Two Important Articles - Media Bias/State Budget Cuts

Pardon me, I don't mean to be a bother, but it just happened again.

On Thursday, April 22, Rasmussen Reports released its most recent poll results on the Maryland governor's race. The voter survey was highly enlightening in two respects. First, for its content and second, for its treatment by The Washington Post and The Baltimore Sun.
First, the content. Rasmussen's survey of 500 likely voters conducted on April 20 showed former Gov. Bob Ehrlich closing to within three points of incumbent Gov. Martin O'Malley (47 percent to 44 percent). This was a significant change from Rasmussen's Feb. 23 poll when the gap was six points (49 percent to 43 percent).

Second, the suppression. When neither The Post nor The Sun wrote about the Rasmussen Poll in their Thursday editions, I figured the poll was released after Thursday's deadline but would surely appear Friday. However, when I opened Friday's newspapers, no poll. Instead, The Sun ran a feel-good account of O'Malley installing solar panels atop a Howard County home in tribute to Earth Day. The Post was silent.

I guessed that maybe the political reporters were saving the poll results for their weekend updates of the governor's race. But on both Saturday and Sunday, nothing.

Finally, on Monday, The Post's John Wagner wrote a long piece on Ehrlich spiked with the usual anti-Ehrlich barbs and Democratic talking points. Wagner's theme: Ehrlich looks and sounds the same as four years ago, so how can he expect to win? In support of his theme, Wagner trotted out the usual "experts," liberal academics and Democrats whose quotes confirmed Wagner. Then Wagner cited "murmurs in Maryland political circles" that Ehrlich doesn't have "the fire in the belly needed to win."

In other words, it was just another Washington Post hit job by a political partisan posing as a news reporter. But surely, even someone as biased as Wagner couldn't ignore the Rasmussen Poll as a balancer? Alas, Monday's article never mentioned the poll. I guess it wasn't a Democratic talking point.

Then, on Tuesday, the same thing happened in The Sun. Michael Dresser wrote a long preview of O'Malley's campaign kickoff while also ignoring the Rasmussen Poll.

Well, is it possible that the newspaper reporters somehow overlooked the Rasmussen Poll? Unlikely, since most Baltimore and Washington TV stations aired the poll as a news story as did radio (WBAL, WTOP), talk radio and a host of political blogs ("New Rasmussen Poll: O'Malley and Ehrlich In Dead Heat" reported Maryland Politics Watch).

Unless the newspaper reporters went temporarily deaf, dumb and blind, they were fully aware of the poll. They and their editors simply chose to suppress it.

Conversely, both newspapers print every anti-Ehrlich salvo, no matter how baseless, fired by the State Democratic Party. On the day before The Rasmussen Poll, The Sun ran, "Democrats Say Ehrlich Show Amounts to Campaign Gift," confronting the burning question of Ehrlich's talk radio show. Poll results aren't important, but this crap is?

Media bias is an art form, the skillful use of nuances, code words and distortions so that a supposedly objective "news story" reflects the reporter's personal views — manipulating the "facts" to help the favored and hurt the unfavored.

Here's a small example: When asked by reporters if he'd vow not to raise taxes next year, O'Malley tap-danced, "It's my intent to not. It's my great hope not to. I think it's probably irresponsible, especially in time of war, to make that pledge."

Great example of political evasion. But here's how The Post reported it: "O'Malley has said he has no intention of raising taxes next year." Great example of dishonest reporting.
Or compare the difference in how Post reporters treated Ehrlich and O'Malley's campaign kickoffs.

Writing about Ehrlich's kickoff, The Post went into "truth squad" mode. Every Ehrlich statement was rebutted by an O'Malley comment undercutting Ehrlich and leaving O'Malley with the final word. Then, as a sidebar, The Post "truth squad" printed a "Tale of Two Administrations" favoring O'Malley by using Democratic talking points as criteria to compare the two administrations.

However, at O'Malley's kickoff, The Post's truth squad didn't show up. Instead, the reporters dutifully printed O'Malley's claims with no rebuttals, no GOP talking points and no sidebar comparisons.

No Post reporter questioned O'Malley's "tuition freeze" — his claim that after Ehrlich raised college tuitions 42 percent, O'Malley froze them for four years. No Post reporter pointed out that, to do so, O'Malley slashed community college and non-public college funding (resulting in big tuition increases), increased taxes $1.4 billion a year and gave the state universities an extra $25 million annually until, this year, when the Democratic legislature finally put an end to his political grandstanding. This month, O'Malley's tuition freeze thawed under a 3 percent increase, but neither O'Malley nor The Post mentioned it.

Last week's Rasmussen Poll is a fascinating snapshot of Maryland voter's mood, full of interesting data about Obama, the health care bill, offshore drilling and anti-incumbent anger.
Too bad The Post and The Sun decided that you shouldn't see it. Maybe you can get a copy from an objective, unbiased blog.

Blair Lee is CEO of the Lee Development Group in Silver Spring and a regular commentator for WBAL radio. His column appears Fridays in The Gazette. His e-mail address is blair@leedg.com.
Goodbye, stimulus. Hello, state budget cuts
CNN News
Tami Luhby
May 5, 2010: 4:10 AM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/news/economy/state_budget_cuts/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Think states have made deep spending cuts? You ain't seen nothing yet.

States have been struggling with huge budget gaps since 2008, but this year could be worse as federal stimulus funds wind down.

Until now, stimulus money spared governors and state lawmakers from making some of the most brutal budget cuts. But with this lifeline running out, officials are looking at making significant cutbacks to public services, particularly schools and health programs.

"The stimulus funds have staved off what could have been even deeper cuts," said Todd Haggerty, policy associate at the National Conference of State Legislatures. "You're seeing states now are coming to that point where they will have to make additional cuts or find new sources of revenue for fiscal 2011 and that will continue in fiscal 2012."

Stimulus safety net
As of mid-April, states and localities have received nearly $109 billion since the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act was passed in February 2009, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The vast majority of that money went to help states maintain their Medicaid services and education funding in the face of steep drops in tax revenues due to the recession.

In all, the stimulus funds helped plug between 30% and 40% of the $291 billion in budget gaps that states have faced over the past two years, experts said. But Recovery Act money will only be sufficient to plug 20% or less of the coming fiscal year's shortfalls, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. By fiscal 2012, most of the money will be gone.

Already, many states will have used up much of their education allotments by the start of fiscal 2011, which begins on July 1 in 46 states. And the Medicaid assistance will dry up by the end of the year, unless Congress extends it.

What'll they tax next?
Compounding the problem is that many states have already slashed services and raided their rainy day funds to balance their budgets, as they are required to do. And a recent analysis by the Rockefeller Institute shows that the all-important personal income tax revenue for April is likely to decline steeply.

All this means that state officials are being forced to make some of the tough decisions they've been able to put off for the past 18 months.

"States had this one-time money that helped them bridge a difficult period in state finances," Haggerty said. "Now they have to face the absence of those funds and a whole new set of difficult issues."

Cuts on the horizon
Meanwhile, states are looking to Capitol Hill to renew some of the stimulus provisions, particularly the increased federal funding for Medicaid. Both the Senate and House have passed a six-month, $25 billion Medicaid extension, but they have to find a way to pay for it before sending it to President Obama for his signature.

At least 21 states, in fact, have already included the extension in their fiscal 2011 budgets, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. If the measure doesn't become law, these states would be in big trouble and would have to make even deeper cuts, said Nick Johnson, director of the center's state fiscal project.

In Pennsylvania, for instance, that extension translates into $850 million. Without it, the state would have to slash half its funding for domestic violence and rape crisis services and chop 25% off the budget for child welfare services, Gov. Ed Rendell wrote in a letter last month to his state's congressional delegation. In addition, state payments to hospitals, doctors and nursing homes would be reduced.

"If the extension of federal fiscal relief is not enacted, most states will have to lay off thousands of workers and make wrenching cuts to public and private sector services," he said.

School districts, meanwhile, are also feeling the pain. Some 275,000 education jobs could be eliminated in the coming school year due to budget cuts, according to a new survey by the American Association of School Administrators. This would nearly wipe out the estimated 300,000 jobs saved by stimulus funds.

"Faced with continued budgetary constraints, school leaders across the nation are forced to consider an unprecedented level of layoffs that would negatively impact economic recovery and deal a devastating blow to public education," said Dan Domenech, executive director of the association, which is pushing Congress to give states additional funds for education.

Take New York as an example. Some 14,800 teachers -- 8,500 of them in New York City -- could lose their jobs if Gov. David Paterson's proposed $1.4 billion cut in state education aid is enacted, according to a survey by the New York State Council of School Superintendents and the New York State School Boards Association. That represents 10% of the city's teachers and 4.1% of educators elsewhere in the state.

Another 2,600 non-teaching staff, including student support staff, administrators, and other employees, such as custodians, kitchen workers and bus drivers, would also be laid off.

Stimulus funds had staved off some of these harsh cuts. But New York only has $700 million left of the $2.7 billion it received to prop up education aid, said David Albert, spokesman for the school boards association.

"This is the largest state aid cut we've seen in the last two decades," he said. "If you think this year is bad, next year is going to be worse because stimulus will run out."