Big splash headline from Politico:
Debate brews over expansion of Internal Revenue Service's work force
At issue:
Health reform may have finally become law, but the partisan wars over the bill continue to rage — and the latest flash point is a debate about whether the $940 billion overhaul means thousands of new government workers are about to bloat the federal payroll.
Republicans lawmakers are warning the law would put as many as 16,000 new Internal Revenue Service agents and workers on the streets.
...
“Everybody has to buy insurance under this bill, and your local IRS agent is going to show up at your door to tell you that you better do it or else you will have to answer to the IRS,” said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), the ranking member on the Budget Committee, in a colloquy on the Senate floor.
The thing is, this really isn't a debate. The law has been passed. At this point, the only real question is whether the GOP allegations are true -- and surprise, surprise, they are not true. In fact, they are verifiably false. Journalists shouldn't be shy in pointing that out -- in the headline and in the lede.
First, the health care bill does not give IRS employees any power to enforce the mandate -- there will be no audits, no IRS agents, not even any penalties. Despite Judd Gregg's flowery language, nobody will be showing up at anybody's door. There's literally no truth to his claim. It's as simple as that.
Second, despite GOP claims, health care reform will not expand the IRS by 16,500 workers. Not only is that number practically snatched from thin air, to the extent that there is any expansion of the IRS workforce, the expansion will be focused on processing health care insurance subsidies which come in the form of tax credits.
To Politico's credit, it includes information in the story that essentially disproves the Republican allegations -- but that information is buried halfway through the article. Instead of framing this as yet another example of Republicans trying to peddle a false line of attack, the overall frame of the piece is that there are 'two sides' to the story.
But there really aren't two sides to this story. A debate over policy priorities is one thing, but this a question of fact, and on this question of fact, the Republicans are wrong. The truth is the truth, facts are facts, and when it is clear that one side is right and one side is wrong, to be "Fair & Balanced" is to do your audience a disservice.
You can't be "Fair & Balanced" to facts -- truth and accuracy should trump the Fox News approach every single time.
Comments are closed on this story.