KUER0%

Utah tuvo recorte federal del 11%, y el IRS vuelve a contratar en Ogden 28%

By Macy Lipkin0%

6/19/2026, 1:07:36 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 36.7% saturation with 252 hits. Analysis detected 1,527 faulty-reasoning hits from 687 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39% and a BS Rank of 28% (15,769 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 72.00% of the article peer group.

You can find an English-language version of the story here. 
The Internal Revenue Service is  once again  hiring. 
The agency is looking to fill 850 positions in Ogden and will hold events on June 22 and 23. 
Even if it manages to fill all the positions, there will be fewer staff than when President Donald Trump returned to office and his Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, drastically cut the agency. 
Overall, Utah’s federal civilian workforce was 11% smaller in April 2026 than it was in January 2025, according to the Utah Department of Workforce Services. 
Data from the U.S. 
Office of Personnel Management shows the Department of the Treasury had the largest loss. 
It’s down by 1,660 workers, or 20%. 
With the exception of a few, all Treasury employees in Utah work for the IRS, which has a processing center in Ogden and, until 2024, was the largest employer in Weber County. 
Robert Lawrence, speaking as president of the local chapter of the National Treasury Employees Union, said the IRS needs the new hires. 
But he noted those hires wouldn’t be necessary if the agency hadn’t cut more than 20,000 positions nationwide. 
“I’m a professional, so I can’t really say how I feel about it, but I think the professional term I’d like to use is completely inefficient and a waste of money and time,” he said. 
Now, he added, the government will have to invest in training new people and institutional knowledge is lost. 
Meanwhile, the remaining staff is overloaded. 
“Tax returns are piling up so high right now and they’ve had to move people, for example from our IT (information technology) and HR (human resources) departments, people who don’t do taxes, and train them to do taxes,” he said. 
Also, to keep people in their jobs, he said supervisors are denying medical requests to work from home and won’t let employees take time off they’ve earned. 
“The IRS is doing what it thinks it can to keep people in their jobs, but it’s a very toxic environment,” he said. 
Some workers are afraid to leave the building to eat at local restaurants or feel nervous about spending money generally because they worry about losing their jobs. 
Many of those who retired or took buyouts have yet to receive payments, Lawrence said. 
He considers all of this to have a negative impact on the economy. 
After the Treasury, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior had the largest federal employee losses in Utah, though on a much smaller scale, between about 140 and 250 in each agency. 
Nate Lloyd, director of economic research at the Kem C. 
Gardner Policy Institute, said it’s true the state feels a disproportionate impact when federal jobs are cut, because a larger-than-average share of its workforce is made up of federal government civilians. 
“It doesn’t just affect them, it affects our economy, because they might have to move out of state to find a new job,” he said. 
“And maybe some found something here and stayed, but still, they might have found something that pays less.” 
On average, federal government jobs pay about $19,000 more per year than private sector jobs in Utah, according to the Gardner Institute. 
Those who stay and struggle to find work might have trouble paying rent or utilities, and they might cut back on spending at local restaurants and shops. 
But the impacts are unlikely to be noticed beyond that, Lloyd said, partly because other sectors have grown enough that Utah’s economy continues to generate jobs. 
And the impact isn’t evenly distributed, Lloyd added, because there were more federal cuts in some parts of the state than others. 
Weber County was where the most federal workers left their jobs, followed by Salt Lake County. 
Macy Lipkin is a member of Report for America and works for KUER in northern Utah. 
This report was translated by artificial intelligence and edited by Edgar Zúñiga, of Avanza 88.3, Utah’s first bilingual public radio station. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.4%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Macy Lipkin: 2.0%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias2.3%This article: 13.4%Macy Lipkin: 4.3%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic13.4%This article: 9.2%Macy Lipkin: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic9.2%This article: 4.9%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Macy Lipkin: 5.8%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect2.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.8%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias3.8%This article: 2.6%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect2.6%This article: 7.7%Macy Lipkin: 5.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias7.7%This article: 12.1%Macy Lipkin: 2.1%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias12.1%This article: 36.7%Macy Lipkin: 5.6%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias36.7%This article: 5.1%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias5.1%This article: 3.3%Macy Lipkin: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.3%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.6%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority16.6%This article: 4.9%Macy Lipkin: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma4.9%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.2%Macy Lipkin: 3.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization4.2%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 16.3%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion16.3%This article: 2.6%Macy Lipkin: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question2.6%This article: 13.7%Macy Lipkin: 2.2%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.7%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 8.3%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division8.3%This article: 20.1%Macy Lipkin: 3.9%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal20.1%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.6%Macy Lipkin: 1.7%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.6%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.8%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground3.8%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 10.9%Macy Lipkin: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection10.9%This article: 1.5%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice1.5%This article: 5.1%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination5.1%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.5%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%Macy Lipkin: 0.7%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.5%

687 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers63%attributed speech256writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageUtah Department of Workforce Services • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of Personnel Management • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 22 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 18 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 35 words • 100.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 40 words • 100.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 27 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 15 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Lawrence • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageNate Lloyd • 31 words • 0.0% coverageNate Lloyd • 25 words • 0.0% coverageNate Lloyd • 18 words • 0.0% coverageGardner Institute • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageNate Lloyd • 26 words • 0.0% coverageNate Lloyd • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMacy Lipkin • 16 words • 0.0% coverageEdgar Zúñiga • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Robert Lawrence

100%flagged-word coverage
211 attributed words49% of attributed speech69% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Quote-first Misdirection+35.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Robert Lawrence: 35.5%35.5%Indoctrination+16.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Robert Lawrence: 16.6%16.6%Biased Writer Voice-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Robert Lawrence: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Robert Lawrence: 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.