Category: Fact Check

  • Fact Check: Is Nikki Haley right in how she measures China’s naval power?

    On the campaign trail, Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley has warned audiences about a growing military threat from China, arguing that its navy is catching up to the United States’.

    “China has built up their military at a scary pace,” Haley said in Derry, New Hampshire. China has “the largest naval fleet in the world. They had 370 ships. They’ll have 400 ships in two years. We won’t even have 350 ships in two decades.”

    Haley’s numbers, which were similar to ones she cited in the Nov. 8 Republican presidential primary debate in Miami, are about right. Naval ship counts have been a presidential campaign topic since 2012. But do they tell the whole story about naval dominance? Military experts caution that other factors, including ships’ capabilities and advanced technologies, are just as important, if not more so. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has called ship counts “a one-dimensional measure.” 

    Haley’s campaign did not respond to an inquiry for this article. The Pentagon’s 2023 China Military Power Report said China’s navy had about 370 warships. The fleet is expected to grow to 395 ships by 2025 and 435 ships by 2030.

    The current U.S. fleet is smaller, with more than 280 vessels. The secretary of the Navy expects to reach 300 in the early 2030s.

    China is surely gaining ground on the U.S., both in ship counts and overall tonnage — the combined weight of all ships, which helps quantify how many assets a navy has. When Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, compared the two countries’ ship tonnage a decade ago, the U.S. had a roughly 3-1 edge. Now, he said, it’s closer to a 2-1 margin.

    Although “tonnage is not a perfect metric,” O’Hanlon said, simply counting ships “is a terrible one.” 

    Lance Janda, a Cameron University military historian, said the Chinese navy includes many smaller ships and handles regional duties primarily. 

    “Ours is a true blue water navy capable of deploying anywhere in the world for an extended period, and we have many more aircraft carriers, far more naval aircraft, more advanced submarines and a larger Marine Corps.”

    John Pike, director of globalsecurity.org, a think tank, added that “most of the ‘warships’ in the count (for China) are corvettes of a couple of thousand tons,” referring to the smallest type of warship. “It’s a class of ship so small the U.S. Navy has never much used them, because they are too small for high-seas operations,” Pike said.

    Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank focused on national security, agreed that ship numbers “miss a lot.”

    “The U.S. Navy has global responsibilities, whereas (China’s navy focuses) exclusively on the region,” Cancian said.

    Our ruling

    Haley said China “had the largest naval fleet in the world. They had 370 ships. They’ll have 400 ships in two years. We won’t even have 350 ships in two decades.”

    Numerically, she’s on target with both countries’ ship counts. But experts say that simply counting ships omits context about a country’s true military capabilities. 

    Ship counts ignore overall ship size, specific warfighting capabilities, and overall geographic reach, all of which are metrics where the United States maintains an edge over China.

    We rate the statement Half True.



    Source

  • Fact Check: Hamas training in U.S. ‘hidden in plain sight’? No, Alabama compound is not Hamas-operated

    A viral video made a startling claim: The Palestinian militant group Hamas controls a plot of U.S. land and is using it as a training ground.

    “At first glance, it looks like an abandoned dump,” says a reporter in what appears to be a news story featured in a Nov. 12 TikTok video. “But this plot of land in Macon County, Alabama, is described in an FBI search warrant as a makeshift military style obstacle course belonging to a small group of terrorists led by Siraj Wahhaj, who owned the property.” 

    “Hamas is here and training hidden in plain sight,” read the text above the footage. We found examples of the claim elsewhere on TikTok and in a Nov. 13 Instagram post. 

    Screenshot from TikTok

    TikTok identified this video as part of its efforts to counter inauthentic, misleading or false content. (Read more about PolitiFact’s partnership with TikTok.)

    The claims misrepresent what happened at the compound, which is not linked to Hamas. 

    The footage is from a Sinclair Broadcast Group news report that we found published on May 10, 2019. The report did not mention Hamas. Instead, it was about a compound near Tuskegee, Alabama, that the FBI described, in a search warrant Sinclair obtained, as a “makeshift military style obstacle course” run by a group of suspected terrorists.

    The group was linked to a similar compound in New Mexico which was raided in August 2018. 

    Wahhaj, the man mentioned in the video, along with two of his sisters, his brother-in-law and a person named Jany Leveille, were arrested that same month on federal firearms and conspiracy charges. Leveille was charged with being an alien unlawfully possessing firearms and ammunition, while Wahhaj and the others were charged with aiding, abetting and conspiring with Leveille.

    The criminal complaint alleged that the five were planning to conduct deadly attacks on what they saw as “corrupt institutions,” such as educational, military, law enforcement and financial institutions.

    A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico told PolitiFact there is “no indication” that the group has ties to Hamas or any designated terrorist groups. It said the group adopted “unique beliefs and practices” under Leveille’s direction.

    A federal grand jury indicted the five in September 2018 on firearms and conspiracy charges. The indictment alleged that from December 2017 to August 2018, they established a training camp and firing range in Taos County, New Mexico, stored firearms and ammunition, and trained as part of their plan to prepare for violent attacks against institutions.

    Then, in March 2019, a federal grand jury in Albuquerque, New Mexico, returned a superseding indictment charging the five with offenses related to terrorism, kidnapping and firearms violations. This indictment alleged that the defendants conspired to provide material support and resources that were to be used to carry out violent attacks against federal law enforcement officers and members of the military. 

    It also charged four members of the group with kidnapping a child in Georgia and transporting the child to New Mexico, where the child died. 

    According to Snopes, news reports about the Alabama property emerged in the spring of 2019 because the warrant documents were unsealed in April 2019.

    On Oct. 20, 2023, a federal jury convicted Wahhaj and his brother-in-law of conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, providing material support to terrorists and conspiracy to murder an officer or employee of the United States. His sisters and brother-in-law were convicted of conspiracy to commit kidnapping resulting in death and kidnapping resulting in death.

    Leveille pleaded guilty to conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and possessing a firearm while unlawfully in the U.S.

    None of the law enforcement statements or indictments mentioned Hamas. 

    We rate the claim that a video of an Alabama compound showed Hamas “training hidden in plain sight” False.

    CORRECTION, Dec. 1, 2023: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated the charges against Siraj Wahhaj’s sisters. The sisters were convicted of conspiracy to commit kidnapping resulting in death and kidnapping resulting in death. The story has been corrected.



    Source

  • Fact Check: Hannity said he’d leave his beliefs out of the DeSantis-Newsom debate. His charts hinted otherwise.

    Welcoming viewers to the Fox News prime-time “Great Red versus Blue State Debate” between Govs. Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis, host Sean Hannity assured his personal politics would not be part of the program. 

    “It’s kind of widely known that I am a conservative,” Hannity said Nov. 30. “However, tonight I will be moderating this debate. I will not be part of the debate. Our questions tonight will be coming from well-sourced, fact-centered perspectives.”

    In the 90-minute matchup, Hannity showed at least 20 graphics, with most of them painting California, blue states and Democrats’ leadership in a negative light compared with Florida, red states and Republican leadership. He encouraged DeSantis, who is running for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, to push back against Newsom’s attacks. 

    Many visuals contained factual information from government sources, including the U.S Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data Hannity selected often put Newsom on the defensive.

    More than an hour into the debate, Hannity invoked his own beliefs about President Joe Biden’s fitness to hold the highest office. 

    “Joe Biden is (experiencing) what I believe to be significant cognitive decline,” he said. “And, in other words, it’s the toughest job in the world. Is Joe Biden experiencing this cognitive decline? Is it a danger to the country? Do you find when he speaks — what is your reaction to it?”

    Hannity did not mention that former President Donald Trump, Biden’s leading 2024 rival according to recent polls, has had his fitness questioned, too. (DeSantis’ campaign has a “Trump Accident Tracker” of Trump blunders.) 

    We reached out to Hannity and Fox News for comment but did not hear back.

    Graphics, statistics generally favored red states and Florida

    Hannity started by showing three charts. First, “Blue state net migration losses,” followed by, “Red state net migration gains,” and then, “California vs. Florida total net migration.” 

    “In 2021, 2022, California’s lost 750,000 residents to other states,” Hannity said. “Governor DeSantis, during that same two-year period, you gained 454,000 residents from other states. … How do you explain this phenomenon? What’s going on?” 

    (Screenshots from Fox News)

    In a tax-related question, Hannity showed one graphic of California’s income tax rates — 6% for households with a median income of $84,000 and 13% for people with incomes of more than $1.355 million — side by side with Florida’s nonexistent income tax. He showed another comparing each state’s average property tax rate, sales tax, gasoline tax and corporate income tax. In all but one category (average property tax rate), California’s tax rate was higher. 

    (Screenshots from Fox News.)

    The two states’ different tax systems make direct comparisons difficult, and the graphics didn’t capture who bears the brunt of the tax burden. A 2018 study, for example, shows that under Florida’s system, lower income households paid a higher percentage of their income in taxes compared with the wealthiest taxpayers. 

    Next came a graphic comparing the states’ unemployment rates: 2.8% in Florida and 4.8% in California. These rates are accurate, and since January 2019, California’s unemployment has been higher than the national average, while Florida’s has been lower.

    (Screenshots from Fox News.)

    On immigration, Hannity spotlighted encounters at the southern border with foreign nationals from six countries. 

    “While some migrants I know want to come to America for a better life for themselves and their families — find the American dream,” he said. “Others are abusing the asylum process and, in the process, in search of where they’re coming from we are now learning that many are coming from some of our top geopolitical foes.”

    He then showed a graphic that cited U.S. Customs and Border Protection data “leaked to Fox News.” That count showed that Border Patrol agents in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 had encountered thousands of foreign nationals from China, Russia, Afghanistan and Egypt and hundreds of foreign nationals from Iran and Syria at the southern border. An encounter does not necessarily equal an entry into the country, because immigration officials have the discretion to turn away people.

    Citizenship data for border encounters is not publicly published for most of the countries Hannity listed, with the exception of Russia and China. For those countries, Hannity’s figures were close to the published data for southern land border encounters between ports of entry during fiscal year 2022 and 2023: 12,587 Russian nationals and 26,019 Chinese nationals. 

    (Screenshot from Fox News)

    Hannity asked: “What are the odds that Biden’s open borders have allowed terrorists and terrorist cells unvetted into this country? Is that a clear and present danger to every American?” 

    DeSantis answered, “The odds are 100%. Of course our enemies are going to take advantage of this.”

    When Hannity asked Newsom if he saw the same dangers, Newsom responded that he supported border security and that the asylum system is broken.

    For a question about gun ownership laws, Hannity pulled rankings from Everytown for Gun Safety. On one online list in 2023, the gun control advocacy group ranked states by “gun law strength,” putting California at No. 1.

    The language in Hannity’s graphic said California ranked No. 1 for the “most restrictive” gun laws, while Florida ranked No. 19. It also said California had more mass shootings than Florida since 2019.

    Newsom didn’t address Hannity’s question about why California had more mass shootings. Newsom said when it comes to overall gun deaths, Florida “has a 66% higher gun death rate” than California, which isn’t far off.

    How Hannity talked to Newsom, DeSantis

    Twice in the first 15 minutes, Hannity said Newsom had not directly answered a question about why blue states have seen net migration losses while red states have seen net migration gains. Newsom hadn’t addressed the question head on, but it wasn’t the only time he or DeSantis avoided giving an answer. Hannity pressed Newsom to answer questions more often than he did for DeSantis.

    About 16 minutes into the debate, Hannity interrupted Newsom, who had mentioned the Biden administration, to ask, “Is Joe Biden paying you tonight? I thought this was state versus state.” 

    A little more than an hour into the program, Hannity prompted DeSantis to respond to Newsom’s claim about Florida’s “book-banning binge” under DeSantis.

    “First, governor, Yes or no: Are the book bans … is that a state issue or a local issue?” Hannity asked DeSantis, who replied: “It’s local.”

    When DeSantis tried to say more, Hannity cut him off, “OK, that’s all I want to know.” Hannity then asked Newsom about specific books conservatives have alleged are inappropriate for schools.

    (Screenshot from Fox News)

    After showing a graphic of education statistics, Hannity asked: “Gov. Newsom, what is your explanation? You spend more money, and they have better results in Florida. Why?”

    On abortion, Hannity introduced a question by saying Newsom had been “unwilling to answer” questions about whether he supports any restrictions on abortion access. 

    Hannity did not bluntly ask DeSantis whether he would support or sign a national six-week abortion ban as president (something Newsom questioned DeSantis about). 

    Hannity more gently asked DeSantis about Florida’s abortion ban: “You had a 15-week rule in (Florida), you reduced it to six. My question is this: What was your thinking behind it? Was it for religious reasons? Was it for scientific reasons? What was the reason for you, from going from 15 weeks to six weeks?”



    Source

  • Fact Check: The facts on George Santos’ House expulsion: What happens next?

    The U.S. House of Representatives expelled Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., just a year into his first term. Expulsion required a two-thirds majority, which was reached when 73% of those present and voting supported Santos’ heave-ho. 

    In a highly polarized era, the Dec. 1 expulsion was bipartisan (105 Republicans and 206 Democrats voted to oust him) and represented a significant rebuke to Santos’ pattern of fabulism about his life experiences. 

    Santos continues to face criminal counts of wire fraud, unlawful monetary transactions, false statements, records falsification, identity theft and conspiracy.

    After the expulsion vote, Santos told reporters, “To hell with this place.”

    Santos had survived two previous expulsion efforts, as enough lawmakers accepted his argument that expelling him before a trial would short-circuit due process. But the third, successful effort followed the Nov. 16 release of a highly critical investigative report by the House Ethics Committee. 

    Before Santos, only five House members had ever been expelled, most recently in 2002, when Rep. James Traficant, a renegade Democrat from Ohio, was convicted of 10 corruption-related charges. The only other House member expelled since the Civil War era was Rep. Ozzie Myers, D-Pa., who was convicted of bribery in 1980. The others were expelled in 1861 after being deemed disloyal to the U.S. early in the Civil War.

    Under New York state law, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul has 10 days from the date of the vacancy to call for a special election for voters in the district; then the election must follow within 70 to 80 days, the New York State Board of Elections said. Until the election, a taxpayer-funded staff will run Santos’ former office.

    How did Santos get to this point?

    Earlier this year, we covered the extraordinary breadth of Santos’ questionable claims about his personal background, from educational and work achievements to his family history to whether he had been a drag queen in Brazil. We found that he rarely acknowledged fabrications or falsehoods; he mostly reiterated them or ignored any questions about their veracity.

    The committee’s report recapped a litany of Santos’ apparent fabrications, adding its voice to people who have said his stories were false. The 64-page document used a variation on the word “lie” nine times, and a variation on the word “false” more than 30 times.

    “Rep. Santos’ congressional campaigns were built around his backstory as a successful man of means: a grandson of Holocaust survivors and graduate from Baruch College with a Master’s in Business Administration from New York University, who went on to work at CitiGroup and Goldman Sachs, owned multiple properties, and was the beneficiary of a family trust worth millions of dollars left by his mother, who passed years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a result of long-term health effects related to being at one of the towers.

    “No part of that backstory has been found to be true.”

    What’s next for Santos?

    Federal prosecutors have charged Santos with wire fraud, making materially false statements to the Federal Election Commission, falsifying records submitted to obstruct the Federal Elections Commission, aggravated identity theft, access device fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and making materially false statements. 

    Santos allegedly led multiple additional fraudulent criminal schemes, including stealing family members’ identities and using political contributors’ credit card information to fraudulently inflate his campaign coffers, prosecutors said.

    Santos’ defense attorney, Joseph Murray, declined to comment to PolitiFact.

    In 1973, Vice President Spiro Agnew agreed to resign as vice president and entered a no contest plea to federal tax evasion that allowed him to escape a prison sentence. But Santos resisted such a tactic, and some lawyers said Santos’ expulsion could cost him crucial legal leverage.

    “The question really is, does he lose his bargaining chip in dealing with the government?” said Stan Twardy, a former U.S. Attorney in Connecticut, told PolitiFact. “There is no definitive answer.”

    Purely by the numbers, “most federal criminal cases result in a conviction, and from the outside looking in, the government’s evidence appears to be more than sufficient to convict him,” said Ankush Khardori, a former federal prosecutor who specialized in financial fraud and white-collar crime.

    Khardori told PolitiFact that the charges against Santos are so numerous and varied that he doubted his resignation would have mattered much for prosecutors. 

    “Unless Santos decides to plead out, it will still fall to a jury to decide his fate based on the facts and the law,” Khardori said. “The House’s political judgment about his suitability to sit in Congress should not factor into their decision. “

    Steve Friedland, a law professor at Elon University, agreed with Khardori. Although the Ethics Committee echoed several of the indictment’s charges, Congress does not have to follow the same “beyond a reasonable doubt” standards the jury will have to follow.

    Will Santos get a federal pension?

    Santos will lose his $174,000 congressional salary and is not eligible for a pension. A member of Congress can receive a pension only after serving for five years. Previous service as a federal employee can count toward that five-year vesting period, though that doesn’t appear to be an issue for Santos.

    RELATED: A guide to George Santos’ dubious statements about drag, Brazil, his 9/11 connection and more

    RELATED: George Santos said he “never claimed to be Jewish.” That’s Pants on Fire!



    Source

  • Fact Check: Earrings that promote weight loss? That’s fashionably false

    What’s the secret to quick and easy weight loss, as some social media users claim? Just wear earrings.

    A video, shared Nov. 29 on Facebook, showed clips of women wearing “lymphatic earrings” and dramatic before-and-after footage of the weight loss purportedly caused by the jewelry.

    The post’s caption reads, “I have been wearing Lymphatic Earrings for 4 weeks and this turned my tummy back into its normal state! Absolutely recommended!” It then provides a link where people can learn more and buy the product.

    The post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    (Screengrab from Facebook)

    Many products online promise fast ways to lose weight. But there’s no evidence that jewelry promotes weight loss.

    The website linked in the Facebook post says the lymphatic earrings use “magnetherapy” to promote better circulation in the body’s lymphatic system and unclog swollen lymph nodes. It also says the earrings stimulate acupressure points to help detox the body.

    The lymphatic system consists of organs, vessels and tissues that help keep a healthy balance of fluids throughout the body and protect against infection. The Cleveland Clinic says swollen lymph nodes could signal common infections, such as strep throat, or direr conditions, such as cancer.

    Health experts have debunked the efficacy of products that similarly claim to target the body’s lymphatic system to aid weight loss, including magnetic lymph bracelets and acupuncture “slimming” earrings.

    Other fact-checkers have agreed. Lead Stories reported that there was no evidence magnetic jewelry helps people achieve significant weight loss. Experts told Agence France-Presse that scientific research does not support that acupuncture alone aids weight loss; a healthy diet and exercise are still necessary to achieve significant results.

    The Federal Trade Commission warns consumers to avoid products that make misleading promises about weight loss.

    “Any promise of miraculous weight loss is simply untrue,” the commission’s website says. “There’s no magic way to lose weight without a sensible diet and regular exercise.”

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says people who lose weight gradually and steadily, about 1 to 2 pounds per week, are likelier to keep the weight off than people who lose weight quickly.

    To keep the body’s lymphatic system healthy, the Cleveland Clinic advises people to avoid exposure to toxic chemicals, drink plenty of water, exercise regularly and eat a healthy diet.

    We rate the claim that magnetic lymphatic earrings aid weight loss Pants on Fire!



    Source

  • Fact Check: Can a stranger steal contact info from iPhone? No, that’s not how Apple’s NameDrop works.

    Can a stranger covertly get your child’s personal data by placing an iPhone near your kid’s phone?

    Apple’s new NameDrop iPhone feature allows users to quickly share contact information with their phones. But social media warnings — many from U.S. law enforcement agencies — are stoking privacy fears among parents.

    “Stay alert,” one Nov. 30 Instagram post warned. “The new iPhone update automatically enables ‘NameDrop.’ If anyone places their iPhone near your iPhone or child’s iPhone, it will automatically receive their contact information including a photo, phone number, email, address, and more.”

    The post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    We found multiple social media posts making similar claims. They may be echoing recent social media warnings from U.S. police departments, as well as news reports about those warnings.

    (Facebook screenshots)

    A Connecticut police department issued a “tech alert” in a Nov. 26 Facebook post.

    “With this feature enabled, anyone can place their phone next to yours (or your child’s phone) and automatically receive their contact information to include their picture, phone number, email address and more, with a tap of your unlocked screen,” the post said.

    Law enforcement agencies in Oklahoma, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Virginia, Florida and more states have issued similar warnings. One police department in Pennsylvania had such a warning, but has since deleted it.

    Many of the posts overstate the risks from the NameDrop feature and do not accurately reflect how it works, experts said.

    This Apple video explains how the NameDrop feature works. (Apple via YouTube)

    What is NameDrop and how does it work?

    NameDrop was introduced this summer with Apple’s iOS17 update. In a June 5 press release, Apple said “a user can hold their iPhone near another to share their contact information with only their intended recipients. Users can also choose the specific contact details they want to share — and, importantly, what information they don’t want to share.”

    NameDrop is part of Apple’s existing AirDrop feature, which lets users send photos, videos and more to nearby Apple devices.

    The NameDrop technology also works with Apple Watch models that use watchOS 10.1.

    Getting someone’s contact information isn’t as simple as putting two phones near each other, though. A user must take actions to share their contact information and their phone must be unlocked.

    “It was wrongly reported that iPhones would send the information automatically. Physical interaction with the device — pressing an approve button — is required,” said Johannes Ullrich, dean of research for SANS Technology Institute, an accredited college established by the SANS Institute, a company that specializes in information security and cybersecurity.

    Apple’s iPhone user guide explains how NameDrop works:

    • To share contact information between two phones, hold the display of your iPhone a few centimeters from the top of the other iphone. Both phones will vibrate and glow when a connection is made.

    • Keep holding the phones there until NameDrop appears on both screens.

    • Each user can then choose what contact information to share and receive the other person’s, or to receive only the other person’s.

    • To cancel, simply move the phones apart or lock your iPhone before the NameDrop transfer completes.

    The option to share or receive also goes away if you swipe the screen up, according to a demonstration shared on YouTube by ZolloTech, a technology review website.

    “This process necessitates a deliberate and noticeable action, as the phones glow when data is being shared, making it highly improbable for the transfer to occur from a distance of more than a few centimeters,” said Rob Lee, the chief curriculum director and faculty lead at SANS Institute.

    Lee said if a phone is left open and unlocked and out of reach, it is vulnerable to typical data exposure risks, including contact sharing.

    “However, this type of data transfer cannot be executed by merely passing by,” Lee said.

    People with concerns about NameDrop, which is enabled by default in iOS17, can simply turn it off in their iPhone settings. In your iPhone’s settings, go to General, then select “Airdrop,” then turn off the “Bringing Devices Together” option.

    Parents and guardians of children who have phones with this capability should go over the feature with their children so that they understand how to use it. 

    Our ruling

    An Instagram post warned that your child’s contact information could be given to a stranger if their iPhones come too close together, thanks to Apple’s new NameDrop feature. 

    But that is not how the technology works, experts said. To share contact information using NameDrop, two users must place and hold their unlocked phones together, then each person would choose whether to send or receive contact information, or both. They can also choose which information to share, such as an email or a phone number. It’s not something that happens automatically.

    We rate this claim False.



    Source

  • FactChecking DeSantis-Newsom Debate

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and California Gov. Gavin Newsom — who head two of the largest states in the country — squared off in a debate on Nov. 30 on Fox News. The governors spun, mangled and exaggerated some of the facts on issues including COVID-19, migration, abortion, book bans and gasoline prices.

    The debate, which was moderated by Sean Hannity, was billed as “The Great Red State vs. Blue State Debate.” But it wasn’t a preview of the 2024 presidential election. DeSantis is currently trailing former President Donald Trump in the polls for the Republican presidential nomination, while Newsom has ruled out challenging President Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination.

    Florida’s COVID-19 Restrictions

    In a lively exchange on COVID-19 mitigation measures in Florida, Newsom accused DeSantis of initially supporting restrictions “until he decided to fall prey to the fringe of his party.” During that exchange, DeSantis claimed that Newsom was wrong about DeSantis closing beaches and imposing quarantines — but in both instances the California governor was right.

    Newsom: You closed down your beaches, your bars, your restaurants.

    DeSantis: False.

    Newsom: It’s a fact.

    DeSantis: The beaches were not closed.

    Newsom: You had quarantines.

    DeSantis: False.

    Newsom: You had quarantines. You had checkpoints all over the state of Florida. By the way, I didn’t say that. Donald Trump laid you out on this. Dead to rights. You did that. You followed science, you followed [Dr. Anthony] Fauci.

    DeSantis: That’s not true.

    It’s true that DeSantis resisted closing beaches and issuing stay-at-home orders, but he did both in orders that were crafted in a limited way. He also directed the Florida Department of Transportation, or FDOT, to set up checkpoints in an attempt to enforce an order requiring travelers entering Florida from the New York state area to isolate for 14 days. 

    Here’s a brief timeline of events that shows how DeSantis issued a series of increasingly restrictive executive orders to slow the spread of COVID-19.  

    The Florida governor issued executive order 20-68 on March 17, 2020, directing public beaches to restrict “gatherings to no more than 10 persons” and urging beachgoers to “support beach closures at the discretion of local authorities.”

    On March 30, 2020, DeSantis signed an executive order (20-89) directing four counties in South Florida to restrict public access to “non-essential” businesses. Over the following two days, he issued two executive orders: The first (20-90) ordered beaches to be closed in Broward and Palm Beach counties, and the second (20-91) ordered senior citizens and those with a “significant underlying medical condition” statewide to stay at home. The Tampa Bay Times said that DeSantis had – up until that point — resisted issuing a statewide stay-at-home order.

    The April 1, 2020, order, the Tampa Bay Times wrote, “does not mandate any business shut down,” but “it severely restricts the movement of employees and customers and many non-essential stores and offices will likely chose to temporarily close. Businesses are encouraged to telework and restaurants to provide food via drive-thru, take out or delivery.”

    As for checkpoints, DeSantis issued an executive order (20-82) on March 24, 2020, ordering people entering Florida from Connecticut, New Jersey and New York “to isolate or quarantine for a period of 14 days.” He followed that up three days later with another executive order (20-86) directing FDOT to set up “appropriate checkpoints, including at welcome centers and rest stops,” and requiring travelers from those states and others areas “with substantial community spread” to fill out forms at the checkpoints disclosing “the address of their location of isolation or quarantine for a period of 14 days.”

    Californians Moving to Florida

    Both governors sought to portray their states as a more desirable place to live. DeSantis emphasized Florida’s relative low overall crime rate and taxes, while Newsom countered by touting the state’s low murder rate and a progressive tax system that benefits low- and moderate-income taxpayers.

    Asked by Hannity to explain why California residents are moving to Florida, Newsom said: “You mean the last two years, more Floridians going to California than Californians going to Florida?” Newsom added, “That’s going to be fun to fact-check.”

    The facts, however, show that Newsom is wrong to suggest that California has seen a two-year net increase in migration of residents moving between the two states.

    According to Census Bureau migration data for 2022, 50,701 Florida residents had been living in California the year prior, and 28,557 Californians had been living in Florida – a net gain for Florida and a net loss for California of 22,144 residents.

    In 2021, 37,464 Florida residents had been living in California the year prior, and 24,692 California residents had been living in Florida – a net gain for Florida and a net loss for California of 12,772, Census data show.

    That’s a two-year net gain for Florida of 34,916 new residents.

    California Gasoline Prices

    For a variety of reasons, including higher state taxes and clean fuel mandates, California typically has among the highest gasoline prices in the United States. But DeSantis left the misleading impression that the state’s gasoline prices are currently $7 per gallon.

    The issue of gasoline prices came up when Newsom was making a point about California’s progressive tax rate. DeSantis interjected, “How does paying $7 a gallon gas help working people?”

    Gasoline prices fluctuate, and prices have reportedly topped $7 a gallon at some individual stations in the state, from time to time. But currently, the statewide average for regular gasoline in California is less than $5.

    As of Dec. 1, a gallon of regular gasoline cost $4.83 in California, which is the highest in the country, according to AAA. The least expensive gasoline is in Texas, where the average is $2.75 a gallon. In addition to Texas, 27 other states have lower gasoline prices than Florida ($3.16 a gallon).

    Book Bans in Florida

    As governor, DeSantis signed laws that, according to PEN America, “bar instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through third grade (HB 1557), prohibit educators from discussing advantages or disadvantages based on race (HB 7), and mandate that schools must catalog every book on their shelves, including those found in classroom libraries (HB 1467). Due to the lack of clear guidance, these three laws have each led teachers, media specialists, and school administrators to proactively remove books from shelves, in the absence of any specific challenges.” 

    During the debate, Newsom said “1,406 books have been banned just last year under Ron DeSantis’ leadership” – which is not quite right. PEN America reported that during the 2022–23 school year, there were 1,406 “instances of books banned” in Florida schools. Some of the books on the list are duplicates, such as Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison’s first book, “Bluest Eye,” which is listed as being banned in 12 Florida schools or school districts.

    Newsom also asked, “What’s wrong with Amanda Gorman’s [poem]?” – referring to “The Hill We Climb,” which Gorman read at Joe Biden’s inauguration. Newsom suggested that her poem was banned, and it is true that it is on PEN America’s list of banned books.

    But, as we wrote, Gorman’s poem was not banned. In one K-8 school in Miami-Dade County, the book was moved to a shelf for upper-grade students. The school said, “The book is available in the media center as part of the middle grades collection,” meaning sixth through eighth grades.

    Florida’s Abortion Ban

    In April, DeSantis signed legislation, known as the Heartbeat Protection Act, that banned abortion in Florida after six weeks of gestation. A year earlier, DeSantis signed a bill that banned most abortions after 15 weeks.

    During a discussion on abortion, Hannity asked DeSantis about his reason for signing legislation instituting a six-week ban after he had already signed similar legislation prohibiting abortion after 15 weeks. In his response, DeSantis said of the six-week ban: “That bill attaches when there is a detectable heartbeat for the child.”

    That is inaccurate for a couple of reasons. For the first 10 weeks, the correct medical term is “embryo,” not fetus or, as DeSantis said, “child.” Also, as we have written before, a heartbeat isn’t audible at six weeks.

    “What is interpreted as a heartbeat in these bills is actually electrically-induced flickering of a portion of the fetal tissue that will become the heart as the embryo develops,” the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said in a statement to us in 2019. “Thus, ACOG does not use the term ‘heartbeat’ to describe these legislative bans on abortion because it is misleading language, out of step with the anatomical and clinical realities of that stage of pregnancy.”

    For more, read our Ask SciCheck “When Are Heartbeats Audible During Pregnancy?”

    Abortion Ban, Again

    Newsom repeatedly claimed that the six-week abortion ban signed by DeSantis in Florida “criminalizes women” who seek abortions. Although he did not respond to that point in the debate, DeSantis has made repeated public statements that that is not the meaning or intent of the law he signed in April.

    Newsom and other Democrats have seized on the language of the new law, which would make it a felony for “[a]ny person who willfully performs, or actively participates in, a termination of pregnancy” after six weeks of gestation. They say the inclusion of anyone who “actively participates” might subject women getting an abortion to criminal charges.

    As we wrote last month when this issue was raised in an ad from a political action committee tied to Newsom, DeSantis has repeatedly said he does not support penalties against women who get abortions. In an interview with Norah O’Donnell on “CBS Evening News” on Sept. 13, DeSantis said the law he signed — which includes an exception for mothers whose lives are at risk, and delays the abortion ban to 15 weeks for pregnancy caused by rape, incest or human trafficking — only includes criminal penalties for medical providers who perform abortions beyond the deadlines in the law, not the women who get abortions. “We’ve litigated this,” DeSantis said.

    In the case of Florida v. Ashley, an unwed Florida teenager was prosecuted for manslaughter and third-degree murder after she shot herself in the abdomen while in the third trimester of pregnancy. She survived, but the fetus did not. The state Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that she could not be criminally prosecuted.

    The court noted that the penalty section of a 1993 Florida law limiting abortions in the third trimester stated, “Any person who willfully performs, or participates in, a termination of a pregnancy in violation of the requirements of this section is guilty of a felony of the third degree․” In its opinion, the state Supreme Court noted that “in order to overturn a long standing common law principle,” the state Legislature would have had to enact a statute that explicitly criminalized women who got an abortion in violation of the state statute. “Florida has not done so,” the court wrote.

    So, since 1997, Florida has had similar language in its abortion laws, and no women getting abortions in violation of those state laws have been criminally prosecuted.

    Nonetheless, on Sept. 15, Florida Senate Democratic Leader Lauren Book filed a bill citing ambiguity in the wording of the new law and proposing changes to it to make clear that women getting an abortion cannot be criminally charged. The DeSantis campaign did not respond when we asked if the governor would support Book’s bill.


    Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, 202 S. 36th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104. 



    Source

  • Fact Check: Germany does not require vaccination before assisted suicide

    EDITOR’S NOTE: If you or someone you know may be considering suicide, contact the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255 (En Español: 1-888-628-9454; Deaf and Hard of Hearing: 1-800-799-4889) or the Crisis Text Line by texting HOME to 741741.

    Does Germany require its citizens to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 when seeking assisted suicide? That’s what one Instagram post claimed, sharing what looked like a news story headline.

    “In Germany, you must be fully vaxxed before your death by assisted suicide,” the Nov. 28 Instagram post’s headline said.

    Screenshot from Instagram

    This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    That’s misleading. There is no governmental policy requiring people who seek self-determined assisted suicide, to be vaccinated.

    In 2020, Germany’s top court found unconstitutional a 5-year-old law that made “commercial promotion of assisted suicide” a criminal offense. That meant that businesses that helped people seeking to end their lives with professional assistance could resume offering their services. Since then, legislators have struggled to agree on how to regulate this manner of assisted suicide.

    The post linked to a November 2021 article by the National Review, a conservative outlet, as its source; that article cited an article by The Spectator, which also leans conservative. Both articles highlighted a statement by the organization Verein Sterbehilfe, which translates to “Euthanasia Association” in English. 

    According to its website, Verein Sterbehilfe started in 2009 and provides “safe, humane suicide assistance at the end of life,” according to a Google translation.

    Verein Sterbehlife said in November 2021 that because euthanasia and the preparatory examination require “human closeness” that would be a “breeding ground for coronavirus transmission,” it was adopting what was then known as the “2G rule.” That was a reference to pandemic-era restrictions Germany adopted that same month. 

    Germany’s “2G restrictions” allowed vaccinated or COVID-19-recovered people to move freely, but restricted the unvaccinated from most public activities. Germany eased its COVID-19 restrictions on March 20, 2022, ending the 2G rule in nonessential shops or businesses excluding supermarkets, pharmacies and drugstores.

    Verein Sterbehilfe’s website no longer mentions that vaccination rule. By March 2022, the statement had been struck, archived versions of its website show. Verein Sterbehlife did not answer our email asking about the policy’s status.

    None of this is proof that Germany requires people seeking assisted suicide be vaccinated. We rate that claim False.



    Source

  • Fact Check: No, Iceland hasn’t banned COVID-19 vaccines

    Social media users are sharing a headline that claims Iceland has outlawed COVID-19 vaccines after a rise in “sudden deaths.” But these claims are unfounded.

    A Nov. 26 Instagram post showed an X post that said, “Alert: Iceland bans Covid shots amid soaring sudden deaths.” The X post, shared the same day, linked to an article with a headline that made the same claim.

    The Instagram post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    (Screengrab from Instagram)

    The article linked in the social media posts cited organizers of an anti-COVID-19-vaccine conference, who said the Nordic island nation had banned the vaccines.

    However, Iceland’s national health authority denied this claim.

    “Iceland has not banned COVID-19 vaccines, and there are no soaring sudden deaths either,” Guðrún Aspelund, chief epidemiologist at the Icelandic Directorate of Health, told USA Today and Reuters. (PolitiFact reached out to Iceland’s health agency but did not hear back before publication.)

    For fall and winter 2023, Aspelund said the COVID-19 vaccine is recommended for people older than 60, people older than 5 with underlying conditions and health care workers.

    There were no announcements of a COVID-19 vaccine ban on the Directorate of Health’s website. We also found no credible news reports about such a ban or a rise in deaths in Iceland caused by the COVID-19 vaccine.

    In 2021, Iceland, along with other Scandinavian countries, suspended the use of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine for young adults, following reports of blood clots in some people who had received that vaccine.

    Other COVID-19 vaccines are still available in Iceland. In May, the Directorate of Health said the two COVID-19 vaccines currently used in the country are Pfizer-BioNTech’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax.

    About 80% of the roughly 372,000 people living in Iceland have received the primary course, or first two doses, of the COVID-19 vaccine as of Oct. 5, according to the European Union’s COVID-19 vaccine tracker.

    We rate the claim that Iceland has banned the COVID-19 vaccine “amid soaring sudden deaths” False.



    Source

  • Fact Check: Black Friday a bust under Biden? No, video of lone shopper is from London in 2017

    The days of Black Friday shoppers trampling each other at retail stores to find discounts may be over in this era of online shopping.

    But one social media post misrepresents footage of a nearly empty store on Black Friday as an example of President Joe Biden’s effect on the economy.

    A Nov. 25 Instagram video sharing a TikTok shows a worker — with a camera crew nearby — sliding open a store’s doors to find only one person waiting. Text above the footage says, “Swarm of Black Friday shoppers ready to spend their money in Biden’s thriving economy.” 

    The post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    The video doesn’t reflect the state of the U.S. economy under Biden’s leadership. It was filmed six years ago in England.

    (Instagram screenshot)

    Using a reverse-image search, we traced the footage to a Nov. 24, 2017, report from BBC reporter Frankie McCamley. McCamley was at Currys PC World — now known simply as Currys — on London’s Oxford Street at 7 a.m. to catch the Black Friday crowd. Her video, which she shared in 2017 on X, formerly Twitter, and Instagram shows a lone shopper casually entering the store. She identified him in a second X post as Marcel, who she said came to pick up a pre-ordered laptop.

    McCamley’s video also appeared on BBC’s website and in other news reports.

    The way Americans shop for the holidays has changed in recent years, with more people choosing to go online for shopping deals. Still, U.S. shoppers set a record over this year’s five-day holiday weekend from Thanksgiving Day through Cyber Monday, according to the National Retail Federation, the world’s largest retail trade association.

    The federation said 200.4 million consumers shopped — either in person or online — over the holiday weekend, breaking last year’s record of 196.7 million. That’s 18 million more shoppers than the federation had predicted.

    On Black Friday only, 76.2 million Americans shopped in stores — 3.3 million more than last year — and 90.6 million shopped online.

    We rate the claim that this video shows Black Friday shoppers “in Biden’s thriving economy” False.



    Source