Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton, responded Saturday to baseless allegations that the Obama administration may have manipulated the Bureau of Labor Statistics' monthly jobs report to make it look better than it actually was, calling those allegations "literally absurd."
In an interview on Up w/ Chris Hayes Saturday, Stiglitz said the accusations leveled by Republicans and their supporters on Wall Street -- including Rep. Allen West of Florida, former General Electric CEO Jack Welch and former Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes -- were outlandish and contradicted a broad consensus among economists of all party affiliations that the jobs numbers are not influenced by political calculations.
"No president, maybe except Nixon, would actually try to change what the Bureau of Labor Statistics does," Stiglitz said. "These are really independent statistical agencies, and the idea that they would do that is, I say, literally absurd."
Stiglitz recalled his time working in the Clinton White House, explaining that there was a long history of insulating the economic metrics from political pressure. "The history and the culture of these independent agencies is extraordinarily strong," Stiglitz said. "We felt absolutely very strongly, and I think this is bipartisan, that you don’t monkey with the numbers, because they would destroy your credibility. And the one thing that we still have is credibility in the numbers."
When, for example, the Bureau of Economic Affairs adopted a new methodology for calculating the Gross Domestic Product that resulted in lower GDP growth, the agency resisted considerable pushback from then-President Clinton, who was concerned about the potential impact on his re-election campaign. "The president was furious, because everyone wants a good growth number. They were coming up with a number that was lower," Stiglitz said. President Clinton, he added, "said, 'Can’t you stop this? Can’t you tell them to wait until after the election? We said 'No, they’re independent agencies, we can’t touch them.'"
Nonetheless, a number of prominent conservatives have continued to insist that the new jobs numbers, which show the unemployment rate has dipped below eight percent for the first time during Obama's presidency, must be skewed. Some have even gone so far as to offer alternative metrics, just as they have with national polls, which Republicans insist must be wrong because they show President Obama leading Mitt Romney.
Stiglitz said those efforts were symptomatic of a broader trend among Republicans.
"There’s this old debate about, 'we can’t choose our facts, we can choose our interpretation of the facts,'" Stiglitz said. "And what they’re trying to move to is the direction where we get to choose our facts."
:: Sal Gentile (@salgentile) is a segment & digital producer for Up w/ Chris Hayes ::
Leave a Comment:
What a delightful and savvy guest.
Chris, have a show that explores the idea of getting rid of the Republican party. They are a disgrace to this country, are dangerous to democracy, and give America a bad name with other nations. Their antics over voting at the state level should be prosecuted. Where is the outrage? I have seen it with Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, but there should be a kick in the pants to Network Hosts to call out these people. If anyone challenges me in Raleigh, NC when I go to vote I will accuse them of harassment and threaten a law suit. All voters should do this. Do not be intimidated!
The only ones blocking voters are on the left (Philly '08)
And AG Holder and the gang found no evidence of intimidation....
alexis goldstien is my god! thank you alexis for telling the truth about dodd-frank. the public seems to accept gop distortions about tbtf and intentions and reality of the law. in addition, romney's mortgage rule obfuscation has to be challenged as the gop fueled obstruction that is reality. first they set the building on fire, then the turn off the water that's putting out the fire, and then they block the firefighters ability to turn on the water in future, all the while claiming none of that is their fault! read sheila bair's book (a republican) which elegantly details why and what dodd-frank does and is intended to do. how can she still be a republican with her worldview? and finally fire geitner and replace him with alexis goldstein and joseph stiglitz
Here's the question I don't understand, and I never hear anyone ask: Romney claims he will lower the nominal rates and compensate by closing loopholes in such a way as to be revenue neutral, and this will cause the economy to take off and create massive numbers of well-paying jobs. Everyone is arguing about whether he can find enough loopholes, and fair enough, but let's say he can find $5 trillion in loopholes to close. Why would a revenue-neutral, "rich won't pay less", "middle-class won't pay more" change in nominal tax rates (but with everyone paying the same absolute dollar amount) cause the economy to improve and jobs to be created?
Easy to answer that one. Business owners will be willing to hire people and take risks again once the One is living in luxury in Hawai'i.
Great question Paul! The "theory" is that lower marginal tax rates will help "job creators" or entrepreneurs make the leap of faith to make new investments or hire new workers because their after tax return will be higher, and this income will be greater, creating economic growth.
Of course, there are lots of holes in this strategy and the argument. First, as an entrepreneur and manager, I don't normally see cash flow statements and investment return calculations where a small marginal change in after tax returns is even looked at. Most are done on pretax numbers, EBITDA, those sort of metrics. Most entrepreneurs are happy to plan on paying taxes, for it means they will have been a success.
The second point I would make is that this strategy will still leave distinct winners and losers even within the top 1% or 0.1%. If you consider the fact that even very rich people can only take so many itemized deductions (how much can you consume on state taxes, health insurance, mortgage interest, etc) that the new Romney plan will actually create massive winners to the top 0.1% at the expense of the remaining 0.99%, who will see their tax deductions capped or cut, so that the class as a whole does not get a huge tax reduction.
It's kind of ironic, and sweet revenge, that the vast majority of the wealthy are going to be screwed by Romney and they don't even realize it...
see my blog at fiftystatesofblue.tumblr.com or fiftystatesofblue.com
The Caucus Room Conspiracy
October 6, 2012
While the pundits are talking about a fantasy conspiracy, here’s a real one:
On the night of January 20, 2009, while President Obama was celebrating his Inauguration, a group of 12 top Republicans was meeting for dinner at the Caucus Room Steakhouse.
The dinner was hosted by Newt Gingrich and Frank Luntz, their Minister of “Truth”. The group included Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Pete Sessions, Pete Hoekstra, Jon Kyl, Tom Coburn, John Ensign, and Bob Corker.
In the four-hour meeting they strategized how to fulfill Mitch McConnel’s dream – make Barak Obama a one-term president. Since, historically, whether the incumbent president got re-elected or not depended on the state of the economy during the course of his term. So the plan was clear: block any legislation that would make Obama look good, especially bills that would create jobs.
Somehow, President Obama managed to get the stimulus passed – without a single Republican vote. Since then, Republicans have filibustered (the word comes from the days of piracy) over 300 bills, including the Transportation bill and the American Jobs Act. So the Republicans have cost the jobs of around three million people, the money their wages would have pumped into the economy, and the payroll taxes they would have paid. Our economy and our people have suffered, some tragically.
I hope someone totals up the actual cost to the country of the Republicans’ conspiracy, for that’s what their secret meeting surely was. As they left the meeting, Gingrich was heard to say, "You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown."
--- Basic material from Robert Draper’s “Do Not Ask What Good We Do”
As a citizen and a former Republican, I am dismayed and disgusted at the un-American activities of these men and their callous disregard for the anguish of other people who have been trying to just feed their families all this time.
These conspirators plotted a stealthy overthrow of our economy and our government by cunning and lies. Some have called it TREASON. They were not just plotting against Obama. They were plotting against the American people.
Whenever people have complained about the dysfunctional Congress, no one has had the knowledge or courage to remind them that it’s all been part of the Plan. President Obama has been trying to do his job for all the People with one hand – or more -- tied behind his back. It’s a miracle that his administration has gotten anything done at all.
I’m confused as to why our punditocracy hasn’t yet loudly exposed these malefactors. If the Department of Justice were to just launch an investigation before the election…
Good point: This administration has had the ability to pass legislation without the support from the other party. Truth is both parties block job creation legislation either through Republican filibustering or the shelving of hundreds of House passed bills by Senate Democrat leader Harry Reid. If the President can "end run" certain special chosen legislation and doesn't apply those techniques to all, what does that imply?
The great warrior cry from this President and his party this election cycle is the rich need to start paying their fair share of taxes. If rich Democrats like Obama, Peolsi, and Reid truly believed this wouldn't they already be paying more on their returns? Both parties utilize the defense "We can't pass this because the OTHER party blocks it" which in reality is political code for "I don't really want to pass this so I'll blame the other side to pander to my constituents."
We all have been duped into believing legislation that actually help the average American citizen doesn't pass because of the OTHER party. Actions speak louder than words.
FromDown: "The administration has had the ability to pass legislation without the support from the other party." Yes, Dems could up until 2010. And with that progress, we are seeing the slow decline of the unemployment rate.
Since 2010, we can't get anything passed.
The idea that you propose that there is an equivalency between the two is like pointing to the racist statements of Lincoln in his debate with Douglas and proclaim that there was little difference between the two choices. What I am saying is that, sure Obama has demured from breaking up the banks or pursuing punitive prosecution of the individuals responsible for the meltdown. He also demures from punitive prosecution of those responsible for torture.
If the GOP is equivalent and there is no difference, would we have seen anything like the Dodd-Frank bill from congress?
Wake the F--- up. You are spouting nonsense. If I am wrong, show me why.
If the Dodd-Frank bill was really for the people why are American taxpayers still on the hook for risky investment banking and too big to fail?
Why has a law required national budget not been passed since the creation of this administration? ( Both sides are responsible for this because no one wants the blame for making the necessary cuts to balance the budget )
Why is over 1 billion dollars a day being funnelled to the 1% through interest payments on the national debt?
Why is close to or over 1 trillion taxpayer dollars, that have been paid back from the financial institutions earmarked to be returned to the general fund, being held by the privately owned Federal Reserve?
President Obama recently technically implemented another stimulus, which he could not get passed through Congress, by directing the Federal Reserve to bail out the banks again on foreclosure properties by printing and doling out 40 billion dollars a month.
The President has, with the swipe of a pen, been able to implement a version of the dream act and minimize work requirements of welfare recipients.
The powers that be in our government are very smart and well versed in the workings of the government. If they truly want to implement or kill programs they know how to get it done without the blessings of Congress as has been proved time and time again. My suggestion is to judge not by words, count only actions that have been actually implemented, and follow the money.
And Samuel Jackson needs Koolaid rehab.
In other words to think anything happens or doesn't happen in the Government is an accident just isn't realistic
Before investigating Republicans talking to each other, how about the DOJ figures out Fast and Furious first?
These guys were talking strategy. First Amendment ya know, talking.
How 'bout the DOJ explain fully Brian Terry's death to his parents before persecuting(prosecuting) GOP members.
Chris: And anyone else who thinks that the Presidential debates are lacking something. There is a bipartisan group who make sure that the candidates for the two parties are never put on the spot (too much) in the debates. The debates on tv are about as real as Professional Wrestling. The group is called the Commission on Presidential Debates. (CPD) There are currently headed up by a former chairman for each of the major parties. They exclude all third party candidates. Sounds un American, doesn't it. Read the book No Debate - How the Republican and Democratic Parties Secretly Control the Presidential Debates I was stunned at how far they have gone to control and hoodwink the American people.
Living in Paris, I get your show on the Internet the next day. Congratulations, it's great to see US generated real discussion / debate.
Problem: your 2nd segment of Saturday Oct 6, as posted on the site is unreadable. All the other parts show clearly and easily, that one stops after 90sec or so.
Re:Social Security
Chris, hard to believe, I know, but you are making light of a very serious issue.
I would suggest you invite Mike Tanner 0f the Cato Institute on your TV show. If he appears, all of us will learn a great deal about the current state of Social Security, the $20 trillion of unfunded liabilities, and the need for action NOW!
Interestingly, when a pol was recently questioned about those "unfunded liabilities' his response was, "they're not a "liability" within the legal definition of a liability. SSA payments to retired workers who paid in all or most of their lives is a "PROMISE" to pay, and subject to determination by politicians!"How would that go over in the next debate?
Obama and Old Joe don't go near the subject. You deny the weakness in the system, and the clock keeps ticking
.jaazee "twitter" "Salon"
Social Security was enacted to force people into retirement, in the hope that employers would than put young people to work.
Next it is a "Tax" and the means the government has no obligation to pay it back.
Social Security, a tax I've been paying for 32 years, is a ponzi scheme that is going broke.
I just wish I had that 12%(my part plus my employer's)to invest the last three decades.