Willisms
Navigation

Buy WILLisms

XML Feed
rss-icon.gif Feedburner RSS
WILLisms.com on Twitter




Featured Entries

The Babe Theory Of Political Movements.
Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM

Iran's Sham Election In Houston.
June 20, 2005 5:36 AM

Yes, Kanye, Bush Does Care.
Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM

Health Care vs. Wealth Care.
Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM

Americans Voting With Their Feet.
Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM

Idea Majorities Matter.
May 12, 2006 6:15 PM

Twilight Zone Economics.
Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM

The "Shrinking" Middle Class.
Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM

From Ashes, GOP Opportunities.
Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM

Battle Between Entitlements & Pork.
Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM

Let Economic Freedom Reign.
Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM

Biggest Health Care Moment In Decades.
July 25, 2007 4:32 PM

Unions Antithetical to Liberty.
May 28, 2008 11:12 PM

Right To Work States Rock.
June 9, 2008 12:25 PM



Donate





Links









Search



Archives

September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004




Social Security Reform Thursday.
January 29, 2008

Caption Contest Archive
Jan. 21, 2009

The Carnival Of Classiness.
Mar. 14, 2006

Quotational Therapy: Obama.
Apr. 4, 2008

Mainstream Melee: Wolfowitz.
May 19, 2007

Pundit Roundtable: Leaks.
July 9, 2006

A WILLisms.com(ic), by Ken McCracken
July 14, 2006




Credits

Powered by Movable Type 3.17
Site Design by Sekimori




WILLisms.com January 2009 Book of the Month (certified classy):











The WILLisms.com Gift Shop: Support This Site

giftshopbanner.gif











This Week's Carnival of Revolutions: carnivalbutton.gif



Carnival Home Base: homebase.gif

























Willisms

« Trivia Tidbit of the Day: Part 846 -- Only Four Of Twelve Federal Reserve Districts Have Had Job Growth Since January 2001. | WILLisms.com | Trivia Tidbit of the Day: Part 848 -- Transportation. »

Trivia Tidbit of the Day: Part 847 -- Our Broken Federal Fund Dispersal System.

Pork, Stimulus, Recession-

Here's yet another good example of what I don't like about the establishment press.

The Houston Chronicle somehow manages to get it wrong even when they're on the brink of getting it right:

Small states earning big federal dollars: Seniority for senators can mean money disparity per resident

WASHINGTON — North Dakota received about $127 million in federal money in 2010 for projects to benefit its population of nearly 650,000.

Oklahoma, a state with nearly six times as many residents, received only $88 million. The difference is striking, and it's because North Dakota has something Oklahoma does not: a senator who is a powerful and senior committee chairman.

Of the eight senators who represent the nation's four largest states — Texas, California, New York and Florida - only one, California Democrat Barbara Boxer, holds a chairmanship of a standing committee with substantive legislative authority.

Great. This is an interesting story that illustrates how broken our system is, but here's what irks me. On the sidebar of the story, there is this graphic:

resourcessmallstates.gif

This is really just a failure on so many levels. Where is the link to the source? Citizens Against Government Waste puts out a lot of great reports, so this vague citation from the Chronicle is not helpful at all. Why only list a few states? This "I have the information, and I choose which parts to tell you" model of reporting is old style journalism, and it is dying out for a reason.

More importantly, in the entire story, never does the word "earmark" appear, and the word "pork" only appears once, right at the end, in a quote.

This entire story is based on pork barrel spending, not total spending. Pork is defined pretty specifically, too. Pork has to meet one or more of the following criteria:

• Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
• Not specifically authorized;
• Not competitively awarded;
• Not requested by the President;
• Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the
previous year’s funding;
• Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
• Serves only a local or special interest.

This doesn't sound like the spending referenced in the article. The article calls North Dakota's pork haul, simply, "projects to benefit its population."

Yeah. There's a fundamental difference there.

Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book details the information referenced by the Houston Chronicle:

porkpercapita.gif

What is so hard about that?

The future of journalism is not this antiquated top-down offering of patchy bits of information. The future of journalism is data. For example, the most viewed page on the online-only Texas Tribune website is a data app detailing what public employees earn.

Not-so-incidentally, looking at stimulus spending, certain states are also created more equal than others:

stimulusfundingpercapita.gif

So, Texas, a donor state, ranks 41st in pork received, next-to-last in stimulus received, and yet we're dominating it in America's "Great Recession."

This speaks volumes about the effectiveness of government spending.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Unbalanced Recession.

Posted by Will Franklin · 4 August 2010 10:06 AM

Comments