President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

July 09, 2010 06:45 PM UTC

Reporters should keep it simple. CDPHE budget increased under Norton

1 Comments
by: Jason Salzman

Jane Norton has been telling reporters she cut her own budget when she headed the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

In an article Wednesday, The Post set the record straight on Norton’s CDPHE budget history, though some important information was left out. Lucky for you, I will provide it in this blog post.

Wednesday’s Post story states that Norton’s CDPHE budget increased during her first three years at the Dartment, and then it decreased in the last year from from about $32 million to $16.2 million.

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 significantly.

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 rose by $15 million under Norton. 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, 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, the “cash” and “federal” portions. She didn’t do it. She has claimed 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 fight for the reduction in revenue from fees and fines, revenue that she apparently 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, a reasonable person 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 Public Health and Environment’s budget, or its general fund, reporters should inform us, simply, that under Norton the overall CDPHE budget actually increased. No dispute there.

One thought on “Reporters should keep it simple. CDPHE budget increased under Norton”

Barron X says:

July 10, 2010 at 6:16 am

.

you report on something other than that same story that you’ve posted at this site over 20 times. I dare not mention the “protagonist” by name, lest I set you off yet again.

.

Log in to Reply

Login

Lost Password

Reporters should keep it simple. CDPHE budget increased under Norton

Comments

One thought on “Reporters should keep it simple. CDPHE budget increased under Norton”

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Recent Comments

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Newsletter