'Moving to Canada' Search Spike?
On 1 March 2016, a number of American states held "Super Tuesday" primaries. The next day, Google Trends tweeted that searches originating from the United Statesaboutemigrating from the toCanada reached an all-time high: Super Tuesday Searches for "Move to Canada" are higher than at any time in Google history #SuperTuesday pic.twitter.com/0KBJPrHdEO #SuperTuesday pic.twitter.com/0KBJPrHdEO  GoogleTrends (@GoogleTrends) March 2, 2016 Google offered no explanation for the spike, but on2 March 2016, the Washington Post published apiecethat maintained thatthe real winner of Super Tuesday was "Canada":  piece Donald Trump was projected to win in at least seven states. Chris Christie, who endorsed Trump last week, was shown standing behind the Republican presidential front-runner wearing an expression of unmasked horror. And, the government of Canadas immigration website was experiencing delays. Coincidence? The Internet didnt think so. By the end of the night, Trump had secured victories in seven states, well ahead of his competitors. But his popularity wasnt apparent on Facebook and Twitter, where users lamented the billionaire real estate moguls rise and contemplated fleeing the country ... Simon Rogers, a data editor at Google, noted that the phrases search popularity had increased by 350 percent between 8 p.m. and midnight Eastern. At midnight, the spike reached 1,500 percent. To quote Trump himself, Just look at the numbers, way up! The Washington Post included a tweet of a screenshot of the Canadian immigration web site published late on 1 March 2015:  Canada's immigration website is being overloaded with web traffic after Super Tuesday results. pic.twitter.com/JqxW8ZSUHB  jay newman (@Big_Dread) March 2, 2016 pic.twitter.com/JqxW8ZSUHB March 2, 2016  However, it wasn't immediately clear whether Super Tuesday (or any other specific event) spurred the search spike. U.S. News & World Report dug into the data, and discovered that the searches were indeed highest in two states where Trump won primaries on Super Tuesday (Massachusetts and Virginia). discovered But that outlet uncovered some other related search data that suggested the cause and effect wasn't necessarily cut and dried. For example, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders received equal attention in related searches, but no one seemed to be blaming the spike on him:    Vox pointed out that while the spike following the re-election of George W. Bush appeared smaller, that was also a periodbeforesmartphones and widespread use of social media. TIME reported that immigration did increasefollowing that election, but no one is sure specifically what caused thatuptick. (Confounding factors like a weak economy or increased internet relationships could have also been factors.) pointed reported Shortly after the story made its rounds, psychology professor Adam Alter speculatedthat few truly would leave the United States: speculated In truth, though, few of Trumps detractors are likely to leave the country because of Novembers results. And had Mitt Romney won in 2012, as I wrote then for the Atlantic, few diehard supporters of President Obamas would have done so, either. This pattern has a history: Twelve years ago, as George W. Bush took a commanding lead over John F. Kerry in the polls, Canadian immigration applications tripled. Visits to the immigration departments website skyrocketed from an average of 20,000 per day to 115,000 the day after Bush won the election. A small crop of diehard liberals followed through, but U.S-Canadian immigration was ultimately unchanged in the year following the election. Two years later, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh promised to move to Costa Rica if the Affordable Care Act passed. It did, but Limbaugh still lives in Palm Beach, Fla. Why do so many disgruntled voters threaten to leave the country, only to see so few actually follow through? Because people overestimate how much pain theyll feel when they experience a dreaded outcome. A key aspect of the rumor hinged on the number of Americans searching for ways to get out of the country on Canada'sofficial immigration site, but when we visited that link on 9 March 2016, a nearly identical error message appeared: link    The exact impetus for the rise insearchesfor the phrase "move to Canada" remains unclear.WhileAmericans on both sides of the aislethreaten to leave thecountry for political reasons during every election, studiessuggest that only a handful follow through with such plans. Also, reported error messages on the Canadian immigration website on 1 March 2016 were still in place on 9 March 2016, more than a weekafterthe spike in searches abated.
In a Milwaukee Public Radiointerviewon Sept. 22, 2014, Democrat Mary Burke critiqued Gov. Scott Walkers jobs strategy, saying the Republican governor generally believes that you give tax breaks to those at the top and the special interests and somehow it trickles down and creates jobs. Well, Im a business person. Thats not how jobs get created, countered Burke, who formerly served as a Trek Bicycle Corp. executive and state Commerce secretary. So, its a flawed model and I have a very different model and I lay out in my jobs plan the five core strategies on how were going to do this, Burke continued, before making a claim we want to check. It means we need to have a more entrepreneurial climate in Wisconsin. Thats one of them (her five strategies). Right now, were 46th in the country in terms of new businesses started. Just the other day, werated Truea Walker claim that Wisconsin ranks 11th in total business establishment growth, compared with 47th in the years that Burke was Commerce secretary. So we wondered whether Burkes claim contradicts that. As well see, terminology is key. Different measures Walker referred to business establishments, a term that means a business location, such as a new store or factory or farm. A single company can have multiple establishments, and new establishments can be opened by existing or new firms. So its a particular measure. Burkes terminology is different than Walkers,and refers to a different measuring stick. In October 2013, days after announcing her candidacy for governor, Burke said Wisconsin was 49th in the United States in new businesses created. We rated her statementMostly True. Burke cited the Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity, an annual study produced by the nonpartisan Kauffman Foundation, a Kansas City-based group that works to foster entrepreneurial activity. Business administration professorStewart Thornhill, executive director of the Institute for Entrepreneurial Studies at the University of Michigan, told us it is a widely cited measure. The index uses U.S. Census data to capture the number of new business owners in their first month of significant business activity. InKauffmans 2013 index, Wisconsin tied with Michigan for 48th among the states in the number of entrepreneurs per 100,000 people, ahead of only Nebraska and Minnesota. So, whats the landscape now? Burkes evidence To back Burkes new claim, her campaign cited the2014 Kauffman index. Here are the states rated lowest in terms of new business owners in their first month of significant business activity:  Rank/State Entrepreneurs per 100,000 people U.S. average 280 (tie) Wisconsin and Washington 170 (tie) Minnesota and Indiana 160 Rhode Island 140 Iowa 110  So, Wisconsin is actually one notch higher than Burke indicated. On one hand, tying for 45th is an improvement from 48th in the 2013 index. On the other hand, Wisconsins 2014 rate of 170 entrepreneurs per 100,000 people is actually lower than its 2013 rate of 180. (Montana ranked first in both 2013 and 2014. Its 2014 rate was 610 entrepreneurs per 100,000 people.) Walkers response Walker campaign spokeswoman Alleigh Marre pointed out that in our earlier Burke factcheck, the Kauffman Foundation warned that its index isnt meant to provide a precise ranking of states. But its report in effect does that by reporting precise ratings and singling out states in the top five highest and lowest groups. Marre also cited other business-creation statistics, including the Walker claim about total business establishment growth. But, again, that is a different measure than the one Burke cites. Our rating Burke said Wisconsin is 46th in the country in terms of new businesses started. Wisconsin actually ties for 45th in the well-known Kauffman index, in terms of new business owners in their first month of significant business activity. We rate the statement Mostly True. To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelsweb page. "The Price Is Right" is not ending, nor did its host, Drew Carey, endorse keto diet pills, despite what some readers might have seen online in a fake article that was designed to mimic the Us Weekly website. The Price Is Right Drew Carey keto Us Weekly On May 9, 2022, we looked at a paid advertisement from the Blossom Words Facebook page that showed a picture of Carey with a sad expression on his face. The ad read, "What you didn't know about the 'Price Is Right' host. Will the show stay on air?" It appeared to hint that the long-running game show would be ending. However, this was nothing but misleading clickbait to try to sell a keto diet pill product named Lifestyle Keto. Facebook Carey Price Is Right  The ad appeared to vaguely hint that something was revealed about Carey that he was sad about. We previously saw this same clickbait tactic used with "Jeopardy" host Mayim Bialik. In that instance, an ad falsely claimed that there were "allegations" against Bialik. The ad led to a fake CBD gummies endorsement page that mentioned nothing of any "allegations" against the TV star, because there were none. Carey Jeopardy Mayim Bialik CBD After clicking the ad with Carey's sad facial expression, we were led to a scammy website (entertainmentnewsnow.net) that published a fake Us Weekly article. It appeared that scammers had copied the design from the official Us Weekly website and recreated it to push their scam, all seemingly without the authorization of the magazine's parent company, A360 Media, LLC. A360 Media, LLC  The article included a fake interview between Carey and Ellen DeGeneres in which he purportedly endorsed a product named Lifestyle Keto. The interview supposedly happened on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show." At one point during the fake interview, DeGeneres supposedly asked, "Lifestyle Keto? You mean Lifestyle Ketosis? I think I saw something on Dr. Oz about it." We found no record of this interview or any mention of Lifestyle Keto on Dr. Mehmet Oz's show, because it was completely made up by the person or people who designed the website. Ellen DeGeneres Dr. Mehmet Oz The fake interview in the fake Us Weekly article had the following headline: "After Drew Careys Shocking Health News- Millions Of Americans Are Melting Body Fat & Getting Ripped Thanks To His Intermittent Keto Routine!" It began like this: The Price Is Right's Drew Carey has recently opened up about his recent body transformation after having battled with weight problems for most of his life. Drew was recently announced as one of Time's 100 Most Influential People, and is a loving father. Carey said that for his entire comedy career, he had tried everything. He tried a lot of classes, he tried his own healthy recipes, but nothing worked like Lifestyle Keto did. Like millions of parents across North America, the TV star seems to swear by Keto Prime, but he has said it was hard to find something that worked and he trusted - it took him years to find this keto solution. In 2022, Drew Carey told US Weekly Magazine that he had tried almost every fitness style, class, and supplement out there, but was yet to figure out what works for him. The Price Is Right "I tried spinning, I tried running, I tried Pilates. I realized I don't like running ... I refuse to do it," Drew Carey told the publication. Eventually, he said he fell in love with Lifestyle Keto. This whole article was both misleading and false. Again, we found no record that Carey had ever endorsed Lifestyle Keto or any other keto diet pills. To cover all of the bases for any future claims, we also found no evidence that he endorsed any CBD gummies or oil products. We previously saw Us Weekly's website design being used in other keto diet pill scams, all seemingly without the publisher's authorization. In 2018, we debunked a claim to the effect that singer Kelly Clarkson had been fired from the reality TV series "The Voice" and that she later endorsed keto diet pills. debunked Kelly Clarkson In 2021, another fake article that mimicked the Us Weekly website design claimed that the cast of the "Shark Tank" reality TV series had endorsed a product named Keto Burn. All of this was false. claimed Shark Tank In 2010, People.com published an article about the real way that Carey said he lost 80 pounds. Keto diet pills didn't appear in the story: article So how'd he do it? No carbs, Carey says. I have cheated a couple times, but basically no carbs, not even a cracker. No bread at all. No pizza, nothing. No corn, no beans, no starches of any kind. Egg whites in the morning or like, Greek yogurt, cut some fruit. He snacks on fruit, and for dinner he ll have grilled chicken and steamed vegetables and water. I dont drink anything but water, he says. No coffee, no tea, no soda. In sum, no, "The Price Is Right" is not ending or going off the air, nor did Carey ever endorse Lifestyle Keto or any other keto diet pill products. All of this was false. The Price Is Right Source: Hammel, Sara. Drew Carey: How I Lost 80 Lbs. People.com, 29 July 2010, https://people.com/health/drew-carey-how-i-lost-80-lbs/. As U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimacy of mail-in voting during the summer of 2020, numerous Snopes readers asked us to investigate whether the leader of the U.S. Postal Service was carrying out a nefarious scheme to help Trump win another presidential term. mail-in voting In late July and early August, various rumors surfaced regarding Louis DeJoy, a North Carolina businessman whom the Postal Service's governing board selected to run the agency in May 2020. For example, a viral tweet thread alleged: viral tweet My mailman just confirmed they have all officially been told to "SLOW THE MAIL DOWN," per trump's Postmaster General. ...He says that there is backed up mail ALL OVER THE FLOOR. He's never seen anything like it. It has ALREADY begun. But as long as we keep each other informed, we can beat their dirty tricks with INFORMATION.   The claim's underlying notions were these: DeJoy was a political ally to the Republican president, and the new postmaster general had used his new authority to order Postal Service carriers and clerks to slow deliveries to help Trump win the 2020 November election. A backlog of ballots in the weeks or days before Election Day, critics of the president worried, could lead to votes going uncounted or deemed invalid due to state laws governing mail-in election deadlines. state laws What follows is an examination of federal documents obtained by Snopes  including letters by members of Congress, campaign finance reports, and internal memos to Postal Service employees  as well as interviews with postal union representatives and a Postal Service spokesperson, to determine the legitimacy of those questions. DeJoy could not be reached for an interview for this report.  Note: Snopes not only investigated DeJoy's relationship to Trump, but his financial stake in companies that compete with the Postal Service to evaluate if, or to what extent, his past investments provided any evidence of a plan to undermine the Postal Service's longstanding mission: to provide mail service to every American, no matter their address or income. Yes. DeJoy, who lives in Greensboro, donated more than $1.2 million to the Trump campaign between August 2016 and February 2020, according to campaign finance reports compiled by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Federal Elections Commission It's unclear when or how DeJoy developed a relationship with Trump, and why he decided to support the billionaire's political pursuits. In a 2005 interview with Greensboro's local newspaper, DeJoy  then-CEO of New Breed Logistics, a distribution and warehousing company  appeared less supportive of Trump, saying his self-important attitude on the reality-TV show "The Apprentice" was destructive. 2005 interview The Apprentice "I'd be fired," DeJoy said, if he was a contestant. Nonetheless, by early 2017, DeJoy was among his state's top donors to Trump (see below for The Charlotte Observer's list that ranks DeJoy at No. 3 with a total contribution of $111,000). And by October of that year, DeJoy had become close enough to the president to host him and other donors for fundraiser at his Greensboro house. top donors Greensboro house.     Also, by that time, DeJoy's wife, Aldona Wos, had been appointed by the president to serve as vice chair of a White House commission that oversees paid fellowships in federal offices, according to the couple's foundation website. foundation website In addition to his contributions to Trump's political campaigns specifically, DeJoy has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican causes or campaigns over decades, the FEC records show. The Postal Service's governing board, a group appointed by the president with confirmation from the Senate, selected DeJoy as Postmaster General on May 6, 2020, after what it described as an extensive nationwide search for qualified candidates. At the time of that decision, Trump had appointed all six board members  Chairman Robert Duncan, John Barger, Ron Bloom, Roman Martinez IV, Donald Moak, and William Zollars  since the early days of his presidency. what it described Robert Duncan John Barger Ron Bloom Roman Martinez IV Donald Moak William Zollars  DeJoy, who was in charge of fundraising for the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Charlotte when the board made its announcement, made the following donations since the start of 2020, according to filings from the FEC: National Republican Congressional Committee. National Republican Congressional Committee Facebook In sum, considering DeJoy's record of donations, as well as evidence of him hosting a Trump fundraiser at his Greensboro home in fall 2017, it is accurate to claim that the new postmaster general is a political ally to the Republican president.  home The answer to this question is less clear. In summer 2020, the viral claim about DeJoy  that he had directed carriers to delay mail to benefit Trump's reelection campaign (which we unpack below)  took on another layer: that DeJoy had also allegedly invested $70 million of his own money in delivery companies that compete with the Postal Service. another layer allegedly     That allegation, which we deemed true (see the explanation below), was particularly worrisome for critics of Trump and DeJoy, who believed the alleged holdings were more proof of the two leaders conspiring together  this time in an attempt to privatize the Postal Service. critics Here's some context before we dive into DeJoy's personal assets: Conservative Republicans have long pushed to remove government from mail services that they believe should be left to the private commercial market. Since Trump took office, he has called the Postal Service "a joke" or Amazon's "delivery boy," considering its package rates, and has floated the idea of eventually privatizing the agency. a joke delivery boy eventually privatizing the agency Meanwhile, others fear dismantling the federally-mandated mail service would disproportionately affect people who live in rural areas, where private companies such as FedEx and UPS either charge higher rates or do no shipments at all. At the same time, the Postal Service  which does not receive tax dollars for its operating expenses  faces a worsening financial situation due to a 2006 congressional mandate that required the agency to prepay health care benefits of retirees, as well as a decline in first-class mail customers. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated those long-standing problems, forcing several post offices nationwide to completely close or scale back hours. congressional mandate coronavirus pandemic scale back hours For instance, on April 9, 2020, roughly one month before DeJoy was selected to lead the Postal Service, then-Postmaster General Megan Brennan said the agency was preparing for a $13 billion revenue shortfall due directly to COVID-19 and an additional $54.3 billion in losses over 10 years. Considering those projections, she said the agency could run out of cash this fiscal year  or the end of September  without federal intervention. (Brennan announced her retirement in October 2019, after more than 30 years with the agency.) April 9, 2020 announced her retirement The former Postal Service leader made those comments shortly after federal leaders negotiated a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 economic relief package, called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which, initially, included a $13 billion one-time boost for the mail service. But, purportedly at the urging of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and aides to Trump, congressional leaders removed that provision from the stimulus package, and instead included a $10 billion loan that the Trump administration could leverage in its favor. Then, on July 29, 2020, The Washington Post reported that under DeJoy's leadership, the postal agency gave Mnuchin's office's proprietary information about the Postal Service's most lucrative private-sector contracts, such as Amazon, FedEx and UPS, in exchange for the loan money. economic relief package Steven Mnuchin The Washington Post By that time, Congressional leaders and Trump were battling yet again over another emergency relief package; Democrats proposed a $25 billion boost for the Postal Service but then lowered that amount to $10 billion during talks with Republicans. On Aug. 13, 2020, during an interview on Fox Business Network, the president said frankly the tug-and-pull over Postal Service funding was part of his administration's plan to try to make it harder for the agency to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots in the November election. If we dont make a deal, that means they dont get the money, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to the false claim that Democrats are are proposing a universal mail-in voting system. That means they cant have universal mail-in voting; they just cant have it. told Which brings us to DeJoy's assets, and the above-mentioned claim that he had "$70 million invested in companies that compete with USPS." For the basis of this analysis, we considered private companies that provide shipping or distribution services, such as DHL, the FedEx Corporation, and United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), business competitors with the post office. For more than 30 years, DeJoy was the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a supply chain business that contracted with a variety of public and private companies, including the Postal Service. In 2014, XPO Logistics acquired DeJoy's company, and he served on the company's executive team or board of directors until May 2018. According to internal documents, which we obtained using the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) database of company filings, XPO Logistics considered its competitors to include DHL, FedEx, UPS, and J.B. Hunt Transport Services.  XPO Logistics DHL FedEx UPS J.B. Hunt Transport Services Aside from that evidence, which proved DeJoy's former company competed for business with organizations that also competed with the Postal Service, Snopes uncovered a letter from his wife, Wos, to a White House legal advisor on January 3, 2020, that listed her family's financial assets, known as "Attachment A." According to that list, the family had stock in companies including UPS, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and XPO Logistics, Inc. letter She wrote the letter in response to a nomination by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Canada, and she said she would divest from all holdings in the document within 90 days of her confirmation. However, as of this writing, Wos had not been sworn into the position. The letter, which was available via the Office of Government Ethics, read: nomination Office of Government Ethics   As of June 15, 2020, the day DeJoy assumed his role as postmaster general, The Washington Post reported the couple had between $30.1 million and $75.3 million in assets in Postal Service competitors or contractors. XPO Logistics represented the vast majority of those investments, and the couple's combined stake in UPS and trucking company J.B. Hunt, for examples, was roughly $265,000. The Washington Post reported On DeJoy's first day, the Senate's top Democrat, Charles Schumer of New York, said in letter to the Postal Service's board of governors' chairman: "[DeJoy's] financial interests in companies that have business ties with the Postal Services, as well as his extensive campaign fundraising efforts, raise questions" over his ethical conflicts of interest and partisan interests. letter By that point, a spokeswoman for DeJoy told journalists he had resigned as finance chair for the Republican National Convention, and would "comply with any financial divestitures that are required" for the new leadership position. told journalists In sum, reports proved the DeJoy family at one point had millions of dollars in assets in companies that compete or contract with the Postal Service, which lend credibility to the viral assertion. But the exact amount of such investments was unclear, and as of this writing, it was unknown if or to what extent the couple had divested any of the financial holdings. Not exactly  but there is some truth to the claim. Upon our analysis, the rumor seems to have stemmed from a series of directives DeJoy gave Postal Service employees since he took over the agency. On his first day, for example, he addressed the agency in a video that alluded to impending changes under his leadership that aimed to create a "viable operating model," though he did not go into specifics. video Then, in mid-July, he issued several memos to employees, including a "New [Postmaster General's] expectations and plan." Those messages to all managers, clerks, and carriers nationwide appeared to be the source of the claim, and detailed changes to how and when the Postal Agency would deliver mail. A July 10, 2020, internal document to managers, which Snopes received from the American Postal Workers Union and refers to an "operational pivot" for the agency, said the following, for example: American Postal Workers Union The initial step in our pivot is targeted on transportation and the soaring costs we incur due to late trips and extra trips, which costs the organization somewhere around $200 million in added expenses. $200 million in added expenses The shifts are simple, but they will be challenging, as we seek to change our culture and move away from past practices previously used. But perhaps most relevant to the claim, the DeJoy-sponsored directives included instructions for employees to leave letters or packages at distribution centers if they delayed carriers from their routes  contradicting previous rules for deliveries  and said the Postal Service would no longer pay employees overtime to complete all mail deliveries. The July 10, 2020 memo said:  contradicting One aspect of these changes that may be difficult for employees is that  temporarily  we may see mail left behind or mail on the workroom floor or docks [in Processing and Distribution Centers], which is not typical. We will address root causes of these delays and adjust the very next day. Any mail left behind must be properly reported, and employees should ensure this action is taken with integrity and accuracy. As we adjust to the ongoing pivot, which will have a number of phases, we know that operations will begin to run more efficiently and that delayed mail volumes will soon shrink significantly. We also considered a separate message to employees in July 2020 that said, under a new initiative, carriers in certain regions would not sort any mail during the morning and instead clock in, retrieve sorted mail from the previous day and limit time in the office as much as possible. Then, when they returned from the streets, they would sort all available mail for the next day. July 2020 The agency said the extra spending on employees' overtime or delivery trips had not improved "our performance scores," without going into detail on what that meant, and framed the changes as necessary steps to improve its financial position. A July 27, 2020, public statement from DeJoy said: said public statement Given our current situation, it is critical that the Postal Service take a fresh look at our operations and make necessary adjustments. We are highly focused on our public service mission to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient service to every person and business in this country, and to remain a part of the nations critical infrastructure. David Partenheimer, manager of media relations for the Postal Service, told Snopes that the postmaster general was not doing any media interviews regarding the initiatives, nor about the underlying claims of this report. In a roughly 760-word email to us, however, Partenheimer reemphasized what the agency viewed as the need for the adjustments, and said: "We acknowledge that temporary service impacts can occur as we redouble our efforts to conform to the current operating plans, but any such impacts will be monitored and temporary ... and corrected as appropriate." Soon after the directives, American Postal Workers Union President Mark Dimondstein told us in a phone interview that employees and customers across the country were noticing mail delays. In the Philadelphia region, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported situations where residents were going upwards of three weeks without receiving packages and letters, and postal union leaders and carriers said mail was piling up at offices, unscanned and unsorted. Mark Dimondstein employees Philadelphia Inquirer "When you ... say this is what you have to do as workers, then that's what we have to do  [the change] runs counter to everything that the Postal Service is about, which is we treat the mail as our own; we get it to the customer as quickly as we can," Dimondstein said. "They've never seen mail backed up like this  it's not being moved." That meant, while DeJoy had not told carriers to "slow the mail down" verbatim, he initiated changes to how and when carriers go about doing their job that the Postal Agency said would cause temporary mail delays. However, it would be inaccurate to assume all slow deliveries under DeJoy's leadership were a result of the July 2020 directives specifically, when they could also be linked to reduced hours for some post offices or other circumstances. Roughly three months before the 2020 presidential election, voting rights groups and outspoken critics to the president believed the new directives by DeJoy occurred at a convenient time for Trump: when a record number of Americans were preparing to vote by mail and avoid potential exposure to the COVID-19 coronavirus by casting ballots at in-person polling places. Specifically, they worried the new requirements for post office carriers and clerks would lead to backlogs of mail-in ballots and thus create challenges for elections officials who, in the majority of states, must invalidate ballots that reach them after Election Day  even if they were postmarked before that date. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, for example, led colleagues in writing a letter to DeJoy on July 20, 2020, that said: Rep. Carolyn Maloney "While these changes [to mail service] in a normal year would be drastic, in a presidential election year when many states are relying heavily on absentee mail-in ballots, increases in mail delivery timing would impair the ability of ballots to be received and counted in a timely manner  an unacceptable outcome for a free and fair election." We asked Dimondstein, APWU president, whether he believed the July directives by Postal Service leadership were somehow linked to a plan to cause mail service chaos before the November election and help Trump win reelection. He said: What we do know for truth is this administration is, in written record, proposing and planning to sell the post office to private corporations, i.e. privatizing. ...That was June 2018. We also know as a fact that ...that [there are] calls for reduced service, increased prices, and less workers' rights and benefits. So if you take those two things together, certainly if they're implemented, then they're going to cause delays in mail; they're going to cause service being undermined. ... written record This is a fact: [DeJoy is] what's considered a mega-donor of the Trump administration and the Republican party. ... Anything that undermines the Postal Service' [service to customers] ... has us concerned that it could be linked back to those who have an agenda to eliminate [the Postal Service]. But I can't sit here and tell you that that's a fact. Partenheimer said any notion that DeJoy made decisions for the Postal Service under directions from Trump (which include claims that he issued the July 2020 changes that resulted in delays to help Trump's re-election campaign) were "wholly misplaced and off-base." He said the Postal Service, typically an apolitical agency, remains committed to "fulfilling our role in the electoral process" in places where politicians allow voters to cast ballots by mail and "to delivering Election Mail in a timely manner consistent with our operational standards." He elaborated: "[Despite] any assertions to the contrary, we are not slowing down Election Mail or any other mail. Instead, we continue to employ a robust and proven process to ensure proper handling of all Election Mail consistent with our standards." Days later, he said in a statement to news media that certain deadlines concerning mail-in ballots, may be incompatible with the Postal Services delivery standards, especially if election officials dont pay more for first-class postage. To the extent that states choose to use the mail as part of their elections, they should do so in a manner that realistically reflects how the mail works, he said. news media Then, on Aug. 18, 2020, DeJoy issued a statement in which he said he would temporarily suspend initiatives "that have been raised as areas of concern as the nation prepares to hold an election in the midst of a devastating pandemic," including the controversial July 2020 directives that eliminated overtime and some delivery trips. The statement read: statement To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded. I want to assure all Americans of the following: In addition, effective Oct. 1, we will engage standby resources in all areas of our operations, including transportation, to satisfy any unforeseen demand. In sum, it was accurate to state that DeJoy, a political ally to Trump, ordered Postal Service workers to leave late-arriving mail at distribution centers for delivery the following day and eliminate extra trips in July 2020  a change the Postal Service was expecting to cause temporary mail delays  although no verifiable evidence proved those directives were part of a deliberate scheme to disenfranchise voters in the November 2020 election. Additionally, there was no proof to show the changes aimed to help Trump win reelection. For those reasons, we rate this claim "Unproven." Ye Hee Lee, Michelle and Bogage, Jacob. "Postal Service Backlog Sparks Worries That Ballot Delivery Could Be Delayed In November".
 The Washington Post. 30 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War".
 NPR. 29 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War".
 NPR. 29 July 2020. USPS Contributor. "What Is The History Behind The Unofficial USPS Motto?"
 Postal Posts. 11 September 2015. USPS. "Postmaster General Statement On Operational Excellence And Financial Stability".
 27 July 2020. Office of Inspector General. "U.S. Postal Service's Processing Network Optimization And Service Impacts".
 USPS. 16 June 2020. Dawsey, Josh, et. al. "Top Republican Fundraiser And Trump Ally Named Postmaster General, Giving President New Influence Over Postal Service".
 The Washington Post. 6 May 2020. Bogage, Jacob. "Postal Service Memos Detail 'Difficult' Changes, Including Slower Mail Delivery".
 The Washington Post. 14 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "New Postmaster General Is Top GOP Fundraiser".
 NPR. 7 May 2020. Hummel, Marta. "New Breed CEO No One's 'Apprentice' Louis DeJoy Is A Big Supporter Of George W. Bush But Says The Clinton Era Was His Most Profitable".
 News & Record. 7 January 2005. Heckman, Jory. "USPS Board Names Logistics Executive As New Postmaster General".
 Federal News Network. 6 May 2020. Gordon, Aaron. "USPS Plans To Slash Hours At Many Post Offices, Hoping To Save A Buck".
 Vice. 29 July 2020. Cohen, Rachel. "USPS Workers Concerned New Policies Will Pave The Way To Privatization".
 The Intercept. 29 July 2020. Derysh, Igor. "With Trump Donor In Charge, Postal Service May Shut Locations And Cut Service Before Election Day".
 Salon. 31 July 2020. Rushing, Ellie. "Mail Delays Are Frustrating Philly Residents, And A Short-Staffed Postal Service Is Struggling To Keep Up".
 The Philadelphia Inquirer. 2 August 2020. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney. "Maloney, King Lead Bipartisan NY Delegation Call For Immediate Help For The Postal Service".
 28 April 2020. House Committee On Oversight And Reform. "Senior Democrats Request Information On Postal Service's Operational Changes".
 20 July 2020. Bogage, Jacob. "Trump Ally Takes Over Crisis-Ridden Postal Service As Top Senate Democrat Demands Inquiry On Hiring".
 The Washington Post. 15 June 2020. Murphy, Brian. "NC Businessman, A Big-Time GOP Donor, Is Tapped To Lead US Postal Service".
 The News & Observer. 7 May 2020. Shear, Michael. "Mail Delays Fuel Concern Trump Is Undercutting Postal Service Ahead Of Voting".
 The New York Times. 1 August 2020. Sargent, Greg. "Trump Just Told Us How Mail Delays Could Help Him Corrupt The Election".
 The Washington Post. 31 July 2020. Reichmann, Deb, and Izaguirre, Anthony. "Trump Admits He's Blocking Postal Cash To Stop Mail-In Votes."
 Associated Press. 14 August 2020. USPS. "Postmaster General Louis DeJoy Statement."
 18 August 2020. This report was updated to include an interview by Trump with Fox Business Network on Aug. 13, 2020, where he acknowledged that he was intentionally blocking Postal Service funding in an attempt to make it harder for the agency to process mail-in ballots in the November presidential election. This report was updated to include a statement by DeJoy on Aug. 18, 2020, in which he announced the suspension of certain initiatives "to avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail." A child's kidnapping in Nigeria in late 2016 was erroneously said to have occurred in Houston, Texas, in posts that began circulating online in May 2017. online The post featured a picture of a child identified as five-year-old Anibe Alexandra Odoma and stated: She was kidnapped last night by unknown persons.She's from Houston TexasPls [sic] help me forward to / share with as many people as you can. Forwarded as received This happened last night.Pls help anyway you canAt least spread the picturePls let's be carefulShe went to open the door bell inher home yesterday and she wastakenHer family hasn't slept, they arewaiting for a phone callNone has come in yetHer mother has to be sedated this morning, she still isn't sleepingKindly spread   Neither the Houston Police Department nor the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children have a record matching Anibe's description. However, the same picture also circulated in December 2016 attached to a story about an abduction in the Nigerian city of Abuja on 11 December 2016, which also included two phone numbers for people to call if they had information:   Two days later the news web site CKN Nigeria reported that the girl had been rescued. We called one of the phone numbers seen in the original post concerning her disappearance and a man identifying himself as her father told us that she was safe. reported CKN Nigeria. "Kidnapped Girl Rescued In Abuja."
13 December 2016. Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris recently attacked President Donald Trump over his trade policy, saying it is hurting American workers. The California senator then said as many as 300,000 auto workers were expected to lose their jobs this year, suggesting Trump was to blame. Donald Trump betrayed a lot of people. He came in office, making all kinds of promises to working people, from farmers to auto workers, Harris said in aCNN interviewon Aug. 12. He said he was going to help working people, and it is estimated that as many as 300,000 auto workers may be out of a job before the end of the year. Trumps trade policy, especially the tariffs hes placed on China, have been blamed by economists forhurting farmers. But are as many as 300,000 auto workers really expected to lose their jobs by the end of this year as Harris claimed? Two recent fact-checks called that figure into question. Well review the facts and place a rating on the senators claim. Checking the facts After the interview, Harris campaign told CNN the 300,000 number is from aFebruary study by the Center For Automotive Research, CAR. The research group examined the impact of a 25 percent tariff Trump proposed on all imported cars and auto parts except on Canada, Mexico and South Korea. It estimated that between about 70,000 jobs and 367,000 jobs would be lost across all sectors of the U.S. economy, but not specifically among autoworkers, under a worst-case scenario. In May, Trumpdelayed for six monthshis decision on whether to impose the tariffs. Kristin Dziczek, vice president of industry, labor & economics at the research center, or CAR,told FactCheck.orgin an email: 300,000 auto workers out of a job before the end of the year is NOT what CAR is projecting. FactCheck.org added thatDziczekconfirmed the figure was an estimate for job loss across the economy one year after several proposed and implemented trade policies on the auto industry went into effect. Auto workers produce vehicles at Volkswagen's U.S. plant in Chattanooga, Tenn. in 2017. (AP Photo/Erik Schelzig) The CAR report did not specify how many of the up to 367,000 job losses would come from the auto industry.Dziczektold CNN the (auto) sector is starting to shrink, but she added that a rapid loss of 300,000 autoworker jobs would be orders of magnitude worse than what we're expecting to see. The only industry specific estimate was for 77,000 job losses at car dealerships.Dziczektold PolitiFact California there would an overall net loss in auto assembly and parts sectors. How big of a loss depends on how willing consumers would be to switch brand preference from imports to vehicles made in the United States, she wrote in an email. FactCheck.org described Harris claim as wrong, while CNN said it was false. Harris campaign did not respond to our request for comment, including whether the senator has corrected, or plans to correct, her statement. Our ruling Sen. Kamala Harris claimed that as many as 300,000 auto workers may lose their jobs by the end of this year. She relied on a study that predicted, in a worst-case scenario, that between 70,000 jobs and 367,000 jobs could be lost across all sectors of the U.S. economy, but in no way all from the auto industry. The losses would take place one year after President Trump imposes a proposed 25 percent tariff on imported cars and auto parts. Trump has delayed his decision on those tariffs until later this year, meaning the one-year later impact would not be felt until well into 2020, and not by the end of this year as Harris said. Harris claim far overestimates potential job losses for the auto industry, the timing of them and ignores the fact that no decision has been made on the tariffs. We rated her claim False. FALSEThe statement is not accurate. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Following the Oct. 25, 2023, election of U.S. Representative Mike Johnson, R-La., to the post of Speaker of the House, a meme attributing the statement "Every American woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker" to him went viral: meme  Snopes has not identified any instance of Johnson saying these words. They instead appear to stem from an inaccurate paraphrase of a statement Johnson made about Roe v. Wade. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, and others, posted the seed that spawned that meme on social media following Johnson's election: others posted During a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Mike Johnson attacks Roe v. Wade, insisting that if only women were compelled to bring more "able-bodied workers" into the world, Republicans wouldnt need to slash Social Security and Medicare. pic.twitter.com/RGzg09TYEW pic.twitter.com/RGzg09TYEW  House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) October 25, 2023 October 25, 2023  "During a House Judiciary Committee hearing," the post read, "Rep. Mike Johnson attack[ed] Roe v. Wade, insisting that if only women were compelled to bring more 'able-bodied workers' into the world, Republicans wouldnt need to slash Social Security and Medicare." This is a fair characterization of arguments made by Johnson during a May 11, 2022, House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing that discussed, in part, Supreme Court ethics. post hearing Johnson shared this excerpt to his official YouTube channel in the form of a video titled "Congressman Johnson on Overturning Roe v. Wade: I will not yield" on the day of the hearing. Viral versions of the video circulating in October and November 2023 omitted the middle paragraph of Johnson's remarks, which are shown below: a video Roe v. Wade gave constitutional cover to the elective killing of unborn children in America. Period. Think about it. Let it settle on you. As a result, the lives of more than 63 million American children have been lost. Think about the staggering implications of that. I was born in January, 1972. I'm just a year older [...] than Roe. [...] 63 million represents somewhere between one half and one third of my entire generation. My high school class should have been almost twice as large as it was [...]. If you're under the age of 50, your class should have been twice as larger, maybe a third larger than it was. Your classmates were not allowed to be born. You think about the implications of that on the economy. We're all struggling here to cover the bases of social security and Medicare and Medicaid and all the rest. If we had all those able-bodied workers in the economy, we wouldn't be going upside down and toppling over like this. Listen, [...] Roe was a terrible corruption of America's constitutional jurisprudence. Viral posts on social media following the shorter Oct. 25 release of the video were quick to paraphrase the statement in ways similar to the meme form in circulation now. One representative post from Oct. 28 on X that had received over 500,000 views at the time of this reporting compared Johnson to Chinese President Xi: post Chinese President Xi: "Every ... woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker." Wait... That wasn't Xi. Or any communist. That was GOP Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. NPR affiliate Red River Radio KDAQ, which serves East Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and parts of Mississippi, quoted a local activist who repeated the above characterization of the quote as if it were fact in an Oct. 31, 2021, story: serves quoted Local LGBTQ activist Alana Oldham tells me the mood has changed lately, into a climate of fear for some. Im 53 years old and Ive been out as a lesbian since I was 18 and Ive never once been afraid for my safety until 2023 happened. Oldham cites one remark in particular by Johnson that left the greatest impression on her: Im looking at this quote from Mike Johnson where he says every American woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker. And that is just, thats Handmaids Tale level scary stuff. remark duty to birth The KDAQ story, which repeated a second-hand characterization, is the only media source attributing the quote  as it appears in memes  to Mike Johnson. Because the underlying source that serves as the basis for that statement does not use these words, the claim that he said them is False. About Us. Red River Radio, https://www.redriverradio.org/about-us. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Chinese President Xi: Every ... Woman Has a Duty to Birth at Least One Able-Bodied Worker. X (Formerly Twitter), https://twitter.com/iche_me/status/1718251006092324882. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Congressman Johnson on Overturning Roe v. Wade: I Will Not Yield. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdyifVvEO-w. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. During a House Judiciary Committee Hearing, Rep. Mike Johnson Attacks Roe v. Wade, Insisting That If Only Women Were Compelled to Bring More Able-Bodied Workers into the World, Republicans Wouldnt Need to Slash Social Security and Medicare. X (Formerly Twitter), https://twitter.com/HouseJudiciary/status/1717183190463336780. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Markup: H.R. 6943, the Public Safety Officer Support Act of 2022" | Part 1. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Um3ZwhDKU. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Speaker Johnsons Shifting Sands of Public Opinion. Red River Radio, 31 Oct. 2023, https://www.redriverradio.org/2023-10-31/speaker-johnsons-shifting-sands-of-public-opinion. U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-11th, recently invoked the name of Ronald Reagan to drum up support for raising taxes for a new stimulus program.During a June 5floor speech, Connolly lamented the refusal of House Republican leaders to allow the American Jobs Act to come up for a vote. The bill, proposed by President Barack Obama, calls for $447 billion over 10 years to pay for infrastructure and school improvements, new job training programs, unemployment insurance, and temporary tax cuts for working families and small businesses.The stimulus would be funded by levying taxes on corporations and people earning more than $1 million a year.Connolly said the House, in considering the legislation, should ask, What would Ronald Reagan do?Many Republicans decried the use of additional revenue to help offset any increase in national debt, Connolly said. Apparently, they forgot that when faced with rising deficits, Ronald Reagan looked to revenue increases, broadening the tax base, closing loopholes and raising taxes. Yes, he raised taxes in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987.Did the Gipper really raise taxes during five years of his presidency? We checked.Lets start by noting that if you recall Reagan as tax cutter, your memory is good. Reagan campaigned in 1980 on reducing taxes. During his administration, the top income tax rate decreased from 70 percent in 1981 to 28 percent in 1986.But to combat a rising deficit and debt burden, Reagan also approved increased taxes.In 1982, The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act raised the gasoline tax by $3.3 billion.In 1983, Reagan signed off on legislation to raise payroll taxes and tax Social Security benefits for some higher earners.In 1984, the Deficit Reduction Act included increases in taxes on estates and distilled spirits and ended some business tax breaks, to the tune of $18 billion per year.In 1985, Reagan signed legislation making permanent a 16-cent federal excise tax on a pack of cigarettes, then worth about $2.4 billion a year.In 1986, the Tax Reform Act lowered the top income tax bracket from 50 percent to 28 percent. To pay for the reductions, however, the legislation closed a number of tax loopholes.In 1987, Reagan signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act that extended the telephone excise tax and eliminated a real estate tax deduction loophole.So its accurate to say Reagan increased levies during five years of his administration, but theres a caveat: The overall tax burden on businesses and individuals went down during his presidency.We examined data from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that computes the nations tax revenues as a percentage of its Gross Domestic Product -- the total of all goods and services produced.When Reagan took office in 1981, federal taxes were 19.6 percent of GDP, the highest level since World War II. That figure dropped to 17.3 percent during his first term and rose to 18.2 percent at the end of his second term.For comparison, federal tax revenues for this fiscal year are estimated at 15.8 percent of GDP.Reagans efforts to cut top income tax rates at the same time he was increasing defense spending created strain, and the federal debt rose from $994 billion at the start of his first term to almost $2.9 trillion at the end. As a result, Reagan was willing to accept and sometimes promote proposals that would close loopholes and create a broader tax base, according to C. Eugene Steuerle, who organized the Treasury Department's 1984-86 tax reform effort and is now a fellow at the Urban Institute and Tax Policy Center.This April, President Barack Obama said Reagan understood repeatedly that when the deficit started to get out of control, that for him to make a deal, he would have to propose both spending cuts and tax increases. PolitiFact National rated the claimMostly True, noting that Reagan did not repeatedly propose increases but agreed to tax hikes put forth by Congress.Our rulingConnolly said Reagan, as president raised taxes in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987. Reagan did, in fact, sign off on at least one tax increase during each of those years.Some of the increases were modest in scope. And its important to note that overall U.S. taxes, when measured as a portion of the nations GDP, went down during Reagans presidency.But theres no doubt that Reagan was willing to cut budget deals that included raising revenues. We rate Connollys statement True. Claim:  Marines surreptitiously failed to observe the proper protocol in saluting President Clinton all throughout his eight years in office.    . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Military courtesy change I picked up on something very funny this morning. CNN showed George W. leaving HM-1. The Marine at the front step saluted, GW returned it, and as he walked away, the marine executed a right face to stand facing GW's back . . . something that was missing in eight years of the Clinton presidency.  The traditional Marine Corps mark of respect was rendered to the new president. That one goes back to the days in the rigging, when the Marine orderly to the ship's Captain always faced him, no matter hisdirection of movement, to be ready to receive an order.  Who says that enlisted men can't hold back when they don't respect someone? . . . And for eight years, they did. Origins:  According to this Internet-circulated piece, to a man, Marines decided they didn't respect President Clinton the minute he took office, and so for eight years all of them declined to observe proper protocol in his presence.  Moreover, no officer ever objected to this behavior, and not one member of the Presidential entourage ever noticed or reported it. The best way to answer this one would be to ask a Marine.  So we did: If the question is "Did the Marines who greeted the President willfully show disrespect by failing to execute a   "facing" movement after the salute?" the answer is no.  Proper protocol is for the Marine to snap a salute to the President. The President may or may not return the salute at his discretion. If the President returns the salute, the Marine immediately "cuts" or "posts" by bringing his arm sharply down to his side from the salute and remaining at a position of attention. If the President does not return the salute, the Marine will wait until the President passes him, then he will cut and remain at a position of attention. This is the protocol when greeting a senior officer, including the President.  With the new Presidency comes a changing of the Presidential Detail. The new command of the Presidential Detail may have chosen to add a facing movement to the protocol. This is at the complete discretion of the command. A Marine does not have the luxury of choosing whether or not he follows proper protocol. He is given an order and he follows it to the letter. If the order does not include a facing movement, the facing movement will not occur. If the order includes a facing movent, the facing movement occurs. It is that simple. Whether or not this movement becomes a standard part of protocol remains to be seen.  Marines do not act as individuals, we act as a team. Marines follow procedure and protocol. The Marines you saw followed their orders. That is a Marine. This piece was also refuted in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Snappy little story. It has only two problems:   "It's absolutely false," says Staff Sgt. Keith Milks of the public affairs office at Marine Corps headquarters.   If it was true, the Marines would see it as an insult to their own honor, not to Bill Clinton. Milks said crew members of the presidential helicopter "are chosen for their professionalism." In a phone interview, Milks said crew members of HM-1 - Marine One, the presidential helicopter - had followed the same protocol with Clinton that they used for all presidents, to wit:  The Marine at the bottom of the steps salutes the debarking president. As soon as the salute is returned, the Marine does a right face to face the president's back. The Marine holds that position until the president "has moved a comfortable distance away," Milks said. Even if one dislikes the man who is currently President, protocol dictates that he be shown the proper respect in order not to dishonor the office of President of the United States. Marines know that as well as anyone.  Additional information:        Presidential Tradition   (RonaldReagan.com)   Last updated:  27 January 2007    Sources:   Levins, Harry.  "Don't Believe Your E-Mail: The Marines Didn't Show More Respect to Bush Than Clinton."   St. Louis Post-Dispatch.  10 March 2001  (p. 2). Claim:   Congressional recommendations currently under consideration would cut $115 million in federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Status:  True. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, 2006] House Republicans just voted to slash funding for NPR and PBS this year. We stopped them last year. We can stop them again. Can you ask 3 friends to sign the petition telling Congress to save NPR and PBS? https://www.civic.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting https://www.civic.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting Origins:  Although a long-outdated  piece decrying supposed  piece upcoming cuts in funding for the NEA, NPR, PBS, and Sesame Street has been circulating for years (it addressed legislation already voted upon way back in 1995), recent congressional efforts have brought the issue to public attention again. In June 2006, the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees health and education funding voted to cut federal funding provided to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes money to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio. The proposed cuts would reduce the corporation's 2007 budget by $115 million, a 23% decrease in funding.  So far the budget cuts are only a subcommittee recommendation; they will not take effect unless they are approved by the full House Appropriations Committee and both houses of Congress. Similar budget cuts recommended by the subcommittee in June 2005 were overturned through lobbying efforts. June 2005 Last updated:  8 June 2006    Sources:   Klein, Rick.  "GOP Takes Aim at PBS Funding."    The Boston Globe.  8 June 2006. Budget-cutting is a favorite theme for Champaign County Rep. Jim Jordan, a formerRepublican StudyCommitteechairman with themost conservative votingrecord of any Ohio Congress member. Jordan has frequentlyopinedthat thecontroversial sequester budget cutsimplemented on March 1 are a positive step toward reining in out-of-control government spending. On March 19, the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs, Stimulus Oversight and Government Spending that Jordan chairs held a hearing on how several government departments decided where to make cuts required by the sequester. At the hearing, Republicans and Democratsblamed each otherfor the $85 billion in cuts to government programs that were implemented after Congress failed to agree on an alternative. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's representative to Congress, rattled off the list of cuts to agencies testifying before the hearing: $2 billion to the Agriculture Department, $551 million to the Commerce Department, and $17 million to the Federal Communication Commission and concluded: This hearing really should be entitled: 'Sequestration Oversight; What Were House Republicans Thinking.' Jordan responded to her speech by saying: The reason we support reducing spending in sequestration is because we have a debt larger than our entire annual economy. We do have to cut some spending around this place and were finally taking some modest first steps. Jordans point about the national debt being larger than the entire U.S. annual economy is becoming a familiar GOP talking point. A few days before Jordan spoke at the hearing,  House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan made avirtually identical statementin a speech at Washington, D.C.s Conservative Political Action Conference, saying  Our debt is already bigger than our economy. PolitiFact has examined that statement and several other similar ones, noting that the politicians government debt tally included IOUs between government agencies, which dont affect the wider economy and credit markets as much as publicly held debt, which totals 75 percent of GDP. To find the size of the economy, PolitifFact national cited a Feb. 28, 2013 news release from The Bureau of Economic Analysis that put the GDP at just over $15.8 trillion. The governmentdefinesthe GDP -- gross domestic product -- as the market value of the goods and services produced by labor and property within the country. As for the debt, the U.S. Treasury is the go-to source. As of March 14, 2013,total outstanding public debtwas $16,708,225,460,175.14. Thats broken down into two categories: debt held by the public and intragovernmental holdings. Here are those dollar figures: Debt held by the public: $11.9 trillion Intragovernmental holdings: $4.8 trillion To explain the difference, well borrow from our PolitiFact Texas colleagues handiwork. Intragovernmental debt refers to money owed by agencies within government to other agencies -- basically an internal accounting issue. An example: Social Security surpluses that the government uses for other federal operations. Such money will have to be repaid, its presumed, but the demand is less pressing right now and it doesnt affect credit markets. In contrast, public debt reflects money borrowed from outside sources -- giving it more of a connection to the economy, Josh Gordon, an analyst with the anti-deficit Concord Coalition, told PolitiFact Texas. If your problem with the national debt is that you think its affecting the economy or interest rates or something like that, the only part of the national debt that affects the economy is the debt held by the public. Thats where the (U.S.) Treasury is borrowing money on the open market. Paul Van de Water, an economist with the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, further explained why that matters. Debt held by the public is important because it reflects the extent to which the government goes into private credit markets to borrow. Such borrowing draws on private national saving and international saving and therefore competes with investment in the nongovernmental sector (for factories and equipment, research and development, housing, and so forth). Large increases in such borrowing can also push up interest rates and increase the future interest payments the federal government must make to foreign lenders, which reduces Americans income. Achieving a stable debt-to-GDP ratio is a key test of fiscal sustainability, Van de Water wrote in a memo. So, if we just consider debt held by the public -- which is what most affects the economy -- it totals about 75 percent of GDP -- which is not larger than the entire economy, as Ryan and Jordan stated. But the pair arent entirely off-base, especially since partisans tend to disagree about the importance of intragovernmental holdings. When you dig a bit deeper, you hit a partisan debate about the portion of the debt not held by the public, most of which is held by the government in trust funds. Republicans say that the trust funds are filled with IOUs, which eventually will have to be redeemed with other funds. Democrats say that the trust funds represent binding promises that government has made to tens of millions of Americans. Theyre both right, said William Galston, an expert with the Brookings Institution who was an adviser to President Bill Clinton. When we asked Jordans press secretary if there was additional information that PolitiFact Ohio should consider in evaluating her boss assertion, she replied: The facts are correct behind Rep. Jordans statement: economy - $15.8 trillion, debt - $16.7 trillion. Jordan claimed we have a debt larger than our entire annual economy. If you count debt held by the public and intragovernmental holdings, the debt is roughly 105 percent of the economy, which makes his statement accurate. But the debt held by the public is more relevant to discussions about federal spending and the economy. With that clarification, we rate his statement Mostly True.