FactChecking Tim Scott’s Presidential Campaign Announcement

Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina announced on May 22 that he will seek the Republican nomination for president in 2024. We reviewed his speech — and an exclusive NBC News interview he did shortly after — and found that he made a few claims that were false, misleading or lacked important context.

  • Scott said that, under President Joe Biden, “millions” have left “the workforce entirely” and “the share of working age men choosing to work” is at its “lowest.” But both the civilian labor force level and the male labor force participation rate have increased.
  • He left the false impression that preventing illegal immigration would “stop fentanyl from crossing our border.” Most drug seizures at the border occur during traffic stops at legal ports of entry.
  • In talking about the southern border, Scott said “hundreds of people on our terrorist watchlist are crossing our borders.” Since fiscal 2021, 209 people on the watchlist have been stopped trying to cross illegally on the southern border. But hundreds more have been stopped at legal ports on the northern border.
  • Scott said Biden “wants to make waitresses and mechanics pay for the student loans of lawyers and doctors making six figures.” While some doctors and lawyers earning over $100,000 would be eligible for loan cancellation under Biden’s plan, the Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that about two-thirds of the benefits would accrue to households making $88,000 or less.

Labor Force

Since Biden took office, the number of people in the civilian labor force has increased, and the labor force participation rate for men also has gone up. But Scott gave the opposite impression in his speech from Charleston, South Carolina.

Scott announces his campaign for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination on May 22 in North Charleston, South Carolina. Photo by Allison Joyce/Getty Images.

“Under President Biden, our nation is retreating away from work and dignity,” Scott said. “Millions and millions of people have dropped out of the workforce entirely, and the share of working age men choosing to work is the lowest it has ever been.”

Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the civilian labor force, which includes all people over 16 who are working or actively looking for work, has gone up under Biden. As of April, there were almost 166.7 million people in the labor force — which is up from 160 million in January 2021, when Biden was sworn in as president, and 164.5 million in February 2020, which was the last month before the COVID-19 pandemic was declared.

The labor force participation rate for men 16 and older also has increased while Biden has been in office. Their participation rate was 68.1% in April. That’s higher than the rate of 67.4% in January 2021 and the rate of 66.1% in April 2020, which was the lowest rate for men going back to 1948.

The rate in April was still below the pre-pandemic level of 69.1% in February 2020, but the participation rate among males generally has been declining since the late 1940s, according to BLS figures, as shown in this chart from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

In a 2021 report, an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond wrote that “the general consensus of research” was that male labor force participation had been declining for several reasons, including “a shift in U.S. industry structure, a decline in male educational attainment, delayed family formation, the rise of substance abuse, and heavy use of video games.” The aging of the male population also was a factor, the article said.

Furthermore, the labor force participation rate for men ages 25 to 54 — which is sometimes called the prime working age — was 89.2% in April. That’s up from 87.6% when Biden’s presidency began, and it’s equal to the rate in February 2020, just before COVID-19 economic shutdowns sent the rate down to 86.4% two months later.

Finally, the unemployment rates for men 16 and over, and men 25 to 54, were the same in April as they were in February 2020 – 3.5% and 3.1%, respectively. Those respective figures were down from 6.4% and 5.8% in January 2021.

Fentanyl

In his interview on NBC News after he announced his candidacy, Scott left the false impression that building a wall along the southern border and taking other steps to prevent people from illegally entering the country can “stop fentanyl from crossing our border.”

“Closing that southern border saves perhaps tens of thousands of American lives. 70,000 Americans have lost their lives in a single year because of fentanyl,” Scott said. “Building the wall, using the latest and greatest technology that’s available today, about $5 billion, will provide more surveillance on our southern border to stop fentanyl from crossing our border.”

Scott is right about the number of deaths from fentanyl — a powerful synthetic opioid that is responsible for a growing increase in the number of drug overdoses in the U.S. that predates Biden’s presidency. Synthetic opioids – primarily fentanyl and fentanyl analogues – have been the leading cause of overdose deaths since 2016 and continue to rise, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.

In 2021, there were more than 71,000 fatal overdoses from synthetic opioids, primarily fentanyl, up from nearly 58,000 in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there were a record 109,680 overdose deaths, including 76% that involved opioids, according to CDC’s preliminary estimate. 

But Scott is wrong to suggest that stopping people from illegally entering the country can “stop fentanyl from crossing our border.”

As we have written before, most drug seizures at the border occur during traffic stops at legal ports of entry.

“Generally, intelligence suggests that more foreign-produced cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, and fentanyl flow into the country through official ports of entry (POEs) than between the ports,” the Congressional Research Service said in a 2020 report (emphasis is in the report). “Seizure data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) follows this pattern as well.”

Mexican cartels use “a variety of methods to transport heroin, fentanyl, and other illicit opioids into the United States,” but private vehicles, “rental vehicles, and trucks/tractor trailers” are “the most commonly used modes of transport,” the Drug Enforcement Administration said in its 2020 threat assessment report.

As CRS says, CBP seizure data suggest that fentanyl is largely entering the U.S. through legal ports of entry.

Through the first seven months of fiscal year 2023, 15,500 pounds of fentanyl were seized at legal ports of entry by the Office of Field Operations. By contrast, the U.S. Border Patrol seized 1,500 pounds of fentanyl in between the legal ports of entry.

Terrorist Watch List

Scott linked immigration at the southern border to the terrorist watchlist. But his remarks require some context.

“And if our southern border is unsafe and insecure, it’s not our country,” Scott said in his speech. “Hundreds of people on our terrorist watchlist are crossing our borders.”

Voters may be surprised to learn that U.S. Customs and Border Protection has encountered more people on the terrorist watchlist trying to enter at legal ports of entry on the northern border in recent years than those apprehended trying to cross the southern border illegally.

The statistics from Customs and Border Protection show the number of people caught trying to enter the U.S. who are on the Terrorist Screening Dataset, commonly called the watchlist, which includes “known or suspected terrorists” and “additional individuals who represent a potential threat to the United States, including known affiliates of watchlisted individuals,” CBP says. There aren’t statistics on watchlisted individuals who may not have been stopped by CBP.

In the past three years, CBP has seen an increase in non-U.S. citizen watchlist individuals on the southern border between ports of entry, in other words attempting to enter the U.S. illegally. In fiscal year 2021, which ended on Sept. 30, 2021, the number was 15 people; in fiscal year 2022, it was 98, and so far in fiscal 2023, 96 watchlist individuals have been stopped. That totals 209 people, just making Scott’s description of “hundreds” — though he doesn’t explicitly say he’s only talking about illegal immigration.

For fiscal years 2017 through 2020, the number encountered on the southern border between ports of entry totaled only 11.

Of course, the total number of people apprehended while trying to cross the southern border has also gone up considerably during the Biden administration, as we recently explained.

But CBP’s data show the larger issue has been watchlist individuals encountered at legal ports of entry, particularly at the northern border.

In fiscal 2022, there were 313 watchlist encounters at legal ports of entry on the northern border. This may include some U.S. citizens, since CBP notes these are from “all nationalities.” It also says these figures “may include multiple encounters of the same individual.”

Since fiscal 2017, the year with the highest number of watchlist encounters overall was fiscal 2019, with 541 — all but three of these encounters were at legal ports of entry on both the northern and southern border.

The chart below shows the breakdown of these figures.

FactChecking Tim Scott’s Presidential Campaign Announcement 1

The last line shows that those encountered between ports of entry are a tiny percentage of all people stopped by U.S. Border Patrol. “Encounters of watchlisted individuals at our borders are very uncommon,” CBP says.

Student Loan Forgiveness

Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan was crafted in a way to ensure that the majority of debt cancellation goes to middle- and lower-income households. Nonetheless, some relatively high-income professionals would get relief, and to the extent all taxpayers are on the hook for the cost of Biden’s plan, moderate-income people could be paying a share of loan forgiveness for some high-income earners.

Scott exploited those possibilities when he said that Biden “wants to make waitresses and mechanics pay for the student loans of lawyers and doctors making six figures.”

It’s true that some doctors and lawyers would benefit from Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, but Biden’s plan has some eligibility requirements that would limit the number who would stand to gain.

Under the plan Biden unveiled in August 2022, individuals making less than $125,000 or married couples making less than $250,000 would be eligible for up to $10,000 in debt cancellation. Another $10,000 could be waived for some people under those income caps who also received federal Pell Grants, which are awarded to students based on financial need.

People with advanced degrees — like those required to be a doctor or lawyer — tend to have more student debt, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute. But they also are more likely to earn more, and are less likely to be eligible for Biden’s proposed loan forgiveness due to the income caps.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median annual pay for lawyers in 2021 was about $128,000. It was at least $208,000 for physicians and surgeons. So right off the bat, most doctors and many lawyers would be ineligible for student loan forgiveness because they earn too much money. Nonetheless, some doctors and lawyers earning six figures would still be eligible.

The Penn Wharton Budget Model concluded that Biden’s debt cancellation plan would cost between $469 billion and $519 billion over 10 years. To the extent that all taxpayers would shoulder that cost, some waitresses and mechanics would pay for loan cancellation for some doctors and lawyers.

However, the Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that about two-thirds of the benefits of student loan forgiveness would accrue to households making $88,000 or less in 2021. A little more than 8% would accrue to households that earned between $141,096 and $212,209 (those in the 80th to 90th percentile). Households making more than that would see 1.7% of the loan cancellation benefits.

Biden’s plan is on hold as it is being challenged in the courts. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on two cases by the end of June.


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. 

The post FactChecking Tim Scott’s Presidential Campaign Announcement appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Related articles

Rory McIlroy Rips Unruly Ryder Cup Fans After Wife Gets Hit by Drink

Irish golf sensation Rory McIlroy slammed American Ryder Cup fans, including whoever struck his wife with drink.

The post Rory McIlroy Rips Unruly Ryder Cup Fans After Wife Gets Hit by Drink first appeared on Mediaite.

‘He just dynamites it’: Alarm sounded over Trump’s ‘smoking gun for abuse of power’



Legal commentator Elie Honig said during a podcast Sunday that the indictment of former FBI director James Comey might be "abuse of executive power."

Speaking to journalist John Avalon on The Bulwark's podcast, Honig, who is the author of the book When You Come at the King: Inside DOJ's Pursuit of the President, From Nixon to Trump, said, "I mean, God, Trump basically, by mistake, published a DM demand to his AG that in any other environment would be seen as a smoking gun for abuse of executive power. And now it just seems like something happened two Fridays ago. And who can remember or care?"

He continued: "I do think more people will get indicted on the hit list. He gave us a hit list. I know there's speculation if it's a DM that he inadvertently posted. It has hallmarks of both."

Avalon said the indictment "seems like a new low in the politicization of justice and the persecution of [President] Donald Trump's enemies."

According to Honig, there is "the complete evisceration of this wall that has long existed between the White House and the political operation of the executive branch and the Justice Department's prosecutorial function."

"When the president gets involved in dictating who gets charged and who doesn't, prosecutorial decisions, then we have crossed the line. And that's something that both parties for decades. Presidents don't always love it. Presidents would like to have more control over prosecutors. But even going back to Nixon, they've always understood that there has to be some independent prosecutorial function. But that's changing now very quickly," he added.

Honig further noted that there is no law per se "saying DOJ must be separate and independent from the White House, from the president."

He added: "I mean, if you went to court and said, I want to sue because I think DOJ is no longer independent, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. This is more along the lines of a long established law foundational norm and tradition that both parties have long observed and respected."

Referencing his book, Honig noted how Trump 2.0 appears different from other presidencies.

"And part of the book is about ways that that has been chipped away over the years. But whether it's Nixon or Clinton, and they're not all equal, but Nixon or Clinton or Trump 1 or Biden, they've all chipped away at that wall in various ways."

"But now here comes Trump 2.0 and it's over. He just dynamites it. This is one of those things that's like not really enforceable. I mean, yes, Jim Comey can go into court and argue that he's being selectively prosecuted. And I think he's going to win on that. Given the things Trump has said and posted on social media publicly, he makes the case for him, but it's not like 'my fourth amendment constitutional right is being violated. My first amendment constitutional right is being violated.' It's just really like good government that we've long recognized that is now totally scrapped."

Avalon noted that "there is an unwritten part of the constitution, which is rooted in concepts of honor, decency, and common sense, as the founders intended and as everyone has recognized."

"And the rest of the quote, 'Rome wasn't built in a day, but it was burnt in one.' And Trump is burning something. I mean, FBI shows outside John Bolton's house. You've got [New York Attorney Genera] Letitia James next on the list."

Commenting on James' case, Honig said, "I've looked at the allegations against Letitia James. You know, I've been a critic, a sharp critic of Letitia James. But this mortgage fraud case is bogus. It's bonkers."

‘Factually Without Foundation’: Fox’s Andy McCarthy Calls for Trump DOJ’s Comey Case to be ‘Dismissed’

Andy McCarthy argued that the Trump Justice Department's indictment of former FBI Director James Comey "should be dismissed" in a new column.

The post ‘Factually Without Foundation’: Fox’s Andy McCarthy Calls for Trump DOJ’s Comey Case to be ‘Dismissed’ first appeared on Mediaite.

‘You were wrong, Mr. President!’ CNN warns Trump his big push has become ‘political loser’



President Donald Trump has continued to lean into his use of the military to crack down on crime in Democrat-run cities — once a politically-strong issue for him — but new data reviewed by CNN Monday shows Americans’ are quickly souring on the moves.

Trump’s latest pledge to deploy federal troops to the city of Portland, Oregon comes after his federal takeover of Washington, D.C., which itself came after Trump deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles, California. New polling, however, shows that the continued use of the military may now be doing more harm than good for Trump’s favorability.

“If Donald Trump thinks that potentially sending in the National Guard into cities like Portland is a winning political issue, the polling says you are wrong Mr. President!” said CNN’s Harry Enten.

According to the new polling data shared by Enten, Trump’s use of federal troops is now well underwater, with 58% of voters opposed. Among independent voters, that opposition rises to 64%.

“We've heard this song before, and what happened the last time that Trump sent National Guard [members] into a national city?” Enten continued.

“Well, look at the change in Trump's net approval: overall, it dropped four points! How about immigration? It dropped by seven points! We have a history of Trump sending the National Guard into a western city and what happened was there were clear political ramifications for the president of the United States, and they were not good ramifications.”

The souring of American voters on Trump’s antics also extended to Immigration Customs and Enforcement, the nation’s chief immigration agency. Enten shared data that showed net approval of ICE during Trump’s first term was at 0 points, but now, has reached a net negative 14.

“Down it goes because of their actions during the second Trump term. In fact, the Pew Research Center polled 16 different agencies; ICE's net popularity rating was 15th out of 16th, it was close to being the least popular of them all,” Enten said.

“Bottom line is the president may think this is a politically winning issue for him, but the numbers tell a very different story. It's, in fact, a political loser.”