Did every Democrat vote against a 2.8 percent increase in Social Security COLA?
In mid-October 2018, Facebook users shared an inaccurate meme asking "Were any of you aware that ALL the Democrats voted AGAINST the 2.8% Social Security cost of living increase?":     No Democrats, or any other legislators for that matter, voted for or against the 2.8 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase that Social Security recipients will see beginning in 2019. Since 1975, COLA increases have kicked in automatically and are based on changes in the consumer price index, a figure calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. figure Here's how the Social Security Administration has summarized the history of COLA increases: summarized Most people are aware that there are annual increases in Social Security benefits to offset the corrosive effects of inflation on fixed incomes. These increases, now known as Cost of Living Allowances (COLAs), are such an accepted feature of the program that it is difficult to imagine a time when there were no COLAs. But in fact, when Ida May Fuller received her first $22.54 benefit payment in January of 1940, this would be the same amount she would receive each month for the next 10 years. For Ida May Fuller, and the millions of other Social Security beneficiaries like her, the amount of that first benefit check was the amount they could expect to receive for life. It was not until the 1950 Amendments that Congress first legislated an increase in benefits. Current beneficiaries had their payments recomputed and Ida May Fuller, for example, saw her monthly check increase from $22.54 to $41.30. These recomputations were effective for September 1950 and appeared for the first time in the October 1950 checks. A second increase was legislated for September 1952. Together these two increases almost doubled the value of Social Security benefits for existing beneficiaries. From that point on, benefits were increased only when Congress enacted special legislation for that purpose. In 1972 legislation the law was changed to provide, beginning in 1975, for automatic annual cost-of-living allowances (i.e., COLAs) based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do beneficiaries have to await a special act of Congress to receive a benefit increase and no longer does inflation drain value from Social Security benefits. In 1972 legislation The latest increase will affect 62 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients starting in January 2019. It's the largest increase since 2012, when beneficiaries saw a 3.6 percent boost. affect largest Konish, Lorie.  "Your Social Security Check Will Get a 2.8% Boost in 2019."
  AL.com.  16 October 2018. Social Security Administration.  "Historical Background and Development of Social Security."
  Accessed 17 October 2018. Social Security Administration.  "Social Security Benefits to Increase in 2019."
  11 October 2018.
Claim:  The "real McCoy" refers to a type of automatic oiler invented by a black man.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, February 2000] Railroading was vital to the development of our economy and culture in the 19th century.  An example: the real McCoy refers to McCoys automated oilier and not his many imitators that where not nearly as good.  [Collected via e-mail, April 2005] Curiously, an invention left off [a list of black inventors] is perhaps the most distinctive of its kind, the McCoy Automatic Lubricator (US Pat #129,843).  Elijah McCoy invented an entirely new class of machinery improvement, being the very first time a railroad locomotive could be continuously lubricated while in motion.  Variations were used on virtually every steam locomotive built since.  The McCoy device was so popular that a number of inferior knockoffs appeared on the market - leading master mechanics of the railroads to specify the genuine article - the "Real McCoy." Origins:  While most folks instinctively grasp the meaning of the phrase "the real McCoy" (the genuine article, as opposed to an imitation), no one has the definitive answer as to where that peculiar expression came from. There are a number of competing theories as to who or what was "the real McCoy":  Elijah McCoy, inventor of a device that lubricated the moving parts of a railway locomotive, or his invention itself.  Someone from the Hatfield-McCoy family feud of the 1880s.   Products of the Nelson McCoy Pottery company in Ohio.  Booze supplied by Prohibition-era rum-runner named Bill McCoy, whose product was said to always be of the highest quality.  Joseph G. McCoy, the cattleman who laid out the Chisholm Trail.   A Pennsylvania wildcatter of the name of McCoy who diverted nitroglycerin from job sites to safecrackers, who in turn dubbed the explosives he supplied "the real McCoy" (to distinguish them from the homemade less reliable concoctions they sometimes used).  Mrs. McCoy of a 19th century Irish ballad wherein she thrashes her husband, thereby proving herself "the real McCoy."  The products of a British pharmaceutical company that were much in demand by addicts in the U.S. after passage of the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914, with the appellation spreading to any commercially produced drug product (to differentiate it from blackmarket drugs of dubious origin).  Arising from rivalry among branches of the Mackay clan in Scotland as to which was the most valid, with the name of one clan's leader (Reay Mackay) over time morphing into "real McCoy."  A corruption of "the real Macao," slang for pure heroin, the best of which supposedly came from Macao.  A corruption of "the real McKay," a slogan used to advertise the products of whisky distillers A & M McKay of Glasgow.  American welterweight champion Norman Selby, known as Kid McCoy. The saying's recorded history is murky, but while there is no indisputable origin for the term, one theory (which actually combines two of the above elements) does stand far above the rest. While the earliest verified print sighting of "the real McCoy" dates to 1908, the first surfacing of the phrase it likely stemmed from was noted in 1856: "A drappie o' the real McKay," referring to a brand of whisky produced in Scotland. Said brand of hooch subsequently came to be advertised under the slogan "the real McKay" in 1870, thereby exposing an even greater number of Scots to its existence. Over time, other sightings into which misspellings had crept were noted:   1865: The ceremony being concluded, Bacchus was worshipped to a most satisfactory extent - the supply of "the real MacKay" being unlimited - capital in quality, and accompanied with tempting viands.  1908: I took a good-size snort out of that big bottle [of furniture polish] in the middle.... Have you none of the clear McCoy handy around the house? (The item being described as "McCoy" in this sighting was whisky.)  1934: There's something very attractive about the real McKie when you meet it. These two points (misspellings creeping in plus the first McCoy sighting being about whisky) somewhat work to support the theory that the Scottish advertising slogan "the real McKay" became a tad garbled as it crossed the ocean into the U.S.   Yet however it got there, once it had arrived in the new land, it subsequently came to be associated with a boxer of some fame, thereby greatly increasing its spread. Norman Selby, better known  Norman Selby as Kid McCoy, was the American welterweight champion in 1896. As he gained weight, he moved up into the middleweight class, and during his career fought many notable heavyweights. Selby's life outside the ring was every bit as interesting as it was within it: he was married eight times (thrice to the same woman), served a nine-year prison sentence for the murder of a married lover, and ended his life by his own hand.  It is not known how he came by his "Kid McCoy" sobriquet. (Another nickname attached to him was "The Corkscrew Kid," in reference to his signature "corkscrew" punch.) But however he came by the McCoy handle, he did fight under it.  An apocryphal tale ties Norman Selby to the origin of  "the real McCoy." By its lights, he encountered a drunk in a bar who was skeptical of his claims to be the great fighter Kid McCoy. The boxer settled all doubt with one punch that flattened the sot. Upon regaining his feet, the now thoroughly convinced lush loudly announced to all present that the one who'd decked him was "the real McCoy."  Similarly, another legend states that McCoy had so many imitators that he eventually had to bill himself as Kid "The Real" McCoy. No reason exists to believe either tale; they appear more fanciful lore than anything else. However, the boxer's fame likely contributed to the popularity of the expression, as potentially did the fame of another pugilist who bore the actual surname: Al McCoy, middleweight title holder from 1914 to 1917.  That's the long way around to this most likely of explanations of the origin of "the real McCoy": a Scottish whisky slogan came to the U.S., with its "McKay" becoming "McCoy" in the process, with the saying subsequently further popularized through confusion between a popular boxer of the day (Kid McCoy) and the saying (the real McCoy). Of the many other potential origins for the phrase, while some contain elements that are rooted in history (there was a black inventor by name of Elijah McCoy who did invent a revolutionary device that allowed for the oiling of machines while in operation, and there was a famous cattle baron of the name of Joseph G. McCoy), most are not. If addicts ever referred to heroin as "the real Macao," we've yet to encounter an instance of it. Likewise, there's little reason to suppose that a Pennsylvania wildcatter named McCoy was selling nitroglycerin swiped from job sites to safecrackers.  Nelson McCoy Pottery wasn't founded until 1910 which, given the 1908 "real McCoy" sighting, puts it out of the running. 1910 Of the three less credible purported explanations that involve real people, although there was a famous cattle baron called Joseph G. McCoy, it's unlikely he was confused with anyone else, thereby requiring him to self-identify as "the real McCoy." Joseph G. McCoy Likewise, while the oiler invented by Elijah McCoy amounted to a startling development in its time, it does not appear to have been competing with copycats, thereby leaving buyers clamoring for "the real McCoy." Also, it was a specialized piece of equipment, which means its pool of potential purchasers was very small. It is therefore not believable that widespread consumer insistence upon having the McCoy oiler and no other created the phrase. Elijah McCoy Similarly, while there was a Prohibition-era rum runner named Bill McCoy, even if the booze he had been vending had been of the highest quality, he could not have been the McCoy celebrated in the saying, given that the line has been documented back to 1908, whereas Prohibition did not begin in the U.S. until 1920. Bill McCoy For the saying to not only have taken root but survived for more than a century, it had to have caught the public's imagination in its infancy rather than been merely a catchphrase within a small specialized area. A phrase first recorded as used in reference to whisky in 1856 then enshrined as a particular brand of firewater's official slogan in 1870 fits the bill in ways the other proffered explanations do not, especially if it were given a further boost via being confused with the nickname of a well-known boxer in its new homeland.  Barbara "boxer rebellion" Mikkelson Last updated:  19 February 2011   Rawson, Hugh.  Devious Derivations.   New York: Crown Trade Paperbacks, 1994.  ISBN 0-517-88128-4  (pp. 173-175).   The Compact Oxford English Dictionary.  Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.  ISBN 0-19-861258-3. With the fire of a Baptist preacher, Georgias newest presidential prospect warned a crowd of thousands that the country has gone astray under President Barack Obama.We have become a nation of crises, Republican Herman Cain shouted during his Saturday announcement at Centennial Olympic Park that hes running for president.Look at the facts. Dont listen to the rhetoric, he said. High gas prices. A rising national debt. High unemployment.Forty-seven million people on food stamps, Cain said. Thats 14 million more than when the current occupant of the White House took over.Food stamps? your PolitiFact Georgia scribes wondered. Whats with Georgia Republicans and food stamps lately?Last week, the states other presidential contender, Newt Gingrich, said Obama deserves to be called the most successful food stamp president in American history because 47 million Americans are on food stamps.We ruled Gingrichs statement Half True. For the most part, Gingrich got his facts straight but oversimplified who was to blame.Cain, a former radio talk show host and Godfathers Pizza CEO, urged the crowd at his rally to look at the facts. PolitiFact Georgia is all to happy to oblige him.Food stamps, officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, give certain low-income Americans vouchers to buy groceries.The most recent data show roughly 44.2 million people received SNAP benefits in February, the most recent data available.Cains numbers arent quite accurate, but hes close. The number of recipients has topped 44 million since December, which means his estimate is about 7 percent too high.The number of beneficiaries has climbed every single month since Obama took office, despite signs of an improving economy. According to historical data, Februarys count appears to be the highest in any month since the program was established in 1969.Obama took office in January 2009. That month, nearly 32 million people received SNAP benefits. That means the number of food stamp recipients has increased by about 12.2 million since the start of his administration.Cain placed the increase at 14 million, which is about 15 percent too high. Again, hes close, but not quite right.Whether Obama deserves the blame for the increase is far less clear.The rise in food stamps is a direct consequence of the Great Recession, which started more than a year before Obama took office. Conservatives and liberals agree that Obama inherited a troubled economy. Whether SNAP usage would have been lower if Republicans won the presidency is impossible to tell.The number of food stamp beneficiaries ticked upward under President George W. Bush because of policies that broadened eligibility for the program and more aggressive efforts to get eligible Americans to apply for benefits. These policies remained in place under Obama.Another reason assigning blame is tough is that there is typically a lag between when the broader economy begins to recover and when SNAP usage declines. The monthly growth has slowed for the past three months, and it could start declining in a month or two.Cains accusation against Obama was not as barbed as Gingrichs, but he did lay the blame for food stamp usage at the presidents feet. We therefore give the presidential candidate a Mostly True. After an unusually cruel winter and chilly spring, we couldnt stop dreaming of hot summer days at the seashore. Then Governor Chafee proposed nearly doubling fees at state beaches. It hit us like a bucket of ice water.Under the plan, the price for a season pass would increase to $60 for Rhode Islanders from $30. Daily rates for state residents would jump to $10 from $6 during the week and to $14 from $7 on weekends and holidays. Fees for out-of-staters would also increase.While discussing the proposed fees on WJAR-TVs 10 News Conference on April 3, Richard Licht, director of the Department of Administration, asserted they werent out of line.For $30 more, you are getting a season pass to one of the greatest sets of beaches in the country. You still, at $60, are less than some of the town beaches charge  I dont think thats an inordinate burden on the people of Rhode Island, Licht said.Could the fees atstate beachesstill be lower than town beaches  even if doubled?When we inquired where Licht got his information, the governors spokesman, Michael Trainor, told us wed hear back by the next day.While we waited, we made some phone calls and found 14 coastal communities that charge admission to their beaches. Most of the beach fees have been set for the season.Like a beach ball on a breezy day, the fees are all over the place. And there are many different categories, covering residents, non-residents and seniors. (The Chafee administration ultimately referred us to the state Department of Environmental Management, which cited many of the same figures we found in our survey. )We decided to focus on the fee that the majority of state residents -- who dont live in beach communities -- would pay for a season pass or a single day at the shore. If they visit a state beach, theyd all pay the new fees. If they visit a town beach, theyd pay that communitys non-resident fee.The most expensive non-resident season pass costs $175 for Little Comptons South Shore Beach. Middletowns Sachuest Beach, also known as Second Beach, charges $140. Next comes Charlestown, at $90. Passes go for $80 at Newports Eastons Beach and South Kingstown Town Beach and $70 at Wuskenau Town Beach in Westerly.So how does the states proposed $60 season pass compare? Of the eight towns that offer passes to non-residents, the state fee would be less than all but Portsmouth, which collects $50 for a pass to Sandy Point Beach, on the Sakonnet River.So far, so good for Licht.But what about daily fees? (Remember, were comparing state fees to local non-resident fees, setting aside favorable pricing for residents. )Lets begin with weekdays.The Chafee administration wants to increase the $6 daily state fee to $10.Three towns -- Warren, Bristol and Tiverton -- charge just $5 per day. Westerly charges $6 and Portsmouth charges $7.Prices are higher at the ocean beaches: $10 in Charlestown, Narragansett, Middletown and Newport; $12 in Little Compton; and $15 a day in South Kingstown and Jamestown. (Narragansett also charges a separate fee to walk onto the beach.) Two towns -- Barrington and North Kingstown -- dont allow non-residents to park at their beaches.So the $10 state fee would be less than 5 of the 12 towns that welcome out-of-towners.On weekends and holidays, the states new fee would be $14 -- less than fees in 8 of the 12 beach towns.So when Licht says the new state fees are less than some of the town beaches, we cant  disagree. In fact, the state fees are lower in many instances.We wont kick any sand at Licht on this one. We rate his claimTrue. In his speech at the Democratic National Committee in Charlotte, N.C., President Barack Obama mocked Republicans for turning to tax cuts as the solution to every problem.Have a surplus? Try a tax cut. Deficit too high? Try another. Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning! Obama said.Now, Ive cut taxes for those who need it  middle-class families and small businesses. But I dont believe that another round of tax breaks for millionaires will bring good jobs to our shores, or pay down our deficit, Obama said.Obama is often accused by Republicans of raising taxes, and he has raised some taxes during his presidency. Hes also said that he intends to raise income tax rates for couples who make more than $250,000 a year or single people who make more than $200,000 a year.Here, were going to look at his claim to cut taxes for middle-class families and small businesses. (Weve been tracking all of Obamas campaign promises about taxes on our Obameter. )Obama has signed off on two major tax cuts for middle-class families: the Making Work Pay tax credit that was part of the economic stimulus of 2009 and a temporary reduction in Social Security payroll taxes that went into effect in 2011.As part of the stimulus, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, single workers collected a $400 tax credit, and working couples got $800. The credit didnt come in the form of a check; it worked out so that most workers had about $400 less in federal income taxes withheld from their paychecks spread out over the entire year.Most workers received a tax cut under that plan, with the exception of some high earners. The tax cuts phased out for couples who make more than $250,000 or a single person making over $200,000, according to an analysis from thenonpartisan Tax Policy Center.The result mirrored what Obama promised he would do on the campaign. Obama pledged tax cuts of $500 for each worker and $1,000 for working couples. We rated the promisea Compromiseon ourObameterbecause the resulting tax cut was a little lower than what Obama wanted.That tax cut expired at the end of 2011. But Obama won another round of tax cuts for most workers in a December 2010 tax deal with Republicans in Congress. Those tax cuts -- a temporary reduction in workers payroll taxes, worth about 2 percent of total earnings -- expire in 2013. Again, the tax cut didnt come as a check, but gives workers a little more in their paychecks than they would have otherwise.Obama also has passed an array of tax cuts for small businesses.Eight of them were included in the stimulus, the Affordable Care Act (also known as the health care law), and the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (also known as the HIRE Act). Among the cuts were the exclusion of up to 75 percent of capital gains on key small business investments; a tax credit for the cost of health insurance for small business employees and new tax credits for hiring Americans out of work for at least two months.Another eight cuts came via the Small Business Jobs Act, signed by Obama in September of 2010. These included: adding deductions for business cell phone use; creating a new deduction for health care costs for the self-employed; allowing greater deductions for business start-up expenses; eliminating taxes on all capital gains from key small business investments, and raising the small business expense limit to $500,000.Three months later, the president signed a tax bill that raised the expense limit to 100 percent of small business new investments until the end of 2011. It also extended the elimination of capital gains taxes for small business investments through the end of 2012. (For more details, see our previous fact-check that provided at least 16 tax cuts to small businesses; we rated itMostly True. )To be clear, this doesnt mean the middle-class and small businesses havent seen any tax increases under the Obama administration. We rated his campaign promise that no family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase asPromise Broken. Obama has signed off on new taxes on cigarettes and indoor tanning. His health care law includes a tax penalty for people who dont buy health insurance; that starts in 2014. (It includes hardship exemptions for people who cant find affordable policies. )Also, under the health care law, small businesses that have more than 50 employees that dont offer their employees health insurance could face fines.Our rulingObama has raised some taxes during his presidency, but hes also pursued broad-based tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses. We particularly give weight here to the tax cuts that were part of the stimulus and the payroll tax holiday, which reduced taxes for broad swaths of the workforce. Some small businesses may have been hit by new taxes that were part of Obamas health law, but these would depend on the particular circumstances of each business. Also, there were new taxes on cigarettes and indoor tanning.Obama said he has cut taxes for those who need it  middle-class families, small businesses. He has, but he also has raised some taxes. So while his statement is accurate, it lacks that additional context. We rate his claim Mostly True. Claim:  Barack Obama's net worth increased over $10 million from 2008 to 2012. UNDETERMINED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October  2012] Seen on Facebook: Tea party's photo of  President Obama on a golf cart purporting his net worth 12/31/07 and 12/31/11  Origins:  This graphic claiming that Barack Obama's net worth had increased from $1.3 million at the end of 2007 to over $11.4 million by the end of 2011 was widely circulated in October 2012.   It's fair to say the Obamas' net worth has increased significantly during the time Barack Obama has been President, but fixing a specific  dollar amount to that increase is difficult: net worth figures for politicians are typically derived from analyzing financial disclosure forms, a method which leaves room for a good deal of interpretation. financial disclosure Certainly the dollar figures displayed in the above graphic were not just pulled out of thin air: CNN/Money did peg Barack Obama's net worth at $1.3 million in 2007, and some sources (such as this Associated Press article) stated his net worth in mid-2012 to be around $11.8 million.  CNN/Money Associated Press Other sources vary widely regarding the latter figure, however.  In mid-2012 Forbes estimated the Obamas' net worth to be $5.7 million (down slightly from the previous year), OpenSecrets.org put the figure somewhere in the broad range of "$1,566,014 to $7,764,999," and other sources listed similarly broad range estimates such as "somewhere between $2.6 million and nearly $8.3 million." Forbes OpenSecrets.org other sources The Forbes report noted why the online version of its article included a considerably lower estimation of the Obamas' net worth than the print version of its article had: The current issue of Forbes magazine values the Obamas at a shared net worth of nearly $9 million, based on the May 16, 2011 financial disclosure, the most up-to-date as of press time. The day after our issue went to press, Obama released his new financial disclosure form, showing that: 1) the Obamas have taken money out of treasurys; 2) book money is decreasing; and 3) the family still owes on its mortgage, disclosed for the first time. The latest disclosure also gave new information on the familys college savings plans, which allowed us to refine our valuation and  bring the sum down. The above valuation takes all this into account. Last updated:  16 October 2012 In May and June 2019, a misleading but widely seen meme about immigrants and Medicare benefits continued to circulate on Facebook:   Although the trope that undocumented immigrants are cashing in on U.S. government-funded public benefits for free is a common one, it's generally misleading. common one generally misleading Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research."In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs actually are helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So its the other way around -- its not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it."The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue.A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S.PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes  and thats true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons."Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of the ones who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money.  Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research. undocumented persons "In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs actually are helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So its the other way around -- its not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it." The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue. rejecting A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S. 2017 study PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes  and thats true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons." Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of the ones who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money. Frazee, Gretchen.  "4 Myths About How Immigrants Affect the U.S. Economy."
  PBS News Hour.  2 November 2018. Hirschfeld Davis, Julie, and Somini Sengupta. "Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees."
  The New York Times.  18 September 2017. Congressional Budget Office.  "The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments."
  December 2007. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine.  "The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration."
  2017. In the weeks after a gunman opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on 14 February 2018, killing seventeen people, Internet trolls and "hoaxers" continued to share an already completely debunked rumor that David Hogg  a teenaged survivor of the mass shooting who has since become an outspoken advocate of gun control  is actually a professional actor who went to school in southern California:   As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD "Eagles" mascot shirt two rows above him: reported previously Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF  Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018 February 21, 2018  Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.)  video blog Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the "March For Our Lives." known as The students' activism has made them the target of "hoaxers"  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government. hoaxers Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the "fringe." Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by "Hollywood elites." arrested jailed stalking ongoing lawsuits blunders claimed statement DAngelo, Bob.  "NRA: March Fueled By 'Gun-Hating Billionaires and Hollywood Elites.'"
Dayton Daily News.  25 March 2018. Herman, John. "The Making of a No. 1 YouTube Conspiracy Video After the Parkland Tragedy."
The New York Times.  21 February 2018. Chavez, Nicole.  "School Shooting Survivor Knocks Down 'Crisis Actor' Claim."
CNN.  21 February 2018. On 1 October 2017, pseudoscientific alternative health website NaturalNews.com, which is geared primarily toward supplement enthusiasts with a discerning taste for deep state conspiracy theories, posted an article ("Dont Look Now, But Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012") that attempts to cast doubt on the scientific veracity of global warming by first presenting the following grotesque caricature of a straw man argument: article straw man One of the most popular pieces of "evidence" that climate alarmists just love to bring up to prove the global warming narrative is the "all the ice is melting in the Arctic and the polar bears are dying" line. Weve all seen the documentaries where a polar bear is desperately clinging to a tiny piece of ice and you just know hes going to die soon. They article then presents two observations that make the generally factual point that there has been relatively more sea ice in the Arctic and glacial ice on Greenland in 2017 than there have been at specific times in the recent past: The latest figures from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, located at the University of Colorado, show that sea ice extent has increased by 40 percent since 2012. [...] [The Danish Polar Portal reports that]: If we rank the annual surface mass balance since 1981 from low to high, the lowest on record was 2011-2012 (38 Gt) and this year is the 5th highest out of the 37 year record. Danish Polar Portal To be clear, the primary data scientists use to document global warming are records of Earth's temperature over time, not doomed polar bear imagery. Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist for the independent, nongovernmental Berkeley Earth research group told us in an e-mail that, in this area, pretty much "all groups who provide estimates" of global temperature unequivocally point to nearly uninterrupted temperature rises since the 1970s, as shown in this comparison of various estimates produced by the climate and energy policy website Carbon Brief: Zeke Hausfather produced   "People interested in global warming are best-served looking at actual global temperatures," Hausfather said. While this temperature trend is uncontroversial and clear, the climate system as a whole is a complex beast with numerous entangled parts. The basic approach to writing a blog post that "debunks" the concept of global warming is to highlight without explanation various parts of that system at a single point in time. NaturalNews.com is no exception to that basic strategy here. Arctic Sea Ice Natural News cites a climate change denial blog called ClimateDepot.com as evidence of the claim that sea ice has grown 40 percent since 2012. In reality, the claim made by this website was more specific and less useful. In a post dated 18 September 2017, Climate Depot stated: stated Arctic sea ice extent is up 40% from this date five years ago. "Sea ice extent" is one of many different metrics used to characterize the presence of sea ice, and is generally defined as "the area of ocean [based on pixels in satellite imagery] where at least 15 percent of the surface is frozen". On the day of 17 September 2017, sea ice extent was indeed higher than it was on 17 September 2012: defined   This does not mean, however, that sea ice has grown almost 40 percent since 2012, nor does it mean that the overall trend in arctic sea ice is toward growth  it hasn't and it isn't. The issue here is that sea ice extent is quite variable from year to year, and thus looking at two discrete points is a fairly useless exercise without the full context. "We don't expect it to monotonically decrease every year," Hausfather told us.  This chart (using data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center) shows September sea ice extent compared against the same average used in the maps cited by Climate Depot, showing both this aforementioned variability but also an overall trend of reduced ice extent. Note that the year 2012 was no random year to select for comparison; it is actually the record lowest year in terms of Arctic sea ice extent  making anything compared to it necessarily higher: from   The overall trend of declining sea ice is even clearer when you look at a different measure: sea ice volume (presented by the Polar Science Center, below). Not only do such records show a clear negative trend, they also show just how anomalous 2012 was as a data point: Polar Science Center   In reality, 2017 was the eighth lowest year on record for Arctic sea ice extent since satellite measurements began in 1978. But in no world but the pseudo-scientific fringe internet would the concept of global warming rely on every single year breaking the previous year's record for sea ice minimum. eighth Tom Karl, the former director of NOAAs National Centers for Environmental Information, told us that 2017's sea ice extent was still much lower than the 1980-2010 average (by two standard deviations), and that, despite claims to the contrary, "one can't look at a trend over 5 years and say much about the impact of global warming as other factors are also important on these short time scales." director Glacial Ice on Greenland The NaturalNews.com approach for glacial ice on Greenland was similarly lacking scale and context. The main source for these arguments was a completely legitimate end-of-year report put out by the Danish Polar Portal, a website run by the Danish Meteorological Institute. In that report, the organization makes this factual statement: report Heavy snow and rain in winter with a relatively short and intermittent summer melt season have left the Greenland ice sheet with more ice than has been usual over the last twenty years  in fact we have to go back to the 1980s and 90s to see a year similar to this one in terms of snow fall and ice melt. This statement, and the figures presented by NaturalNews.com, are referring to a metric known as Surface Mass Balance (SMB), which Polar Portal describes: describes Each year glaciers gain ice from snow and freezing rain and lose ice by melt that runs off. Adding these together gives the surface mass budget (SMB) in Greenland, the ice sheet typically gains mass from around September to May and loses more mass than it gains in the ablation [melting] season of June, July and August. Importantly, however, this measurement only presents half the picture in terms of how much mass is being lost from year to year from Greenland's glaciers. That's because it does not include the rather significant portion of ice that breaks  or calves  off into the ocean to melt elsewhere. On average this accounts for about 500 Gt [gigatons] of further ice loss. This, as stated in the Polar Portal post, nearly matches the estimated gain in SMB reported by Natural News, effectively canceling it out. In a post on Carbon Brief, analysts with the Danish Meteorological Society put this years measurement in context: post While the Greenland ice sheet has seen a neutral, or small positive, change in ice for this year, it should be noted that Greenland has lost approximately 3,600bn tonnes of ice since 2002. Like the record of Arctic sea ice earlier, when put in the context of the entire trend of Greenland's ice mass over time (presented by Polar Portal below), 2017's measurement does nothing to change larger and completely unambiguous trends of overall melting: Polar Portal    Further, in the case of Greenland's ice sheet, there is not much of a mystery surrounding the lackluster amount of melting this year; a massive storm  the remnants of Hurricane Nicole  parked itself atop the continent, dumping a large amount of snow on the ice-covered continent: Hurricane Nicole dumping Heavy rain and snow in October in especially eastern Greenland gave record totals of precipitation in the main east coast town of Tasiilaq as the remnants of former hurricane Nicole passed by and, much as with Harvey in Houston this year, got lodged over eastern Greenland for some days. However, after Nicoles extreme precipitation, the rest of the winter was actually pretty average in terms of the amount of snow that fell. Because neither the higher-than-2012 arctic sea ice from 17 September 2017 nor the neutral amount of ice loss in Greenland in 2017 do anything to disrupt the overall trends of decreasing ice, and because climatological science does not require (nor does it expect) ice or temperature records to be broken every single year, we rank the claim that these observations are reasons to doubt the tenets of climate change as false. Watson, Tracey.  "Dont Look Now, but Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012."
  Natural News.  1 October 2017. Mottram, Ruth, et al.  "Guest Post: How the Greenland Ice Sheet Fared in 2017."
  Carbon Brief.  1 September 2017. Polar Portal.  "End of the SMB Season Summary 2017."
  12 September 2017. Morano, Marc.  "Massive Arctic Ice Gain (Up 40%) Since Low Point of 2012.
  Climate Depot.  19 September 2012. Hausfather, Zeke.  "State of the Climate: Warm Temperatures and Low Sea Ice Mark First Half of 2017."
  Carbon Brief.  21 July 2017. National Snow and Ice Data Center.  "Arctic Sea Ice at Minimum Extent."
  19 September 2017. Polar Science Center.  "PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis."
  Accessed 4 October 2017. NASA.  "End-of-Summer Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Eighth Lowest on Record."
  19 September 2017. NASA.  "NASA Sees Tropical Storm Nicole Going Extra-Tropical."
  18 October 2016. Just over a week ago, voters approved a new library taxing district, securing funding for the Multnomah County Library well into the future. During the campaign to persuade voters to mark yes on their ballots, the Library Yes! Committee made a number of arguments in the districts favor.One of the most ubiquitous was the oft-repeated fact that the Multnomah County Library was the second busiest in the nation. Given that Portland doesnt even crack the 25 largest cities in the nation (by population), this fact has always struck us as pretty interesting.During the campaign season, we were a bit distracted with various other claims, but now that things are bit quieter, we thought wed come back to this one -- if only for curiositys sake.We e-mailed Liz Kaufman, who handled media requests for the library district campaign, and she quickly followed up with a handy breakdown of statistics about the Multnomah County Library and its peer institutions, compiled by the American Library Association.The association doesnt track how busy a system is per se, but it does check the circulation -- or the total number of items issued in a given year. By that measure, the Multnomah County system is, indeed, the second busiest with 23,946,498.We followed up with a phone call to the association for good measure and spoke with Macey Morales, their media point-person. She cautioned that their figures came from the Public Library Associations survey. A total of 1,300 libraries from the U.S. and Canada voluntarily complete the survey, so the report reflects a sample of public libraries in North America, she wrote in a follow-up e-mail.That said, the Multnomah County system does have the second highest circulation in the most recent survey. The New York Public Library comes in first -- although to be fair, that system has some 87 branches compared to Multnomahs 18. A quick aside: We also have the second highest circulation per capita. In that category, we were edged out -- 33 to 34 per person a year -- by Ohios Cuyahoga County Public Library.Morales did point us to one other source, the Institute of Museum and Library Services. The institute does a more complete library census, looking at some 9,000 systems. The catch there is that their figures take a while to get published. Theyre currently waiting on 2010 figures.A report released by the institute in December 2009, said Multnomah County Library boasted the third highest circulation rate in the country -- theres no mention of who is first or second. Those figures, of course, would be somewhat dated compared to the other survey -- though potentially more complete.Its often said that the Multnomah County Library system is the nations second busiest. The most recent available statistics from a survey used widely in the industry backs up the claim.We rate this claim True. As U.S. President Donald Trump faced impeachment following the deadly Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, a video of a Texas pastor circulated widely online alleging that anonymous sources told him Trump would soon declare "martial law"  the temporary military takeover of civil functions such as policing and courts. faced deadly Capitol Rev. Wade McKinney, who leads a ministry in rural eastern Texas, used Facebook Live to stream himself talking in a vehicle for roughly 22 minutes on Jan. 9, and that video spread rapidly on YouTube and other platforms in the following days. In the footage, which Snopes obtained via McKinney's Facebook page before it was permanently removed, he said: other platforms I have got a lot of contacts the lord has helped me build over the last few years, and those contacts are people who have given me intelligence and given me information that has to do with our nation and it's future, so I could use it for Bible prophecy teaching. [...] We are looking imminently  and when I say imminently, I'm talking about the next two or three days  we're looking at a martial law being declared. This is coming straight from my contacts in D.C., ya'll. We are going to see martial law declared. What level, what degree of martial law? Whatever they have to do to bring things under a corrective mode. So, basically, what I'm trying to tell you is, you need to be prepared for there to be a martial law declaration. McKinney also claimed Trump's opponents in government "are going to be brought down" in some "house cleaning" and that the rest of America needed to prepare for that event. He urged viewers to secure cash, food, and supplies, such as fuel tanks for vehicles and bullets for gun owners, and develop communication plans should cell service supposedly stop. supposedly stop "It's the president's last effort," McKinney said of the alleged event, while making several other baseless claims regarding military efforts, the 2020 presidential election, and the Capitol insurrection. "We are in a battle for everything that God intended for this country." 2020 presidential election the Capitol insurrection   In short, the pastor alleged that Trump was preparing to invoke martial law and use military force to arrest his political opponents before Biden's inauguration on Jan. 20. use military force First, to investigate those claims, Snopes reached out to McKinney to learn more about his alleged sources in Washington, D.C., and unidentified military bases  people he did not name but said told him about the president's purported plans. The pastor did not respond to us. We will update this report when, or if, he returns our message. It is common practice for reputable news organizations to report information from credible people who requested anonymity out of fear of repercussions for speaking publicly and that journalists have cross-referenced with other sources. McKinney did not explain why, or under what circumstances, his alleged sources asked not to be named, nor did he outline any efforts to investigate their truthfulness. Now, let us explain the nature of the pastor's allegations. No federal statute nor the Constitution defines martial law. However, other executive authorities  such as those provided in the Insurrection Act  give presidents the power to deploy the military or the National Guard in U.S. cities, whether due to terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or other safety issues. Over the course of history, presidents have relied on martial law to order military forces to take the place of civilian governments, like in Hawaii during World War II. Insurrection Act like in Hawaii during World War II The Brennan Center for Justice said of martial law: said It describes a power that, in an emergency, allows the military to push aside civilian authorities and exercise jurisdiction over the population of a particular area. Laws are enforced by soldiers rather than local police. Policy decisions are made by military officers rather than elected officials. People accused of crimes are brought before military tribunals rather than ordinary civilian courts. In short, the military is in charge. [...] To some observers, a deployment of troops under the Insurrection Act might look and feel very much like martial law. Given the degree of confusion over the term, some within the media or the government itself might even call it martial law. Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act before or after he encouraged his supporters to try to block a ceremonial vote to affirm Biden's presidency and an angry mob broke into the Capitol on Jan. 6. Insurrection Act encouraged Additionally, he had not declared martial law as of this writing, and no credible evidence showed that he was preparing to do so. If, like McKinney alleged, people within the White House or Department of Defense wanted Americans to know that Trump was preparing to make the declaration, history shows they would not turn to one pastor living in rural Texas to spread the important announcement. Instead, they would use official communication methods, such as a news conference or public statement, to broadcast it widely. Also, Americans should rely on emergency management departments for trusted information on when, and how, they must prepare for natural or human-caused emergencies. None supported McKinney's recommendations to stock up on food and supplies prior to Biden's inauguration. Nonetheless, thousands of National Guard members were patrolling Washington, D.C., in the days between the Jan. 6 insurrection and Biden's swearing-in ceremony, and the FBI warned law enforcement agencies nationwide of armed protests at all 50 state capitols. warned But all of those efforts by military forces and law enforcement agencies were unrelated to martial law and the Insurrection Act, and they were not a scheme by Trump to arrest his political opponents during the final days of his term. Rather, they were strategies to try to preserve government properties and safety in the event of more election violence. In sum, since no evidence existed to support McKinney's assertion that credible sources said Trump was preparing to invoke martial law, we rate this claim