Labor unions unite behind Kamala Harris but concern emerges about potential VP pick Mark Kelly
Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Vice President Kamala Harris has received a flurry of endorsements from many of the nation’s largest labor unions since she announced her candidacy for president.
Concern has emerged within the labor movement, however, over the potential selection of Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., as a running mate because he has not signed onto a key piece of labor reform legislation.
Current and former union officials told ABC News that the possible selection of Kelly sounds alarm bells due to his unwillingness to back the PRO Act, legislation that would ease the path toward forming unions and winning labor contracts. Some officials outright oppose the pick, while others say the policy position should be part of a wider assessment of Kelly.
At least one labor leader who backs Harris said Kelly’s position on the measure should not reflect on his support toward labor or deter his selection as vice president.
Kelly and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro are the two leading candidates for the nod as vice president on a Harris-led ticket, a senior administration official told ABC News on Tuesday. Harris is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee after receiving more than half of the party’s delegates.
“Why would the Democrats even consider a senator for the vice presidency if the senator doesn’t support the PRO Act?” John Samuelsen, president of the Transport Workers Union and an ally of President Joe Biden, told ABC News. “It’s the most important piece of national legislation workers have right now.”
The Transport Workers Union is an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, a 12.5 million member union federation that endorsed Harris on Monday. Samuelson, who said he did not attend the meeting at which the AFL-CIO endorsed Harris, will not decide on his union’s endorsement of Harris until after she selects her vice presidential nominee.
Kelly, who took office in 2020, has declined to sign onto the PRO Act throughout his tenure. The latest version of the bill, known as the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act, boasts the support of 48 of the 51 U.S. Senators who caucus with Democrats.
Richard Bensinger, former organizing director at the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest labor organization, said in a post on X that he opposes Kelly due to his position on the PRO Act.
“Only 3 Democrats refused to sign on to the Pro Act, one of whom was Mark Kelly,” Bensinger said on Sunday, after Harris announced her candidacy. “The right to organize unions is the most important thing to labor so that’s a hard no.”
In a statement, Kelly’s office said the Arizona senator has robustly backed labor.
“Senator Kelly is the son of two union police officers and has been a strong supporter of workers throughout his time in the Senate,” Kelly spokesperson Jacob Peters told ABC News.
Peters pointed ABC News to a statement Kelly made to the Huffington Post in 2021 in which he said he supports “the overall goals” of the legislation while acknowledging that he had “some concerns.”
In 2022, Kelly’s Senate campaign was endorsed by the Arizona AFL-CIO and the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, among other unions.
At least one labor leader whose union endorsed Harris told ABC News that the position taken by Kelly on the PRO Act should not reflect negatively on his perceived support for labor or deter Harris from selecting him for vice president.
The legislation has stood well short of passage in both chambers during Kelly’s tenure in office, the person said. In turn, the person added, Kelly has chosen to prioritize his standing among voters in the highly contested state that he represents. The labor leader requested that their name not be used due to the sensitivity surrounding the Harris campaign.
“I think that Kelly voted against the PRO Act when he felt his vote was not going to make a difference but might have been necessary in order to achieve labor’s bigger objective, which was to control the U.S. Senate,” the labor leader said.
“We don’t question his support for working people,” the labor leader added.
A union president who backs Harris, however, told ABC News they oppose the potential selection of Kelly on account of his position on the labor reform measure. The union president requested that their name not be used due to the sensitivity surrounding the Harris campaign.
“The Democrats cannot afford to have someone on the ticket who is identified as soft on labor,” the person said, referring to Kelly. “This is a huge problem.”
Larry Cohen, former president of the Communications Workers of America, said Kelly’s position on the PRO Act raises concern but the primary consideration in assessing his selection as vice president should be whether he helps the Democratic ticket win in November.
“I wouldn’t rule out Mark Kelly but he certainly wasn’t quick to support what I would call moderate labor reform in a democracy near the bottom in terms of workers’ rights,” Cohen told ABC News.
MORE: Kamala Harris rallies new campaign to fight against Trump after Biden’s endorsement “I would tend to go back to the issue of the swing states. Who can move the needle?” Cohen added, noting Arizona is a battleground state. “The number one goal is beating Trump.”
The AFL-CIO did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Nor did the Service Employees International union, the nation’s largest private sector union, which endorsed Harris.
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during a campaign event in North Hampton, New Hampshire, US, on Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2024. (Kacey Chapman/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris on Wednesday unveiled a vastly expanded $50,000 tax benefit for new small businesses and a lower long-term capital gains tax than that was proposed by President Joe Biden in his budget blueprint, one of her clearest breaks yet with Biden.
Speaking to a crowd of supporters in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Harris said, “And while we ensure that the wealthy and big corporations pay their fair share, we will tax capital gains at a rate that rewards investment in America’s innovators, founders, and small businesses,” before proposing a 28% long-term capital gains tax on people making $1 million a year or more.
Biden previously called for a 39.6% tax rate on capital gains. It is unclear where Harris stands on the additional 5% tax. While Harris’ presidential rival former President Donald Trump has not explicitly outlined a position this cycle, in 2016 he supported capping capital gains taxes at 20%, and the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 calls for a 15% capital gains tax.
A source familiar with the plan told ABC News that Harris believes a more moderated approach toward capital gains taxes will balance with other measures she supports to crack down on billionaires and big corporations. Harris said on Wednesday that she supported a minimum tax rate on billionaires. The source said she also supports raising the corporate tax rate and quadrupling taxes on stock buybacks.
However, the move comes as Harris and Trump seek to sharpen their economic messages to voters before facing off in their first debate on ABC News in Philadelphia next week. Trump is scheduled to give his own economic policy address on Thursday.
Harris’ announcement is part of a broader effort to generate a record-breaking 25 million new small business applications in her first term if elected, and her tax plan would represent a tenfold expansion of a $5,000 deduction already available to entrepreneurs to help cover startup costs.
An official familiar with Harris’ plans said the $50,000 benefit would help offset the $40,000 it costs on average to start a small business. The terms of the proposal would also allow eligible enterprises operating at a loss to delay utilizing the benefit until they turn a profit.
Some profitable businesses could also defer the full benefit, opting to instead use it across multiple years by deducting only earnings from the first year of business and utilizing the remainder of the total $50,000 in future years, according to literature circulated to reporters from the Harris campaign.
Harris said her administration would also seek to develop a standard deduction for small businesses to reduce the burden and cost of filing taxes, and remove barriers around occupational licensing, which inhibits workers from working across state lines.
While the literature circulated to reporters did not estimate the program’s cost, Harris told the crowd that the the plan would provide access to venture capital, support “innovation hubs and business incubators,” and increase the number of federal contracts with small businesses.
Many aspects of Harris’ proposed tax program would likely require congressional approval. The current 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law by Trump, is set to expire next year.
Harris also said that her administration would provide low- and no-interest loans to already existing small businesses. The campaign’s literature detailed a fund that would enable community banks and Community Development Financial Institutions to cover interest costs as small businesses expand in historically underinvested regions.
“We will have a particular focus on small businesses in rural communities, like right here in New Hampshire,” she said.
Both Trump and Harris have repeatedly sought to strike populist economic tones in their messaging, promising to provide relief to middle-class earners and even finding agreement on a proposed phase-out of federal income taxes on tipped wages.
Under pressure to define aspects of her policy agenda, Harris unveiled a slew of additional economic priorities last month that included, among other policies, restoring the American Rescue Plan’s expanded Child Tax Credit, proposing $25,000 in down payment assistance to qualifying first-time home buyers, capping prescription drug prices and a federal ban on price gouging in the food sector.
Meanwhile, Trump has advocated for broader reforms to U.S. economic policy, which have included tax cuts for businesses and wealthy individuals alongside an across-the-board tariff hike on imports to the U.S., generally, with tax rates as high as 60% to 100% on Chinese goods.
(PHILADELPHIA) — Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump met for the first time Tuesday in their first presidential debate of the 2024 election, hosted by ABC News.
The high-stakes, 90-minute debate is being held at Philadelphia’s National Constitution Center, with Trump and Harris arguing their case for the White House.
As the Democratic and Republican nominees debate the most pressing topics facing the nation, ABC News is live fact-checking their statements for answers that are exaggerated, need more context or are false.
Please check back for ongoing updates.
HARRIS CLAIM: 16 Nobel laureates say Trump’s plan would increase inflation and land us in a recession
FACT-CHECK: Mostly true
Harris correctly describes what the Nobel laureates said about inflation during a Trump presidency: “There is rightly a worry that Donald Trump will reignite this inflation.” But while the group describes Harris’ agenda as “vastly superior” to Trump’s, their letter doesn’t specifically predict a recession by the middle of 2025. Rather, the group wrote: “We believe that a second Trump term would have a negative impact on the U.S.’s economic standing in the world and a destabilizing effect on the U.S.’s domestic economy.”
The 16 economists are George Akerlof, Angus Deaton, Claudia Goldin, Oliver Hart, Eric S. Maskin, Daniel L. McFadden, Paul R. Milgrom, Roger B. Myerson, Edmund S. Phelps, Paul M. Romer, Alvin E. Roth, William F. Sharp, Robert J. Shiller, Christopher A. Sims, Joseph Stiglitz and Robert B. Wilson.
-PolitiFact’s Louis Jacobson
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump wants “20% tax on everyday goods” that would cost families “about $4000 more a year”
FACT-CHECK: True, but needs context
Trump has proposed a universal “10-20%” tariff on all U.S. imports, from cars and electronics to wine, food products and many other goods. He has also proposed a 60% tariff on imports from China. Vice President Harris called the plan “Trump’s sales tax,” though the former president has not explicitly proposed such a tax. Independent economists, however, say the proposed import tariffs would unquestionably result in higher prices for American consumers across the board.
The precise financial impact on families is hard to predict and estimates vary widely — from additional annual costs per household of $1,700 to nearly $4,000, depending on the study. Trump has not called for any tax hikes for American families.
He has proposed exempting Social Security benefits and tips from taxation, as well as extending individual tax cuts enacted in 2017.
-ABC News’ Devin Dwyer
TRUMP CLAIM: Trump says “We have inflation like very few people have ever seen before. Probably the worst in our nation’s history.”
FACT-CHECK: False, but it was very high
It’s true that early in Joe Biden’s presidency the annual inflation rate peaked at roughly 9 percent (June of 2022), but that’s not the highest it’s ever been. There are several examples of the inflation rate being much higher than 9 percent in the U.S, including in the immediate aftermath of WWII and during the oil embargo and shortages of the late 70’s and early 1980s.
But, there are several examples of the inflation rate being much higher than 9 percent in the U.S., including in the immediate aftermath of WWII and during the oil embargo of the late 70’s and early 1980s when the inflation rate peaked at 14.5 percent. The inflation rate as of July 2024 is at 2.9 percent annual inflation, the lowest it has been in 3 years. It should also be noted that President Biden has falsely claimed that he inherited a high rate from his predecessor. In fact, inflation was at 1.4 percent when he took office.
*Data for this fact check was gathered from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, or St. Louis Fed
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump left us the worst unemployment since the Great Depression
FACT-CHECK: Needs context
The unemployment rate peaked at 14.8% in April 2020 when Trump was in office – that was indeed the highest level since the Great Depression, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But unemployment rapidly declined to 6.4% in January 2021 by the time Trump left office, as the economy started to rebalance. And that 6.4% unemployment rate is still better than the 10% peak during the Great Recession in October 2009.
If you eliminate pandemic statistics, the lowest unemployment rate under Trump was just slightly higher than the lowest point under Biden. Both were good: 3.5% under Trump and 3.4% under Biden at their lowest respectively, according to data provided by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and Bureau of Labor Statistics.
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump “killed” bill that would have secured border
FACT-CHECK: True
Earlier this year, a bipartisan group of senators unveiled a $20 billion plan to substantially bolster security along the U.S.-Mexico border. It would have added hundreds of border patrol and ICE agents and asylum officers; funded construction of new border wall; expanded detention facilities; ended “catch and release;” effectively closed the border entirely when illegal crossings surge; and raised the bar for asylum claims, according to the bill.
The influential Border Patrol union, which has previously endorsed Trump, publicly backed the bill. But hours after the draft legislation was unveiled on Feb. 5, Trump urged his party to oppose the bill, even as many Republicans have spent years lobbying for some of the security measures included in the deal.
“I’ll fight it all the way,” Trump told supporters at a Las Vegas rally Feb. 8. “A lot of the senators are trying to say, respectfully, they’re blaming it on me. I say, that’s okay. Please blame it on me.” Trump openly invoked election-year politics as a motivation for his position: “This Bill is a great gift to the Democrats, and a Death Wish for The Republican Party. It takes the HORRIBLE JOB the Democrats have done on Immigration and the Border, absolves them, and puts it all squarely on the shoulders of Republicans,” Trump wrote on social media. The bill failed a key Senate procedural vote in May, with all but one Republican voting against it, including all those involved in crafting the deal.
TRUMP CLAIM: Haitian migrants eating pets in Ohio
FACT-CHECK: False
According to the city of Springfield, Ohio, these claims are false. A city spokesperson tells ABC News there have been “no credible reports or specific claims of pets being harmed, injured or abused by individuals in the immigrant community.”
Rumors that migrants from Haiti are stealing and eating animals there have run rampant after a series of claims spread widely online, amplified by social media posts from leading political figures in recent days.
“Additionally, there have been no verified instances of immigrants engaging in illegal activities such as squatting or littering in front of residents’ homes. Furthermore, no reports have been made regarding members of the immigrant community deliberately disrupting traffic,” the spokesperson added.
The House Judiciary GOP X account used AI tools to show Trump holding cats and ducks, portraying him as a savior of animals.
One of the main images circulating online, showing a man holding a dead goose, was taken not in Springfield but in Columbus, Ohio, two months ago. The resident who captured the image told ABC News he was surprised to see his image used to ” push false narratives.”
According to the Springfield News-Sun, the Springfield Police Department has not received any reports of pets being stolen and eaten. The city even created a webpage debunking some claims.
Migrants have been drawn to the region because of low cost of living and work opportunities, the city says on its site. The city estimates there are around 12,000 to 15,000 immigrants living in the county, and that the rapid rise in population has strained housing, health care, and school resources. But the city also says that the migrants are in the country legally and that many are recipients of Temporary Protected Status from the federal government.
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump ‘intends on implementing’ Project 2025
FACT-CHECK: Needs context
Conservative allies and former advisors to Donald Trump published a 900-page policy blueprint in April 2023 to help a new Republican administration transition to power. The effort – dubbed Project 2025 – was organized by the Heritage Foundation, a prominent right-wing think tank. It details proposals for staffing the government and restructuring federal agencies, writing regulations, managing the economy and ensuring national security.
Harris claims Trump “intends on implementing” the “detailed and dangerous” plan if he wins a second term. But Trump denies any association with Project 2025, saying on social media in July: “I have not seen it, have no idea who is in charge of it,” and also publicly denounced its substance as “seriously extreme” and developed by the “severe right.”
“I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal,” Trump posted on social media. Many of the document’s priorities, however, are broadly championed by Trump, including construction of a border wall, mass deportation of undocumented immigrants and banning transgender athletes from women’s sports, among other things.
Dozens of former members of his administration were involved in the project, including former cabinet secretaries and West Wing aides. Many of the same people helped craft the Republican Party platform, ABC News has reported. Speaking at a Heritage Foundation event in April 2022, Trump said: “This is a great group and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do… when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.”
HARRIS CLAIM: ‘If Donald Trump were to be reelected, he will sign a national abortion ban.’
FACT-CHECK: False
Trump has said he has “no regrets” in selecting the Supreme Court justices who overturned the constitutional right to an abortion. But he also repeatedly has promised that if elected, he will not sign a federal abortion ban into law and will leave the issue up to the states. One open question this year had been whether he would enforce the Comstock Act, an 1873 law that prohibits mailing materials used in abortions.
Among other things, the law would make it illegal to ship the drug mifepristone, which is used to terminate early pregnancies. The Biden administration has said the law is unenforceable because the drug has medical uses other than abortion, and it would be impossible to know how the drug was being used. Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, and other conservatives have called for the enforcement of the law.
In an August interview with CBS News, Trump said that while “we will be discussing specifics of it,” he will not enforce the Comstock Act.
TRUMP CLAIM: Trump said ‘they didn’t fire anybody having to do with Afghanistan.’
FACT-CHECK: True, but needs context.
It is accurate that no one with a direct role in the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in 2021 has been held publicly accountable.
Trump appears to be specifically referring to a suicide bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members. U.S. Central Command ultimately concluded that the bombing was not preventable and that members of a Marine sniper team were mistaken when they told others they had the suicide bomber in their sights.
Trump, congressional Republicans and several Gold Star families say they believe these investigations have not gone far enough.
TRUMP CLAIM: Kamala Harris wants to ban fracking
FACT-CHECK: Needs context
It’s true that Harris once called to ban fracking altogether, but she has since said she changed her policy view. During a CNN town hall on climate change in 2019 when she was still a Senator, Harris said, “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” Fracking is short for “hydraulic fracturing,” and it’s a technique used in the extraction of oil and natural gas from underground rock formations.
Harris also said she backed California’s efforts to stop the practice in her home state when she was the state’s attorney general. However, she eventually changed her view on fracking when she became Biden’s running mate in 2020. During an October 2020 segment on ABC’s The View, Harris said neither she nor Biden would ban fracking. Harris reiterated that she would not ban fracking during the ABC News Presidential Debate.
TRUMP CLAIM: Trump said ‘I’d like to give you 10,000 National Guard soldiers. They rejected me. Nancy [Pelosi] rejected me.’
FACT-CHECK: False
The final report by the bipartisan Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol determined there was “no evidence” to support the claim that Trump gave an order “to have 10,000 troops ready for January 6th.”
The report quoted President Trump’s Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller, who directly refuted this claim under oath, saying, “There was no direct order from the President” to put 10,000 troops to be on the ready for January 6th.
Instead, the report noted that when Trump referenced that number of troops, it was not to protect the Capitol but that he had “floated the idea of having 10,000 National Guardsmen deployed to protect him and his supporters from any supposed threats by left-wing counter-protesters.”
HARRIS CLAIM: If elected, Trump would be immune from criminal prosecution
FACT-CHECK: Partly true
Vice President Harris claimed Trump would be “immune from any misconduct” and have “no guard rails” after a landmark Supreme Court decision in June.
The court did rule the core powers, which include the ability to make treaties, veto bills, nominate cabinet members, appoint ambassadors, act as Commander-in-Chief of the military, and grant pardons.) The court also said that presidents enjoy “at least presumptive immunity” for other “official acts” – defined broadly as actions within the “outer perimeter” of official responsibilities but not “manifestly or palpably beyond his authority.”
While the decision is widely construed as granting broad protection for a president, the court said presidents are “not above the law” and enjoy no “absolute” immunity, leaving room for a narrow set of cases where a current or former president could face criminal prosecution. There is also no immunity for “unofficial” acts, the court said.
Trump faces a pair of active federal criminal cases against him brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The Supreme Court decision does not mean those prosecutions cannot move forward, but it has significantly delayed proceedings and made it more difficult to convict Trump. If he were to win a second term, Trump’s Justice Department could dismiss the Special Counsel and effectively end the cases against him.
TRUMP CLAIM: Trump said he ended the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and ‘Biden put it back on day one.’
FACT-CHECK: Mostly false
The Nord Stream 2 is an undersea pipeline that would have allowed Russia to increase natural gas exports to Western Europe while bypassing Ukraine and depriving Kyiv billions of dollars in access fees. It’s true that in 2019, Trump announced sanctions that halted the pipeline’s construction. But by that point, the pipeline was nearly complete with a majority of the project occurring under Trump’s presidency, according to a 2020 analysis by the Congressional Research Service.
Biden later waived sanctions against the pipeline’s builder at the request of Germany in 2021, but reimposed penalties the following year as Russia invaded Ukraine.
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump’s deal with the Taliban is to blame for the chaotic withdrawal in Afghanistan.
FACT-CHECK: Needs context
The top government watchdog on the Afghanistan war blames Trump’s 2020 deal with the Taliban as “the single most important factor” in the rapid collapse of Afghanistan’s forces a year later. But the same office also says Biden’s decision to stick with a firm withdrawal date of U.S. troops was a factor as well.
Trump’s deal with the Taliban called for the withdrawal of U.S. forces by May 2021 and release 5,000 of its fighters from Afghan prisons so long as they agreed not to attack U.S. forces. According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, the agreement was seen by Afghan forces as a “signal that the U.S. was handing over Afghanistan to the enemy as it rushed to exit the country.” Trump also had reduced U.S. troop levels to the lowest point in the 20-year war, and Afghan forces weren’t prepared to take over, according to the inspector general.
Biden aides say the poor security situation when he took office in January 2021 put the newly elected president in an almost impossible position. Biden could have surged U.S. troops to the country to try to bolster the weakened Afghan government. But doing so would have extended what was already the nation’s longest war and put American forces at risk of renewed attacks by the Taliban. According to the inspector general, Biden’s announcement that he would stick with a 2021 withdrawal date contributed to the poor morale among Afghan troops, paving the way for a government collapse and subsequent Taliban takeover.
TRUMP CLAIM: Harris and Walz support abortion ‘in the seventh month, the eighth month, the ninth month… And probably after birth.’
FACT-CHECK: False
Trump has claimed that Democrats in some states allow for the killing of an infant after birth. This is false.
There is no state that allows the killing of a baby after birth. Infanticide is illegal in all 50 states. His false claim stems from a refusal by many Democrats to support any legal restrictions on abortion, and he specifically references comments by former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, a physician, who once said that in rare, late-pregnancy cases when fetuses are nonviable, doctors deliver the baby, resuscitate it if the mother wishes, and then have a “discussion” with the mother.
While most states that allow abortion do so only up until fetal viability, there are several states – including Colorado, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont and Gov. Tim Walz’s home state of Minnesota — that do not impose a legal limit on abortion procedures. Advocates for abortion rights say the absence of legal consequences after fetal liability doesn’t mean doctors will try to terminate full-term, healthy pregnancies.
In fact, access to late term procedures is limited, costly and medically complex — typically done only when a woman’s life is threatened or the fetus isn’t expected to survive. Many Democrats say they want to pass legislation that would codify the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which protects abortion rights up until viability.
TRUMP CLAIM: Trump said he lost the 2020 election on a ‘technicality’ because judges determined he lacked standing in election lawsuits.
FACT-CHECK: False
Trump lost the 2020 election after Biden won 306 electoral votes, compared to Trump’s 232 electoral votes.
After losing the 2020 election, Trump and his allies filed more than 60 lawsuits to challenge the outcome of the election — the overwhelming majority of which were dismissed or dropped. Many of the cases were dismissed because the plaintiffs in the cases could not prove a strong enough connection to the action they were challenging. Not having “standing” is a common and legally justifiable reason for a case to be dismissed.
TRUMP CLAIM: The Biden administration left $85 billion worth of ‘brand new beautiful military equipment behind’ in Afghanistan that was seized by the Taliban.
FACT-CHECK: False
This is not accurate, as $83 billion is an estimate of the entire amount spent by the US in security assistance in Afghanistan since 2001.
Still, the Defense Department’s Inspector General estimates $7.12 billion worth of U.S.-funded equipment was seized by the Taliban when the U.S. withdrew. According to the government watchdog, that amount includes 78 aircraft, some 9,500 air-to-ground munitions, 40,000 vehicles, 300,000 weapons and nearly all night-vision, surveillance, communications and biometric equipment provided to Afghanistan forces.
HARRIS CLAIM: ‘Trump took out a full page ad calling for their execution’
FACT-CHECK: True
Not long after the Central Park Five were arrested, Trump placed full-page ads in New York newspapers urging New York to bring back the death penalty. “These muggers and murderers” should be “forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes,” said the ad, above Trump’s signature.
-PolitiFact’s Aaron Sharockman
HARRIS CLAIM: Trump exchanged love letters with Kim Jong Un
FACT-CHECK: False
Trump did exchange letters with Kim Jong Un in August 2018 after the two leaders held a summit together in Singapore in June 2018. Trump tweeted thanking the North Korean leader “for your nice letter – I look forward to seeing you soon.” The White House at the time said Trump sent a reply to the North Korean leader, but the White House did not provide details about what was in Kim Jong Un’s letter or what was in Trump’s reply.
In August 2019, Trump said he received a “very beautiful letter” from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un when speaking to reporters.
In September 2018, Trump told a crowd at a campaign rally that there was once tough talk between the two leaders, “and then we fell in love.”
“And then we fell in love, okay? No, really – he wrote me beautiful letters, and they’re great letters,” Trump said at the rally. Trump did often speak favorably of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un during and after his presidency.
HARRIS CLAIM: Biden-Harris made historic investments in clean energy
FACT-CHECK: Needs context
The U.S. budget for clean energy investments (over $559 billion as of August 2023) is the largest in the world, according to the World Economic Forum. About a third of that investment is going toward low-carbon electricity projects, and about a quarter is aimed at developing low-carbon, efficient transportation, according to WEF. In the first quarter of 2024, the U.S. “continued its record-setting growth” with a new high of $71 billion invested in clean energy and transportation, according to Clean Investment Monitor.
At the same time, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in March that the U.S. is now producing more crude oil than any country ever has — and has been for the past six years in a row. In December 2023 the U.S. reached a new monthly record high of more than 13.3 million barrels per day, according to the EIA.
The Harris-Walz campaign told ABC News that the trillion-dollar amount cited by the vice president is based on the total spending of the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. In a statement, they told us “Vice President Harris was proud to cast the tie-breaking vote on the largest ever investment to address the climate crisis and under the Biden-Harris Administration, America is more energy secure than ever before with the highest domestic energy production on record.”
Even if you take the lowest estimate for federal spending under the IRA, 780-800 billion dollars, adding the funds allocated in the CHIPS and BIL laws does exceed the $1 trillion figures that Harris has cited in her campaign speeches. All three laws include provisions that address climate change.
(CHICAGO) — Several young Democrats said they are embracing the “vibe shift” in the party that they’ve experienced over the last few weeks, feeling newly enlivened at the Democratic National Convention with Vice President Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket.
“I’ve been around a lot of political things for the past few years, and it has never felt this exciting,” Jonah Simon, 20, told ABC News at the DNC.
Simon said he feels that unlike merely a month ago when President Joe Biden was the nominee, younger voters now have a candidate in Harris they are “proud to get behind, somebody who we can be really excited to rally around.”
For decades, younger voters were a reliable part of the Democratic coalition, including in the 2020 election. But polls leading up to Biden’s departure from the race showed his wide advantage with Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 had diminished.
Liz Benecchi, 22, echoed a refrain heard from Democrats young and old — that while the party respected Biden’s record and decades of service, there was a necessity to turn the page.
“I have so much admiration and so much deep respect for him. I’m going to be honest, I wasn’t as excited about going out on Election Day to vote for President Joe Biden. But it was time for something new and it was time for a change. And I think everyone here is really fired up,” said Benecchi.
Benecchi pointed to the Harris campaign’s fresh embrace of social media, especially TikTok, leaning into memes like “brat summer” and Harris’ viral “coconut tree” moment, as a more earnest way to communicate with the party’s youngest flank.
“I have so many friends that want to get engaged. They want to volunteer, they want to canvass, they want to be a part of it,” Benecchi said.
That kind of enthusiasm can’t exist in a vacuum — and Lorenzo Ruiz, 20, said he feels like the energy transfer to get-out-the-vote mobilization is kicking off in earnest now.
“We’re moving on the right path. The trajectory feels like it’s toward victory, and we’re really seeing people lock in and engage. And that’s what we need. We need people excited. We need them happy and joyful. And this is a joyous campaign. And, that’s the campaign that we’ve been building and that we as a group, people on the campaign, people working grassroots, will continue to build. And, I think we’re going to win this thing,” Ruiz said.
This sort of enthusiasm is reflected in the newest ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll, with the data showing an 18-point swing from Biden (at +2) to Harris (at +20) with people under 40.
But her support from the younger generation is not guaranteed — especially as young progressives remain heavily critical of Biden’s (and Harris’) position on Israel.
Jasmine Wynn, 19, one of such progressives, still plans on voting for Harris regardless. And while she acknowledges that others on the left may not follow suit, Wynn supposes that there’s a practical argument to be made to persuade them.
“I think a lot of young left, especially my friends, initially they were reluctant to vote for Harris or any kind of like Democratic ticket because of kind of what they’ve done so far in Gaza. But I think there’s kind of a shift in terms of, I think, approaching electoral politics in a very pragmatic sense as opposed to an idealistic sense,” said Wynn.
