A reader sent us comments on our article on gain-of-function research and whether the federal government helped fund such research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Gain-of-Function Research

I would like to thank Lori Robertson and editorial staff for the article entitled “The Wuhan Lab and the Gain-of-Function Disagreement” [May 21]. It was the most complete, unbiased, and thorough article I have read on the subject. I sincerely appreciate the work that must have gone into preparing the piece.

Stephen Brown
Winneconne, Wisconsin

The post Mailbag: Gain-of-Function Research appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Federal Minimum Wage

In regards to your article [“Biden’s Minimum Wage Exaggeration,” Feb. 11], you failed to mention that every time raising the minimum wage comes up there is a doom and gloom scenario given by the opposition. We are always told there will great job loss. With the last wage raise you would have expected the economy was going to nearly collapse and the unemployed would be standing in great lines for soup kitchens. It did not happen. I do not know who the ignorant characters are that set the poverty levels but they are always way too low. You try living on 12.00 dollars an hour.

Just thought you should have included the historical ramifications each time the minimum wage has been raised as this is constantly ignored every time the subject comes up. Yet each time we have been warned on how devastating (they always give all kinds of facts and figures and graphs) this will be but it always works out to be just fine. Although prices will go up as the business owners will not want to adjust their living standard so it will not be long and $15.00 an hour will be equivalent to what $7.00 is now. I can remember when I was in awe of people making $40,000 a year. Although I am now reduced back to that point LOL.

Anyway, thanks for your time, I appreciate your work and I am constantly telling people to go to your web site and get the facts.

Gary Peterson
Maiden Rock, Wisconsin

The post Mailbag: Minimum Wage Increase appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Joe Biden’s Claymont Childhood Home

The statement [“Posts Misquote Biden on Section 8 Housing,” Oct. 22] about Biden’s growing up in Section 8 housing is not exact. Problem is Biden wanted listeners to make the inference that he was poor. Where he grew up had NOTHING to do with Section 8 housing. He wanted people to think his upbringing had some correlation with poverty. It didn’t.

Tom Kakadelis
Pinehurst, North Carolina

The post Mailbag: Biden’s Claymont Childhood Home appeared first on FactCheck.org.

That story, of course, has been overtaken by subsequent events. The president acknowledged in an Aug. 13 interview that he opposes a coronavirus pandemic relief bill crafted by the House Democrats because it includes funding for the U.S. Postal Service and state election officials — funding that Trump said is needed to allow the Postal Service to handle an expected surge in mail-in voting.

“They want $3.5 billion for something that will turn out to be fraudulent, that’s election money basically. They want $3.5 trillion — billion dollars for the mail-in votes, OK, universal mail-in ballots, $3.5 trillion,” Trump said. “They want $25 billion, billion, for the Post Office. Now they need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots. Now, in the meantime, they aren’t getting there. By the way, those are just two items. But if they don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting because they’re not equipped to have it.”

We wrote about Trump’s latest remarks [“Trump Proves Biden Right on USPS Funding, Mail-In Ballots,” Aug. 14], and provided an update at the top of the June 26 story with a link to our new story. But we didn’t change the headline.

Robert Skaggs, a reader from Coral Springs, Florida, wrote: “We live in a fast-paced world. Many people only look at headlines which is why you should change the headline to your story about Biden having a quote-unquote baseless claim against Trump defunding the United States postal service. The editor’s note is good but the headline needs to be adjusted as well since Trump came out and admitted it.”

After further internal discussions, we agree — to a point.

We won’t change the headline, because the first story was accurate at the time we wrote it in late June. But we did add an update to the original headline to give the new information more prominence.

In late June, Biden said that Trump “wants to cut off money for the post office so they cannot deliver mail-in ballots,” but the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act that Trump signed in late March gave USPS access to a $10 billion Treasury loan that the USPS said at the time would alleviate its cash flow problem and keep it operating through at least May 2021.

Also, as we wrote in June, USPS monthly financial reports showed an improvement in its finances at the time we wrote that first story. The Postal Service reported a net loss of $1.2 billion in April, but a more modest $225 million in May, according to its monthly financial reports.

“The recent trends indicate that our 2020 financial performance will be better than our early scenarios predicted,” David Partenheimer, a USPS spokesman, told us at the time. “Regarding our role in elections, our current financial condition is not going to impact our ability to deliver election and political mail this year.”

But the facts have changed since we wrote that story.

In addition to Trump’s stark statements about the Postal Service, the new postmaster general — Louis DeJoy, a Trump donor and ally — instituted changes that could cause delays in election mail delivery service. There was no evidence of that in late June, but there is now:

• In a July 10 memo to all employees, the Postal Service directed mail carriers to begin and end their routes on time — even if it means leaving behind some unsorted mail at processing and distribution centers — because “late trips” and “[e]xtra trips are no longer authorized or accepted.”
• On Aug. 13, Oregon Live reported that mailboxes were being removed from Eugene and Portland, and the Washington Post reported the next day that mailboxes were also being removed in parts of New York, Pennsylvania and Montana. The Postal Service said it typically takes mailboxes in low-use areas and moves them to growth areas, but will stop reallocating mailboxes until after the election, the Post reported.
• Also on Aug. 14, there were reports of USPS removing mail sorting machines. NBC News reported on Aug. 14 that DeJoy initiated a plan to decommission 671 of its letter-sorting machines, citing an internal document. On CNN’s “State of the Union,” White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said no additional machines would be removed “between now and the election.”

Whether any of these changes will have an effect on mail-in ballot delivery remains to be seen. DeJoy, who took over in June, described the changes as having “unintended consequences” on service.

But Biden’s claim about Trump is no longer “baseless” and “unsupported.” His speculation about Trump’s motives has been proved right by the president himself.

The post Mailbag: Our Headline on U.S. Postal Service Story appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

COVID-19 Vaccination Distribution

If in fact Trump plans to hand over distribution responsibilities to the military, this will deliver a fatal blow to the possibility of widespread acceptance of vaccination, especially among African-American and Hispanic people. [“Dueling Trump, Biden Claims on COVID-19 Vaccination Distribution,” Aug. 7.]

In the wake of Tuskegee, the mustard gas experiments on Black soldiers in World War II, the Agent Orange debacle, the threatened militarization of urban police forces, and so many other examples that can be cited, can you honestly envision most Black folks trusting this at all?

David G. Whiteis
Chicago, Illinois

The post Mailbag: COVID-19 Vaccination Distribution appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Wearing Face Masks in Public

Your article [“COVID-19 Face Mask Advice, Explained,” April 6] really saddened me. You need to come to Asia.

I feel your article is only from a Western viewpoint. It is like no one considers what is happening here in Asia, with millions of people, and how everyone here is dealing with it, and successfully. Sure it is hard to get numbers out of China.

People live in high density like New York with many generations in the same rooms, but they each are doing their part for everyone. The virus came here very quickly as Chinese tourists are everywhere in Asia.

But look at the numbers……

• Taiwan, 21 million people next to China- only 5 deaths!!!!
• South Korea- 51 million people- only 192 deaths
• Japan- 126 million people, 92 deaths
• Hong Kong- 7.3 million- 4 deaths—right next to China. Connecting rail lines and roads
• Singapore- 6 million- 6 deaths

Sure there are some special conditions in each of these examples, but as a group, so few deaths. Why?? Many reasons, one common simple behavior is they all wear a mask.

We are US citizens living 6 months a year in Thailand and travel in Asia. Have done so for 15 + years.

Everyone, yes everyone wears masks, here. You don’t go outside without it. Naturally we wash hands and keep distance, also. Sanitizer is offered in every shop.

Many people are still working and many shops are open. It is true if you shut everyone inside it will work, but can your economies take this? How many months? Who can afford this? And when you step out and don’t have a mask—more chance of restarting it. A mask protects both you and other people, given that no one knows who may have the virus, it’s essential. Its respectful.

Are Westerners just too vain to do this? Here, we don’t wear N95 masks. They are for health care workers. Many masks are homemade.

Walking down a street with everyone in masks is much safer. May not [be] perfect compared to a closed room.

Be careful, please wear a mask. It is how we respect our fellow citizens.

Gary Soden
Santa Rosa, California

The post Mailbag: Face Masks appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Costs Should Include Health Care & Climate Change

When comparing energy generation costs [“Does Wind ‘Work’ Without Subsidies?” July 16], please include the increased costs burners impose on us via increased healthcare costs and climate change infrastructure costs. These are subsidies by definition. Not sure why you are leaving them out of fact check articles on energy generation.

Woody Henderson
Idyllwild, California

The post Mailbag: Electricity Costs appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Don’t Ignore the Issue of Intellectual Property

Having lived in Silicon Valley for thirty (30) years and in Asia for five (5) years for business purposes. The general feeling in both areas of this tariff confrontation is the issue of Intellectual Property, not consumer products or other services. The Asians, particularly China, are extremely fearful of us developing methods and processes that can really eliminate their ability to continue and steal our creative-leading edge systems and processes. My time in Asia working with numerous Asian companies was that their executives continuously told me that they the Asian people were outstanding at copying and modifying an end product. But that the process of “creating” was an American capability and quality they did not have. They blamed it on cultural differences. So, today they resort to attacking our companies and their databases to acquire our creative systems and processes.

However, as you are aware the deficit in measurable dollars with these countries is a measurable factor. Further, the purpose of these tariffs is not to just balance our measurable deficits with these countries, but to stop the theft of a much, much larger cost to the USA, which is our Intellectual Property! What impresses me is that even the Democrats are realizing what this tariff situation is aiming to accomplish.

So, in the future please make sure that you include the Intellectual Property issue as a factor when explaining the tariff situation, which is a fairer portrayal of the real “why” behind the tariffs that the American people can better understand! So far, all the reporting has been about commodities or products and services and how this is hurting everyday Americans. Thank you.

Mike Young
Sacramento, California

The post Mailbag: U.S.-China Trade Dispute appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

Stephen Miller’s Words ‘Damning’

Thank you for the supporting material regarding the “taken out of context” remarks by Stephen Miller [“Twisting Stephen Miller’s Words,” April 24]. With the context they are even more damning for Miller and Trump as they represent an open assault on one of the tri-equal branches of government.

William Sterr
Vancouver, Washington

The post Mailbag: Stephen Miller appeared first on FactCheck.org.

In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to editor@factcheck.org. Letters may be edited for length.

History of Term Limits for Presidents

While you are accurate regarding the congresswoman from Queens/Bronx misapplication of history [“Ocasio-Cortez Gets FDR History Lesson Wrong,” April 2] your analysis leaves out one very important portion of the amendment.

It did not apply to a president holding the office at the time of its introduction or final ratification and effective date. Therefore, President Truman was not precluded from running for office in 1952. Of course, he chose not to do that. Also, the Republican candidate, Thomas Dewey, the Republican nominee for the presidency in 1944, on October 31, 1944, did publicly endorse the concept, for obvious political reasons – he thought that might swing the vote. Of course, it did not. The Republicans did not have congressional control until January 1947 to move the amendment. In fact, then it was not an easy ratification process since it was not finally ratified until over four years later.

Historically, there were questions regarding [President Franklin D. Roosevelt] running for a third term in 1940. He justified it based upon the conflict in Europe and pledged to keep the United States out of the war. Members of his own party took exception and there were those Democrats that did not support FDR for a third term. The Republican nominee, Wendell Wilkie, also raised the issue. It might be said that this concern about presidential term limits was a bipartisan concern.

There have been subsequent efforts to rescind the 22nd Amendment, however, they have not made it out of committee. Most notably those efforts occurred during the Reagan administration in the hope that he could run for reelection in 1988. One might opine that when you like him you want to keep him and when you do not like him you want him gone.

Kenneth P. Johnson, Lt. Col., USAF (Ret)
Milton, Pennsylvania

A Reader’s ‘Confession’

Editor’s note: Frank Bergen, a reader in Tucson, Arizona, copied us on this email that he sent to his friends. He agreed to allow us to publish it.

Gentlemen,

I have a confession to make. I was traveling yesterday when I received the FactCheck response to my query regarding AO-C [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] and Daylight Saving Time [“Daylight Saving Time Spoof Story Not Real,” March 27]. I was so delighted to have a rebuttal of the accusation you had discussed at lunch on Thursday that I forwarded it without having read the message from [FactCheck.org Undergraduate Fellow] Catherine Monk all the way through, a terrible thing to do in any instance and especially by me, quick as I am to criticize others for doing anything of the sort.

Now that I have read it, I see how thoroughly FactCheck has factually debunked the satirical piece, providing us with its source, a gentleman who edits a satirical publication and with whom the folks at FactCheck had communicated.

In response to one of your observations I looked for a FactCheck mailing address and discovered that they are indeed based in Philadelphia,  ‘one of those east coast liberal cities’ and are therefore automatically suspect.

You have collectively spurred me to make a small contribution to FactCheck in your collective honor.

Your apologetic and much embarrassed brother in Christ.

Frank Bergen
Tucson, Arizona

The post Mailbag: Presidential Term Limits, Viral Deception appeared first on FactCheck.org.