Telling readers that FBI agents and staff will take off one day per period would be meaningful if they knew that the period is two weeks, meaning a 10 percent reduction. That’s the equivalent of laying off 40 of those 400 FBI agents—far from a “theoretical” effect on criminal, terrorist and background investigations.
Contrast the Journal’s self-contradictory “theoretical” assessment to that of Tony Marrero in the Tampa Bay Times (née St. Petersburg Times). “Head Start staffers will forgo retirement money to maintain services,” read the headline on Marrero’s Saturday morning report.
After interviewing Heidi Rand, who runs the local Head Start, Marrero wrote:
Stopping retirement contributions will cover almost half of the shortfall.
Rand considered cutting full-time employees to 35 hours a week, with three of those hours lost by closing the program early on Fridays. But that would have hurt client families, Rand said, and Head Start staffers said they would rather lose retirement money than take-home pay.
“So many of them are living paycheck to paycheck, they see it as the lesser of two evils,” she said.
To help cover the rest of the deficit, Rand is eliminating staff training and reducing contracted cleaning service from three days a week to two. Employees will have to pick up the slack.
So Head Start workers, who typically earn less than median wage, will have less income in their old age—also not a “theoretical” cut and one that may add to taxpayer burdens when those Head Start staffers are too old to work.
The Big Five papers should be leading the way on this important, evolving story. Here’s hoping there’s some strong coverage in the works.
Follow @USProjectCJR for more posts from this author and the rest of the United States Project team.