Words and the things they mean

Below, I have reproduced long passages from the text of T-P reporter Jan Moller's 4th grade Social Studies "current events" assignment titled "Jindal hacks budget earmarks" and interspersed it with Clancy Dubos's actual reporting and analysis of the very same event titled "Veto Showdown Coming" It makes a fun exercise in comparative literature. Moller's project is on the front page of today's Times-Picayune. It appears above the fold and is accompanied by a photo of a pleasantly smiling Governor PBJ. Dubos's piece is a post on the Gambit blog.

Moller:

BATON ROUGE -- Gov. Bobby Jindal used his line-item veto authority to cut more than $16 million in proposed state spending Monday, killing hundreds of earmarks added by legislators for projects in their districts and signaling a new aggressiveness in dealing with the state budget.

The 258 vetoes in House Bill 1, the state's nearly $30 billion operating budget for the 2008-09 fiscal year, is more than double the combined number of line-item vetoes in the past 12 years. Coupled with Jindal's veto of $9.3 million in spending from a previous budget bill, they suggest the new governor is serious about curbing a cherished legislative tradition of sprinkling the budget with items for constituents, often with little or no oversight.

So right here in the first two paragraphs of a front page article, we have Moller swooning over PBJ's "aggressive" stance toward legislators' "cherished" unsupervised "sprinkling of the budget with items" Moller also makes certain to point out that Jindal has even managed to set a new statistical record for aggressive daddying of the budget. I'll bet those numbers would make a neat addition to next week's "Viewpoint" page.

Meanwhile....
Dubos:

Gov. Bobby Jindal’s “record-breaking” 258 vetoes seem contrived to give him some cheap headlines while actually having a miniscule impact on the overall state budget. The political backlash from lawmakers, however, could be huge. There is open discussion among lawmakers — including some of Jindal’s top legislative allies — about the possibility of a veto override session.

THE CONTRIVANCE — A press release from Jindal’s office proudly proclaims in the first paragraph: “Governor Jindal’s 258 vetoes in HB1are more than double the vetoes for all the state’s previous 12 budgets combined.”

Just in case we didn’t get the point, the release continues in the very next paragraph: “Previously, Governor Kathleen Blanco had 39 line item vetoes in her house budget bills during her entire four years in office. Governor Mike Foster had 81 line item vetoes in house budget bills during his term, and over the last 12 years combined, there was a total of 120 line item vetoes in state budget bills.”

A key question with regard to Jindal’s vetoes is whether he achieved that “record” number by accident or design. A very knowledgeable source tells me that Jindal’s Chief of Staff Timmy Teepell asked Senate Secretary Glenn Koepp’s office before the vetoes were announced how many vetoes the last two governors had exercised. That pretty much tells us what Team Jindal’s priorities were in this little exercise: headlines, not fiscal accountability. It’s all about the resumé, folks.

Among the other highlighted items in that passage, please notice the way Clancy actually cites the Governor's own press release as a source before analyzing its content. Moller merely reports it as a neat fact.

Moller:

While critics have long derided such earmarks as pork-barrel spending, defenders say they pay for critical needs that otherwise wouldn't be financed. Gone is money targeted for museums, church groups, festivals, youth programs, nonprofit groups and economic development initiatives, including millions of dollars for the New Orleans area.

"For too long, state government has spent and spent, with little regard for taxpayers' money," Jindal said. ". . . We are striving for an efficient state government that operates transparently, and wisely invests taxpayer money in state priorities."

But the vetoes could also serve to deepen the wound that Jindal opened when he killed a pay raise for legislators last month after promising lawmakers he would stay out of the matter.

Here Moller acknowledges that funding for some vaguely defined programs in the New Orleans area are affected but makes sure to frame this as a delicate and balanced dispute between "critics" and "defenders" of "earmarks" Moller then gives Jindal the last word in this dispute before wrapping it all up by reminding us how Jindal saved us all from the very scary pay raise.

Meanwhile, Clancy, continues to provide us with actual information.

Dubos:

THE NUMBERS — Jindal is focusing on the number of items vetoed perhaps to draw attention away from the overall fiscal impact — or lack of impact — of his line-item vetoes. When he talks about 258 vetoes, it sounds as though he took a buzz saw to the budget. However, $16.14 million out of a state budget of $29.5 billion is barely 1/20th of 1 percent of the operating budget. Put another way, it’s less than 6/10,000 of the state budget — the proverbial spit in the ocean.

To be sure, Jindal sliced some questionable “NGOs” from the budget. At the same time, he gutted the budgets of Boys and Girls Clubs statewide, not to mention money for the Jazz Fest, several YMCAs and YWCAs (including the Dryades YMCA, which takes kids off some of the meanest streets in New Orleans), the homeless in New Orleans and several senior citizens’ programs.

THE IMPACT — Jindal appeared to spread the pain statewide. Still, more than $6 million of $16 million in cuts come from the greater New Orleans area (Orleans, Jefferson, St. Bernard and the Northshore). The real impact, however, will be measured in unfunded local social service programs that affect everyday people.

In once case, Jindal cut operating money for a local senior citizens program that had been funded by the state for three decades. The state had already spent roughly $1 million to rebuild the senior citizens’ community center — then Jindal cut the money they needed to move in later this summer.

One of the biggest items that Jindal cut was $500,000 for the Jazz & Heritage Festival. According to one source, the administration felt that the Jazz Fest was “too local” to satisfy the governor’s “statewide or substantial regional impact” criteria. Huh? The Jazz Fest too local? Apparently the governor has never been to the Fest … or looked into its financial impact.

Moller's project does not mention any of the affected items by name. Not even the Jazzfest. It allows that some of the money "would have paid for things such as playground equipment" but makes sure to attribute that to Sen. John Alario, D-Westwego.

Both Moller and Dubos go on to discuss the likelihood of a legislative veto session. The analysis there also differs greatly and includes conflicting reports on the possible intentions of Senate President Joel Chiasson. I'm not going to quote from these sections because 1) You should go read the rest of Clancy's post and 2) I think I've made my point.

Dubos concludes:

No matter what the outcome, this will look good on his resumé — like so many of his contrivances.

And given what we've seen from the T-P, Jindal will not lack for aid in padding that resume.

Note: The print edition of the T-P also attributes Ed Anderson on its current events project.

Update: Don't miss BSJD's comments... which he has presented as a full post here where he looks at the specifics of which political foes Jindal may be acting against with these vetoes.

Also: more fun follow-up from Clancy here.

Upperdate: Moller and Anderson take another look at the possibility of a veto session in this morning's T-P

Uppestdate: Clancy Dubos also takes another look at the possible veto session adding some of the patronage angle suggested by BSJD.