This is kinda frustrating to see considering the many, many other open data problems I've seen. Sure, it's a typo, but did it deserve its own article? No. There are more important things to discuss.

(Not trying to minimize the work or the problem of the typo, just that it's very in-line with the many other issues I've seen that need to be fixed.)

I think the author used this as an example to highlight and bolster the importance of open data:

"The fact that this amount of money made it through the budget process presumably mislabeled makes the case for Open Data even stronger. Open Data is not just about “transparency”. Our government officials are only human and our agencies have limited resources. Budgets are far too large and complex to be understood end-to-end by our legislators. As more data gets out to the public, we’ll start to see that our citizens can help improve the way government operates - even if it’s sometimes proof reading! "