If Norton says she cut Health Dept. budget, reporters should say it increased
Last week, I was all set to rag on The Denver Post for paraphrasing a statement by gubernatorial candidate Jane Norton but neglecting to inform us that she had her facts wrong.
As a reporter, you don’t want to offer up false or misleading information from a candidate without setting the record straight. In this case, last week, The Post reported:
Norton touted her record heading the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment under Gov. Bill Owens, saying she cut her own budget there.
But I never got around to pointing out that, in fact, during the four years she headed the CDPHE, Norton did not cut her Department’s budget. It actually increased.
And then this week rolls around, and The Post got Norton’s CDPHE budget history right in an article Wednesday, though The Post left out some important information, which lucky for you I will provide in this blog post.
The Post reported that when Norton offers CDPHE “budget cuts as proof of her fiscal conservatism, the numbers don’t tell the whole story.”
Wednesday’s Post story states that Norton’s CDPHE budget increased during her first three years at the Dartment, and then:
Only in her last year was the general fund budget cut …- from about $32 million to $16.2 million.
That year, state lawmakers wrestled with a small shortfall sparked by a recession right after 9/11, and it was the first time state revenues fell short of previous years since 1981.
In an impressive bit of reporting, The Post quotes former state Sen. Dave Owen, a Republican who sat on the Joint Budget Committee when Norton headed CDPHE, as saying that Norton didn’t cut the general-fund budget at the time. He says Gov. Bill Owens or the budget committee forced the cut on Norton.
But The Post rightfully points out that this hasn’t stopped Norton from claiming, repeatedly, that she cut the general-fund budget, quoting Norton as saying, “When I was head of the CDPHE, I cut my budget by 28 percent.”
But even if you, as a reporter, think budget-maven Owen got it wrong, and you accept that Norton actually cut her general-fund budget during one of the four years she headed CDPHE, you still have deal with the fact that, under Norton, the overall CDPHE budget rose.
In Wednesday’s article, The Post should have stated more clearly, like reporters at 9News and Fox 31 did previously, that in addition to the general-fund part of the CDPHE budget, there are also two other portions: federal allocations and cash funds.
The Post reported, correctly, that “federal allocations during [Norton’s] tenure from 1999 to 2002 increased from $147 million to $162 million.” So it’s clear from The Post piece that Norton did not cut the “federal allocations” portion of her budget at all.
But The Post did not report that the “cash funds” portion of the CDPHE budget, which includes fees and fines, also rose under Norton from $56 million to $86 million.
So, overall, if you count all three portions of the CDPHE budget (general fund, federal allocations, and cash funds), you find the overall CDPHE budget actually grew under Norton, as Fox 31 reported, starting at $226.5 million when Norton took over and finishing at $269.5 when she left.
It’s the overall CDPHE budget numbers, which rose by over $40 million under Norton, that reporters should use to assess Norton’s claim that she cut the CDPHE budget when she headed the agency.
Norton has argued that she only had control of the general-fund portion of the CDPHE budget. But reporters shouldn’t allow Norton to point to the general-fund portion of the CDPHE budget, which Owen told The Post Norton didn’t want to cut at the time anyway, and claim she has a record of budget cutting at CDPHE.
Norton had four years to find a way to cut the other parts of the CDPHE too, the”cash” and “federal” portions. She didn’t do it. She claims that she had no power to do this, but before believing her, a reporter, like a Tea Party activist, would want to see proof that she tried…-and failed…-to reject federal funds, for example, or to find mechanisms that would reduce revenue from fees and fines, revenue that she did not complain about spending, as Department head.
I mean, no one recalls Norton complaining, like some governors have done regarding stimulus funding, that she was forced to spend the cash her department got from the feds. Ditto with the fines and fees. She didn’t object to spending the money, as far as we know.
Clearly, you can look at the facts about the CDPHE budget in different ways, but in the end, the fairest way to cut through the clutter is to look at the bottom line.
If Norton continues to claim that she trimmed the Colorado Department of Health’s budget, or its general fund, reporters should inform us, simply, that under Norton the Colorado Department of Health’s budget actually increased.