FDIC: Notification of Bank Insolvency
Virus:  FDIC notice of bank failure. REAL VIRUS Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2009] FDIC has officially named your bank a failed bank You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insuredbank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your accountwith as a failed bank, thus, taking control of its assets. You need to visit the official FDIC website and perform the followingsteps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage:  Visit FDIC website: https://www.fdic.gov/  https://www.fdic.gov/  Download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage Origins:  In October 2009, Internet users began receiving e-mails purporting to have come from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the agency that insures deposits in U.S. bank accounts.  These messages claimed that the recipients were holders of FDIC-insured bank accounts in failed banks and instructed them to click on a link to the FDIC web site in order download a file which would allow them to check their "Deposit Insurance Coverage."   However, the link embedded in the e-mail led not to the real FDIC web site, but to a spoof web site.  Attempting to download the proffered file from that site could initiate the installation of malware on the user's computer (presumably to collect sensitive personal information):  The real FDIC  put up an alert to warn consumers about this fraudulent mailing: alert The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has received numerous reports of a fraudulent e-mail that has the appearance of being sent from the FDIC. The subject line of the e-mail states: "check your Bank Deposit Insurance Coverage." The e-mail tells recipients that, "You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insured bank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your account with as a failed bank, thus, taking  control of its assets." The e-mail then asks recipients to "visit the official FDIC website and perform the following steps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage" (a fraudulent link is provided). It then instructs recipients to "download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage." This e-mail and associated Web site are fraudulent. Recipients should consider the intent of this e-mail as an attempt to collect personal or confidential information, some of which may be used to gain unauthorized access to on-line banking services or to conduct identity theft. The FDIC does not issue unsolicited e-mails to consumers. Financial institutions and consumers should NOT follow the link in the fraudulent e-mail. Last updated:  28 October 2009
On 5 May 2015, a photograph purportedly showing a fisherman holding a furry trout was posted to the web site of a local Wisconsin news station: photograph  Wanted to share a rather remarkable catch I had this afternoon. I was fishing the Menomonee River where some trout were packed into a bottleneck. I caught a few and nothing was out of the ordinary until I reeled this one in. I have never seen anything like it. I contacted a local wildlife official and they referred to it as a rare fur-bearing trout. They went on to explain that this was an extreme case of Saprolegnia, or cotton mold. Apparently old Great Lakes legends spoke of these as a uniquely evolved trout species that existed only in the deepest, coldest parts of the lakes and needed the fur to stay warm. I doubt it will make Cabella's non-traditional mount wall but I'm still excited to reel in a genuine Wisconsin legend! You have my permission to share and use this photo in any form you'd like. You can credit George Weber. Im a 41 year old carpenter and live in Wauwatosa. The image was picked up by several web sites such as Unexplained Mysteries and Cult of Weird and soon prompted an Internet debate about the existence of furry trout.  Unexplained Mysteries Cult of Weird Although there is no species of fish called "furry trout," a genus of freshwater mold (also called cotton mold) known as Saprolegnia does grow on diseased fish and lends them a somewhat furred appearance. But unlike the picture of the fish seen in the above-displayed photograph, this mold typically grows in patches and doesn't resemble fluffy white fur: resemble   So if this fish isn't suffering from Saprolegnia, then is this a real furry trout?   Stories about fur-bearing trout have been circulating for years, but that mythical creature still exists only in the imaginary realm. One common form of the myth is that the species came about as the result of a hair tonic spill in the Arkansas river, while another theory holds that this furry fish evolved to grow a thick coat in order to survive in the cold waters of Alaska: theory Some of those tall tales of the West are partly true, no matter how ridiculous they sound. As noted in the first installment of Roaming Wyoming, jackalope may be fake, but science does support the existence of rabbits that may look like they have horns. Is there a factual basis behind the story of the fur-bearing trout? So far, not one has been found. Just plenty of good-natured humor. The fur-bearing trout, also called the furry fish, beaver trout, or (probably jokingly) the sabled salmon, is said to live wherever water becomes cold enough to warrant a warm winter coat. This includes all of Canada, and most of the far northern states of the United States (including Wyoming). The most publicized encounter with the fur-bearing trout appeared in a 1929 issue of Montana Wildlife magazine, the official publication of the Montana State Fish and Game Department. Mr. J.H. Hicken of Whitefish, Montana, told his story in colorful detail. Mr. Hicken snagged a furry fish at a lake in Glacier National Park where the water was so cold it was below the freezing point. But, "Nature has taken care of her own by providing the fish with a thick coat of fur," Mr. Hicken remarked. He did add that since the fish are so cold, "the change of temperature from this water to atmosphere is so great that the fish explodes upon being taken from the water, and fur and skin come off in one perfect piece, making it available for commercial purposes, and leaving the body of the fish for refrigerator purposes or eating, as desired." Real furry trout do not exist, but these fictional creatures can sometimes be spotted mounted on the walls of hunting lodges and museums. According to The Beasts That Hide from Man: Seeking the World's Last Undiscovered Animals, one of the most famous examples of the furry trout was hanging in the Royal Museum of Scotland until it was revealed to be a hoax. A local taxidermist admitted that he had covered the fish with white rabbit fur: famous  While we can't definitively say if this Wisconsin fisherman covered his fish in rabbit fur, it's clear that this catch has more in common with a widely spread hoax than it does with freshwater mold. In February2016, links began circulating on Facebookpromising a treasure trove of Sharpie brand markers to users who completed a short series of steps:   The embedded links led toURLs which were generated seemingly at random and didn't link to Sharpie's web site. Users who clicked through to claim the promised prize were routed to pages which appeared plausibly Facebook-esque(but werehostedoff Facebook):   As evidenced by the above-reproduced screenshots, the associatedURLs don'tmatch the official domains of Sharpie or Facebook. The fake giveaway was another version of the common survey/sweepstakes scams which urge readers to share freebie bait on Facebook, which then spreads the scam to more friends and groups. Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among brandsused as enticementsbyscammers, many aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureauexplained how to identify and avoidbad actorsimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Why the big surplus predicted in the state budget? Gov.Scott Walkersays wise government belt-tightening and reforms, tax cuts and business-friendly deregulation boosted hiring and the economy, promising now to help fill state coffers with extra income-tax revenue. When Walker made that claim in hisState of the State addresson Jan. 22, 2014, theDemocratic Party of Wisconsinbegged to differ. Scott Walkers surplus isnt built on prudent financial decisions -- its built on disinvestments in our future that harm the economic security of the middle class, aDemocratic news releaseissued during the speech argued. Walkers first budget cut nearly one billion dollars from public schools and our technical college system that provides critical job training programs. Then the party added this: The national economic recovery has led to higher than expected tax revenues and projected budget surpluses in nearly every state in the nation, including Wisconsin. Before Walkers speech fades into history, lets check the claim that Wisconsin is far from alone in enjoying a firmer financial footing. Wisconsin is projected to have a $1 billion surplus at the end of the two-year budget period covering July 2013 to July 2015 -- almost all of it because tax collections are rising faster than expected, the nonpartisanLegislative Fiscal Bureau saidin January. The predicted surplus -- expected revenues exceeding planned expenditures -- is a notable switch from shortfalls that forced Wisconsin and other states into emergency changes to keep budgets balanced during the Great Recession and its immediate aftermath. We asked Democratic Party spokesperson Melissa Baldauff to back up the claim of higher than expected tax revenues and projected budget surpluses in nearly every state. She cited anAssociated Press storyfrom January 2014 that said that almost all states will see fairly decent surpluses in their 2014 budgets. That story quoted theNational Association of State Budget Officers(NASBO). We followed up with Scott Pattison, executive director of the budget officers group. He confirmed the projection. The 2013 stock market surge will goose income tax collections, Pattison said, and many states budgeted conservatively for 2014, not foreseeing the markets runup. That, he said, means surpluses are in store for fiscal year 2014, which for most states ends by mid-year. And that comes on the heels of the 2013 budget year in which 37 states exceeded original (revenue) forecasts, six states were on target and seven states ended fiscal 2013 below the original revenue estimate, according to the nonpartisan budget associations December 2013 report,The Fiscal Survey of States.Baldauff also cited that report. The revenue windfalls meant surpluses were common, the report said. So the Democrats claim of higher than expected tax revenues and resulting widespread surpluses was confirmed by the group. We broadened our view, checking with theNational Conference of State Legislatures, which also regularly tracks state budgets. State fiscal conditions continued to improve in fiscal year (FY) 2013, the group said in itsState Budget Actions FY 2013 and FY 2014.General fund revenue growth was notably strong and outpaced projections in most states. Did that leave states with extra money to play with? Yes, the group said. At the same time, expenditures were generally on target, its report said. The combination of these factors enabled many states to shore up reserves and support supplemental expenditures. Overall, the fiscal situation was solid in almost every state in FY 2013. In another report, the group noted in January 2014 that in a dramatic turn from recent years, California lawmakers will consider how to allocate a potential budget surplusyes, a surplus. In itsState Legislatures Magazinein January 2014, the group added: Driven by improving revenues and on-target expenditures, states entered fiscal year 2014 in better economic shape than they have been in years. The revenue collection boost was somewhat unexpected, it said, and many states used the excess to supplement appropriations or fortify their rainy day funds. Early in fiscal 2014 pointed, state revenue collections were meeting or exceeding targets in most states,the group reported. Few are predicting, though, that revenue gains will be as strong as in 2013. Many states planned for that, said Pattison of the budget officers organization, fearing that the 2013 rise was a one-time event. Our rating The Democratic Party of Wisconsin generated this claim: The national economic recovery has led to higher than expected tax revenues and projected budget surpluses in nearly every state in the nation, including Wisconsin. State budget watchers confirm a widespread recovery in tax revenues as the nation continues to edge out of the Great Recession. This fiscal year likely will not match 2013 in tax-revenue growth, but states predicted that and most should see surpluses by mid 2014, as most did in 2013. We rate the partys claim True. You have to go a long way back to trace U.S. Rep. Ralph Halls voting record. A conservative political action committee claimed theNortheast TexasRepublican has never voted to raise the debt ceiling in amail flierforwarded March 10, 2014, to PolitiFact Texas by Matt Mackowiak, an adviser to his challenger in the May 27, 2014, primary runoff for the GOP nomination. Hall, who faces former U.S. Attorney John Ratcliffe, was elected to Congress in 1980 and has served 17 terms; hes theoldestserving House member in history, as PolitiFact wrote March 20, 2014, in afact-checkrating False a charge that Hall was the oldest member in Congress ever. Since 1980, there have been more than 50 votes to raise the debt ceiling, which caps how much the U.S. government can borrow to carry out everything budgeted by Congress. And during Halls tenure, the limit has never been reduced. But did Hall, who promises in a campaignadthat he wont raise the debt ceiling, ever, never vote before to increase the cap? Debt ceiling votes tend to split on party lines. Typically, the party that controls the White House has had to push through the politically ticklish vote to raise the limit, while the other party gets a free run at criticizing the hike and voting against it.Memorably, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., voted against raising the ceiling in 2006 when the Republican president, George W. Bush, sought an increase. Hall has been on both sides of that partisan divide, serving as a Democrat (albeit a conservative one)untilJan. 5, 2004, when heswitchedto the GOP. Clickhereto visit the Washington Posts interactive graphic on increases in the debt ceiling, updated Feb. 11, 2013 and spanning most of U.S. Rep. Ralph Halls time in Congress. We called and emailed theConservatives Acting Together PACfor information on its claim and didnt hear back. Hall campaign spokesman Ed Valentine told us by phone that the campaign wasnt involved with the mailer. Mackowiak told us by email that contrary to the PACs claim, Hall voted seven times to raise the ceiling from December 1985 through April 2005 -- twice under President Ronald Reagan, twice under President BIll Clinton and three times under Bush. Mackowiaks breakdown almost entirely holds up, though we found that some of Halls votes for raising the ceiling were wrapped into other House decisions. According to theHouse clerks officeand theCongressional Record, Hall voted five times in favor of raising the ceiling, though most of these instances were not pure votes on elevating the ceiling. Such increases were, for example, wrapped into theContract with America Advancement Act of 1996and theBalanced Budget Act of 1997. In the other two cases Mackowiak cited, one each in1985and2005, the ceiling-hike resolutions were passed by the House as a whole, rather than by individual representatives voting. This came about under theGephardt rule,named after former Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., whichoperated on the premisethat if representatives had voted for the budget, they had intended to fund everything in the budget, and it was thus not necessary to force them to take the potentially unpopular step of voting to raise the debt limit separately. In 2005, Hall votedforthe House budget measure that triggered the debt limit hike. But in 1985, he votedagainstthe original House version of the budget that was wrapped into the resolution the Senate approved -- so under the logic of the Gephardt rule, Hall presumably did not approve the debt limit increase that came with that budget. Hall votes: April 28, 2005, House Joint Resolution 47deemed passed. Hallvoted forthe budget measure that triggered it. Nov. 18, 2004,votefor Senate Bill 2986. June 27, 2002,votefor Senate Bill 2578. July 30, 1997,votefor House Resolution 2015. March 28, 1996,votefor House Resolution 3136. Aug. 14, 1986,votefor House Resolution 5395. Dec. 11, 1985, House Joint Resolution 372deemed passed.Hall voted againstHouse Concurrent Resolution 152, which was wrapped intoSenate Concurrent Resolution 32, the approval of which triggered HJR 372. Our ruling The PAC said, Ralph Hall has never voted to raise the debt ceiling. We didnt have to look further than the votes cited by his opponents campaign to find six instances from 1986 through 2005 in which Hall backed debt-limit increases. We rate this claim as False. FALSE The statement is not accurate. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. While his critics decry his economic policies, President Barack Obama keeps insisting that hes had economic success. In a speech in Wilmington, Del., last week, Obama offered several pieces of evidence that, in his view, suggests that the country is rebounding from the recession. Unemployment is at its lowest rate since 2008, he noted; the auto industry is booming, America is making more oil than it imports, and the deficit has been cut in half, he added. All told, Obama said, weve recovered faster and come farther than almost any other advanced country on Earth. That final claim got our attention, so we took a closer look. The evidence We asked the White House for evidence to back up Obamas claim, and they pointed us to theirannual economic reportto Congress. According to the report, the United States is one of only two of the 12 countries that experienced systemic financial crises in 2007 and 2008 but have seen real (gross domestic product) per working-age person return to pre-crisis levels. The 12 countries are France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Ukraine, United Kingdom and United States. Germany is the only other country of these 12 in that category -- that is, that has seen its GDP per person age 16 to 64 return to its pre-recession level. Heres the summary chart from the White House report:    This provides evidence for Obamas claim, because, aside from Germany, all the other countries in this category havent yet returned to their pre-recession level at all. So, case closed? Not quite. There are many ways to measure the economy beyond real GDP per working age. And while the 12 countries studied in the report all experienced bank crises during the recession, Obamas statement was broader than that -- he said almost any other advanced country on Earth. (The list of the most advanced countries on Earth also usually doesnt include Ukraine.) So we ran this measurement past some experts. In general, they agreed with the tenor of Obamas claim, but said it wasnt as simple as relying on the chart the White House provided. The general sentiment is quite right, said Jeffrey Frankel, an economist at Harvard University. But to evaluate the statement in its sweeping form, one would have to look at more countries, and one should look at other possible measures of economic performance. Additional measurements On the experts recommendations, we looked at inflation-adjusted gross domestic product, as well as unemployment rates, in a wider selection of advanced countries. We used data from the International Monetary Fund, which considers 36 economies to be advanced. For each of these 36 countries, we calculated the growth between their worst point in GDP and unemployment to 2013, the last year for which full data is available. Positive growth in GDP is good, while negative growth in unemployment is desirable. Each value that is better than the United States (the last country on the list) is highlighted in bold-italic. (The raw data ishere.) Country GDP Unemploym. Country GDP Unemploym. Australia 13.01% 1.49% Korea 15.98% -16.11% Austria 5.93% 2.45% Latvia 15.36% -36.44% Belgium 4.25% 1.82% Luxembourg 6.93% 17.72% Canada 9.96% -14.58% Malta 8.57% -6.14% Cyprus -6.66% 155.94% Netherlands 0.39% 54.15% Czech Republic 2.37% -4.48% New Zealand 9.18% -6.22% Denmark 2.55% -6.25% Norway 5.30% -2.26% Estonia 17.76% -48.36% Portugal -3.90% 50.52% Finland 3.76% -2.87% San Marino -15.98% 61.78% France 4.08% 11.14% Singapore 29.34% -37.19% Germany 8.93% -32.12% Slovak Republic 10.51% -2.20% Greece -16.92% 117.47% Slovenia -1.72% 39.40% Hong Kong 16.96% -40.30% Spain -2.79% 31.38% Iceland 7.10% -45.41% Sweden 12.39% -6.71% Ireland 1.98% -5.83% Switzerland 7.98% -14.67% Israel 19.48% -32.10% Taiwan 19.58% -28.55% Italy -2.09% 45.31% United Kingdom 4.86% -3.13% Japan 7.31% -20.30% United States 9.32% -23.64%  So the United States has clearly done better in expanding GDP and lowering unemployment than most of the economies deemed advanced by the IMF. Still, some countries have fared better, particularly in Asia. It is also worth nothing that some countries, like Estonia, have seen an improvement in GDP, yet their GDP has not yet returned to pre-recession levels. Among the countries beyond the United States that are doing well are Canada, Germany and Switzerland. Israel and some Asian countries, such as Korea and Singapore, have seen improvements as good or better than the United States' in recent years, but they were not as dramatically affected by the recession as North America and Europe. Austan Goolsbee, Obamas former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers (which prepares the White Houses annual economic report), pointed to an IMF paper from April,World Economic Outlook: Recovery Strengthens, Remains Uneven. Overall, the report suggests that the United States forecast for economic growth is better than it is for many advanced European economies, with others roughly comparable. In general, the United States is expected to have the highest growth in the coming year -- a projected 2.75 percent. In fact, the report found that the United States economy accelerated faster than anticipated in 2013, while many advanced economies in Europe are still struggling with high unemployment, debt and other financial issues. Canada, too, has seen some growth, but sluggish exports and business investments have kept the growth fairly slow. The strengthening of the recovery from the Great Recession in the advanced economies is a welcome development, the report says. But growth is not evenly robust across the globe. In many advanced Asian economies, for instance, the recovery is steady due in large part to growing exports, domestic demand and strong labor markets. (Japan, which is undergoing structural reforms, is an exception.) Australia and New Zealand -- neither of which was included in the report the White House cited -- have growth classified as stable. Laurence Ball, an economist at Johns Hopkins University, said another factor to consider is thelong-term damagecaused by the recession. Ball looked at 23 countries that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and compared how much they thought they could grow in 2007 to how much they think they can grow now, based on OECD estimates. Ball found that, on average, these countries sustained an 8.3 percent blow to their potential output for growth. While some countries, Australia and Switzerland, took a very small hit to their potential output, Greece, Hungary and Ireland absorbed blows of roughly 30 percent compared to their GDP prospects before the recession. For the United States, the figure is 5.3 percent -- lower than the rate for most advanced countries, but higher than Australia, Switzerland and Germany. This shows that even though the United States has recovered well compared to other countries, it has still lost potential output as a result of the recession, Ball said. Our ruling Obama said the United States has recovered faster and come farther than almost any other advanced country on Earth since the end of the Great Recession. The White Houses supporting data is pretty narrow, but other measurements show that the United States has generally fared better since the recession than many -- though not all -- of its peers among the worlds advanced economies. On balance, we rate this statement Mostly True. In the summer of 2020, readers asked us to examine widely shared Facebook posts that claimed the Kroger supermarket chain was refusing to give customers cash change, and thereby overcharging them.  One widely shared post from July 9 stated that: post "Kroger will no longer keep coins in the drawer. Starting tomorrow. We will take them, but we can't give change. You can round up to the nearest dollar and donate it to the food bank, or round up and it goes onto your Kroger card as a credit. So it begins ..."   One week later, Facebook users began sharing a post that purported to describe a contentious transaction and conversation at a Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois. The post claimed that, in light of a coin shortage, Kroger was rounding up the price of items to the next dollar, where a customer pays in cash, and then refusing to give out change, thus effectively overcharging customers: users began sharing post ... Stopped by Kroger today for just a gallon of milk. Seems due to this "Change Shortage", their new policy is to round every cash purchase UP to the next full dollar! I can even accept if they insisted on they could not "give" any coin back.It cost $2.41. I offered $2.50 payment. The clerk refused the quarters, explained "due to change shortage" policy & demanded another dollar instead. I offered the $2.50 again.Clerk: "Your total is $3.00."Me: The total is $2.41, which $2.50 adequately covers & I don't care to give up the 9 cent, but I do NOT accept being up charged 60 cent while you refuse to take the coins I am offering.Clerk: it's $3.00 So literally the clerk was insisting I pay the $3 or they were refusing the sale. WTF ?!?...   A nationwide coin shortage did take place in the summer of 2020, contrary to a prevalent conspiracy theory that falsely claimed the crisis was fabricated or manufactured in order to usher in a cashless economy as part of a broader push towards a "New World Order." That conspiracy theory reared its head in the Kroger post, which included the line, "This is how being FORCED into a Cashless economy begins!" did take place conspiracy theory Remarkably, it is not clear what Kroger's company policy was with regard to providing cash change to customers, at the time the Bourbonnais Facebook post was originally published, in the early hours of July 16.  Initially, a spokesperson for the company provided Snopes a statement which asserted that, in light of the ongoing nationwide coin shortage, Kroger was offering customers the option of receiving the amount of their change in the form of loyalty card credit or rounding up their total and donating the remainder to charity, as well as the existing options of paying by credit or debit card, or paying by cash and getting cash change. The statement read: "We remain committed to providing our customers with an uplifting shopping experience and the freedom and flexibility to choose their payment method, including cash, during this unprecedented time. The Federal Reserve is experiencing a significant coin shortage across the U.S., resulting from fewer coins being exchanged and spent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many retailers and businesses, we are adjusting to the temporary shortage in several ways while still accepting cash. "Customers can switch their payment type (e.g., use debit or credit vs. cash), and through our upgraded technology, we can now load coin change to their loyalty card for use during the next shopping trip, provide coin change at a lane with coins available or round up their order to support The Kroger Co. Zero Hunger | Zero Waste Foundation, a public charity committed to creating communities free of hunger and waste." [Emphasis is added.] However, after this fact check was first published, we became aware of contradictory public statements attributed to Kroger earlier in July. In a July 15 article, KABC-TV reported that Kroger had "announced this week that they will not be returning coin change to customers who pay with cash." The article attributed the following statement to the company: KABC-TV "Currently our stores are collecting donations... by allowing customers to round up their order total to the next dollar... For customers that choose not to donate, our cashiers will load the coin value due back through their loyalty card. Customers can redeem the amount on their next transaction. We know this is an inconvenience for our customers and we appreciate their patience." That statement made no mention of the continued possibility of customers receiving their coin change as coin change, an omission which naturally indicates that Kroger policy at that time was to not provide customers with coin change.  On July 10, a named company spokesperson appears to have told another news outlet that Kroger policy was to no longer give out coin change. WXIX reported that: "Kroger spokesperson Erin Rofles confirmed Friday the grocer will no longer return coin change to customers. Instead, the remainders from cash transactions will be applied to customers loyalty cards and automatically used on their next purchase." WXIX We asked Kroger to explain these glaring discrepancies in the company's various public articulations of its policy on coin change. A spokesperson said that the statement initially provided to Snopes (which asserted that company policy was to give customers the option of receiving coin change) was "first issued on July 13," suggesting the company had been consistent in its messaging on the subject. We found the same wording in a series of tweets the company sent to a customer on July 14. Nevertheless, the company also told KABC-TV the opposite in an article published the following day.  tweets In one particularly egregious example of the confusion surrounding Kroger's articulation of its policy, on July 14 the company actually posted two different sets of tweets in response to the same customer's inquiries on Twitter. In one pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that customers could either have their change loaded on to their loyalty card or donated to charity (no mention of coin change). In a second pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that the company could accept a credit or debit card as payment, or load the customer's change on to their loyalty card, or have it donated to charity, or they could "provide coin change at a lane with coins available."  sets of tweets The company spokesperson suggested to Snopes that news articles reporting that Kroger was no longer giving out coin change might have been based on signs that have been erected inside Kroger supermarkets. The spokesperson provided the following example, which reads: ATTENTION CUSTOMERS:The Federal Reserve is currently experiencing a coin shortage. Please consider Rounding Up for Zero Hunger ZeroWaste, using exact change or another form of payment. We apologize for any inconvenience this maycause and appreciate your help.   A sign that apologizes to customers for the inconvenience associated with an ongoing nationwide coin shortage, suggests three ways to avoid the need to provide change, and omits to mention that customers can still get their change in coin form is very obviously likely to create the perception that Kroger no longer gives out coin change.  We asked Kroger for exact details on whether, when and how its policy on coin change had changed; as well as whether, when, and how those changes had been communicated to Kroger's regional divisions, in-store employees, and paying customers. We will update this fact check if we receive a response to those questions.  In its initial statement to Snopes, Kroger gave us the clear impression that its policy on coin change was unambiguous, made no mention of any existing confusion or misinformation over that policy, and made no mention whatsoever that the company and its spokespersons had previously made directly contradictory public statements about that policy.  In reality, Kroger and its spokespersons had indeed issued contradictory and confusing public statements, and had done so before the original "Bourbonnais" Facebook post was published in the early hours of July 16. As a result, we are changing the rating in this fact check from "false" to "Mixture." It's not entirely clear what took place at the Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois, specifically, but it appears to have been at least similar to the description in the widely shared Facebook post. A spokesperson for the company told Snopes:  "The associate who engaged with this customer was newly trained to the cashier role and misunderstood the various ways were adapting to the temporary national coin shortage. It is an isolated event, and weve since coached the associate and contacted the customer." This appears to be a tacit admission by the company that, in the specific instance highlighted in the Facebook post, the cashier did incorrectly insist on receiving $3 in cash for the milk, but that this was not in keeping with the company's policy, although as we outlined above, the company's public articulation of its policy on coin change has not been consistent. The image of a receipt that accompanied the viral Facebook post was dated July 15, and indicates that the customer in question paid $3 in cash for a $2.41 container of milk (after tax). A line in the receipt labelled "change shortage" had $0.59 next to it, and the "change" line had 0.00 next to it. That indicates that the customer did not receive cash change.  Shortly after midnight on July 16, a person who lives near Bourbonnais, whose name we are withholding because their original Facebook post was private, published what appears to be the original version of the subsequently widely shared post. (That original version of the post began "Stopped by Kroger today" while versions published later began "Stopped by Kroger yesterday," and the edit history of the post shows that a photograph of the receipt that showed the name of the cashier was replaced with a photograph showing the cashier's name obscured -- both signs that the post was published by the customer in question).  We contacted that person, whose identity we verified. In an email to Snopes, that person reiterated the version of events presented in the original Facebook post. The customer clarified that it was not possible to purchase the milk with a debit or credit card because the patron lives on "a cash basis." To complicate matters further, on July 22 a Facebook page with the name "KROGER-Bourbonnais" published responses to the viral post, explaining that the company was "currently allocating the remaining change that you would typically receive after your purchase to your Kroger Loyalty Card," but later wrote that "we are not rounding up ... it was just a mistake of [sic] a cashier." explaining later Those posts were not written by an authentic Kroger company account, a spokesperson told Snopes, adding "Our social media team isnt affiliated with it." Mac Guill, Dan. "Did a Nationwide US Coin Shortage Occur in Summer 2020?"
  Snopes.com.  8 July 2020. Grider, Geoffrey.  "Remember the Psy-Op Called the Great Toilet Paper Shortage? Now We Are Pretending There's a National Coin Shortage ..."
  NowTheEndBegins.com.  11 July 2020. Updated [23 July 2020]: Rating changed from "false" to "Mixture." Article substantially updated to include Kroger's previous, contradictory public articulations of its policy on coin change. Claim:  "Make the Pie Higher!" poem is composed of actual quotes from George W. Bush.  Status:  True. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] MAKE THE PIE HIGHERby George W. Bush  I think we all agree, the past is over.This is still a dangerous world.It's a world of madmen and uncertaintyand potential mental losses.  Rarely is the question askedIs our children learning?Will the highways of the Internet become more few?How many hands have I shaked?  They misunderestimate me.I am a pitbull on the pantleg of opportunity.I know that the human being and the fish can coexist.Families is where our nation finds hope, where our wings take dream.  Put food on your family!Knock down the tollbooth!Vulcanize society!Make the pie higher! Make the pie higher! Origins:  We certainly didn't need to write a piece to inform the world that, like his father, President George W. Bush is not a strong public speaker.  Particularly when speaking   extemporaneously, he often uses words similar in sound but different in meaning to what he intends tosay (e.g., "vulcanize" for "Balkanize") or uses incorrect forms of words (e.g., "resignate" for "resonate"), garbles familiar phrases by transposing words (e.g., "where wings take dream"), and makes a variety of grammatical mistakes (e.g., "how many hands have I shaked").  The point here was not to rehash the numerous lists of "Bushisms" to be found in a variety of media, but to perform a sort of investigative experiment into the accuracy of information transmission in the Internet age. A common phenomenon in the world of the printed word is that once a public figure  whether he be an athlete such a Yogi Berra, an entertainment figure such as Samuel Goldwyn, or a politician such as Dan Quayle  acquires a reputation for spouting malapropisms, people quickly begin to put words into his mouth. All sorts of humorous misuses of words and phrases that sound like something that person might have said are soon attributed to him as something he "really said"; newspapers run the erroneous quotes without verification and are later cited as documented proof of their veracity, thereby enshrining apocrypha as  fact. Only when someone undertakes the chore of trying to track the quotes back to their sources are the misattributions discovered, usually far too late to dislodge them from the public consciousness. So, we thought we'd tackle a project to see whether the increased availability of information in the Internet age has had any effect on this phenomenon; whether quotes are less likely to be misattributed when nearly every utterance of a public figure as prominent as a presidential candidate is recorded and stored in one form or another.  As a test example, we chose the "Make the Pie Higher!" piece reproduced above (generally credited to "Washington Post writer Richard Thompson," a satirist and illustrator who produces the "Richard's Poor Almanac" feature appearing in the Post's Sunday edition) and attempted to trace every statement listed therein to its source to determine how many of them were actually uttered by George W. Bush.  Our standard was that in order to consider a statement to be a genuine "Bushism" we had to find at least one major newspaper article that quoted the actual words spoken (rather than paraphrasing them), included specific information about when and where the statement was made, and was printed within a few days of the event at which the statement was offered. In this statistically insignificant non-random sample of one, we found that yes, the accuracy of quote transmission was remarkably high: All but a couple of the items in this piece could be reliably traced back to the mouth of George W. Bush. Here are the results:  "I think we all agree, the past is over." In March 2000, Texas governor George W. Bush locked up the Republican presidential nomination, beating out his chief rival, Senator John McCain of Arizona, in a rancorous primary campaign marked by personal attacks and charges of dirty tactics on the part of both sides.  Two months later Senator McCain somewhat reluctantly endorsed Governor Bush for president during a joint appearance at the Westin William Penn Hotel in Pittsburgh, where both men tried their best (somewhat unconvincingly) to assure the press that they had put their differences behind them: Both sides swapped charges of dirty campaign tactics. McCain aides accused Bush supporters of personal attacks, and Mr. Bush denounced McCain forces for suggesting that the governor was guilty of anti-Catholic bigotry. On Tuesday, the pair told some 200 journalists that they had discussed policy, not personal history. "There's no point," Mr. McCain said. "I hold no rancor. Others will be the judge of this campaign, not me."  Mr. Bush said the McCain challenge toughened him for the fall campaign against Mr. Gore.  "We had a tough primary," Mr. Bush said. "I told him point blank: 'You made me a better candidate.'"  Later, on his campaign plane, the governor described the discussion as "very cordial, very frank, very open." He added: "I think we agree, the past is over."1 "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." On the campaign trail in South Carolina while pursuing the Republican nomination in January 2000, Governor Bush spoke before 2,000 loyal Republicans at a well-attended oyster roast held on a plantation outside Charleston and mystified his audience when, during his discourse on the need for a strengthened U.S. military, he made reference not to "mental" losses (which itself would have sounded odd in the given context), but to "mential" (pronounced "men-shul") losses: During his visit to South Carolina this week, the first Bushism exploded as the governor painted a passionate picture of the military dangers facing the US, and the pressing need for protection against rogue missile launches. "This is still a dangerous world," he told more than 2,000 supporters at an oyster roast. "It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mential losses." Bush's spokespeople could not immediately explain what a mential loss was, but it seemed only distantly related to missile launches.2 "Rarely is the question asked, 'Is our children learning?'" During that same South Carolina campaign swing in January 2000, Governor Bush committed another grammatical mix-up while wrangling a sentence containing both singular and plural subjects, this example occurring (with a modicum of irony) during the portion of his stump speech dealing with education: That's not to say Bush hasn't had his share of flubs. Part of his stump speech focuses on education. On Tuesday, talking to a crowd of several hundred at a cavernous civic center in Florence, S.C., Bush decried those who ignore educational programs that produce no results  inadvertently revealing a temporary shortcoming in his own grammar skills.  "What's not fine is rarely is the question asked, are, is our children learning?" Bush said.3 "Will the highways of the Internet become more few?" During his January 2000 push to win the first primary election of the campaign, held in New Hampshire, Governor Bush was asked to comment on the recently announced merger of media giants Time Warner and AOL, and he addressed concerns over its potential monopolistic effects with some unusual phrasing: When asked about the Time Warner/America Online merger, the candidate took an unexpected detour on the information superhighway. The key question in considering the merger, Bush said, is "will the highways to the Internet become more few?"4 "How many hands have I shaked?" By October 1999 Republicans were noting Governor Bush's relatively rare appearances in New Hampshire and were beginning to question whether he had assumed he had the nomination sewn up and could afford to take the February 2000 New Hampshire primary for granted.   When reporters persistently questioned him about that possibility on 22 October 1999, during his first campaign swing through New Hampshire since early September, Governor Bush expressed the notion that the important factor was not the number of appearances he made, but the number of people he reached during those appearances: Asked repeatedly today about why he had not been around more, Mr. Bush at one point interrupted a reporter's question to say, "The important question is, How many hands have I shaked."5 "They misunderestimate me." The misuse of 'misunderestimate' for 'underestimate' seems to be one of  George W. Bush's more common elocutionary mistakes.  We can't pin down exactly when he used 'misunderestimate' for the first time in a public statement as a presidential candidate; the earliest print reference we could find appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times on 13 November 2000, but it didn't detail where and when he said it.  Nonetheless,  Bush was still using the word (and catching himself at it) after his inauguration as President, as demonstrated by this excerpt from a 29 March 2001 news conference: Look, it is in our nation's best interests to have long-term tax relief, and that has been my focus all along. I'm confident we can have it, get it done. I believe not only can we get long-term tax relief in place. Since our country is running some surpluses in spite of the dire predictions about cash flow, I believe we have an opportunity to fashion an immediate stimulus package, as well. The two ought to go hand in hand. Those who think that they can say, "We're only going to have a stimulus package, but let's forget tax relief," misunderestimate ...  or, excuse me,  underestimate  just making sure you were paying attention  underestimate our administration's resolve to get this done ...6 "I am a pitbull on the pantleg of opportunity." This line is a retrospective statement Bush uttered during an interview about his involvement in a partnershipthat bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in 1989: George W. Bush has frequently claimed to have cobbled together the deal to buy the Rangers in 1989. "I was like a pit bull on the pant leg of opportunity," Mr. Bush said in a long interview about his past. "And I just grabbed on to it. I was going to put the deal together. And I did." The initiative, Mr. Bush acknowledges, came from Bill DeWitt, a businessman and friend of the family. Mr. DeWitt had heard that the Rangers were on the market and wanted to recruit Mr. Bush as a partner to buy the team.15 "I know that the human being and the fish can coexist." On Friday, 29 September 2000, Governor Bush was on the stump in Saginaw, Michigan, and deviated from his prepared speech to reassure the business community that he would not support the tearing down of energy-producing dams merely to protect threatened fish species, an issue he had recently covered while campaigning in the Pacific Northwest:    Friday, feeling the need to explain his statement during a speech on energy policy that he intended to maintain dams in the Pacific Northwest, he departed from his text and added, "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." He did not elaborate.7 Mark Crispin Miller noted in The Bush Dyslexicon that: This remark is striking not because it's silly but because it casts a threatened creature as a national enemy.  A relic of the Cold War, the phrase "peaceful coexistence" was a predtente Soviet coinage, meant to pitch conciliation between the world's two rival superpowers. "Families is where our nation finds hope, where our wings take dream." Swinging through Wisconsin in mid-October 2000 en route to a debate with Democratic presidential challenger Al Gore, Governor Bush was discussing the importance of tax cuts to American families when he transposed a couple of words in a well-worn phrase: The Texas governor and GOP presidential nominee tangles up words often enough that he sometimes jokes about it, and the phenomenon has acquired a name  Bushism. On the campaign trail Wednesday, he let one fly: "Families is where our nation finds hope," he said, "where wings take dream."8 "Put food on your family!" On 27 January 2000, speaking in Nashua just a few days before the New Hampshire primary, Governor Bush was trying to illustrate the economic plight of single working mothers and again transposed (and omitted) a few words in the familiar reference to putting food on the table for one's family: At a breakfast meeting with the Nashua Chamber of Commerce, Bush illustrated his brand of compassionate conservatism by urging his listeners to put themselves in the role of a single mother "working hard to put food on your family."4 Since these words are difficult to quote in the context in which they were offered, they were soon being rendered as the pithier "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." "Knock down the tollbooth!" Governor Bush's misuse of 'tollbooth' for 'roadblock,' in reference to eliminating tax obstacles that prevent the working poor from joining the middle class, comes from his New Hampshire campaign appearances in January 2000, but contemporary reports don't seem to agree on the exact words he used  perhaps there was more than one such incident: Things must be good here, because the mere mention of tax cuts is not enough to get the crowd cheering. What they like is when Bush worries about the working poor; they applaud vigorously when he complains that a single mother making $22,000 is being penalized by the tax system. "It's not fair!" Bush exclaims. "It's a tollbooth on the road to the middle class, and I intend not only to reduce the fees but to knock the tollbooth down."9  "The hardest job in America is to be a single mom, making $20,000 a year," Bush declared at a recent Rotary Club lunch where he promised that as president, he would reduce the struggling woman's marginal income-tax rate and "knock down her tollbooth to the middle class."10   Last weekend, fire marshals were actually turning people away from political rallies. At a high school near Nashua, you could see folks forlornly peeking in the windows, yearning to be let inside to hear George W. Bush call for "a law that provides liability to teachers who enforce discipline in the schools." All the candidates are tired, but Mr. Bush's speeches are getting particularly unintelligible  at the same high school, he announced, "I think we need not only to eliminate the tollbooth to the middle class, I think we should knock down the tollbooth." 11 "Vulcanize society! " At the very beginning of the 2000 presidential campaign, Ken Herman reported in a front-page story appearing in the 23 March 1999 edition of the Austin American-Statesman that Governor Bush had expressed his disdain for racial quotas as programs that "vulcanize" society: Sometimes this smooth operator is anything but. This was evident in a March 23 piece by Ken Herman, the Austin American-Statesman's chief Bush watcher, who wrote about the governor's "2-step around hot topics." Mr. Bush says he's against "hard quotas, quotas that basically delineate based on whatever. However, they delineate, quotas, I think, vulcanize society."12 In this instance Governor Bush of course meant to say 'Balkanize' (to divide a group into small, often hostile units) rather than 'vulcanize' (to improve the strength of rubber by combining it with sulfur in the presence of heat and pressure).  However, the issue was muddied a few days later when the American-Statesman reversed itself and issued a correction:  A front-page story Tuesday inaccurately quoted Gov. George W. Bush's position on quotas in college admissions and the awarding of state contracts. The story said Bush believes quotas "vulcanize society." Bush actually said he believes quotas "Balkanize society."13 Whether the reporter misquoted Governor Bush or whether Governor Bush really did say 'vulcanize' and the American-Statesman later printed an amended quote at the behest of his office is something we can't determine. "Make the pie higher!" This final item (a misstatement of the concept of putting more money into the hands of Americans by reducing taxes to grow the economy and enlarge the economic "pie" that everyone shares  i.e., making the pie "bigger" rather than "higher") is the phrase perhaps most often cited as an example of "Bushisms," so much so that it was used for the title of the poem quoted at the head of this page.  And it is a real quote, something Bush said during the course of a 15 February 2000 Republican debate (moderated by CNN host Larry King) in Columbia, South Carolina, between Texas Governor George W. Bush, Senator John McCain of Arizona, and former Reagan administration official Ambassador Alan Keyes: The difference between our plans is, I know whose money it is we're dealing with. We're dealing with the government  we're dealing with the people's money, not the government's money. And I want to give people their money back.  And if you're going to have a tax cut, everybody ought to have a tax cut. This kind of Washington, D.C., view about targeted tax cuts is tax cuts driven by polls and focus groups. If you pay taxes in America, you ought to get a tax cut.  Under my plan, if you're a family of four in South Carolina, making $50,000, you get 50-percent tax cut. I've reduced the lower rate from 15 percent to 10 percent, which does this  and this is important. There are people on the outskirts of poverty, like single moms who are working the toughest job in America. If she has two kids, and making $22,000, for every additional dollar she earns, she pays a higher marginal rate on her taxes than someone making $200,000.  You bet I cut the taxes at the top. That encourages entrepreneurship. What we Republicans should stand for is growth in the economy. We ought to make the pie higher. This one initially posed something of a mystery to us, because transcripts of the debate prepared by the Federal Document Clearing House and CNN attribute the block of text quoted above to Senator John McCain, not Governor Bush.  However, the immediately preceding question had clearly been posed to Governor Bush, and newspaper accounts the following morning noted the "make the pie higher" comment as something uttered by Governor Bush: Bush, shedding his sometimes goofy demeanor, was as animated and forceful as he has been in any debate, punching the air with his fist to underscore his words. He scored points among the party faithful in calling for an end to the Clinton era in Washington  one of the money lines of the night. On taxes and bringing prosperity to struggling working mothers, however, Bush mangled one metaphor: "We ought to make the pie higher."14 Moreover, at a Radio/TV correspondents' dinner in Washington, D.C., a few weeks later, Governor Bush made humorous use of the item with no indication that the words weren't his own: Now most people would say in speaking of the economy, "We ought to make the pie bigger." I, however, am on record saying, "We ought to make the pie higher." As frivolous as this experiment may have been, let's hope it's a harbinger of more accurate information to come. Last updated:  21 July 2008    Sources:    7.  Allen, Mike.  "Bush's Gaffes Are Back As Debates Near."   The Washington Post.  1 October 2000  (p. A8).    11.  Collins, Gail.  "Savor the Moment."   The New York Times.  1 February 2000  (p. A21).     5.  Henneberger, Melinda.  "New Hampshire Warns Bush, 'Don't Be a Stranger Hee-ahh'"   The New York Times.  23 October 1999  (p. A12).    12.  Hunt, Albert R.  "George W. Can Run But He Can't Hide."   The Wall Street Journal.  1 April 1999  (p. A23).     4.  Hutcheson, Ron.  "Candidate George W. Bush Sometimes Mangles Words."   Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  29 January 2000  (p. A8).        Ivins, Molly.  Shrub: The Short But Happy Political Life of George W. Bush.   New York: Random House, 2000.  ISBN 0-375-50399-4  (p. 19). Shrub: The Short But Happy Political Life of George W. Bush     1.  Jackson, David and Wayne Slater.  "Subdued McCain Endorses Bush."   The Dallas Morning News.  10 May 2000.    16.  Kristof, Nicholas D.  "The 2000 Campaign: Breaking Into Baseball."   The New York Times.  24 September 2000.    10.  Leonard, Mary.  "Fight Intensifies for Votes of Women."   The Boston Globe.  22 January 2000  (p. A1).     8.  Mason, Julie.  "Campaign Notebook."   The Houston Chronicle.  19 October 2000  (p. A38).    14.  Miga, Andrew.  "Tight S. Carolina Race Fuels Contentious Debate."   The Boston Globe.  16 February 2000  (p. 27).        Miller, Mark Crispin.  The Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder.   New York: W.W. Norton, 2001.  ISBN 0-393-04183-2. The Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder     3.  Miller, T. Christian.  "With a Grin, Bush Answers Early Charges of Aloofness."   Los Angeles Times.  14 January 2000  (p. 20).        Smith, Zay N.  "A Small Comfort Amid Election Snafus, Quarrels."   Chicago Sun-Times.  13 November 2000  (p. 26).     9.  Von Drehle, David.  "12 Hours, 4 Contenders, Many Parallels."   The Washington Post.  15 January 2000  (p. A1).    13.  Austin American-Statesman.  "Corrections."   25 March 1999  (p. A2).     2.  The Financial Times.  "Bushed Again."   14 January 2000.     6.  The New York Times.  "In Bush's Words: 'Both Sides Must Take Important Steps' in the Mideast."   30 March 2001  (p. A12). <!---->When economic conditions are tough and/or the price of gasoline rises substantially, the suggestion that already financially pinched consumers aren't even getting a fair shake at the pump is enough to make anyone see red. So, it's not surprising that the warning quoted below and its variations about "cheating at gas pumps" quickly gained widespread currency in April 2008 as gasoline prices edged towards $4.00 per gallon, and began hitting inboxes again during an ongoing economic downturn in May 2009: Examples: [Collected via e-mail, April 2008] Cheating at Gas Pumps This is a true story, so read it carefully. On April 24, 2008, I stopped at a Kangaroo BP gas station, located at 1325 Main Street, Cartersville, GA. My truck's gas gage was on 1/4 of a tank. I use the mid-grade, which was priced at $3.71 per gallon. When my tank is at this point, it takes somewhere around 14 gallon's to fill it up. When the pump showed 14 gallons had been pumped I began to slow it down, then to my surprise it went to 15, then 16. I even looked under my truck to see if it was being spilled. It was not. Then it showed 17 gallons had been pumped. It stopped at almost 18 gallons. This was very strange to me, since my truck has only an 18 gallon tank. I went on my way a little confused, then on the evening news I heard a report that 1 out of 4 gas stations had calibrated their pumps to show more gas had been pumped than a person actually got. Here is how to check a pump to see if you are getting the right amount: Whichever grade you are using, put EXACTLY 10 GALLONS in your tank, then look at the dollar amount, if the dollar amount is not EXACTLY 10 times the price of the fuel you have chosen, then the pumps are rigged. In my case as I said the mid-grade was $3.71 9/10 per gallon, my dollar amount for 10 gallons should have been $37.19. If I had only check the pump. It doesn't matter where you pump gas, please check the 10 gallon price. If you do find a station that is cheating, contact the Georgia Agriculture Department, and direct your comments to Tommy Irvin, Commissioner. In other states contact proper authorities. Please don't delete this until you have sent it to all people in your address book. We need to put a stop to this outrageous cheating of customers. The gas companies are making enough profits at honest rates. [Collected via e-mail, May 2009] Cheating at the gas pumps (PRINT OUT YOUR RECEIPTS!!!)This email was sent to me by a friend whose cousin is the Ridgetown, Ont. fire captain.This is true. It happened to them three weeks ago somewhere in Ridgetown on our way to Kingston. The pump should have totaled @ $38.00 (and change). When the receipt was printed, and she checked it was $ 47.00 (and change).She got mad, went inside the store, asked for a calculator and let them do the math. They refunded her. She told them that if they cheat, they had better make it right. Normally, her husband would skip printing the receipt.. Not herWe saw on the news the other night that this is happening everywhere.Brian pumped exactly one liter of gas. The price did not match the cost of one liter. It was higher. He went inside and complained, got a refund.There is also a number on each pump that you can call and complain.This is a true story, so read it carefully.On March 24, 2009, I stopped at a gas station in Chatham. My truck's gas gauge was on 1/4 of a tank. I use the regular grade, which was priced at $0.885 per liter. When my tank is at this point, it takes somewhere around 45 liters to fill it up.When the pump showed 45 liters had been pumped, I began to slow it down. Then, to my surprise, it went to 50, then 55. I even looked under my truck to see if it was being spilled. It was not. Then it showed 60 liters onthe pump. It stopped at 62 liters. This was very strange to me, since my truck has only a 65 liter tank. I went on my way a little confused, then on the evening news I heard a report that 1 out of 10 gas stations had calibrated their pumps to show more gas had been pumped than a person actually got.Here is how to check a pump to see if you are getting the right amount:Whichever grade you are using, put EXACTLY 10 LITERS in your tank, then look at the dollar amount. If the dollar amount is not EXACTLY 10 times the price of the fuel you have chosen, then the pumps are rigged.In my case, as I said, the mid-grade was $0.885 per liter; my dollar amount for 10 liters should have been $8.85. I wish I had checked the pump. It doesn't matter where you pump gas, please check the 10 liter price. If you do find a station that is cheating, contact the MTO, and direct your comments to the Commissioner, the info is on the gas pumps.Please don't delete this until you have sent it to all people in your address book. We need to put a stop to this outrageous cheating of customers. The gas companies are making enough profits at honest rates. Cheating at the gas pumps (PRINT OUT YOUR RECEIPTS!!!) This email was sent to me by a friend whose cousin is the Ridgetown, Ont. fire captain. This is true. It happened to them three weeks ago somewhere in Ridgetown on our way to Kingston. The pump should have totaled @ $38.00 (and change). When the receipt was printed, and she checked it was $ 47.00 (and change). She got mad, went inside the store, asked for a calculator and let them do the math. They refunded her. She told them that if they cheat, they had better make it right. Normally, her husband would skip printing the receipt.. Not her We saw on the news the other night that this is happening everywhere. Brian pumped exactly one liter of gas. The price did not match the cost of one liter. It was higher. He went inside and complained, got a refund. There is also a number on each pump that you can call and complain. This is a true story, so read it carefully. On March 24, 2009, I stopped at a gas station in Chatham. My truck's gas gauge was on 1/4 of a tank. I use the regular grade, which was priced at $0.885 per liter. When my tank is at this point, it takes somewhere around 45 liters to fill it up. When the pump showed 45 liters had been pumped, I began to slow it down. Then, to my surprise, it went to 50, then 55. I even looked under my truck to see if it was being spilled. It was not. Then it showed 60 liters onthe pump. It stopped at 62 liters. This was very strange to me, since my truck has only a 65 liter tank. I went on my way a little confused, then on the evening news I heard a report that 1 out of 10 gas stations had calibrated their pumps to show more gas had been pumped than a person actually got. Here is how to check a pump to see if you are getting the right amount: Whichever grade you are using, put EXACTLY 10 LITERS in your tank, then look at the dollar amount. If the dollar amount is not EXACTLY 10 times the price of the fuel you have chosen, then the pumps are rigged. In my case, as I said, the mid-grade was $0.885 per liter; my dollar amount for 10 liters should have been $8.85. I wish I had checked the pump. It doesn't matter where you pump gas, please check the 10 liter price. If you do find a station that is cheating, contact the MTO, and direct your comments to the Commissioner, the info is on the gas pumps. Please don't delete this until you have sent it to all people in your address book. We need to put a stop to this outrageous cheating of customers. The gas companies are making enough profits at honest rates. Variations: This email was sent to me by a friend whose cousin is the LA fire captain.This is true. It happened to them three weeks ago somewhere in Pomona on their way to Pechanga. The pump should have totaled @ $68.00 (and change). When the receipt was printed, and she checked it was $77.00 (and change). She got mad, went inside the store, asked for a calculator and let them do the math. They refunded her. She told them that if they cheat, they had better make it right. Normally, her husband would skip printing the receipt. Not her... We saw on the news the other night that this is happening everywhere. Brian pumped exactly one gallon of gas. The price did not match the cost of one gallon. It was higher. He went inside and complained, got a refund. There is also a number on each pump that you can call and complain. It's difficult to verify whether some anonymous person in Georgia truly encountered a malfunctioning gas pump one day in April 2008 (and whether his report of same was accurate), but the Georgia Department of Agriculture told us at that time that the pumps at the station referenced in the quoted e-mail had been checked by that agency's Fuel and Measures Section in November 2007 and were re-checked (in response to this e-mail) in May 2008, and in both cases they were found to be operating according to standards: Our Fuel and Measures Section has looked into these claims against the station in Cartersville. The station in question was inspected on November 29, 2007 and all the pumps were found to be accurate. The station was inspected again on May 5, 2008 and again all pumps were found to be accurate. Since this message conflates two distinctly different issues (whether gas pumps accurately report the amount of gasoline dispensed vs. whether gas pumps accurately register the proper charge for the amount of gasoline dispensed), we'll address them by discussing some general factors involved in the dispensing of gasoline. Vendors of gasoline are subject to a variety of state and federal laws requiring them to maintain adequately calibrated dispensing equipment and calling for periodic inspections by government regulatory agencies to ensure that they are in compliance with said laws. However, this does not guarantee that every gas pump you might encounter will necessarily be accurate, for a variety of reasons: Some agencies may not have the funds to regularly carry out required inspections at every location, regulators' equipment might itself be inaccurate, understaffed agencies may not be able to adequately enforce compliance with regulations, etc. Furthermore, instances of malfunctioning or improperly calibrated pumps are not necessarily indicators that a particular gasoline vendor is "cheating." Such irregularities may be due to worn-out equipment which can be difficult to spot (and is about as likely to cheat the vendor as it is the customer), such as the common occurrence of worn check valves: check valves Some alert consumers have noticed it over the years: A pump that seems to hesitate a second when the lever is squeezed. Anywhere from 2 to 6 cents tick off before the rush of gasoline starts. That's what happens with a common, hard to diagnose and mostly ignored problem with the "check valve," which is supposed to make sure gas flows at the same time the price meter starts.Don't blame the gas guys. Even consumer advocates say retailers may be losing as often as consumers, and no one appears able to rig the meters. But the small "check valve" at the end of the multibillion dollar industry just wears out, and often goes unnoticed for months. A bad valve can also work against retailers, freezing the price gauge for an instant after gas starts. No one's sure who gets gored more, or how deeply. Unfortunately, much of the responsibility for spotting such irregularities and reporting them to regulatory agencies falls upon consumers themselves, and it isn't always easy for the average consumer to notice problems like the ones described in the above-quoted message. Determining whether a particular pump is correctly reporting the amount of gasoline dispensed can be rather difficult, especially if the difference is relatively small  just about all consumers can do in this area is to be aware of how much gasoline their vehicles should take at various fuel gauge level readings and note whether the reported number of gallons they buy corresponds to this number. (That is, if you know your car typically takes seven gallons to fill when your gas gauge needle is on the halfway mark, you should be concerned if a half-tank fill-up suddenly takes eight or nine gallons instead. Note that you need to learn this system by trial and error: Because gas gauge needles do not necessarily move at an even rate across the full range between "F" and "E", you can't assume that a car with a 14-gallon gas tank will necessarily take exactly seven gallons to fill when the needle sits on the halfway mark.) It's much easier to determine whether pumps are accurately registering the proper charge for the amount of gasoline dispensed simply by multiplying the number of gallons you buy by the price per gallon. (If you can't easily do this calculation in your head, you can either use a calculator or employ the suggested method of noting the total dollar charge at the moment the pump reads exactly ten gallons dispensed.) But of course, catching this sort of problem is only possible if the pump is accurately reporting the amount of gasoline dispensed, which, as noted above, is usually much more difficult to determine. (It can also be the case that gas pumps which test as correctly calibrated when dispensing, say, five gallons of gasoline may not necessarily test as correctly calibrated when dispensing smaller or larger amounts of fuel.) For now, though, it's generally the case that the retail gasoline industry has a number of other (and bigger) problems to deal with, and that consumers have not (so far) been very aggressive in reporting the problems they might encounter: "I think our industry would love to replace anything that wears down," Bob Renkes of the Petroleum Equipment Institute said. But the check valves aren't a high priority when the industry is dealing with issues such as preventing identity theft when swipe cards are used, static electricity discharges and the 5 percent of retailers whose old mechanical equipment can't register a price of $4 a gallon.State and local regulators doubt any but the most ambitious consumers would contact them in case of a problem, even though the phone numbers are on inspection stickers. More likely, consumers fume and wonder if they were cheated, or report it to the manager of the gas station or convenience store.   Elder, Laura.  "Gas Station Accused of Cheating Customers."
  The [Galveston County] Daily News.  23 July 2008.   Gormley, Michael.  "Common Glitch at Pump Adds to Gas Costs, Also Cheats Station."
  Associated Press.  26 April 2008.   Theodore, Terri.  "Feds Announce Fairness at the Pumps Legislation."
  Canadian Press.  15 April 2010.   Associated Press.  "2 Mich. Men Charged with Rigging Gas Station Pumps."
  Toledo Blade.  7 September 2005. State schools superintendent Tony Evers, the Democratic challenger facing Gov. Scott Walker, has pledged to seek$606.1 million increasein funding for special education programs, which would bring funding for such services to $900 million by 2021. School districts have a legal obligation to kids with disabilities, and they are required to provide those services, Evers said when he made the announcement. That, in turn, puts pressure on the rest of the school budget. Its time to change that momentum. States use different methods to allocate special education funds. Wisconsin is one of five that reimburse schools for the costs incurred for educating special-needs students. It is considered categorical aid -- that is, based on a category outside of the regular funding formula. According to areport from the state Department of Public Instruction: This categorical aid is the states primary direct fund source to recognize the additional costs of educating pupils with disabilities. This critical aid program has widespread statewide impact providing funding for all pupils with disabilities, approximately 14 percent of Wisconsin pupils, providing equal benefit across all school districts. Evers request would more than double the state reimbursement rate for school districts special education costs, from 27 percent to 60 percent by 2019. Were going to add $600 million to special education categorical aid; it hasnt been raised in over a decade, Evers said at a primary election forum broadcast Aug. 16, 2018, byWRRD Resistance RadioDevils Advocates. Is Evers right? The evidence When asked about special education funding, a spokesman for the state Department of Public Instruction directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to theWisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, a nonpartisan entity considered the gold standard on state budget matters. According to the fiscal bureau, in the 2006-2007 budget, the number was just over $350 million. In every year since then, the total has been just under $369 million -- $368,939,100, to be exact. Abdur Chowdhury, Marquette University Department of Economics Professor Emeritus, said inflation in the U.S. from 2007-18 averaged between 1 percent and 2 percent. Thus, he said, in later years, you need to provide more nominal aid in order to be equal to real aid in the early years. So, to keep up with inflation, the$368,939,100in fiscal year 2007 aid would have to have amounted to this much in subsequent years: 2008-09 -- $381,741,700 2009-10 -- $388,003,320 2010-11-- $400,250,755 2011-12 -- $408,533,744 2012-13 -- $414,517,781 2013-14 -- $421,242,038 2014-15 -- $421,742,043 2015-16 -- $427,062,373 2016-17 -- $436,160,315 At the same time, the report notes that while costs have increased, Wisconsin has experienced adecrease in special education enrollmentsince fiscal year 2007: 2007-2008 -- 124,520 2008-2009 -- 123,734 2009-2010 -- 123,412 2010-2011 -- 122,763 2011-2012 -- 121,881 2012-2013 -- 121,378 2013-2014 -- 120,698 2014-2015 -- 118,601 2015-2016 -- 118,923 2016 -2017 -- 118,209 That represents an enrollment drop of 5.07 percent from 2007-08 to 2016-17. The enrollment counts for 2018-19 are not final, but they are expected to again decrease. So, all this raises a question about what has happened with the per-student average -- and whether that has kept up with inflation. According to the Department of Public Instruction, special education costs per pupil in 2008-09 was $10,388, with the state on average paying $2,981, or nearly 29 percent per pupil. In 2018, the estimated cost per pupil is at $12,084, with the state on average paying $3,140, or nearly 26 percent per pupil. So, had the per-pupil amount being paid by the state kept pace with inflation, it would be an estimated$3,489.18in 2018, not the projected $3,140. A DPI spokesman pointed out that the per pupil figures are just special education costs, and those ride on top of regular education costs. The Walker team When asked about Evers claim, Walker campaign spokesman Austin Altenburg pointed PolitiFact Wisconsin to Walker education initiatives that feature targeted aid in the form of grants and other avenues for special education students: Altenburg did not say whether he was arguing these programs more than make up for the lack of increase in the main aid program. In any case, Evers was talking about the main categorical state aid for education, and that is what we are focusing on here. Our rating Evers said special education categorical aid from the state hasnt been raised in over a decade. The Walker administration has launched several initiatives that feature targeted aid in the form of grants for special education students, but the special education categorical aid continues to be set at nearly $369 million. Data shows a per-pupil increase in raw dollars paid by the state, from $2,981, or 28.6 percent, per pupil in 2008 to an estimated $3,140, or 25.98 percent, paid per pupil in 2018. But that increase is more than eaten away byinflation. And the state is paying a lower share of the cost per pupil. We rate Evers statement Mostly True. On 28 December 2014, the web site CenLamar published an article titled "House Majority Whip Steve Scalise Was Reportedly an Honored Guest at 2002 International White Supremacist Convention." According to the site, current House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, then a Louisiana state representative, was a guest speaker at an event hosted by the  European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), a group headed by former Klan leader and neo-Nazi David Duke, at the Landmark Best Western Hotel in Metairie, Louisiana, in May 2002.  (EURO was a renamed version of Duke's NOFEAR group that advocated fighting for "white civil rights" for "Europeans and Americans wherever they may live.") article EURO NOFEAR The dozen years elapsed between the EURO event in 2002 and the article's publication in 2014 made it markedly difficult to investigate the article's claims. At the time of the convention, much internet-based political discussion occurred solely on message boards, many of which have long since been retired due to inactivity, abandoned, or became otherwise inaccessible for a variety of reasons. Following the article's publication, the claim was circulated and reposted on a number of left-leaning web sites. This repetition created the impression multiple sources were documenting the claim, but the information all pointed back to the same single source: Stormfront.org, a white supremacist message board with a lengthy and notorious history on the web. A 2002 post claiming Scalise attended the EURO conference held in Metairie that year became suddenly notable in late 2014. In that post, the writer stated: stated EURO's recent national convention held in the greater New Orleans area was a convergence of ideas represented by Americans from diverse geographical regions like California, Texas, New Jersey and the Carolina's. This indicates that concerns held are pervasive in every sovereign state and Republic alike, within an increasingly diminishing view of where America stands on individual liberty for whites.  In addition to plans to implement tactical strategies that were discussed, the meeting was productive locally as State Representative, Steve Scalise, discussed ways to oversee gross mismanagement of tax revenue or "slush funds" that have little or no accountability. Representative Scalise brought into sharp focus the dire circumstances pervasive in many important, under-funded needs of the community at the expense of graft within the Housing and Urban Development Fund, an apparent give-away to a selective group based on race.  There was also a call for the many women active in the movement to not only let their voice be heard, but their presence known. Recognizing the duties placed on white mothers to maintain decreasing birth rates, it was an appropriate call to arms to emphasize the unity message forming the basis of EURO. Aside from the single mention by a single user on one internet forum back in 2002, no other record of such an appearance by Scalise emerged. A newsletter of indeterminate origin appearing to be the work of David Duke, EURO's founder, listed the May 2002 event's speakers but did not mention Scalise: newsletter   On 29 December 2014 Moira Bagley Smith, a spokeswoman for Scalise, addressed the controversy by releasing a statement seemingly acknowledging Scalise's appearance at the 2002 EURO event (without actually stating that he was there), maintaining that Scalise spoke to a number of diverse groups at the time in order to publicize his political platform and that Scalise held no affiliation with or sympathy for EURO and its objectives: Throughout his career in public service, Mr. Scalise has spoken to hundreds of different groups with a broad range of viewpoints. In every case, he was building support for his policies, not the other way around. In 2002, he made himself available to anyone who wanted to hear his proposal to eliminate slush funds that wasted millions of taxpayer dollars as well as his opposition to a proposed tax increase on middle-class families. He has never been affiliated with the abhorrent group in question. The hate-fueled ignorance and intolerance that group projects is in stark contradiction to what Mr. Scalise believes and practices as a father, a husband, and a devoted Catholic. Scalise himself also seemingly confirmed that he addressed a EURO group (again without actually stating that he did) in an interview with the New Orleans Time-Picayune, asserting that he didn't remember speaking at the event: interview Q: Please walk me through how you came to appear at the white nationalist event.  A: "I don't have any records from back in 2002, but when people called and asked me to speak to groups, I went and spoke to groups. It was myself and [former state Sen.] James David Cain who were opposed to the Stelly tax plan. I was the only legislator from the New Orleans area who was opposed to the plan publicly, so I was asked to speak all around the New Orleans region. I would go and speak about how this tax plan was bad. I didn't know who all of these groups were and I detest any kind of hate group. For anyone to suggest that I was involved with a group like that is insulting and ludicrous. I was opposed to a lot of spending of spending at the state level. When people asked me to go speak, I went and spoke to any group that called." Q: You don't remember speaking at the event?  A: "I don't. I mean I've seen the blog about it. When you look at the kind of things they stand for, I detest these kinds of views. As a Catholic, I think some of the things they profess target people like me. At lot of their views run contradictory to the way I run my life. Kenny Knight, a longtime associate of David Duke who said he booked space for the 2002 EURO conference, asserted that Scalise didn't actually speak at the EURO conference itself, but rather to a contingent of people (including some EURO attendees) who had gathered earlier in the day prior to the EURO conference kick-off: asserted According to Knight, the EURO conference was slated to start in the early afternoon, roughly around 1 p.m. But his reservation at the hotel gave him access to the conference space for a few hours before the events official kickoff. At the time, Knight headed the Jefferson Heights Civic Association, which was largely comprised of elderly people who lived in his and Scalises neighborhood. Knight said he set up a morning event for his own civic association in the hotel space before the EURO conference started. Though that event was in the conference's hospitality room, it wasn't at all related to the EURO event, he said. Knight invited thenstate Rep. Scalise as well as a representative from the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office and a person from the American Red Cross to speak to the civic association at the hotel.  Knight estimates that about two-thirds to three-quarters of the people in the hospitality room at the civic association meeting were local residents who weren't there to attend the EURO event, and about one-third to one-quarter were EURO convention attendees who arrived early and filtered into the hospitality room to drink coffee and kill time. Barbara Noble, Knight's then-girlfriend who was also present at the hotel event, corroborated Knight's account. "[Scalise] was just up there for a few minutes, maybe 10, 15 at the most, and it was in the morning," she said. However, the Times-Picayune then poked holes in a number of Knight's statements, namely his claims that he was not himself a member of EURO, did not line up speakers for the 2002 EURO conference, and was not himself present at the conference: poked holes Kenny Knight [said] that he was not a member of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, but documents filed with the Louisiana secretary of state's office list him as treasurer of its predecessor, the National Organization for European American Rights, in 2000. Further, a May 16, 2002, news release on an an archived version of EURO's former website, www.whitecivilrights.com, lists Knight as "EURO Louisiana State Representative Kenny Knight." The release says Knight was expected to address the group's May 17-18, 2002, conference. When asked by telephone about the records listing him as EURO's treasurer, Knight twice hung up on a reporter. "Is that 15 years ago? I don't even remember that," he said. "I'm not communicating any more with the news media. I'm finished with y'all." EURO head David Duke himself stated in a Washington Post interview that Scalise had indeed been invited to address the EURO gathering and had accepted that invitation and was present at the conference (although Duke was not himself present at the event and therefore didn't personally witness whatever Scalise may have done there): interview Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke said that his longtime political adviser, Kenny Knight, was "friendly" with House Majority Whip Steve Scalise in 2002, and cited that relationship as the reason Scalise accepted an invitation that year to speak at a gathering of white supremacists. Duke recalled Scalise as a "nice guy" and said he was invited to the conference by two of Duke's longtime associates: Howie Farrell, who had worked on Duke's gubernatorial campaign, and Kenny Knight. "Scalise would communicate a lot with my campaign manager, Kenny Knight," Duke said. "That is why he was invited and why he would come. Kenny knew Scalise, Scalise knew Kenny. They were friendly." Duke, who spoke to the crowd remotely, recalled Knight reaching out to Scalise in the weeks before the conference to come and update attendees on state affairs, and that Scalise accepted without reservation. "Maybe that is evidence he knew what he was doing when he came to the meeting," Duke said. "Who knows? All I know is that Kenny liked him." Duke said he spoke to the conference twice, once by phone and later by video hookup. But he did not hear Scalise speak, he said, and does not know whether Scalise heard him speak.