Misleading Recovery.gov chart

There is a chart on recovery.gov that gives the breakdown on the ARRA, but it is VERY misleading. If you look at the note and follow the link and read the small print you see what is really going on.

Here is what they show:


What is missing is that the Tax Relief should really be broken into the separate categories.  They note it in the small text, quoted here:

* Tax Relief – includes $15 B for Infrastructure and Science, $61 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, $25 B for Education and Training and $22 B for Energy, so total funds are $126 B for Infrastructure and Science, $142 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, $78 B for Education and Training, and $65 B for Energy.

State and Local Fiscal Relief – Prevents state and local cuts to health and education programs and state and local tax increases.

Given this information, this is how the graph should look.

[Edit: My original graph was missing Tax Relief that was not listed as belonging to any particular category.  I have included it here under the Other heading, even though some of it is likely going to the State and Local Fiscal Relief.  This category, however is actually a bit misleading as well as it lists that this money may be marked for specific local programs including Health Care and Education and Training. Without mining through the ARRA itself it is impossible to correct this further at this time.]



I can guess why this was done.  It looks like this was done so that Tax Relief looks to be a bigger part of the pie, as well as to down-play the Protecting the Vulnerable (seen as entitlement) part of the act.  This goes against the nature of the site, and is shameful to be presented in this way, even if it is politically convenient.

[Edit: The category of Infrastructure and Science is also misleading, in that Science should likely either remain separate or be grouped with Energy, Health Care, or Education and Training, as these areas have money that is likely being invested in research and developing new technologies.  This only reason that I can think of as to why Infrastructure and Science are grouped is the cynical one to make Infrastructure look like a larger part of the picture than it is.  When people see this they are thinking that this money is going to building and fixing roads and bridges, although there are many other projects that are grouped under this category.]

 For these reasons I am worried about the reliability of future of this site.  I was hoping that this would be a place where politics would be put aside in the name of the truth.  Recovery.gov is supposed to be a place where citizens can get real information on where their money is being spent, and while the site is new and is likely going though growing pains, it has certainly started off on a bad foot.  I hope this changes.