The federal government is facing a shutdown due to a dispute over border security funding.
Two-thirds of IRS employees will face furloughs at the height of tax filing season if no agreement on long-term spending legislation is reached by March 23, and active-duty U.S military service members would remain on the job without pay in case of a shutdown.
The federal government is facing a shutdown due to a dispute over border security funding. The deadline for the shutdown is March 23, and Congress has until then to reach an agreement on long-term spending legislation. If no agreement is reached, two-thirds of IRS employees will face furloughs at the height of tax filing season, and active-duty U.S military service members would remain on the job without pay in case of a shutdown.
A dispute over border security funding threatens to force a shutdown of vast swaths of the federal government in less than a week.
Two-thirds of IRS employees would face furloughs at the height of tax filing season if there is no agreement on long-term spending legislation.
The roughly 1.3 million active-duty U.S military service members would remain on the job without pay in case of a shutdown.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the Republican party and their stance on immigration policy. The author uses language that dehumanizes immigrants by referring to them as 'unauthorized migrants' and portrays them as a threat to national security. The author also quotes GOP negotiators who use inflammatory language such as 'manage people into the country' which is used in an attempt to delegitimize the human rights of immigrants. Additionally, the article uses examples from previous shutdowns that were caused by Republican actions and portrays them as a result of Democratic obstructionism.
GOP negotiators use inflammatory language such as 'manage people into the country'
The article portrays previous shutdowns caused by Republican actions and portrays them as a result of Democratic obstructionism
The author refers to unauthorized migrants as 'people' who need to be managed into the country
The package initially planned for release Sunday would have included five full-year funding bills covering the departments of Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and State, along with the Internal Revenue Service and general government and foreign operations
Congress has until Friday to pass legislation to keep various parts of the government funded or risk its first partial government shutdown in years
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy when it states that the White House official told Politico on Sunday that Republicans wanted to underfund DHS after rejecting an offer from Democrats for an extra $1.56 billion in funding for border security.
]This statement from an unnamed White House staffer is misleading and counterproductive to reaching a bipartisan agreement to avoid a government shutdown.
Bias
(85%)
The author Aris Folley demonstrates bias by using language that depicts one side as extreme or unreasonable. The phrase 'deep partisan divisions remain in Washington on the border and immigration' implies that Republicans are being unreasonable.
deep partisan divisions remain in Washington on the border and immigration
The federal government has once more begun the mandatory process of planning to bring affected agencies nonessential functions to a halt one week from Friday.
One week prior to the expiration of appropriations bills, regardless of whether enactment appears imminent, OMB will communicate with agency senior officials and share a draft communication template.
Funding for roughly 70 percent of the federal government will lapse at 12:01 a.m. Saturday unless Congress acts before then.
Two-thirds of IRS employees would face furloughs at the height of tax filing season if there is no agreement on long-term spending legislation.
The roughly 1.3 million active-duty U.S military service members would remain on the job without pay in case of a shutdown.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title implies that a partial shutdown of critical departments is imminent when it's not clear if one will actually happen. Secondly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that this is 'once more counting down to a partial shutdown', which creates fear and anxiety for readers without providing any context or information about what might happen. Thirdly, the article quotes an expert who states that millions of federal workers would be affected by a shutdown, but fails to mention that many of these workers have already been through multiple government funding deadlines and stopgap bills in recent months. Lastly, the author uses selective reporting by focusing on only six departments out of 24 when discussing which departments are at risk of being affected.
The title implies a partial shutdown is imminent without providing any context or information about what might happen.
The author uses sensationalism to create fear and anxiety for readers.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement that implies the federal government is preparing for another shutdown. The author uses language such as 'mandatory process of planning to bring nonessential functions to a halt' and 'one week prior to the expiration of appropriations bills'. This suggests bias towards portraying the situation in an extreme manner, with no mention or context given about why this is happening.
The federal government has once more begun the mandatory process of planning to bring nonessential functions to a halt one week from Friday.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The authors of the article have a conflict of interest on several topics related to government funding and shutdowns. They are reporting on critical departments that may be affected by a partial shutdown, including those in agriculture, commerce, justice, veterans affairs, energy interior transportation housing urban development food and drug administration military construction.
The article mentions the Department of Agriculture as one of the critical departments that could be impacted by a government shutdown. The authors do not disclose any financial ties or personal relationships they may have with this department.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has conflicts of interest on the topics of government funding deadline, partial shutdown, critical departments and military construction. The article does not disclose these conflicts.
Betsy Klein is a CNN political correspondent who covers Congress and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Tami Luhby is a CNN health policy reporter who has covered government funding for healthcare programs such as Medicare. Katie Lobosco is a CNN politics reporter who has covered military construction projects.
The article discusses the partial shutdown that occurred in 2018 and 2019, which was caused by disagreements over government funding. The author does not disclose any conflicts of interest related to this topic.
Negotiations over the fiscal 2024 Homeland Security bill have fallen apart and lawmakers are now planning for a full-year continuing resolution for the agency.
The yearlong stopgap bill for the agency would count as “full-year appropriations” and not trigger automatic cuts on April 30 that were laid out in the debt limit law if a part-year CR were still in place.
The Homeland Security bill has been the most difficult all along. Appropriators were continuing to work toward a full-year DHS bill as recently as Thursday morning, but it appeared they would not be able to resolve all their differences and instead would simply default to status quo funding levels and policies currently in place.
Anomalies under consideration include extra Secret Service funding for protection of presidential candidates, and the Alaska delegation has been seeking to add money for a new Coast Guard icebreaker. Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Chair Christopher S. Murphy, D-Conn., said the negotiations have been difficult.
Accuracy
The yearlong stopgap bill for the agency would count as full-year appropriations and not trigger automatic cuts on April 30 that were laid out in the debt limit law if a part-year CR were still in place.
Negotiators for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) appealed to the White House rather than congressional Democrats to engage in spending talks, revealing the fraught nature of conversations.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the Homeland Security bill has been the most difficult all along and that negotiators were still working towards a full-year DHS bill as recently as Thursday morning. However, this contradicts itself later on when it says that lawmakers no longer expect to reach an agreement on the bill and instead will be planning for a full-year continuing resolution for the agency. This is clearly deceptive because if negotiators were still working towards a full-year DHS bill as recently as Thursday morning, then they would not have been planning for a yearlong stopgap measure. Secondly, it states that funding extra Secret Service protection for presidential candidates and adding money to fund a new Coast Guard icebreaker are 'anomalies' under consideration. However, these are clearly legitimate issues that need to be addressed in the DHS bill and should not be considered anomalous or deceptive. Finally, the article states that Republicans want to eliminate funding for UNRWA after Israel alleged that members of the group participated on Hamas' Oct 7 attack on Israel. This is a clear example of political bias and deception as it presents only one side of an issue without providing any context or evidence to support its claims.
The article states that funding extra Secret Service protection for presidential candidates and adding money to fund a new Coast Guard icebreaker are 'anomalies' under consideration. However, these are clearly legitimate issues that need to be addressed in the DHS bill and should not be considered anomalous or deceptive.
The article states that negotiators were still working towards a full-year DHS bill as recently as Thursday morning, but later on says they no longer expect to reach an agreement and will be planning for a yearlong stopgap measure. This is clearly deceptive because if negotiators were still working towards a full-year DHS bill then they would not have been planning for a yearlong stopgap measure.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the continuing resolution for DHS would count as full-year appropriations and not trigger automatic cuts on April 30 if a part-year CR were still in place. This statement is false because it contradicts the debt limit law, which states that funding disruptions in key areas will occur if a part-year CR is still in place. The author also uses an informal fallacy by stating that Republicans seem intent on walking away from a deal just as they did on a negotiated bipartisan border package. This statement is false because the two situations are not comparable, and there was no agreement reached on the border bill. Additionally, the article contains several examples of dichotomous depictions in statements such as 'most of the other bills are in better shape at this point' and 'the Homeland Security bill has been difficult all along'. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Republicans want to eliminate funding for UNRWA after Israel alleged that members of the group participated on Hamas' Oct. 7 attack on Israel, which is a false statement.
The continuing resolution for DHS would count as full-year appropriations and not trigger automatic cuts if a part-year CR were still in place
Republicans seem intent on walking away from a deal just as they did on a negotiated bipartisan border package
'most of the other bills are in better shape at this point'
'the Homeland Security bill has been difficult all along'
