Is COVID-19 Being Spread Through Gas Pumps?
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 Editor's note: This article was updated in August 2021 to include a new but similar iteration of the 2020 social media claims in response to the Delta variant, as well as new guidance issued by the CDC. In March 2020, during the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic, social media users began sharing warnings about the virus allegedly "spreading quickly from gas pumps." Such warnings cautioned readers to use gloves or paper towels while pumping gas and to discard them immediately afterward:  One particular version of this class of warning attributed the advice to "Galway Hospital" in Ireland:  In early August 2021, Snopes readers sent our team a new iteration of the claim with slightly different language that seemed to have been updated in response to the then-rampant Delta variant: Fwd: The hospital sent a message this morning that the Covid-19/delta mutant virus seems to be spreading rapidly through gasoline pumps, asking everyone to wear gloves or use paper towels when refueling and handling-please share. Please send it to everyone in your contact list. Don't leave this information to yourself. Make it available to all your family and friends As with many coronavirus-related pieces of advice, it's something of a mixed bag. We're not aware of any credible reports of COVID-19 being spread via gas pump handles (something that would likely be difficult to determine as the specific source of any particular infection). It is true that surface contact is one of the means of transmission of the novel coronavirus, and since gas pumps are objects that are typically handled by many different people throughout the course of a day -- in many places without being regularly cleaned between uses (especially in areas where self-service is the norm) -- they are a potential route for the virus to spread from person to person. surface contact The CDC issued new guidance for employees at transit stations in June 2021 in response to growing concerns about SARS-CoV-2 variants. new guidance The virus mainly spreads from person to person through respiratory droplets that are emitted when a person coughs, sneezes or talks. The virus can also be spread by touching a surface that has the virus on it and then touching the face, mouth, nose, or eyes. In May 2020, the CDC shared an instructional Facebook post to inform consumers on to safely pump gas. In the post, the agency recommended using disinfecting wipes on handles and buttons before touching them, using hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol after pumping and paying, and washing hands for at least 20 seconds with soap and water upon arriving at the destination. https://m.facebook.com/CDC/posts/10157908635896026/?_rdr Like door handles, grocery carts, and ATMs, many people touch gas pumps throughout the day. The chance of COVID-19 exposure at the gas pump is low, especially if Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommended practices are followed, wrote the American Petroleum Institute (API) in a one-page statement. statement Research conducted by a collaboration of scientific institutions, including the National Institutes of Health and Princeton University, found that the virus can survive up to three days on some surfaces. But as API pointed out, several events would need to happen for the virus to spread from a pump to a person. Research First, a person with COVID-19, with or without symptoms, would have to emit respiratory droplets containing the virus within 6-feet of a pump or touch it with contaminated hands. The virus would then need to survive long enough for a non-COVID-19 individual to touch the surface in a way that the virus would be transferred to their hands. Lastly, the healthy individual would then have to touch their eyes, nose or mouth. While it is entirely possible to encounter SARS-CoV-2 by touching a gas pump, surface-to-surface transmission is not thought to be the primary spread of the virus. At this time, we are not aware of any studies that support the claim that the virus can be transmitted via contact with a gas pump, wrote API. However, the level of risk associated with contracting the virus from a gas pump is no different than the risk associated with touching other common surfaces like grocery store carts or door handles. But how much risk pumping gas poses relative to other ordinary day-to-day activities is difficult to determine. Consumer Reports, for example, offered advice in 2020 that was consistent with what was expressed in some social media warnings: advice For many [persons] the occasional trip to the gas station is inevitable, as is touching the pump handle and payment keypad. Pump handles and credit card keypads, which are high-touch areas, could have the virus present, which experts say can stay alive for hours or even days on hard surfaces ... [T]here are a few things you can do that will help you stay safe when you have to pump gas.  Consider carrying some disposable nitrile or latex gloves in your car to use when gripping the pump handle. Short of that, you can try to use paper towels that are sometimes available at the pump or have some with you to cover your hands when you grip the handle.  Invert the gloves and throw them away, and also any paper towels you might have used. Use hand sanitizer to make sure your hands are clean after youre done and before you get back into your car. On the other hand, in response o the 2020 social media posts, the Irish Petroleum Industry Association told the TheJournal.ie the following: Our members are implementing enhanced hygiene protocols in our service station shops. In line with HSE [Health and Safety Executive] advice, our workers regularly wash and sanitise their hands and the areas customers interact with such as fuel nozzles, credit card PIN pads, door handles and food areas. We are aware of messages being shared on social media and wanted to inform customers that pump handles are no more or less prone to the spread of infection than any other hard surface and to outline the significant steps we are taking to combat the spread of Covid-19 and keep our valued customers safe. Gas pumps could be considered somewhat more of a concern because consumers typically touch other surfaces -- such as the door handles and interiors of their vehicles -- immediately afterward and could thereby create yet another pathway of contamination for themselves or others. However, gas pumps are just one of many objects that multiple people commonly handle in a similar fashion during the course of a day, including ATMs, payment processing systems, shopping cart handles, and currency, all of which pose varying degrees of risk. Preston, Benjamin.  "How to Protect Yourself Against Coronavirus When Pumping Gas."
  Consumer Reports.  21 March 2020. Grey, Jess.  "How to Clean and Disinfect Yourself, Your Home, and Your Stuff."
  Wired.  19 March 2020. National Institutes of Health.  "New Coronavirus Stable for Hours on Surfaces."
  17 March 2020. The Journal.ie.  "Debunked: No, 'Galway Hospital' Hasn't Circulated a Message Telling People to Wear Gloves at Petrol Pumps."
  20 March 2020. Update [Aug. 5, 2021]: This article was updated to include a new iteration of the claim that circulated in response to the Delta variant, as well as to include new guidance issued by the CDC.
On 24 October 2016, health insurance broker Tyler McClosky created a phenomenon on Facebook when he posted a screen shot of what it would cost for a family of four with a total household income of $98,000 in Lee County, Florida, to buy insurance on the Affordable Care Act's marketplace: We were able to recreate McClosky's viral post using the shopping tool at healthcare.gov and the same data he entered (two non-smoking parents with a combined income of $98,000 and two 8-year-old children in Lee County, Florida): tool   But data sent by a Department of Health and Human Services official pointed out that 81 percent of families of that size on an Obamacare plan have household incomes of less than $48,000. So the average family currently subscribing to Obamacare would not be paying nearly as much as the image above depicts in their out-of-pocket premium costs. We entered the same data but changed the income to $48,000 here:   McClosky created the post on 24 October 2016, the same day a report by the Department of Health and Human Services was released detailing an average 25 percent increase in costs to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) customers: customers Across states using the HealthCare.gov platform, the median increase in the second-lowest cost silver plan premium is 16 percent, while the average increase is 25 percent. This figure varies based on locale. For instance, a table compiled by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that people in Phoenix, Arizona will have a 145 percent premium increase, but a tax subsidy will mean a 40-year-old, non-smoking Phoenix resident with a $30,000 annual income will not have to pay any more than last year (which is roughly $207 a month, depending on the plan selected). table According to data sent by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a majority of consumers covered by the ACA (85 percent) qualify for tax credits that keep pace with premium increases, so many won't see much of an impact on their out-of-pocket costs. data But McClosky was addressing people whose income disqualifies them from that assistance. He told us he used the $98,000 annual income as an example because that is the threshold at which households of four with two children do not qualify for tax credit assistance (you qualify if you make up to 400 percent of the federal poverty line). He said he created the post because he wanted to raise awareness about what it costs to insure a family in which each adult is making an annual salary of $44,000, and neither has access to employer-based health care  a fairly common situation in the United States. His concern, he said, is that only consumers who qualify for a tax subsidy can afford insurance under ACA. If their incomes are too high to qualify for assistance, they may simply go without. While the number of uninsured Americans dropped under ACA, as of 2015, 28.5 million people still lack coverage. Per the Kaiser Family Foundation: Even under the ACA, many uninsured people cite the high cost of insurance as the main reason they lack coverage. In 2015, 46% of uninsured adults said that they tried to get coverage but did not because it was too expensive. Many people do not have access to coverage through a job, and some people, particularly poor adults in states that did not expand Medicaid, remain ineligible for financial assistance for coverage. Some people who are eligible for financial assistance under the ACA may not know they can get help, and others may still find the cost of coverage prohibitive. In addition, undocumented immigrants are ineligible for Medicaid or Marketplace coverage. Eric Seiber, associate professor of health services management and policy at Ohio State, said that the health care system in the United States is the most expensive in the world, and costs have steadily increased over the years. Despite its name, the Affordable Care Act doesn't actually address the cost of health care itself: The ACA is not health care reform. Its health insurance reform. It really doesnt do that much about affordable care or patient protection beyond the subsidies and Medicaid. People's perception that their wages have been flat is an effect of compensation increases going to cover rising healthcare costs instead of into their paychecks, Seiber said. McClosky, who sells health and life insurance plans in Florida, said that the Affordable Care Act has had the effect of diminishing competition among carriers. For instance, Lee County residents can only purchase Blue Cross Blue Shield. Prices in Miami-Dade are lower than in Lee County, because there are more carriers competing with each other. McClosky says insurance carriers have been squeezed by part of the mandate which requires them to spend 80 to 85 percent on claim payouts and health care quality improvement. He pointed to Assurant, a 123-yea-old insurer that specialized in individual and small business plans. They could not survive under the ACA and filed for bankruptcy in 2015. Health care is a source of roiling political debate for years. While the cost of health plans under Obamacare will go up an average 25 percent as of 1 November 2016, the majority of consumers won't experience much change in their out-of-pocket costs when open enrollment starts for 2017, because the tax credits will buffer that increase. Further, as the New York Times pointed out, many Americans are shielded from the immediate costs of health care by employer-based insurance or the public programs: pointed out These increases really matter only for those who buy their own insurance. Most people are unaffected by the rate increases because they get their insurance through an employer or are covered through government programs like Medicare, Medicaid or the Department of Veterans Affairs. Only a small fraction of Americans who have insurance buy individual policies. There are about 10 million people in the Obamacare markets and around an additional seven million who buy health plans outside the marketplace, according to Obama administration estimates. The published rate increases apply only to people who shop in the markets, but premiums are expected to go up sharply for the other plans as well. However, as McClosky's post makes clear, whether people notice it or not, American health care costs are high  and not everyone can qualify for available assistance. Kaiser Family Foundation. "2017 Premium Changes and Insurer Participation in the Affordable Care Acts Health Insurance Marketplaces."
25 October 2016. ASPE Research Brief. "Health plan choice and premiums in the 2017 health insurance marketplace."
24 October 2016. Abelson, Reed, and Sanger-Katz, Margaret. "A Quick Guide to Rising Obamacare Rates."
The New York Times. 25 October 2016. Boulton, Guy. "Milwaukee-based Assurant Health to be sold off or shut down."
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 28 April 2015. The Iranian missile strikes launched against U.S. forces in Iraq inspired the spread of false and inaccurate claims on Facebook, with one post taking aim at former President Barack Obama. The missiles that were launched at American forces in Iraq from Iran, were funded by Barack Obama, with American tax dollars. Let that sink in, said a Jan. 8Facebook postfrom a page that calls itself Conservative Headquarters. A text image posted to Facebook on Jan. 8, 2020 contains a claim that we rate False. The post, with over 19,000 shares, was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook.) It cites a2016 articlefrom the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website. But the Free Beacon post  from nearly four years ago  doesn't allege what the Facebook image did. There is no evidence that the Iranian missiles were paid for by U.S. taxpayers. The Facebook post, likeotherpostsandclaimswevefact-checkedbefore, misrepresents terms of the Iran nuclear deal that Obama signed on behalf of the United States in 2015. The deal with Iran was promoted by Obama, but it was also signed by China, Russia, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, with assistance from the European Union. Thedealallowed Iran to regain access to some of its own assets, which had been frozen as an economic sanction levied in retaliation for the countrys pursuit of a nuclear weapon. The United States and other countries lifted the sanctions and freeze on funds after international inspectors verified in 2016 that Iran was doing enough to curb its nuclear program. So the money was Irans. It wasnt handed to Iran by the United States or Obama, nor was it funded by U.S. taxpayers. Its not clear what ultimately happened to the funds. InJanuary 2016, then-Secretary of State JohnKerry said he expected that some of the money would end up with organizations involved in terrorism. But theres no evidence that the money was behind the strike in Iraq. On Jan. 5, after a U.S. airstrike killed top Iranian military leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iransaidit would no longer comply with the limits the deal placed on its ability to enrich uranium. In addition to the unfreezing of assets, the United States did provide Iran $1.7 billion as part of a settlement ending a legal dispute. That money was part of a cash transfer that theCongressional Research Service reviewed. It resolved an arms contract between the United States and Iran that predated the Iranian revolution in 1979. Iran had paid for military equipment, but it was never delivered. As wevenotedbefore, there was $400 million in that account as of 1990, and negotiators agreed that accrued interest would add $1.3 billion to the amount. The United States sent the money to Iran in euros, Swiss francs and other currencies. But this was a repayment, meaning the United States was giving Iran its money back with interest. And while the interest came from a governmentfundmaintained by taxpayer dollars, the money being reimbursed originated with Iran, not the U.S. taxpayer. And again, theres no evidence that this money ultimately went toward the recent missile strikes. A Facebook post said, The missiles that were launched at American forces in Iraq from Iran, were funded by Barack Obama, with American tax dollars. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal was signed by multiple nations, and it did not involve the United States or Obama cutting a check to Iran. The funds Iran received were its own frozen assets. American tax dollars were never part of the deal. A separate payment that went to Iran under Obama was to settle a decades-old dispute over U.S. military equipment that Iran paid for but never received. We rate this statement False. Clarification and update, Jan. 10, 2020: The Washington Free Beacon story cited by the author of the viral image never alleged that taxpayer dollars were used to fund the missiles launched at American forces in Iraq. An original version of this story may have been unclear on this point. In early March 2021, Snopes readers asked about screenshots of what appeared to be a scam circulating on the payment platform Venmo. The alleged scam shows a Venmo user sending $600 to another user and then requesting it back, claiming to have sent it to the wrong person:   Although we don't know the intentions of the Venmo user involved in the above exchange (and we cropped the person's name out for privacy reasons), sending money to strangers and then requesting it back is a known type of scam on Venmo. known The Dayton Daily News, a Dayton, Ohio-based daily newspaper, described how the scam works: Even Venmo is aware of these scams and puts a warning on its website that Venmo is designed for payments between people who trust each other because there is no protection for the buyer or seller. Therefore, its important you dont accept or give money to strangers who could potentially be scammers. For example, scammers connect stolen credit cards to Venmo and use them to transfer money to unsuspecting users. If you send the money back to the scammer, he or she will delete the stolen credit card from the account and add his or her own card in its place. Others send screenshots of fake emails that make it seem like theyve paid you through the app, when they actually havent.  The Better Business Bureau (BBB) also warns against this type of scam, in which a cash app user "accidentally" sends a stranger a payment and then requests that they send it back. The BBB advises that if you are targeted in an exchange like this, don't send the money back. Instead, ask the other person to simply cancel the transaction. warns against "The sender can request that the vendor cancel the transaction. If the person refuses, its probably a scam," the BBB states. The BBB also encourages cash app users to check their security settings and to link their accounts to credit cards instead of debit cards or bank accounts because, in the event that you are scammed, it's easier to recoup the money if you charged it to a credit card. Claim:  Protest against federal spending encourages Americans to mail tea bags to the White House.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2009] Mailing Tea Bags to Washington, DC What a wonderful idea, I just wish it had been mine. I have a feeling that USPS is going to have a hell of a lot of tea to contend with, after all it only costs 42 cents to send a message, hopefully heard round the world!!! So please mark your Calendars There's a storm abrewin'. What happens when good, responsible people keep quiet? Washington has forgotten they work for us. We don't work for them. Throwing good money after bad is NOT the answer. I am sick of the midnight, closed door sessions to come up with a plan. I am sick of Congress raking CEO's over the coals while they, themselves, have defaulted on their taxes. I am sick of the bailed out companies having lavish vacations and retreats on my dollar. I am sick of being told it is MY responsibility to rescue people that, knowingly, bought more house than they could afford. I am sick of being made to feel it is my patriotic duty to pay MORE taxes. I, like all of you, am a responsible citizen. I pay my taxes. I live on a budget and I don't ask someone else to carry the burden for poor decisions I may make. I have emailed my congressmen and senators asking them to NOT vote for the stimulus package as it was written without reading it first. No one listened. They voted for it, pork and all. O.K. folks, here it is. You may think you are just one voice and what you think won't make a difference. Well, yes it will and YES, WE CAN!! If you are disgusted and angry with the way Washington is handling our taxes. If you are fearful of the fallout from the reckless spending of BILLIONS to bailout and "stimulate" without accountability and responsibility then we need to become ONE, LOUD VOICE THAT CAN BE HEARD FROM EVERY CITY, TOWN, SUBURB AND HOME IN AMERICA. There is a growing protest to demand that Congress, the President and his cabinet LISTEN to us, the American Citizens. What is being done in Washington is NOT the way to handle the economic free fall. So, here's the plan. On April 1, 2009, all Americans are asked to send a TEABAG to Washington, D.C. You do not have to enclose a note or any other information unless you so desire. Just a TEABAG. Many cities are organizing protests. If you simply search, "New American Tea Party", several sites will come up. If you aren't the 'protester' type, simply make your one voice heard with a TEABAG. Your one voice will become a roar when joined with millions of others that feel the same way. Yes, something needs to be done but the lack of confidence as shown by the steady decline in the stock market speaks volumes. This was not my idea. I visited the sites of the 'New American Tea Party' and an online survey showed over 90% of thousands said they would send the teabag on April 1. Why, April 1?? We want them to reach Washington by April 15. Will you do it? I will. Send it to; 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. 20500. Forward this to everyone in your address book. Visit the website for more information about the 'New American Tea Party'. I would encourage everyone to go ahead and get the envelope ready to mail, then just drop it in the mail April 1. Can't guarantee what the postage will be by then, it is going up as we speak, but have your envelope ready. What will this cost you? A little time and a 40 something cent stamp.. What could you receive in benefits? Maybe, just maybe, our elected officials will start to listen to the people. Take out the Pork. Tell us how the money is being spent. We want TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. Remember, the money will be spent over the next 4-5 years. It is not too late. Of course, if you agree with the way things are being done now, just delete!!!!! Origins:   On the evening of 16 December 1773, a group of American colonists who called themselves "The Sons of Liberty" furtively boarded the ship Dartmouth, which was docked in Boston harbor with a load of East India Company tea.  Working  through the night, the colonists dumped over 45 tons of tea into the waters of the harbor as a protest against the Tea Act passed by the British government.  The event, which came to be known as "The Boston Tea Party," was one of the seminal events of the American Revolution and remains one of the most iconic moments in all of U.S. history. In 2009, the iconic status of that event was referenced in the name of the New American Tea Party, described as a "coalition of citizens and organizations concerned about the recent trend of fiscal recklessness in government" who have begun coordinating events around the U.S. with the announced goal of protesting largesse in federal spending.   The item quoted above seeks to take up the "Tea Party" spirit by encouraging Americans to mail tea bags to the White House on 1 April 2009 (in order to arrive by 15 April, the day on which income tax filings are due) as a form of symbolic protest against "the way Washington is handling our taxes."  (The concept is vaguely reminiscent of a 1955 campaign that had citizens mailing small bags of wheat to President Eisenhower to encourage the U.S. to provide surplus food to flood victims in China.) New American Tea Party events wheat Of course, everyone is free to choose whether or not to participate in symbolic protests, so such actions don't have much in the way of verifiable "true" or "false" aspects  the only issue is how effective the chosen form of protest is likely to be.  With that in mind, we offer a few caveats for those inclined to participate:  An entry in the New American Tea Party blog states that they don't endorse the effort: entry We have received hundreds of questions about an email circulating that urges folks to send tea to Washington on April 1st or April 15th.  This effort is not endorsed by the New American Tea Party, so we can't answer any questions about it.  Given the more stringent security procedures for mail handling enacted after 9/11, there are no guarantees envelopes containing mailed teabags will get through to the White House without being discarded or significantly delayed, something also noted in the New American Tea Party blog: It is a neat idea, but things like that will likely either be held up getting scanned or end up getting thrown away due to security precautions. (A subsequent New American Tea Party blog entry suggested that just mailing the labels from tea bags might be a way of avoiding this potential pitfall.) entry  Envelopes that cannot be run through USPS sorting machines are subject to an additional 20 postage surcharge. A mailed item is considered  nonmachinable if: nonmachinable  It is a square letter (the minimum size for a square envelope is 5 x 5 inches) It is too rigid  does not bend easily It has clasps, string, buttons, or similar closure devices It has an address parallel to the shorter dimension of the letter It contains items that cause the surface to be uneven The length divided by height is less than 1.3 or more than 2.5  The specific aims of the tea bag protest are not clearly articulated in the e-mail quoted above, so senders might wish to include explanatory notes with their envelopes stating the desired outcome, such as: "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that provide money to businesses without provisions for strict transparency and accountability in how that money is to be spent" or  "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that include earmarks." Last updated:  12 March 2009    Idaho Statesman.  "Local Group Stages 'Reckless Federal Spending' Protest."   27 February 2009.    WJXT-TV [Jacksonville, FL].  "'Tea Party' Protests Wasteful Spending."   MSNBC.  2 March 2009. President Donald Trump took to the airwaves to tout his budding bromance with rapper Kanye West. The hosts ofFox & Friendsasked Trump during an April 26telephone interviewabout the enthusiastic tweets exchanged between the two men, such as this one. my MAGA hat is signed pic.twitter.com/DrDHJybS8V Trump turned his sudden friendship with West into a commentary about the economic results on his watch. Trump said, Kanye looks and he sees black unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees Hispanic unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees (womens unemployment) the lowest its been in now almost 19 years. Trump haspreviously made claims of this sort, but its been a few months, so we thought wed take a new look at the numbers. In March 2018, the African-American unemployment rate stood at 6.9 percent. Thats not a record low, but its close  and the record low was 6.8 percent in December 2017, also on Trumps watch. Heres the full data for the black unemployment rate since the statistic was first calculated in 1972: The Hispanic unemployment rate was 5.1 percent in March 2018. Thats not a record either, but once again, its close. The Hispanic unemployment rate was as low as 4.8 percent three times in 2017, in June, October and November. Those low points all occurred on Trumps watch. Heres the full historical data: Currently, the unemployment rate for women is 4.0 percent. It was slightly lower during an earlier point in Trumps presidency  3.9 percent in October 2017. The womens unemployment rate was lower still in December 2000, when it hit 3.8 percent. That falls within the 19-year windowTrump cited. Heres the full run of data: Economists agree that presidents dont deserve either full credit or full blame for the unemployment rate on their watch. The president is not all-powerful on economic matters; broader factors, from the business cycle to changes in technology to demographic shifts, play major roles. And to the extent that a president does deserve credit for low unemployment, Trumps predecessor, Barack Obama, deserves at least as much as Trump does. As these charts show, the unemployment rate for blacks, Hispanics, and women declined dramatically on Obamas watch as the country pulled out of the Great Recession. Black unemployment peaked at 16.6 percent in April 2010, when Obama was president. It then fell by more than half to 7.8 percent by the time Obama left office in January 2017. Hispanic unemployment, meanwhile, peaked at 13 percent in August 2009, then fell to 5.9 percent at the end of Obamas term in January 2017. And unemployment among women peaked at 9 percent in November 2010, before falling to 4.8 percent by the time he left office in January 2017, a drop of nearly half. Trump said, Kanye looks and he sees black unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees Hispanic unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees (womens unemployment) the lowest its been in now almost 19 years. The unemployment rates for African-Americans and Hispanics have hit all-time lows in recent months on Trumps watch, and the rate for women was recently the lowest its been in more than 18 years. But its worth remembering that,to the extent that presidents deserve any credit for economic conditions on their watch, the heavy lifting in getting rates that low occurred before Trump became president. We rate the statement Mostly True. After a flurry of attack ads in the past two weeks, President Barack Obama this week released aTV adin which he spoke directly into the camera and discussed how his policy approaches differed from Mitt Romneys. He cited taxes as one area where they had different philosophies. Obama said, Gov. Romney's plan would cut taxes for the folks at the very top.Well check whether this is an accurate characterization of Romneys plan.Romney has posted somekey elements of his tax planon his campaign website. Heres a summary of the provisions for individual taxpayers: Cut marginal rates by one-fifth on a permanent, across-the-board basis Eliminate interest, dividend, and capital gains taxes for taxpayers with an adjusted gross income below $200,000 Eliminate the estate tax Repeal the Alternative Minimum TaxTo analyze the Romney tax cut, we turned to the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, an independent think tank that evaluates the tax proposals submitted by presidential candidates. The Tax Policy Center looked at two versions of Romneys tax proposal. We will use theanalysisof the more recent of Romneys two plans, which the group published in March 2012.The Tax Policy Center ran two sets of numbers, one that gives Romney credit for extending the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush and for an annual adjustment in the Alternative Minimum Tax and one that doesn't. Under the analysis that gives Romney credit for extending the Bush tax cuts and the AMT, people in each of the 11 income ranges in the centers study saw a tax cut, with after-tax income increasing by anywhere from 0.3 percent for people who earn less than $10,000 to 19.8 percent for people earning more than $1 million per year. Under the other measurement, which we find is more appropriate, people in eight of the 11 income ranges got cuts -- all except the income ranges below $30,000. For those earning more than that, after-tax income would increase by anywhere from 0.8 percent for those in the $30,000 to $40,000 range to nearly 12 percent for those earning more than $1 million.So Obama is telling part of the story. Yes, there are substantial benefits for people at the top, but he ignores that most people in the middle and lower reaches of the income ladder would benefit as well. Using the calculation that does not give him credit for the Bush and AMT extensions, people earning from $40,000 to $50,000 would see a cut of $512 on average, while taxpayers in the $50,000-to-$75,000 range would see a cut of $1,122.Still, there is support for Obama's point because the Romney tax cuts are tilted toward the wealthy. The biggest winners under Romneys tax plan are those earning more than $1 million. That group accounts for less than 1 percent of all taxpayers, but would receive 26 to 31 percent of the Romney plans tax benefits, according to the Tax Policy Center's calculations.Our ruling Obama is correct that Romneys plan does indeed cut taxes for high-income Americans -- quite heavily in fact -- but the rich arent the only ones who would see a cut. Taxes would be reduced in lower income ranges, too. Still, the plan gives a large share of the benefits to higher income taxpayers. On balance, we rate the claim Mostly True. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz sees a consistent pattern of lawlessness from this president and this administration-- unilaterally altering laws and choosing which to enforce, Cruz said in Austin on Jan. 10, 2014. One example, the Texas Republican said, came last summer, when President Barack Obama delayed by a year the Obamacare laws requirement that companies with 50 or more employees provide coverage to their workers. The presidents a big fan of saying, Its the law of the land. We need to follow the law of the land. Oh, really? Lets see, that law of the land says on Jan. 1, 2014, the employer mandate shall kick in for big business, Cruz said at a Texas Public Policy Foundation conference. And yet the president just announced unilaterally, No, were not enforcing this. Im granting an exemption to all of big business. And by the way, this was done -- was this done through a big formal announcement, through an address to the American people: Theres a problem in this law; were going to have to change it? No. It was done through a blog post by a mid-level bureaucrat at the Department of Treasury on July 3, right before the Fourth of July break. Were not getting into whether laws were broken; not our purview. But we wondered if Cruz accurately captured how the change was revealed. Cruz spokesman Sean Rushton told us by email that Cruz was referring to a July 2, 2013,blog entryon Treasury.gov attributed to Mark Mazur, assistant secretary for tax policy. The post said, The administration is announcing that it will provide an additional year before the ACA mandatory employer and insurer reporting requirements begin. News coverage that day said the Treasury and White House websites broke the news.The New York Timesreported: In a significant setback for President Barack Obama's signature domestic initiative, the administration on Tuesday abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in his health care law's mandate that larger employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties. The decision postpones the effective date beyond next year's midterm elections. Employer groups welcomed the news of the concession, which followed complaints from businesses and was posted late in the day on the White House and Treasury websites while the president was flying home from Africa. TheWashington Posts Wonkblogsaid: The Obama administration will not penalize businesses that do not provide health insurance in 2014, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday. We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively, Mark Mazur, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, wrote in a late Tuesdayblog post. In a July 3, 2013,news story, Bloomberg News described the White House website announcement: Valerie Jarrett, a senior Obama adviser, said in a blog post announcing the move that the administration decided on the delay so officials could simplify reporting requirements and give employers a chance to adjust their health-care coverage. Some months later, it looks to us like the Treasury announced the change shortly before the White House did. Jarrettspostis time-stamped 6 p.m. Eastern; the Treasury blog entry does not have a time stamp. But the earliest news accounts we saw solely cited the Treasury post: the Washington Post news blog entry, stamped 5:51 p.m., a Business Insidernews storystamped 5:41 p.m., and a Huffington Postitemstamped 5:50 p.m. Eastern. With the announcements, the government put in motion one-year delays for businesses to report certain information to the IRS and related penalties. The Obamacare law, approved in 2010, essentially requires affected employers and other health coverage providers to report whether their insurance plans meet the laws minimum coverage standards and whether employees are enrolled in them. There were more notification steps: A July 9, 2013, IRSnoticeformalized the change, and Treasury and the IRSpublishedproposed versions of the rules for comment Sept. 9, 2013, in the Federal Register. When we called in January 2014, IRS spokesman Eric Smith told us by phone that the final rules had not yet been issued. Debate has swirled over whether the administration had the authority to unilaterally make this change. Rushton emailed us a link to a July 8, 2013,blog postby the libertarian Cato Institute saying the Affordable Care Act gives Treasury the authority to collect penalties, not to waive them or the reporting requirements. In contrast, a Treasury officialtolda House subcommittee on July 17, 2013, that the departmentgenerally may delay effective dates in some circumstances -- such as easing the transition to new requirements -- because of a lawstatingthe IRS can prescribe all needful rules and regulations to enforce relevant laws. So: The news was announced on two government blogs. And was the originator a mid-level bureaucrat? John Palguta, vice president for policy at the Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan group that studies the federal workforce, told us by email, The assistant secretary for tax policy is far from a mid-level Department of Treasury employee. Of the approximately 2.1 million civilian employees in the executive branch of government (not counting the Postal Service), Mr. Mazur is one of only 1,217 Senate-confirmed, political employees in government paid at executive-level IV, which in 2013 was $155,500 a year. On the other hand, a University of North Carolina constitutional law professor who wrote abookon federal appointments told us by email, He could be described as mid-level but, because he is Senate-confirmed, not a bureaucrat. Under the Constitution, officials requiring Senate confirmation are thought of as officers of the U.S.  a term, Michael Gerhardt said, that has been defined by the Supreme Court as someone who wields some substantial policymaking authority. A bureaucrat sounds as if it is someone who does not have much authority or discretion, he said. Gerhardt said mid-level typically means ranking somewhere within the middle of the hierarchy of the department. It is not unusual for Senate-confirmable officials to be in such posts. Our ruling Cruz said that Obama unilaterally announced he was delaying the employer mandate through a blog post by a mid-level bureaucrat at the Department of Treasury. The announcement was also made on a White House blog, and mid-level bureaucrat isnt necessarily accurate. We rate his statement as Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Correction, 4:10 p.m. Jan. 21, 2014:We revised this story, which originally overstated the salary of executive-level IV government employees. This correction did not affect our rating of the claim. 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 Claim:  E-mail reproduces comedian Bill Cosby's platform as a write-in candidate in an upcoming presidential election. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] 0I HAVE DECIDED TO BECOME A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE.  HERE IS MY PLATFORM: ( 1.)  Press 1 for English is immediately banned.  English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can. ( 2.)  We will immediately go into a two year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude.  NO imports, no exports.  We will use the 'Walmart' policy, 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.' ( 3.)  When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on it.  ( 4.)  All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border.  (six month tour) They will be under strict orders not to fire on SOUTHBOUND aliens. ( 5.)  Social security  will immediately return to its original state.  If you didn't put nuttin in, you ain't gettin nuttin out.  The president nor any other politician will not be able to touch it. ( 6.)  Welfare - Checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40 hour school week and the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade. ( 7.)  Professional Athletes - Steroids - The FIRST time you check positive you're banned for life. ( 8.)  Crime - We will adopt the Turkish method, the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There is no more life sentences.  If convicted, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim; gun, knife, strangulation, etc. ( 9.)  One export will be allowed...Wheat.  The world needs to eat.  A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil. (10.)  All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes.  When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can make the decision whetherit's a worthy cause. (11.)  The Pledge of Allegiance will be said every day at school and every day in Congress. (12.)  The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc. Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes, but a vote for me will get you better than what you have, and better than what you're gonna get.  Thanks for listening, and remember to write in my name on the ballot in November. God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!! Bill Cosby!!!!!!!! Origins:   This piece setting out a hypothetical reactionary "platform" for a potential write-in U.S. presidential candidate was originally circulated prior to the 2008 elections and commonly attributed to entertainer  Bill Cosby.  Although the identity of the original author remains unknown, this piece is most assuredly not the work of the popular comedian:  When Dr. Cosby speaks out politically, it is generally to urge blacks to take responsibility for making the most of educational opportunities and eschewing choices that limit their potential for success.  Immigration, imports, foreign aid, steroid use in sports, and insufficient recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem are not his political btes noires.  (This "platform" has also been attributed to comic George Carlin, and it's equally out of tune with that late comedian's commonly expressed political views.) Bill Cosby speaks out Just before the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Bill Cosby himself disclaimed involvement with this "write-in candidate" e-mail on his web site: BILL COSBY IS NOT A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENTI am not a write-in candidate for President. The statement purportedly from me stating that I am a candidate is a hoax. The platform attributed to me (and at various times to Robin Williams, Andy Rooney and George Carlin) does not represent my views and in many respects is abhorrent to me. Apparently those bloggers and websites who continue to spread this hoax do not care to do even minimal fact checking. This piece has continued to circulate well beyond the 2008 elections and has since been updated to suggest that it is a platform for a potential candidate in the upcoming 2012 elections, a change which prompted the posting of yet another disclaimer on Dr. Cosby's site in September 2009: disclaimer Whatever I say is on Twitter, Facebook or BillCosby.com A viral email is appearing on the internet purporting to be a Bill Cosby statement that he is running for President of the United States in 2012 and outlining his platform. This is a hoax, completely false and with no factual basis. Bill Cosby says, "False Bill Cosby statements are not funny nor fun and sometimes mean-spirited." Last updated:  25 September 2010 In early 2017 several news outlets reported on a story that owners of Amazon's Alexa digital assistant device owners were "left out of pocket" after a 6-year-old girl named Brooke Neitzel inadvertently triggered one into placing an order for an expensive dollhouse, and a news report on the incident triggered a plague of automated, unwanted dollhouse ordering: reported [In January 2017] it was reported that an Amazon Echo in Dallas, Texas, had ordered a $170 dollhouse after six-year-old Brooke Neitzel asked: 'Can you play dollhouse with me and get me a dollhouse?' Although the little girl apparently meant it as a rhetorical question the device saw it as a command and ordered a KidKraft Sparkle mansion dollhouse, as well as four pounds of sugar cookies. But to make matters worse many Amazon Echoes apparently picked up on TV anchor Jim Patton's words in the report: 'I love the little girl saying "Alexa ordered me a dollhouse".' Viewers at home were then left stunned when their own Amazon Echoes picked up the voice requests in the report and ordered dolls houses too. As voice-command purchasing is enabled as a default on the Alexa devices, viewers found it had mistaken the show for their command and bought the toy. According to that report, a Texas kindergartner's request for Alexa to "play dollhouse" with her and "get [her] a dollhouse" resulted in her family's being charged for an order for a top-dollar toy. And when the family's tale was reported by a San Diego news station, "stunned" viewers also became the recipients of unwanted dollhouses simply because an anchor repeated the same phrase, which their own Amazon Echo/Alexa devices picked up on and transformed into orders.   In one interview, Neitzel's mother Megan provided the Alexa log showing that her daughter had asked the device "Can you play dollhouse with me and get me a dollhouse?" But the embedded video of the log suggested that instead of confirming a dollhouse order, Alexa had responded, "Sorry, I couldn't find the answer to your question": interview  We attempted to replicate the circumstances of the purported inadvertent order and were unable to do so. When asked "can you play dollhouse with me and get me a dollhouse?" our, Alexa responded with "now shuffling songs by Bauhaus." Asking "Alexa, can you get me a dollhouse?" returned "hmm ... Im not sure what you meant by that question." "Alexa, can you play dollhouse with me? returned  ... heres a sample of 'Dollhouse Sounds' by Dollhouse Incorporated. Alexa, can you get me a dollhouse? was answered by I wasnt able to understand the question I heard." No permutation of "[c]an you play dollhouse with me and get me a dollhouse?" we tried resulted in a prompt to confirm a dollhouse order in any of our experiments conducted with two separate Alexa-enabled devices. The only potential purchase-triggering word appeared to be "order," after which it was necessary to confirm or decline the transaction (which we did at least three times and did not accidentally order any dollhouses). An Amazon spokesperson told us in response to our inquiry that ordering items through Alexa is a multi-step process that requires confirmation: You must ask Alexa to order a product and then confirm the purchase with a yes response to purchase via voice. If you asked Alexa to order something on accident, simply say no when asked to confirm. You can also manage your shopping settings in the Alexa app, such as turning off voice purchasing or requiring a confirmation code before every order. Additionally, orders you place for physical products are eligible for free returns. This conforms to our own experience: we couldn't induce Alexa into ordering anything without its first showing us the item, displaying a price, and asking us for verbal confirmation.  We also couldn't get Alexa to order two items at once, as supposedly happened with the dollhouse and cookies  Alexa always processed multiple items separately no matter how we tried to join them, displaying a price and requiring a verbal confirmation for each item. We also could find no confirmation (outside of anecdotal repetition) that a spate of unwanted dollhouse orders followed in the wake of San Diego newscaster Jim Patton's report on the story.  Perhaps the television audio of that newscast might have woken up some viewers' Alexas, but those viewers would still have had to confirm any potential dollhouse purchases by responding 'yes' to Alexa's request for purchase confirmation. We have yet to locate any of the "viewers at home left stunned" as their Alexa devices foisted undesired $165 toys upon them. CBS News.  "6-Year-Old Orders $160 Dollhouse, 4 Pounds of Cookies with Amazon's Echo Dot."
  5 January 2017.