Ocnus.Net
News Before It's News
About us | Ocnus? |

Front Page 
 
 Africa
 
 Analyses
 
 Business
 
 Dark Side
 
 Defence & Arms
 
 Dysfunctions
 
 Editorial
 
 International
 
 Labour
 
 Light Side
 
 Research
Search

Dysfunctions Last Updated: May 25, 2019 - 11:35:49 AM


The Trump administrationís war on statistics isnít slowing down
By Catherine Rampell, Washington Post , May 23, 2019
May 24, 2019 - 1:51:31 PM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Donít like the numbers? Invent new numbers instead.

Or make it harder to collect trustworthy numbers next time.

Or just put the squeeze on the number crunchers themselves.

Slowly but surely, the Trump administration has been chipping away at the independence and integrity of our federal statistical agencies, whose data is critical to keeping our democracy functioning and our economy healthy. So far as we know, the administration still hasnít managed to pierce the citadel of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (the independent agency that releases jobs and inflation numbers) or Bureau of Economic Analysis (the independent agency that tabulates gross domestic product). But around the edges, itís trying to compromise lots of other official government data.

This week, the New York Times reported that the Environmental Protection Agency plans to massage the model it uses to determine how many people die of pollution. The goal is to make the rollback of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan look significantly less deadly than the current models suggest. This is also part of a broader administrative effort to downgrade official estimates of environmental harm resulting from the administrationís deregulatory agenda.

Itís reminiscent of another proposal the administration made this month, relating to how we measure poverty. Thatís also a technical, boring-sounding, deep-in-the-weeds change that most of the public wonít notice.

At least, not at first.

But over time, the change would reduce the number of Americans officially counted as poor ó not because theyíve started earning more money but because this technical, boring-sounding change would redraw the line for who is in or out of poverty.

If youíre a right-wing politician, this change would be a double win. It allows you to claim your policies have lifted families out of poverty, even if theyíre still struggling. Itís also a backdoor way to slash spending on the safety net.

Thatís because the poverty threshold is used to determine eligibility for lots of safety-net services, meaning those newly defined as not-poor would also become newly defined as not-eligible for food stamps, Medicareís Part D Low-Income Subsidy program and other benefits. After 10 years, for instance, more than 300,000 children would lose comprehensive coverage through Medicaid and the Childrenís Health Insurance Program (CHIP), according to an estimate from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

When directly manipulating official government measures isnít an option, the administration can also mess with the data-collection process.

Thatís precisely whatís behind the Commerce Departmentís last-minute decision to jam a citizenship question into the 2020 Census, the constitutionally mandated enumeration of all ďpersonsĒ (not just citizens) in the United States.

Immigrant and ethnic minority populations in this country already have high levels of distrust of government, thanks to xenophobic rhetoric and actions by President Trump (including, at one point, a proposed Muslim registry). Now just imagine what happens if the government suddenly demands that every household in America report the citizenship status of every occupant.

Significant population undercounts and otherwise inaccurate data can be expected to result, and the consequences of these distortions would be far-reaching. An inaccurate count would skew congressional representation and the allocation of hundreds of billions of federal dollars each year. It would also warp the many other public and private data measures that use the census as a baseline.

The Supreme Court will soon decide whether the administrationís plans can proceed; three lower courts have blocked the question, on the grounds that the administrationís actions violate administrative law or the Constitution.

Finally, thereís the Economic Research Service, the independent statistical agency housed within the Agriculture Department.

Its researchers compile and analyze data related to crops, yes, but also poverty, food stamps, trade and climate change, among other politically sensitive issues. And right now these economists and statisticians are quitting in droves. Thatís because the Trump administration abruptly decided to relocate hundreds of positions. Workers were told that if they want to keep their jobs, they have until the end of September to move their families to . . . a still as-yet-unnamed new city.

The relocation is, ostensibly, to save money. But it sure seems like a backdoor purge of an independent agency that has produced analyses inconvenient to the administration, including on the harms caused by Trumpís trade wars and how little the 2017 GOP tax overhaul has helped small farmers.

Presumably the Trump administration has calculated that doctoring statistical models, skewing survey results and trying to strong-arm statisticians will serve its near-term political interests. In the long term, however, sowing distrust in government data only reduces the ability of policymakers, businesses and voters to make informed decisions.

Of course, maybe that was the goal all along.


Source:Ocnus.net 2019

Top of Page

Dysfunctions
Latest Headlines
Afghanistan: Fickle Factions Frightened
Trumpís Awful Middle East Policies Are Coming Back to Haunt Him
Putin Overplays Hand With Normandy Summit, Inadvertently Rescues Zelenskyy From the Brink
How the Kikotan Massacre Prepared the Ground for the Arrival of the First Africans in 1619
LNA Members Killed in Drone Strike Near Tripoli
These Are Hard Times for US-German Relations
Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House
Election Protests Erupt in Far East Russia After Pro-Kremlin Candidate's Victory
Labour rebels ready to defy Corbyn and back PM on Brexit
Why Remoaners are so terrified of a General Election