Most people in New Hampshire want to raise the minimum wage. (State Rep. Marilinda) Garcia opposes it.
A gun reform group founded by former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, has turned its focus to New Hampshire, running a TV ad that criticizes Republican congressional candidate Marilinda Garcia not only on gun ownership, which is the groups main focus, but also on the minimum wage and equal pay for women. In a 30-second spot titled Strange Ideas, Giffords group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, asserts that Garcia holds views different from a majority of New Hampshire residents. Marilinda Garcia has some strange ideas. Most people in New Hampshire want to raise the minimum wage. Garcia opposes it. Most people support guaranteeing women get equal pay for equal work. Garcias against that, too. Garcia even opposes closing the loophole that allows dangerous criminals to get a gun without a background check. Granite Staters deserve commonsense leadership, not Marilinda Garcia. PolitiFact New Hampshire decided to check the record on those claims. In this item, well check Garcias stance on a minimum wage increase. Garcia, a state representative, is challenging incumbent U.S. Rep. Ann McLane Kuster, a Democrat, for the 2nd Congressional District seat. The Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC unveiled the advertisement in September, just as it stopped airing a controversial TV ad that accused a congressional candidate in Arizona of opposing legislation that aims to prevent convicted stalkers from buying guns. On-screen, the New Hampshire ad cites a WMUR-TVpoll from Februarythat found three-quarters of New Hampshire residents supported raising the state minimum wage to $9 an hour. That provides support for the ads claim, though its worth noting that a federal proposal supported by President Barack Obama and other Democrats would push it higher, to $10.10 an hour. At the time the poll was conducted, the New Hampshire Legislature was considering a bill (HB1403) to increase the minimum wage from $7.25 to $8.25 in 2015, and then to $9 in 2016. The poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, found that 59 percent of residents strongly supported the increase and another 17 percent somewhat supported it. Eight percent strongly opposed it and 5 percent somewhat opposed it. Another 11 percent were neutral or don't know enough to say, according to WMUR. New Hampshire is the only state among its neighbors without a higher wage than the federal floor of $7.25, and it has the lowest minimum wage of any New England state. The minimum wage is $8.73 an hour in Vermont, $8 in Massachusetts and $7.50 in Maine. All told, it is one of 18 states have the same minimum wage as the federal minimum of $7.25, according to theNational Conference of State Legislatures. About a month after the poll, the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted toincrease the states minimum wageby a vote of 173-118. Legislators voted mostly along party lines, with five Democrats voting against it and four Republicans voting for it. We checked theroll callto see how Garcia voted, but on three successive votes on March 12, 2014, related to the minimum wage bill, Garcia did not cast a vote. Later, in May, the Republican-controlled State Senatekilled the bill, with all 13 Republicans voting against it and 11 Democrats voting in favor of it, a process in which Garcia played no official role. An earlier legislative battle over the minimum wage in New Hampshire also sheds light on Garcias record. In 2011, the New Hampshire legislature, with a majority of Republicans in the House and Senate, passed a bill that deleted the states minimum wage, meaning that the states lowest wage would be the federal minimum. At the time, New Hampshires minimum wage was $7.25 an hour, the same as the federal amount, but critics said the bill was intended to keep the states minimum wage as low as possible. In the House, Garcia was one of 236 legislatorsto vote in favorof that bill, HB133. After passing the state Senate, Gov. John Lynch vetoed the measure. Both the House and Senate overrode Lynchs veto, and Garcia was one of261 members of the House to vote in favorof overriding the governor. So, while Garcia has no voting record on the 2014 minimum wage increase in New Hampshire, she did take a clear stand on the 2011 law tying the states minimum wage to the federal one. As further evidence of Garcias opposition to increasing the minimum wage,  the ad cites an article fromThe Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress,which reported that Garcia opposes a minimum wage hike. That article, publishedJune 9, introduced Garcia -- then considered an underdog in the Republican primary against state Sen. Gary Lambert -- to a national audience. The article reviews her record as a state legislator and points to how some GOP establishment figures had feared Garcia would be viewed as too conservative in a general election race. The article quotes Garcia saying in a March interview that while increasing the minimum wage superficially seemed like a good idea, it wouldnt actually help anybody much more and could in fact hurt. It actually has negative outcomes in many areas. One would be, if were trying to encourage people to educate themselves further so they dont have to stay in a minimum-wage job anymore, raising [the minimum wage] lowers the incentive to do that, she said. Garcias stance hasnt changed since then. In an email message to PolitiFact New Hampshire, Kenny Cunningham, the Garcia campaigns political and communications director, reinforced the position. A one-size-fits-all minimum wage from Washington, D.C., is counter-productive. Economists agree it would increase unemployment, particularly amongst teenagers, Cunningham said. Instead, Marilinda wants to reduce Americas highest-in-the-world corporate tax rates and rein in job-killing regulations. Our ruling An ad from the liberal Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC says most people in New Hampshire want to raise the minimum wage, but Marilinda Garcia opposes it. Polls from when the New Hampshire Legislature was considering raising the states minimum wage showed that a majority of residents surveyed supported increasing the wage from the federal minimum of $7.25 to $8.25 and eventually to $9 an hour. And Garcia has gone on the record criticizing attempts to raise the minimum wage, saying its effects could be counter-productive and could lead to negative outcomes. She also cast several votes in 2011 that effectively kept the state minimum wage the lowest in the region. The claim needs a slight clarification. As backup for the assertion that most people in New Hampshire want to raise the minimum wage, the poll cited a poll that asked residents about a $9 minimum wage. Its not clear whether residents would support a hike to the higher level of $10.10, as the president and congressional Democrats are seeking. On balance, we rate the claim Mostly True.
Its one of Madisons worst-kept secrets: Republicans at the Capitol want to cut state income taxes, and hope to take up the issue in the 2013 legislative session, which begins in January.The question is: Cut them for who?On that, its a good idea to listen to Rep. Robin Vos, the Republican from Rochester who was elected Nov. 13, 2012 as speaker of the state Assembly.Vos made clear in a recentWisPolitics interviewthat his top priority is a middle-class income tax cut.If youre poor in Wisconsin, it is one of the best places in the country to be poor. Were in the bottom 10 states as far as paying taxes if youre poor, Vos said in the interview. If youre successful, we are in the middle. I think were number 15 or 16 ...But if youre a person in the middle class, somebody who makes $20,000 to $200,000, youre in the top 4 or 5 worst places in the country to be a middle-class income taxpayer.Vos went on to tell WisPolitics that Republicans want an across-the-board income-tax cut, though the primary benefits would go to the middle class. When we asked him to clarify what he meant, he told us fiscal constraints might preclude -- for now -- reducing income tax rates on upper-income earners for whom legislative Democrats and Gov. Jim Doyle raised the top rate in 2010.So, is Vos right about how the income tax burden affects low and middle-income earners?When asked for backup, Vos pointed us to research presented to the bipartisanSteering Committee on Income Tax, a study group chaired by Vos that was set up through the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council.Lower-income workers:Vos said their income tax burden is in the bottom 10, and its clear from the complete interview he meant among the 41 states that levy a personal income tax.In a November 2009 study, the nonpartisan, liberal Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)ranked the burdenon the lowest one-fifth of Wisconsins earners as the 29th-lowest among those 41 states.Thats not quite bottom 10, but the groups executive Matthew Gardner told us the difference between Wisconsin and the lowest rung of the bottom 10 was so trivially small as to be meaningless.Another 50-state study, by theMinnesota Taxpayers Associationin 2011, ranked the low-income burden in Wisconsin as either 32nd- or 34th-lowest for married couples at $10,000 or $20,000. Both are bottom 10.In Wisconsin, as in several other states, the working poor often have a negative income tax bill -- they get tax credits that wipe out their tax liability and in some cases result in a payment to them from the state.Wisconsin would be lower in these rankings, but some states pay even larger credits.Middle-income earners:Vos said this group faces a top-five burden.Income taxes paid by Wisconsin married couples and single heads of household in the $75,000 to $100,000 income range are fifth-highest in the country, based on the Minnesota study. The Wisconsin Department of Revenue indirectly cited the Minnesota study in testimony before the Vos-chaired study group.A sub-group of all married couples -- senior couples making $100,000 -- have the fourth-highest.The Minnesota groups research director, Aaron Twait, said he considers the $100,000 mark for two earners a classic middle-class household, based on average incomes in Wisconsin and Minnesota.In addition, the ITEP study shows only four states collecting a higher average tax rate than Wisconsin in the $57,000-$88,000 range.So Vos has evidence to back up this part of his claim.But when you look at other levels within Voss middle-class range of $20,000 to $200,000, the burden is not quite as heavy as Vos said.For example, at the $150,000 level in the Minnesota study, the rankings are No. 10 for singles, No. 8 for married couples filing jointly and No. 9 for single heads of household. Again, thats among the 41 states with an income tax.At $50,000, we found a mix of rankings between No. 3 and No. 7.Finally, Vos mentioned one other income group, the successful, by which he meant upper-income. Its not part of the claim were testing, but Vos said that groups income-tax burden was in the middle of the 41 states.Thats basically on target. We found tax-burden rankings from No. 11 to No. 17 for top earners in categories such as $250,000, $500,000 and $1 million annual income. These rankings were from the Minnesota study. The ITEP study also shows the rankings falling as income rises.Our ratingVos said that when it comes to income taxes, Wisconsin is one of the best places in the country to be poor but top 4 or 5 worst for middle-income earners.Hes mostly on target here, based on credible tax studies showing a very low burden on the working poor, compared to a very high burden on many middle-income earners.Not all the middle-income earners face a top-5 tax burden, though: Its top-10 for some in the middle-class as he defined it.We rate his claim Mostly True. A new political mailer from the Committee to Protect Florida attacks State House District 45 candidate Kathryn Starkey of New Port Richey for her record on taxes, citing her role on a water district board and her support of the Penny for Pasco, a 2004 increase in the county sales tax.The committee is headed up by Rockie Pennington, a political consultant for Richard Corcoran, one of Starkeys two opponents in the Aug. 24 Republican primary. (Fabian Calvo is also on the ballot. )Taxin Kathryn, says the mailer sent in early August 2010. With Kathryn Starkeys record on taxes here at home, how can we trust her -- or afford her -- in Tallahassee?We wondered, can you trust the mailers claims? We looked at three claims, and this Truth-O-Meter item tackles her attendance at meetings. Other items arehereon her voting record for river board tax rates, andhereon her actions involving the Pasco sales tax.We looked at the claim that As a member of the Pinellas-Anclote River Basin Board, Kathryn Starkey had the opportunity to fight for lower taxes in 14 separate budget meetings between 2002 and 2008. But ... She only attended half of those meetings!Pennington said he based that claim on minutes from the basin boards meetings. We took a look, too.We looked at two budget meetings each year: June, when the basin board typically sets its preliminary tax rate, and August, when it takes a final vote. (In 2007, the final vote was taken in July. )Starkey served on the board from June 2002 through April 2008, so we looked only at the 12 budget-related meetings that fell within that period. (Pennington, who put together his mailer a month ago, said he wasnt sure why we came up with different counts for the meetings. )Of 12 budget meetings she could have attended, Starkey attended seven (five of those seven were the final votes). That attendance record is more than half  by a hair.We rate this claim Mostly True. In November 2013, South Korean designer Jeabyun Yeon unveiled his concept for a "Portal Oxygen Respirator" dubbed Triton, a device that would allow people to breather underwater "simply by biting it," at theSamsung Art and Design Institute (SADI)graduation exhibition: South Korean designer Jeabyun Yeon just unveiled a conceptual scuba mask that would allow divers to breathe underwater without air tanks. The mask, called the Triton, consists of two branching arms designed to serve as "gills" that extract oxygen from the water and deliver breathable air directly into their wearer's lungs. Instead of hauling around heavy scuba equipment, swimmers could simply bite down on a plastic mouth piece.  Yeon's concept proved popular, and in March 2014 the web siteInhabitat published an article about the nifty design. Whilethat article correctly described the Triton as a "conceptual scuba mask" and noted that "the design is just a concept" that may "someday be turned into a commercial product," the article'sheadline ("Triton Scuba Mask Transforms Divers into Human Fish") misled some readers into believing that the Triton was a fully developed, workable, real product. headline An IndieGogo page dedicated to raising funds for the project explains how the Triton gills supposedly work: Triton employs cutting-edge technology to produce 'artificial gills'. TheMicroporous Hollow Fiber makesbreathing underwater possible. The holes of the threads are smaller than water molecules, they keepwater out and let oxygen in. The micro compressor then extracts and stores the oxygen  allowing youto breathe naturally and revel in your underwater freedom. We are using a very powerful modified micro compressor, it compresses oxygen and stores the extracted oxygen in a storage tank.The micro compressor operates through a powerful modified lithium-ion battery.  However, as more skeptical reports have noted, the Triton is far more concept than product, and not necessarily a concept that will ever be realizable: skeptical   I'm not sold on the Triton. My biggest issue with it is that it would just have to filter so much water to provide all the oxygen a human needs for a single breath. The average human need 500mls of air with every breath; going in, the air has a 21% oxygen concentration and a 16% concentration coming out, for a total of ~25mls of oxygen intake with every breath. Scientific literature places the concentration of oxygen at 6mg/L of ocean water so the Triton would have to go through ... about 6L of water for each breath (assuming our lungs can scrub almost all the oxygen in the air which they don't)? I dont really think it can do that. That being said, finding a way to take oxygen out of seawater is a great idea. But Yeon needs to make this thing go through a lot of sea water very fast before it's actually usable for diving   Yeonuploaded a videoon 20 February 2016 supposedly showing a working prototype of a set of Triton gills, but given the number of cuts in the video (such that the diver is never seen fully underwater for an extended period of time and could simply be holding his breath), it's not possible to determine if the product shown actually works as claimed:  After the release of the promotional video, more articles expressed some of the same doubts about the viability of such a device, and more: articles   There are several raised by experts and commentators about the device: 1) The device has to be able to extract enough oxygen from the water to allow you to actually breath.  This is possible in theory however as pointed out in an article on Deep Sea News in 2014 (when the device first came to light as a concept) it requires not only an incredibly efficient ability to extract the oxygen  which the designers say is down to a new Microporous Hollow Fiber  but also water has to be forced through the device at upward of five liters every 15 seconds which could only be achieved with a pump bigger than the whole Triton design. 2) Next is the issue of storing the gas in a chamber  this would require a compressor and battery "order of magnitude more efficient than anything on the market today".  The makers claim on the website that they have a "very powerful modified micro compressor" but again without any real proof. 3) Let's say theyve managed to crack those two issues the next one is the ability to deliver the oxygen to you in the right amount at the right pressure to be able to breathe.  This is possible as we see it in open-circuit Scuba systems and in Closed Circuit Rebreathers however, again, there is no technology on the market right now that can achieve such a feat in such a small design. 4) Finally there is the video, on face value it looks like there is a working unit, however on close inspection you can see that it is made up of several short clips where the person seems to be getting progressively more negatively buoyant (probably due to expelling air from their lungs to create the "bubbles" from the device) and no clip ever shows a person underwater for longer than one minute.  As we know from Freediving that is not even a difficult breath-hold for most people. All-in-all the possibility of a device such as Triton is not beyond the realm of possibility at some point; sadly, though, the challenges faced by the designers just do not seem to be reasonably solved with technology available today.  The designers would have had to have developed 3 or 4 incredibly efficient and compact new technologies to make this possible.   Other commentators began question whether the Indiegogo campaign to fund development of the Triton gill device might not be a scam, given the extreme scientific unlikelihood that such a device could be built with existing technology and the lack of evidence for Triton's having produced anything beyond a mere concept: scam   Right now, an Indiegogo campaign for a device that its makers claim is "the future of underwater breathing" is raking in cash  more than $600,000 at the time of this post, $100,000 of which poured in over just 24 hours. It's easy to see the appeal of the handheld device, called the "Triton." Diving equipment is heavy and complicated. Meanwhile, the Triton looks seductively simple and the campaign says it "allows you to breathe underwater." But despite the slick crowdfunding campaign, there's no real evidence that this device actually works, multiple experts told Tech Insider. One of them is Neal Pollock, a research associate at the Center for Hyperbaric Medicine and Environmental Physiology at Duke University Medical Center, and the research director for the Divers Alert Network  a non-profit organization that helps divers in medical emergencies and promotes dive safety. "In concept it sounds very good and it's very exciting," Pollock tells Tech Insider, but "I would not encourage anyone pulling out a wallet." For the makers of Triton to prove they've invented a device that can actually do what they say it can, Pollock and other experts want to see more evidence; the crowdfunding campaign and Triton website simply don't provide enough to go on. Regardless, Pollock notes the technological challenges involved in creating a device like Triton are so vast that "it's not realistic, it's science fiction."   On 1 April 2016, Triton published an update announcing the release of a new video showing the product in action.  They also disclosed that the Triton requires the use of 'liquid oxygen' cylinders, and that they had decided to refund the donations of all the backers who had contributed to so far and launch a new campaign: update video   Inside of each Triton, the artificial gills utilize liquid oxygen, which combined with the other components allow users to breathe underwater, which you can see in the video above. We will release more information about the liquid oxygen cylinders and safety strap. Note that the liquid oxygen cylinders wont last forever so we plan to make it possible for backers to purchase and exchange cylinders through our website. They will come in packs of 1, 3 and 5, and well list prices as soon as they are finalized. Were also working on a solution to make them refillable. We wanted to share it at the beginning of the campaign but were hesitant because we also wanted to  protect our intellectual property. Our success and the positive comments we have received have made it clear that these details are important for our backers to understand. We launched this campaign to build a community of people who are excited to bring Triton to life, and we are committed to making sure our backers feel confident in our efforts. After careful consideration and in light of this new information, we have decided to refund all Triton backers and launch a brand new campaign. Claim:  "Little History Lesson" article accurately explains origins of many common phrases.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2000] In George Washington's days, there were no cameras. One's image was either sculpted or painted. Some paintings of Washington showed him standing behind a desk with one arm behind his back while others showed both legs and both arms. Prices charged by painters were not based on how many people were to be painted, but by how many limbs were to be painted. Arms and legs are "limbs" therefore painting them would cost the buyer more. Hence the expression, "Okay, but it'll cost you an arm and a leg". As incredible as it sounds, we are informed that men and women took baths only twice a year! (May & October) Women always kept their hair covered while men shaved their heads (because of lice and bugs) and wore wigs.  Wealthy men could afford good wigs. The wigs couldn't be washed so to clean them, they would carve out a loaf of bread, put the wig in the shell and bake it for 30 minutes. The heat would make the wig big and fluffy, hence the term "big wig." Today we often use the term "here comes Mr. Big Wig" because someone appears to be or "is" powerful and wealthy. In the late 1700's many houses consisted of a large room with only one chair. Commonly, a long wide board was folded down from the wall and used for dining.  The "head of the household" always sat in the chair while everyone else ate sitting on the floor. Once in a while an invited guest would be offered to sit in this chair during a meal whom was almost always a man.  To sit in the chair meant you were important and in charge. Sitting in the chair, one was called the "chair man of the board." Today in business we use the expression/title "Chairman of the Board." Needless to say, personal hygiene left much room for improvement.  As a result, many women and men had developed acne scars by adulthood. The women would spread bee's wax over their facial skin to smooth out their complexions. When they were speaking to each other, if a woman began to stare at another woman's face she was told "mind your own bee's wax."   Should thewoman smile, the wax would crack, hence the term "crack a smile?"  Also, when they sat too close to the fire, the wax would melt and therefore the expression "losing face." Ladies wore corsets which would lace up in the front. A tightly tied lace was worn by a proper and dignified lady as in "straight laced." Common entertainment included playing cards. However, there was a tax levied when purchasing playing cards but only applicable to the "ace of spades." To avoid paying the tax, people would purchase 51 card instead. Yet, since most games require 52 cards, these people were thought to be stupid or dumb because they weren't "playing with a full deck." Early politicians required feedback from the public to determine what was considered important to the people. Since there were no telephones, TV's or radios, the politicians sent their assistants to local taverns, pubs and bars who were told to "go sip some ale" and listen to people's conversations and political concerns. Many assistants were dispatched at different times... "you go sip here" and "you go sip there". The two words "go sip" were eventually combined when referring to the local opinion and thus, we have the term "gossip." At local taverns, pubs and bars, people drank from pint and quart sized containers. A bar maid's job was to keep an eye on the customers and keep the drinks coming. She had to pay close attention and remember who was drinking in "pints" and who was drinking in "quarts." Hence the term "minding your "P's" and "Q's." Origins:  In 1999, a spurious missive purporting to explain the origins of a number of common phrases appeared on the Internet. That laughable compilation, titled "Life in the 1500s," was pulled together as someone's idea of a joke. 1500s In 2000, the pranksters went at it again with yet another specious list of purported word and phrase origins, this time dating it to the1700s. Typically titled "Little History Lesson," it offered the set of false etymologies listed in the Example section above. Below we analyze each entry in order: In George Washington's days, there were no cameras. One's image was either sculpted or painted. Some paintings of Washington showed him standing behind a desk with one arm behind his back while others showed both legs and both arms. Prices charged by painters were not based on how many people were to be painted, but by how many limbs were to be painted. Arms and legs are "limbs" therefore painting them would cost the buyer more. Hence the expression, "Okay, but it'll cost you an arm and a leg". While some portrait artists might have charged extra for the inclusion of additional details in commissioned works, we know of none that charged per limb displayed. (Most varied their fee by the size of the canvas requested.) The "costs an arm and a leg" saying instead first surfaced around the 1940s, with a meaning of "An exorbitant amount of money," and it likely developed from much older phrases wherein arms and legs were used as examples of extremely valuable items their possessors might be persuaded to surrender in exchange for things desired even more. "If it takes a leg" (used to express desperate determination) dates to 1872. Similarly, print sightings for "I'd give my right arm" (to be able to do something especially desired) go back as far as 1616. As incredible as it sounds, we are informed that men and women took baths only twice a year! (May & October) Women always kept their hair covered while men shaved their heads (because of lice and bugs) and wore wigs.  Wealthy men could afford good wigs. The wigs couldn't be washed so to clean them, they would carve out a loaf of bread, put the wig in the shell and bake it for 30 minutes. The heat would make the wig big and fluffy, hence the term "big wig." Today we often use the term "here comes Mr. Big Wig" because someone appears to be or "is" powerful and wealthy. Full immersion bathing didn't become the norm for a very long time because it took a fair bit of work to haul the amount of water and wood needed to fill and heat a bath. However, that folks weren't routinely taking what we would consider proper baths doesn't mean that they didn't regularly clean themselves. Cleaning one's body was a matter of taking what we would regard as "sponge baths": wetting oneself down with a damp cloth, followed by scrubbing the body with a soapy cloth,  rinsing with a wet cloth, and finishing off with a toweling dry. Even in the 1700s in locales and social strata where the wearing of wigs was common, these headcoverings were indeed washed (albeit carefully); they were not inserted into loaves of bread and baked. (One has to wonder about an explanation that posits folks who were afraid they'd damage expensive goods by washing them would happily risk incinerating them.) Print sightings of "big wig" and "big wigged" date to 1781 and 1778 respectively, with the term's always having referred to someone regarded as societally prominent by virtue of wealth, position, or power. While the term does find its origin in the rather impressive wigs sported by the upper crust, said wigs were deliberately constructed to be large and imposing; they didn't get that way from having been baked in bread to kill lice. In the late 1700's many houses consisted of a large room with only one chair. Commonly, a long wide board was folded down from the wall and used for dining. The "head of the household" always sat in the chair while everyone else ate sitting on the floor. Once in a while an invited guest would be offered to sit in this chair during a meal whom was almost always a man.  To sit in the chair meant you were important and in charge. Sitting in the chair, one was called the "chair man of the board." Today in business we use the expression/title "Chairman of the Board." People have been eating off tables of various forms for about as long as humans have been recording history. We're wholly unaware of any society wherein a board hinged to the wall was let down at dinnertime so that folks seated on the floor in front of it could eat from it. The "board" in "chairman of the board" refers to a board of directors, generally a group of successful businessmen appointed to oversee the running of a corporation. The word "chairman" dates to 1654 and refers to the occupier of a chair of authority. Needless to say, personal hygiene left much room for improvement.  As a result, many women and men had developed acne scars by adulthood. The women would spread bee's wax over their facial skin to smooth out their complexions. When they were speaking to each other, if a woman began to stare at another woman's face she was told "mind your own bee's wax."  Should thewoman smile, the wax would crack, hence the term "crack a smile?"  Also, when they sat too close to the fire, the wax would melt and therefore the expression "losing face." While throughout history women have used odd (and sometimes dangerous) substances on themselves in pursuit of beauty, we're unaware that at any point they were coating their visages with wax.  "Mind your own beeswax," a phrase first noted in 1934, is no more than a cutesy way of saying "Mind your own business," with "beeswax" used as an ear-pleasing substitute for the more staid "business." The saying it's based upon, "To mind one's business," dates to 1660 and means to tend to one's own concerns in preference of involving oneself in the doings of others. One "cracks a smile" in the same way that one cracks a joke or a boast; there is no physical crevice made in anything, let alone the fictional wax masks women were supposedly parading about in. Sightings of "crack" used in the sense of uttering something loudly and with flair date to 1315, with "crack a boast" to 1386. The linguistic concept of "losing face" (or saving it) didn't enter the English language prior to contact between British traders and the Chinese and was first noted in 1834. The "face" the Chinese were so concerned about wasn't an anatomical one but rather the publicized image of oneself, in the sense of the "face" one displays to the world at large. Two Chinese words, one meaning "moral character," the other "social prestige," were each translated into English as "face," with "to lose face" meaning to have damage done to one's reputation or to be publicly embarrassed.  Ladies wore corsets which would lace up in the front. A tightly tied lace was worn by a proper and dignified lady as in "straight laced." "Strait-laced" does derive from the tying of corsets, but the proposed etymology given in the article has it backwards: The term's origin has to do with the tightness of the lacing and the consequent constriction of such garments, as opposed to the moral character of the persons wearing these underpinnings. (One needs to remember that a multitude of men and women, from the wholly proper and dignified right down to the entirely disreputable, wore corsets.) "Strait" came into the English language from the Latin verb "stringere," which means "to strain; draw tight." Other "strait" words we're familiar with, such as Straits of Gibraltar and strait-jacket, likewise employ its narrowing or restraining elements. "Strait-laced" was first spotted in 1430, and while at that time it did have to do with the tightness of corsets, by the 1540s the term had expanded to encompass things that were narrow in range or scope or people that were uncommunicative (i.e., kept a great deal of themselves in). By the 1550s, it was used to describe folks who were excessively rigid or scrupulous in matters of conduct. Common entertainment included playing cards. However, there was a tax levied when purchasing playing cards but only applicable to the "ace of spades." To avoid paying the tax, people would purchase 51 card instead. Yet, since most games require 52 cards, these people were thought to be stupid or dumb because they weren't "playing with a full deck." Taxes were levied on playing cards in England at various times in its history, with the earliest instance occurring in 1588. However, when this tax was in force, the basic duty was applied to each deck, not just a specific card within it. Once the tax had been paid, one card from the now-taxed deck was stamped with a special seal to show that the duty had been properly rendered. Over time, that card came to be the ace of spades (most likely because it's the one on the end of the deck). "Not playing with a full deck" is simply one of countless sayings of the same ilk as "two bricks shy of a load" or "a couple of French fries short of a Happy Meal"; a phrase indicating that the person referred to lacks ordinary intellectual capacity. Early politicians required feedback from the public to determine what was considered important to the people. Since there were no telephones, TV's or radios, the politicians sent their assistants to local taverns, pubs and bars who were told to "go sip some ale" and listen to people's conversations and political concerns. Many assistants were dispatched at different times... "you go sip here" and "you go sip there". The two words "go sip" were eventually combined when referring to the local opinion and thus, we have the term "gossip." "Gossip" descends from "God sib," an ancient term (1014) for godparent or sponsor. (A christening ceremony was a "gossiping.") Along the way to its current meaning, "gossip" picked up the additional meaning of "chum" or "friend." One of the activities folks engage in with their friends is chewing over the events of the day, and over time the word "gossip" shifted away from the person chatted with to the activity itself, as well as coming to attach to people overly fond of discussing the doings of others. At local taverns, pubs and bars, people drank from pint and quart sized containers. A bar maid's job was to keep an eye on the customers and keep the drinks coming. She had to pay close attention and remember who was drinking in "pints" and who was drinking in "quarts." Hence the term "minding your "P's" and "Q's." In an nutshell (with the non-nutshell version to be found here), while the definitive origin of this phrase has yet to surface, ones that most certainly can be ruled out are the "pints and quarts served in a bar" explanations. The first print sighting of the saying dates to 1756 (or even earlier if we accept a 1602 sighting of a variant of the phrase), which means it long predates the selling of beer in pints and quarts. here While the "Little History Lesson" e-mail has remained surprisingly static across its decade-plus existence, one additional item about freezing the balls off a brass monkey has come to be added to it.  One more: bet you didn't know this! In the heyday of sailing ships, all war ships and many freighters carried iron cannons. Those cannons fired round iron cannon balls. It was necessary to keep a good supply near the cannon. However, how to prevent them from rolling about the deck? The best storage method devised was a square-based pyramid with one ball on top, resting on four resting on nine, which rested on sixteen. Thus, a supply of 30 cannon balls could be stacked in a small area right next to the cannon. There was only one problem... how to prevent the bottom layer from sliding or rolling from under the others. The solution was a metal plate called a "Monkey" with 16 round indentations. However, if this plate were made of iron, the iron balls would quickly rust to it. The solution to the rusting problem was to make "Brass Monkeys." Few land lubbers realize that brass contracts much more and much faster than iron when chilled. Consequently, when the temperature dropped too far, the brass indentations would shrink so much that the iron cannonballs would come right off the monkey. Thus, it was quite literally, "Cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey." (All this time, youthought that was an improper expression, didn't you.) That writeup first appeared on the Internet in September 2002 as a stand-alone item. By March 2004 it began showing up as the completing entry in the "Little History Lesson" mailing. In a further nutshell, (with the non-nutshell version offered here), while the etymology of this pronouncement is still up in the air, the "cannonballs" explanation should be dismissed because  when the saying started appearing in print in the mid-19th century, various body parts (ears, tail, nose, or whiskers) were said to be about to fall off a brass monkey thanks to the cold. here Barbara "frozen assets" Mikkelson Last updated:  1 November 2010    Lighter, J.E.  Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang.   New York: Random House, 1997.  IBSN 0-679-43464-X. Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang    The Compact Oxford English Dictionary.   Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.  ISBN 0-19-861258-3. The Compact Oxford English Dictionary The Raimondo administration wants to see more efficiency when it comes to spending on Medicaid, the joint state and federal program that provides health insurance to the very poor and people with disabilities. Roughly every dollar spent by the state is matched by the federal government. Duringa March 2, 2015, presentationto the Reinventing Medicaid Working Group, the state's secretary for health and human services, Elizabeth Roberts,displayed a slidewhich said that nearly a third of all state tax dollars goes to Medicaid. More than 30 cents of every state tax dollar goes to Medicaid, the slide said. It also contained a pie chart in which Medicaid is shown eating up 31.5 percent of those tax dollars. The slide lists the source as the state budget for the 2013 fiscal year. But on March 31, 2015, groups that want to create a single-payer health insurance system in the statechallenged that statistic and othersbeing used by the Raimondo administration in itspush for Medicaid reform. The Rhode Island chapters of Physicians for a National Health Program and HealthCare Now said the actual percentage isn't 31.5 for fiscal 2013, but closer to 22. We decided to see who was correct. Because Roberts specifically mentioned state tax dollars, for this fact check, we will only look at general revenue funds raised by the state, not federal funds shared with the state or restricted funds. When we contacted Roberts' office, spokesman Michael Raia said the source of the information was listed incorrectly. The 31.5 percent is based on the current fiscal year of 2015. According to data from the House Finance committee, this year the state is slated tospend $1.084 billionof its unrestricted money on Medicaid. That's 31.5 percent of the$3.445 billion in general revenue funds. (The state budget enacted that year totaled $8.78 billion, including restricted revenue and federal money for Medicaid and other things.) That made us curious. What were the numbers in 2013, the year cited incorrectly by Roberts? The Rhode Island Health Care Association, one of the groups questioning the numbers, referred us to the executive summary ofGov. Lincoln Chafee's budget for the 2015 fiscal year. Page A-5 listed $3.216 billion in general revenue for that year and page 71 of the budget'stechnical appendixsays the Office of Health and Human Services (OHHS) actually received $772 million from the general fund. That would be 24 percent, close to what the critics claimed. But in the 2013 enacted budget,20 percent of the state's Medicaid money was spent by other departments, including Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) and the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF). That makes the 24 percent too low. When all of the states spending for Medicaid out of its general revenues is accounted for, the percentage comes out to around 31 percent. Our ruling Roberts said more than 30 cents of every state tax dollar goes to Medicaid. She cited a specific percentage of 31.5 percent and said it came from the 2013 fiscal year. It's actually from the 2015 fiscal year. But the percentage from 2013 is very close to that. Roberts may have gotten the source year wrong, but it turns out that either year produces the same result. We rate her statement asTrue. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.) In August 2018, a number of social media users came across an image offering a purported newspaper clipping of an article entitled "Tech Billionaire Parenting" and wondered if the article, as well as the information contained within it, was genuine: image   This image presents a slightly paraphrased version of an article written by Alice Thomson entitled "Help Kids to Kick Social Media Addiction" which was published in The Times of London in March 2018, the original text of which read as follows: The Times The philanthropist Melinda Gates told me the same. Her children dont have smartphones and only use a computer in the kitchen. Her husband Bill, the Microsoft co-founder, spends hours in his office reading books while everyone else is refreshing their homepage. The most sought-after private school in Silicon Valley, the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, bans technical devices for the under-11s and teaches the children of eBay, Apple, Uber and Google staff to make go-karts, knit and cook. Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg wants his daughters to read Dr Seuss books and play outside rather than use Messenger Kids. Steve Jobss children had strict limits on how much technology they used at home. Its astonishing if you think about it: the more money you make out of the tech industry, the more you appear to shield your family from its effects. The general theme of this article, that several prominent tech billionaires advocated limiting their children's use of technology, is accurate and supported by various interviews and articles. Our only quibble is with the claim that Bill and Melinda Gates' children don't currently have smartphones. As far as we can tell, the Microsoft moguls didn't allow their children to possess smartphones of their own until they reached the age of 14, but as of this writing Jennifer, Rory, and Phoebe Gates are all now over the age of 14. In a June 2018 interview with The Mirror, Bill Gates explained some of his parental rules when it came to technology use by his children: The Mirror We often set a time after which there is no screen time and in their case that helps them get to sleep at a reasonable hour. Youre always looking at how it can be used in a great way  homework and staying in touch with friends  and also where it has gotten to excess. We dont have cellphones at the table when we are having a meal, we didnt give our kids cellphones until they were 14 and they complained other kids got them earlier. Melinda Gates also penned an op-ed for the Washington Post in August 2017 in which she warned about putting a computer in a child's pocket at too early of an age. Gates seemed to acknowledge that her children had cellphones at the time but said that she "probably would have waited longer" if she had the chance to do it again: Washington Post Still, as a mother who wants to make sure her children are safe and happy, I worry. And I think back to how I might have done things differently. Parents should decide for themselves what works for their family, but I probably would have waited longer before putting a computer in my childrens pockets. Phones and apps arent good or bad by themselves, but for adolescents who dont yet have the emotional tools to navigate lifes complications and confusions, they can exacerbate the difficulties of growing up: learning how to be kind, coping with feelings of exclusion, taking advantage of freedom while exercising self-control. Its more important than ever to teach empathy from the very beginning, because our kids are going to need it. As for the remainder of the text at the head of this page, it appears wholly accurate. A number of Silicon Valley parents truly do send their children to the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, where an emphasis is placed on pen and paper rather than digital screens. News outlets such as the New York Times and the Guardian have reported on that school's technology policy in relation to the student body's connection to Silicon Valley: New York Times Guardian The chief technology officer of eBay sends his children to a nine-classroom school here. So do employees of Silicon Valley giants like Google, Apple, Yahoo and Hewlett-Packard. But the schools chief teaching tools are anything but high-tech: pens and paper, knitting needles and, occasionally, mud. Not a computer to be found. No screens at all. They are not allowed in the classroom, and the school even frowns on their use at home. Schools nationwide have rushed to supply their classrooms with computers, and many policy makers say it is foolish to do otherwise. But the contrarian point of view can be found at the epicenter of the tech economy, where some parents and educators have a message: computers and schools dont mix. This is the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, one of around 160 Waldorf schools in the country that subscribe to a teaching philosophy focused on physical activity and learning through creative, hands-on tasks. Those who endorse this approach say computers inhibit creative thinking, movement, human interaction and attention spans. The web site for the Waldorf School of the Peninsula also includes a page in which they describe their "Media & Technology Philosophy": page Waldorf educators believe it is far more important for students to interact with one another and their teachers, and work with real materials than to interface with electronic media or technology. By exploring the world of ideas, participating in the arts, music, movement and practical activities, children develop healthy, robust bodies, balanced and well-integrated brains, confidence in their real-world practical skills and strong executive-function capabilities. In the high school curriculum, Waldorf embraces technology in ways that enhance the learning process, by using it as a tool, rather than replace the role of the teacher. Students quickly master technology, and many Waldorf graduates have gone on to successful careers in the computer industry. The claim that "Steve Jobss children had strict limits on how much technology they used at home" is supported by a 2014 New York Times article which labeled the Apple founder a low-tech parent: article [N]othing shocked me more than something Mr. Jobs said to me in late 2010 after he had finished chewing me out for something I had written about an iPad shortcoming. So, your kids must love the iPad? I asked Mr. Jobs, trying to change the subject. The companys first tablet was just hitting the shelves. They havent used it, he told me. We limit how much technology our kids use at home. Im sure I responded with a gasp and dumbfounded silence. I had imagined the Jobss household was like a nerds paradise: that the walls were giant touch screens, the dining table was made from tiles of iPads and that iPods were handed out to guests like chocolates on a pillow. Nope, Mr. Jobs told me, not even close. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg's reported desire to have his daughter read Dr. Seuss and play outside comes from an open letter he wrote after the birth of his second daughter in August 2017: letter But rather than write about growing up, we want to talk about childhood. The world can be a serious place. Thats why its important to make time to go outside and play. You will be busy when youre older, so I hope you take time to smell all the flowers and put all the leaves you want in your bucket now. I hope you read your favorite Dr. Seuss books so many times you start inventing your own stories about the Vipper of Vipp. I hope you ride the carousel with Max until youve tamed every color horse. I hope you run as many laps around our living room and yard as you want. And then I hope you take a lot of naps. I hope youre a great sleeper. And I hope even in your dreams you can feel how much we love you. Gates, Melinda.  "Melinda Gates: I Spent My Career in Technology. I Wasnt Prepared for Its Effect on My Kids."
  The Washington Post.  24 August 2017. Richtel, Matt.  "A Silicon Valley School That Doesn't Compute."
  The New York Times.  22 October 2011. Bilton, Nick.  "Steve Jobs Was a Low-Tech Parent."
  The New York Times.  10 September 2014. Jenkin, Matthew.  "Tablets Out, Imagination In: The Schools That Shun Technology."
  The Guardian.  2 December 2015. Abramson, Alana.  "'Childhood Is Magical.' Read the Letter Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan Wrote to Their Baby Daughter."
  Fortune.  28 August 2017. Stillman, Jessica.  "Why Steve Jobs and Bill Gates Both Severely Limited Their Kids' Tech Use."
  Inc.  29 October 2017. Claim:  Photograph shows a USA-shaped maze carved in a cornfield by a farmer. Status:  True. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002]  Here's an aerial picture of a cornfield in Lawrenceburg, TN.  The ownerallegedly drew the picture out on his computer, then downloaded it to hisGPS system, and then followed the GPS on his Bushhog (a big-league mowingdevice).      Origins:  As the economics of family farming in America have become increasingly difficult, many farmers have turned to alternative uses of their land to supplement their incomes.  One method of raising much-needed revenue has been the implementation of various agritourism schemes, such as leasing land for hunting and fishing, giving tours, or charging tourists to spend a day (and night) on the farm.    Another popular agritourism scheme (one which Barbara and I have experienced personally, at the cost of many aching muscles) is the conversion of corn fields into large, elaborate mazes, which hapless tourists fork over dollars for the privilege of wandering through for hours on end (also known as "solving" the maze). mazes When Jon Rose of Lawrenceburg, Tennessee, decided to bring in some money by creating a maize maze on his farm for the second straight year in 2002, he went whole hog.  Inspired by a picture in a magazine, Rose planned a giant labyrinth based on a map of the United States of America (including Alaska and Hawaii), bordered above and below by the phrase "God Bless America," encompassing an endurance-straining 7.6 miles of aisles. Creating this monstrous maze would ordinarily have required the work of ten men hacking away at corn stalks for a full three weeks, a labor-intensive process Rose wanted to avoid.  Instead, he came up with an ingenious solution: He had a special program created for his GPS device, entered his design into it, and, using a map displayed on his GPS screen as a guide, sculpted the maze on a riding mower with just one day's effort.  The results are shown in the photograph above.  Jon Rose also created a whopping 34.8-acre American flag maze.  Last updated:  29 May 2005    Sources:   [Northwest Alabama] TimesDaily.  "A-Maizing: Giant Map of U.S., Flag Carved Into Cornfield."    27 August 2002. California officials proposed in November 2018 a new surcharge on cell phone users' monthly bills, a move that was misrepresented by some social media users as a "text tax" and targeted for expression of anti-immigrant sentiment. The California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) proposal would have instituted a surcharge on text messaging services to be included in cell phone users' monthly service bills. The commission's plan called for the revenues so raised to be used to fund public-purpose programs that provide phone service for lower-income residents as well as for deaf and disabled residents. proposal However, the proposal did not call for a "5-cent tax" per text message. Rather, the tax would have been based on a percentage of a cell phone users' monthly bills, costing around $1.40 per $20 of texting charges. The surcharge would have been similar to  existing taxes, as KGO-TV reported: costing existing For example, you pay about 3.75 percent for Universal Lifeline Telephone Service, which funds discounts for low-income customers. You pay .40 percent for the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program, which funds free specialized equipment to customers who need them. The CPUC says it needs the "text tax" because revenue that funds those programs is down, since people are making fewer calls and texting more. Regardless, some social media users accused the CPUC of seeking to financially benefit people they felt were undesirable, such as "drug addicts" and "illegals":  The commission had originally planned to vote on the issue on 10 January 2019, but the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) stepped in on 12 December 2018 and ruled that both Short Message Service (SMS) and Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) should be regulated as "information services" akin to email and not as  telecommunication services. ruled The FCC's 3-1 decision meant that text messages would fall under the purview of the federal Telecommunications Act, which limits state jurisdiction over them. Five days later, the CPUC announced that the proposal for the surcharge had been withdrawn from their docket. announced Sze, Kristen.  "If Passed, This Is How California's 'Text Tax' Would Affect Your Cellphone Bill."
  KGO-TV.  12 December 2018. Woolfolk, John.  "FCC Decision Deals Blow to California Text-Tax Plan."
  [San Jose] Mercury News.  12 December 2018. Timm, Jane C. and Dennis Romero.  "O rly? California Considers Plan to Tax Text Messages."
  NBC News.  13 December 2018. On 19 December 2016, a photograph purportedly showing a Russian flag on display at the Texas State Capitol was circulated on social media:  Many social media users shared the above-displayed photograph along with claims that it showed pro-Russian elements celebrating Donald Trump's election and insinuated that Russia had helped installed him as the next President of the United States. In fact, this image actually shows a group of demonstrators who were protesting Trump's election on the day Texas' electors met to cast their ballots for him, taken by a Texas Tribune photographer who goes by the handle @BobPhoto on Twitter: Russian flag flies at Texas Capitol prior to #ElectoralCollege @TexasTribune @bobphoto #txlege pic.twitter.com/0pcYFoY3bA #ElectoralCollege @TexasTribune @bobphoto #txlege pic.twitter.com/0pcYFoY3bA  bobphoto (@bobphoto) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016  Guys with Russian flag in line House gallery #ElectoralCollege #txlege @TexasTribune @bobphoto pic.twitter.com/PZ9YqtRdMj  bobphoto (@bobphoto) December 19, 2016 #ElectoralCollege #txlege @TexasTribune @bobphoto pic.twitter.com/PZ9YqtRdMj December 19, 2016  Aliyya Swaby, another reporter for the Texas Tribune, added some more context to these photographs when she shared an image of the protesters outside of the capitol building: Joke contingent of pro-Russia supporters shows up to "protect our investment" and ensure electors vote Trump pic.twitter.com/xuod4x3tWk pic.twitter.com/xuod4x3tWk  Aliyya Swaby (@AliyyaSwaby) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016  This display was not one celebrating Trump's alleged friendly relationship with Russia; it was a tongue-in-cheek message delivered by a group of protesters. In early 2021, readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a widely-shared social media post that purported to describe U.S. President Joe Biden's intention to eliminate a piece of tax law that allows taxpayers to benefit from selling on a home that is left to them by their parents. The post  which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan  first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign, but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows: first emerged regained Did you know Biden wants to get rid of something called "stepped up basis"? How does this affect you! When your parents pass and leave you the family house, normally you would inherit that property at what it is worth today. If you were to sell that house you would only pay taxes on the gain from what it is worth today and what it sells for. If Biden does away with "stepped up basis," you will inherit the property for what your parents paid for the property. If you decide to sell you will pay taxes on the difference between the original purchase price and what it sells for today. Here is what this looks like! Current PolicyInherited House at Current Value - $200,000Sells for $205,000Taxable income = $5000Taxes Due - 20% of $5000 = $1000Profit to you = $204,000Biden PolicyInherited House at original purchase price - $40,000Sells for $205,000Taxable income = $165,000Taxes Due - 20% of $165,000 = $33,000Profit to you = $172,000If your parents were to have sold this property prior to passing, they would have paid no taxes because it was their primary residence.So much for helping the middle class get ahead.My educated guess would be that at least 95% of Americans dont even know Biden has proposed this. We are talking tens of thousands of more tax dollars for the average sold after inheritance! Wow, google Biden stepped up basis and educate yourself because this is a biggie! Please share!   The viral post accurately stated that Biden proposed getting rid of the "stepped-up" basis for capital gains tax, and correctly explained the potential practical consequences for an individual taxpayer who inherits a home. In fact, the tax hit for wealthier individuals would be even greater than the post stated, because Biden has also proposed doubling the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with income over $1 million. We are issuing a rating of  Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares, a piece of property, and so on: describes When people sell an asset for more than the price for which they obtained it, they realize a net capital gain. The net gain is typically calculated as the sale price minus the assets adjusted basisgenerally the original purchase price adjusted for improvements or depreciation. To calculate the gains on inherited assets, taxpayers generally use the assets fair-market value at the time of the owners death, often referred to as stepped-up basis, instead of the adjusted basis derived from the assets value when the decedent initially acquired it. When the heir sells the asset, capital gains taxes are assessed only on the change in the assets value relative to the stepped-up basis. As a result, any appreciation in value that occurred while the decedent owned the asset is not included in taxable income and therefore is not subject to the capital gains tax. In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works: explanation ...Suppose an individual leaves stock worth $50 million to an heir, who immediately sells it. When purchased, the stock was worth $10 million, so the capital gain is $40 million. However, the heirs basis in the stock is stepped up to the $50 million gain when he inherited it  so no income tax is due on the sale, or ever due on the $40 million of gain. Each year, hundreds of billions in capital gains avoid tax as a result of stepped-up basis.  During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to get rid of the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that: Politifact ABC News The plan makes official several policies the former vice president often discusses on the trail about student debt as well. Bidens policy includes his plan for reducing student loan debt obligations for students who go into the public service sector, allowing $10,000 of undergrad or graduate debt relief per year for up to five years of service. Biden would also double the maximum amount of Pell grants available to students, including Dreamers, and would allow students making less than $25,000 a year to defer payments on their federal loans without accruing interest. Any student making more than $25,000 would pay 5% of their discretionary income toward their loans rather than the current 10% owed. The plan would be paid for through the elimination of the stepped-up basis loophole, a type of break on inheritance taxes, and capping itemized deductions for wealthy Americans at 28%, according to the campaign. In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told would-be donors: "Im going to get rid of the bulk of Trumps $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that but Im going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis. CNBC On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated): document The Biden plan for post-secondary education is a $750 billion investment over 10 years, aimed at developing a stronger and more inclusive middle class. It will be paid for by ensuring the super-rich pay their fair share. Specifically, this plan will be paid for by eliminating the gap in our tax law known as the "Stepped-up Basis Loophole" as well as reducing the itemized deductions that the richest Americans can make to 28 %. [Emphasis is added]. Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only getting rid of the stepped-up basis, but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains  that is, profits from the sale of an asset that you owned for more than one year  for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan: long-term stated As President, Biden will make health care a right by getting rid of capital gains tax loopholes for the super wealthy. Today, the very wealthy pay a tax rate of just 20% on long-term capital gains... As President, Biden will roll back the Trump rate cut for the very wealthy and restore the 39.6% top rate he helped restore when he negotiated an end to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2012. Bidens capital gains reform will close the loopholes that allow the super wealthy to avoid taxes on capital gains altogether. Biden will assure those making over $1 million will pay the top rate on capital gains, doubling the capital gains tax rate on the super wealthy. The Facebook post shared widely in late 2020 and early 2021 accurately described Biden's stated intention to get rid of the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, a move that would indeed increase the tax burden on a notional individual who inherits a piece of property from their parents, before selling it on. The tax hit for wealthier taxpayers would be even greater than the Facebook post outlined, since Biden has also proposed increasing the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with an income above $1 million. The Facebook post did not mention that Biden had stipulated he would use the money raised from eliminating the stepped-up basis to help pay for his healthcare and education plans. We are issuing a rating of  Snopes contacted the White House to ask whether the Biden administration still intended to push for the elimination of the stepped-up basis, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.