WaPo Fact Checker Gives Obama 4 Pinocchios For Janitor Claim (pay cuts)

[ProSense]

WaPo Fact Checker Gives Obama 4 Pinocchios For Janitor Claim

In his remarks highlighting draconian budget cuts known as sequestration at the White House on Friday, President Barack Obama claimed that even janitors working on Capitol Hill would receive a pay cut.

“Starting tomorrow everybody here, all the folks who are cleaning the floors at the Capitol," Obama said at a press conference. "Now that Congress has left, somebody’s going to be vacuuming and cleaning those floors and throwing out the garbage. They’re going to have less pay. The janitors, the security guards, they just got a pay cut, and they’ve got to figure out how to manage that. That’s real.”

Glenn Kessler, who fact checks for the Washington Post, obtained a memo from the Architect of the Capitol, who manages janitorial staff, debunking the claim.

<...>

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan also got into hot water for embellishing harmful effects of sequestration this week, when he claimed the cuts already cost teachers jobs.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/wapo-fact-checker-gives-obama-4-pinocchios-for

Evidently, the fact checking orgs have decided it's a lie to claim sequester will hurt public employees. From the WaPo fact check:

<...>

A White House official noted at first that the memo does refer to “further reducing overtime.” Technically, that could mean some janitors might see less pay, but it’s unclear how many actually earn overtime. Under the reasonable person test, a possible reduction in overtime appears a bit different from “just got a pay cut.”

The White House thought our position was unreasonable. “Folks who are getting paid hourly aren’t breaking up their paycheck to say, well, technically this portion of my paycheck came from my overtime pay, so I’m not going to actually count that towards my income,” an official said. “They rely on that overtime and they pay their bills with that income. So, we disagree with this ‘reasonable person test.’”

Then, another White House official asserted that the janitors--both part-time and full-time--are contracted out by the Architect of the Capitol. “Since the AOC said that the contracts would be reduced or eliminated, it’s hard to convincingly make the case those contract workers won’t be affected,” he claimed.

In other words, White House officials assumed there was an impact but they were not exactly sure themselves. We will also note that the president said the pay cut was happening “tomorrow.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/sequester-spin-obamas-incorrect-claim-of-capitol-janitors-receiving-a-pay-cut/2013/03/01/3407535c-82a9-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_blog.html

Kessler: Losing overtime pay isn't "technically" a pay cut, contract workers don't count and if furloughs are deemed necessary in the coming weeks, so what? Republicans are running around claiming all sorts of dire consequences in their strategy to blame the President.

Does the WaPo fact checker have an agenda? Here's a WaPo fact check from February 26:

Can you trust what any politician says about the impact of the sequester? Let’s just say all facts and figures should be viewed with skepticism.

The sequester is a remarkably blunt instrument, slashing many programs with equal vigor. Another issue is that the federal fiscal year, which ends Oct. 1, has just seven months left, so these reductions must be squeezed into a shorter time frame. That heightens the pain to federal agencies, especially because some of the biggest parts of the budget (such as Social Security) have been walled off from any cuts.

There is also a ramp-up effect. On March 1, when the sequester goes into effect, the cuts are not immediate; they will build up over time, so the effects may be difficult to discern at first.

These cuts also would come after the federal budget has grown dramatically in recent years. In some ways, the reductions would undo budget increases that President Obama engineered as part of the stimulus law. But even so, this round of reductions would still leave many programs at spending levels near or above what they were when Obama took office. Whether that is a good or bad thing is in the eye of the beholder.

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/spin-and-counterspin-in-the-sequester-debate/2013/02/25/e709db58-7fa4-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_blog.html

What utter bullshit. In that piece, Kessler admits the sequester time frame "heightens the pain to federal agencies," but only because Social Security isn't in the mix. Social Security has nothing to do with deficit reduction. It's clear that Kessler decided to use his fact check to shill for Republicans. I mean, where the hell did he get that bizarre claim about the stimulus? He needs to get his facts straight.

For the record, last year, over President Obama's first four years, the deficit shrunk by about $300 billion. This year, the deficit is projected to be about $600 billion smaller than when the president took office. We are, in reality, currently seeing the fastest deficit reduction in several generations.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/22/17056939-a-well-kept-fiscal-secret

[spanone]

1. k&r...

[Zax2me]

2. So, what, President Obama is lying?!

This appears to be another predictable hit piece.
Now that the sequester is in place, we'll see how many people start pointing fingers - and WHERE they point them - when they wake up Monday morning to a country is complete disarray.

[still_one]

3. Fuck the Washington post. They were not one of the papers who distinguished themselves when

We invaded Iraq based on a lie

Just protect your shrill Woodward

No one reads your garbage paper anyway

[Enrique]

4. not fact checking

losing overtime pay obviously is a pay cut, so that's that. End of fact checking.

Glenn Kessler is not fact-checking, he is simply taking sides, just like Bob Woodward and everyone else in the DC media, especially the Washington Post. They aren't taking sides against Obama, they are taking sides against Social Security and Medicare.

[Tempest]

5. Once your fact checking has been shown wrong, you're no longer credible

This is the same idiot who said Romney's Jeep ad was correct.

And it was completely WRONG.

[CatWoman]

18. really?

well that's all we need to know.

[99Forever]

6. I'll tell you what's bullshit.

Thinking that We the People are so fucking stupid that we aren't on to the invented crisis, good cop/bad cop routine being used to fuck us over, by BOTH major parties.

WE SEE YOU.

[NCTraveler]

9. +1

Four Pinocchio's all over the place.

[ProSense]

11. Here's the problem:

"Thinking that We the People are so fucking stupid that we aren't on to the invented crisis, good cop/bad cop routine being used to fuck us over, by BOTH major parties. "

...If you truly believe this is a "good cop/bad cop routine," how "stupid" is it to keep believing that repeating that is going to change anything?

See, I don't believe Boehner, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are on the same side as Obama, Pelosi and Bernie Sanders. I sure as hell don't believe Kessler is part of some 11th dimension chess game being perpetrated by a sinister President Obama.

Statement from the President (on filibuster of Democratic sequester replacement)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022443634

[99Forever]

12. Who signed that bill you are now whining about into law?

Who didn't do shit about ending filibusters in the Senate?

WE SEE YOU.

[ProSense]

13. So

"Who signed that bill you are now whining about into law?"

President Obama, and if calling out Republicans and Kessler is "whining," I'm guilty.

"Who didn't do shit about ending filibusters in the Senate? "

Harry Reid.

That clearly means Boehner, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul support

Health care reform (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022424843), Wall Street reform (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022441546) and Raising taxes on the rich (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022409893).

And this was part of the "good cop/bad cop routine":

<...>

If the bill would have become law, it would have replaced tens of billions of dollars in spending cuts set to take place this year with 10 years’ worth of deficit reducing tax increases and targeted spending cuts. The revenue would have come largely from individuals making over $5 million a year, by imposing a minimum “Buffett Rule” tax on their earnings. The cuts would have been divided evenly between agriculture subsidies and defense spending.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/02/republicans-block-sequestration-alternative.php

Roll call: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00027

You got me.

[Cha]

25. thanks ProSense..

...If you truly believe this is a "good cop/bad cop routine," how "stupid" is it to keep believing that repeating that is going to change anything?

Really Damn Stupid.

[librechik]

7. WaPo is nothing but propoganda for the right wing nowadays

Kessler is a stooge and fact checkers get bonuses for making the facts seem to fit the agenda. That is all.

[JaneyVee]

8. Fact check the fact checkers.

[Raine1967]

10. This isn't the first time Glenn Kessler has pulled this crap.

I'm really sick of him.

He's proof that some people are actually entitled to there own opinion while pretending they are facts. He does have an agenda -- Especially when he makes such statements as you posted:

In some ways, the reductions would undo budget increases that President Obama engineered as part of the stimulus law. But even so, this round of reductions would still leave many programs at spending levels near or above what they were when Obama took office. Whether that is a good or bad thing is in the eye of the beholder.

This is not fact checking, that is an opinion.

As another poster said up-thread, once you are proven wrong in your fact checking, you lose credibility. I don't trust him at all. That isn't a fact, that is my opinion.

Just today the local radio statio was saying that a few maintenence projects at the NAval Ship yard here in Virginia we put on hold. You know what that means -- many private citizens who work for the companies contracted to do said maintenance are now or will shortly be, out of work.

The pentagon Sent MAryland Governor O'Malley a letter:

The Air Force would lose at least $10 million to its operations, including reductions in facilities projects at Andrews Air Force Base. The Navy would lose $9 million for a demolition project at Patuxent River Naval Air Station.

The letter says most of the Defense Department's civilian employees in Maryland would be placed on unpaid furlough status for up to 22 discontinuous workdays, affecting about 46,000 workers.

http://www.wtop.com/41/3237925/Pentagon-sends-letter-to-Gov-OMalley

Kessler is disingenuous at best -- I think he is willfully misinforming people. It's shameful considering he is here in the DC/VA/Ma area where most everyone will be affected by what is happening.

[OldDem2012]

14. You should change the thread title to: WaPo Fact-Checker Makes Dishonest Claims....

...unless you read the entire post, you might assume the President was caught lying.

Good catch, though.

[bluedigger]

15. I winced when I heard him make that argument.

He phrased it poorly.

[ProSense]

16. Really?

"He phrased it poorly."

Does that change the fact that Kessler's claim is full of shit?

[bluedigger]

17. No, but it gave Kessler the opening he needed.

I'm sorry that I found fault with the President. I'll try not to let it happen again.

[ProSense]

19. What garbage

"No, but it gave Kessler the opening he needed."

You actually believe that a statement you consider "phrased it poorly" was reason enough for Kessler to go to lengths to call it an outright lie?

President Obama claimed pay cuts. Kessler said it was a lie, which is bullshit.


"I'm sorry that I found fault with the President. I'll try not to let it happen again."

Try defending your argument instead of introducing a bullshit red herring.

[bluedigger]

20. Calm down and discuss it like a rational human being and I will.

When I think of a pay cut I think of getting paid less for the same work. Furloughs and loss of overtime are loss of income. It's pretty simple, really, and not bullshit.

I never defended the accusation. I just anticipated the attack, which was easily avoidable.

[ProSense]

21. Ah,

"When I think of a pay cut I think of getting paid less for the same work. Furloughs and loss of overtime are loss of income. It's pretty simple, really, and not bullshit."

...because less money and lost of pay, or as you say, "loss of income," is not the same as a pay cut because no loss of money is involved, right? Are you going to argue that contract workers who are no longer working didn't experience a pay cut?

"Calm down and discuss it like a rational human being and I will."

Oh, I'm calm and "rational." I'm just taking issue with bullshit rationalizations.

[bluedigger]

23. Your passion and lack of objectivity in defense of the President are common knowledge here at DU.

I apologize if I read more into your post than you meant to convey, but you seemed to be hopping mad.

Your inability to even admit that the argument could have been made better, and insistence that I accept it as perfect, lead me to think further discourse on this trivial disagreement would be fruitless. Thanks for validating my initial impression with your OP, anyways.

I am a little disappointed that I didn't get a wall of copy and paste with links in response, though. Am I not worthy?

[ProSense]

26. Wait

Your passion and lack of objectivity in defense of the President are common knowledge here at DU.

I apologize if I read more into your post than you meant to convey, but you seemed to be hopping mad.

Your inability to even admit that the argument could have been made better, and insistence that I accept it as perfect, lead me to think further discourse on this trivial disagreement would be fruitless. Thanks for validating my initial impression with your OP, anyways.

I am a little disappointed that I didn't get a wall of copy and paste with links in response, though. Am I not worthy?

...you're now introducing your own straw men to knock down? Who insisted that you "accept it as perfect"?

I asked if you actually believe that a statement you consider as "phrased it poorly" was reason enough for Kessler to go to lengths to call it an outright lie?

My point had nothing to do with whether or not the "argument could have been made better." I'm simply saying that it's bullshit to claim that "loss of income" is not a pay cut, especially for hourly workers.

The people Kessler can't see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251291117

See if anyone who is losing income over the sequester thinks they're not getting a pay cut.

[Cha]

30. And, all you have are personal attacks dripping with

acid sarcasm. Fail.

[OldDem2012]

28. Hmmm. Can't put lipstick on a pig and call it a beauty queen....

...Kessler's still lying no matter how he dresses it up.

[dsc]

22. apparantly the janitors aren't going to see less pay

The people in charge of those janitors are claiming in email and memos that they won't. If that is true, then it seems the President was wrong.

[ProSense]

24. You see it right there in the OP

"apparantly the janitors aren't going to see less pay The people in charge of those janitors are claiming in email and memos that they won't. If that is true, then it seems the President was wrong."

It's all laid out in the OP, including Kessler's interpretation of the memo and parsing of the WH's claim:

From the OP:

A White House official noted at first that the memo does refer to “further reducing overtime.” Technically, that could mean some janitors might see less pay, but it’s unclear how many actually earn overtime.

From the memo

At this time, we will begin implementing the AOC’s Sequestration plan. The top priorities in theplan are maintaining critical support for Congress and the Supreme Court and supporting AOCemployees. We will focus our efforts first on the following:

• Reducing or eliminating certain contracts
  
• Postponing some repair and alteration projects
  
• Trimming maintenance and operations programs
  
• Reducing bench stock and supply levels
  
• Delaying replacement of old equipment
  
• Further reducing overtime, training, and awards
  
• Limiting new hiring

We do not anticipate furloughs for AOC employees as a result of Sequestration. However, we will not know the AOC’s final budget for this year until Congress passes legislation to replace the existing continuing resolution, which expires March 27. If that legislation further reduces our budget, we may have to consider additional spending reductions, which could include furloughs. We will utilize furloughs, if necessary, only as a way to avoid more harmful actions such as a Reduction in Force.

I bolded "reducing or eliminating certain contracts" and "futher reducing overtime." That's loss of income, a pay cut for a lot of hourly workers. The other bolded line is in the original. Notice what follows?

Also, ignoring that the contract worker aspect is completely dishonest.

Getting beyond making janitors an example, the fact that Kessler doesn't mention that there will be furloughs and pay cuts for many federal employess shows exactly how disingenuous his claim is.

The people Kessler can't see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251291117

[dsc]

27. I am referring to the Elias email

which is unambiguous. It directly states that there be no changes to the janitors. Assuming the email isn't a lie, then the President wasn't correct.

[Tempest]

29. Why are you assuming the email isn't a lie and not CYA? n/t

[dsc]

32. It would be a pretty stupid lie

when the paychecks go down they would have to deal with it. So for some number of weeks of not having to deal they are going to expose themselves as liars? It seems to be reckless.

[ProSense]

31. Ah,

"I am referring to the Elias email"

...so the other memo stating that there will be loss of pay and contract workers will be affected is to be ignored?

"Assuming the email isn't a lie, then the President wasn't correct."

Why would you assume the e-mail is a "lie"?

Maybe because we have no idea the context or who this person is?

[dsc]

33. the email says who he is

and comes from your link so sorry that I assumed you actually read the stuff you link. But since you don't read the stuff you link here is his title Superintendent of the Capital building.

[ProSense]

34. The e-mail

"the email says who he is"

...says his title. It provides no context for his e-mail.

"...I assumed you actually read the stuff you link. But since you don't read the stuff you link here is his title Superintendent of the Capital building."

Yeah, I read it. Did you read the memo? I mean, you're basing your claim on an e-mail that you suspect may or may not be a "lie."

That memo is there, and it supports the claim that there will be loss of pay and contract workers will be affected.

Do you deny that?

[dsc]

35. It is clearly responding to the President's statement

it even references it. And the memo appears to say that if the janitors lose pay it will be because of a government shut down or legislation passed to avert it not the sequester. It is mentioned in the memo.

[ProSense]

36. Are you really

"It is clearly responding to the President's statement it even references it. And the memo appears to say that if the janitors lose pay it will be because of a government shut down or legislation passed to avert it not the sequester. It is mentioned in the memo."

...trying to deny that the memo is about sequestration. As I posted, this is from the memo:

At this time, we will begin implementing the AOC’s Sequestration plan. The top priorities in theplan are maintaining critical support for Congress and the Supreme Court and supporting AOCemployees. We will focus our efforts first on the following:

• Reducing or eliminating certain contracts
  
• Postponing some repair and alteration projects
  
• Trimming maintenance and operations programs
  
• Reducing bench stock and supply levels
  
• Delaying replacement of old equipment
  
• Further reducing overtime, training, and awards
  
• Limiting new hiring

We do not anticipate furloughs for AOC employees as a result of Sequestration. However, we will not know the AOC’s final budget for this year until Congress passes legislation to replace the existing continuing resolution, which expires March 27. If that legislation further reduces our budget, we may have to consider additional spending reductions, which could include furloughs. We will utilize furloughs, if necessary, only as a way to avoid more harmful actions such as a Reduction in Force.

I bolded "reducing or eliminating certain contracts" and "futher reducing overtime." That's loss of income, a pay cut for a lot of hourly workers. The other bolded line is in the original. Notice what follows?

Also, ignoring that the contract worker aspect is completely dishonest.

Getting beyond making janitors an example, the fact that Kessler doesn't mention that there will be furloughs and pay cuts for many federal employess shows exactly how disingenuous his claim is.

The people Kessler can't see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251291117

[dsc]

37. I am no fan of Kessler

and his fact checks. But Obama used a poor example and spoke poorly about it. I wouldn't give this four pinoccios. I would likely have waited to rate it at all, but the simple fact is at best Obama spoke ahead of the facts in this case. He should have used a more clear cut example of federal employees who were for sure going to be laid off or furloughed.

[ProSense]

38. Again

"I am no fan of Kessler and his fact checks. But Obama used a poor example and spoke poorly about it. I wouldn't give this four pinoccios. I would likely have waited to rate it at all, but the simple fact is at best Obama spoke ahead of the facts in this case. He should have used a more clear cut example of federal employees who were for sure going to be laid off or furloughed."

...with the "poor example" excuse. That has nothing to do with why Kessler's claim is bullshit.

[dsc]

39. It has everything to do with the claim

if the janitors aren't furloughed and don't lose overtime then Obama would be wrong. Apparently there is some chance that the janitors won't be furloughed and won't lose overtime. The chance they won't be furloughed appears to be rather high, the chance they won't lose overtime appears to be somewhat lower. If the workers aren't furloughed and don't lose overtime then Obama will have been wrong. Obama clearly made it sound like those workers who have those things happen immediately. On that he is quite likely not accurate. His statement may become accurate, but it may not. He should have used a different example.

[ProSense]

40. You're back to

"It has everything to do with the claim if the janitors aren't furloughed and don't lose overtime then Obama would be wrong. Apparently there is some chance that the janitors won't be furloughed and won't lose overtime. The chance they won't be furloughed appears to be rather high, the chance they won't lose overtime appears to be somewhat lower. If the workers aren't furloughed and don't lose overtime then Obama will have been wrong. Obama clearly made it sound like those workers who have those things happen immediately. On that he is quite likely not accurate. His statement may become accurate, but it may not. He should have used a different example."

...making claims that run counter to the information in the OP and the memo, which clearly indicates that workers will lose overtime. So let me repost your previous claims and my response because you're clearly jumping through hoops.

You just posted this:

"I am no fan of Kessler and his fact checks. But Obama used a poor example and spoke poorly about it. I wouldn't give this four pinoccios. I would likely have waited to rate it at all, but the simple fact is at best Obama spoke ahead of the facts in this case. He should have used a more clear cut example of federal employees who were for sure going to be laid off or furloughed. "

I responded: A "poor example" has nothing to do with why Kessler's claim is bullshit.

You previously stated:

"It is clearly responding to the President's statement it even references it. And the memo appears to say that if the janitors lose pay it will be because of a government shut down or legislation passed to avert it not the sequester. It is mentioned in the memo."

...trying to deny that the memo is about sequestration. As I posted, this is from the memo:

At this time, we will begin implementing the AOC’s Sequestration plan. The top priorities in theplan are maintaining critical support for Congress and the Supreme Court and supporting AOCemployees. We will focus our efforts first on the following:

• Reducing or eliminating certain contracts
  
• Postponing some repair and alteration projects
  
• Trimming maintenance and operations programs
  
• Reducing bench stock and supply levels
  
• Delaying replacement of old equipment
  
• Further reducing overtime, training, and awards
  
• Limiting new hiring

We do not anticipate furloughs for AOC employees as a result of Sequestration. However, we will not know the AOC’s final budget for this year until Congress passes legislation to replace the existing continuing resolution, which expires March 27. If that legislation further reduces our budget, we may have to consider additional spending reductions, which could include furloughs. We will utilize furloughs, if necessary, only as a way to avoid more harmful actions such as a Reduction in Force.

I bolded "reducing or eliminating certain contracts" and "futher reducing overtime." That's loss of income, a pay cut for a lot of hourly workers. The other bolded line is in the original. Notice what follows?

Also, ignoring that the contract worker aspect is completely dishonest.

Getting beyond making janitors an example, the fact that Kessler doesn't mention that there will be furloughs and pay cuts for many federal employess shows exactly how disingenuous his claim is.

The people Kessler can't see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251291117

Now, you're back to making the