KCUR57%

Catholic bishops in Missouri join to argue Amendment 5's tax changes will hurt the poor 91%

By Libby Howell0%

7/23/2026, 1:41:08 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Loss Aversion, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 46.8% saturation with 125 hits. Analysis detected 978 faulty-reasoning hits from 267 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 84.3% and a BS Rank of 91% (2,058 of 21,175 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 90.30% of the article peer group.

Missouri Catholic leaders are urging Missourians to consider how voting to eliminate the state income tax would affect the poor. 
In a statement, the Bishops of the Kansas City, St.Louis, Jefferson City and Springfield-Cape Girardeau diocese say passing Amendment 5 would likely burden social service agencies that serve low-income individuals. 
Missouri Catholic Conference Executive Director Jamie Morris said he hopes the bishops' statement will help guide the Missouri legislature. 
"Whichever tax system we utilize, remember the poor first and foremost and try to balance whatever system we come up with that it is not on the backs of those who are least able to pay for it." 
Morris said. 
Catholic Charities of Missouri declined comment, but the bishops' statement says the church believes, "those with greater resources bear a proportionately greater share of the public burden." 
Still, Catholics and non-Catholics alike are questioning whether the church should get involved with politics. 
Morris said the church was expecting some negative feedback, adding the statement was released as a reminder of the Church's values. 
"The bishops maybe don't want to prescribe one particular vote yes, vote no, but want to adequately equip the faithful to kind of sit on this, ponder this, pray about this, and then go, 'okay, I can now make up my mind on how I'm going to vote on this particular amendment.'" 
Morris said. 
The statement points out sales taxes, which would likely be increased if the income tax is eliminated, "place a disproportionate burden on those with lower incomes." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.1%Libby Howell: 3.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias10.1%This article: 9.7%Libby Howell: 3.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias9.7%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.6%Libby Howell: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic5.6%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 46.8%Libby Howell: 31.3%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect46.8%This article: 29.6%Libby Howell: 9.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion29.6%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.9%Libby Howell: 2.6%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias7.9%This article: 21.0%Libby Howell: 7.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias21.0%This article: 25.5%Libby Howell: 10.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias25.5%This article: 7.9%Libby Howell: 2.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 19.5%Libby Howell: 6.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect19.5%This article: 19.5%Libby Howell: 6.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias19.5%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 6.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 19.5%Libby Howell: 11.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma19.5%This article: 11.2%Libby Howell: 3.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope11.2%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.6%Libby Howell: 8.9%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization5.6%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 27.3%Libby Howell: 28.1%Columbia Missourian: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion27.3%This article: 14.2%Libby Howell: 4.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question14.2%This article: 9.7%Libby Howell: 3.2%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.7%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.7%Libby Howell: 3.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote9.7%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 13.5%Libby Howell: 4.5%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice13.5%This article: 41.2%Libby Howell: 31.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination41.2%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Howell: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 11.2%Libby Howell: 3.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…11.2%

267 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers70%attributed speech80writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageBishops of the Kansas City, St.Louis, Jefferson City and Springfield-Cape Girardeau diocese • 30 words • 100.0% coverageJamie Morris • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJamie Morris • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageCatholic Charities of Missouri • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJamie Morris • 21 words • 100.0% coverageJamie Morris • 52 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jamie Morris

85%flagged-word coverage
130 attributed words70% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Indoctrination+44.2 ptsWriter: 25.0%Jamie Morris: 69.2%69.2%Unattributed Quote-32.5 ptsWriter: 32.5%Jamie Morris: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.6 ptsWriter: 18.8%Jamie Morris: 16.2%16.2%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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