STLPR0%

Some St. Louis organizations could see less funding from the state this year 20%

By Sarah Kellogg38%

7/1/2026, 7:15:30 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Slippery Slope, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 14.8% saturation with 88 hits. Analysis detected 465 faulty-reasoning hits from 596 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 34.4% and a BS Rank of 20% (17,025 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 80.40% of the article peer group.

Several St. 
Louis-area organizations are in state funding limbo after Gov. 
Mike Kehoe restricted spending in signing the state budget. 
On Tuesday, Kehoe issued 65 line-item vetoes.<b> </b>They totaled over $52 million, with more than $30 million of that being general revenue dollars. 
Kehoe also restricted over $440 million in funding, including more than $337 million in general revenue. 
Those projects were not vetoed, but for now the funds are not being released for the 78 budget items on the restriction list. 
Those budget restrictions could be lifted but only by the governor. 
Local organizations affected include the Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater St. 
Louis, Annie Malone and Habitat for Humanity St. 
Louis. 
Boys and Girls Clubs President and CEO Brandon Williams said Wednesday the organization remains optimistic that opportunities still exist to restore the funding after $4 million was frozen. 
“We look forward to continuing to work collaboratively with Governor Kehoe and legislative leaders to identify solutions that help ensure young people throughout the St. 
Louis region have access to safe, high-quality programs and the opportunities they deserve,” Williams said in a statement. 
Habitat for Humanity St. 
Louis was slated to get $200,000.<b> </b>Habitat’s CEO Kimberly McKinney said that was the entirety of state funding the organization was expecting. 
The money would have gone toward new housing. 
“We take the allocation every year that we receive from the state and then couple it together with local monies and private donations to construct houses,” McKinney said. 
She hopes Habitat for Humanity being on the restricted list rather than the veto list means that Kehoe sees the value in the work the organization is doing. 
“I am a big believer in keep hope alive, so I would rather be on the withhold list than the veto list, because it least means there's still a chance,” McKinney said. 
Rep. 
Betsy Fogle, D-Springfield, said she was surprised at how little Kehoe vetoed in the budget. 
“I was honestly kind of surprised that the governor didn't make more cuts. 
I think what this sets us up for is a few years of very difficult decisions that will be made by future general assemblies, where we will probably see cuts to core services that state government is intended to provide,” Fogle said. 
Vetoes issued by Kehoe include: 
* A transfer of $7.5 million that lawmakers wanted from an Interstate 44 fund into general revenue. 
Kehoe said that keeping the interest in this fund could “help offset any potential cost overruns and allow the project to be completed." 
* $200,000 to Black Men Read, a tutoring literacy program focused on men and fathers in St. 
Louis. 
Kehoe said in his veto letter that the state funded this organization last year and it was intended to be a one-time investment. 
* &nbsp;$1.9 million in general revenue with the Department of Public Safety’s budget for a school safety platform. 
Kehoe said it was “incumbent upon local school districts to prioritize the use of their resources for this type of programming.” 
Of the expenditure restrictions Kehoe placed, many of them were within <u>HB 2019</u>, which often contains projects outside the operating budget. 
Fogle said if she were Kehoe, she would have vetoed those restrictions, rather than freeze them. 
“I think people are going to have their hopes up that those dollars might make their way to their organization or to their infrastructure project. 
I would anticipate that next to zero of those dollars are spent in fiscal year 2027,” Fogle said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.2%Sarah Kellogg: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Sarah Kellogg: 7.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect4.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 14.8%Sarah Kellogg: 3.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias14.8%This article: 10.1%Sarah Kellogg: 2.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias10.1%This article: 2.5%Sarah Kellogg: 4.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias2.5%This article: 2.7%Sarah Kellogg: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.9%Sarah Kellogg: 1.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority3.9%This article: 5.4%Sarah Kellogg: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma5.4%This article: 7.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope7.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.1%Sarah Kellogg: 3.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization10.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 9.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.7%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.2%Sarah Kellogg: 2.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal4.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 4.2%Sarah Kellogg: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection4.2%This article: 1.8%Sarah Kellogg: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice1.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

596 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers63%attributed speech219writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageBrandon Williams • 28 words • 0.0% coverageBrandon Williams • 25 words • 100.0% coverageBrandon Williams • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageKimberly McKinney • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageKimberly McKinney • 28 words • 0.0% coverageKimberly McKinney • 28 words • 0.0% coverageKimberly McKinney • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 15 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMike Kehoe • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageMike Kehoe • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageMike Kehoe • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 25 words • 0.0% coverageBetsy Fogle • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Betsy Fogle

100%flagged-word coverage
129 attributed words34% of attributed speech9.1% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.0 ptsWriter: 5.0%Betsy Fogle: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.