Wolves in Non-Profit Clothing?

Perhaps because Ohio has one of the worst tax climates for business in the nation its governor, Ted Strickland, is begging the Obama people even before they get in office for 5 billion bucks.

Now honestly I don't know Ted Strickland. I've got an Uncle in Ohio who is a nice guy. I know LeBron James plays in Cleveland, and they have the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, so in sum, I'd say Ohio is probably in my column of places I don't really mind all that much. But 5 billion bucks seems a little high compared to the bargain price of 7 billion the Governator wants for California.

But I do have a major problem with people quoted in a piece for the Washington Post who are, at the very least, disingenuous, and that's what this budget expert for these guys is being when he says that increased federal government help is the only possible solution to Ohio's problems. And the president of this "non-profit" agreed and said without federal assistance they won't be able to pay the state's Medicare bills.

Ah, but here's the rub.........those two "non-profits" both receive MORE THAN HALF OF THEIR OPERATING REVENUE FROM THE STATE OF OHIO!!!!!!! Check out the financials here and here (I did, and it's not pretty).

Is it worse than giving grants directly Halliburton? I'm not sure, but it sure annoys me as someone who works at a non-profit that actually is not a government lackey organization to see these people cited as dis-interested community experts. THEIR JOBS DEPEND ON GOVERNMENT FUNDING!!!!!!

Isn't part of journalistic responsibility to be asking questions about why people say what they say to reporters? After all, the Washington Post is more than happy to give readers a heads-up about the fact that Cato is staffed by "50 or so small-government and individual-liberty scholars." Why not call out these "non-profits" for what they are - government agencies masquerading in sheep's clothing.