Says a proposed $1.05 billion Austin school district bond proposition will require no tax rate increase.
A handout urging voter support for aproposed $1.05 billion Austin school district bond issueon the November 2017 ballot singles out the need to repair and renovate schools averaging 40 years of age plus a desire to modernize or build 16 schools. Moreover, the handout from the Committee of Austins Children PAC says: Did you know? AISD Prop. 1 bonds will require no tax rate increase, a claim the group also makes onits website. Is that rate statement accurate? To rehash, the handout saysthe sought bondswont require a rate increase. Its silent on whether district residents will pay more in taxes if the proposition passes--which struck Austin lawyer Bill Aleshire, formerly Travis Countys elected judge, as misleading. Aleshire, who brought the handout to our attention, said by email: No one in their right mind should believe AISD can borrow $1 billion plus interest and not have a property tax increase as a result. When we asked, David Butts, a consultant to the PAC, told us by phone the group based its rate claim on district presentations. Butts said: Weve never said that you wouldnt pay higher taxes, in that barring an economic recession, escalating local property values stand to drive up how much the district reaps--without the district needing a rate bump. Property taxes are tied to assessed property values which in Austin (like other prosperous cities) lately spiral nearly every year. In this fact-check, well share assumptions behind the no-hike scenario and unpack estimates of how much money the proposed bonds would likely cost homeowners in increased tax bills. Its also worth noting the speculative quality of tax predictions. To our inquiry, Roger Falk of theTravis County Taxpayers Union, which opposes the proposition, questioned anyones ability to fact-check rate-related claims because, he said by phone, tax effects depend on unknowns including whether and how much total appraised property values change and if the districts intended debt repayment schedules and interest rates bear out. You cannot assume its a sunny day every day, Falk said. Its going to rain sometime. Austin districts assumptions District leaders have said that presuming total assessed property values continue to increase and also that the district repays more than half the proposed debt within a decade, the school board will be spared from considering an increase in the districts total tax rate of $1.192 per $100 valuation--the bulk of which covers day-to-day maintenance and operations. A September 2017Austin American-Statesmannews storyelaborated: The district points to its last bond election $392 million approved by voters in 2013 as an example of how it can tamp down the impact on property tax bills. Those bonds were expected to raise the tax rate by 3 cents, or about $38.40 a year to the property tax bill for a $200,000 home. But instead, the story said, the district, buoyed by increasing property values, lowered the tax rate by 5 cents per $100 of a homes assessed value. Homeowners are still paying more, of course, because property values in Austin have shot up 12 percent a year, on average, for the past five years. Tiffany Young, a district spokeswoman, emailed us the districts August 2017tax capacity analysisof the proposed bond costs, which included a summary of annual changes--of late 11-percent-plus annual increases--in total assessed property valuations in the district from 2008 through 2017:           SOURCE:Document showing tax capacity analysis of proposed bond debt, Austin Independent School District, Aug. 10, 2017 (received by email from Tiffany Young, senior communication specialist, AISD, Sept. 26, 2017) That news story noted that the districts payback plan for the proposed bond package assumes an annual increase in total assessed property values of 7 percent in the first two years and 1.5 percent for each subsequent year. Property values actually have a 10-year average growth rate of nearly 8 percent, the story said. School leaders advised that if theres a flattening in property-value increases, the district could tap $46 million in reserves, or savings, to make up for lost revenue. Also, the story quoted Ellen Wood, who chairs the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerces board of directors, calling district assumptions behind no tax-rate hike prediction conservative and appropriate. By phone, Wood told us chamber members based that judgment on talks with the districts chief financial officer, Nicole Conley Johnson, and a firm advising the district on the proposed issuance. To our inquiries, Conley Johnson reaffirmed the districts conclusion that the proposed bonds can be paid off without a tax-rate hike. In fact, Conley Johnson said by phone, she expects the district to land interest rates perhaps 2 percentage points less than the 5 percent rate assumed in its modeling, a decrease that would reduce repayment costs. Noting increased assessed property valuations in recent years, Conley Johnson also said its reasonable to expect assessed values to surge more each year than the 1.5 percent rate assumed in the modeling past the first couple years. If the proposition fails at the polls, Conley Johnson confirmed,the school board could reduce the debt portionof the district tax rate in 2021-22 by $0.0297 per $100 valuation to $0.0833 with additional reductions doable most subsequent years through 2039-40--though that scenario depends, perhaps improbably, on no additional costs accumulating in the intervening years. If the proposition passes, Conley Johnson said, in 2022, the district will need some $35.5 million to pay incremental costs on the proposed bonds. An estimated $35.5 million would be raised by from that $0.0297 per $100 valuation in tax rate, the district projects. Worst-case scenarios? We separately asked Conley Johnson andChris Allenof First Southwest, the firm hired by the district as financial advisers on the proposition, to lay out a worst-case scenario that might cause district officials to recommend a rate increase after all. Youd have to have a major economic downturn, Allen said by phone. Youd have to have the housing market plummet. Allen, referring to the districts assumed 7 percent increases in total assessed valuations in both 2019 and 2020, said: I think the 7 percent is conservative. If you look around, there are cranes everywhere. The housing and commercial market is on fire. Conley Johnson said by email: We estimate that if total assessed valuation growth stayed flat for the next 8 years or there was a cumulative decline in AV of 20%, we would need to consider increasing the tax rate. Of course. she said, these events would buck historical trends of the last 10 years where there was only year that AV declined, in 2011 due to the national recession--arguably the worst in history. Even still, there was subsequent growth thereafter and the decline was made-up after two years and growth doubled after that. Falk, the proposition foe, questioned the assumption that the district can repay the bonds at a 5 percent interest rate past this next year. Theres no science--no way to know--past one year, Falk said. Falk called the assumed annual increases in total property valuations a best guess. We also askedCharles Gilliland, a land-market expert at Texas A&M University, to evaluate the no-rate-increase claim. Gilliland said by phone the districts post-2020 assumption that total assessed property values will increase 1.5 percent annually seems pretty conservative. The rest of the story is its not going to be a nice steady increase, Gilliland said. There are going to be ups and downs. Generally, Gilliland said by email: Without exhaustive historical studies of the parameters of their model and an examination of the operating conditions of the district, I have no evidence to cast doubt on the assumptions underlying the districts analysis. Costs to taxpayers Falk called the tax-rate claim by itself a head fake intended to dupe voters into overlooking that each taxpayer would be paying more dollars to cover bond repayments. He also emailed us thetaxpayer groups analysis, which provides estimated effects on property tax bills by assuming that  total assessed valuations within district boundaries wont go up or down. Then again, the district has acknowledged that property owners will pay more in taxes to pay debt service on the bonds, if approved. A June 2017American-Statesmannews storyon school board members voting to place the proposition before voters initially noted that district officials said the tax rate would remain flat at $1.192 per $100 of assessed property value, with $1.079 designated for operations and $0.113 of the rate going toward repaying debt issued to fund capital improvements. Still: For the owner of the districts average taxable value home of $355,947, the school tax bills would total nearly $4,243. As properties increase in value, the story said, that same tax rate would lead to increasingly higher tax bills. District web pages devoted to the proposition similarly indicate property owners will likely face increases in what the district bills. We initially spotted no estimates of how much more, but estimates were provided when we asked. Lets cover those web posts, then turn to what the district gave us. Heres a question on the districts main FAQ section about the proposition: I've heard AISD say this bond will not raise my property tax rate. How is that possible? The 202-word reply stresses the districts plan not to issue the sought debt all at once plus plans to draw on other funds; it doesnt concede additional direct-to-taxpayer bond costs. We saw this question on a separate districtFinance FAQ web pageabout the proposition: So does this mean that I wont have an increase in my tax bill? The districts reply opens, No. That reply otherwise says higher taxes depend on the appraised value of taxable property, which is determined by the Travis Central Appraisal District, not AISD. An increase or decrease in taxable property value, even with no change in the tax rate, would result in an increase or decrease in the actual amount of taxes paid. The reply goes on to note that residents who qualify for Travis Countys over-65 homestead exemption wouldnt pay more in school taxes. Moreover, the reply continues, other governing entities levy property taxes including the city of Austin, Travis County, the Austin Community College District and the Travis County Health Care District. The rates for each entity are set annually by the elected or governing officials, the district says. The rate for each of the taxing entities is then applied to your home value, it says. We also noticed the last, 18th question on the districts main FAQ page for the proposition: What's the bottom line, the one thing you want voters to know? The districts reply: AISD needs to address facility deficiencies and is committed to creating 21st-century learning spaces for our students. We can do so without a tax rate increase. Conley Johnson told us that in 2021-22 (the third year of the district starting to sell and repay the bond debt being presented to voters), the cost to taxpayers of the new debt would range from $29.70 for the owner of a property with an assessed value of $100,000 up to $297 for the owner of a property with an assessed value of $1 million.See the districts full chart here. According to what Conley Johnson described as the districts worst-case modeling of the proposed bonds effect on taxes, the owner of an Austin homestead at theaverage 2017-18 assessed value($332,103) would see the debt portion of her or his district tax bill increase from $375 in 2017-18 to $484 in 2027-28--driven by expected bumps in assessed property values. Absent the sought bonds or other approved debt, this modeling indicates, the 2027-28 costs to such a homeowner for district debt would total $250.57. An owner of a homestead at the 2017-18median value($262,282) would face $382.75 in district debt-tied taxes in 2027-28--up from $296 in 2017-18 and greater than the $197.89 in such taxes the homeowner would face if the district doesnt issue additional debt. Theres more: As we made our inquiries, the district posted adocumentestimating each homesteading homeowners future tax payments to the district related to paying off the proposed bonds. Upshot: Starting in 2022, some $0.0297 per $100 valuation of the districts tax rate would generate sufficient revenue to pay debt service on the sought bonds, the document says. The share of the districts tax rate needed to pay that debt service will escalate in subsequent years, the document says, with that share reaching its maximum of $0.0530 per $100 valuation as of 2029. According to the document, the district estimates the dollar costs in annual taxes on the median-value homestead in the district--which in 2017 had an appraised value of $287,282--to be $77.90 in 2022 and $139.01 in 2029. At the upper end, the estimated annual dollar costs due to debt service on the proposed bonds to a homestead appraised at $1 million in 2017 is shown as $289.58 in 2022, $516.75 in 2029. Our ruling The PAC said the proposed Austin school district bonds will require no tax rate increase. Missing from this claim: Individual homeowners are expected to pay more in property taxes even if the tax rate remains the same, which looks likely thanks to rising property valuations in a hot real-estate market. We rate this statement, which lacks the important clarification that only the tax rate isnt expected to rise, Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUEThe statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.
Claim:  In 2002 you could trigger a $1 donation to paralysis research by sending a birthday greeting to actor Christopher Reeve.   . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] Please forward this email to your friends and encourage them to sign Christopher Reeve's birthday card at https://www.christopherreeve.org. For every signed birthday card, an anonymous donor will contribute $1 to the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation. Help support CRPF and Christopher by telling your friends!  Together we can raise even more money for paralysis research. Origins:  Most everyone familiar with actor Christopher Reeve (most famous for his portrayal of comic book superhero Superman in a series of four films between 1978 and 1987) knows that he had been paralyzed from the shoulders down since being thrown from a horse in a 1995 accident.  Reeve fell on his head, fracturing his first and second cervical vertebrae and damaging the nerve fibers of his spinal cord just below the brain stem; the injury left him a quadriplegic, dependent upon a ventilator to breathe and a power wheelchair for movement.   Christopher Reeve Superman Reeve (who died in 2004)   again came into the news in 2002 with the announcement of some small but extraordinary improvements in his condition.  Although doctors believed he had permanently lost all instantaneous and voluntary motor control and sensation below the shoulders, Reeve was able to move his right wrist and the fingers of his left hand, straighten his arms and legs and move them around in a swimming pool, breathe on his own for up to two hours without the aid of a respirator, and had regained the ability to distinguish between hot and cold and up to two-thirds of a normal sense of touch.   For the years prior to the improvements noted in 2002, Reeve had also devoted a good deal of his time and effort to raising funds for research to develop treatments and cures for paralysis caused by spinal cord injury and other central nervous system disorders and for programs aimed at improving the quality of life for people living with disabilities, causes he supported as Chairman of the Board of the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation (CRPF). CRPF In honor of Christopher Reeve's 50th birthday celebration on 25 September 2002, the CRPF web site offered visitors a chance to send virtual birthday greetings to the actor.  An anonymous donor offered to contribute $1 to the CRPF for every birthday greeting sent.   birthday greetings The usual question is: "Is this for real?"  The CRPF wouldn't provide us with details of who was funding the birthday greeting donations (that's what "anonymous" is all about, after all), but there's no reason to believe this program was anything other than what it claimed to be.  Participants didn't need to provide anything other than their names and addresses, and for the cynical who believed this was just another address-harvesting scheme, the CRPF's privacy policy promised that they "will not disclose your e-mail address or any other contact information you have provided."  (For the ultra-cynical,  we point out that you can always lie to the computer; it won't know the difference.) privacy policy Last updated:  8 October 2007    Sources:   Kluger, Jeffrey.  "Against All the Odds."   Time.  16 September 2002.     Talan, Jamie.  "Reeve's 'Exciting' Progress Lifts Hopes."   Newsday.  24 September 2002. FACT CHECK:  Did President Obama "suspend" the Second Amendment?  Claim:  President Obama has "suspended" the Second Amendment.     Examples:  [Collected via Twitter, October 2015] BREAKING NEWS- President Barack Hussein Obama Jr. SUSPENDS 2ND AMENDMENTRead more at https://t.co/CVT80kEfls https://t.co/CVT80kEfls  The Dc Gazette (@TheDcGazette) October 2, 2015 October 2, 2015   This is bull crap. Get rid of this idiot! He cant do this https://t.co/oqv0GWX1d2 https://t.co/oqv0GWX1d2  Mason Page (@MasonKanePage) October 2, 2015 October 2, 2015   Origins:   On 1 October 2015, ten people were killed in a mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon.   In the wake of the incident (and ensuing interest in the topic of gun violence), the disreputable web site Universal Free Press published an article with the clickbait headline "BREAKING NEWS  President Barack Hussein Obama Jr. SUSPENDS 2ND AMENDMENT," stating that: mass shooting In a move unprecedented by a sitting president and in wake of the recent mass shooting in Oregon, Barack Obama said Ive had enough and I will not allow more women and children to die by gun violence on my watch. Sources on Capitol Hill say, that Obama while in a cabinet meeting, was handed the recent statistical reports on violent crime and at the same time was told of another mass shooting, it was then that he exclaimed Are you joking, this is unacceptable and THIS time Im going to do something about it! He continued by saying, For too long, have I sat idly by and watched crime after crime be committed when there was a gun involved, well NO MORE, I have to think of the safety of the American people, after all, I took a solemn oath to do so. Sources close to the president explained that suspending a constitutional right was not within his power, Obama exclaimed,  I have certain powers granted to me and I intend to use them to keep the citizens of this great nation safe, if there is a legality issue, we can sort it out later. A few (but not all) users who shared the link on Twitter noted that the article was both prefaced by and concluded with a note indicating that its claims were entirely fabricated (and calculated to take advantage of the tragedy and produce revenue-generating traffic by provoking baseless outrage): *Disclaimer* This article is satire and there is no basis of fact for it to be taken seriously. Last updated:     2 October 2015 Originally published:   2 October 2015 U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine had an old prediction tossed back at him during a debate this summer. It was thrown by moderator Judy Woodruff, the anchor and managing editor of PBS NewsHour. She reminded Kaine that in 2016, when he was the Democratic nominee for vice president, he said the election of then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump would be a disaster for the economy. Woodruff asked Kaine to square that with the strong economic results during the first 18 months of the Trump administration: about3 million new jobs, the unemployment rate dippingbelow 4 percent, and soaring corporate profits. Kaine replied, The national economy was strong, in its longest expansion in private sector jobs, before President Trump came into office. We fact-checked Kaines claim that Trump, when he became president on Jan. 20, 2017, inherited the nations longest expansion of private jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics keepsmonthly recordson private sector employment back to 1939. They show that the U.S. experienced 82 months straight months of private sector job growth before Trump became president - from March 2010 through December 2016, when Barack Obama was in the White House. That easily qualifies for the longest streak during the eight decades the BLS had been keeping the statistics prior to Trumps presidency. The streak is still alive under Trump and - through August 2018, the latest statistics are available - is up to 112 months. The second longest streak was 64 months. It ran from May 1995 through October 2000, when Bill Clinton was president. The longest continuous drop in private employment lasted 22 months - from January 2008 through October 2009 during the Great Recession. That was during the last year of George W. Bushs administration and the first year of Obamas. Presidents from both political parties traditionally have been quick to claim the credit for good economies and fast to dodge the blame when times turn bad. Economists have repeatedly told us its mostly a political dance; that the policies of presidents and  governors dont drive economic ups and downs. Our ruling Kaine said, The national economy was strong in its largest expansion of private sector jobs before President Trump came into office. Data shows hes right. We rate his statement True. In December 2023, one of the most common examples of the Mandela Effect saw renewed online attention thanks in part to a TikTok video on the topic: that the Fruit of the Loom company logo once contained a cornucopia. The Mandela Effect is generally defined as a "collective misremembering" in which large numbers of people share the same false belief.  video generally defined @dimelifting #mandelaeffect #storytime #fypppp #greenscreen  original sound - Nicole  The TikTok video in question concludes that there has been a massive coverup at the corporate level. The video's creator decries the effect the alleged obfuscation has had on the general public. The cornucopia removal and coverup is "one of the greatest marketing ploys in history," she argued, "but at what cost?" Fervent belief in a Fruit of the Loom cornucopia is not uncommon. A post on Quora captures this viewpoint: post I have a strong opinion about the Fruit of the Loom logo and whether it had a cornucopia or not. I remember seeing a cornucopia in the logo when I was a kid, and I learned what it was from my school. A cornucopia is a horn-shaped basket that is filled with fruits and vegetables, and it symbolizes abundance and prosperity. I think the cornucopia made sense for the Fruit of the Loom brand because it showed that they had a variety of quality products. An image of the purported logo is often shared in defense of this claim: purported logo  However, that is a fabrication, not the actual Fruit of the Loom logo. The perception of a cornucopia goes back decades. For example, a 1994 piece in a local Florida paper about the actor, Samuel Wright, who played Sebastian the Crab in "The Little Mermaid" and who also appeared in Fruit of the Loom commercials, repeated the assertion that the logo contained a cornucopia in print: 1994 piece For 19 years, Wright made anywhere from 120-140 television commercials for Fruit of the Loom underwear. And he didn't even wear Fruit of the Looms. He wore skimpy bikini briefs. "My wife is European," he says from a hotel room in Tampa. "She said (cotton underwear) made me look like an old man." Anyhow, Fruit of the Loom's logo was initially a cornucopia swollen with an apple, green grapes, purple grapes, and their green leaves. Wright was the purple grape cluster. And he had to pretend Fruit of the Looms never found them that were great. While the existence of these commercials is factual, one cannot help but note that nobody played a cornucopia in the actual commercial series referenced in this article: these commercials  The company has, as well, officially weighed in on the claim. On June 26, 2023, the company tweeted an image from a USA Today crossword puzzle that included the clue "Fruit of the ____ (company that does not, in fact, have a cornucopia in its logo)." It noted that the "Mandela Effect is real," but that the cornucopia claims were false: tweeted The Mandela Effect is real, the cornucopia in our logo is not ? pic.twitter.com/qoiuvemsIy pic.twitter.com/qoiuvemsIy  Fruit of the Loom (@FruitOfTheLoom) June 26, 2023 June 26, 2023  The Fruit of the Loom logo has always contained an apple, green grapes, purple grapes, and leaves. Snopes searched archived newspaper advertisements from every decade from the 1910s to the 2020s and could not locate a single one with a cornucopia: Snopes searched newspaper advertisements every decade from the 1910s to the 2020s   (Snopes.com) In rebuttal to these facts, at least two major lines of purported evidence have been proffered. In broad terms, these arguments boil down to the claim that there are photographs that show Fruit of the Loom shirts with a logo that includes a cornucopia, and that legal filings related to its trademark describe that company's logo as including a cornucopia. The December TikTok video focused on the former claim. The legal argument is popular on Reddit.  video on Reddit While Snopes has no definitive explanation for the purported photographic evidence, we find its use as proof for an official cornucopia logo weak. Of the hundreds of emails received by Snopes, only two discrete images showing shirts with a cornucopia logo have been produced. Both images are allegedly taken from shirts found in thrift stores.  Most examples sent to Snopes appear to have their origins in a June 2023 post (above) that went viral in the r/funny subreddit, among other places. The only other example (below) stems from the aforementioned TikTok video: June 2023 post TikTok video  The provenance of these photos is unknown, and as a result their utility as evidence is limited. Two shirts on their own do not disprove the mountain of evidence attesting to the lack of cornucopia in the company's official logo. The legal argument presented to Snopes, also proffered on Reddit, is that, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Fruit of the Loom itself described its trademark as containing a cornucopia. on Reddit This misconception stems from the fact that at least one trademark registration document apparently filed by Fruit of the Loom used what is known as design search code 05.09.14 to describe the trademark  indicating an image with "Baskets of fruit; Containers of fruit; [or] Cornucopia (horn of plenty)." Reddit posts posit that this document has some legal bearing in the world of intellectual property law. registration document First, this is not the case. The primary goal of these search codes, according to the USPTO, is to identify the most "significant" visual design elements as an aid for prospective applications to search for similar trademarks. While Snopes has no insight into the legal decisions made by Fruit of the Loom in the 1970s, the 05.09.14 example contained in the USPTO database classification manual does share some visual similarity with the Fruit of the Loom logo at issue: significant  Second, and more to the point, this document is irrelevant. Filed in 1973, the corporate contact was listed as an office in Manhattan. The application itself was rejected by the USPTO. Whatever this document is, it does not represent the active Fruit of the Loom trademark application. The USPTO challenged the cornucopia-containing application in 1980, apparently rejecting it on clerical grounds. The application was officially canceled in 1988.  an office apparently rejecting canceled The active trademark registration, filed in 1981, lists Fruit of the Loom's Kentucky office as its contact and, crucially, does not use database search code 05.09.14. Instead, codes for several other non-cornucopia visual elements are included: active trademark Kentucky office 05.03.08 - More than one leaf, including scattered leaves, bunches of leaves not attached to branches 05.03.25 - Leaf, single; Other leaves 05.09.02 - Grapes 05.09.05 - Apples 05.09.06 - Avocados; Fruits with pits (apricots, peaches, plums, olives and the like) 26.03.02 - Ovals, plain single line; Plain single line ovals Because the document cited in support of the legal argument that Fruit of the Loom's logo once contained a cornucopia is a failed application that was replaced, or superseded, by an application that contained no descriptors of a cornucopia or cornucopia-related images, it also fails as evidence in support of a cornu-cover-up. Because no verified image of a Fruit of the Loom containing a cornucopia exists in print, and because the company has officially stated that its logo has never contained a cornucopia, we rate the claim as  1987 Fruit of the Loom "The Unbustables" TV Commercial. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5fH3ebtFtI. Accessed 5 July 2023. "Did One of the Old Fruit of the Loom Logos Include a Cornucopia?" Quora, https://www.quora.com/Did-one-of-the-old-Fruit-of-the-Loom-logos-include-a-cornucopia. Accessed 5 July 2023. "Fruit of the Loom Detergent Logo 1979." Newspapers.Com, 25 Apr. 1979, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-kokomo-tribune-fruit-of-the-loom-det/127691447/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo, 1926." Newspapers.Com, 3 Aug. 1926, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-bridgeport-telegram-fruit-of-the-loo/127688561/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 1940." Newspapers.Com, 25 Apr. 1940, https://www.newspapers.com/article/intelligencer-journal-fruit-of-the-loom/127688834/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 1951." Newspapers.Com, 23 Apr. 1951, https://www.newspapers.com/article/lancaster-new-era-fruit-of-the-loom-logo/127689672/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 1966." Newspapers.Com, 5 June 1966, https://www.newspapers.com/article/chicago-tribune-fruit-of-the-loom-logo-1/127690881/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 1987." Newspapers.Com, 2 Aug. 1987, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-marion-star-fruit-of-the-loom-logo-1/127691698/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo, 1996." Newspapers.Com, 15 Sept. 1996, https://www.newspapers.com/article/springfield-news-sun-fruit-of-the-loom-l/127692161/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 2008." Newspapers.Com, 10 Aug. 2008, https://www.newspapers.com/article/green-bay-press-gazette-fruit-of-the-loo/127692306/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 2011." Newspapers.Com, 16 Jan. 2011, https://www.newspapers.com/article/palladium-item-fruit-of-the-loom-logo-20/127692582/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo 2020." Newspapers.Com, 10 Mar. 2020, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-park-city-daily-news-fruit-of-the-lo/127692838/. "Fruit of the Loom Logo in 1917." Newspapers.Com, 26 Aug. 1917, https://www.newspapers.com/article/detroit-free-press-fruit-of-the-loom-log/127688395/. "Underwear Character Is Still A-Peeling." Newspapers.Com, 14 Oct. 1994, https://www.newspapers.com/article/florida-today-underwear-character-is-sti/127697411/. 15 U.S. Code  1052 - Trademarks Registrable on Principal Register; Concurrent Registration. LII / Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1052. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. 15 U.S. Code  1068 - Action of Director in Interference, Opposition, and Proceedings for Concurrent Use Registration or for Cancellation. LII / Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1068. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. Design Search Codes. https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/search/design-search-codes. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. FAQs. Fruit of the Loom, Inc., https://www.fotlinc.com/our-company/faqs/. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. Trademark Status & Document Retrieval. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73006089&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. ---. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73317339&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. USPTO. FRUIT OF THE LOOM - Fruit Of The Loom, Inc. Trademark Registration. USPTO.Report, https://uspto.report/TM/73006089. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024. A Democratic legislator declared that state aid fully fuels Texas charter schools while schools serving the vast bulk of students field less money. State Rep.Donna Howardof Austin said in her July 18, 2018tweet: Here's the thing. In Tx, charters get 100% state $/pupil funding while district schools (95% students) get about 1/3 funding from state w/ rest coming from local prop taxes (which is why those taxes are so high). Districts getting less b/c scarce $ going to charters. Howard was reacting to a national Associated Pressnews storyon billionaires championing charter schools. Since 2006, the story says, philanthropists and their private foundations and charities--topped by the Walton Family Foundation, run by heirs to the Walmart fortune--gave almost half a billion dollars to 52 state-level charter support organizations to sustain, defend and expand the charter schools movement. Texas charter schools--public schools with charters run most often by private nonprofit entities--have boomed since the 1995 Legislature authorized them by law. Such schools must meet state-set academic accountability standards, but theyre exempted from other laws affecting districts such as teacher certification and elementary school class-size limits. To our inquiry, Bruce Marchand of theTexas Charter Schools Associationcalled Howards jam-packed claim factually squishy solid. The squishy part, Marchand said by email, is the implication that 100% funded charters have something to do with high property taxes and that districts get less money because that money is going to charters. Districts get less, Marchand said, because state dollars follow students based on where theyre enrolled. Lets break down Howards tweet by its factual elements. Howard said charter schools get all their funding from the state: Charter schools get nearly all their funding from state aid, Marchand agreed by phone, drawing 3 percent from grants and federal sources. That heavy state reliance is logical, Marchand and others said, because unlike districts, charter schools lack the authority to levy property taxes. According to a December 2017 Texas Education Agencydocument summarizing charter school funding, state aid to charter schools escalated from nearly $417 million for 2005-06 to about $2 billion in 2015-16. Howard said school districts serve 95 percent of students: Charter schools serve a growing handful of pupils--5.5 percent of Texas public school students in 2017, according to figures we fielded by email from the TEAs DeEtta Culbertson. That year, she said, 705 charter campuses enrolled 296,323 students--a doubling since 2011, according to an August 2018agency presentationnoted by Marchand. (The state caps the number of state-issued charters, but a charter-holder may open more than one school.) An implication: Districts in 2017 served 94.5 percent of public school students. Howard said districts get one-third of their aid from the state:Earlier this year, we reviewed Legislative Budget Board figures to conclude that in the 1980s, lawmakers voted for the state to cover 70 percent of theFoundation School Program, which is the states primary way of funding schools. State aid, we found, ended up covering a little more than half of related state-local costs. State aid covered 44 percent of such costs in 2016; its expected to cover 38 percent of such costs in 2019. Thats more than a third. When we sought Howards factual backup, Jacob Cottingham in her office responded with materials including aJanuary 2018 LBB chartdelivering percentages like what we previously reported. Cottingham also emailed us a spreadsheet isolating state aid going to districts alone.According to the sheet, which Cottingham said he built based on LBB data, in 2016, more than $17.8 billion in state aid sent to districts accounted for 39 percent of state spending on public education. The sheet says that in 2019, more than $15.7 billion in state funds projected to go to districts will account for 32 percent of state school aid. Howard said the states one-third share of what schools spend is why school property taxes are so high:  To the contrary, we asked Howard, isnt it changes in the value of local property tax bases that drive how much state aid a district is entitled to receive? Howard replied with a statement noting that a districts per-pupil tax wealth is key to how much state aid flows. When students leave a district for a charter (or private school or drop out), the (districts) property wealth per student increases as there are fewer students, and the state's required minimum share to the district is decreased, Howard said. The TEAs Culbertson separately responded by email: One of the primary drivers of the Texas school finance system is student attendance. If a student leaves a school district for any reason, including moving out of state, enrolling in another school district, public charter school, or private school (including home school), the original school district would no longer incur the costs of educating that student, and the original school districts total funding entitlement would be reduced. Howard said districts get less money because dollars go to charter schools: Cottingham told us Howard reached that conclusion by reviewing changes in per-student state spending on charter schools and districts. Cottingham emailed us anLBB chartshowing Foundation School Program state aid per student enrolled in districts compared with charter schools from fiscal 2010 through fiscal 2016 plus estimated and projected aid for fiscal 2017 through fiscal 2019. The chart shows charter schools consistently getting thousands of dollars more per student in average daily attendance:  SOURCE: Chart,Foundation School Program State Aid and Average Daily Attendance for School Districts and Charter Schools, Fiscal Years 2010-19,Legislative Budget Board, 2018 (confirmed by email, R.J. DeSilva, communications officer, Legislative Budget Board, July 31, 2018) According to the chart, charter schools in 2016 fielded $8,956 in state aid per ADA and school districts on average drew $3,800--meaning charter schools got 136 percent of what districts drew.By our calculations, the chart shows charter schools getting 149 percent of what districts would have gotten in 2017 and 167 percent of what districts would get in 2018 and 190 percent of what districts would get in 2019. Cottingham told us the fact that state aid to districts goes up or down based on the value of local tax bases helps explain why districts are projected to get increasingly less in state aid than charter schools. Charter schools, he said, can count by law on getting each years full average adjusted state-aid allotment in contrast to districts whose allocations are affected by how much theyre expected to reap in property taxes. By phone, Amanda Brownson of  the Texas Association of School Business Officials offered a similar analysis. Another facet noted by Cottingham: The state ponies up the full per-student entitlement cost of each student--costing the state more than each per-student payment sent to districts. Of late, the August 2018 TEA presentation says, charter schools draw an adjusted state allotment of $6,540--equivalent, the agency says, to what a small district receives. Meantime, the presentation says, more than 95 percent of students enrolled in districts are in districts getting less than $6,540 in state allotments. We also heard back from Greg Worthington, a University of Texas doctoral student. By email, Worthington saidlegislation revising the school finance system that passed into law in a summer 2017 special sessionwould result in numerous districts losing chunks of per-student aid as charter schools draw more. Asked how funding of charter schools results in less money for districts, Worthington offered adetailed replycentered on reductions in aid to districts caused by students transferring to charter schools. This shouldnt surprise, Worthington indicated, in that the concept of school choicepromulgatedby the late economist Milton Friedman relies on schools competing for funding tied to enrollment. Friedman said government might be responsible for funding schools, Worthington wrote, but he maintained it isnt supposed to administer education. School choice policies embraced by many ruling Republicans ultimately work to replace the public school system with a market-based education system, Worthington said. Our ruling Howard said Texas charter schools get all their per-student aid from the state while school districts, which serve 95 percent of students, get a third of their funding that way with the rest drawn from property taxes. Also, Howard said, districts get less because scarce dollars go to charter schools. Howards points about student enrollment and state funding going to charter schools and school districts hold up. Its also true that a student who leaves a district school to attend a charter school costs the district state aid while that student brings the charter school thousands of dollars more in per-pupil state aid than what the district would get. This dense tweet lacks the clarification that upticks or slides in local property values greatly affect whether a district faces ups or downs in state aid. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In early August 2023, an advertisement was displayed to online users that claimed Oscar-winning actor George Clooney had come "out of the closet," apparently implying that he had recently revealed he is gay. The ad read, "Clooney, 64, Out of the Closet. At 64, George Clooney confirms the speculation."  This ad led to an extremely lengthy list article on reference.com that showed the headline, "Stars You May Not Know Are LGBTQ+." article The article began as follows: The entertainment industry has long been a space where members of the LGBTQ+ community have thrived, despite the societal pressures that have often kept them in the shadows. From the early days of Hollywood to the present day, there have been countless stars who identify as LGBTQ+, but many have kept their identities hidden for fear of retribution or damage to their careers. However, with the rise of LGBTQ+ rights and representation in recent years, more and more stars are coming out and proudly sharing their identities with the world. However, nowhere in the massive article was Clooney's name even once mentioned. It was nothing but false and misleading clickbait. In September 2014, Clooney married Amal Alamuddin, who, following the wedding, assumed his last name. married As of August 2023, we found no evidence that the couple had split or that Clooney had revealed he identified as part of the LGBTQ+ community. As for the misleading ad and article, in the website address (URL) of the story, the campaign name for the advertising campaign was visible. It read as, "go_002_btq_7-31_x_us_george_clooney_zero_28091c." In other words, the person or people who managed the ads were tracking various metrics, so that they could measure if it was successful in receiving clicks. The purpose of the ad and the idea of tracking its metrics were all about a strategy for making money. That strategy is called arbitrage. arbitrage Here's how arbitrage works: Taking the false Clooney ad as an example, the advertiser who created the ad hoped to make money based upon people viewing and clicking on the other ads in the extremely lengthy reference.com article. If they made more money back on their own ads in the reference.com article when compared to the budget they put toward the false Clooney ad, then they profited. Similar to this fact check, in the past, we previously reported about how advertisers had also claimed that stand-up comedian and TV host Jay Leno was gay and had a "gorgeous husband," and that Oscar-nominated actor Michelle Pfeiffer was married to a woman. Neither of these claims was true. Like the claim about Clooney, they were nothing more than misleading clickbait for arbitrage purposes. Jay Leno was gay Michelle Pfeiffer was married to a woman Liles, Jordan. "Does Michelle Pfeiffer Have a Wife?" Snopes, 15 Nov. 2021, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/michelle-pfeiffer-wife/. MacGuill, Dan. "Did Jay Leno Marry a 'Gorgeous Husband'?" Snopes, 23 Jan. 2021, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jay-leno-gorgeous-husband/. "Stars You May Not Know Are LGBTQ+." Reference.com, https://go.reference.com/entertainment/stars-you-may-not-know-are-lgbtq/. As she campaigns to upend GOP state Sen. Robert Cowles in one of the closely watched Wisconsin recall campaigns, Democrat Nancy Nusbaum is talking up her long record of public service.Now anally of Cowles, the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, is trying to use that record against Nusbaum.In a television ad paid for by its issues fund, the heavyweight business group is ripping Nusbaums fiscal record during her eight years as Brown County executive, which ended in 2003.Spending went up, taxes went up,theadsays in part. Everything Nancy Nusbaum touches goes up. When Nusbaum was Brown County executive, spending went up nearly 50 percent. Tell Nancy Nusbaum we expect fiscal responsibility to be real, not a lot of hot air.In the ad, hot air balloons and rockets rise to underline the point.When we sought backup from WMC, the group did not return calls. So we checked the record.Brown County officials looked up the budget numbers for us, focusing on the seven budgets Nusbaum signed from late 1995 to early 2003.Operating spending went up 53 percent over those seven years. That works out to an average increase of 6.3 percent per year. State, local and federal funds contribute to the budget.So the ad is on target numerically.Indeed, Nusbaum does not dispute the numbers in it and did not criticize the ad as unfair but noted the County Board had a role in the budgets.By contrast, the spending increase over the seven years following Nusbaums tenure was 34 percent, which is 4.2 percent per year on average.The ad pulls the statistic out without any context for what was behind it.Why the dramatic difference in spending?Nusbaum pointed to replacement of an overcrowded jail, the cost of state-mandated services, increasing urbanization and associated social service costs, and the costs of caring for an aging population, among other reasons.Property values and state aid to counties were rising, welfare and jail spending grew rapidly, and counties saw big increases in administrative costs for things such as information technology, said John Reinemann, legislative director for the Wisconsin Counties Association.Levy limits on counties were minimal compared with today, Reinemann noted.Reinemann told us that 7 percent to 8 percent annual spending increases such as those in Brown County were not uncommon in the late 1990s among Wisconsin counties.His view is backed up by a ranking of counties that shows Brown in the middle of the pack in growth of spending per capita from 1993-2001. That is from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a research organization.Spending in six key categories went up 6.3 percent annually during that time, the group found.Nusbaum, a retired teacher and former mayor of De Pere, said she prefers to point to the property tax rate instead of the total tax levy and kept it stable as executive. Brown County records show she did that.But the rate does not reflect the true cost of government, especially when it comes to property taxes. The rate can stay steady or decline, but tax bills can rise if the property tax levy (an indicator of spending) goes up.In Brown County, as elsewhere, increasing property values in the 1990s helped hold down the tax rate even as total tax levy collections rose. Statewide values jumped up 7.7 percent a year from 1993-2002, WTA found. In fact, statewide, net property tax rates actually dropped during the decade as property values soared.Lets conclude.A business group spotlighted the budget increases during Nusbaums term, suggesting through words and graphics that they were sky high.They certainly were large compared with the years that followed, for reasons related to decisions by Nusbaum, county supervisors, the state, and local residents -- as well as demographics and sociological trends.The number -- 50 percent -- is on target.But the ad leaves out information about the other factors that went into the spending. Indeed, Brown Countys spending was not atypical for the time and by at least one groups measure was in the middle of the pack.We rate the WMC claim Mostly True. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence's August 2018 announcement of plans for the creation of a sixth branch of the U.S. military dubbed "Space Force" drew mixed reactions from pundits, politicians, and Trump administration supporters and critics. Retired astronaut Mark Kelly was one of those who supposedly chimed in on the issue, as reflected in a meme circulated by social media users that quoted him as opining that the proposed Space Force was a "dumb idea":   This is a genuine quote from Mark Kelly, who flew several missions on NASA's Space Shuttle from 2001 to 2011. The wording was taken from a tweet the former astronaut posted in June 2018 shortly after President Trump directed the Pentagon to "begin the process necessary to establish a space force as the sixth branch of the armed forces": directed This is a dumb idea. The Air Force does this already. That is their job. Whats next, we move submarines to the 7th branch and call it the under-the-sea force? https://t.co/S1urOuJBe6 https://t.co/S1urOuJBe6  Mark Kelly (@ShuttleCDRKelly) June 19, 2018 June 19, 2018  Kelly elaborated on his position in an interview with MSNBC which took place shortly after Vice President Pence's announcement, saying that he stood by his "dumb idea" remark and that a Space Force would be redundant: Former astronaut Mark Kelly on President Trump's "Space Force" effort: "The only person that Ive heard say this is a fantastic idea is the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States. Everybody else says its redundant, its wasteful." https://t.co/5WNNuWy4v4 pic.twitter.com/e1c5uocTgv https://t.co/5WNNuWy4v4 pic.twitter.com/e1c5uocTgv  MSNBC (@MSNBC) August 9, 2018 August 9, 2018  Michael Dodge, an assistant professor in the Department of Space Studies at the University of North Dakota, noted Space.com that while other branches of the military (such as the U.S. Air Force) also started out as sectors of larger branches, the existence of the Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) would not necessarily be redundant because it would "free up the Air Force to focus on what it does best": Space.com President Donald Trump's administration is pushing to form a U.S. Space Force, a new military branch, but how would that agency differ from the Air Force Space Command, which already oversees much of the country's defense assets in space? The early version of the U.S. Air Force existed as the U.S. Army Air Corps, an aerial warfare sector of the U.S. Army. But as planes continued to advance technologically and find their way into mainstream travel, "Congress decided they needed to have a new branch of the military," Dodge said. The country needed a branch that could "address issues unique to this domain." The Air Force became the fifth branch of the U.S. armed forces in 1947. The Space Force would essentially serve the same purpose, but for space. Dodge said it would "free up the Air Force to focus on what it does best," as the new branch addressed issues unique to space. Dodge noted that this space-oriented, sixth military branch makes the most sense now. " [O]ur assets are so critical in outer space and everything that we do is so dependent on outer space that we need a new force capable of focusing on that domain by itself," he said." Another former astronaut, Buzz Aldrin, offered a different reaction to the new military branch. The Apollo 11 Lunar Module Pilot was in attendance in June 2018 when President Trump announced his intention to create a Space Force and later tweeted that the idea was "one giant leap" in the right direction: One giant leap in the right direction. #SpaceForce https://t.co/3ZAvB2Oex4 #SpaceForce https://t.co/3ZAvB2Oex4  Buzz Aldrin (@TheRealBuzz) August 10, 2018 August 10, 2018  Davenport, Christian.  "Pence Details Plan for Creation of Space Force in What Would be the Sixth Branch of the Military."
  The Washington Post.  9 August 2018.  Gohd, Chelsea.  "Trump Wants a Space Force  But We Have an Air Force Space Command."
  Space.com.  10 August 2018. Greshko, Michael.  "Would a U.S. Space Force Be Legal? Get the Facts."
  National Geographic.  9 August 2018. Stewart, Phil.  "Going Where No President Has Gone Before, Trump Wants Space Force by 2020."
  Reuters.  9 August 2018. On Feb. 12, 2024, a screenshot claimed to show a post from Travis Kelce's official X account that said, "How about this: I'll keep playing American football and Donald Trump can keep sucking Russian d***." The screenshotted post was an apparent response to former U.S. President Donald Trump suggesting that he had once threatened to encourage Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO allies. screenshot suggesting Shared by X account @FaithRubPol, the screenshot had the caption, "Travis Kelce SLAMS Trump over his NATO comments." (Screenshot via X) The above screenshot is fake and was shared by an account that describes itself as satirical in nature. As such, we rate it as "Labeled Satire." describes The X account @FaithRubPol's description states: "Most of the images we share are parodies." The screenshot also has the label "Parody by Back Rub." description We also found no evidence on Kelce's official account that he ever made such a statement. Furthermore, the account handle in the screenshot does not belong to Kelce. Kelce's real X account is @tkelce, while the screenshot shows the handle @tkelpe. @tkelce During a campaign rally on Feb. 10, 2024, Trump generated controversy when he said he would "encourage" Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO member states. He suggested he would not abide by the alliance's collective-defense clause  which states that if an ally is attacked it is considered an attack on all members  if that ally was not meeting defense spending obligations. said He cited a conversation from his time as president with an unnamed world leader: cited One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, "Well, sir, if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us?" I said, "You didn't pay, you're delinquent?" He said, "Yes, let's say that happened." "No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills." In sum, the above post is satirical in nature and completely fake. For background, here iswhywe sometimes write about satire/humor. why Haberman, Maggie, and Jonathan Swan. "G.O.P. Officials, Once Critical, Stand by Trump After NATO Comments." The New York Times, 12 Feb. 2024. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/us/politics/trump-nato-republicans.html.Accessed 13 Feb. 2024. Knutson, Jacob. "How Trump's NATO Comments Escalate His Disdain for America's Allies." Axios, 12 Feb. 2024, https://www.axios.com/2024/02/12/trump-nato-history. Accessed 13 Feb. 2024. The claim that McDonalds is the worlds largest purchaser of cow eyeballs shares roots with many other beware of fast food legends. In this particular case, the sentiment is of the huge fast food corporations only care about profits, so theyll put anything they can (legally) get away with in their food to save money variety.Snopes came across the below-displayed message online in 1999: legends A few weeks ago I was watching Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher on TV and one of the guests made a remark in a quite serious voice that the Billion dollar fast food chain McDonalds, is the largest purchaser of cow eyeballs. Now Ive hear about Burger King using camel meat and stuff, but this one was new to me. And the fact that Mcdonalds doesnt have an email address to contact them nor a toll free number doesnt give me much reassurance on the matter. Similar expressions of this anxiety have resulted in widespread tales about McDonalds making hamburgers fromworm meat, usingchicken feathersin their shakes, and even purchasing food supplies from a company named 100% Beef so that they can put any old dreck in their burgers while still legitimately advertising that they use 100% Beef products. worm meat chicken feathers We dont know what the going rate for cow eyeballs is, but we suspect that  just like worms  theyre too expensive to be practical as an alternative to real beef for a restaurant chain looking to save on their food costs. Youd think theyd be dirt cheap, because after all,who the heck would wantcow eyeballs? They actuallydohave other uses, however  many schools purchase them for students to dissect in biology labs, for example.  Whatever the market price of cow eyeballs, the idea of using them as filler in beef (or even in place of beef) just isnt practical. The wholesale price of beef for companies who purchase as much of it as McDonalds does is already very low, and the amount of eyeball meat available per cow is miniscule compared to the amount of real beef produced per animal. McDonalds If you really have your doubts about this one, check out theingredientlists on the McDonalds website. All of their hamburgers are made from 100% beef patties; furthermore, they define beef patty as being 100% pure USDA inspected beef; no additives, no fillers, no extenders. This means exactly what it says. When the U.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA)grades beef, it gradesbeef; it doesnt allow beef marketers to use the word as if it merely meant cow parts. ingredient USDA Some versions of this rumor posit that the cow eyes are used only as hamburger filler, or to make beef patties stick together better, or as tenderizer, or as thickener in milk shakes. Still, one has to wonder what the (presumably more expensive) alternative to cow eyeballs is, and what all the other fast food chains who cant get cow eyes (because McDonalds has cornered the market) use instead, and why competitors products dont cost significantly more (or are noticeably inferior) as a result. If you really dont want to eat at McDonalds, its not hard to come up with a few legitimate reasons not to. The lack of beef in their beef isnt one of them, though. dont want to eat at McDonalds This post was updated to meet Snopes' current formatting standards on Oct. 13, 2022.