Obama came into office with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I had passed any law. ... We came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade.
In a spirited and unscripted debate with the House GOP, President Barack Obama said Republicans were wrong to portray him as running up large deficits. Speaking at a retreat for House Republicans in Baltimore on Jan. 29, 2010, Obama was particularly critical of a question from Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. Hensarling asked Obama, You are soon to submit a new budget, Mr. President. Will that new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25 percent of our economy? The fact of the matter is, Obama replied, is that when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion -- $1.3 trillion. So when you say that suddenly I've got a monthly deficit that's higher than the annual deficit left by Republicans, that's factually just not true, and you know it's not true. And what is true is that we came in already with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I had passed any law. What is true is, we came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade. We checked Hensarling's claim in a separate item. Here, we'll look at Obama's claim that he came into office with a $1.3 trillion deficit and $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade. On Jan. 7, 2009, two weeks before Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the deficit for fiscal year 2009 was projected to be $1.2 trillion. The 10-year projection was estimated to be about $3.1 trillion. So Obama's number was very close on the 2009 deficit -- he said $1.3 trillion -- but substantially different from the 10-year projection -- he said $8 trillion. There are two reasons why he differs from the CBO. On the difference between the $1.2 trillion and the $1.3 trillion, the Obama administration credited a small portion of spending on its watch to policies of the previous administration. The reason for this is that the federal government runs on a fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, so Bush and Obama technically split responsibility for 2009 spending. The large difference on the 10-year projection has to do with Bush administration tax cuts. The CBO creates its estimates based on current law, which means the CBO assumes that the Bush tax cuts will end in 2010 and everyone will start paying higher taxes in 2011 and going forward. The Obama administration, on the other hand, assumed in its baseline that those tax cuts would be renewed. Economists we spoke with -- Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition, and Brian Riedl, lead budget analyst of the conservative Heritage Foundation -- both said they believe the White House approach is more realistic because it assumes current policy will continue. So the CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. It does highlight, however, that when it comes to budget projections, people can have differences of opinion about what to include. In any budget projection there is room for interpretation, but it seems reasonable to assume for a baseline that the Bush tax cuts will continue. Obama's numbers are fairly solid, so we rate his statement Mostly True.
On March 3, 2021, conservative media outlet The Washington Times reported that U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said new metal detectors designed to keep lawmakers safe following the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection were a form of voter suppression.  The Washington Times U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene voter suppression   First, some context: Capitol maintenance crews installed the machines to screen people entering House chambers after the deadly insurrection. Since then, most House members used the metal detectors regularly without questions, The Associated Press reported. But some Republicans initially sidestepped the devices or refused to be checked with wands after they set them off.  deadly insurrection The Associated Press "Capitol Police have now placed desks and velvet ropes near the metal detectors to block anyone from walking around the machines," the AP reported on Jan. 22. Now, let us address the claim that Greene, a far-right conspiratorialist, compared the safety measure to nefarious schemes by partisan groups to prevent people from voting in U.S. elections. According to CSPAN's video recording of congressional proceedings on March 2, the representative indeed said the practice of standing in "long lines to enter the chamber" to use the metal detectors was "real voter suppression" in her opinion. She made the statement during a debate over legislation to change campaign-finance and voting laws on (read bill H.R. 1 here). CSPAN's video recording here Here's Greene's full quote, according to the video footage: I rise in opposition to H.R. 1. While we are talking about voter suppression and long lines, there is real voter suppression that happens right here in Congress. Many members of Congress have to stand in long lines to enter the chamber going through metal detectors, emptying our pockets, and being treated very disrespectfully. So that is real suppression, and it's a shame it happens right here on the House floor. Standing in line to vote is not voter suppression  it's just part of the voting process, just like people stand in line to buy groceries at the grocery store.  Voters in a northwestern region of Georgia in November 2020 elected Greene to represent them, and she began her term in Washington, D.C., in January 2021. During her campaign and afterwards, she embraced the QAnon conspiracy theory and advocated on the frontlines of former President Donald Trump's misinformation campaign to try to convince voters that Joe Biden won the presidency using illegal methods. See our fact checks regarding that false claim here. QAnon conspiracy theory President Donald Trump here Amid intensifying debate around the prospect of U.S. President Donald Trump's impeachment after it was revealed he had asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate unsubstantiated rumors about former Vice President Joe Biden's dealings with that country, Republicans and Trump supporters hit back by attempting to tie several high-profile Democrats and their families to Ukraine. Right-leaning websites scrutinized the purported business activities of Paul Pelosi Jr., son of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and attempted to draw a meaningful connection between Ukraine and the Clintons. Pelosi attempted On Oct. 6, the Twitter account @RealJack posted a widely-shared tweet which claimed that the sons of Biden and Pelosi, as well as those of former Secretary of State John Kerry and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), had worked for "energy companies doing business in Ukraine": Biden's sonPelosi's sonRomney's sonKerrys son All are on the board of directors for energy companies doing business in Ukraine... Coincidence? No.  Jack Murphy (@RealJack) October 6, 2019 October 6, 2019   @RealJack's claims were further promulgated when multiple Facebook accounts re-posted the wording of his tweet, including the group "Texas for Donald Trump 2020": multiple Facebook accounts On Oct. 8, the right-leaning, Trump-supporting Twitter account @Education4Libs attempted to draw all these strands together with a widely-shared, innuendo-laden tweet claiming that an unspecified conspiracy connected donations to the Clinton Foundation with the alleged business activities of the sons of prominent Democrats: "From 1999-2014, Ukraine donated more money to the Clinton Foundation than any other foreign country. Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, & Romney all have children working for Ukrainian gas companies. And all of the people I mentioned want Trump impeached. Are you connecting the dots yet?" From 1999-2014, Ukraine donated more money to the Clinton Foundation than any other foreign country. Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, & Romney all have children working for Ukrainian gas companies. And all of the people I mentioned want Trump impeached. Are you connecting the dots yet? ?  Educating Liberals (@Education4Libs) October 8, 2019 October 8, 2019 These tweets constituted a mixture of some accurate statements with false claims, as well as unsubstantiated suggestions of unspecified wrongdoing or corruption on the part of those involved. Clinton Foundation donations In 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that between 1999 and 2014, Ukrainians had donated more than individuals of any other nationality to the Clinton Foundation, a non-profit humanitarian organization founded by former President Bill Clinton. So @Education4Libs' claim that Ukraine as a country -- rather than individual Ukrainian nationals -- had topped the list of donations was not backed up by the Journal's research. reported Hillary Clinton stepped away from her seat on the board of directors of the Clinton Foundation when she became Secretary of State in 2009. According to the foundation's website, neither she nor Bill nor Chelsea Clinton has ever derived any personal income from their involvement in the charity. website The Bidens Hunter Biden, the former vice president's 49-year-old son, served on the board of Burisma Holdings, a major Ukrainian natural gas producer, from 2014 until April 2019, according to multiple reports. His decision to join the company's payroll caused some political discomfort at the time, since Burisma's owner had recently been embroiled in a money-laundering scandal and Biden's father, the vice president, was heading the Obama administration's efforts to discourage and crack down on corruption in Ukraine. multiple reports discomfort However, no evidence has yet emerged suggesting that either Biden engaged in any wrongdoing with regard to Burisma or Ukraine, despite President Trump's efforts to have both men investigated. It is accurate to say that Hunter Biden worked for and was on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian natural gas company, but no evidence indicates any link between his work there and Ukrainian donations to the Clinton Foundation. no evidence Furthermore, @Education4Libs claimed in October that Biden is "working for" a Ukrainian gas company, but that's not correct since he stepped down from his place on the board in April 2019. The Pelosis Paul Pelosi Jr., son of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was at one time on the board of a California-based oil-processing company called Viscoil, according to the account he gave in a video recorded in 2010. The link between Viscoil and Ukraine is either tenuous or non-existent and does not appear to involve Pelosi at all. oil-processing video Viscoil was linked to a somewhat shadowy figure going by the name "Ana Shell," who claims to be an investor and environmental entrepreneur, and claims to have provided funding to both Viscoil and another entity called NRG Lab. The purported Ukraine connection arose from a YouTube video posted by "NRG Lab Research Council" in 2013, whose caption stated "Mika Newton helped to secure the rights to build a plant for the production of SH-boxes in Ukraine." claims video That single line from the caption of an NRG Lab promotional video was cited by Patrick Howley, who writes for The Epoch Times, a website known for promulgating pro-Trump misinformation, in advancing a link between Pelosi and an energy company that "did business in Ukraine." However, the claim that Newton, a Ukrainian singer born Oksana Stefanivna Hrytsay, had any connection to NRG Lab or Viscoil, appears to be false. cited known We found a Facebook page labelled "Mika_Newton.official" which appears distinctly unofficial, has very little content apart from "Ana Shell" promotional imagery, and includes the following description: "Hi, my name's Mika Newton. This is my official page to support projects that NRGLab Singapore makes":   Neither Newton's actual official Facebook page nor her Instagram account (where she engages in prolific product promotion) contain any mention of NRG Lab, Viscoil, or "Ana Shell." The link between NRG Lab, Newton, and production rights in Ukraine appears to be bogus. page account In any event, Pelosi appears to have ended his involvement with Viscoil before the bogus Mika Newton connection was ever made. A spokesperson for Speaker Pelosi told PolitiFact that: "The company [Viscoil] was based in Southern California and focused solely on U.S. business. The company later reorganized under a different name [NRG Lab], but Paul Pelosi Jr. played no role in the new entity." PolitiFact Pelosi Jr. did travel to Ukraine in 2017, but that trip related to his work for the Corporate Governance Initiative and had no discernible link to Viscoil, NRG Lab, or "Ana Shell." travel John Kerry This claim is riddled with errors. First off, former Secretary of State and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry doesn't have a biological son. The man in question is his stepson, Chris Heinz, who was born to Kerry's wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, and her first husband, John Heinz. Heinz appears to have been added to the list because of his former business partnership with Hunter Biden and their friend Devon Archer. The three men formed an investment firm called Rosemont Seneca, and both Archer and Biden later joined the board of Burisma. However, Heinz did not. In fact, according to reports by The Washington Post and the Washington Examiner, Heinz expressed his own reservations about Archer and Biden's decision at the time, which underlines just how inaccurate and wrongheaded the meme's inclusion of Heinz was. Post Examiner A spokesperson confirmed to Snopes that Heinz had never been involved in Burisma in any way, nor had he ever worked for or sat on the board of directors of any energy company, or even traveled to Ukraine. Mitt Romney Mitt and Ann Romney have five sons, and we found no evidence that any of them have ever had any involvement with either a "Ukrainian gas company" or an "energy company doing business in Ukraine." The couple's oldest son Tagg (49) has worked as a vice president at Reebok, chief marketing officer for the Los Angeles Dodgers, founded the investment firm Solamere Capital, and worked as an advisor and surrogate during his father's 2002 Massachussetts gubernatorial campaign as well as his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. officer founded Matt Romney was previously marketing director for the software company LavaStorm, worked as a real estate developer in California, and as a vice president for the real estate investment firm Excel Trust (which was acquired by the private equity firm Blackstone in 2015). marketing director developer Excel Trust acquired Josh Romney is president of the Romney Group, a Utah-based real estate and property investment firm, and chairman and owner of Intercap Lending, a mortgage lender. He previously worked as a real estate developer in Salt Lake City. Romney Group Intercap Lending developer Ben Romney is a radiologist in Utah and Idaho, and Craig Romney, the youngest son, has worked in music production for the advertising firm McGarry Bowen and later for the real estate investment firm Sundance Bay. radiologist Utah production McGarry Bowen Sundance Bay Contrary to @Education4Libs' claim, Romney had not called for President Trump's impeachment as of Oct. 8, undermining the putative basis for the Romney family's inclusion in the nonexistent conspiracy of wrongdoing to which the meme alluded. One America News Network.  "Son of House Speaker Pelosi Made Money in Ukraine, Used Her in Ads."
  4 October 2019. DCWhispers.com.  "Bingo! Clinton Foundation Donor Amounts by Country -- Guess Who Was #1."
  27 September 2019. Grimaldi, James V. and Rebecca Ballhaus.  "Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends."
  The Wall Street Journal.  19 March 2015. Braun, Stephen and Lynn Berry.  "The Story Behind Biden's Son, Ukraine and Trump's Claims."
  Associated Press.  23 September 2019. Vogel, Kenneth P. and Iuliia Mendel.  "Biden Faces Conflict of Interest Questions That Are Being Promoted by Trump and Allies."
  The New York Times.  1 May 2019. Sonne, Paul et al . "The Gas Tycoon and the Vice-President's Son: The Story of Hunter Biden's Foray Into Ukraine."
   The Washington Post.  28 September 2019. Wilkinson, Tracy and Sergei L. Loiko.  "Former Ukraine Prosecutor Says He Saw No Evidence of Wrongdoing by Biden."
  The Los Angeles Times.  29 September 2019. Goodman, Alana.  "John Kerry's Son Cut Business Ties with Hunter Biden Over Ukrainian Oil Deal."
  The Washington Examiner.  27 August 2019. Henson, Steve.  "Little Takes Laid-Back Approach to Dodgers."
  The Los Angeles Times.  2 December 2004. Mims, Bob.  "Genealogy Website Gets Swamped by Searchers."
  The Spokesman-Review.  29 May 1999. Luo, Michael.  "Romneys Invade Iowa."
  The New York Times/em>.  11 August 2007. Olson, Kyle.  "Nancy Pelosi's Son Appears in Ukraine -- To Talk Soccer?"
  The American Mirror.  25 July 2017. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO To prevent the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus disease, state leaders across the U.S. ordered widespread school closures in March 2020. In the weeks that followed, millions of students spent their days at home instead of in classrooms. Some teachers and staff moved lessons online, and administrators locked the doors to school buildings so the general public could not enter. COVID-19  The closures were among the most dramatic steps by state leaders to combat the novel coronavirus that has killed more than 58,300 people globally as of this writing in mid-April 2020. About 56.6 million students registered for elementary or secondary school classes in the U.S. at the start of the 2019-20 academic year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.  58,300 people National Center for Education Statistics While a disruption to students' learning, the shutdowns in America may have provided an unintended benefit, beyond limiting people's exposure to the virus. On April 13, 2020, a journalist tweeted to his some 49,600 followers: "Last month was the first March without a school shooting in the United States since 2002." tweeted   The reporter, Robert Klemko, quickly gained Twitter popularity among Americans who believe federal and state leaders should enact stricter gun laws, including former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. "It shouldn't have taken a pandemic to make this possible," her Twitter account wrote in a retweet of Klemko's post. Hillary Clinton Meanwhile, Facebook users shared screenshots of Klemko's tweet, and one Instagram account for a website that brands itself as a fact-checking service on that platform posted a photograph of a law-enforcement officer monitoring students boarding a school bus with Klemko's claim as overlay text. Among media sites, CBS News published a story stating the assertion as fact. one Instagram account website sites CBS News published a story   "My teens said this is the first time they have relaxed. No need to be hyper vigilant of every unusual sound, can just focus on school work," one person tweeted. "Both grew up with regular Active Shooter Drills since kindergarten." one person tweeted The claim about school shootings since 2002 is twofold: It asserts that no school shootings occurred in the U.S. in March 2020 and that every March between 2003 and 2019 documented at least one such incident. But because agencies across government and the news media do not share a consistent way for tracking and defining school shootings, the truth of both assertions depends on whom you ask. The U.S. Secret Service and FBI, for example, provide an explanation of factors that contribute to school shootings but do not keep a running list of all on-campus gun crimes. Academics and school officials often rely on news media reports for their research, though journalists may not cover every shooting. U.S. Secret Service FBI The nation's biggest guns-rights group, the National Rifle Association, does not publish a running tally of shootings in schools, yet it has convened researchers to compile recommendations on how to avoid such incidents, like other organizations. Meanwhile, a leading opponent of the NRA  the lobbyist group Everytown for Gun Safety  has tracked all "incidents of gunfire" in K-12 schools and colleges, including suicides; shootings in which no one suffered injuries; and cases where the victims or gunmen may not have any connection to the school, since 2013. National Rifle Association recommendations Everytown for Gun Safety Those prominent advocacy groups aside, the least partisan and most comprehensive source of school-shooting data appears to be the "K-12 School Shooting Database" sponsored by the U.S. Center for Homeland Defense and Security (CHDS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Updated daily by emergency-management researchers, the database records "each and every instance in which a gun is brandished, fired, or a bullet hits school property for any reason, regardless of the number of victims, time of day, or day of week," according to its stated methodology. Its website summarizes the tricky situation analyzing school-shooting data as follows: CHDS FEMA methodology. Without a common methodology for data collection, individual data sources are limited in both validity and utility. Furthermore, there is no consensus for what actually defines a school shooting ... Based on the differences among all available reporting platforms, there is currently no single source for objective and accessible data from which school administrators, law enforcement, and public officials can draw to inform their decisions.  With that as background, administrators of the CHDS-sponsored K-12 database documented eight incidents fitting its definition of a "school shooting" in March 2020. Local news media reports affirm those findings. The incidents include: The Dallas Morning News The Miami Herald The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Local coverage here Local coverage here Local coverage here Local coverage here The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Regarding the claim that March 2020 was the first March without a school shooting since 2002, the data is more murky. The CHDS-sponsored database lists at least one incident in U.S. K-12 schools in March of every year from 2003 through 2009, and every year from 2011 through 2020, but none in 2010. Supporting that finding, tallies of K-12 school shootings by the for-profit National School Safety and Security Services consulting firm and the advocacy group the National School Safety Center do not show a March 2010 incident. tallies National School Safety and Security Services National School Safety Center However, those sources only consider shootings on U.S. elementary, middle and high school properties. If you expand the scope of research to also include shootings on college campuses, Ohio State University documented a deadly shooting on March 9, 2010. According to the New York Times' coverage of the incident, officials said a custodian of the school shot and killed a co-worker before killing himself in a maintenance building. Another person was wounded in the gunfire.  coverage We reached out to Washington Post reporter Klemko  the author of the viral claim  to understand where he got his numbers. He said he did include cases involving post-secondary institutions, rather than only focusing on K-12 schools. But unlike other datasets, he said he only considered shootings in which students, teachers, or staff were the targets of the gunfire or the perpetrators. In other words, he said he did not consider cases where people trespassed on school property and opened fire at other people who aren't part of the school community. He also did not consider cases in which persons (no matter their affiliation with the school) accidentally discharged a gun or shootings on school properties outside of school hours or on weekends. "I used shootings on school property, k-12, vocational schools, colleges and universities, where students or staff were intentionally shot at, or doing the shooting," he wrote in an email. "Where government and private data were inconclusive, news reports filled the gaps." Looking at the comprehensive standards by which the CHDS-sponsored database documents shootings, he said "it's a mistake" to consider the database's definition of a "school shooting" as the most fair. "Few Americans would agree, for example, that an incident where a safety officer accidentally fires a gun in an office, injuring no one, constitutes a school shooting," he said. "Likewise, few would agree that adults trespassing on school grounds and exchanging gunfire when school is not in session and no children are present, is a school shooting." In sum, given the absence of a universal definition of "school shooting" in the U.S., and given that a government database and news media reports show at least eight shootings did occur on school properties in March 2020, we rate this claim as "false". Simone Burns, Asia. "3 in hospital after shooting in DeKalb elementary school parking lot".
 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 31 March 2020. KNOE 8 News. "Monroe Police have made multiple arrests in connection to a parking lot shooting at Roy Shelling Elementary School".
 24 March 2020.  KTBS 3 ABC. "Shreveport high school parking lot shooting, 1 wounded".
 19 March 2020. McCord, Cory. "Man wanted, accused of deadly shooting during pickup football game at Atascocita HS".
  KHOU 11. 15 March 2020. London, Derry. "SRO accidentally fires gun inside elementary school".
 News 4. 13 March 2020. Lee, Lauren. "None hurt, suspect in custody after bullet strikes school van in Shenango".
 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 10 March 2020. Smalls II, Isaiah. "He brought a gun to school. He ended up shooting the maintenance man in the eye, cops say".
 Miami Herald. 6 March 2020. Scudder, Charles. "Student in custody after gun was 'accidentally discharged' at North Forney High School".
 The Dallas Morning News. 2 March 2020. Purdum, Todd. "Shooting at School Leaves 2 Dead and 13 Hurt".
 The New York Times. 6 March 2001. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Secret Service. "Protecting America's Schools: A U.S. Secret Service Analysis of Targeted School Violence".
 Accessed 16 April 2020. Federal Bureau of Investigations. "The School Shooter: A Thread Assessment Perspective".
 Accessed 16 April 2020. The Washington Post. "Robert Klemko".
 Accessed 14 April 2020. Education Week. "Map: Coronavirus and School Closures".
 13 April 2020. National Center for Education Statistics. "Fast Facts".
 Accessed 14 April 2020. Johns Hopkins University and Medicine. "Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering."
 Accessed 14 April 2020. Lewis, Sophie. "March 2020 was the first March without a school shooting in the U.S. since 2020".
 CBS News. 14 April 2020. Riedman, David, and Desmond ONeill. "CHDS  K-12 School Shooting Database".
 Center for Homeland Defense and Security. 15 April 2020. Hutchinson, Asa. "The National School Shield: Report of the National School Shield Task Force".
 National Rifle Association. 2 April 2013. Everytown for Gun Safety. "Gunfire on School Grounds in the United States".
 Accessed 16 April 2020. Riedman, David, and Desmond ONeill. CHDS  K-12 School Shooting Database."
 Center for Homeland Defense and Security. 16 April 2020. Riedman, David, and Desmond ONeill. CHDS  K-12 School Shooting Database."
 Center for Homeland Defense and Security. 16 April 2020. National School Safety Center.  The National School Safety Centers Report on School Associated Violent Deaths.
 Accessed 16 April 2020. National School Safety Center.  The National School Safety Centers Report on School Associated Violent Deaths.
 Accessed 16 April 2020. National School Safety and Security Services.  School-related deaths, school shootings, & school violence incidents: 2009- 2010 School Year Incidents Identified by National School Safety and Security Services, Inc.
 Accessed 16 April 2020. National School Safety and Security Services.  School-related deaths, school shootings, & school violence incidents: 2009- 2010 School Year Incidents Identified by National School Safety and Security Services, Inc.
 Accessed 16 April 2020. Urbina, Ian.  Ohio State Employee Kills Co-Worker, Then Self, Police Say.
  The New York Times.  9 March 2010. Urbina, Ian.  Ohio State Employee Kills Co-Worker, Then Self, Police Say.
  The New York Times.  9 March 2010. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has tried to sprinkle sugar on what many government workers see as the bitter pill hes proposing in his controversialbudget-repair bill.Lets see if what he is sprinkling is as sweet as he says it is.For many state and local government workers, losing collective bargaining power is the bitter pill. The bill also would require most public employees to pay more for pensions and health insurance.The hit would be $5,400 per year for a state employee who earns the average wage -- $50,000 -- and chooses the least-expensive family plan for health insurance, Walkers administrationsays.The sugar, at least the way the Republican governor presents it, is in another provision of the bill. It would prohibit union dues from being withheld from public employees paychecks. That means state and local government workers would have to pay their unions directly.According to Walker, if workers opt out of the union, they could save a fair amount of money.On Feb. 20, 2011, on the Fox News Sunday program, Walkersaidfor those workers who don't want to be a part of the union, if you don't want that deduction each month out of the paycheck, they should be able to get that $500, $600 or in some cases, $1,000 back that they can apply for their health care and their pension contribution.Walker made asimilarstatementthree days earlier on Fox televisions On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. And Washington Post columnist George Willwrotethat Walker told him that many employees could save $500 or $600 per year in union dues and that teachers could save up to $1,000.Lets find out if the governors figures are correct.Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie sent us adocumentthat he said came from the state payroll department. Payroll would know the amount of union dues for state workers, since it withholds them from state workers paychecks.The document indicates that annual union dues are as low as $208 for certain legal employees and $300 for apprenticesheet metal workers; dues are as high as $3,180 forplasterersand $3,465 forplumbers.The exact range, however, could be different because dues for some employees are a percentage of their pay, and the document does not spell out those amounts. Moreover, the document does not specify how many employees pay the various dues amounts that are listed, and it does not provide any averages. We asked Werwie for more information, but he had not responded by publication time.So, we contacted some of the major public employee unions to ask what their members pay annually in dues. Our list is not comprehensive, but it does cover tens of thousands of state and local government workers.General employeesMost of the 23,000 state workers who are members of American Federation of State, County and Municipal EmployeesCouncil24pay $420 per year in union dues, though some pay $492, said Bob Allen, spokesman forAFSCME-Wisconsin.They tend to be front-line workers such as correctional officers, administrative support staff, probation and parole officers and custodians, he said.Members of Local 1914 -- one of the units of Council 24 -- pay $470 per year, according to theduespageon that locals website. Those300membersare state employees in Eau Claire, Chippewa, Rusk, Clark and Taylor counties, and hold non-academic jobs at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire.Members ofAFT-Wisconsinwho earn over $34,000 per year pay about $510 per year in dues, said president Bryan Kennedy. AFT says it represents 17,000 public workers in 500 different classifications.Health care workersAnnual dues for the 15,000 members of theProfessional Patient CareUnitof Service Employees Union International range from about $192 for home care workers to $864 or more for senior nurses, said president Dian Palmer.TeachersMilwaukee Public Schools teachers paid $995 in dues in 2010, while educational assistants who worked more than 20 hours per week paid $469, according to thefiguresfrom the website of theMilwaukee Teachers Education Association.That unionsaysit represents more than 8,200 employees, including 6,000 teachers.Green Bay public school teachers pay $834 in dues, said Lori Blakeslee, spokeswoman for the Green Bay Education Association.The typical Wisconsin teacher who belongs to the states largest teachers union, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, pays $450 per year for the state and national portions of their dues, said WEAC spokeswoman Christina Brey. But the additional amount in local dues paid varies and Brey said she did not know what the range is. Both Milwaukee and Green Bay belong to WEAC.Lets return to the statement.In pushing his budget-repair bill, Walker said state and local government workers could stop paying union dues and take home $500 to $1,000 more per year in pay. He didnt say most or many, but his statement suggests that a significant number of public employees pay dues in that range. And we found thousands of public employees who do.We rate Walkers claim Mostly True. In May 2016, syndicated talk radio host Sean Hannity aired an item claiming that Donald Trump had sent a plane to give 200 stranded U.S. marines a much-needed ride home after Operation Desert Storm in 1991: item When Corporal Ryan Stickney and 200 of his fellow Marines prepared to return to their families after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, a logistics error forced them to turn to a surprising source for a ride home: Donald J. Trump. Today, Stickney would like to say "thank you." Stickney (left), was a squad leader in a TOW company of a Marine reserve unit based in Miami, FL and spent approximately six months in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War between 1990 and 1991. Upon his units return to the United States, the former Marine says the group spent several weeks decompressing at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina before heading back to Miami. Stickney recalls being told that a mistake had been made within the logistics unit and that an aircraft wasnt available to take the Marines home on their scheduled departure date. This  according to Stickney  is where Donald Trump comes in. "The way the story was told to us was that Mr. Trump found out about it and sent the airline down to take care of us. And thats all we knew ... I remember asking 'Who is Donald Trump?' I truly didn't know anything about him," the former Marine said. Corporal Stickney snapped a photo to remember the day by:   The story came up several times during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign (Cpl. Stickney even told it in person at a Trump rally), but skeptics questioned its validity despite a statement from the Trump campaign allegedly confirming it: "The Trump campaign has confirmed to Hannity.com that Mr. Trump did indeed send his plane to make two trips from North Carolina to Miami, Florida to transport over 200 Gulf War Marines back home. No further details were provided." told confirming The few details we do have about Trump's alleged participation don't, in fact, add up. We can confirm, based on military records, that the 209-member Anti-Tank (TOW) Company, part of the 8th Tank Battalion for Operation Desert Shield, deployed to Camp LeJeune, North Carolina, from their home base in Miami on 26 November 1990. And we can confirm that the company deployed from Camp LeJeune to Saudi Arabia on 22 December, served throughout the combat phase of Operation Desert Storm (from 17 January to 28 February 1991), and returned to North Carolina in April. A command chronology of the deployment notes that a "Cpl. Stickey" was among those receiving certificates of commendation. deployed command chronology We can also confirm, via a 23 April 1991 article from the Sun-Sentinel, that a series of flight delays stalled the company's homecoming to Miami on 22 April, but that they finally did arrive home after split across two separate flights. Stickney's photograph shows that he arrived on a plane marked "Trump," but it also proves something else: that even if Trump did send the plane, it wasn't his private jet. article That Trump didn't send the pictured plane at all was something noted by a sharp-eyed reader, who wrote to us to note: First, thats not Trumps private 727 jet; its one of the jets in the Trump Shuttle fleet. I wondered if maybe Trumps jet back in those days was painted differently, so I researched his private jet as of April 1991. I found that Trump was deep in the red, financially, and having to liquidate assets, one of which was his personal 727. The sale of that jet was finalized in the first week of May 1991, making it highly unlikely he was also flying reservists around while discussing the sale at the end of April. jet Shuttle The markings of the plane in Stickney's photo match those of the Trump Shuttle fleet, so the question becomes: Did Trump himself send a Trump Shuttle to retrieve the stranded Marines, or was it procured some other way? To arrive at an answer, it's necessary to go into a bit of the history of Trump Shuttle. A July 2015 article in NYC Aviation detailed Trump's short-lived airline industry involvement, beginning with an entirely separate carrier, Eastern Air Shuttle, which he immediately rebranded with his own name: article carrier rebranded CEO Frank Lorenzo ... began selling off assets including the prized Shuttle operation. Donald Trump placed a winning bid for the Shuttle, its aircraft and landing slots at LaGuardia and National for $380 million dollars that was financed through no less than 22 banks. The newly branded Trump Shuttle took the skies on June 7, 1989. Timing is everything in business, and unfortunately for Trump he entered the airline game at the wrong time. The US entered an economic recession in the late-80s leading many corporations to cut back on business travel. In addition, tensions in the Middle East leading up to the first Gulf war caused oil prices to spike. This 1-2 punch was devastating for the airline industry and led to the demise of a number of airlines including Eastern and Pan Am. Given these circumstances, the Trump Shuttle lost money, and with Trump continuing to accumulate debt in his other ventures it was becoming increasingly difficult to pay back the loans taken to purchase the airline. In September of 1990 Trump defaulted on his loan and control of the airline went back to the banks led by Citibank. Given that the bankers, not Donald Trump, owned Trump Shuttle from September 1990 until it was sold to U.S. Air in 1996, Trump wasn't in a position to send the planes anywhere, much less on a spur-of-the-moment Marine transport mission. So who did? As it turns out, the U.S. military itself chartered the flights -- a common practice in the day, according to an 11 August 2016 report by The Washington Post: Lt. Gen. Vernon J. Kondra, now retired, was in charge of all military airlift operations. He said that relying on commercial carriers freed up the military cargo aircraft for equipment transport. Vernon J. Kondra Kondra's notes on the flight are declassified and available online and show a contract for Trump Shuttle to "move troops in [the] continental United States" during the 1990-91 timeframe: online There are several references to a 1990-91 contract for Trump Shuttle to carry personnel across the United States, between the East and West Coasts, on a standard LaGuardia-Dover-Charleston-Travis-Chord-Kelly-Dover-LaGuardia run.   "It worked very well, and the crews loved it, and really thought that we'd done something special for them," Kondra recalled in the oral history. "It was a helluva lot better than using 141s [cargo craft], which we could use for something else." But Kondra said that the notion that Trump personally arranged to help the stranded soldiers made little sense. "I certainly was not aware of that. It does not sound reasonable that it would happen like that. It would not fit in with how we did business. I don't even know of how he would have known there was a need." So the real story underlying the claim that Donald Trump personally sent his jet to pick up stranded soldiers and return them to the U.S. is that the military paid to charter a plane from an airline Trump no longer owned in order to bring those service personnel home. Kessler, Glenn.  "Too Good to Check: Sean Hannitys Tale of a Trump Rescue."
  The Washington Post.  11 August 2016. Reed, Ted.  "Trump: I Ran a Great Airline."
  The Globe and Mail.  26 September 2011. Rodriguez-Florido, Lourdes.  "Grand Homecoming Welcomes War-Weary Marine Reservists Company Looks Forward to Settling Into Life's Regular Routines."
  Sun-Sentinel.  23 April 1991. CNN.  "Inside Donald Trump's Private Jet."
  10 November 2009. GulfLINK.  "8th Tank BN Command Chronology 8th Nov 90 to March 91."
  12 April 1991. PolitiFact has rapped Rob Portman for certain claims made during his U.S. Senate campaign. Weve credited Portman, too, for truthful statements. Thats the nature of the Truth-O-Meter: We play it as it lays.Which brings us to Portmanslatest television ad.In the 30-second spot, Portman points to out-of-control federal spending, dangerous deficits and an economic stimulus plan that he says isnt working. Since the $800 billion stimulus passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs, Portman says in the commercial.The claim about the stimulus program not working has been batted about repeatedly. The White House said when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009, that unemployment would peak at 8 percent. Yet it is now 9.6 percent nationally, and 10.7 percent in Ohio.A number of economists say that even more jobs would have been lost were it not for the government spending to stimulate the economy. TheCongressional Budget Offices last quarterly evaluationsaid the stimulus increased national employment by 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. There have been mistakes, missteps and gaffes documented in the spending programs, however, and Portman and other Republicans say the spending was poorly focused. This central question will be for historians and economists in the future to settle.Were merely taking note of Portmans claim because of this: He uses a lower number -- 100,000 jobs lost in Ohio since the stimulus passed -- than he used previously. When he put the figure at 150,000 in June,the Truth-O-Meter ruled it Half True-- because only 127,900 jobs had actually been lost, judging by the most widely accepted measure.That was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures through May, the most current at the time. The numbers come from surveys of employers and are adjusted as the data becomes more complete. Using updated data, BLS now shows the post-stimulus job losses in Ohio came to 130,000 for the period Portman claimed in his earlier statement..But now its October and Portman is using a lower figure when he speaks. As he said in his newest ad, and repeated during an Oct. 8 debate at the City Club of Cleveland, since the stimulus bill passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.Yet heres the thing: Portmans rhetoric might actually be too cautious now. As measured by the latest BLS figures, which go through August and are preliminary, Ohio has 149,200 fewer jobs now than when the stimulus passed. Thats exquisitely close to 150,000.What happened?The state steadily lost jobs through 2009 but the numbers started improving early in the year, continuing through May. The summer saw a retraction, however, reducing Ohios employment count by a total of 19,200 jobs during June, July and August.So Portman was accurate and then some with his recent, more cautious statement. The Half True ruling nevertheless stands for his June claim, because PolitiFact doesnt believe in fortune-telling and Portmans numbers were in fact off when he made that statement.But we give credit where credit is due. So the Truth-O-Meter takes a turn to the right and rules on Portmans newest claim: True. Comment on this item. Since November 2020, an identically worded bit of text alleging that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "is a private nonprofit corporation" has been shared across multiple social media platforms. The claim has its origins on the website Armstrong Economics  which sells a variety of self-published conspiracy books by the titular Martin Armstrong  and would become a well-shared bit of copy-and-paste "copypasta," reproduced in part below: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention its origins well-shared Did you know the CDC is a private nonprofit corporation? [...] The CDC is quasi-government under the Department of Health and Human Services which strangely has sources of funding that are predicated on the fact that it also has a private 501(c)(3) public charity, like the Clinton Foundation. The CDC Foundation receives charitable contributions and philanthropic grants from individuals, foundations, corporations, universities, NGOs and other organizations to advance the work of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is NOT a government-funded organization. It is not exclusively a government-funded [sic]  very curious. Natural News, which boasts a massive audience of conspiracy theorists, republished it in December 2020. At the time of this writing, versions of this copypasta still creep up on various social media platforms. On May 3, 2021, a Facebook account named The Daily Callout published it along with a picture of purported CDC funding sources. Commenters to that post were evidently confused: republished published   The allegations leveled against the CDC are not all that coherent in these posts. The copypasta suggests the CDC is both a non-profit and a "quasi-government" agency. Further, those issues are tangled up in the separate issue of corporate donations to the CDC. The title of the post, however, provides Snopes with a clearly stated contention: "Did you know the CDC is a private nonprofit corporation?" You most likely did not know this, because it is, in fact, not true. The CDC is a federal agency housed in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The confusion stems from the fact that, in 1992, Congress mandated the creation of a non-profit foundation  the CDC Foundation  that would "not be an agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government" and whose purpose would be "to support and carry out activities for the prevention and control of diseases, disorders, injuries, and disabilities, and for promotion of public health." As part of that goal, the foundation has an endowment and accepts charitable gifts from a variety of entities, including corporations, which are forwarded to the CDC to support specific initiatives.  housed in in 1992 mandated the creation CDC Foundation "The government has unique capacities as well as limitations. The same is true for the private and philanthropic sectors," the CDC Foundation argues on its website. "We believe that people, groups and organizations have greater positive impact and can accomplish more collectively than individually." Funds raised by the CDC foundation are donated to various programs and initiatives within the CDC. its website The CDC Foundation is one of two ways corporations can legally provide funds to the CDC. Donations to the CDC foundation are an indirect route as, by law, "officers, employees, and members of the board of the Foundation shall not be officers or employees of the Federal Government." Direct gifts by corporations to the CDC are also allowed under a portion of the U.S. Code that authorizes the secretary of HHS "to accept on behalf of the United States gifts made ... for the benefit of the Service or for the carrying out of any of its functions." by law a portion For both direct gifts to the CDC and gifts made via the CDC Foundation, conditional funding is allowed so long as those requirements are not, as outlined in CDC policy documents: policy documents The acceptance of corporate donations earmarked for specific causes  both to the CDC Foundation and to the CDC itself  have caused apparent conflicts of interest. In 2015, the medical journal BMJ published an editorial outlining several examples of potential conflicts, including these examples: an editorial In 2010, the CDC, in conjunction with the CDC Foundation, formed the Viral Hepatitis Action Coalition, which supports research and promotes expanded testing and treatment of hepatitis C in the United States and globally. Industry has donated over $26m to the coalition through the CDC Foundation since 2010. Corporate members of the coalition include Abbott Laboratories, AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, OraSure Technologies, Quest Diagnostics, and Siemenseach of which produces products to test for or treat hepatitis C infection. [...] In 2012, [a company named] Genentech earmarked $600,000 in donations to the CDC Foundation for CDCs efforts to promote expanded testing and treatment of viral hepatitis. Genentech and its parent company, Roche, manufacture test kits and treatments for hepatitis C. The CDC argues that it has policies in place to prevent such conflicts. Its website states that "when we engage with the private sector  we maintain our scientific integrity by participating in a gift review process that is rigorous and transparent. CDCs gift acceptance policy requires a comprehensive gift review prior to accepting a gift. This includes CDC Foundation (CDCF) gifts and gifts given directly to [the] CDC, whether they are monetary or non-monetary." These processes have been refined and standardized several times since 2014. has policies since 2014 While the issue of potential corporate influence over public health policy merits scrutiny, it is also important to consider the scale of private funding compared to the overall congressionally appropriated budget of the CDC. In the 2020 fiscal year, the CDC received $13 million in conditional gifts from the CDC Foundation and $10 million in conditional and unconditional direct contributions from the private sector. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the nearly $8 billion in funding the CDC receives from Congress: 2020 fiscal year compared to   Even from a rhetorical standpoint it would be a stretch to argue the CDC proportionally is awash in corporate funding. Narrowly speaking, however, the assertion that the CDC is a non-profit, non-government organization is incorrect because that claim conflates the CDC (a federal agency) and the CDC Foundation (a 501(c)(3) charity). As such, the claim is In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook):    As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.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 retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: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.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.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 retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams 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 Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating 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. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks Freshman Oregon Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend, is clear that lawmakers need to fix the Public Employees Retirement System this year, and that they themselves should not be part of the system. He pledged during his campaign to decline membership in PERS.Earlier this month, Knopps officeissued a press release sayingthat along with being sworn into office, he upheld a campaign promise not to join the state retirement program known as the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).It is very important to me to honor the promises that Ive made, Knopp is quoted as saying in the release. If wedont fix PERS now there will be fewer firefighters protecting our communities, fewer police officers on the streets, and fewer teachersin the classroom.PERS is contentious.Lawmakers reformed the system in 2003, curbing benefits for new employees going forward. Some lawmakers say its still too generous. Public employee unions are firm that the benefits were bargained for and are fair.Gov. John Kitzhaber, a Democrat, wants to find savings in the system, as do Republicans;House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, is lukewarm to the idea. Public employees generally favor Democrats with campaign help and money, so its not surprising to hear that Knopp, a Republican, promised to opt out.But PolitiFact Oregon also recalled that before he joined the Senate this year, Knopp was a three-term member of the Oregon House. In fact, he was House majority leader when lawmakers tackled reform in 2003. We were pretty sure he had been a member of PERS.Knopps office confirmed what we thought to be true. He joined the system in 1999, when he was first elected to the House, and remained an active member until 2005, when he left office. As a member for six years, he was vested in the system. The money continued accruing until 2010.What happened in 2010? Knopp needed money for a family medical emergency, so he cashed out his account. The total gross amount was $8,167.07, which we acknowledge is not an astonishingly high figure. Retirement benefits are calculated based on pay, and length of service, and legislators dont earn much, about $20,000 a year.Still, we think his previous membership is a relevant detail curiously missing from an otherwise glowing press release. If PolitiFact Oregon were in office and had made public employee retirement a major part of our platform and had promised to opt out, we think wed make it explicit that we had once been part of PERS, in the interest of full and complete disclosure.In any case, Knopp had three options when he was sworn into office this year: Join the Oregon Public Service Retirement Plan, which is the pension system hes complaining about; join the Oregon Savings Growth Plan, which is like any other deferred compensation plan; or decline to join a retirement plan.Knopp chose the deferred compensation plan. The state -- his employer, the taxpayers -- contributes 6 percent to his plan. The state does not pick up the additional 6 percent of salary on behalf of employees, as it would under PERS.We had two questions for the senator from Central Oregon: One, why not publicize the fact that he was a member -- for more than a decade -- of the system he is now criticizing? And two, why take a retirement option at all?Lets take the retirement question first. Knopp told PolitiFact Oregon that hes not opposed to compensation for legislators. He just doesnt want them to vote on a system in which they have a stake. To that end, he has co-sponsored a bill toprohibit future legislators from joining PERS or the deferred compensation plan, because they shouldnt be forced to be in the system, as he was.Actual or perceived, there needs to be somebody who completely represents citizens and taxpayers, without a conflict, he said.As to the first question, Knopp said he disclosed his previous membership on the campaign trail. When his Democratic challenger said Knopp was a PERS member at an October 2012 candidates forum, he said, I closed my account years ago, honestly, to pay some medical bills when my daughter had two brain surgeries.We get that the retirement system in 1999 was not the legislative issue that it was in 2003 or that it is in 2013. But why didnt he close his account before 2003, when it was clear hed have to vote on PERS reforms? He said it wasnt clear at the time whether he could..Why not close the account in 2005, after leaving office? He saidhe co-sponsored a bill in 2003 that offered a financial incentive for peoplewith inactive accounts to close their accounts. He thought it unseemly to benefit from that legislation -- although we checked, and he wouldnt have qualified.Then why wait until 2010 to close his account? Knopp didnt have a clear answer. He acknowledges that had he not needed the money in 2010, he would have continued to be a member.Knopp has been a consistent and outspoken critic of the Public Employees Retirement System. He served as the House chairman of the committee to reform PERS in 2003. He promised voters that he would not accept PERS this year and he followed through on the promise.What Knopp failed to mention is that he was a member of PERS who closed his account in 2010 because his family needed the money. Knopp could have closed his account in 2003 -- and avoided the conflict then -- or he could have closed his account when he left office in 2005.None of that takes away from the accuracy of the statement -- he honored his pledge to stay out of PERS -- but it is additional information that we deem missing from his press releases.We rate the statement Mostly True. Amid national debates about income inequality and tax cuts for the ultra-rich, one talking point is frequently highlighted in online memes and by political figures such as Bernie Sanders is that online retailing giant Amazon.com, despite taking in $5.6 billion in profit in 2017, paid no federal corporate income taxes for that year: Bernie Sanders   (With respect to the claim about Amazon employees on welfare, see our fact check on that topic here.) here In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazons tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars): SEC filing   Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazons reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks:   The third negative item in the SEC filing, $789 million in reduced tax burden as a result of the 2017 Tax Act, will be applied to future tax years, according to a report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. report SEC filings do not require a company to list the specific credits they utilize, but there are several avenues Amazon would likely have pursued. Annette Nellen, a professor and director of the Master of Science in Taxation program at San Jose University, said that Amazons write-offs likely include credits for research and development, domestic production, and equipment depreciation. And according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute, Amazon receives myriad tax incentives from state and local governments as well: said report The expansion of Amazons physical distribution network has coincided with a strategic business plan of negotiating millions in tax abatements, credits, exemptions, and infrastructure assistance from state and local governments in the name of regional economic development. By the end of 2016, Amazon had likely received over $1 billion in state and local subsidies for its facilities, which would include not only fulfillment centers but sortation centers that only sort packages, mailing centers, and other facilities. Publicly-traded corporations can list the stock options they grant to employees as a business cost in their accounting, and if an option-receiving employee makes over $1 million a year in salary, the profits from the sale of those stocks can be then counted as a federal income tax deduction for the corporation (primarily due to a Clinton-era compromise over how to cap executive pay). Stock options allow an employee to purchase stock in their employers company at a set price, regardless of its current market value: list Options give executives and investors the right to buy shares of a company at a later date and at specific prices. For example, if a chief executive joins a media company when its stock is trading at $55 a share, but years later, the share price has skyrocketed to $100, that chief executive can still buy the shares at $55, pocketing the massive difference. In the cases of their highest paid employees, Amazon and other companies are able to deduct the massive difference employees make when they sell that stock at a profit. According to the Center for Tax Justice, because companies typically low-ball the estimated values, they usually end up with much bigger tax write-offs than the amounts they deduct as a 'cost' in computing the profits they report to shareholders. The $917 million in stock-based compensation listed in Amazon's SEC filing likely stems from their top employees' cashing in on their stock options for a large profit. deduct While it is impossible to know the exact amount of money Amazon did or did not pay to the federal government in 2017, their own accounting suggests that they expected their federal corporate income tax burden to be negative that year.  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  Amazon.com Inc. Form 10-K"
  2 February 2018.
 Gardner, Mathew.  "Amazon Inc. Paid Zero in Federal Taxes in 2017, Gets $789 Million Windfall from New Tax Law."
  Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.  13 February 2018.
 Tobias, Manuela.  "Bernie Sanders Says Amazon Paid No Federal Income Tax in 2017. He's Right."
  Politifact.  3 May 2018. 
 Jones, Janell and Ben Zipperer.  "Unfulfilled Promises."
  Economic Policy Institute.  1 February 2018. 
 Gunjan, Banerji.  "Potential Loser in Tax Overhaul: Executive Stock Options."
  The Wall Street Journal.  19 December 2017.
 Citizens for Tax Justice.  Fortune 500 Corporations Used Stock Option Loophole to Avoid $64.6 Billion in Taxes Over the Past Five Years."
  9 June 2016.