Well, this is an improvement. After recently behaving as though tax cuts are free, the Washington Post has an article today that focuses on the costs of extending the scheduled-to-expire Bush tax cuts:

Senate Republicans unveil a plan to make Bush tax cuts permanent

By Lori Montgomery

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, September 15, 2010; 3:16 AM

Even as they hammer Democrats for running up record budget deficits, Senate Republicans are rolling out a plan to permanently extend an array of expiring tax breaks that would deprive the Treasury of more than $4 trillion over the next decade, nearly doubling projected deficits over that period unless dramatic spending cuts are made.

If you read closely, you probably noticed that the word “permanent” appears in the article's headline and lede, but the cost assessment referred to “the next decade.” That disparity persists throughout the article: The word “permanent” appears six times, but no cost assessment refers to anything beyond the next decade.

Now, I don't want to be too hard on the Post. Like I said, it's great to see them focus on the costs of massive tax cuts rather than behaving as though they are free. Compared to some of the paper's recent work, today's article deserves a gold star. And you'd have to do some serious searching to find anyone talking about the cost of tax cuts beyond ten years. But news organizations routinely report long-term (i.e., beyond ten years) budgetary consequences of public policy -- when the policy in question is Social Security or Medicare.

So, what happens when you routinely discuss the costs of Social Security and Medicare over decades-long time horizons, but do not do the same when it comes to tax cuts? Obviously, you rig the debate in favor of tax cuts and against social safety net spending.

If they're going to continue to report the long-term costs of programs like Social Security and Medicare, news organizations should also try to provide estimates of the long-term costs of tax cuts.