In fact, most of the media remains controlled by the opposition, which attacks the government endlessly on all the major TV channels. It is the most vigorous and partisan opposition media in the hemisphere, one that has not been censored under Chvez. Like all of Latin America, Venezuela has governance problems: a weak state, limited rule of law, corruption and incompetent government. But no reputable human rights organization has alleged that Venezuela under Chvez has deteriorated with regard to civil liberties, human rights or democracy, as compared with prior governments. Nor does the country compare unfavorably on these criteria with its neighbors in the region. In Peru, the government has shut down opposition TV stations; in Colombia, union organizers are murdered with impunity. From a Latin American point of view, Venezuelans should have the right to choose their own president  even one who sometimes insults the American president  without interference from the United States. And Chvez's anger at Washington, from Latin Americans' point of view, appears justified. U.S. government documents released under our Freedom of Information Act indicate that Washington not only supported but was involved in the military coup that temporarily overthrew Venezuela's elected government in April 2002. Neither a "buycott" nor a boycott was likely to accomplish much beyond the symbolic.  In the first case, the Citgo brand (marketed by Citgo Petroleum Corporation, which has been owned by Petrleos de Venezuela,  Citgo the national oil company of Venezuela, since 1990) doesn't have nearly the capacity and presence in the U.S. to satisfy demand and wean American consumers from Middle Eastern oil supplies; in the second case, boycotting a gasoline brand over political issues is problematic for a number of reasons (not least of which is the notion that threatening not to buy gasoline from someone who is threatening not to sell it to you doesn't sound like an effective ploy for either side).   Many different oil companies buy crude oil from Venezuela, so even Americans who shun CITGO brand gasoline have no guarantee that they aren't still sending their money to that country.  And although Citgo may be owned by Petrleos de Venezuela, it is a formerly American company which is still headquartered in the U.S. (in Houston, Texas), employs 4,000 people, and supplies 14,000 independent retailers with gasoline and other petroleum products  Americans with no substantive connection to Venezuela who would be economically harmed by such an action. (Citgo also provides free or discounted heating oil to low-income communities and tribal reservations within the United States.) And, of course, in a tight oil market Citgo could likely find alternative buyers for its products far more easily than the U.S. could make up the shortfall created by a cut-off of Venezuelan oil.   As we've noted in many other articles discussing various schemes regarding where and how people should purchase gasoline, the global and fungible nature of the world oil market doesn't really provide consumers with many effective opportunities to influence political issues through their buying patterns.  articles Since the original e-petitions cited above originally appeared in early 2006, they have gone through a number of changes that added and dropped additional claims about Citgo.  In September 2006, the following addendum to one of the Citgo-related e-mails began circulating:  Friends, I asked you earlier to boycott Citgo Gas Stations in response to the actions of Hugo Chavez and the Venezuelan Government.  I am coming to you again and asking you to take this a step further. Many 7-11 Stores sell Citgo gas.  I ask you to boy cut these stores and notify the Southland Corp. & the store managers of your action and be sure they know that it is because they sell Citgo Gas Products. You may think this is an extreme step but Hugo & other American haters count on Americans not to have the stomach to do anything. Prove them wrong! One by one we can make a difference.  Please forward this to others if you believe in taking a stand against the thugs of our century. God Bless America! Shortly afterwards, 7-Eleven Inc. announced it was dropping Citgo Petroleum as its gasoline supplier, although the convenience store chain also stated the move was not motivated by political issues: 7-Eleven's contract with Citgo was due to expire at the end of September 2006, and the company had already made plans to market its own brand of gasoline. In October 2006, the following e-mail about Citgo and Petro Express began circulating: CITGO, BEING AWARE THAT GASOLINE SALES ARE DOWN DUE TO U.S. CUSTOMERS NOT WANTING TO BUY FROM "CHAVEZ".... HAVE  BEGUN CHANGING THE NAME OF SOME OF THEIR CIRCLE K STORES IN TEXAS & OKLAHOMA...AND POSSIBLY OTHER PLACES AS WELL, TO: "PETRO  EXPRESS" THEREFORE, DO NOT BUY FROM "PETRO EXPRESS", ...NOR CITGO....  "PETRO EXPRESS" IS ALSO 100% OWNED BY "CHAVEZ" .... Both Circle K and Petro Expressare privately-owned chains of convenience stores, the former an international property of Quebec-based Alimentation Couche-Tard, and the latter owned by The Pantry, Inc., which is headquartered in Sanford, North Carolina.  Neither chain is owned by Citgo or the Venezuela government.   Circle K Petro Express The Pantry Petro Express outlets (which the parent company has been converting to their Kangaroo Express brand) were known for selling Citgo-branded gasoline.  The Pantry stated in October 2006 that the chain would be phasing out sales of that brand by 2007, and  soon after The Pantry's acquisition of Petro Express in 2007,  the new parent company announced that gasoline sales at those outlets would be converted to Chevron's Texaco brand.  However, The Pantry's 2010 annual report indicates that Citgo is still one of their fuel suppliers, with a contract running through August 2013: acquisition As of September 30, 2010, Marathon, BP and CITGO supplied approximately 68% of our fuel purchases. On July26, 2010, we entered into a new fuel supply agreement with Marathon. Our contract with Marathon for unbranded fuel anddistillate expires on December 31, 2017, and our contract with Marathon for branded fuel and distillate expires on June 30,2013, with an option for the Company to renew until December 31, 2017. As a result of this new fuel agreement withMarathon, we now have three principal suppliers for the majority of our fuel. On September 1, 2010 we entered into aMarketer Franchise Agreement, including an Addendum to Marketer Franchise Agreement, with CITGO. Our contract withCITGO expires August 31, 2013 and our contract with BP expires September 30, 2012. It is not uncommon for independent stations and chains to switch fuel suppliers from time to time.  Occurrences of independents' dropping Citgo in favor of other suppliers are often misinterpreted by the public as attempts on Citgo's part to "switch names" in order to fool consumers into continuing to purchase Citgo gasoline. An addendum about AK-47 factories and Iranian-run oil refineries was also later appended to this piece: NEWS FLASH: Chavez is NOW getting a Russian Weapons Factory built by Putin. The RUSSIANS are building an AK-47 Kalashnikov Assault Rifle  factory in Venezuela to give armament support to Communist Rebel groups throughout the Americas. Chavez NOW has IRANIANS operating his oil refineries in Venezuela for him. It is likely only  a matter of time, if not already, before Chavez has Iranian built LONG RANGE missiles,  with a variety of warhead types aimed at: Guess Who? According to news reports, Russia's Izhevsk Mechanical Plant (IMP) has already manufactured and supplied about 100,000 AK-103 assault rifles to Venezuela under an earlier contract, and they have also signed a contract for two arms plants in Venezuela (one to produce AK-103a  and the other to produce 7.62-mm ammunition for those rifles), with construction to begin at the end of 2007 and be completed by 2010. Also in 2007, Venezuela and Iran signed a $4 billion deal to develop Ayacucho 7, a block of the lucrative Orinoco Reserve in Venezuela which is believed to hold more than 30 billion barrels of oil.  Under the deal, Iran will build four oil rigs off the shore of Venezuela by the end of the year.  Last updated:  8 January 2012    Corrales, Javier.  "Hugo Chvez Is Part Robin Hood, Part Oil Mogul, Part Electoral Wizard."   The Dallas Morning News.  12 February 2006.    Douglass, Elizabeth.  "7-Eleven Dumps Venezuela-Backed Citgo to Pump Own Brand."   Los Angeles Times.  28 September 2006  (p. C1).    Gentile, Carmen J.  "Venezuela, Iran Team Up on Oil."   United Press International.  17 July 2007.    Kirkpatrick, Christopher D.  "Petro Express Nixing Citgo Gas."   The Charlotte Observer.  17 October 2006.    Padgett, Tim.  "Chavez: 'Bush Has Called Me Worse Things.'"   Time.  22 September 2006.    Sieff, Martin.  "Defense Focus: Venezuela's Kalashnikovs."   United Press International.  15 August 2007.    Stock, Sue.  "Petro Express Stores to Get Name Change."   The Charlotte Observer.  3 February 2010.    Weisbrot, Mark.  "The Failure of Hugo-Bashing."   Los Angeles Times.  9 March 2006  (p. B13).    Associated Press.  "Chvez Hosts Peace Activist."   Miami Herald.  31 January 2006.    The Australian.  "US Brushes Off Chavez Barbs to Rice."   22 February 2006.    BBC News.  "Profile: Hugo Chavez."   13 October 2005.    Diario El Universal.  "US Calls Empty Rhetoric President Chvez' Threats of Cutting Oil Supply."   21 February 2006. In early April 2021, Snopes readers asked us to investigate rumors that U.S. President Joe Biden's administration was coming around to the idea of a continuous wall between Mexico and the U.S. and considering restarting construction on it. Among entities that highlighted the claim was Charlie Kirk's conservative political group, Turning Point USA. Via statements like the below-displayed Facebook post, the group and other Biden critics attempted to frame the rumor as evidence of the president's alleged hypocrisy; he had promised not to build "another foot of wall" during his 2020 presidential campaign. Charlie Kirk below-displayed Facebook post another foot of wall   While it was false to claim the Biden administration had warmed up to the border wall as a solution to immigration problems, it was true that funding was allowed for "limited construction" (via unspecified congressional actions) to occur during the Biden presidency, according to The White House. Below, we lay out evidence for those conclusions. First, the claim surfaced after Biden issued an executive order on Jan. 20 pausing a stream of federal funding toward border-wall construction initiated by former President Donald Trump. Trump had framed the multi-billion-dollar spending as a necessary step to curb illegal border crossings by people fleeing poor living conditions in Central American nations. By contrast, Biden dubbed the concept "a waste of money that diverts attention from genuine threats to our homeland security." executive order dubbed As of Jan. 15, 2021, the government had spent $6.1 billion of the $10.8 billion in work it signed contracts to have done, according to a Senate Democratic aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity to The Associated Press (AP). Around that time, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency that oversees border security and operations, said the wall, in total, spanned 771 miles, including vehicle barriers and pedestrian fencing  about one-third of the length of the entire border. The Associated Press said Biden's executive order halted "immediately the obligation of funds related to construction of the southern border wall, to the extent permitted by law," and required his administration to determine the cost of cancelling in-process construction contracts and whether the money could be spent elsewhere, according to the order and news reports. news reports Cut to April 5, when the Washington Times, a conservative-leaning news outlet, published an article titled, "EXCLUSIVE: Biden's DHS may restart border wall construction to plug 'gaps'." The reporting was based on notes supposedly documenting a meeting the previous week between Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) employees. article Alejandro Mayorkas It was unclear, based on The Washington Times report, when or under what circumstances the purported meeting took place, as well as how the media outlet obtained the notes. No reputable news outlet -- such as The Associated Press or Reuters -- reported on the alleged conversation about filling in "gaps" at the border wall (aside from Business Insider, which primarily recirculated The Washington Times' reporting). Business Insider According to the purported notes, Mayorkas said CBP leaders have submitted proposals for "different projects" along the border wall because officials supposedly have the opportunity to finish or update certain areas. Here's his full quote in The Washington Times: 'The president has communicated quite clearly his decision that the emergency that triggered the devotion of DOD funds to the construction of the border wall is ended. But that leaves room to make decisions as the administration, as part of the administration, in particular areas of the wall that need renovation, particular projects that need to be finished,' he said. He said those parts include 'gaps,' 'gates,' and areas 'where the wall has been completed but the technology has not been implemented.' Put another way, despite Biden's order to stop pumping emergency dollars into the project, Mayorkas purportedly said an unidentified sum of money could still be used to repair or update certain areas. Such construction could include gates or technology improvements, according to his alleged comments. order It is unclear how, or under what congressional action or work contract, border officials could legally access said funding for the potential construction. We reached out to agencies including the White House and DHS for clarity on that legality, and we did not receive a response. We will update this report when, or if, we do. During daily press briefings on April 6 and 7, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed previously approved congressional actions set aside funding for "some components of the wall" and "limited construction." Her comments did not explain the nature of that construction, nor when it would take place. Here's the verbatim transcription of her statement on April 6, according to an official White House transcript and C-SPAN video recording of the media event: White House transcript C-SPAN video Wall construction remains paused, to the extent permitted by law. So some has already been funded through a congressional authorization and funding allocation. But as agencies develop for a plan  its paused while agencies are developing a plan for the President on the management of the federal funds.  When the administration took office, as you referenced, funds had been diverted from congressionally appropriated military construction projects and other appropriated purposes toward building the wall. And wall construction was being challenged in multiple lawsuits  and for much of the wall, I should say; not all of it  by plaintiffs who allege serious environmental and safety issues.  Under those circumstances, federal agencies are continuing to review wall contracts and develop a plan to submit to the President soon. It is  it is paused. There is some limited construction that has been funded and allocated for, but it is otherwise paused. The following day, she reiterated the same points, stressing the administration's overall opposition to the border-wall concept, according to C-SPAN and a White House transcript.  C-SPAN White House transcript "There are some components of the wall that had already been allocated," she said. "We dont believe the wall is an answer. We have never believed the wall as an answer to addressing the challenges  immigration challenges at the border.  Theres a review underway of, kind of, where this funding had been allocated and not, but its currently paused and  for the most part." Meanwhile, criticism of the Biden administration's alleged participation in border-wall construction surfaced among progressives. U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, tweeted on April 7: "It's shameful and unacceptable for @POTUS to continue the construction of Trump's xenophobic and racist wall." tweeted @POTUS  In sum, the nature of the "limited construction" that could still take place on the wall under the Biden administration is unknown -- no evidence showed it would extend the barrier's length. For that reason, and those listed above, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of true and misleading information. Claim:  A hearing-impaired student at Tioga Hills Elementary School was physically disciplined by a teacher and sustained a dislocated shoulder as a result. UNDETERMINED Example:  [Collected via Facebook, April 2015]   PLEASE SHARE! I would like to ask my friends to please share and support us at this time. I am not going to stand silent anymore. On Tuesday, March 17th, my son, Tommy suffered an attack on him by his math teacher, Mrs. Joan Barr Pokorak at Tioga Hills Elementary School in the Vestal School District. As many of you know, my 10 year old, fourth grade son, Tommy has been through many ear surgeries over the past years, resulting in a significant hearing loss in his left ear. He has a 504 Plan in place at school due to his disability. The plan specifies that he have preferential seating in the front of the room with his right ear, his "good" ear towards the teacher. This plan has been in place over 2 years. It came to our attention that during this math teacher's class, Tommy is seated near the back of the classroom with his impaired ear in the direction of the math teacher. During CSE meetings the hearing specialist from the school noted that Tom cannot hear in this position. Tommy and students in the classroom testify that on Tuesday, March 17th Mrs. Pokorak was working on a math problem at the front of the room and hesitating with an answer. Tommy blurted out, "the answer is.." giving the answer out of turn. From what students have testified, Mrs. Pokorak screamed, "GET OUT!!!!"   Tommy said he was startled and wasn't sure if she was talking to him. She came directly behind him, dragged and lifted him up from his chair, pulled him by his right arm to the door and pushed him out into the hallway with both hands while screaming, "GET OUT!!!" She then slammed the door, causing the teacher from the next door classroom to come out into the hallway to see what was going on. Parents reported to me, that students still in the classroom sat there stunned. My son was hurting, shocked, and terrified what just happened to him. When Tommy came home that day, I checked with parents of students in the class to see what they would say happened. They all told the same scenario that Tom relayed of the events. Tommy complained of shoulder pain and his shoulder was making very loud popping sounds. Concerned that the teacher had injured his shoulder, I took him to Lourdes Hospital Emergency Room. X-rays and the Dr. confirmed that due to the attack on Tommy from this teacher, he suffered a third degree separation (Closed dislocation) of his Acromioclavicular Joint with significant scapular winging. At that time the hospital social worker said as a mandated reporter she must call Child Protective Services for an investigation of the case. Our family was devastated. Expecting to hear from Vestal School District regarding their concern for Tom's health and well being we waited and waited thinking we would be contacted by someone from the district. Up to this point, no explanation or even acknowledgement of the incident has been made on the part of the school. The State Police investigator has informed us that the school district has blocked him from contacting individuals, students, and has retained legal counsel for Mrs. Pokarak.  Again, to this day she refuses to speak to the investigator regarding her brutal attack on my son. Now, the Tioga County District Attorney, Eric Gartenman, is refusing to speak with our attorney regarding this incident. We are left confused and without resolution or answers as to why. When speaking with the investigating officer, he stated that Mr. Gartenman felt that Mrs. Pokarak was justified in injuring my son due to his "talking in class." The investigator stated that Tommy wasn't out of control, disrespectful to the teacher or others..he was "talking." When we explained that he MUST be seated toward the front of the room with his good ear facing the teacher (according to his 504 plan) Tommy said he truly didn't hear the teacher from where he was placed in the classroom if she had asked him to be quiet. Why couldn't she ask him to leave the class, why the brutal attack that resulted in a dislocation? What kind of force and anger causes this action and injury? Why is this okay? And WHY are there so many questions left unanswered?!  My son is now experiencing both physical and emotional trauma due to this assault. He is afraid to be in school, afraid of another attack. If not on my son..who will be next? Our elected officials are doing NOTHING!! So, when you think your kids are safe at school, think again. It is with a heavy heart that I post this and ask for support, because I am a teacher and can't even imagine EVER harming one of my students. Please, please help us get the word out regarding this cover up by Vestal School District and Eric Gartenman and ask for justice on behalf of my son. Keep all of our children safe. Please "Share" in hopes we migh get some help and resolution and prevent this from happening to someone else's child. Thank you so much- Sharon and Frank Russo.  [Click here to expand text]. [Click here to expand text] Origins:   Sharon Vail Russo of Binghamton, New York, posted the above-reproduced item to her Facebook page on 3 April 2015, detailing an alleged assault on her 10-year-old son Tommy by his math teacher on 17 March 2015 at the Tioga Hills Elementary School in in Apalachin, New York.  According to Ms. Russo's account, her fourth-grade son has a significant hearing loss in one ear and is therefore typically seated in classrooms towards the front of the room with his "good" ear positioned towards the teacher in order to help compensate for his hearing loss. For some reason Tommy was seated in a disadvantageous position in his math class, and when he supposedly blurted out something like "c'mon, the answer is ..." in reference to a math problem the teacher was attempting to work out on in front of the room, the teacher yelled at him to "GET OUT" of the classroom. When Tommy failed to respond to this command (because his hearing issue made him unsure whether it was addressed to him), the teacher physically dragged him out of his seat, pushed and pulled him out the classroom door and into the hallway, and slammed the door behind him, screaming at him and dislocating his shoulder in the process. posted The New York State Police Child Abuse hotline was contacted a day after the alleged incident, and in April 2015 state police reported they had completed an investigation into the allegations and that a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges (two possible misdemeanor charges) rested in the hands of the Tioga County District Attorney. On 6 April 2015 Ms. Russo posted again about the incident to her Facebook page, indicating that the district attorney's office had opened a case about the matter: posted I spoke with my attorney, Mr. Ronald Benjamin. He told me that he has been in contact with Mr. Gartenman (1st Assistant DA for Tioga Co.) and the case has been opened. He expressed that as soon as the big trial Tioga Co. is dealing with now is over, they will be dealing with the CPS investigation from the NY State Police regarding Mrs. P.Mr. Benjamin also said he would speak to media regarding the case and they should contact him should they wish.  As for the teacher, Mrs. P- She is still at Tioga Hills Elementary as of today. However, on 7 April 2015 Vestal Central School District Superintendent Mark LaRoach sent a letter to parents of students at Tioga Hills Elementary stating that the District Attorney's office had determined the accusations were unfounded and the teacher had been exonerated. letter Nonetheless, the Russos' attorney said they had filed an action against the school district that would "mature into a lawsuit in the next couple of months." Last updated:  9 April 2015 Criminals, beware. Just because you got away with an illegal activity doesnt mean the IRS isnt going to come after your earnings. Thats because just ahead of the 2021 tax season, the IRS released guidelines that required taxpayers claim items they have stolen, as well as earnings from illegal activities.  The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. And went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax szn is around the corner.  publications joked running out of time  And its true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under other income  categorized as self-employment activity  required to be reported to the federal tax agency.  Publication 17 general rules  Screengrab/IRS Publication 17  IRS Publication 17   "Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from your self-employment activity," read the 2021 the IRS guidelines. The guidelines also require that those who steal property must report fair market value as income in the year that the item was stolen. Of course, one can avoid paying taxes on such items so long as the person returns them to the person they were stolen from in the first place.   Screengrab/IRS Publication 17  IRS Publication 17   The handy regulations also list how to report embezzled funds, notes that bribes are considered nondeductible expenses, and notes that kickbacks, side commissions, and push money must also be included in the Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from self-employment activity. Its not just items or earnings obtained through illegal activities. That watch you found in the gym locker room? Yep, its taxable.  If you find and keep property that doesnt belong to you that has been lost or abandoned (treasure trove), its taxable to you at its fair market value in the first year its your undisputed possession, noted the IRS. Snopes spoke with an accountant who said that while the reporting requirements themselves aren't new, there was previously a separate form specifically for reporting illegal activity income. It's unclear to what extent people actually used the form in the past. Its not exactly clear whether law enforcement will be given information about individuals who report income from illegal activities. What is clear is that anyone under the age of 65 who made more than $12,550 in 2021 is required to file by April 18, 2022.  Sources Dolan, Debra. Time Is Running out to Return Stolen Goods to Avoid Paying Taxes on Them. Https://Www.Wdbj7.Com, https://www.wdbj7.com/2021/12/29/time-is-running-out-return-stolen-goods-avoid-paying-taxes-them/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. IRS Asks That Criminals Provide Its Cut of Stolen Property, Illegal Income. KXXV, 29 Dec. 2021, https://www.kxxv.com/news/local-news/irs-asks-that-criminals-provide-its-cut-of-stolen-property-illegal-income. Publication 17 (2021), Your Federal Income Tax | Internal Revenue Service. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. Stole Something? IRS Says Stolen Property and Bribes Must Be Reported as Income. Usatoday, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/12/28/irs-says-stolen-property-must-reported-and-twitter-goes-wild/9035694002/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. Columbus politics is dominated at the moment by a fiery debate over a proposal to overhaul collective bargaining laws for public workers. Known as Senate Bill 5, the legislation is drawing raucous crowds to the normally serene Statehouse atrium.Republican Gov. John Kasich, backed by a Republican-controlled legislature, wants to end collective bargaining for state workers and abate the ability of city workers, including firefighters and police officers, to bargain for pay and benefits. Republican leaders say such reforms are needed to lower costs and ease the financial burden on the state and city budgets.Democratic leaders, flanked by a few Republcian office holders and lots of labor leaders, argue that teachers and firefighters and other union workers are not overpaid and that collective bargaining keeps both workers and employers in check at a minimal cost.The Ohio Democratic Party on Feb. 14 boiled down its argument in a Twitter message. Both the brevity and first word of the tweet caught Politifact Ohios attention: FACT: the special assistant in @johnkasich's office makes over three times more than an average #OH firefighterGiven the debate that rages on behind the tweet, we thought it was worth checking out.The tweet refers to Jai Chabria, a senior advisor, or special assistant, to Kasich, says ODP communications director Seth Bringman.Chabria, who worked with Kasich at the defunct Wall Street firm Lehman Brothers, is part of governors inner-circle, whose members are paid six-figure salaries, a point that received a good bit of attention earlier this year. Chabrias annual salary is $145,000 and is not subject to any collective bargaining deal. He serves at the pleasure of the governor.ODPs Bringman says the tweet also refers to the average annual salary of an Ohio firefighter of $41,160. He cities the Bureau of Labor Statistics as the tweets source.The bureau indeed shows that the mean, or average, salary of an Ohio firefighter is $41,160. The figure does not include benefits and is based on the data compiled in May 2009, the latest available.Its important to note that the figure, however, is based on six surveys of 200,000 employers collected over a three-year period, not on an actual accounting of every Ohio firefighters salary.Looking for something more current, Politifact Ohio compared the bureaus survey data to actual salary data collected by the Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund, which manages the retirement plans for safety officers. Spokesman David Graham says the fund doesnt track the average salary of an Ohio firefighter but actual raw data is compiled in actuary reports.According to one such report in 2010 by Buck Consultants, there are 13,001 full-time fire personnel in Ohio whose collective annual salary totaled $860,966,828. Dividing the total salary by the number of personnel produces an average annual salary of $66,000.The actuary reports also reveal that firefighters with one-year of experience are paid an average salary of $45,000. Fire personnel with 40 years of experience can earn $80,000. The data can also be sliced numerous other ways to produce a range of salary figures.But the pension fund figures also include other ranking officers, like captains or chiefs, who earn more and would raise the average. The data also doesnt separate firefighters who are cross-trained as paramedics or in hazardous materials and typically earn more than others firefighters.It includes the fire chief from Cleveland to the firefighter from Piqua, Graham said. He couldnt say exactly what ranks and specialties are in the latest figures but said captains and others all qualify under Ohio Revised Code as firefighters and therefore are members of the pension fund.So where does this leave the Ohio Democratic Partys tweet on the Truth-O-Meter?Chabrias salary of $145,000 is more than three times the salary figure of $41,160 that the party cited. And its based on widely accepted data produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is widely regarded as a reliable source for statistics. But its important to know that some of that data, collected in surveys, is several years old.Chabrias salary is also more than three times the average salary of a firefighter with one year of experience, according to the Ohio Police & Fire Pension Funds actuary reports. (But only 3.7 percent of current firefighters had 1 year of experience, the report shows. )While we would like to have more current data, the overall pension fund numbers are skewed because they also include pay figures from higher ranking, higher paid officers.All of this  also underscores the point often made by the Politifact: Statistics often need illumination. We rate the tweet as Mostly True. On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story."  However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank  not Deutsche Bank  for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0. In early August 2020, Snopes readers asked whether the following meme shared across social media accurately quoted U.S. President Donald Trump's commenting on the United States Postal Service and voting by mail:   This quote appears to be a fabricated one. Although the meme's text states that Trump made the remark on a talk radio show hosted by Fox News personality Sean Hannity on July 30, 2020, Trump wasn't a guest on  Hannity's AM radio talk show  that day. Hannity's AM radio talk show  It's true that Trump has repeatedly disparaged mail-in voting, falsely stating  that voting by mail leads to rampant election fraud (except in Florida). He even appeared to suggest in a tweet, which prompted widespread backlash, that the November 2020 election should be delayed because the widespread use of mail-in ballots during the ongoing pandemic would compromise the results. falsely stating  Florida tweet widespread backlash Some concern has also been expressed that Trump has reduced the effectiveness of the Postal Service with budget cuts, as The New York Times reported: "Fueled by animus for Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, and surrounded by advisers who have long called for privatizing the post office, Mr. Trump and his appointees have begun taking cost-cutting steps that appear to have led to slower and less reliable delivery." reduced However, we found no evidence that Trump made the remark in the above-displayed meme. It wasn't posted to his Twitter account or recorded in any statements transcribed by the White House. And Trump was not a guest on the Hannity show on July 30, 2020, so he didn't make the remark there, as suggested by the meme.   These words appear to be someone else's paraphrase of what they assumed Trump was thinking or planning. posted We therefore rate this claim  Lee, Jessica.  "Do Mail-In Ballots Increase Risk of Voter Fraud?"
  Snopes.com.  26 May 2020. Welna, David.  "Citing Election Delay Tweet, Influential Trump Ally Now Demands His Re-Impeachment."
  NPR.  31 July 2020. Shear, Michael D. et al.  "Mail Delays Fuel Concern Trump Is Undercutting Postal System Ahead of Voting."
  The New York Times.  31 July 2020. Freking, Kevin.  "Trump Encourages Mail Voting in Florida But Sues in Nevada."
  The Associated Press.  5 August 2020. Claim:  An Indiana Congressman is introducing legislation to change the name of Interstate 69. Status:  False. Example:  [Hoosier Gazette, 2004] John Hostettler, the Congressman representing the 8th district of Indiana, has been convinced by local religious groups to introduce legislation in the House that would change the name of an Interstate 69 extension to a more moral sounding number. There are plans to extend the interstate from Indianapolis through southwestern Indiana all the way through Texas into Mexico in the coming years.  While most believe this highway will be good for the states economy, religious conservatives believe "I-69" sounds too risqu and want to change the interstates number. [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  Despite   the disclaimer on the site of the Hoosier Gazette, a number of its satirical articles have been mistaken for real news (such as a report that a Kinsey Institute study found that having children lowers the IQ of parents).   disclaimer Hoosier Gazette report Now yet another entry from the Hoosier Gazette has made the news, this one proclaiming that Indiana Congressman John Hostettler is attempting to introduce legislation to rename Interstate 69 (because the pronunciation of its common abbreviation, I-69, sounds like a slang term for a sexual position).  The spoof has caused no small amount of consternation at Congressman Hostettler's office, where aides have been kept busy handling calls about the fictional legislation: entry John Hostettler Interstate 69 sexual position U.S. Rep. John Hostettler's office is fielding outraged calls about an Internet hoax that says he's proposed changing the name of Interstate 69 to Interstate 63 for religious reasons.  Hostettler spokesman Michael Jahr said Monday he had been fielding calls about the story all day.  "There is no truth in the story about any legislation changing the name of I-69," he said. "The Web site is satirical in nature, and any suggestion otherwise is absurd." The Hoosier Gazette has also published a sampling of responses to their I-69 article, many of them submitted by readers who didn't get the joke. responses Last updated:  21 November 2004    Sources:   Wehrman, Jessica.  "Hostettler's Office Fields Hoax Calls."   Evansville Courier & Press.  16 November 2004. Does New York get the short end of the stick when it comes to federal funding? Gov. Andrew Cuomo said so in atweeton Jan. 14. New Yorkers are just tired of subsidizing other states with our tax dollars. New York subsidizes 42 other states. No state gets back less from Washington than New York state. The federal government must stop shortchanging NY, Cuomo tweeted. New Yorkers are just tired of subsidizing other states with our tax dollars.New York subsidizes 42 other states.No state gets back less from Washington than New York State.The federal government must stop shortchanging NY.#SOTS2021 Is Cuomo correct that no state gets back less from Washington than New York state? We looked at a comprehensive independent analysis and found that Cuomos assertion was close to accurate. Freeman Klopott, a spokesman for the New York State Division of Budget, told PolitiFact that Cuomo was referencing a widely citedanalysisfrom the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy arm of the State University of New York. The report, published in January 2020, shows four-year totals of funding flows from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2018. The report found that New Yorkers cumulatively sent $116 billion more to the federal government during that period than New York state received from the federal government. The four major categories of federal spending analyzed by the report are direct payments for individuals under programs such as Social Security and Medicare, federal grants to state and local governments, federal contracts and procurement, and wages paid to federal workers. The institute found that during that period, only 11 states received fewer dollars in funding than they sent to the federal government in tax payments  and of these, New Yorks cumulative shortfall was easily the largest. The other 10 states with negative balances with the federal government during that four-year period were, in descending order, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, Illinois, Colorado, Nebraska, Washington, Utah and New Hampshire. In the most recent year studied in the report, 2018, New York sent almost $22 billion more to the federal government than it received. Thats a larger sum than the next two statess shortfalls combined, New Jersey and Massachusetts. But when adjusted for population, New York isnt the biggest loser. Its fourth, after three of its smaller neighbors: Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Cuomos mention of 42 states stems from the 2018 figures in the report, which says, Forty-two states had a positive balance of payments with the federal government in 2018, Broadly speaking, federal money flows from high-income states to low-income states through spending by programs such as Medicaid. The system isnt designed to give back each state the equivalent of what its residents and businesses paid. Because New York is home to a large critical mass of very high-income households, as well as a considerable number of merely very affluent (mid-six-figure) residents, the Empire States residents generate a disproportionately large share of federal revenues through a tax system that is, after all, based on a progressive income tax, said E.J. McMahon, founder and research director of the Empire Center for Public Policy, a free-market think tank. New Yorks balance of payments with the federal government could worsen in the coming years unless a change made to the tax code in 2017 is reversed. In the Republican-backed tax bill signed that year by President Donald Trump, lawmakers limited the size of the federal deduction for state and local taxes paid. This change to thestate and local tax deductionmeant that some taxpayers in high-tax states like New York would pay more in federal taxes. Cuomo said that no state gets back less from Washington than New York state. This aligns with a widely cited study by the Rockefeller Institute of Government that looked at every states balance of payments with the federal government from 2015 to 2018. However, that same study notes a slightly different result when population is taken into account. On a per-capita basis, New York ranked fourth, after Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts. We rate the statement Mostly True. A story from 1995 resurfaced around Veterans Day 2019, reporting that then-private citizen and real estate mogul Donald Trump had "saved" the Veterans Day parade that year in New York City when organizers ran out of money. On Nov. 6, 2019, for example, the Daily Caller News Foundation website published a story bearing the headline, "The 1995 NYC Veterans Day Parade Had $1.21 In The Bank. Then Donald Trump Stepped In." A meme circulating on Facebook similarly described Trump's intervention:This claim apparently originated with Trump himself, or at least it was touted on his campaign website in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. The website at the time stated: headline  campaign website Mr. Trump has long been a devoted supporter of veteran causes. In 1995, the fiftieth anniversary of World War II, only 100 spectators watched New York Citys Veteran Day Parade. It was an insult to all veterans. Approached by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the chief of New York Citys FBI office, Mr. Trump agreed to lead as Grand Marshall a second parade later that year. Mr. Trump made a $1 million matching donation to finance the Nations Day Parade. On Saturday, November 11th, over 1.4 million watched as Mr. Trump marched down Fifth Avenue with more than 25,000 veterans, some dressed in their vintage uniforms. A month later, Mr. Trump was honored in the Pentagon during a lunch with the Secretary of Defense and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff. First off, Trump's website contained some confusing pieces of misinformation: The Veterans Day parade in New York City went by the name the "Nation's Parade." The poorly attended parade "with only 100 spectators" occurred in 1994, not 1995 (The New York Times reported police did not give a crowd estimate). Only one Veteran's Day parade took place in the city in 1995  the Nation's Parade on Nov. 11. That event was slated by the U.S. Defense Department as representing "the official close of the 50th anniversary of World War II." reported We contacted the United War Veterans of New York (UWNY), which organized the Nation's Parade in 1995, to ask about claims that Trump's intervention saved the event from cancellation, and we were referred by spokesman Pat Smith to a Nov. 10, 1995, New York Times article about the event. Smith told us that Trump did make a financial contribution toward the parade, but also said UWNY is a small, volunteer-staffed group that doesn't keep records that could answer questions in detail about an event that occurred more than two decades ago. article  The 1995 Times article reported that Trump did make a financial contribution, but that he tried to make it in exchange for being named the parade's grand marshal even though he is not a veteran. The Times reported Trump gave $200,000, not $1 million: By mid-August, organizers had a bank account of exactly $1.21. A request to airlines to donate blankets for aging veterans was turned down because logos might not be visible on television. Then Donald Trump, a nonveteran, agreed to throw in $200,000 as well as raise money from his friends, in exchange for being named grand marshal. Since then, money has come in, though not enough to meet the original budget, which was reduced from $2.9 million to $2.4 million. Fireworks were just one of many cuts. In May 2016, CNN spoke to Vincent McGowan, the president emeritus of UWNY who organized the parade in 1995. McGowan said that Trump's contribution was "somewhere between $325,000 and $375,000," but McGowan also said Trump's donation did save the event. McGowan also said Trump was never the grand marshal because that honor was only given to military veterans. CNN In a follow-up story, the Times in 1995 reported that organizers had agreed to make Trump the parade's grand marshal, a move that had angered some veterans, while others expressed appreciation for his "crucial" financial assistance: reported Also in the reviewing stand was the developer Donald Trump, who provided the only note of controversy in an otherwise positive day. Many veterans were angry that organizers had agreed to name Mr. Trump, who is not a veteran, as grand marshal in exchange for his contribution of $200,000 and help in raising additional funds. Another story, dated Nov. 11, 1995, from the news service UPI, reported that Trump contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000 for the parade, which was viewed by parade Director Tom Fox as having been key: UPI Police estimated 500,000 people attended the largest military parade ever held in New York. Organizers, who placed the turnout at closer to a million, said the parade would not have been a success if it hadn't been for real estate developer Donald Trump, who contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000. "Donald Trump saved the parade," said parade director Tom Fox, himself a Vietnam veteran. "We had asked for donations from 200 corporations, and none of them came through," he said. "This donation is the single most important thing I've ever done," said a beaming Trump. "This is more important than all of my buildings and my casinos. This is my way of saying thank you to all the men and women in the armed services who have made it possible for me to become a success. Without them freedom and liberty would be gone." In sum, we are rating this claim "True" because two individuals involved with the planning of the 1995 parade stated on two separate occasions that Trump's efforts and donation did indeed enable the event to take place. Still unclear are the origins of other sources of funding. Martin, Douglas."Veterans Day Parade Tries for a Comeback."
The New York Times.10 November 1995. Fitzpatrick, David and Curt Devine."Trump Will Give $1 Million to Marine Charity, but There Are Other Discrepancies."
CNN.25 May 2016. McFadden, Robert D. "On Parade To the Beat of History."
The New York Times.12 November 1995. UPI."More Than 500,000 Watch Nation's Parade."
11 November 1995.