USA Today uncritically reported GOP charge that stimulus advocates supported "provision that allowed the [AIG] bonuses to be paid"

On March 27, USA Today reported the Republican charge that proponents' support for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 amounted to support for "a provision that allowed the [AIG] bonuses to be paid" without noting that those bonuses would have been paid in the absence of the stimulus bill.

Reporting on the March 31 New York 20th Congressional District special election, USA Today reporter John Fritze wrote that Republican candidate James Tedisco "has tried to tie [Democratic candidate Scott] Murphy's support of the stimulus to AIG because the law includes a provision that allowed the bonuses to be paid." At no point in the article did Fritze note that the stimulus bill did not create the right of AIG to pay those bonuses, which would have been paid without the bill at all. What the stimulus bill did was impose restrictions on the ability of companies receiving aid in the future to pay bonuses. So if the bill hadn't passed at all -- the outcome Tedisco reportedly says would have been the right one -- then there would be no restrictions on the payment of bonuses by companies receiving aid.

From Fritze's March 27 USA Today article:

The midterm elections are more than a year away, but voters who live in the small towns and rolling farms of Upstate New York are providing an early look at how President Obama's economic policies may play out on the campaign trail in 2010.

Months before races heat up elsewhere, two candidates here are vying for an open House seat in the nation's only competitive special election -- a swing district where the $787 billion stimulus law and bonuses paid to AIG executives have become key issues. The winner may provide a blueprint for how to campaign next year in an election that will decide control of Congress.

[...]

The candidates, Republican James Tedisco and Democrat Scott Murphy, have battled for weeks over Obama's response to the economy and now the American International Group bonuses. Both are echoing messages heard in Washington: Murphy says the stimulus is imperfect but necessary to stem further job losses, and Tedisco argues the measure includes wasteful spending that will not help the economy.

Tedisco also has tried to tie Murphy's support of the stimulus to AIG because the law includes a provision that allowed the bonuses to be paid. Murphy has countered that Tedisco's opposition to the stimulus would have cost the state tens of thousands of jobs and killed a tax break intended to benefit middle-income residents.

[...]

Money flowing into the district has translated into a bitter television ad war. Tedisco aired an ad last week on the AIG bonuses, arguing that because Murphy supported the stimulus he "supported a loophole letting AIG executives keep their bonuses." The language was a last-minute addition to the bill and did not become widely known until after the company paid bonuses this month.

Murphy has suggested in his ad that because Tedisco opposes the stimulus he is against 76,000 jobs for Upstate New York and "the largest middle-class tax cut in American history." The jobs figure is an estimate that even the Obama administration has said is subject to large margins of error.