The Post is guilty of some seriously lazy reporting in its lead story on the Democrat's bill for Iraq War funding. The article reports that the bill includes $21 billion in funding that President Bush did not request. It gives several examples of items that seem to fit the definition of pork, but then notes that the bill includes $2.9 billion for the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. Is this pork?
It would be reasonable to ask that an article give some systematic breakdown of this $21 billion. How much likely would be appropriated in any case, but just placed in different bills? What percentage is going to pork and what percent is going for real programs? Will this money be spent in one year or over many years? I know that it would take some time to get this information, but I believe that the Post has full-time reporters. Making sure that the numbers presented in their articles provide information to readers would be a good use of their time.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. For over 30 years, The American Prospect has delivered independent reporting that exposes corporate power, investigates political corruption, and analyzes threats to our democracy. Unlike many media outlets, we’re not owned by billionaires or corporations—we’re powered by readers like you.
Today’s independent journalism faces unprecedented challenges. Your support makes our reporting possible and keeps our work free and accessible to all. Whether it’s $5 or $50, every contribution helps sustain our nonprofit newsroom.
Join our community of supporters and make a donation today to help keep independent journalism thriving.
Copyright 2025 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved
