I just thought I'd ask since the paper apparently decided to tell readers that the government's health and retirement programs are expensive. This information is given in the context of an article on a plan by House Speaker John Boehner to offer a short-term continuing resolution that will maintain funding for the government into the new fiscal year that begins on October 1.
The article told readers:
"Obama and other Democrats are eager to turn off the sequester and have offered a plan to replace the savings with a mix of tax increases and reforms to expensive health and retirement programs."
The piece did not tell readers how it determined that these programs are expensive. They clearly take up a large share of the budget, but that true statement is not well-conveyed by the adjective "expensive."