Bush's Education Dept. paid commentator to promote law

In response to continued revelations of government-funded "journalism" -- ranging from the purported video news releases put out by the drug czar's office and the Department of Health and Human Services to the recently uncovered payments to columnists Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher, who flacked administration programs -- Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) will introduce a bill, The Stop Government Propaganda Act, in the Senate next week.

"It's just not enough to say, 'Please don't do it anymore,'" Alex Formuzis, Lautenberg's spokesman, told E&P. "Legislation sometimes is required and we believe it is in this case."

The Stop Government Propaganda Act states, "Funds appropriated to an Executive branch agency may not be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States unless authorized by law."

"It's time for Congress to shut down the Administration's propaganda mill," Lautenberg said in a statement. "It has no place in the United States Government." The bill is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Jon Corzine (D-N.J.).

Formuzis told E&P that while the bill is being introduced by Democrats, its message and intent is something endorsed by Republicans and Democrats alike.

"We only have a few senators on the bill so far, but we hope and expect that we'll get a number of others to sign on to the legislation once we introduce it," he said. "This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. This is an issue about an independent press, and I think that's something that will cross party lines."

PDiddie wrote:

This whole racket seems designed to support third-rate conservative pundits. Who the hell are these guys?

Other than "marriage experts", I mean....

They are just that ... experts hired to do what they are expert at. As it is, they also write a column. I'm speaking specifically about these last 2, both of whom were hired for their knowledge in their field of expertise. Should the government be precluded from hiring an expert if that person happens to write a column? What these 2 should have done was disclose the fact of payment to their readers. That's just the right thing to do.

Clearly not hired merely for expertise...yes? ...

Spellings Vows Tought Spending Controls

Tuesday February 1, 2005

By BEN FELLER

AP Education Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Education Secretary Margaret Spellings says she will aggressively oversee the ways her department promotes its agenda, after flaps over a gay-themed children's show and a hired media pundit dominated her first days on the job.

``We need to know what we're getting,'' Spellings told The Associated Press on Tuesday in her first interview as secretary. ``I mean, we need to have a clearer, brighter line so that we don't discover late in the process that this is what is coming down the pike.''

As for the major education development of the Bush administration, the No Child Left Behind law, she said she might consider changing enforcement if legitimate concerns emerge. She named such possible areas as the testing of disabled children or teacher-quality struggles in rural regions. But she said some topics are off the table, including regular testing, which she called ``the linchpin of the whole doggone thing.''

At 47, Spellings is the new public face of education for the administration, but she has spent a decade as a senior adviser to George W. Bush in Texas and as his domestic policy chief in the White House.

She is the first mom with school-aged children to be education secretary. One of her daughters attends a Catholic high school, the other a public middle school, both in Alexandria, Va.

Less than two weeks after replacing Rod Paige, Spellings is promising change.

The Education Department has shut down its contract with Ketchum, the public relations firm hired primarily to promote Bush's education law. Of the $1.3 million contract, about $240,000 went to commentator Armstrong Williams. The money went toward the production of ads, the department says, although Williams was also hired to promote the law in other ways.

``There's nobody who's more concerned about the credibility of this department and the credibility of No Child Left Behind - and how those two go together - than I am,'' Spellings said. ``And I have a high interest in making sure that we address this and move on.''

Spellings said she and her chief of staff, David Dunn, who spent time at the department last year, did not know the agency had hired Williams until some point after the contract was signed. The department's inspector general is investigating the Williams deal.

``Is it right and appropriate to educate communities about this law? Yes,'' she said. ``Is it right to pay columnists who represent themselves as legitimate news people? No.''

Spellings defended her criticism of PBS for producing an episode of ``Postcards from Buster'' that included two lesbian couples. The department provides money for the children's show through a federal program designed to help kids learn through television.

PBS has decided not to distribute the show, but some stations are running it anyway.

``On lifestyle issues, I think it's appropriate for parents to deal with those and address those as they see fit, in their own way and in their own time,'' Spellings said. ``I believe that as a mother, and I believe that as a policy-maker. For the Department of Education or public broadcasting to get into things that are, you know, in a grayer area, is just not something we need to do.''

Asked if her move signals a more conservative approach from the department, Spellings said the agency won't get into such local matters as whether a gay teacher leads a classroom. It will get involved, she said, when federal tax dollars are being used.

The heart of Spellings' agenda is getting all children at least to grade level in reading and math, the central goal of No Child Left Behind. That remains a huge undertaking, as many students, particularly poor and minority kids, remain below federal standards in the basics.

In the interview, Spellings said that ``horror stories'' about the law have more to do with misunderstandings than the law itself.

It's the department's job, she said, to help end the ``misinformation and anxiety'' among people who think the law is forcing them to cut arts classes, gym or even their spelling bee.

Schools officials have welcomed her early pledge to listen to complaints about the law, which demands higher student performance and penalizes many schools that fall short.

But Spellings added Tuesday: ``I don't want people to misperceive that we're open for business, and that No Child Left Behind is up - it's not.''

In fact, Spellings will lead Bush's campaign to expand the law by requiring two more years of state testing in high schools. Some members of Congress are balking, but Spellings said support from governors and federal promises of more aid will help build support.

Asked when the administration will push Congress to take it up, Spellings said: ``In four years, I've learned one thing, and that is you cannot predict the timetable of Congress.''

"Spellings Vows Tought Spending Controls"

Tought should be Taut? Or Tough, maybe?

Sounds like a phonetic error to me...

She can begin tightening up by getting conservative pundits off the dole.

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings says she will aggressively oversee the ways her department promotes its agenda, after flaps over a gay-themed children's show and a hired media pundit dominated her first days on the job.

``There's nobody who's more concerned about the credibility of this department and the credibility of No Child Left Behind - and how those two go together - than I am,'' Spellings said. ``And I have a high interest in making sure that we address this and move on.''

Spellings said she and her chief of staff, David Dunn, who spent time at the department last year, did not know the agency had hired Williams until some point after the contract was signed. The department's inspector general is investigating the Williams deal.

``Is it right and appropriate to educate communities about this law? Yes,'' she said. ``Is it right to pay columnists who represent themselves as legitimate news people? No.''

They should hire liberal pundits?

Ticomaya wrote:

PDiddie wrote:

She can begin tightening up by getting conservative pundits off the dole.

They should hire liberal pundits?

They should hire no pundits. What's wrong with you? Pretending to be dense (actually it's rarely pretense) is the singular talent of lots of others here. But not you.

tico

PD's suggestion isn't without grounds. A page back you quoted a sentence of mine quite ignoring the related, and acutely relevant, Alterman point.

And, I think your claim these three were hired for expertise alone is naive, extremely. Most particularly that's clear in the case you acknowledge to be different, but in the two others (so far) as well.

Regrettably, it is human nature for you (not just you, but I certainly think I can include you in this group) to assume the Bush Administration is generally purely evil as your default position;

The Web sites are examples of what the military calls "information operations," or programs designed to influence public opinion by countering what the Pentagon considers to be misinformation or lies that circulate in the international news media. The Pentagon's use of the Web sites has raised questions about blurring the lines between legitimate news and what some would