Author

admin

Browsing

One body has been recovered and six people are missing, according to Italian authorities, after a luxury yacht sank off the coast of Sicily.

A tornado hit the vessel around 5 a.m. Monday, according to a spokesperson for Italy’s Coast Guard. The yacht was anchored about a half a mile from the port of Porticello on the Mediterranean island.

Fifteen people have been rescued from the scene and one child was airlifted to the children’s hospital in Palermo. The captain is among the survivors, according to the Coast Guard spokesperson for Italy’s Coast Guard.

The Italian fire brigade said its divers had reached the yacht’s hull 49 meters (160 feet) below sea level, according to a press statement. The brigade also dispatched helicopters to bolster the search operation.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will travel to Ukraine, officials said Monday, weeks after he made his first trip to Moscow since Russia launched its full-scale invasion.

His forthcoming visit to Ukraine – also his first since the start of the war – comes at a crucial moment, as Kyiv’s troops push further into Russian territory in a shock military offensive that stunned even Kyiv’s closest allies.

Modi has repeatedly called for a ceasefire in Ukraine, without condemning Russia’s aerial campaign or denouncing the ground invasion. India has also abstained from all resolutions on Ukraine at the United Nations.

India remains heavily reliant on the Kremlin for its military equipment and has ramped up purchases of discounted Russian crude oil, giving Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nation a major financial lifeline as it faces isolation from the West.

Modi visited Putin in July, a sign that the two nations remain close. Images and video showed the two leaders hugging, chatting over tea, riding in an electric vehicle and watching a horse show.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned the meeting that coincided with a brazen assault on several Ukrainian cities and a deadly strike on a children’s hospital.

The Ukrainian leader described the meeting as a “huge disappointment and a devastating blow to peace efforts to see the leader of the world’s largest democracy hug the world’s most bloody criminal in Moscow on such a day.”

Modi did not address the strikes directly during his trip, but did say solutions to conflict are unlikely to come through war, but rather peace and dialogue. The remarks appeared to be his most critical comments to date against Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“Whether it’s conflict, war or terror, any person who believes in humanity is troubled when there are deaths, especially when innocent children die,” Modi said while seated alongside the Russian president.

“As a friend, I have always said that peace is necessary for the prosperity of future generations, but I also know that on the battlefield, solutions aren’t easy to come by between guns, bombs and bullets. We have to adopt a path to peace through dialogue,” he added.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

A witty pun about a sailing trip has been crowned the funniest joke told at this year’s Edinburgh Festival Fringe.

Thousands of performers flock to Scotland’s capital each year to entertain and delight crowds at the Fringe.

British entertainment channel U&Dave, owned by British broadcaster UKTV, has handed out the “Funniest Joke of the Fringe Award” for the last 15 years, according to a UKTV news release on Monday.

Despite vast competition, comedian Mark Simmons won with his gag: “I was going to sail around the globe in the world’s smallest ship but I bottled it.”

A panel that included leading UK comedy critics and comedians attended hundreds of shows across the festival and submitted their 10 top gags.

A shortlist of jokes that were anonymized was then presented to 2,000 members of the British public to vote on the one that evoked the most laughter.

“I’m really chuffed to win U&Dave’s Funniest Joke of the Fringe,” Simmons said in the release. “I needed some good news as I was just fired from my job marking exam papers, can’t understand it, I always gave 110%.”

Simmons became a comedian after his friend convinced him to do an open-mic night, and he began performing solo at the Edinburgh Fringe in 2014, according to the release.

This is the first time he has won the top joke prize, with his humorous one-liner being taken from his PHB’s Free Fringe show at Liquid Room Annexe.

The runner-up was this joke by comedian Alec Snook: “I’ve been taking salsa lessons for months, but I just don’t feel like I’m progressing. It’s just one step forward… two steps back.”

Hosted in Scotland’s capital annually, the Fringe is the world’s largest arts festival.

Gags that made the top 10:

1. “I was going to sail around the globe in the world’s smallest ship but I bottled it.” Mark Simmons

2. “I’ve been taking salsa lessons for months, but I just don’t feel like I’m progressing. It’s just one step forward… two steps back.” Alec Snook

3. “Ate horse at a restaurant once – wasn’t great. Starter was all right but the mane was dreadful.” Alex Kitson

4. “I sailed through my driving test. That’s why I failed it.” Arthur Smith

5. “I love the Olympics. My friend and I invented a new type of relay baton: well, he came up with the idea, I ran with it.” Mark Simmons

6. “My dad used to say to me ‘Pints, gallons, liters’ – which, I think, speaks volumes.” Olaf Falafel

7. “British etiquette is confusing. Why is it highbrow to look at boobs in an art gallery but lowbrow when I get them out in Spoons?” Chelsea Birkby

8. “I wanted to know which came first the chicken or the egg so I bought a chicken and then I bought an egg and I think I’ve cracked it.” Masai Graham

9. “My partner told me that she’d never seen the film Gaslight. I told her that she definitely had.” Zoë Coombs Marr

10. “The conspiracy theory about the moon being made of cheese was started by the hallouminati.” Olaf Falafel

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Nicaragua has revoked the registration of 1,500 non-profit organizations, the latest in a years-long crackdown in the small Central American nation.

The organizations, which include hundreds of religious groups, are accused of failing to report their financial statements for a period of between one and 35 years, according to a notice published Monday in the government gazette, La Gaceta.

Some associations effectively shuttered by the announcement were sports oriented, hosting basketball, tennis and soccer teams. There were groups for health, womens’ rights, LGBTQ rights, legal associations and veterans’ clubs. Over 400 of the groups were religiously-tied organizations, most of them Christian.

Earlier this month, Nicaragua canceled the legal status of the Diocese of Matagalpa’s Caritas for alleged bureaucratic reasons, according to Vatican News. The diocese is headed by Bishop Rolando Alvarez, a vocal critic of the government who lives in exile after being convicted of charges including conspiracy and treason.

Civil liberties in Nicaragua have shrunk dramatically under the longtime leadership of authoritarian President Daniel Ortega, who claimed a fifth term in 2021.

Widespread anti-regime protests in 2018 were also met with brutal force, with Nicaraguan security forces killing hundreds of people, injuring thousands and arbitrarily detaining many, according to Human Rights Watch. Tens of thousands of Nicaraguans have fled the country.

In June, the United Nations expressed “grave concern” over the human rights situation in Nicaragua. At least 35 people have been arrested since March as part of a “crackdown on civic space,” said Nada al-Nashif, the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Sham Abu Tabaq, age 5, has a piercing stare. Behind her dark eyes are memories she has hardly begun to process.

She has experienced war. She has been forced from her home. And she was in her father’s arms when he was fatally shot, and saw both him and her older sister left for dead in the street.

And then, there’s this: Sanaa doesn’t just blame the Israeli military for killing her husband and daughter and shooting her in the leg – though certainly she does blame the Israeli military.

An Israeli soldier may also have saved her life.

That should not be extraordinary. All militaries are obligated under international law to help injured civilians. But in the war in Gaza, stories like Sanaa’s are exceedingly rare.

“He had mercy towards us,” she said of the soldier. But he and his comrades, she said, “also took from me the most precious thing I had.”

Sanaa and her husband Akram – a schoolteacher – lived with their daughters Sham and Yasmeen in Beit Lahia, in the northernmost end of Gaza.

She worked at a foundation that provides support for orphans. Like many women in Gaza, she dressed conservatively and often covered her face, which is marked by deep burn scars from a childhood accident.

In the days after Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel, and Israel’s ensuing military campaign, the family were forced from their home – fleeing Israel’s unprecedented bombardment of the Gaza Strip. When a brief ceasefire was announced in late November as part of a hostage release deal, they saw an opportunity to return.

“We were so happy we weren’t even able to sleep,” Sanaa recalled. “A truce was happening, and we were going to go home.”

They departed the United Nations-run health clinic where they had been living, in the Jabalya refugee camp, and began the roughly three-mile journey on foot. They were almost home, she said, when shots rang out.

“It was like there was a sniper and he was shooting at us. We didn’t see him,” she said. “Suddenly we were all injured.”

‘They finished him off’

Seven-year-old Yasmeen’s condition was the most serious. She was shot in the back and shoulder. Akram was struck in the stomach, and Sanaa in the leg. Only Sham was left unscathed by the hail of bullets.

“My husband was telling me, ‘Let’s crawl and maybe we can find an ambulance to take us, or somebody might see us and help us.’ But I couldn’t crawl. And Yasmeen was in a very terrible condition – two bullets, and she was all covered in blood. So, I told him, ‘We can’t.’ He said, “I’ll try to crawl.’ So he crawled a little bit. They finished him off! He remained in his place. He was killed,” Sanaa said.

For several hours they lay there in the middle of the street – too injured and fearful to move. Sanaa held Yasmeen, promising her daughter that an ambulance was on the way and that they would survive. But no help was on the way. False hope was all Sanaa could offer her daughter in that moment.

Life drained out of Yasmeen, and she succumbed to her wounds.

“I laid my daughter Yasmeen on the ground, may God bless her soul. And I covered her with a blouse. And I told Sham, ‘Come on darling, let’s crawl.’”

Crawling along the ground, speaking in whispers, they left behind the bodies of their family and made it inside a partially bombed two-story house. They huddled in a bathroom as night fell.

“In the morning, around 7:30, we heard the sounds of the Israelis and of the tanks,” Sanaa said. “I told her, ‘Sham my darling, the Israelis have come. They are going to shoot us. But don’t be afraid. It’s over. And we are going to die.’ She said, ‘Okay mom, but hide me. I don’t want to see them when they come and shoot me.’”

As Sanaa cradled her daughter, an explosion shook the house, blowing in the door of the bathroom where they were huddled and shattering the window above them, sending glass raining down.

Soon, the soldiers were inside the house. After some tense moments of shouting, she said, the soldiers were convinced that Sanaa and Sham were not harboring militants and tended to their wounds.

Sanaa soon began pleading with an Arabic-speaking soldier, who denied that his forces had killed Sanaa’s husband and eldest daughter, and instead blamed Hamas and its leader, Yahya Sinwar, for their deaths.

“I told him, ‘Please hand me over to an ambulance to Gaza (City). Can you at least take me to my family, so they take my daughter? I am not important. I know I’m going to die. I just want my family to take my daughter.’”

“He told me, ‘No, we cannot hand you over to Gaza. Wait a little bit. I might be able to help you,’” Sanaa said.

Sanaa says the Israeli soldiers concluded they could not treat her in the field. Her condition was critical, she says, and she needed to be treated in a hospital. After making several calls, she recalled, the Arabic-speaking soldier said they would take them to a hospital in Israel. They carried her out of the house on a stretcher with Sham.

As she was being loaded onto a Humvee, Sanaa says she saw her daughter Yasmeen’s body in the street.

“I told him: ‘This is Yasmeen. Please bring her to me.’ He said no. I told him, ‘Then, please bury her for me,’” Sanaa recalled. “They kept going with the stretcher.”

An hour’s drive later, Sanaa says, they arrived at what appeared to be a mostly empty military staging ground. Standing in an open area, soldiers doing a security check ordered Sanaa to remove her jilbab – a full-body covering garment – in front of female soldiers, while male soldiers said they would look away. All the while, she continued to bleed from the bullet wound to her leg.

“Then they made me lift off my blouse and my undergarment items,” she recalled. “Sham – they took off all her clothes as well.”

“If it was not for Sham, I wouldn’t have agreed to take off my clothes. Because I was scared that if I didn’t take off my clothes, they would shoot Sham. Or they would shoot me in front of Sham, and I would never know what happened to her. If I had been alone I would have rather they shoot me, and I wouldn’t have taken off my clothes.”

‘This is God who stood by my side’

For eight months, she has had a slow recovery, with physical therapy. She and Sham have lived in a single, shared hospital room. She has no idea what happened to the bodies of her daughter and husband.

It is a vexing limbo – aware of the privilege of their safety yet pining for a home and life that has been irrevocably changed.

And she is terrified at being sent back into the warzone that was her home. Indeed, Israeli authorities are now planning on returning the pair to Gaza next month unless another government takes them in, according to hospital officials, Israeli officials and human rights organizations.

The Israeli military denies its soldiers shot Sanaa and her family.

Sanaa called that claim a lie. The IDF claimed that the militants fired grenades on their position – Sanaa said she did not hear any explosions.

“If we had heard the voice of Israelis, we would have fled and returned (to the shelter). If we had heard the voice of resistance, we would have fled and returned,” Sanaa said.

“It’s true he helped me,” Sanaa says of the Arab-speaking soldier who helped facilitate the decision to take her out of Gaza, to Israel.

But she cannot bring herself to thank him. And she says she would not, if she saw him again.

“This was a miracle from God that the soldier who was speaking to me in Arabic was helping me,” she said.

“This is God who stood by my side, and He put mercy in them towards me. It is from God,” she said. “Not by (the soldier’s) own will.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

The bodies of six Israeli hostages have been retrieved from Gaza during an overnight military operation, Israeli authorities said Tuesday.

In a joint announcement, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israel’s security agency (ISA) named them as Yoram Metzger, Alexander Dancyg, Avraham Munder, Chaim Peri, Nadav Popplewell and Yagev Buchshtab.

All but Munder had been announced dead in recent months by the Israeli military.

“Tonight our forces returned the bodies of six of our hostages who were held by the murderous terrorist organization Hamas,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement, thanking those involved in the operation for their “bravery and determined action.”

“Our hearts ache for the terrible loss,” he said.

Israeli authorities did not immediately release details of the operation to recover the hostages’ bodies but the joint statement said it was “enabled by precise intelligence from the ISA, IDF intelligence units, and the IDF Intelligence Directorate Hostage Headquarters.”

Munder, 79, Metzger, 80, and Peri, 80, were all residents of Kibbutz Nir Oz, near the Gaza border, where they were captured during Hamas’ October 7 attacks, according to statements from the kibbutz.

Munder was taken along with his wife, daughter and grandson. They were later freed during a temporary truce in November. Munder’s son, Roee, was killed during the attack.

Metzger’s wife Tami was also kidnapped and later released in the November truce.

Popplewell, who was 51 when abducted, and Buchshtab, 35, were taken from Kibbutz Nirim, the kibbutz said in a statement.

The IDF said in July that Buchshtab was believed to have been held in Khan Younis and died several months ago, while the IDF was operating there. It did not detail the circumstances of the death at the time.

About 1,200 Israelis were killed and 250 other kidnapped during Hamas’ October 7 attacks on Israel, according to Israeli authorities.

More than 40,000 Palestinians have been killed and more than 92,000 injured during Israel’s war in Gaza, according to the health ministry in the enclave.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

DETROIT — Canada’s two largest railroads are starting to shut down their shipping networks as a labor dispute with the Teamsters union threatens to cause lockouts or strikes that would disrupt cross-border trade with the U.S.

Both the Canadian Pacific Kansas City and Canadian National railroads, which haul millions of tons of freight across the border, have stopped taking certain shipments of hazardous materials and refrigerated products.

Both are threatening to lock out Teamsters Canada workers starting Thursday if deals are not reached.

On Tuesday, CPKC will stop all shipments that start in Canada and all shipments originating in the U.S. that are headed for Canada, the railroad said Saturday.

The Canadian Press reported that on Friday, Canadian National barred container imports from U.S. partner railroads.

Jeff Windau, industrials analyst for Edward Jones & Co., said his firm expects work stoppages to last only a few days, but if they go longer, there could be significant supply chain disruptions.

“If something would carry on more of a longer term in nature, then I think there are some significant potential issues just given the amount of goods that are handled each day,” Windau said. “By and large the rails touch pretty much all of the economy.”

The two railroads handle about 40,000 carloads of freight each day, worth about $1 billion, Windau said. Shipments of fully built automobiles and auto parts, chemicals, forestry products and agricultural goods would be hit hard, he said, especially with harvest season looming.

Both railroads have extensive networks in the U.S., and CPKC also serves Mexico. Those operations will keep running even if there is a work stoppage.

CPKC said it remains committed to avoiding a work stoppage that would damage Canada’s economy and international reputation. “However we must take responsible and prudent steps to prepare for a potential rail service interruption next week,” spokesman Patrick Waldron said in a statement.

Shutting down the network will allow the railroad to get dangerous goods off of its network before any stoppage, CPKC said.

Union spokesman Christopher Monette said in an email Saturday that negotiations continue, but the situation has shifted from a possible strike to “near certain lockout” by the railroads.

CPKC said bargaining is scheduled to continue on Sunday with the union, which represents nearly 10,000 workers at both railroads. The company said it continues to bargain in good faith.

Canadian National said in a statement Friday that there had been no meaningful progress in negotiations and it hoped the union “will engage meaningfully” during a meeting scheduled for Saturday.

“CN wants a resolution that allows the company to get back to what it does best as a team, moving customers’ goods and the economy,” the railroad said.

Negotiations have been going on since last November, and contracts expired at the end of 2023. They were extended as talks continued.

The union said company demands on crew scheduling, rail safety and worker fatigue are the main sticking points.

Concerns about the quality of life for rail workers dealing with demanding schedules and no paid sick time nearly led to a U.S. rail strike two years ago before Congress intervened and blocked a walkout. The major U.S. railroads have made progress since then in offering paid sick time to most rail workers and trying to improve schedules.

Windau said the trucking industry currently has a lot of excess capacity and might be able to make up some of the railroads’ shipping volumes, but, “You’re not going to be able to replace all of that with trucking.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

It is not because of Donald Trump that the Republican Party is associated with the color red (for that you can largely thank George W. Bush and the state of Florida), but few Republicans have embraced the color as enthusiastically as have Trump and his followers. Trump’s branding skills might be overstated, but he has made red baseball caps an unusually potent political signifier.

To someone of a certain age — like, say, 78 — red was at one point associated more firmly with the Soviet Union and communism more broadly. (That it aligned with the GOP only after the fall of the U.S.S.R. is probably not a coincidence.) A “red” was someone believed to hold views antithetical to the United States, someone to be uprooted from 1950s society and government.

It’s interesting, then, to see Trump lean into the idea that the nation faces a new communist threat — one that even his supporters aren’t convinced exists.

On Monday afternoon, hours before the Democratic convention kicked off in Chicago, Trump — in his inimitable fashion — presented a sweeping argument against the left.

After President Joe Biden withdrew from the race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, he wrote on his social media platform that he has to beat “a Radical Left Marxist, Comrade Kamala Harris.” He added that “the good news is that she should be easier … to beat than Crooked Joe in that the USA will never allow itself to become a Communist Country.”

This is hardly the first time he’s made such a claim. In 2016, he regularly disparaged Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) as a communist. During the 2020 election, he took to describing the left and Biden as advocates of socialism or Marxism or communism, or all of them. There wasn’t much differentiation; each was a term of disparagement understood as such, in particular by Americans who lived through the Cold War.

Something interesting happened in 2020, in fact. Usually, search interest in “communism” follows a regular pattern, dropping in the summer and rising through the fall before peaking in the spring. There’s an obvious explanation for this: Communism generally comes up as a topic of conversation in school.

The year of the coronavirus pandemic, there was an anomaly: Searches for “communism” remained relatively high through the summer. This was certainly in part because restrictions on activity aimed at limiting the spread of the virus were compared to the heavy-handed tactics of communist regimes. It’s probably also related to the virus’s point of origin. Use of the term “Chinese Communist Party” to refer to China’s government surged in the wake of the pandemic.

Trump’s campaign was deliberate about highlighting the idea that Democrats endorsed communism in part because of whom the campaign was targeting that November. The Republican convention featured a Cuban-born immigrant warning about the risk of America collapsing into a communist system like the one he’d escaped. On Election Day, Trump beat expectations in South Florida, home to many Cuban American expats who were the target of that message.

By late 2023, though, it was clear that Americans weren’t really worried about the idea that the country was on the brink of collapsing into a communist dictatorship. YouGov asked Americans specifically about the likelihood of such a shift in the next 10 years. A surprisingly large percentage of people said it was likely, but most people described such a change as not very likely or not likely at all.

The group most likely to say it could happen was Republicans. But only a quarter of Trump’s party indicated that this was somewhat or very likely. And this was nearly three years into Biden’s presidency.

Again, it’s very unlikely that Trump is arguing that Harris, if elected, would establish communes in which people would collectively own systems of production. He’s instead raising the specter of left-wing authoritarianism — explicitly as a response to the left’s suggestions that he would seek to establish a right-wing authoritarian state. (“THE DEMOCRATS ARE, ‘A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY?’” his social media post concluded in his idiosyncratic style.) Trump, of course, has repeatedly embraced other right-wing authoritarians and actively endorsed erosions of liberal democracy, making the rejoinder more than a little specious.

It’s been noted that Trump is largely a product of the 1980s, and that holds true here. In 1984, about the worst thing you could call someone was a communist. In 2024, that’s about the worst thing Trump can gin up, too.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

“Fact: Trump announced a budget to cut Social Security and Medicare every single year he was in office.”

tweet by the Harris-Walz campaign, Aug. 14

“Remember he tried to cut Medicare every year he was president, threatening a program that tens of millions of seniors count on.”

— Vice President Kamala Harris, remarks in Raleigh, N.C., Aug. 16

Expect to hear some version of these claims throughout the Democratic National Convention and for the rest of the election season. Donald Trump has repeatedly said he will not touch Social Security and Medicare if he is reelected, despite a financial crunch in the coming decade, and this attack line is intended to show that his promise cannot be trusted.

Trump has rarely been consistent on policy, so it’s a matter of opinion whether he would keep his promise. But this attack is misleading. His proposed “cuts” to Medicare in the budgets for the fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 were intended to save money and extend the solvency of the program — and were mostly borrowed from the Obama administration. Trump also did not propose changes to Social Security retirement benefits in those budgets; instead he sought (relatively minor) savings from the Social Security disability program.

Let’s look in more detail.

The Facts

Both political parties make misleading claims about Medicare “cuts,” depending on which party holds the presidency.

The game is played this way: When a president’s budget is released, politicians from the opposing party will claim that any difference over 10 years between anticipated Medicare spending (what is known as the “baseline”) and changes in law intended to reduce spending are devastating “cuts” that will harm seniors who rely on the old-age program.

Politicians (and reporters) usually discuss the numbers —“$350 billion in cuts” — with little context. Medicare is such a huge program — more than $10 trillion over 10 years — that a figure like that amounts to a relatively small percentage.

The overheated rhetoric also ignores this reality: Virtually all of these anticipated savings would be wrung from health providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. Hospitals and doctors object, sometimes vehemently, but often these are good-government reforms intended to make Medicare run more efficiently and with lower costs.

Given the strength of hospital and doctor lobbies, it’s difficult to enact such changes. Barack Obama borrowed a lot of his ideas for squeezing providers from George W. Bush’s budgets. Then Trump borrowed Obama’s unfilled requests — such as charging the same rate for office visits whether a doctor works at a hospital or elsewhere — and put them in his budgets. Trump didn’t have much luck either. In any case, even if provider cuts are enacted, Congress later will sometimes halt or reduce the changes in response to political pressure.

Marc Goldwein, senior vice president at the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which seeks to lower the budget deficit, closely studied the Trump proposals each year.

“The basic argument here is quite ridiculous,” he said of the Harris-Walz campaign tweet. Goldwein noted that the Inflation Reduction Act, in which Harris cast the tiebreaking vote for passage, also reduced health-care costs for Medicare, such as through inflation caps. “By the same logic, you could say Joe Biden cut Medicare.”

The budget group in 2019 estimated that 85 percent of Trump’s proposed Medicare savings came from provider reductions, “many of which closely resemble or build upon proposals made in President Obama’s budgets” and would lower costs for seniors. “Another 5 percent of the savings, by our estimate, would come from policies that reduce overall health care costs and improve Medicare’s finances as a side effect.” The remainder of the savings came from the benefit design for Medicare’s prescription drug program, which the group said would reduce costs for some seniors (especially those using generic drugs) and increase it for others.

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning group that studies the impact of budget policies, broadly agreed with that assessment in 2020, noting that some of the ideas to address overpayments to providers were borrowed from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, a congressional agency.

“Most of these proposals would have reduced payments to providers and not affected beneficiaries directly. Most are also repeats from prior years, since they were not enacted,” said Paul N. Van de Water, a senior fellow at the center who specializes in Medicare and Social Security, in an email.

Van de Water said he believed that an executive order on Medicare issued by Trump in 2019 would have weakened Medicare and its financing, especially its promotion of private Medicare Advantage plans and a proposal to increase payments to providers. But those proposals were not contained in the budget.

Just over half of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage, compared to traditional Medicare, which is run by the government and favored by Democrats. The Project 2025 plan issued by the Heritage Foundation — which Trump has sought to distance himself from but which was engineered by many former Trump administration officials, among others — recommends promoting Medicare Advantage plans.

As for Social Security, Trump kept his promise not to touch retirement benefits, bucking longtime efforts by Republicans to raise the retirement age. (In a 2000 book, “The America We Deserve,” published when Trump sought the presidential nomination of the Reform Party, Trump also made an emphatic case for a higher retirement age.)

But Trump did seek, without success, to reduce spending for Social Security Disability Insurance as well as Supplemental Security Income, which is administered by the Social Security Administration. The number of people who receive disability benefits, 8.5 million, is one-seventh the size of the pool who receive retirement and survivor benefits.

Goldwein said that the reductions generally were intended to make the programs more efficient, such as eliminating double payments of both unemployment insurance and disability (also sought by Obama). He also said the proposals were relatively small.

“The President’s budget identifies programmatic changes that would reduce Social Security spending by $25 billion, or less than 0.2 percent over a decade,” the Committee for a Responsible Budget wrote in 2018. “Importantly, most of these changes are meant to reduce overlapping or improper payments and address certain inequities in the program. … Just over half of the savings come from policies also proposed by President Obama in his own budgets.”

The fiscal 2019 budget also claimed it would get another $48 billion in savings from vague pilot programs intended to reduce disability spending, but that was dismissed as a budget gimmick. The Congressional Budget Office concluded no savings would result.

Still, the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities said some of the proposals, never implemented, could have cut in half the retroactive benefits that disabled workers may receive — a potential $7,500 average loss — and would have reduced benefits for families in which more than one member qualifies for SSI.

In response to our findings, Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson Joseph Costello defended the tweet’s phrasing, citing a Washington Post report published during the GOP primary campaign that said each of Trump’s White house budget proposals “included cuts to Social Security and Medicare programs.” (The Post article, which examined various GOP candidates’ past positions, did not explain that those proposed Trump White House program cuts primarily affected providers, not beneficiaries.)

“Donald Trump has repeatedly attempted to cut Social Security and Medicare after repeatedly promising the American people that he won’t cut those exact programs,” Costello said in a statement. “In his 2016 campaign, he pledged, ‘I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican, and I’m not going to cut Medicare.’ But sure enough, as president, just ‘like every other Republican,’ Donald Trump tried to cut Social Security and Medicare. So no matter how much he lies today, Trump’s own record makes clear that he will gut critical benefits for millions of Americans if he takes power.”

The Pinocchio Test

The Harris-Walz campaign is being disingenuous and misleading. Virtually all of Trump’s proposed Medicare “cuts” were good-government efforts intended to reduce costs and put the program on a sounder financial footing, with some ideas even borrowed from Obama. The campaign has a slightly stronger case for claiming Social Security cuts, as Trump proposed some changes in programs for people on disability. Still, they were relatively minor. Trump kept his promise not to mess with retirement and survivor benefits — the core of Social Security.

This rhetoric is worthy of Three Pinocchios.

Three Pinocchios

(About our rating scale)

Send us facts to check by filling out this form

Sign up for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter

The Fact Checker is a verified signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network code of principles

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

Vice President Kamala Harris’s recent anti-price-gouging push has met with significant skepticism from policy analysts and even some normally politically aligned commentators.

They’ve suggested that her somewhat vague “federal ban on price gouging” to combat inflation is unworkable, counterproductive, a “gimmick” and pandering. Many have noted that Richard M. Nixon tried price controls in August 1971, and it went poorly.

In fact, Nixon had just months earlier privately conceded that price controls — and I’m skipping over some Nixonian colorful language here — “will not work.” But he pressed forward anyway, apparently for political reasons.

The Nixon comparison isn’t totally apt, and Harris seemed to temper her proposal somewhat when it was actually rolled out.

But there’s a reason Nixon pulled a 180, and there’s clearly a political reason for Harris to play up this issue, pander or not.

It’s because lots and lots of Americans blame price gouging for inflation. (Whether such gouging actually exists is a point of contention, but the Federal Trade Commission has said some large grocery chains have increased prices more than needed to cover extra costs.)

And lots and lots of Americans like the idea of the federal government doing something about it. That appears to include when you use the language favored by its critics, “price controls.”

Americans blame lots of things for inflation. But price gouging is perhaps the perceived culprit where the most bipartisan consensus emerges.

A late 2021 Fox News poll showed 75 percent of Americans blamed “price gouging by companies” at least somewhat. That was nearly as much as the 78 percent that blamed the most obvious culprit, the coronavirus pandemic.

About 4 in 10 Republicans, Democrats and independents agreed that price gouging was “very responsible” for inflation. And independents were more apt to blame price gouging than they were to blame even President Joe Biden.

More recent polling suggests price gouging has grown as a boogeyman:

  • A YouGov survey released in July 2023 showed Americans’ No. 1 inflation offender — out of 11 factors mentioned — was “large corporations seeking maximum profits.” Even 44 percent of Republicans blamed that “a lot.”
  • A late 2023 Ipsos/Yahoo Finance poll showed price gouging was independents’ top culprit among seven options.
  • And a Financial Times/Michigan Ross poll this year showed those blaming large corporations for charging more amid inflation rising from 54 percent six months earlier to 63 percent. That was significantly more than the 38 percent who blamed Democrats’ policies.

Americans also see government action as both effective and desirable.

That YouGov poll showed about half of Americans thought that having the government set price limits (51 percent) and fining companies for price gouging (49 percent) would at least probably decrease inflation. Significantly fewer — about 3 in 10 — felt these ideas wouldn’t work. (The rest offered no opinion.)

The only ideas perceived as being more effective, out of 16 tested, were increasing oil production and investing in the supply chain — and only marginally so.

Just because people think these things would work doesn’t necessarily mean they want them, of course. There is risk in Harris’s proposal looking heavy-handed and too big-government. Donald Trump over the weekend labeled Harris’s idea “SOVIET Style Price Controls.”

But people do say they want such measures — even when you characterize them as “price controls.”

A late 2023 CBS News/YouGov poll asked whether people approved of “government price controls — that is, laws that limit the amount that companies can raise prices, or charge for products and services.”

Americans approved nearly 2-to-1, and even a majority of Republicans (56 percent) approved.

You begin to see why such a proposal, however practical or seriously intended, would have appeal for the Harris campaign. It’s not just a potent boogeyman; it’s a potent boogeyman that deflects blame from the administration that has been in charge these past 3½ years.

And the Harris campaign has surely demonstrated a willingness to play up the populism and take some liberties in its appeals to voters.

Its recent plan to get rid of taxes on tips — after Trump proposed a different version of the same thing — appeared calculated to offset any potential benefit Trump might glean in Nevada, a swing state featuring many service workers. But some experts say neither proposal is likely to be enacted, and they’re skeptical they’d even work.

Judging by these numbers, Harris might have just one-upped Trump on the populism.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com