We have the highest (corporate tax rates) in the world right now.
On the Jan. 2, 2011, edition of NBC'sMeet the Press, Sen.-elect Pat Toomey, R-Pa., cited a striking statistic in urging the United States to lower its corporate tax rates.Asked by host David Gregory about possible areas where President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans can work together, Toomey suggested several areas, including taxes.I think tax policy is a possible area, one with plenty of landmines but plenty of opportunities,Toomey said. Simplify the code, lower rates. We should be lowering corporate tax rates because we have the highest in the world right now. (Later in the roundtable discussion, Yale Law School professor Stephen Carter repeated the statistic, but we'll check Toomey's quote here. )We wondered whether the U.S. really has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.Using the most straightforward definition of corporate tax rates, Toomey is right. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a group of 32 large, industrialized democracies,ranksthe combined corporate income tax rate in its member nations. That means the highest tax bracket for general corporate income, excluding taxes levied on specific products or services.For 2010, the U.S ranks second to Japan by a fraction of a percentage point -- 39.54 percent for Japan to 39.21 percent for the U.S. But that figure is already outdated: Japan has recently moved to cut its rate for 2011 by 5 percentage points, leaving the U.S. with the highest corporate tax rate among OECD nations.But before we declare Toomey's statement True, let's dig a little deeper.The OECD rate is the statutory rate -- that is, the top corporate tax rate on the books. But many companies pay considerably less than that, due to deductions and other exclusions. Adjusting for these factors produces a statistic called the effective tax rate.The World Bankhas assembled datafrom 183 nations and made a series of statistical adjustments to produce a full international comparison of effective tax rates. By this measurement, the U.S. rate is considerably lower than the published rate -- 27.6 percent. But in a comparative sense, that's still pretty high: Among larger international economies, only Japan, New Zealand and Thailand produced a higher effective rate in the World Bank study. And Japan's number should fall by the time next year's study comes out.The World Bank also produces another -- and broader -- statistic. This measure factors in not only the corporate profit tax but also a range of other taxes paid by businesses, including the cost of employee taxes borne by the employer. When the World Bank ranked countries from the lowest level of taxes to the highest, the U.S. ranked 124th out of 183 -- meaning corporate taxes were relatively high. A number of other large and/or democratic countries were higher, including Austria, Belgium, Brazil, China, France, Hungary, India, Italy, Spain and Sweden.This last measure provides a wider snapshot of U.S. tax policy toward businesses, but it also introduces some complications. Factoring in the employer-paid portion of labor taxes makes the corporate tax rate seem higher in countries that provide higher benefits such as pensions or health care through business taxes, while making the rate seem lower for countries that provide less generous benefits through the tax code. So making apples-to-apples comparisons can be tricky.There's also broader context that Toomey doesn't get into.In a previous item, we noted that when all taxes, including those such as personal income taxes and property taxes -- not just corporate taxes -- are taken into account and compared to gross domestic product, the U.S. doesn't rank near the top of the OECD table in total tax burden.Still, if you rate Toomey on his specific wording by looking at corporate tax rates, he's right that the U.S. does now have the highest corporate tax rates on the books, at least among the biggest industrialized democracies, which is most economists' typical yardstick. So we rate his statement Mostly True.
Reaction was swift and strong after Republican Gov. Scott Walker said the curbs he enacted on the collective-bargaining power of public-employee unions were philosophically in line with principles espoused by President Franklin Roosevelt, the liberal Democratic icon. Walker drew the comparison ina July 29, 2013 speechat theGovernmental Research Association policy conferencehosted by Milwaukees Public Policy Forum. The governor, whose Act 10 law wiped away most subjects of bargaining for most public unions and shifted more pension and health-care costs to workers,arguedthe changes helped balance government budgets and made merit more important than teacher seniority in schools. We think it has a dynamic impact going forward on how we perform, and that is putting power in the hands of the people duly elected at the state and at the local level,  Walker said. Its why -- some people are surprised to know this -- the position I pushed is not unlike the principle that Franklin Delano Roosevelt, not exactly a conservative, pushed as well when it came to public sector collective bargaining, Walker added. He felt that there wasn't a need -- and others like him, (former New York Mayor Fiorello) LaGuardia and others -- felt there wasnt a need in the public sector to have collective bargaining because the government is the people. We are the people. Did Roosevelt -- the patron of the post-Depression boost in organizing by industrial unions in the private sector -- really take the position that when it came to federal government employees, there wasnt a need to have collective bargaining? Before we check Walkers claim, lets stipulate the obvious: There are dramatic differences between Walker and the architect of the New Deal, from their approaches to governing in times of economic distress to their views on the proper size and role of the state. In the labor realm, when it came to private-sector unions whose cause he championed, FDR called collective bargaining a fundamental individual right. Walker, meanwhile, has not ruled out signing right to work limits on private-sector unions, though hes not pushing it now. Thats one reason the comparison so riled Democrats and union leaders. FDR brought us out of the Great Depression with strong investment in workers and jobs programs that worked, Wisconsin State AFL-CIO leader Phil Neuenfeldt said. Scott Walker is drowning in a jobs deficit and to compare himself to FDR is laughably delusional. But Walker in his speech made a claim on a very specific historical point: FDRs views on collective bargaining for public employees. And that is the claim we are examining. Where Roosevelt stood Compared to the mountain of evidence on FDRs sympathetic stance on protections and rights for private laborers, the historical record on his attitude toward public-sector unions is less than a few inches high. Walker cites an on-point and oft-quoted FDR letter that conservatives frequently highlight when arguing for limits on unions in the government sector. That letter, we found, dominates scholarly debate over Roosevelts views on this issue. And its easy to see why: The presidentsAug. 16, 1937 correspondencewith Luther C. Steward,  the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, is bluntly worded -- to say the least. Roosevelt was responding to an invitation to attend the organizations 20th jubilee convention. In the letter, FDR says groups such as NFFE naturally organize to present their views to supervisors. Government workers, he observed, want fair pay, safe working conditions and review of grievances just like private-industry workers. Organizations of government employees have a logical place in Government affairs, he wrote. But Roosevelt then shifted gears, emphasizing that meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government. Then, the most-famous line and the one directly on point to Walkers comment: All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service, he wrote. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. Roosevelt didnt stop there. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations, he wrote. When Walker claimed FDR said the government is the people, he had Roosevelts next line in mind. The employer, Roosevelts letter added, is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters. Roosevelt concluded with a strong stance against strikes by unions representing government workers, noting that NFFEs bylaws rejected strikes. The letter, the FDRPresidential Library sitepoints out, was released publicly by the Roosevelt White House and became the administration's official position on collective bargaining and federal government employees. Roosevelt had previously laid out his views on public-sector unions at aJuly 9, 1937 news conference. His statements there add more weight to Walkers claim. A reporter directly asked Roosevelt whether he favored government employees joining unions to the extent of collective bargaining with the government. Roosevelts response made clear he thought managers should listen to worker concerns, whether raised by union representatives or not. Federal workers are free to join any union they want, he said. But he recalled that in 1913, when he was Navy assistant secretary, he told a union official the Navy would not enter into a contract with the union because it had no discretion under federal law. The pay is fixed by Congress and the workmen are represented by the members of Congress in the fixing of Government pay, Roosevelt said. His thinking then still applied, Roosevelt told the reporters in 1937. At the end of news conference, Roosevelt was asked, after making the point that Congress sets compensation: In other words, you would not have the representatives of the majority as the sole bargaining agents? Roosevelt: Not in the government, because there is no collective contract. It is a very different case. There isnt any bargaining, in other words, with the government, therefore the question does not arise. Taken together, the letter and news conference remarks positioned Roosevelt as deeply skeptical of the need and wisdom of collective bargaining power for unions in the federal system. When he wrote that the unique circumstances would make it impossible for government officials to make a binding deal on behalf of the government, that didnt leave a lot of ambiguity. Same with the phrase insurmountable limitations. What the scholars say Perhaps because of the strong wording of his views, the 1937 letter remains -- nearly 75 years later -- the best piece of evidence on this topic. Even scholars and union officials who chafe at Walker linking himself to FDR have acknowledged the letters significance. Roosevelt absolutely did not favor collective bargaining for federal workers and especially did not favor the right to strike, public-sector labor scholar Joseph McCartintold Salon.comshortly after Walkers dramatic action in 2011. And the current head of the National Federation of Federal Employees says Roosevelts words meant he believed that there should be no right to federal bargaining over wages and benefits. The union chief,William Dougan, told us Roosevelt feared that dealing with multiple unions could lead to pay disparities. To be sure, Roosevelts views were in part a product of his time. At the time, government unions had no collective bargaining rights, and it was not uncommon for elected officials to stand against union bargaining rights for government employees. Even in the private-sector, labor rights were still developing, their constitutionality still under debate in the courts. The notion of expanding those powers to the government sector had not yet taken hold -- and it would not under FDR. It wasnt until 1962 that President John F. Kennedysexecutive orderallowed bargaining, and then just over working conditions. Federal unions still cannot bargain over pay and benefits. Still, there are prominent scholarly voices who think Roosevelts 1937 letter has been misinterpreted, at least in part. One such voice is McCartin, theGeorgetown University history professorwho told Salon that Roosevelt absolutely did not favor collective bargaining for federal workers and especially did not favor the right to strike. When we asked McCartin about that interview, he said he had spoken prematurely. He and other historians note that Roosevelt wrote that collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. Historians and union officials have parsed the phrase for decades, debating its meaning, and sometimes disagreeing with each other. The phrase, some say, leaves open the possibility that Roosevelt supported a modified form of collective bargaining, different from what private workers had created. They note that in the letter, Roosevelt directed his opposition most specifically at the right to strike. Dougan, the union official,believes Roosevelt appeared opento bargaining over working conditions. Several scholars emphasize that Roosevelt later praised a union contract negotiated between the federally owned Tennessee Valley Authority and unions representing workers for the electric utility created by the federal government in 1933. The TVAs board, appointed by Roosevelt,chose as a matter of policyto recognize the unions and bargain with them. The TVA Act signed by Roosevelt did not direct or discourage such bargaining. TheTVAepisode is the only effective rebuttal offered to the words in FDRs letter, wrote Wilson R. Hart, a longtime labor relations adviser in the federal government who examined Roosevelts thinking on unions. Hart felt that the apparent contradiction between FDRs TVA comments and his 1937 letter strongly suggested that Roosevelt was not denouncing all elements of collective bargaining in the letter. How Walkers action compares Scholars, including McCartin, believe FDRs views might have evolved in favor of public sector bargaining -- and against what Walker did. We wont judge that for this item, but well end with a few observations regarding the two situations, separated by nearly three-quarters of a century. In substance, Walkers move dramatically limited, but did not completely end, collective bargaining by most public employees. His Act 10 allowed the state to cut benefits and try to limit pay increases. He argued that unions had become too powerful and that elected representatives of the people should have more control over taxpayer-funded compensation. Roosevelt said in the 1937 press conference that compensation levels for federal employees should be set by Congress and the president, not through bargaining with unions. So both men -- decades apart -- envisioned a limited role for unions in the public sector. But the differences in context make the two mens views hard to compare. Walker acted after 50 years of collective bargaining between the state and its employees -- in the birthplace of public collective bargaining -- while FDR expressed his views before labor won that toehold into that arena. Our rating Walker said FDR felt there wasnt a need in the public sector to have collective bargaining because the government is the people. The governor relies -- to good effect -- on Roosevelts 1937 letter, which, along with other primary evidence, lays out in striking language FDRs deep reservations about the need for and wisdom of public-sector bargaining. While Roosevelt was open to discussion with represented and unrepresented employees over working conditions, he seemingly had major concerns about a formal, contractual bargaining process. Scholars cite Roosevelts positive comments on the Tennessee Valley Authority labor contracts, and debate certain phraseology in FDR's writings, but its limited evidence compared to the clear impression left by the letter and press conference remarks. Roosevelt saw a logical place for unions in government affairs, but the most compelling evidence suggests he drew the line at collective bargaining with them. We rate Walkers narrow statement True. Claim:  Item provides a list of "Paul Ryan's proposed budget cuts."  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2012] The real story on Paul Ryan's proposed budget cuts List of Republican Budget Cuts, WOW Notice Soc.Sec. and the Military are NOT on this list. These are all the programs that the new Republican House has proposed cutting. Read to the end. * Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy  $445 million annual savings. * Save Americas Treasures Program  $25 million annual savings. * International Fund for Ireland  $17 million annual savings. * Legal Services Corporation   $420 million annual savings. * National Endowment for the Arts  $167.5 million annual savings. * National Endowment for the Humanities  $167.5 million annual savings. * Hope VI Program  $250 million annual savings. * Amtrak Subsidies  $1.565 billion annual savings. * Eliminate duplicative education programs  H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually. * U.S. Trade Development Agency  $55 million annual savings. * Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy  $20 million annual savings. * Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding  $47 million annual savings. * John C. Stennis Center Subsidy  $430,000 annual savings. * Community Development Fund  $4.5 billion annual savings. * Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid  $24 million annual savings. * Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half  $7.5 billion annual savings * Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%  $600 million annual savings. * Essential Air Service  $150 million annual savings. * Technology Innovation Program  $70 million annual savings. * Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program   $125 million annual savings. * Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization  $530 million annual savings. * Beach Replenishment  $95 million annual savings. * New Starts Transit  $2 billion annual savings. * Exchange Programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts  $9 million annual savings * Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants  $2.5 billion annual savings. * Title X Family Planning  $318 million annual savings. * Appalachian Regional Commission  $76 million annual savings. * Economic Development Administration  $293 million annual savings. * Programs under the National and Community Services Act  $1.15 billion annual savings. * Applied Research at Department of Energy  $1.27 billion annual savings. * Freedom CAR and Fuel Partnership  $200 million annual savings. * Energy Star Program  $52 million annual savings. * Economic Assistance to Egypt  $250 million annually. * U.S. Agency for International Development  $1.39 billion annual savings. * General Assistance to District of Columbia  $210 million annual savings. * Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority  $150 million annual savings. * Presidential Campaign Fund  $775 million savings over ten years. * No funding for federal office space acquisition  $864 million annual savings. * End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services. * Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act  More than $1 billion annually. * IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget  $1.8 billion savings over ten years. * Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees  $1 billion total savings.  * Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees  $1.2 billion savings over ten years. * Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of  $15 billion total savings. * Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress. Untold savings could result from this. * Eliminate Mohair Subsidies  $1 million annual savings. * Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change  $12.5 million annual savings * Eliminate Market Access Program  $200 million annual savings. * USDA Sugar Program  $14 million annual savings. * Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)  $93 million annual savings. * Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program  $56.2 million annual savings. * Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs  $900 million savings. * Ready to Learn TV Program  $27 million savings. * HUD Ph.D. Program.  * Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.  * TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years My question is, what is all this doing in the budget in the first place? Send to everyone you know. Summary:  This itemized list of proposed budget cuts is real in the sense that it was encapsulated in a bill (H.R. 408) known as the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, a plan to reduce federal spending by $2.5 trillion through fiscal year 2021, and the specific amounts of savings to be gleaned by eliminating each item on the list come from a Republican Spending Committee report of January 2011.  The Spending Reduction Act of 2011 was introduced to the House of Representatives in January 2011 and referred to committee, where it has remained ever since; it has not been passed or ever put to a vote. H.R. 408 report The current identification of this list as "Paul Ryan's proposed budget cuts" is inaccurate, however, as it was not proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the 2012 Republican vice presidential nominee.   The Spending Reduction Act of 2011 was sponsored by Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, not Paul Ryan, and Ryan was not among the bill's 32 co-sponsors. (Rep. Ryan, as Chairman of the House Budget Committee, has proposed a different budget plan ("The Path to Prosperity") for fiscal year 2013, which seeks to balance the federal budget by the year 2040.)  sponsored budget plan The estimate that "requiring collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees" would produce $1 billion in total savings has raised some eyebrows, but according to the Washington Post, records provided by the Internal Revenue  according showed that "about 98,000 federal, postal and congressional employees owed $1.03 billion in unpaid taxes at the end of fiscal 2010." In February 2011, Rep Jason Chaffetz of Utah introduced a bill, the Federal Employee Tax Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 828), which would "provide that persons having seriously delinquent tax debts shall be ineligible for Federal employment."  That bill was passed by the House but has not been voted upon by the Senate. H.R. 828 One of the few items on this list of proposed budget cuts which is not accompanied by a specific amount of expected dollar savings is the "Death gratuity for Members of Congress," which in the Internet-circulated version of this list bears the legend "Untold savings could result from this," suggesting that this item is a comparatively large one.  In fact, it has been the traditional practice of Congress that when a member dies in office, an appropriation is made to provide the deceased member's spouse, children, or other next-of-kin with a one-time payment equal in amount to the member's annual salary.  Since the current salary for members of Congress is $174,000 per year, and Congress averages about two deaths per year (84 members of Congress have died in office since 1973), the expected savings from the elimination of this tradition would be a bit less than $350,000 per year. (More recently, Rep. Bill Posey of Florida has sponsored a bill specifically seeking to "prohibit the payment of death gratuities to the surviving heirs of deceased Members of Congress," but that bill has also failed to clear its committee assignment.) practice sponsored Last updated:  12 October 2012 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 Things appeared pretty bleak in March 2020 as the COVID-19 coronavirus disease continued to spread across the globe. Businesses and restaurants were being shut down, people were asked to stay inside their homes, and the stock market was crashing. But, according to viral list on social media, it wasn't all bad news.  On March 16, a Facebook post that supposedly highlighted some "good news" about COVID-19 started to spread online: post How about some good news? - China has closed down its last coronavirus hospital. Not enough new cases to support them. - Doctors in India have been successful in treating Coronavirus. Combination of drugs used: Lopinavir, Retonovir, Oseltamivir along with Chlorphenamine. They are going to suggest same medicine, globally. - Researchers of the Erasmus Medical Center claim to have found an antibody against coronavirus. - A 103-year-old Chinese grandmother has made a full recovery from COVID-19 after being treated for 6 days in Wuhan, China. - Apple reopens all 42 china stores, - Cleveland Clinic developed a COVID-19 test that gives results in hours, not days. - Good news from South Korea, where the number of new cases is declining. - Italy is hit hard, experts say, only because they have the oldest population in Europe. - Scientists in Israel likely to announce the development of a coronavirus vaccine. - 3 Maryland coronavirus patients fully recovered; able to return to everyday life. - A network of Canadian scientists are making excellent progress in Covid-19 research. - A San Diego biotech company is developing a Covid-19 vaccine in collaboration with Duke University and National University of Singapore. - Tulsa County's first positive COVID-19 case has recovered. This individual has had two negative tests, which is the indicator of recovery. - All 7 patients who were getting treated for at Safdarjung hospital in New Delhi have recovered. - Plasma from newly recovered patients from Covid -19 can treat others infected by Covid-19. So it's not all bad news. Let's care for each other and stay focused on safety of those most vulnerable. We're not sure who wrote this Facebook post. The earliest version we could find was posted by Dr. James Fedich, but we've come across several other variations of the list across social media. We reached out to Fedich to confirm authorship but we have not yet heard back.  More importantly, this list appears to be generally accurate. Some of the statements are missing some context, are a bit exaggerated, or appear to be little more than wishful thinking, so let's take a brief look at each of the claims individually: China has closed down its last coronavirus hospital. Not enough new cases to support them.  China built several temporary hospitals in order to care for people sickened by COVID-19. On March 11, journalists reported that these hospitals were shut down as the spread of the disease started to slow. On March 19, China reported no new locally transmitted cases had been reported for the first time since the start of the pandemic: reported    Doctors in India have been successful in treating Coronavirus. Combination of drugs used: Lopinavir, Retonovir, Oseltamivir along with Chlorphenamine. They are going to suggest same medicine, globally.  The Economic Times reported that the combination of two anti-HIV drugs had proven crucial to the treatment of coronavirus patients. India's Union of Health Ministry revised its guidelines to recommend the use of "anti-HIV drug combinations Lopinavir and Ritonavir on a case-to-case basis depending upon the severity of the condition of a patient having coronavirus infection." reported recommend But it's unclear how effective these drugs will end up being or if they will be implemented in treatment worldwide.  Researchers of the Erasmus Medical Center claim to have found an antibody against coronavirus. The Dutch newspaper NL Times reported that "a team of ten scientific researchers from the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam and Utrecht University" reported that they discovered an "antibody capable of fending off an infection by the Covid-19 variant of coronavirus." reported This may prove to be a big step in developing a vaccine for COVID-19.  A 103-year-old Chinese grandmother has made a full recovery from COVID-19 after being treated for 6 days in Wuhan, China. The Independent reported on March 11 that a 103-year-old woman named Zhang Guangfen contracted the disease in Wuhan, China. Guangfen was treated for six days at the hospital before being released. Dr. Zeng Yulan told reporters that the centenarian's quick recovery was likely due to the fact that she had no underlying health conditions.  reported Apple reopens all 42 China stores. Although China was once the epicenter of this pandemic, the country managed to get a handle on the situation, and as of this writing cases in the country continue to drop. On March 13, 2020, Apple announced that it was reopening all 42 of its stores in China.  Reuters reported: "Apple Inc (AAPL.O) is reopening all 42 of its branded stores in China on Friday [March 13], a company spokesman said, more than a month after they were shut in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak." reported Cleveland Clinic developed a COVID-19 test that gives results in hours, not days. The MetroHealth Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio, announced on March 16 that it can test COVID-19 samples at its laboratory and get the results in just two hours. These tests, however, were in very limited supply: MetroHealth CEO and President Akram Boutros, MD, FACHE, said: "Supplies are very limited, and testing at this time must be reserved for the hospitalized patients who are critically ill and those who have had direct contact with them." Good news from South Korea, where the number of new cases is declining. While COVID-19 continues, currently, to spread in places like the United States, some other countries have managed to "flatten the curve" and suppress the spread of the disease. Science Magazine wrote on March 17: "Amid these dire trends, South Korea has emerged as a sign of hope and a model to emulate. The country of 50 million appears to have greatly slowed its epidemic; it reported only 74 new cases today, down from 909 at its peak on 29 February. And it has done so without locking down entire cities or taking some of the other authoritarian measures that helped China bring its epidemic under control." Science Magazine One reason for South Korea's success, according to CNN, is that the COVID-19 outbreak occurred in a population of relatively young, non-smoking women.  CNN Italy is hit hard, experts say, only because they have the oldest population in Europe. While South Korea may have benefited from this disease impacting its young population first, Italy, on the other hand, has one of the oldest populations on earth.  Wired reported: "Italy has been hit particularly hard, with some 2,000 deaths thus far. Overwhelmed hospital staffers have had to make devastating decisions about who to treat and who they must let perish. The reason why Italy is suffering so badly, write University of Oxford researchers in a new paper in the journal Demographic Science, may be twofold: The country has the second-oldest population on earth, and its young tend to mingle more often with the elderly, like their grandparents. Such demographic research will be critical in facing down the threat elsewhere, as more countries grapple with a deadly pandemic thats just getting started and we learn more about how the virus is transmitted within families and communities." reported Scientists in Israel likely to announce the development of a coronavirus vaccine. Haaretz reported on March 18 that "scientists at Israels Institute for Biological Research" have made a "significant breakthrough," and that they could announce in the next few days that they have completed development of a vaccine.  reported Haaretz said: "According to medical sources, the scientists have recently had a significant breakthrough in understanding the biological mechanism and qualities of the virus, including better diagnostic capability, production of antibodies for those who already have the virus and development of a vaccine." However, it will still be awhile before this vaccine reaches a larger population.  Haaretz added: "The development process requires a series of tests and experiments that may last many months before the vaccination is deemed effective or safe to use." 3 Maryland coronavirus patients fully recovered; able to return to everyday life. Fox 5 DC reported on March 14 that Maryland's first three coronavirus patients had all recovered and were returning to their homes.  reported The news outlet wrote: "On Friday, Montgomery Countys Chief Health Officer Dr. Travis Gayles told FOX 5 the first three people to test positive for Coronavirus in the state of Maryland have recovered and are able to resume their normal lives." A network of Canadian scientists are making excellent progress in Covid-19 research. The Montreal Gazette reported on March 13 that the country's scientists were making progress on COVID-19 research as they were able to isolate a copy of the coronavirus.  reported "A team of Canadian researchers from Ontario has isolated and grown copies of the coronavirus, the agent responsible for the outbreak of COVID-19 that has spread worldwide," the Gazette said. "The isolated virus will help researchers in Canada and across the world develop better diagnostic testing, treatments and vaccines, and to gain a fuller understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)." A San Diego biotech company is developing a Covid-19 vaccine in collaboration with Duke University and National University of Singapore. A CBS TV station reported on March 12 that the San Diego biotech company Arcturus Therapeutics was working on a COVID-19 vaccine.  The outlet reported: "As the race to develop a vaccine for coronavirus / COVID-19 continues globally, the San Diego based biotech company, Arcturus Therapeutics, is working on creating one at its Torrey Pines lab ... The biotech company is working with Duke NUS- Medical School, a partnership between Duke University and the National University of Singapore." Tulsa County's first positive COVID-19 case has recovered. This individual has had two negative tests, which is the indicator of recovery. Tulsa World reported on March 12 that the county's first coronavirus case had fully recovered. The Tulsa Health Department reported the good news on Facebook: reported reported   All 7 patients who were getting treated for at Safdarjung hospital in New Delhi have recovered. The Hindu reported on March 14 that seven coronavirus patients at Safdarjung hospital in New Delhi had recovered from the disease, writing: "Safdarjung Hospital, which is treating a bulk of COVID-19 patients here in the Capital has reported that seven of the positive cases currently admitted in the hospital have recovered but are yet to be discharged."  reported Plasma from newly recovered patients from Covid-19 can treat others infected by Covid-19. The final item on this list refers to an experimental treatment. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn said that the FDA was experimenting with a new COVID-19 treatment involving the plasma from a person who recovered from the disease: Tech Crunch reported: reported Hahn also highlighted another experimental treatment possibility that the FDA is investigating: Using plasma derived from blood taken from coronavirus patients who have recovered, and injecting that into other patients in an attempt to potentially jump start their own immune response. Theres a cross-agency effort about something called convalescent plasma, he said. This is a pretty exciting area. And again, this is something that we have given assistance to other countries with as this crisis has developed, so FDA has been working for some time on this. If youve been exposed to coronavirus and youre better, you dont have the virus in your blood. We could collect the blood now, this is a possible treatment. This is not a proven treatment, I just want to emphasize that, [but we would] collect the blood, concentrate that and have the ability, once its pathogen-free, that is virus-free, be able to give that to other patients and the immunoglobulins, the immune response could potentially provide a benefit to patients. In Summary The claims on the popular "good news" list are generally accurate and supported by credible news reports. The number of new cases in China and South Korea have dropped since the pandemic began, enough so that China has closed its temporary hospitals. A number of patients have also successfully recovered from the disease, and several organizations are working on vaccines for COVID-19. However, at the time of this writing (March 19, 2020), this "good news" should not be taken as proof that this pandemic is soon coming to an end. Health officials in the United States continue to urge citizens to practice "social distancing," and it's likely that we won't see a worldwide rollout of an effective vaccine until mid-2021.  vaccine The Hindu.  "Seven Recover at Safdarjung Hospital, Yet to be Discharged."   14 March 2020. Normile, Dennis.  "Coronavirus Cases Have Dropped Sharply in South Korea. Whats the Secret to its Success?."
  Science Magazine.  17 March 2020. Sepkowitz, Kent.  "Why South Korea Has So Few Coronavirus Deaths While Italy Has So Many."
  CNN.  17 March 2020. Simon, Matt.  "Why the Coronavirus Hit Italy So Hard."
  Wired.  17 March 2020. Efrati, Ido; Levinson, Chaim.  "Israeli Research Center to Announce It Developed Coronavirus Vaccine, Sources Say."
  Haaretz.  18 March 2020. Ramirez, Stephanie.  "3 Maryland Coronavirus Patients Fully Recovered; Able to Return to Everyday Life."
  Fox 5 DC.  14 March 2020. Breummer, Rene.  "Coronavirus: Canadian Researchers Make Progress Toward Vaccine."   Montreal Gazette.  13 March 2020. Tulsa World.  "Finally Some Good News: First Tulsa County COVID-19 Patient Has Recovered, Health Department Says."
  12 March 2020. Etherington, Darrell.  "FDA Testing Coronavirus Treatments, Including Chloroquine, Plasma from Recovered COVID-19 Patients,"
  Tech Crunch.  19 March 2020. Lovelace Jr., Berkeley.  "First Human Trial for Coronavirus Vaccine Begins Monday in the US."
  CNBC.  16 March 2020. Cleveland.com.  "MetroHealth Now Testing for Coronavirus."
  17 March 2020. Dalton, Jane.  "Coronavirus: Wuhan Doctors Celebrate Closure of Last Temporary Hospital After Dramatic Fall in Cases in China."
  The Independent.  15 March 2020. Economic Times.  "Combination of Two Anti-HIV Drugs Proved Crucial in Coronavirus Treatment, Rajasthan Official."
  16 March 2020. India Today.  "Coronavirus: Health Ministry Recommends Anti-HIV Drug Combination Lopinavir-Ritonavir on Case-to-Case Basis."
  17 March 2020. Newmark, Zack.  "Dutch Researchers First to Find COVID-19 Antibodies: Report."
  The NL Times.  14 March 2020. Giordano, Chiara.  "Coronavirus: 103-year-old Woman Becomes Oldest Person to Beat Disease."
  The Independent.  11 March 2020. Reuters.  "Apple Says Reopening All its Branded Stores in China."
  12 March 2020. Ever since Melania Trump delivered an oddly familiar speech at the Republican National Convention in 2016, the First Lady has been dogged by accusations of plagiarism (many of which were nothing more than fake news). A new batch of allegations surfaced in May 2018, as keen-eyed readers noticed that a pamphlet linked to Trump's new "Be Best" campaign was nearly identical to a document released by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2014: familiar speech nothing more fake news   It is true that the "Be Best" campaign linked to a pamphlet that was nearly identical to material published by the FTC in 2014. You can see the FTC's pamphlet, "Net Cetera. Chatting with Kids About Being Online," here, and the "Talking with Kids About Being Online" from the White House here. These two documents are nearly identical (with the exception of an introduction from the First Lady), but it's disingenuous to say that Melania Trump "plagiarized" this material.  here here The main piece of evidence supporting the "plagiarism" charge is that the pamphlet was originally presented on the White House web site as a booklet "by First Lady Melania Trump and the Federal Trade Commission," in reference to the First Lady's having contributed an introduction to the "Talking with Kids About Being Online" pamphlet.  That wording was soon updated to describe Talking with Kids about Being Online" as "a Federal Trade Commission booklet, promoted by First Lady Melania Trump."  At no point did Melania Trump take credit for (or claim she had written) the entire pamphlet. presented Nearly every page of the "Talking with Kids About Being Online" pamphlet contains a link to the FTC's web site about Internet safety, and the final page lists web sites for both the Be Best campaign and the FTC's internet safety page: safety   The White House released a contentious statement on 8 May 2018 about the plagiarism accusations: statement Mrs. Trump agreed to add Be Best branding and distribute the booklet in an effort to use her platform to amplify the positive message within. As she said in yesterdays speech, she is going to use Be Best to promote people and organizations to encourage conversation and replication, and helping the FTC distribute this booklet is just one small example. Despite providing countless outlets with ample background, information, and on-the-record comments from the FTC, some media have chosen to take a day meant to promote kindness and positive efforts on behalf of children, to instead lob baseless accusations towards the First Lady and her new initiatives. As stated by Nathaniel Wood, Consumer and Business Education Division Associate Director, FTC, We frequently work with members of Congress, the White House, other government agencies, and the private sector. As a small and independent civil law enforcement agency, the FTC encourages our partners to help spread our message to consumers. We were excited that Mrs. Trump distributed this important information about staying safe online. We look forward to continuing to work with her and others to help parents and children use the Internet safely and responsibly. Our office will continue to focus on helping children and I encourage members of the media to attempt to Be Best in their own professions, and focus on some of the children and programs Mrs. Trump highlighted in her remarks yesterday. On Dec. 17, 2020, a message circulated on social media supposedly announcing an event hosted by U.S. President Donald Trump in Palm Beach, Florida, on Jan. 20, 2021  the day of President-elect Joe Biden's swearing-in ceremony  and continuing Trump's misinformation campaign around election results. President-elect Joe Biden Trump's misinformation campaign The statement, which included a mass heading like that of official messages from the Trump campaign and was allegedly authored by Bill Stepien, Trump's campaign manager, alleged that Trump was not only preparing to bypass Biden's presidential inauguration in Washington D.C., but that he was planning to host an alternative inaugural event with supporters at his Mar-a-Lago resort on the same day. bypass Biden's presidential inauguration   The viral message read: [Winner] of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, Donald J. Trump, and his Administration look forward to the January 20th Inauguration of their continuation of power and Second Term! [...] We look forward to celebrating this occasion with all Americans! Regardless of the intentions of so-called President Elect Joe Biden, President Donald Trump will not be conceding the 2020 election, nor does he plan on leaving the White house at point prior to January 20th. Any attempt to remove the Trump administration will require force. We will not back down from this fight. Americans deserve better. Despite the fact that Trump indeed had not conceded loss to Biden, the message announcing the Florida event was fake. conceded loss to Biden If the sitting president was indeed planning any kind of celebration at the resort, the campaign would have advertised it in messages to supporters, given its history of communicating similar announcements. But as of the original publication of this report, a Dec. 15 news release titled, "Trump campaign statement on Joe Biden visit to Georgia" was the most recent official message from the political operation, and nothing on the campaign's website announced an event on Inauguration Day. Trump campaign statement on Joe Biden visit to Georgia Additionally, no Trump campaign fundraising emails obtained by Snopes included the above-transcribed message, and no one within the president's inner circle  nor the president himself  had advertised the alleged celebration in public remarks or on social media. Trump campaign In fact, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany on several occasions declined to discuss Trump's plans for Inauguration Day, eliminating any possibility that she at one point promoted a Jan. 20 event described in the social media posts. Kayleigh McEnany He knows what his decision is, and hell make his decision at the right time, she said at Dec. 2 press conference, a comment that neither confirmed nor denied rumors in news reports holding that Trump would skip Biden's inauguration for a Florida event. news reports Snopes reached out to the White House and Trump campaign directly, asking for its response to the rumor about Trump hosting a so-called inauguration event on the day that typically serves to signal a peaceful transfer of power between outgoing and incoming presidents. We have not heard back, and we will update this post when or if we do. peaceful transfer of power In sum, given there's no official record of the above-displayed message from the Trump campaign, as well as the fact that no White House source has confirmed the message or its contents as authentic, we rate this claim On May 24, 2022, Facebook scammers seized on a real giveaway from Richard Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage, which was once affiliated with the "Fast N' Loud" reality television series. The show aired its final episodes in 2020. Facebook Richard Rawlings Gas Monkey Garage Fast N' Loud It's true that the official and verified Facebook page for Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage was promoting a giveaway for $200,000. In order to enter, users simply needed to purchase products on the company's website. page However, scammers reposted videos about the giveaway from the official Facebook page to their own accounts. The scammers' posts instructed potential victims to visit a potentially malicious website that asked them to send money through the Stash finance app in order to claim a supposed prize. One of the scammers' posts showed a video of Rawlings talking about the real Gas Monkey Garage giveaway. That video was downloaded and reposted by a scammer's account named Nyong Desi (facebook.com/uygdvuidfhvyfdgviushv):  It read as follows and included three steps, which we've seen in many scams before: Nyong Desi ????????????? ???????-??????? 2022 CONGRATULATIONS for those of you who have received comments from me have been selected as winners???Step 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Coments "Done"Step 3 = Register here? (link removed) ? to receive my prize. And the Gift will be sent after you successfully register (this is authentic and official) God bless you Good Luck The edit history for the post above showed that it was originally created on Jan. 30, 2022 as a giveaway scam involving PlayStation 5 game consoles and $10,000. It was edited on the morning of May 24 in order to change it to the Gas Monkey Garage giveaway scam. PlayStation 5 We visited the website that was displayed in the scammers' posts. In addition to asking users to send the scammers money through the Stash finance app, it also claimed that they had already won $10,000. Of course, this was all misleading. asking Our best tip to avoid these kinds of scams is to always look for the verified badge next to Facebook page names. If it's a big brand name and there's no verified badge, it might be a scam. scams verified badge In sum, the official Gas Monkey Garage Facebook page truly was holding a real giveaway. However, scammers sought to capitalize on the giveaway by downloading and then reposting several videos that showed Rawlings talking in order to trick potential victims into losing money. For further reading, this story might remind some readers of a similar Facebook scam we reported on in the past for the "Diesel Brothers" reality television series. reported on Immigration is a sensitive and touchy issue, and never more so than in the United States during an election year. Thus, when stories started to emerge in 2016 about a group of veterans of the U.S. military living in Mexico after they had been deported from the United States (a story we previously reported on) it seemed natural to question what looked like nothing more than a chunk of political kryptonite. Mexico previously reported However, deported veterans exist, although no one  not even the Department of Homeland Security  knows how many. Their issue has been slowly brought into mainstream American consciousness largely by the efforts of committed activists in Tijuana. exist many "The Bunker," also known as the Deported Veterans Support House, is in a small cinderbrick building tucked away on a side street in Mexico's border town of Tijuana, and is frequented by veterans of every branch of the United States military, who fought everywhere from Vietnam to Afghanistan. Former Army paratrooper Hector Barajas, 39, opened it to be a gathering place and a refuge for veterans who, like him, had been deported: The Bunker deported "I started The Bunker because there was a need," Barajas told us. He said since his deportation, he had been meeting others like him living in Tijuana, and discovered that they lived throughout Mexico  but not just Mexico. There are hundreds of deported military vets living in at least twenty countries, he said. Since then, The Bunker has since become less a refuge and more a cause: Our vision is to end the deportations of Deported Veterans, repatriate the ones who have already been deported, and offer support until they all go home. We shouldn't honor our Deported Veterans by allowing them to return upon death. Honor them by allowing them to return home to their families and give them any benefits that they are eligible for. It may come as a surprise to learn that serving in the United States military does not automatically confer citizenship, but it doesn't. It can smooth the way, provided the aspiring citizen is aware of what they need to do in order to apply for citizenship and gets it done within a certain timeframe. However, it's not uncommon for enlistees to wrongly assume (having never been told otherwise) they have done all they need to do in order to be awarded citizenship, and thus all they have to do after their honorable discharge is wait. citizenship timeframe   Sometimes, too, there are bureaucratic foulups. One man was deported after he was unable to attend a hearing, despite his reason: he was in the hospital receiving surgery at the time. Others do everything the way they're supposed to, filing their paperwork and appearing at their meetings, but still get deported, and no one seems to know exactly why. Once they are outside the U.S., they maintain a legal right to VA benefits such as healthcare, and to whatever funds they might be entitled, but they have no way of getting back into the United States to obtain that assistance, and there are no satellite offices outside the country to help them. VA benefits Because these particular veterans are either in the United States on green cards or without documentation after their discharges, they can be deported with cause, or for no reason at all. Past and present members of the armed forces are supposed to receive special consideration during deportation hearings, but the guidelines are inconsistently applied. consideration However, some of these veterans have spent time in prison for assault or drug offenses, which makes their situation more difficult to parse, at least politically. Elected officials (and candidates) who might ordinarily be in full-throated cry about the importance of military rights tend to go oddly silent when confronted with the spectres of undocumented soldiers. Sympathy for those wounded on the battlefield under the American flag suddenly falters when it turns out they had entered the country without documentation years before. Miguel Perez, a United States Army veteran, falls under that category. The 39-year-old Illinois man, who served two tours in Afghanistan and who has been in the U.S. since he was eight, was convicted of a drug trafficking offense in 2008. The green card holder had served half of a 15-year prison sentence when Immigration, Customs, and Enforcement took him for deportation proceedings. After losing an appeal, Perez was deported in March 2018: deported Perez was flown from Gary, Indiana, to Brownsville, Texas, where officers escorted him across the border and turned him over to Mexican authorities, ICE officials said. Perez appeared shocked by his treatment during his final moments on U.S. soil. An ICE agent who described himself as a fellow veteran told Perez they would "fix this" while leading him to a gate, Perez said. "When we go there he just closed the gate behind me and he said, 'OK, we're done here,'" he said. "He said, 'You see those green lights? You go that way and when you get there just ask for help.'" Perez recalls thinking, "Really? This is it?" The veteran said he immediately contemplated suicide but then said he felt he needed to keep walking and continue the fight to let others know how he and other undocumented veterans are treated by the U.S. Unless something changes for them, the only way most of the deported veterans will be able to return to the United States is by dying. By law, all military veterans (except those who have been dishonorably discharged) are entitled to burial in a national cemetery, and immigration laws don't apply to corpses. entitled apply On 20 April 2016, lawmakers introduced a bill to readmit military veterans who were deported and who were not previously convicted of serious crimes. It would also prevent the removal of military veterans from the U.S. in the future. bill On 13 April 2018, Hector Barajas, the deported veteran who was one of the first to shine a spotlight on their plight, received his American citizenship, potentially paving the way for hundreds of other former United States military members:   Kao, Joanna and Vo, Lam Thuy. "Deported Vets: Life in the Bunker."
Al Jazeera.  26 September 2014. Siegal, Erin. "U.S. Veterans 'Banished' to Mexico."
KPBS.org. 12 November 2012. Tobia, P.J. "They Served Their Country. Now They Can't Live In It."
PBS.org.  10 September 2015. "Naturalization Through Military Service: Fact Sheet."
USCIS.gov. Update [13 April 2018, 2:20 P.M.]: Added detail about Hector receiving U.S. citizenship. Pity the poor children of the United States  they, along with their parents, are already in hock to the federal government for thousands of dollars.Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (R-Monmouth) made that claim Oct. 26 during an interview with Michael Aron on NJTVs On The Record.Every American now is $51,000 in debt, Casagrande told Aron. Thats money I owe, thats money my children owe before they even go to kindergarten, thats their check to the federal government right now.Casagrandes number is solid, but she doesnt have to worry about whipping out her checkbook or debit card any time soon, some federal budget experts say.Lets start by reviewing the two commonly cited forms of national debt -- debt held by the public and total debt.Debt held by the public is money borrowed from investors outside of the federal government. The total debt represents debt held by the public as well as money the federal government owes itself, including for programs such as Social Security and Medicare.Now lets look at the numbers in Casagrandes claim.The U.S. Government Debt website on Nov. 6  the date we started looking into Casagrandes clam -- listed the national debt at $16,295,297,196,000. If thats divided by 314,719,484 -- the total U.S. population, according to the Census Bureau, each American owes the federal government $51,777.21.So, Casagrandes number is accurate. But should Americans actually expect to pay that bill? Not necessarily.Gary Burtless, a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution who has worked as a government economist and served on federal advisory panels under presidents of both parties, explained that what the nation owes each year on the national debt is annual interest and principal payments.Do grandma and the grandkids have to pay off the national debt, as Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande seems to suggest? No, they do not, Burtless wrote. Our grandkids great grandparents did not pay off the federal debt; neither did their parents or grandparents. There is no rule that the national debt has to be paid off in one generation, three generations, or even ten generations. Taxpayers do not face the possibility that they will receive a $51,000 bill in the mail anytime soon.An invoice might not be in the mail but Casagrandes statement is fair, according to spokespeople for the conservative Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute.Were not even going to pay off the debt, were going to pay down the interest, said Matt Jensen, a research associate in Economic Policy Studies at the AEI. Under no proposal that Ive seen is someone paying down the debt in real dollars. What were really talking about is paying the interest on the debt, forever. Youll pay the interest, your children will pay the interest.Our PolitiFact colleagues in Virginia and New Hampshire also looked into similar claims in their states and found that the amount of debt cited by their lawmakers was largely accurate.Virginia Rep. Randy Forbes in January said the national debt amounted to $48,700 for every American or $128,300 for every U.S. Household. Our colleagues rated the claim True.In August, PolitiFact New Hampshire rated Mostly True a claim by Rep. Frank Guinta that every child in the United States has a $50,000 share in the national debt. Guinta  received a Mostly True because that would mean each of the nations nearly 74 million children would owe $216,102. Guintas figure was accurate, however, when the debt was spread across the entire population.Our rulingCasagrande said in a television interview, Every American now is $51,000 in debt. Thats money I owe, thats money my children owe before they even go to kindergarten, thats their check to the federal government right now.A simple mathematical calculation confirms that every American technically owes the government $51,777.21 toward the national debt. But will youngsters have to suddenly start handing over their allowances to pay down the federal deficit? Not likely. We rate the statement Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com. 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 In June 2020, as professional sports in the U.S. worked on strategies to return to work amidst the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, an image was circulated on social media that supposedly showed the NFL's new COVID-19 series helmets:   This is not the official design of the NFL's helmets for the 2020 season. This is a piece of fan art showing what the helmets could look like if the sport returns during the pandemic.  This image did not originate with any of the NFL's official channels, nor was it shared by Nike, the company that is providing the uniforms for the NFL this year. This image originated on the Stadium Facebook page, where it was shared with the caption: "NFL players might sport #COVID19 helmets this fall ... What do you think? ?" The keyword in the previous sentence, of course, is might, but even that implies too strong of a connection between this image and the NFL.  The above-displayed image was created by manipulating a real picture released in 2012 of Nike's latest NFL uniform designs:   While the COVID-19 series NFL helmet shown above is an unofficial concept design, the NFL is reportedly working on new helmet face guards to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.  The Mercury News reported: reported With an eye toward getting back on the field during a pandemic, the NFL is working on a helmet face guard that might provide the same sort of protection as a surgical mask. Atlanta Falcons president Rich McKay, who heads up the leagues competition committee, said the issue was raised during a conference call about a month ago. A lot of players have played with a clear shield to protect their eyes, McKay said Tuesday during a video conference call with Atlanta media. This would be extended even further. Thom Mayer, who is medical director of the NFL Players Association, said league engineers and sports equipment company Oakley are testing prototypes of a modified face mask that might contain surgical or N95 material. As of this writing, the NFL has not released any images showing what these COVID-19 helmets could look like.  Bousky, Patrick.  "Nike Unveils New Chicago Bears Uniforms, Monsters of the Midway Look Stays." 
  Bleacher Report.  3 April 2012. Mercury News.  "COVID-19 Has NFL Considering Helmet Face Guards That Work Like Surgical Masks."
  20 May 2020. FACT CHECK: Is the city of Seattle forcing local businesses to comply with Sharia law?  Claim: The mayor of Seattle has "launched" a new "rule" forcing businesses to comply with Sharia law.   false WHAT'S   Seattle is exploring options to make home loans accessible to Muslims who are unable to participate in standard mortgage programs due to religious proscriptions.     WHAT'S   Seattle businesses are being forced to comply with tenets of sharia law. Examples: Seattle Mayor Planning to Force Banks to Give Sharia Compliant Homes Loans to Local Muslims https://t.co/QSKZ1XqzMB https://t.co/QSKZ1XqzMB  Warner Todd Huston (@warnerthuston) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Seattle's Liberal Mayor Caves To Muslims Following Sharia Law - BuzzPo https://t.co/A3m76OJz7r https://t.co/A3m76OJz7r  EMERSON E.RODRIGUES (@EMERSON_NALITA) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Mayor, no Sharia law applies in America!! Stop this unconstitutional junk. https://t.co/fx7VENmVQx https://t.co/fx7VENmVQx  Bunch (@bunch1243) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Origins:On 17 July 2015, the unreliable web site Conservative Tribune published an article titled "ALERT: Seattle Mayor Launches Rules to Force Local Businesses to Comply With SHARIAH LAW" claiming that: article In one major American city, new rules may force banks to comply with Shariah law on lending and interest. One of the major tenets of Shariah law is that Muslims cannot pay interest on loans. In countries with large Muslim populations, theres something known as Islamic banking, which manages to get around this through various machinations. Seattle Mayor Ed Murray wants to see that change, and hes apparently willing to force banks into Shariah-compliant lending if necessary. This means that, if it passes, Seattle will be the first city in America to mandate that its banks allow access to Shariah-compliant financing.  That claim was sourced to the TeaParty.org site's article "Seattle Mayor Offers Plan for Sharia-Compliant Housing Rules," which offered the following visual: article That article was a word-for-word copy of a Puget Sound Business Journal article about a potential plan by the mayor of Seattle to help Muslims obtain home loans to buy houses.  Quoting both Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Seattle-area Chapter Executive Director Arsalan Bukhari, the article explained that the city was examining housing options available to home-buying Muslims who are prohibited from participating in the traditional American housing market due to religious restrictions that prohibit them from obtaining standard home loans (despite their having desirable credit profiles): article   For some Muslims, it can be hard to buy a house, and Mayor Ed Murray plans to do something about it. Murray's housing committee released its recommendations for ways the city can increase housing in the city. Most ideas were what you'd expect, including increasing the city's housing levy and implementing new rules and regulations to foster development of market-rate and lower-income housing. One suggestion would help followers of Sharia law buy houses. That's virtually impossible now because Sharia law prohibits payment of interest on loans. The 28-member committee recommended the city convene lenders and community leaders to explore options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products. More and more lenders are offering Sharia-compliant financing. The sector has grown to more than $1.6 trillion in assets worldwide over the past three decades, and analysts see potential for continued growth as the number of Muslims in the United States and Europe grows. Based on what he called "rough anecdotal evidence," Bukhari estimated a couple hundred people aren't borrowing money for houses due to their religion. He said this includes even high-wage earners, such as the more than 1,000 Muslims who work for Microsoft and more than 500 Amazon.com  employees. They could easily qualify for home loans but opt not to apply "simply because they don't want to pay interest," Bukhari said. "We will work to develop new tools for Muslims who are prevented from using conventional mortgage products due to their religious beliefs," Murray said. The overall topic of Seattle-area Muslims and banking products was also addressed in another Puget Sound Business Journal article about retirement plans. According to that piece, CEO Thom Poulson of Falah Capital is working to facilitate opportunities for Muslim tech workers to access products such as 401(k)s and mortgages previously inaccessible to them due to religious barriers: article   It's estimated that more than 1,000 Muslims in the Puget Sound region work for Microsoft, and for those who closely follow their faith, it can be difficult to participate in the company's retirement plan. That's because Sharia law forbids them from investing in funds with holdings in companies that peddle pornography, alcohol and other vices. It's almost impossible for retirement funds to guarantee all their investments are free from those kinds of businesses. This has become an issue for workers at other tech companies, too. "You have people who aren't getting the full benefits of their employer's offering," said Thom Polson, CEO of a new Seattle company, Falah Capital LLC, which works with Muslims to ensure they're investing while staying true to their beliefs. In partnership with Seattle-based Russell Investments and IdealRatings of San Francisco, Falah set up its first Islamic exchange traded fund (ETF) last fall. Listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker "FIA," the Russell-IdealRatings Islamic US Large Cap Index, the ETF is the first of its kind on the exchange. Polson said a large percentage of the Muslims who work at tech firms are not using their 401(k) plans because they're not Sharia-compliant. "All of our advisory business is about addressing these needs," Polson said, adding his company is working with clients from the Muslim Association of the Puget Sound. The association has a large community center with a mosque in Redmond near Microsoft's headquarters. Next up for Fallah is a possible foray into home mortgages so clients can buy houses without taking out interest-bearing loans, which is against Sharia law. As part Seattle Mayor Ed Murray's landmark housing initiative, the city plans to work with lenders to help observant Muslims buy homes.   What these articles address are efforts to help businesses  service a significant portion of the local Seattle-area working population who are unable to utilize those business' current offerings  due to religious limitations, not to force businesses to comply with tenets of sharia law.  Mayor Murray's 13 July 2015 "Action Plan to Address Seattles Affordability Crisis" merely included a policy point of "explor[ing] the best options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products," not mandating that any local businesses offer such products: Action Plan  Support the Community in Finding Housing Tools for Sharia-Compliant Lending: For our low- and moderate-income Muslim neighbors who follow Sharia law  which prohibits the payment of interest or fees for loans of money  there are limited options for financing a home. Some Muslims are unable to use conventional mortgage products due to religious convictions. The City will convene lenders, housing nonprofits and community leaders to explore the best options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products to help these residents become homeowners in Seattle.   Last updated: 17 July 2015 Originally published:  17 July 2015