Leave it the Washington Post’s Mr. Pinocchio, Glenn Kessler, to misinform readers again by providing useless, irrelevant information and then misreading it. Today’s contribution to the dumbing of America is a chart the wizards of WaPo created to compare the job creation performance of Mitt Romney with that of President Obama. What?
Now the first thing you must be asking yourself is, how is such a comparison even possible? When did the two men hold comparable jobs or have comparable power to affect employment? Uh, never. When did they preside over similar economies? Uh, never, When did they even preside over the same economy? Uh, never. In the periods being compared, were the economic conditions similar? Uh, nope.
So right from the start, you know that this is likely to be a dubious comparison at best, and in the hands of the Washington Post’s “fact checker,” a comic tragedy. We are all about to become dumber.
Nevertheless, Mr. Kessler and his editors think you can usefully compare, in the same chart, mind you, the effects of a President’s policies on national employment after a severe recession had already started (2009 on) with the effects of a Governor’s policies on state employment during a period that didn’t include a serious recession (2003 on). In short, there’s absolutely nothing comparable in Kessler’s comparison.
But that doesn’t stop the Washington Post:
Readers of Calculated Risk will recognized the structure of this chart; it’s from CR’s “scariest chart ever” that CR updates ever month, but Glenn neglects to note where he got the concept.
Kessler suggests, but then ignores, that national jobless numbers are driven primarily by national macroeconomic factors, but there may be factors unique to a particular state. Hmm. Seems kinda important, but does Kessler then examine what these unique Massachusetts factors were, or tell us what happened in Massachusetts in 2003 that might be different from what happened to the US and European economies in 2008? You know, stuff like a total collapse of the financial system? Uh, no.
Of course, Kessler could have noted that the CBO and numerous economists have calculated the job creation effects of Mr. Obama’s policies — e.g., the stimulus, the payroll tax reduction, etc. They have similarly estimated the job creation effects of Obama’s proposals — the JOBS Act American Jobs
Act – which the GOP Congress obstructed and Mr. Romney presumably opposed as well. These very relevant facts aren’t mentioned or used, but they might offer a valid basis for comparison, since Mr. Romney has said he opposed all of those things.
So it might be possible to compare the jobs Mr. Obama helped create and those he proposed to create during this period, with similar analysis of what Mr. Romney claims he would have done instead — like let the auto industry go bankrupt without federal assistance, or reduce funding for states and extended unemployment insurance and instead cut entitlement spending via the Ryan budget and reduce taxes on the rich. Why, I suspect EPI and CBPP et al have already done some of this.
But Kessler has none of that. The closest Kessler comes to realizing he’s about to do something completely useless is this caveat:
A strong case can be made that a president has more control over the economy than a governor, but we still think it is silly to date his jobs record from the moment he takes the oath of office. Nevertheless, that is the common political metric.
Oh, well done, fact checker. Tell us that the common political metric is dubious, then use it to compare with an even less relevant metric of what a governor does in one state. There aren’t enough Pinocchios for this one.






16 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Glenn Kessler has been reading too many of those Lovecraftian tomes of mind-shattering occult knowledge. He’s gone stark gibbering insane.
Yeah, it’s a stupid chart. No, I’m still not gonna vote for Obama. GOP vs. Dems, right vs. left, blah blah blah. Bunch of fucking little kids throwing turds at each other.
I don’t see a reason to care as the two candidates are just different colored Romneys. Speaking of proposals, let’s not forget that Obama is the one who created the Catfood Commission and proposed grand bargaining away the social safety net, he blocked smog regs in the name of job creation and members of his economic advisory panel want to reduce/eliminate corporate taxes.
Not defending Kessler, but there is some value here. One part of that is that the chart shows that Massachusetts did in fact have more jobs at the end of Romney’s term of office than when his term began. I’ve repeatedly had friends who insist that Massachusetts had a net loss of jobs during Romney’s term of office and who reject not just prior reporting by the WaPo on this subject but also insist that the US BLS is wrong.
Second part is as you say, jobless numbers are driven primarily by national macroeconomic factors. If you go to Calculated Risk and look at the jobs charts there, you’ll find that the Massachusetts numbers under Romney tracked the national numbers pretty well.
On the JOBS act and the payroll tax cut, I call BS…because both of them are BS.
On the payroll tax cut, I’ve outlined the BS repeatedly at sites ranging from FDL to Salon to Americablog. (I happen to have the link to the Americablog comment handy because I used it on Twitter today. See here.)
The JOBS Act is no such thing as a jobs act. The JOBS Act actually does a great deal of harm, starting with the reduction in disclosure requirements for stock offerings that essentially allow companies to not disclose relevant financial data to investors. I’ll let Ryan Grim’s reporting at HuffPo fill in on some (but not all) of the other points.
You’re viewing things like the payroll tax cut and the JOBS act through a partisan lens, and the view you get as a result is distorted. Both were awful, and had they been the proposals of a Republican president I suspect you would not trumpet them but would instead stand in stark opposition. (You should still be in opposition.)
On jobs, Obama is essentially waiting for the arrival of the Confidence Faery and pushing what amount to Republican solutions…which is why we remain in the crapper today.
Bottom line? Kessler is misleading, but he isn’t the only one.
Both candidates stink, and it’s abundantly clear neither one gives a shit about creating jobs.
I should probably have used a different term for the jobs act. I did not mean the misleadingly labeled recent statute that you refer to. There was an earlier set of measures,from last fall, also described as a jobs act. I should have been clearer.
Re the rest, there are credible studies of the effects of different macro policies on employment during a severe recession, so my point that one could construct a comparison that at least compares apples and apples is still valid.
Finally, the post is not a defense or criticism of what Obama has done, or should have done . . . Ive written tons about that before . . . though many commenters persist in turning every thread into that debate.
This whole phony statistical analysis game is just more cooked up BS by the artists of mis-info on the Reich wing of the MSM ( oh excuse me that’s the same thing). Its what called a false equivalency. Its like comparing Apples and Atom bombs. In this case the writers job as a shill for the Reich wing is to boost Mitty’s nos. by creating a false comparison. By the time everyone else tries to explain as this article is attempting to why these two examples are in fact BS, the damage to Barry will be done. Oh and Barry’s crew are clueless, so they’ll probably even buy into the whole thing anyway.
This guy was on Here and Now Friday, working the same gibberish. http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/06/01/jobs-fact-check
It’s hard to see how we can make democracy work when we are assaulted by the stupid at every turn.
Spot on. I’m getting mighty sick of not being able to criticize anybody for anything around here without inserting the caveat that it doesn’t mean I’m defending Obama. It gets very old, very fast.
…though many commenters persist in turning every thread into that debate.
Sorry about that. Didn’t mean to go there. I’m just so damned flummoxed these days that I tend to react viscerally (read “with feeling”) on these issues. I was a lifelong Dem (now age 51) but no longer self-ID as a Democrat at all, and my experience with other lifelong Democratic friends who remain self-identifying Democrats has been incredibly frustrating when it comes to debunking their political talking points (re: Romney’s supposed “net loss of jobs” during his term as Mass guv) with even hard data from places like the BLS. (Remember when Dems/progressives prided themselves on being “The Reality Based” community?)
Again, my apologies. My responses often reflect my frustrations.
That wasn’t directed at me but thanks for the clarification. My respect-o-meter just went way up. :)
I think this is Kessler’s way of applying for a job on Romney’s council of economic advisors. Hell it may even work.
Romney’s 40,000 plus jobs over 4 years was a percentage growth that was 47th in the nation. He really did little good, and did do a few bad things.
His destruction of the finances of local towns and cities via cut backs in state aid despite near 50 “tax” hikes hidden as fee changes caused local real estate tax hikes, affected housing values, and nearly caused school system destruction as teachers had to be laid off.
He spent his last year mostly out of state as he change his policy position from centrist to far right in preparation for running for higher office.
Yet I suspect he would be a better choice for those of us that want to protect Social Security and Medicare.
A few questions and responses for you, paupau…
I’m not arguing that Romney was a great or even a good governor for Massachusetts. The point I have been making in response to (what appears to be) the Democratic talking point that Romney’s Massachusetts had a net loss of jobs during his term — as in a fewer number of jobs on an absolute basis when he left office than when he began — is false. His jobs record during that period may be poor, but the jobs record for much of the US during the very slow employment recovery following the 2001 recession was not much to brag about pretty much across the board. That said, I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t know much detail about what was going on in Massachusetts at that time and which factors behind the fall in job performance were due to Romney’s policies and which were external or otherwise beyond the control of either the governor or legislature. And speaking of legislature…
My understanding is that the makeup of the Massachusetts legislature during Romney’s entire term was strongly Democratic. Given that the governor would have to get anything he proposed by way of cut backs, tax hikes and so on through that Democratic legislature, I’m not sure how those cut backs and tax/fee hikes can be laid solely at Romney’s feet. Again, not excusing him. Just trying to see the bigger (more complex) picture.
Yeah, I’m aware of that. In that regard (shifting positions), Romney reminds me of Obama. Romney runs around pretending to be a far right conservative to get Republican votes just as Obama ran around in 2007 and 2008 pretending to be a populist/progressive/get tough on Wall Street/support labor/revisit NAFTA kind of guy in order to get Democratic/progressive/independents looking for fundamental change votes.
I suspect so also, mostly for the reason that the now basically neutered progressive Democratic base and Democrats in congress would fight Romney if he pushed the very same changes (cuts) that are the Obama agenda if he should get a second term. Under Obama, I expect that base and those congressional Dems to basically roll over. (They’ll pay lip service to fighting, but in the end they’ll manage to eek out just enough votes to get the cuts Obama has been pushing for since before he was inaugurated.)
It all brings to mind Harry S. Truman’s Address at the National Convention Banquet of the Americans for Democratic Action:
I won’t be voting for Romney. But I also won’t be voting for a phony Democrat. Hell, from where I sit, the Democratic Party (at least at the DC elite level) is one big phony. The name remains, but the core ideals that made me a Democrat in the first place are gone.
It’s time to form a new party that will use the principles of FDR as it’s platform. And since people who post on FDL are like minded, let’s call it the FDL party.
Did Romney face mayors who were laying off public workers?
Did the state legislature kill big parts of his legislative agenda?
How many jobs had already been lost when Romney first came into office?
The national recession had been going about a year and a half before Obama took office and there were hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in the last month or two of 2008 and at the beginning of 2009.
The best thing Romney apparently did was cooperate with legislature Dems to pass health care reform. And now that he’s running for president he’s dedicated to repealing it for the nation.
America needs to move FORWARD, not back.