Bit of a weird headline over in The New York Times, where they trumpet that "Voters Split Over Spending Initiatives on States' Ballots." But get into the article and there's no "voters" to speak of -- there are distinct electorates, in distinct states, voting on distinct ballot initiatives. "Five statewide bond initiatives were approved by Texas residents this week," reports The Times, "including $3 billion for cancer research and prevention that was championed by Lance Armstrong and up to $5 billion for highway improvement projects. But in New Jersey voters rejected $450 million in new spending for stem cell research, and in Oregon they blocked a plan for increased taxes for health care." Not all spending is equal. You often get this sort of framing when talking taxes, and it's hugely pernicious. Voters don't, it's true, "like" new taxes. Voters also don't "like" spending money. No one does. But you may want to spend money in order to buy a new TV, just as you may want to pay more in taxes in order to have guaranteed health care, or a war in Iraq. When voters in different states pass some priorities and reject others, they're not "split" on spending, they're making sending decisions. Similarly, when I go to the market and purchase peas but put back the olives, I'm not "split" on spending I'm making choices. --Ezra Klein
