Sound Off: Why exclude Valadao’s anti-ACA stance from article on ACA program? | Columnists – California News

Sound Off: Why exclude Valadao’s anti-ACA stance from article on ACA program? | Columnists – California News

This feedback forum is designed to give readers a way to voice criticisms and compliments or ask questions about The Californian’s news coverage. Your questions may be edited for space and clarity.

Reader: In Harold Pierce’s story about Congressman David Valadao advocating for Obamacare’s Teaching Health Centers Plan (“Valadao introduces legislation to fund centers that train physicians in rural areas,” July 26), I couldn’t help but notice that Mr. Pierce had failed to include a very important fact about Valadao.

He has repeatedly voted to repeal Obamacare. Had Mr. Pierce included this vital fact in his story, it would have portrayed Valadao in a more truthful manner, and the readers would be informed that the congressman is trying to speak out of both sides of his mouth. One side celebrates one of the many benefits of Obamacare and the other side disparages it. I don’t know if it’s Mr. Pierce, his editor, or The Californian’s publisher who allowed such an incomplete and misleading story to be printed.

Price: Harold’s story was all of 219 words, a short article intended to simply get out the essential facts, most likely because of time and space constraints. I guess we’d be safe in guessing that a whole lot of relevant information was excluded. That said, I’m not disagreeing that some brief reference to Valadao’s past opposition to the ACA would have been appropriate. 

Reader: Robert, do you think the First Amendment can survive the Trump administration?

Price: Too many Americans are talking about the importance of the First Amendment…

click here to read more.

Share this post

Post Comment