Congress has reached a deal to keep the government funded through the rest of the fiscal year that began in October.
The surge in migrants at the US-Mexico border is a major issue in election rematch between Democratic President Joe Biden and his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.
The top Republican and Democrat in the US Congress have reached a deal to keep the government funded through the rest of the fiscal year that began in October. The last sticking point was funding for DHS, as a surge in migrants at the US-Mexico border has become a major issue in election rematch between Democratic President Joe Biden and his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.
Congress has announced a deal to fund the government ahead of a weekend deadline.
The Department of Homeland Security had held up talks regarding money for the department, which was resolved by including it in the funding bill.
House and Senate committees have begun drafting bill text to be prepared for release and consideration by the full House and Senate as soon as possible.
Accuracy
The Department of Homeland Security had held up talks regarding money for the department.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Congress has reached a deal to fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year. However, this statement is misleading because only one bill out of seven has been settled and there are still five other bills left to be funded.
The article claims that Congress will finish funding all remaining full-year spending bills by Saturday morning. This claim is false as it does not mention the details of the agreement reached between Congressional leaders, President Biden, and Democrats on Homeland Security funding.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the DHS deal has been agreed upon by Congressional leaders and President Biden without providing any evidence or reasoning for their decision-making process. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the hard-right Freedom Caucus members' letter as a
The article contains several fallacies.
<br>
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the Democratic position on funding for the Department of Homeland Security. The author uses language that portrays Republicans as being unreasonable and unwilling to compromise, while Democrats are presented as being reasonable and willing to work together. Additionally, there is a clear political slant in the article, with references made to specific legislation (H.R. 2) and policies without providing any context or explanation for why they are important.
The author uses language that portrays Republicans as being unreasonable and unwilling to compromise
There is a clear political slant in the article, with references made to specific legislation (H.R. 2) and policies without providing any context or explanation for why they are important
Congressional leaders have reached a deal to keep the rest of the government funded through the fiscal year.
, Congress has until 11:59 p.m. ET Friday to pass this legislation, and getting through both chambers is expected to take days.
Accuracy
Congress has until 11:59 p.m. ET Friday to pass this legislation, and getting through both chambers is expected to take days.
The far right wing of Mike Johnson's conference had been pushing against this bill.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Congressional leaders have reached a deal to fund the rest of government through the fiscal year. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article and it's unclear if such an agreement has been reached or not.
The sentence 'Congressional leaders on Tuesday formally announced a deal to keep the rest of the government funded through the fiscal year,' is deceptive because there is no mention of any specific details about what this deal entails and it's unclear if such an agreement has been reached or not.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that President Joe Biden has welcomed news of the deal without providing any evidence or context for this statement. Secondly, there is a dichotomous depiction of Congressional leaders as needing each other's cooperation in order to prevent a partial government shutdown and then being divided on whether or not to pass the legislation. Thirdly, there are several instances where the author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that funding for DHS has become a major obstacle and that security at the southern border is central issue in 2024 campaign without providing any evidence of this claim.
President Joe Biden welcomed news of the deal.
Congressional leaders on Tuesday formally announced a deal to keep the rest of the government funded through the fiscal year, but with just days to go before a key deadline, members from both parties in the House and Senate will need to cooperate in order to prevent a partial government shutdown.
Funding for DHS has become a major obstacle.
Congressional negotiators had reached an agreement on funding for the Department of Homeland Security.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the Democratic party. The author mentions that Speaker Mike Johnson will likely need many Democratic votes to pass the legislation and also states that any one member of the narrowly divided Senate can slow down the process, pushing the federal government passed its deadline.
>Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries added: 'In the next few days, upon completion of the drafting process, Congress will review and consider the appropriations package in order to fund the government and meet the needs of hardworking American taxpayers.'<
>Speaker Mike Johnson announced in his statement: 'I hope the text of the legislation will be released as soon as possible,' a key step expected before either chamber votes. <
Congressional leaders reached an agreement on the final package of spending legislation to fund the federal government through September 30, 2024.
The Department of Homeland Security funding has been agreed upon for the rest of the fiscal year.
House Republicans and Senate Democrats were at loggerheads over funding levels for DHS.
President Biden plans to sign the bill immediately once it is passed by Congress.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title suggests that Congress has reached a deal on the final spending bill when it hasn't yet passed and may not be able to do so before Friday deadline. Secondly, the sentence 'Although Democrats and Republicans were able to agree to funding levels for the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of the fiscal year, they may not avert a brief partial shutdown.' is misleading as it implies that there will only be one more day left until government funding runs out. However, according to the article, Congress has already passed six-bill $460 billion spending package and are now repeating the process for politically fraught agencies before the second deadline at the end of this week.
The title suggests that Congress has reached a deal on final spending bill when it hasn't yet passed
The sentence 'Although Democrats and Republicans were able to agree to funding levels for the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of the fiscal year, they may not avert a brief partial shutdown.' is misleading as it implies that there will only be one more day left until government funding runs out.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the potential shutdown as a 'brief partial shutdown' and using phrases such as 'litigating disagreements that threatened to imperil the spending package'. Additionally, there is an example of an appeal to authority with Speaker Mike Johnson stating that he plans to sign the bill immediately. There are also examples of dichotomous depictions when describing funding levels for different agencies and how they may be politically fraught.
The article describes a 'brief partial shutdown' which is an inflammatory rhetorical device used to create fear in the reader
Speaker Mike Johnson states that he plans to sign the bill immediately, this is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy as it implies that his word should be taken without question.
The article describes funding levels for different agencies and how they may be politically fraught. This is a dichotomous depiction as it presents two options (funding or no funding) when in reality there are often more nuanced solutions.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement that suggests the possibility of a brief partial shutdown over the weekend. The author also mentions that House Republicans have demanded that Mr. Johnson abide by an internal rule and any number of senators may create procedural hurdles for the bill's passage, which could push final passage past 12:01 on Saturday morning when funding is set to expire.
Congressional leaders said on Tuesday morning that they had reached an agreement on the final package of spending legislation to fund the federal government through the fall, though it was unclear whether they would be able to pass it in time to avert a brief partial shutdown over the weekend.
House Republicans have demanded that Mr. Johnson abide by an internal rule that allows lawmakers 72 hours to consider the text of a bill before they vote on it, though previous House leaders have at times abandoned that guidance.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author is a reporter for the New York Times and has financial ties to the company that owns it.
House Republicans have demanded that Mr. Johnson abide by an internal rule that allows lawmakers 72 hours to consider the text of a bill before they vote on it, though previous House leaders have at times abandoned that guidance.
The measure was being written on Tuesday, but it will take congressional staff time to draw up text of the bill which wraps six spending measures into a sizable piece of legislation
those tactics could push final passage past 12:01 on Saturday morning, when funding is set to expire.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of government funding for Department of Homeland Security. The article mentions that House Republicans have demanded that Speaker Mike Johnson abide by an internal rule allowing lawmakers to consider the text before voting on it and also states that any number of senators may create procedural hurdles for its passage.
House Republicans, Senate Democrats and the White House had been at loggerheads over funding levels for Department of Homeland Security.
The top Republican and Democrat in the US Congress have reached a deal to keep the government funded through the rest of the fiscal year that began in October.
, The last sticking point was funding for the Department of Homeland Security, as a surge in migrants at the US-Mexico border has become a major issue in election rematch between Democratic President Joe Biden and his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(75%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(75%)
The article reports on a deal reached between the top Republican and Democrat in Congress to keep the government funded through the rest of the fiscal year. However, it also mentions that there are still more fights ahead as the nation's national debt continues to grow. This suggests a potential bias towards focusing on negative aspects of funding levels rather than positive ones.
The last sticking point was funding for the Department of Homeland Security, as a surge in migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border has become a major issue in the election rematch between Democratic President Joe Biden and his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.
The Senate prevented a partial government shutdown Friday after approving legislation to fund roughly 30 percent of the federal government.
Congress hit the first deadline for roughly 30 percent of the federal government March 8. Funding for the rest of the federal government would expire March 22.
When funding lapses, many government workers are furloughed until their agencies reopen. Certain federal workers continue working unpaid.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article contains several examples of deceptive practices. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that a government shutdown may occur this weekend when there is no indication in the article that such an event is imminent or likely to happen. Secondly, selective reporting is used as only details about funding for roughly 30 percent of the federal government are reported while other aspects of the budget and potential consequences of a shutdown are ignored. Lastly, science and health articles that imply facts without linking to peer-reviewed studies which have not been retrracted or pre-print studies without disclosing their lack of peer review or pre-print status.
The article states 'A government shutdown may occur this weekend.'
The article only reports on funding for roughly 30 percent of the federal government while ignoring other aspects of the budget and potential consequences of a shutdown.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(75%)
The article contains a statement that implies the government is shutting down. The author uses language such as 'Government shutdown' and 'funding for the rest of the federal government would expire March 22'. However, it also states that Congress hit a deadline for roughly 30 percent of the federal government on March 8th and funding was approved by both houses. This creates ambiguity in whether or not there will actually be a shutdown.
funding for the rest of the federal government would expire March 22
Government shutdown
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of government shutdowns as they are reporting for The Washington Post which is owned by Jeff Bezos who also owns Blue Origin. Additionally, the article mentions that certain federal workers continue working unpaid and national security or vital economic activity which could be affected by a government shutdown.
The article mentions that certain federal workers continue working unpaid and national security or vital economic activity which could be affected by a government shutdown.
The author reports on the potential government shutdown for The Washington Post, an organization owned by Jeff Bezos who also owns Blue Origin.
