Here's the real story on Biden and the alleged funding for crack pipes A Washington Free Beacon article caused a firestorm in the upper echelons of Washington by asserting the Biden administration would spend federal dollars to distribute crack pipes. Republican lawmakers denounced the Biden administration. The White House denied that the administration ever had any such plans and accused the right-leaning Washington Free Beacon of spreading "misinformation." From our jaundiced view of covering Washington for more than three decades, we thought we understood what was going on. We were struck by the fact that the official Department of Health and Human Services statement was more carefully worded than the sharp White House comment. We figured a sub-agency was chugging along with a new program and confirmed its plans to a reporter. When the story exploded, the White House reacted, the top brass at the main agency responded and suddenly a more specific policy was created. But it's more complicated than that. The Free Beacon and HHS shared their email exchanges with the Fact Checker, so we can show readers how this story came about. Essentially, after a spokesman for the agency handled the grant danced the question of what items would be included in safe smoking kits for addicts, the Free Beacon assumed they would contain crack pipes — but the reporter did not specifically ask the question. Once the story was published, the agency denied that was ever the plan. Maybe that's correct. But drug-policy groups said they had expected pipes to be funded, as that's the key part of safe smoking kits. Please click the link to read our comprehensive report. Enjoy this newsletter? Forward it to someone else who'd like it! If this email was forwarded to you, sign up here. Did you hear something fact-checkable? Send it here; we'll check it out. No, the U.S. archivist cannot certify the Equal Rights Amendment The battle over the Equal Rights Amendment has had many twists and turns since Congress first passed it and it was sent to the states 50 years ago for ratification. For proponents, the issue is a simple one — 38 states have ratified the amendment, most recently Virginia in 2020, and so now it is already part of the Constitution. All that is needed, advocates say, is for David Ferriero — the U.S. archivist and chief administrator of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) since 2009 — to acknowledge that fact. "He says he believes in the ERA. Well, if you believe in it, just certify it. He's the one holding it back," said Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) at a news conference sponsored by the ERA Coalition. She even claimed Ferriero had written a letter "saying he supports the ERA and that he would do it." But it's not so simple. The letter referenced by Maloney — who heads the House committee that oversees NARA — indicates no support by the archivist for the ERA. Moreover, every time the issue has been litigated in federal court, most recently in 2021, the pro-ERA side has lost, no matter whether the judge was appointed by a Democrat or Republican. Our detailed report takes you through the court cases and shows how Maloney is offering false hope about the archivist's role — and falsely putting words in Ferriero's mouth. She earned Four Pinocchios. We're always looking for fact-check suggestions. You can reach us via email, Twitter (@GlennKesslerWP and @AdriUsero) or Facebook. Read about our process and rating scale here, and sign up for the newsletter here. Scroll down for this week's Pinocchio roundup. | 
Email 
No comments:
Post a Comment