Cicilline Gifted Another Mostly True From Politifact — Seriously?
Oh my goodness. That was my reaction to this finding. Really?
I can really handle word-jockeying and picking apart statements word by word. I can handle claiming that “words have meaning” when coming up with the justification for the ruling, but at least be consistent about it!
My question is that if I say I do something 75% of the time and I actually do it 25% of the time, does that deserve a “mostly true” ruling?
Politfact is investigating Cicilline’s statement on a recent WPRI Newsmakers about proper pension funding in Providence:
“with the exception of the last year or maybe the last two years, we were at 100 percent”
Like any good investigator should do, Politifact looked into it and here’s what they found for the eight years that Cicilline was mayor of Providence:
|2003||Cianci, John Lombardi, David Cicilline||$42,008,000||80.25%|
*Data taken from Politifact article
Ok sure, the funding level was “close”. It was in the 90s and it was more than the previous administration. However, as Politifact themselves often say, that isn’t what Cicilline said. He said it was at 100% all but two years. It was there for all but six years. That’s a big difference.
So the issue really speaks to Politifact’s credibility, if they have much left. They are, at best, inconsistent with their rulings especially when it comes to Congressman Cicilline. This is the same newspaper that int 2010 endorsed Cicilline for Congress, in part due to his fiscal management of Providence.
I have no idea why the Journal decides to compound their mistake by trying to make his fiscal management look better than it was. I would have thought that after being burned once by Cicilline on the endorsement that the editors would protect themselves a little better when it comes to its handling of his fiscal matters and call out his statements for what they are.
If this were anyone else who said they did something 6 out of 8 times and actually did it 2 out of 8 times, there’s no question Politifact rules that as “False”, as this one should have been.