As the United States marks its 250th anniversary, Florida officials highlighted a nickname for the state with a Revolution-era ring: “the 14th colony.”

The moniker, used by academics and historians for years, appeared in an “America 250” exhibit at the state Capitol this spring. Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has unveiled statues honoring founding fathers in their namesake Florida counties, has used the term, too.

It doesn’t mean that Florida was the 14th U.S. state — that was Vermont. Florida became the 27th state on March 3, 1845.

So what is this “14th colony” idea all about? 

Turns out, the nickname has been used to refer to Florida for decades — and also other British territories outside of the 13 colonies, historians said.

“The phrase has been out there to refer to different places for different reasons for at least the past 50 years, but all to mean the same thing: There’s some extra to the story in our area that’s not part of the original geographic area of the 13,” said historian Mike Bunn, author of “Fourteenth Colony: The Forgotten Story of the Gulf South During America’s Revolutionary Era.” 

British territories fluctuated, with the country controlling 25 to 35 colonies in the Americas — from Quebec to Grenada. Britain didn’t assign numbers to the lands, which were swapped often, and considered the American territories a disjointed group among its other scattered territories in the region. 

Americans popularized the phrase “13 colonies” in the 1770s to explain the rebellious founding of the U.S., historians said. The symbolic “14th colony” nickname came later, appearing in several publications in the 1950s and ’60s around the U.S.’ bicentennial anniversary in 1976, Bunn said. 

Florida was much larger in the colonial era, stretching into the present-day Gulf region. Counter to the Revolutionary spirit remembered today, Florida didn’t share the rebellious streak of the northern colonies. 

Britain divided Florida into two territories

Roger Smith, author of “The 14th Colony, The American Revolution’s Best Kept Secret,” compared the frequent land swaps of the time to a game of three-card monte. 

“They would trade colonies back and forth constantly, bringing in three, giving up two, and so on,” Smith, a historian and University of Florida adjunct professor, said..

Britain acquired Florida with Grenada, Nova Scotia and Quebec as part of a 1763 treaty that ended the Seven Years’ War.

“After Spain relinquished Florida in 1763 to Great Britain in exchange for Havana, Cuba, the first thing the British did was decide it was too big and divided it into two,” Smith said.

Great Britain split Florida into two territories — East Florida and West Florida. Unlike the colonies to the north, both East Florida and West Florida sided with the British during the Revolutionary War and wanted little to do with independence from the crown. 

West Florida comprised parts of present-day Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and the Florida panhandle, with Pensacola as its capital. East Florida comprised most of the Florida peninsula, extending east and south from the Apalachicola River to the Atlantic seaboard, with its capital in St. Augustine. 

Because Britain acquired the group of four colonies on the same day, Smith said he counts them alphabetically — making East Florida No. 14 and West Florida No. 15. 

“When people refer to the whole state as the 14th colony, I think that’s incorrect,” he said.

Bunn said he doesn’t believe the order of East Florida and West Florida is very consequential since they joined the same day, but agreed that referring to both as one colony isn’t quite right; the territories had separate British governing bodies.

Why did East Florida and West Florida side with Britain during the Revolutionary War?

East Florida and West Florida rejected American independence, partly because the territories were underpopulated and, unlike many of their northern neighbors, heavily reliant on British government funding.

Settlers depended on the British military to protect them from local Native American tribes and potential Spanish invasion. 

Florida eventually became a haven for British loyalists fleeing the northern colonies during the war. St. Augustine’s population swelled with people who hated the American rebels, experts said.

When the Continental Congress in Philadelphia invited the other North American colonies to join the rebellion in 1774 and 1775, East Florida and West Florida refused.

While West Florida eventually fell to Spanish forces, East Florida successfully repelled multiple Continental Army invasions between 1776 and 1780, experts said, with the Union Jack (the United Kingdom’s national flag) continuing to fly over St. Augustine until 1783, when Britain officially ceded both Florida territories back to Spain.

“When news of independence came to St. Augustine in 1776, a huge crowd showed up with effigies of Samuel Adams and John Hancock that they hung up and burned in the public square,” Smith said.

Great Britain handed Florida back to Spain following the 1783 signing of the Treaty of Paris that ended the war. Spain ceded Florida to the U.S. in 1819.

Floridians voted in a referendum in favor of statehood in 1838 and approved a state constitution  in 1839. Florida’s statehood became official in 1845, after Congress’ approval.

President Donald Trump has often talked up the stock market’s rise during his second term, saying increases in 401(k) retirement plan balances have made Americans wealthier.

During a June 23 speech at a Mack truck plant in Macungie, Pennsylvania, Trump said, “The typical 401(k), as you know, is up almost $30,000 in … 13 months.”

He’s made similar points going back to his Feb. 24 State of the Union address.

The stock market has risen during Trump’s second term. But the average $30,000 gain he cited is not supported by data; that’s about triple the increase found in a large analysis of 401(k) balances. And a growing share of Americans are withdrawing 401(k) dollars before retirement to cope with unexpected hardships. 

The White House offered no supporting evidence for Trump’s statement. White House spokesperson Kush Desai said “equity markets have hit multiple all-time highs” during Trump’s second presidency.

How much has the stock market increased during Trump’s second term?

The Standard & Poor’s 500, a metric that charts a broad selection of publicly traded stocks, shows notable gains since Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2025.

Between his second inauguration and the day of his February 2026 State of the Union address — the first time he mentioned the $30,000 figure — the S&P rose by about 13%. From his second inauguration to June 23, the day of his Pennsylvania speech, the S&P rose by about 24%.

401(k) balances are rising, but not as high as Trump said

What about the gains for typical 401(k) holders? 

First, narrowing down a “typical” 401(k) account is challenging. People of different incomes, ages and company 401(k) policies can see their balances vary widely — and that’s before factoring in the mix of assets that make up their accounts. 

“The (higher account balance) you have, the more gains you will have achieved,” said Joe Fitter, a senior lecturer in finance at Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business.

Fidelity Investments, a financial institution that operates many 401(k) plans, provides the best available data.

Every quarter, Fidelity examines balances within more than 26,000 corporate 401(k) plans serving roughly 25 million participants. It also breaks down the average balance by the account holder’s age.

We looked at Fidelity’s data for the quarterly period ending Dec. 31, 2024, and for the period ending March 31, 2026. Comparing these two figures offers a measure of the growth in 401(k) balances during the first 15 months of Trump’s second term — a good approximation of how much growth occurred during the period he’s been making this claim.

Fidelity offered breakdowns for 11 age ranges, starting at age 20 and ending at 70 and older. Averaging the gains for these 11 ranges produced an increase of $9,454 — about one-third of the $30,000 figure Trump cited.

The single biggest average increase for any particular age range was 55 to 59, which saw a rise of about $16,000. 

Experts said the average gains might be lower than $9,454.

“Averages in data like this tend to get pulled up by high-balance accounts, so the median would likely be lower than the $9,000 figure,” said Mark A. Johnson, an investments and portfolio management fellow at Wake Forest University’s business school.

A $30,000 gain during this period would likely have required a balance of at least $200,000 in a 401(k), said Mark Williams, a lecturer in finance at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business. But that’s not a typical amount; about 10% to 20% of U.S. adults have an account that big.

In addition, the balance increase doesn’t stem only from stock market gains. Some of the increase comes from the account holder’s own contributions and potentially those of their employer.

Why 401(k) balances may not be rising as fast as the overall stock market

The percentage increases by age in Fidelity’s 401(k) data do not necessarily match the overall growth rate of the stock market. From December 31, 2024, through March 31, 2026, the S&P 500 rose by about 11%, but the average 401(k) Fidelity measured rose by about 6.5%, and several age ranges, especially among the youngest and oldest groups, saw smaller increases.

One reason for the lag is that 401(k) accounts typically contain a mix of investment categories. Williams said the typical 401(k) mix is 60% to 65% stocks, with the remainder in other assets, such as bonds, that are less volatile. During the time period in question, bond returns were flat, he said, and that would hold down overall 401(k) returns.

Another important reason is that 401(k) accounts are a two-way street: Account owners can take out money, though they may have to pay a penalty to do so.

In general, 401(k) accounts are designed to provide retirement income, so early withdrawals — money taken out before age 59 1/2 — may incur a 10% early withdrawal penalty, plus income taxes. 

However, certain circumstances may allow an early withdrawal without incurring a penalty, including birth or adoption costs, a new disability, disaster recovery, medical or other emergencies, funeral expenses and payments to avoid an eviction or foreclosure.

Exercising this option has become increasingly common, the investment firm Vanguard reported in March. The Vanguard data showed that about 6% of the participants in its 401(k) plans took a hardship withdrawal in 2025, up from about 4.8% in 2024 and higher than the level prior to the coronavirus pandemic.

Dorothy C. Kelly, a personal finance lecturer at University of Virginia’s McIntire School of Commerce, said that 401(k) gains have limited immediate use to Americans younger than 59 1/2 who are facing a cash crunch or higher monthly bills.

“The net worth of ordinary Americans with retirement accounts may be benefiting from current high stock prices, but a growing illiquid asset such as a retirement account does not help with working Americans’ monthly bills,” she said.

Our ruling

Trump said that in the past 13 months, “The typical 401(k) … is up almost $30,000.”

The stock market has notched notable increases during Trump’s second term, but a $30,000 rise is not supported.

Fidelity Investments data shows that between Dec. 31, 2024, and March 31, 2026, the average increase in 401(k) balances was $9,454. No age group Fidelity studied saw an increase beyond about half of Trump’s $30,000 figure.

The statement contains an element of truth but ignores other information that would give a different impression, so we rate the statement Mostly False.

Voting where you live in the city, or your place in the countryside?

Can New Yorkers with two homes really choose where to cast their ballot? 

A group called MoveIndigo wants New York Democratic voters who have second homes to vote where their second homes are located if those properties are in swing districts.

“New York State law is clear,” the group claims. “Citizens with dual residences have the right to choose where they want to vote. They do not have to vote where they maintain their primary residence.”

Is that true? 

The New York State Board of Elections publishes updates on state election law, and its 2026 guidance quotes a key court case from 1983, Ferguson v. McNab. The case found that a person with two residences “may choose one to which she has legitimate, significant and continuing attachments as her residence for purposes of the Election Law.”

New Yorkers with more than one residence can vote from one, and only one. According to case law, this residence does not have to be a primary residence, or a “domicile,” which is a permanent home, one suitable for year-round use. 

Judges have found that when voters can decide where to vote, it lessens the burdens on elections staff,  “who in most cases need only verify an address,” as well as the burden on voters with more than one residence, “who otherwise might be turned down at both places and have to go to court in order to be able to vote anywhere.”   

A board of elections spokeswoman confirmed that. 

“New York State Election Law does permit an individual with two residences to choose one or the other to register to vote from,” said Kathleen McGrath, director of public information at the board. McGrath said the facts of each situation matter. 

“New Yorkers may have multiple residences but must only claim a right to vote from one,” she said. 

We also consulted with election lawyer Jerry Goldfeder, senior counsel at Cozen O’Connor, on whether there are exceptions. 

“The election law in New York is perfectly clear: voters may choose from multiple residences from which to vote, as long as they are bona fide homes,” Goldfeder said. 

A 2015 case, Maas v Gaebel, found that if a voter has a position on a political issue, and that issue motivates them “to register to vote in a place where he or she has established a bona fide residence does not render such a residence a ‘sham.’”

These laws of course do not permit voters to lie to a Board of Elections official, or write down a fake address on voter registration forms. 

Some observers have questioned New York’s more permissive approach. There have been few cases of false registration in New York, and “the absence of such guidance gives” people with multiple residences “a greater chance of manipulating the rules,” wrote Kevin Frazier, who has taught constitutional law, in the Appalachian Journal of Law. 

MoveIndigo provided relevant evidence from the Board of Elections on its website to support its claim. 

Our ruling 

A group claims that voters with two homes in New York can vote at either one. New York state case law supports this claim, as does the state Board of Elections. 

It remains the case that voters cannot mislead elections officials. But when voters with two or more homes do follow the law, they are permitted to choose where they want to vote, even if that is for a politically motivated reason. 

We rate this claim True. 

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — Florida Republicans billed their party’s June 27 gathering in South Florida as the “Sunshine State Showdown.” But for U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds, the event’s headliner and GOP frontrunner for governor, it was less of a confrontation and more like a friendly chat.

No other gubernatorial candidates met the party’s fundraising and polling criteria for a debate, and Donalds didn’t call for one.

Donalds took the stage at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino after a video clip of Charlie Kirk, the assassinated Turning Point USA founder, endorsing Donalds’ bid for governor. Donalds didn’t mention his opponents in his speech and took audience questions about the Second Amendment and his plans to lower homeowner’s insurance and protect the state’s water supply. His broad replies didn’t offer much opportunity for fact-checking.

Of the gubernatorial candidates who attended, Florida Lt. Gov. Jay Collins took direct swipes at Donalds’ vulnerabilities, including his decades-old drug charge and campaign donations from a pro-AI super PAC. Former Florida House Speaker Paul Renner touted his actions shaping state law, including 2023 legislation he supported that restricted citizens from China and other “countries of concern” from owning or buying land in Florida. 

The Aug. 18 primary winner will likely face Democratic candidate David Jolly, a former congressman, in the general election. 

Speakers said little about the party’s withdrawn invitation to controversial governor candidate James Fishback, who held his own event nearby. 

They focused more on what unites them: personal freedom and disdain for New York politics. U.S. Sen. Ashley Moody didn’t mention her leading Democratic opponent Alexander Vindman but described New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani-backed congressional race winners as “anarchist psychos that want to destroy this country.” 

Here, we fact-checked some of the speakers’ remarks.

Collins: Donalds voted “against military pay raises.”

Collins speaks to the media at the Florida Sunshine State Showdown on June 27, 2026. (Amy Sherman/PolitiFact)

Collins cherry-picked some of Donalds’ votes against defense spending packages that authorized military pay raises, ignoring that Donalds voted for other measures that included them. PolitiFact rated a similar Collins statement Mostly False.

The National Defense Authorization Act is a sweeping annual package that sets funding and policy for the U.S. Defense Department. While it includes military pay increases, the legislation is typically thousands of pages and authorizes billions in funding for a variety of military operations, and often has unrelated provisions tacked on. 

Donalds voted against the legislation in 2022, 2023 and 2025, saying he disagreed with provisions such as Ukraine funding and climate change initiatives. He supported the package with raises in 2021 and in 2024. 

Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia: Florida is “No. 1 in arresting and deporting criminal aliens in our communities.”

Florida is near the top for arrests, but it’s not No. 1. (We don’t have similar data for deportations.)

The state trails only Texas in arrests, according to Deportation Data Project records analyzed by The Associated Press.

Through “Operation Tidal Wave” — the partnership between Florida’s state and local law enforcement agencies and federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement — agencies arrested more than 10,400 immigrants in the country illegally in Florida in 2025, according to state data.

DeSantis said in January that another 9,600 arrests were made through 287g agreements, which allow state and local law enforcement to enforce certain federal immigration laws. Around 347 state and local agencies in Florida have signed these agreements, the most of any state.

A Miami Herald analysis found that more than 4,800 of the approximately 20,000 people had only immigration violations, and no criminal charges or convictions. A quarter of those arrested had criminal convictions, and the rest had pending criminal charges that included nonviolent crimes.

Data shows that ICE agents in Florida have made more immigration arrests so far in 2026 than in any other part of the U.S. As of March 10, the ICE field office in Miami — which covers Florida, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands — recorded about 120 arrests per day from Dec. 19, 2025, through March 10, or 9,880 arrests in total, The New York Times reported.

U.S. Rep. Kat Cammack: “You should have to show an ID and you should have to be a citizen in order to vote.”

Trump takes a photo with Cammack after delivering the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House chamber at the U.S. Capitol, Feb. 24, 2026. (AP)

Voters already have to be U.S. citizens to cast ballots in federal elections. Cases of noncitizens voting are extremely rare. 

States set voter ID laws. Starting Jan. 1, 2027, the Florida Save Act will require voters to provide photo identification, such as an active U.S. passport or a state driver’s license, at the polls before voting. It prohibits the use of student and retirement center IDs. 

The law also requires new Florida driver’s licenses and state-issued ID cards to include citizenship status. It’s similar to the stalled SAVE America Act backed by Trump.

U.S. Sen. Rick Scott: In Colombia’s recent presidential runoff, “They counted the ballots and announced within three hours,” much faster than California’s primary election.

Colombia does count ballots faster than California. But the two election setups are vastly different than Scott and others have described.

Colombia’s election had just two candidates on the ballot. The election is administered nationally, and the country doesn’t have mail-in voting. 

California’s June 2 primary — where some race results have taken days or weeks to report — included several contests on the ballot. Counties administer the elections, and most California voters cast ballots by mail, which requires more time to process and verify.

Sign up for our Florida Fact Focus newsletter here.

RELATED: All of our fact-checks of Florida politicians including candidates for governor 

After complaining about the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool’s appearance, President Donald Trump launched a renovation project to paint the pool’s  bottom “American flag blue.” But the pool once again is plagued by algae, and its coating is peeling — something Trump blames on vandalism.

Trump has said vandals slashed the pool with a knife, leaving a cut he has variously described as 150 feet, 250 feet, 300 feet and 350 feet long. 

“The 350 foot gash, made by a very sharp knife or razors, is actually numerous slashes over a very long 350 foot length,” he said in a June 23 Truth Social post, a day after telling reporters proof of the vandalism would be provided in court.   

Asked for evidence of vandalism and the gash, the Trump administration pointed PolitiFact and other journalists to several things: the Interior Department; White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt’s interview on Fox News, in which she blamed vandals; and video surveillance footage of people bending over the pool’s edge. A June 25 White House press release included a link to a video a TMZ DC co-managing editor posted on X which appears to show a white line throughout a pool.

We dissected Trump’s statements about vandalism by examining publicly available information about the renovations, arrests, algae blooms and what could cause the pool’s coating to peel. 

Reflecting Pool renovations 

Foundational issues have afflicted the pool since its creation in the 1920s. 

Pipes that are intended to facilitate filtration — to prevent algae and murky water — and maintain the reflective water level are leaking, but that problem was not addressed in Trump’s recent renovations, The New York Times reported. 

Two construction firms with ties to Trump were granted no-bid contracts for the renovations, which started in April. Atlantic Industrial Coatings, which previously worked on the Trump National Golf Club, was awarded a $14.7 million contract to add a blue sealant to the pool floor and repair the expansion joint seals. Green Water Services, owned by John J. Cafaro, who donated $250,000 to the Trump Victory committee in 2020, received a $1.7 million contract to upgrade the water purification system. 

The pool reopened June 6, but less than a week later, the water turned green from algae, obscuring the new blue bottom. Algae excels in sun-exposed shallow, stagnant water, and overactive algae is not a new problem at the monument. 

It’s “unrealistic to eliminate all algae growth” in the Reflecting Pool, Jason Davison, an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at Catholic University, told PBS.

National Park Service workers have put hydrogen peroxide into the water and are using equipment to try to eliminate the algae.

A piece of the blue coating floats among algae at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool Sunday, June 21, 2026, on the National Mall in Washington. (AP)

What could cause the coating to peel

Signs of problems with the new coating emerged before Trump’s recent vandalism allegations. In May, Interior Department staff noticed defects in the blue coating including bubbling and small holes, The New York Times reported. 

The pool has a polyurea coating, which is a rubber-like material.

Steve Goodale, an aquatic systems consultant known online as “Swimming Pool Steve,” told PolitiFact that although creating a gash in polyurea coating is not impossible, he has a hard time imagining a tool that could cause more than superficial damage.

If the lining was cut with a knife, water could infiltrate the space between the sealant and concrete, resulting in peeling. 

However, at the pool, a PolitiFact reporter saw no visible gash. Officers there could not point the reporter to the alleged gash, and it’s not visible from National Park Service Monument video feeds, which provide a view of the pool from the top of the Washington Monument. 

Trump said vandals might have put fertilizer into the water, causing the lining to peel.

Goodale said that it was highly unlikely that fertilizer would affect the lining’s integrity. Polyurea is naturally resistant to chemicals, and because the pool is so large, any nonindustrial amount of substance added would likely have little to no effect.

Goodale told PolitiFact one of the most common failures in polyurea coatings is inadequate surface preparation — not drying or controlling the moisture on the concrete before applying the lining. If the concrete is not fully dry then vapor pressure may build up between the sealant and the concrete, resulting in peeling. 

Have there been arrests? 

In its June 25 press release, the White House said seven people were cited, seven arrested, and that there were 18 police reports for vandalism. PolitiFact asked the White House and the Interior Department for arrest records but received none.

Davey Hearn, a three time Olympian canoeist, told The Washington Post he was arrested and charged with a misdemeanor for destruction of federal property. Hearn told the Post he saw a detaching lining and reached in to feel it. He denied peeling or destroying anything and described being quickly arrested after taking his hand out of the pool, then detained for five hours. 

Gaby Scott, Hearn’s legal representative, told PolitiFact, “There was no crime.” She said people have interacted with the Reflecting Pool for decades and denouncing ordinary behavior as criminal “diverts attention from the real questions of how this project was managed.”  

Trump has said destroying or attempting to destroy the pool is punishable by 10 years in prison. The maximum sentence for federal property destruction is up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines, if $1,000 or more if damage occurs. 

Sara Bronin, a George Washington University law professor specializing in property and historical preservation law, told PolitiFact, “It seems very unlikely that any court would impose the maximum sentence – much less any sentence at all – for the alleged violations.” Bronin said that’s usually imposed only when the defendant committed other, larger crimes or greatly damaged property. 

City Police Department officers, deputized to assist with local law enforcement for events around the 250th anniversary of the U.S., patrol near the area where sections of blue coating have peeled up in the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, Saturday, June 20, 2026, in Washington. (AP)

Trump overstates pool repair costs under Obama

Trump initially said pool renovation costs would be about $2 million, though that price tag has gone up to more than $16 million. He also has repeatedly compared his administration’s work on the pool with work he said the Obama and Biden administrations completed. 

On Truth Social on June 22, Trump wrote, “Obama and Biden spent over 100 Million Dollars on the Reflecting Pool, and it never worked.” 

The Obama administration replaced the basin and water circulation system — which drew water from the Tidal Basin — for $35 million. The Biden administration never conducted any major repairs. 

Major fixes will require redraining the 6.5 million gallon pool, and will happen after celebrations for the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. 

President Donald Trump surprised members of both political parties June 24 when he abruptly canceled an event touting the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which had passed the Senate overwhelmingly — a rare bipartisan achievement on the affordability issue that is top of mind for voters.

Trump posted that he would not sign the bill until passage of the SAVE America Act, which would expand requirements for proof of citizenship to vote. Democrats have criticized the SAVE America Act, saying it would disenfranchise legitimate voters, and Senate Republican leaders have said they don’t have the votes to pass it in their chamber.

When Trump was still planning to sign the housing bill, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on X that the bill was “one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history” and an example of a Trump administration “promise made, promise kept.”

But after Trump’s switch, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala. — one of the five senators to vote against the measure — reiterated his opposition. He said the bill would primarily fund the Department of Housing and Urban Development and benefit immigrants in the United States illegally.

“This is a bill that might touch a little bit of the middle classes, but it’s going to go to a lot of people that are here illegally to build houses for them,” Tuberville said in a June 24 interview with Fox News. (Tuberville is running for governor.)

Tuberville’s fellow Alabama senator, Republican Katie Britt, took the opposite position, saying June 25 that the legislation “appropriates zero dollars and maintains that illegal aliens are not eligible for HUD housing assistance.”

Who’s right? 

In our analysis of the bill, we found nothing in the legislation that would specifically benefit people in the U.S. illegally, and interviews with housing policy experts backed that up. In addition, people in the U.S. illegally are already denied most forms of HUD housing assistance.

The legislation’s goal is to increase the housing supply and lower its cost. It’s possible people here illegally would benefit — but only because the bill affects anyone in the market for housing, regardless of legal status.

“Adding housing will always affect the entire real estate ecosystem,” said Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh, a Columbia University professor of real estate and finance. Any new housing “will lower the cost of housing for anyone else. That’s just general equilibrium in the housing market, or in any market, for that matter. You cannot suspend the laws of economics.”

Tuberville’s office did not respond to inquiries for this article.

What’s in the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act

Provisions of the housing legislation include:

• Expanding access to mortgages under $100,000 through a pilot program backed by the Federal Housing Administration.

• Increasing the maximum loan limits for federal mortgage insurance programs.

• Limiting environmental review processes to accelerate homebuilding. 

• Excluding veterans’ disability benefits from being counted as income for a veterans’ housing program.

• Preventing large corporations and institutional investors from purchasing new single-family homes unless expressly for the rental market.

The bill doesn’t appropriate new funding, though $200 million from HUD’s existing budget would be allocated to an annual competitive grant program for local governments and tribes that “demonstrate measurable increases in housing supply.”

Phrases such as “alien,” “illegal immigrant” or “undocumented immigrant” — often used politically to refer to immigrants illegally in the U.S. — do not appear in the bill text. 

Under a bill first passed in 1980, federal rental assistance programs may not be used to benefit immigrants in the U.S. illegally and people with temporary legal status.

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act would not change this.

How could the newly passed bill affect the housing market?

Because of the restrictions on federal housing assistance, most people in the U.S. illegally are renting through the private market. There is no federal law preventing people in the U.S. illegally from renting from private landlords, and landlords are not at legal risk when renting to someone in the U.S. illegally as long as a reasonable rent is being paid. (Providing free rent, however, could be classified as illegally “harboring” someone who lacks legal status.)

Under federal law, a landlord can take other financial factors into account when considering renting, such as the prospective renter’s ability to pay, but not reject someone who is otherwise qualified purely because of their immigration status. 

For people in the U.S. illegally, “less formal housing arrangements in the private market” are common, said Warren Lowell, a Vanderbilt University professor of human and organizational development. Crowding more people per room tends to be high among this population, so I think ‘affordability’ for this demographic group tends to come by resource pooling.”

If the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act increases affordable housing availability, people in the U.S. illegally would benefit just as any U.S. resident would.

The law, “if effective in practice, could impact both the ownership and rental markets,” said Donald Haurin, an Ohio State University emeritus professor of economics who has specialized in housing and real estate. “Price reductions should eventually spread to the rest of the private market, yielding a better opportunity for all actors.”

Lowell agreed that both low- and middle-income renters, along with first-time homeowners, should benefit from the law. “Increases in supply tend to have rippling effects across neighborhoods and income bands,” he said.

Our ruling

Tuberville said benefits of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act are “going to go to a lot of people that are here illegally to build houses for them.” 

There is nothing in the bill that would “build houses for” people in the U.S. illegally.

The bill does not say anything about people in the U.S. illegally, and it does not change existing laws that make federal rental assistance programs unavailable to immigrants in the U.S. illegally or people with temporary legal status.

The bill’s goal is to expand the affordable housing supply. People in the U.S. illegally who are renters or homebuyers could benefit from a larger supply of homes — but so would U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

We rate the statement False.

Some social media users misleadingly compared two different elections — one in Colombia and another in California — to say that cheating is happening in the Golden State. 

The social media posts referred to Colombia’s June 21 presidential runoff election, won by conservative candidate Abelardo de la Espriella, and California’s June 2 primary, where final results for some races are still pending.

“How is it possible that the Colombians were able to count 99% of the votes in two hours and California still hasn’t finished counting the votes from three weeks ago?” an X user wrote June 21. “Oh, yeah… Colombia isn’t trying to cheat a result like California is.”

Comparing the Colombian election with an American election is like comparing a bicycle to a spaceship, said David Becker, Center for Election Innovation & Research executive director and founder. 

The country and the U.S. state have vastly different processes for vote counting. For one, Colombia’s elections are organized nationally and the June 21 election had only two candidates on the ballot. 

Number of contests: California’s election included multiple statewide and local races. In Colombia’s runoff, there was only one race with two candidates.

Voting methods: California typically takes longer than other states to count ballots, mainly because of the state’s laws and mail-voting option. In Colombia, voters cast their votes in person and don’t have mail-in voting. 

Administration: County election officials administer California elections and count ballots while the state does the final certification. Colombia’s presidential election is administered at the national level.

Here’s a deeper look into how voting works in both places.

How Colombia counts votes

In Colombia, De la Espriella and Cepeda became the top two frontrunners after the first round of the presidential election on May 31, advancing to the June 21 runoff. 

Once voting is complete, judges count the ballots to verify that they match the number of people who voted. After that, they start counting each vote; eventually, a panel of judges, election observers and notaries review the preliminary count to ensure there are no errors.

Then, the National Electoral Council announces the results.

The X post referred to Colombia’s preliminary vote count that showed De la Espriella receiving 49.6% of the votes and progressive candidate Iván Cepeda getting 48.7%. Cepeda conceded the race June 24, hours before the final count ended. The Colombian National Electoral Council announced De la Espriella as the new president that same day, after judges verified the results.

How California counts votes

In California, for most contests the top two vote-getters move on to the November general election, regardless of party preference or whether one candidate receives a majority of all votes cast in the primary election.

All 58 counties must follow state election laws and deadlines, the results come in at different speeds.

State law requires county elections officials to send the first batch of results to the secretary of state’s office no more than two hours after they begin counting votes after polls close on Election Day. 

They continue to report results periodically on election night until the total of all the ballots at polling places have been reported. 

Officials also continue to count vote-by-mail and provisional ballots up to 30 days after Election Day.

In California, a state with about 23 million registered voters, election officials mail ballots to all active voters. In 2024, about 19% voted in person. 

It takes time to process mail ballots, including election workers verifying identity by matching signatures on the envelopes with registration records.

Many voters turn in their ballots on Election Day, experts say. The state counts mail-in ballots even if they are received seven days after the election, but are postmarked on Election Day. 

This year, county elections officials must report their final results to the secretary of state by July 3, and the state will certify results by July 10.

As of June 25, most of the local races in California have been called. For governor and attorney general, 99% of votes have been counted.

Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, previously told PolitiFact that the pace of the count is not proof the election was rigged. Still, the state should better explain that it is prioritizing access, security and accuracy, she said. 

Eduardo Repilloza Fernández, general coordinator of Transparencia Electoral, an Argentina-based organization that oversees elections in the Americas, said that mail-in ballots and drop boxes in the California elections add protocols that don’t exist in the Colombian elections.

“In Colombia, voting takes place on a single day, Sunday, and the entire logistics system is set up to count the votes that same day,” Repilloza Fernández said. 

Evelyn Pérez-Verdía, CEO of We Are Más, an agency that focuses on countering disinformation, said these social media posts connect an election in another country with a U.S. state election to make them distrust the U.S. electoral system. She said it’s a strategy to target diasporas who can vote in the U.S. and in their country of origin.

“These strategies are increasingly used by alliances of like-minded political groups in the United States and by sympathizers of extreme political parties in other countries,” said Pérez-Verdía.

Maine Democrat Graham Platner said U.S. Sen. Susan Collins has aligned herself with President Donald Trump and the interests of wealthy people.

Collins, a Republican, “says she is bipartisan but she’s only bipartisan when it doesn’t matter,” a June 17 Platner ad said. 

The ad cited several examples of what it said were Collins’ policy positions. For this fact-check, we’re focusing on the ad’s statement that Collins “even sided with Trump, giving billionaires and corporations a handout, paid for by cuts to Medicaid and SNAP.” 

The ad refers to Trump’s signature tax and spending legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill, but it misrepresents Collins’ vote. Collins voted against it, in part because of Medicaid cuts.

Collins voted against Trump’s second-term tax bill

Platner’s campaign pointed us to Collins’ June 28, 2025, vote on a motion to advance the One Big Beautiful Bill and included articles that showed she rejected the legislation on final passage.

The ad doesn’t mention the bill by name but cites an article with a headline that says Collins and Sen. Josh Hawley, two key holdouts, “will support advancing GOP megabill.” 

The article said that Collins planned to vote in favor of a procedural motion but wouldn’t necessarily vote for the bill.

“I am planning to vote for the motion to proceed,” Collins said at the time. “Generally, I give deference to the majority leader’s power to bring bills to the Senate floor. Does not in any way predict how I’m going to vote on final passage. That’s going to depend on whether the bill is substantially changed. There are some very good changes that have been made in the latest version but I want to see further changes and I will be filing a number of amendments.”

Collins voted in support of several amendments, including Democratic ones, to protect Medicaid. When those efforts failed, she voted against the bill’s passage.

Collins said she supported tax relief but primarily voted against the bill because of “the harmful impact it will have on Medicaid, affecting low-income families and rural health care providers like our hospitals and nursing homes.” 

Ancor, a network of providers for people with disabilities, gave Collins an award for protecting Medicaid, citing her vote against the legislation.

Republican Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Rand Paul of Kentucky also voted with Democrats against the bill. Vice President JD Vance broke the tie vote in the Senate, and Trump signed it into law July 4. 

Bill’s tax cuts carried more benefits for the rich

The legislation provided tax benefits for people of varying incomes, but wealthier taxpayers came out ahead compared with lower- and middle-income taxpayers. 

The Tax Foundation found the law’s tax changes would increase after-tax incomes across the spectrum in 2025 and 2026, ranging from a 0.8% increase for the bottom 20% of taxpayers to 1.8% for the top 20%. That finding includes the new tax cuts and extending the cuts from Trump’s 2017 tax law. 

By 2034, the bottom 20% of earners will see a net reduction in post-tax income after accounting for the 2029 expiration of new tax deductions and the law’s tighter rules for tax credits, said Garrett Watson, the Tax Foundation’s policy analysis director.

Some provisions temporarily help people earning low to moderate incomes, such as the tax exclusion on some tipped income.

Legislation cut Medicaid and SNAP, including in Maine

The One Big Beautiful Bill made historic cuts to safety net programs including Medicaid, the state-federal health care program for low-income people, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as food stamps. It also tightened work requirements for both programs.

Ian Yaffe, director of the Maine Office for Family Independence that operates the state’s SNAP program, told the Portland Press Herald that Maine has seen a sustained decrease in SNAP enrollment since August 2025. As of April, the number of Mainers receiving SNAP benefits had dropped by about 13,000. 

KFF projected that about 28,000 Mainers will become uninsured because of Medicaid changes. So far, enrollment in Medicaid in Maine dipped slightly. However, the largest changes to the program take effect in 2027 so drops are likely to accelerate next year. 

Collins has offered some praise for the bill she voted against, including legislation that authorized the Rural Health Transformation Program. 

Our ruling

Platner said Collins “sided with Trump, giving billionaires and corporations a hand-out, paid for by cuts to Medicaid and SNAP.”

Collins voted on a motion to proceed on the One Big Beautiful Bill but warned that without substantial changes she would reject the legislation. When those changes didn’t occur, she voted against its passage.

The ad tells voters that Collins took action to harm Medicaid. But when Collins voted against the bill, she cited Medicaid cuts as a reason. A group cited her vote when it gave her an award for leadership on Medicaid.

We rate this statement False.

RELATED: Yes, Collins usually votes with Trump, as Platner said. But she broke with him at key moments.

RELATED: MAGA-Meter: Tracking Trump’s second term promises including about taxes

The U.S. is one step closer to selling sunscreen products similar to those you might find in cosmetics stores across Europe, Australia and parts of Asia.

More than 20 years after chemical manufacturer DSM Nutritional Products first applied for approval, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave the go-ahead to an active sunscreen ingredient bemotrizinol (beh-moe-TRI-zinol), sometimes called BEMT, which protects people against harmful ultraviolet radiation.

Dermatologists are enthusiastic about the ingredient’s upcoming introduction to U.S. products. 

“It expands the available options for UV protection in the U.S.,” said Dr. Marisa Garshick, a clinical dermatology professor at New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medicine. “Having access to newer UV filters can help improve sunscreen formulations and hopefully encourage more consistent sunscreen use.”

What makes bemotrizinol different? 

Like other active sunscreen ingredients, bemotrizinol is a UV filter that protects against both ultraviolet A and B rays.

UVB is the type of radiation most responsible for causing sunburns, but UVA radiation is also harmful and linked to sunburns, wrinkles and some skin cancers. Dermatologists recommend people use sunscreen with a “broad spectrum” label that means it protects against both UVA and UVB rays.

But there’s more that excites dermatologists and skin care product consumers: Bemotrizinol is a very photostable chemical, meaning it remains more effective in sunlight than other filters. 

It doesn’t break down quickly in the sun and it can help improve the performance of other sunscreen ingredients, said Dr. Mona A. Gohara, a Yale School of Medicine dermatology professor. 

“It also blends well into formulas, making sunscreens more cosmetically elegant and less likely to leave a noticeable white cast,” she said. 

And its longtime use elsewhere in the world has shown it has a strong safety record and low skin absorption, Gohara said.

Some sunscreen critics on social media have worried that other chemical sunscreen filters such as oxybenzone absorb into the bloodstream and interfere with hormones, but that concern hasn’t been proven in humans.

Sunscreen ingredients, including oxybenzone, are shown Wednesday, May 2, 2018, in San Jose, Calif. (AP)

What else should you know about this new ingredient? 

The FDA says bemotrizinol is safe for adults and children as young as 6 months old. 

Similar to other skincare products, some people might experience skin irritation or sensitivity from bemotrizinol, but serious reactions are uncommon, dermatologists said. 

“People with sensitive skin should still patch test new products if they have a history of reactions,” Garshick said.

This new ingredient isn’t a silver-bullet, either, experts said.

“Bemotrizinol is an exciting addition, but no sunscreen ingredient is magic,” Gohara said. “Consistent sunscreen use matters far more than chasing the newest ingredient.” 

Dermatologists recommend choosing a broad-spectrum sunscreen that’s SPF 30 or higher, applying enough and reapplying regularly — at least every two hours. 

Why did U.S. approval take longer than other countries?

The U.S. regulates sunscreen as an over-the-counter drug, which means new ingredients face an intense and often slow-moving FDA review and approval process. Europe, by contrast, regulates sunscreen as a cosmetic. 

Although DSM Nutritional Products, now DSM-Firmenich, originally applied for bemotrizinol’s approval in 2005, the application didn’t progress for many years. In September 2024, DSM-Firmenich applied again using a faster administrative pathway created by the 2020 CARES Act. The FDA issued its final order June 10, approving bemotrizinol. It goes into effect Aug. 9, 2026. 

Where can I buy sunscreen with this new ingredient? 

Unless you’ve got an international trip planned, you can’t get your hands on it just yet.

In December 2025, DSM-Firmenich said its product would be available soon after the FDA’s final order went into effect. It’ll be sold under the brand name Parsol Shield.

DSM-Firmenich has exclusive rights to market bemotrizinol in the U.S. for 18 months, and NPR reported that the company said the first sunscreens with this filter will be on shelves starting in September.

RELATED: Do you need SPF 30, 50 or 100? We answer your burning sunscreen questions

In his bid to be Florida’s next governor, Democrat David Jolly is singling out the state’s healthcare system as leading most of the country in unnecessary and expensive hospital costs.

“More people are going without healthcare than ever before and as a result Florida is 49th in avoidable hospital costs — 49th,” Jolly, a former Republican, said June 11 at Florida International University’s Graham Center in Miami. 

That raised our curiosity. Is Florida really a standout on this measure? And what is considered “avoidable”?

Jolly’s campaign pointed us to a September 2025 Florida Policy Institute article that referenced the statistic. “Florida ranks 49th in potentially avoidable hospital use and cost, meaning that the state pays more than others due to a lack of timely and effective care, preventive care, and health insurance,” the article said, citing a June 2025 analysis by the Commonwealth Fund, a nonpartisan healthcare research organization.

The Commonwealth Fund evaluated state health systems across the U.S., including healthcare access and affordability, prevention and treatment and “avoidable hospital use and cost.” 

The study accounted for the states and the District of Columbia, ranking Florida’s health system 39th overall and 49th in the avoidable hospital use and cost category, meaning its inefficiencies are among the nation’s most significant.

Jolly’s campaign said he was arguing for opening up more Federally Qualified Health Centers, nonprofit and county health clinics across the state to increase patient access to primary care and bring down healthcare costs.

David Radley, a Commonwealth Fund senior scientist and the report’s lead author, said the “avoidable hospital use and cost” category represents state health system efficiency, and includes some costs outside of hospital settings, such as for costly imaging that patients may not need and state Medicare spending.

How did the study measure avoidable hospital use and cost?

The Commonwealth Fund’s state healthcare system scorecard is part of a series of reports tracking how well health care systems are working for people in every state. Its 2025 report used 2023 data, the most recent available at the time.

The scorecard, which has been produced intermittently for more than a decade, includes over 50 measures broken down into various categories. Its avoidable hospital use and cost category examines potentially avoidable emergency department visits, outpatient care admissions for certain conditions, 30-day hospital readmissions, costly medical imaging and more. 

“That rank of 49 is basically the combined aggregate score where Florida ranks based on its performance on these components, which were chosen because they reflect, in some way, inefficient use of finite healthcare resources,” Radley said.

For example, for the “potentially avoidable emergency room visits” metric, researchers incorporated a widely used tool from New York University that categorizes ER visits based on the medical urgency of patients’ diagnoses and treatments.

This breaks down the different things people may show up to the ER for, Radley said, ranging from emergent conditions such as trauma, heart attack and stroke to health issues that could have been treated by a primary care or specialty physician.

Another metric in the category, “admissions for ambulatory sensitive conditions,” involves a list of certain disease complications, as designated by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, that typically don’t require hospital admission if the underlying condition is being well managed. These include hospitalizations for certain complications of diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma and hypertension.

“If you’re diabetic and you need your leg amputated, of course the hospital is the right place to be,” Radley said, “but if that person has their disease being managed, and they are engaged with their doctors, they typically shouldn’t get to the point where they need their leg amputated.”

The “hospital readmissions within 30 days” measure includes situations in which people got discharged too early or didn’t receive appropriate follow-up care, resulting in their unnecessary readmission.

Hospital admissions are among the most expensive costs associated with healthcare. The average cost for a one-night hospital stay in Florida is around $3,060, according to KFF, close to the U.S. average of $3,297 per night.

Researchers  also evaluated how often patients receive costly, but unnecessary medical imaging. In many instances, less expensive X-rays or CT scans may show what a doctor needs to know without an MRI. An MRI can cost $500 to $1,000 and often get prescribed the first time someone shows up at the doctors, Radley said.

“A lot of times, these MRIs are happening for these conditions where there is really no real indication that an MRI is needed,” Radley said. “At least not right away.” 

Our ruling

Jolly said Florida is “49th in avoidable hospital costs.”

This matches a 2025 Commonwealth Fund analysis that placed Florida 49th out of 51, accounting for the states and the District of Columbia, in its “avoidable hospital use and cost” category.

Researchers arrived at that ranking by studying the frequency of potential avoidable emergency department visits, ambulatory admissions for certain conditions, 30-day hospital readmissions and more.

The category also included data that wasn’t exclusive to hospitals, such as Medicare spending.

Jolly’s claim is accurate but needs some additional information. We rate it Mostly True.