About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Hannity distorts article to smear administration on stimulus money distribution

July 10, 2009 8:54 am ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Fox News' Sean Hannity and CNN's Kiran Chetry cited a USA Today article to claim or speculate that political favoritism played a role in the distribution of funds from the recovery act. However, the article itself stated, "Investigators who track the stimulus are skeptical that political considerations could be at work."

24 Comments

On the July 9 editions of Fox News' Hannity and CNN's American Morning, both Sean Hannity and Kiran Chetry cited a USA Today article headlined, "Billions in aid go to areas that backed Obama in '08," to claim or speculate that political favoritism played a role in the distribution of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. However, the USA Today article itself stated, "Investigators who track the stimulus are skeptical that political considerations could be at work." USA Today also reported that "[t]he imbalance didn't start with the stimulus. From 2005 through 2007, the counties that later voted for Obama collected about 50% more government aid than those that supported McCain, according to spending reports from the U.S. Census Bureau."

After Hannity read from the USA Today article, he asked, "So is this a mere coincidence, or is there something more sinister at work?" Fox News anchor and analyst Kimberly Guilfoyle later stated, "[W]e're not born yesterday. Of course it's going to go to the blue states. It's called, like, you know, you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. It's very simple." Conservative commentator S.E. Cupp later added, "I think the message is completely clear. If you want more of the taxpayers' money, vote Democratic. If you want a chance to actually earn your own, well you'll have to vote Republican," to which Hannity responded, "Yeah. And so he's punishing those areas that voted for McCain."

On American Morning, Chetry teased a segment by stating, "Where are your tax dollars actually going? A new report just breaking this morning says it may depend on how your county voted." She later noted that "the report also says that that imbalance didn't just start with the stimulus. From 2005 through 2007, counties that later voted for Obama collecting about 50 percent more government aid anyway, according to spending reports from the Census Bureau."

From the July 9 USA Today article:

The reports show the 872 counties that supported Obama received about $69 per person, on average. The 2,234 that supported McCain received about $34.

Investigators who track the stimulus are skeptical that political considerations could be at work. The imbalance is so pronounced -- and the aid so far from complete -- that it would be almost inconceivable for it to be the result of political tinkering, says Adam Hughes, the director of federal fiscal policy for the non-profit OMB Watch. "Even if they wanted to, I don't think the administration has enough people in place yet to actually do that," he says.

"Most of what they're doing at this point is just stamping the checks and sending them out," Hughes says.

The stimulus package Obama signed in February includes about $499 billion in new spending, and to date, the Obama administration has allocated about $158 billion to specific projects and programs. Most of that money has gone directly to state governments, which then disperse the money to prevent school layoffs, repair roads and fund social services. That contrasts with the $17 billion that Washington distributes directly to local communities.

Including the larger chunk of money given to state governments, the aid favors states that voted for Obama, which have received about 20% more per person [sic]

Not all of the money favors places that supported Obama. About a third of the $17 billion, or $5.5 billion, in contracts that the federal government has signed for projects ranging from repaving runways to cleaning up nuclear waste has gone overwhelmingly to counties that supported McCain.

Jake Wiens, an investigator with the non-profit Project on Government Oversight, says it's too soon to draw meaningful conclusions about whether the type of aid in the stimulus favors Obama's constituents.

But, he says, "it will be important to pay close attention as the data come in to ensure that political favoritism plays no role."

The imbalance didn't start with the stimulus. From 2005 through 2007, the counties that later voted for Obama collected about 50% more government aid than those that supported McCain, according to spending reports from the U.S. Census Bureau. USA TODAY's review did not include Alaska, which does not report its election results by county.

From the July 9 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

HANNITY: Seven hundred and eighty-seven billion dollars are being doled out as part of the federal stimulus, but where exactly are they going? Now, USA Today reveals a startling fact, quote: "Counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration's $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Senator John McCain."

So is this a mere coincidence, or is there something more sinister at work? And joining me now to answer this question, Fox News anchor and analyst Kimberly Guilfoyle and conservative columnist S.E. Cupp. All right, what is this?

GUILFOYLE: Call on me. Call me. Sinister.

[...]

HANNITY: So billions in aid go to these areas that back Barack Obama.

GUILFOYLE: Correct.

HANNITY: Sinister?

GUILFOYLE: Absolutely, but definitely expected, right? I mean, come on, we're not born yesterday. Of course it's going to go to the blue states. It's called, like, you know, you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. It's very simple.

HANNITY: Only if you're wearing orange, obviously. All right, but --

GUILFOYLE: But, I mean, this is the way politics goes down. I mean, really, do you think it's just unique -- I don't know -- to the Democrats?

CUPP: But the stimulus was sold as completely altruistic, and when less than 1 percent of it is going to small businesses and 18 million of it is going to redesign the recovery.gov website -- I'm sorry, there's something going on here. It's not OK.

HANNITY: No, here's --

GUILFOYLE: It's inappropriate, that's for sure.

HANNITY: All right, but, wait a minute. Here's --

CUPP: It's dishonest.

HANNITY: But here's what I'm thinking. I'm taking it a little bit deeper.

GUILFOYLE: Go ahead.

CUPP: Dig deeper.

HANNITY: I think that Barack Obama -- every person out there -- the government doesn't have money. It comes from everybody watching and working really hard.

GUILFOYLE: Right. Yeah. Right.

HANNITY: OK, so Barack Obama, to shore up his re-election campaign --

CUPP: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

HANNITY: -- is basically buying votes in the areas where he got votes --

CUPP: Yes, I think --

HANNITY: -- with our money.

CUPP: -- the message is completely clear. If you want more of the taxpayers' money, vote Democratic. If you want a chance to actually earn your own, well you'll have to vote Republican.

HANNITY: Yeah. And so he's punishing those areas that voted for McCain.

GUILFOYLE: Well, it's very clear, if you look at the analysis and you break down the dollars and cents, it doesn't take the world's best accountant to realize that there is some funny, fuzzy math going on here in terms of who's benefitting from it, and it's not right.

HANNITY: All right, so --

GUILFOYLE: What about transparency in government, and what about taking care of the whole country, all of the United States, all of the taxpayers --

HANNITY: No, I agree.

GUILFOYLE: -- that are contributing?

From the July 9 edition of CNN's American Morning:

CHETRY: Where are your tax dollars actually going? A new report just breaking this morning says it may depend on how your county voted. Are parts of the country that are blue getting more of the stimulus cash?

[...]

CHETRY: Well, as that back and forth continues over whether or not the stimulus is working in Washington, a new report in the USA Today is claiming that the amount of money your county gets may depend on how you voted. The report says counties that President Obama won in last year's election have actually gotten twice as much money per person as those that voted for John McCain.

So breaking that down into raw numbers, the counties that supported Obama, the report shows, received about $69 per person on average. Counties that supported McCain on average received about $34 per person. But the report also says that that imbalance didn't just start with the stimulus. From 2005 through 2007, counties that later voted for Obama collecting about 50 percent more government aid anyway, according to spending reports from the Census Bureau.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by terrapin53 (July 10, 2009 9:12 am ET)
      2  
      It might even become more disparate if these wingnuts don't fill out their census next year. It is the census that determines where a lot of the money goes.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (July 10, 2009 9:32 am ET)
      2  
      Using ConLogic...: If the counties in question were receiving 50% more government money from 2005-2007 then the Republicans were attemping to buy their votes.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by princeofwheels (July 10, 2009 10:51 am ET)
           
        P.S. QOTUS is now included on the Urban Dictionary website.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by LuvLuLu (July 10, 2009 1:18 pm ET)
        2  
        From 2005 through 2007, the counties that later voted for Obama collected about 50% more government aid than those that supported McCain, according to spending reports from the U.S. Census Bureau."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by neon desert (July 10, 2009 10:52 am ET)
      3  
      What?!? More money per person to the counties in which one finds New York City and LA than the counties in which one finds Mosquito Point and Sanger?

      Shocking!!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by tman418 (July 10, 2009 10:57 am ET)
        5  
        Exactly. Obama won in more densely populated areas. Of course they'll get more money. Is anyone measuring per capita spending?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (July 10, 2009 11:50 am ET)
          3  
          If rational logic is going to continue to be used by you libs, I will not be taking part in this subversive action against the ConLogic thinking people. How dare you uppity elitists think like this? >reality<
          Report Abuse
          • Author by neon desert (July 10, 2009 1:08 pm ET)
            1  
            Well, it pains me but I have to point out that:

            "...the report shows, received about $69 per person on average. Counties that supported McCain on average received about $34 per person."

            My point was that in general, the types of businesses in rural areas (farmers, ranchers - R voters) are not as likely to benefit society by creating new jobs from the stimulus money going to them as the large factories (unions - dem voters) found in larger metro areas.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Soapm (July 12, 2009 1:33 am ET)
             
          I think conservative counties should be upset with their conservative leadership for for folding their arms, sticking out their lips and refusing to represent them into the stimulus. Boner looks good saying the libs passed the wrong kind of stimulus then complain about not getting as much of the (wrong) stimulus money???
          Report Abuse
      • Author by kfraz43 (July 10, 2009 1:48 pm ET)
           
        What do you have against Sanger, anyway? I live fifteen minutes from there! Actually, now that I think about it, I know EXACTLY what you have against Sanger. Carry on...

        But your point is correct. There are larger, more expensive projects in urban areas than there are in the sticks.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by neon desert (July 10, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
          1  
          I just figured I'd give Fresno a break.

          Maybe Coalinga instead?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by diannesrave (July 10, 2009 11:38 am ET)
      1  
      If Fox Noise was truly a responsible network it would pull Sean Hannity aside and let him know in no uncertain terms that this distortion and ignoring of the facts has got to stop or he will no longer be on the air. But since Fox Noise is simply a shill for the right-wing these distortions, half truths and out right lies will continue and grow out of this man's uninformed month. Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Ailes are more concerned with ratings and pandering to the right than being a responsible source of the news.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pags2 (July 10, 2009 12:15 pm ET)
      1  
      This is just more disinformation from Fox so we should not surprised at such outrageous statements.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by LORISNJ (July 10, 2009 12:50 pm ET)
         
      Isn't it the editors that control the headlines? They need to be more dilligent in making sure the headline of a story relates to the conclusion or main issue of the story. Fox News and all the other "conservative" media outlets only read the headlines and maybe the first paragraph of any story - so they need to aim the headlines and the first paragraphs toward the lowest common denominator (i.e. Fox News).

      Unless of course your media outlet is owned by Rupert who has his own method for reading and repeating stories (example [not real story]. STORY: Large crowds wait in pouring rain to see President Obama and the 1st family on their trip to Russia. Rupert's story HEADLINE: President Obama and 1st family make Russians wait in pouring rain on their trip to Russia).

      It is a good thing that most Americans aren't buying that crap anymore but in some cases those are the only media outlets that are available to people who would believe the headlines and not bother to read the articles.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by frankbyron (July 10, 2009 1:08 pm ET)
      1  
      At what point do Hannity's continual misrepresentations and selective editing to falsely portray events finally become illegal? Where is the FCC in all this? Everyone knows, of course, that Fox is nothing but a house organ for the GOP, but does the network have any Standards and Practices policies at all?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by sheerinsanity (July 10, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
      1  
      If Hannity doesn't have a legitimate conspiracy to promote (he never does), then it only means one thing. He has to make one up.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by haywood jabuzoff (July 10, 2009 2:12 pm ET)
      1  
      I think we're being too harsh on Sean (you're a great American) Hannity. It's not that he doesn't see the truth; it's just that he holds no affinity for it. I've the same problem with broccoli.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jmh (July 10, 2009 2:43 pm ET)
      2  
      hmm... doesn't the fact that some Republican leadership, by initially refusing Stimulus Funds to their regions, and thereby delaying the funds deployment, skew the current statistical data?
      Dang, the only thing worse than the ambiguity of Statistics is Statistics in the Hands of Sean Hannity
      Report Abuse
      • Author by John Paradox (July 10, 2009 5:22 pm ET)
        1  
        "We're not getting our fair (and balanced?) money that we said we didn't want"
        Report Abuse
    • Author by smarshall1432997 (July 10, 2009 5:17 pm ET)
         
      Maybe the Republicans, Sean Hannity, and CNN "think" that the Census has taken place "already" under the Obama's Administration, and so see what happens when Counties voted for a Democrat? Wink, wink.

      The Republicans know how the game is played, just look at where missing money went under the Bush Administration for the past eight years. Trillions upon trillions of dollars gone, and "NO" Reporter got the scoop of where it went. Oh wait, the missing trillions was based on facts, and this 'scratch-my-back-for-Stimulus-money' is made-up by Republicans and FoxNews. Gotcha. Too funny indeed.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Soapm (July 10, 2009 8:26 pm ET)
         
      All of this talk on the stimulus is to take America's focus away from health care. What the GOP fail to acknowledge is the stimulus that was passed has tax cuts for average American's and small businesses. They keep saying real stimulus is cutting taxes for small business. Who exactly are they talking about? Small businesses did get a tax cut.

      The alternative they presented wanted to make the Bush tax cuts permanent and cut taxes for the same large corporations that sent our jobs overseas. If the Bush tax cuts were going to work, we wouldn't be in this mess since they have been in place for years.

      As for the census, the GOP conducted the last one. Are they afraid the the Democrats will do like they did or something?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by subs3441 (July 12, 2009 4:52 pm ET)
         
      Is it not possible that the counties that voted for each person are also a reflection of the people that inhabit each county? More densely populated areas would receive more cash, and they were, for all practical purposes, more leaning towards voting for President Obama, than they were for Senator McCain? Just my take.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by proudconservative (July 13, 2009 8:30 am ET)
         
      Face it leftists, this economic 'surge' was doomed from the start.

      Government should not have gotten into this kind of financial civil war in the first place. The competing banks, insurance companies, auto companies should resolve this conflict themselves and not require the US government to waste precious dollars, our children's resources on failed policy. The economic surge is a failure, we cannot effect change by throwing precious economic resources into a battle that has been unresolved for untold mileniums. All the economic surge is doing is creating new economic combatants that will rise up and attack our finacial shore.

      Now mind you, I love and support our dollars without reservation but this economic surge is a failure. It never had a chance from the beginning and to continue with this policy is reckless and foolhardy. Again, I honor our dollars' service but we must call our money back into the wallets of individuals immediately.

      The economic surge is a failure.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.