Census ‘faked’ 2012 election jobs report
In
the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September,
the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to
Washington. The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in
September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a
reliable source, were manipulated.
And the
Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.
Just
two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an
employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one
of the most closely watched measures of the economy. And a knowledgeable source says
the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time
President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.
“He’s
not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but
is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked. The Census
employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential
Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past
weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.
Ironically,
it was Labor’s demanding standards that left the door open to manipulation.
Labor
requires Census to achieve a 90 percent success rate on its interviews —
meaning it needed to reach 9 out of 10 households targeted and report back on
their jobs status.
Census
currently has six regions from which surveys are conducted. The
New York and Philadelphia regions, I’m told, had been coming up short of the 90
percent.
Philadelphia
filled the gap with fake interviews.
“It
was a phone conversation — I forget the exact words — but it was, ‘Go ahead and
fabricate it’ to make it what it was,” Buckmon told me. Census, under contract
from the Labor Department, conducts the household survey used to tabulate the
unemployment rate.
Interviews
with some 60,000 household go into each month’s jobless number, which currently
stands at 7.3 percent. Since this is considered a scientific poll,
each one of the households interviewed represents 5,000 homes in the US.
Buckmon,
it turns out, was a very ambitious employee. He conducted three times as many
household interviews as his peers, my source said. By making up survey results
— and, essentially, creating people out of thin air and giving them jobs —
Buckmon’s actions could have lowered the jobless rate. Buckmon said he filled out
surveys for people he couldn’t reach by phone or who didn’t answer their doors.
But,
Buckmon says, he was never told how to answer the questions about whether these
nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up.
But
people who know how the survey works say that simply by creating people and
filling out surveys in their name would boost the number of folks reported as
employed.
Census
never publicly disclosed the falsification. Nor did it inform Labor that its data was tainted. “Yes,
absolutely they should have told us,” said a Labor spokesman. “It would be
normal procedure to notify us if there is a problem with data collection.” Census
appears to have looked into only a handful of instances of falsification by Buckmon,
although more than a dozen instances were reported, according to internal
documents.
In
one document from the probe, Program Coordinator Joal Crosby was ask in 2010, “Why
was the suspected … possible data falsification on all (underscored) other
survey work for which data falsification was suspected not investigated by the
region?” On one document seen by The Post, Crosby hand-wrote the
answer: “Unable to determine why an investigation was not done for CPS,” or the
Current Population Survey — the official name for the unemployment report.
With
regard to the Consumer Expenditure survey, only four instances of falsification
were looked into, while 14 were reported. I’ve been suspicious of the Census
Bureau for a long time. During the 2010 Census report — an enormous
and costly survey of the entire country that goes on for a full year — I
suspected (and wrote in a number of columns) that Census was inexplicably
hiring and firing temporary workers.
I
suspected that this turnover of employees was being done purposely to boost the
number of new jobs being report each month. (The Labor Department does not use
the Census Bureau for its other monthly survey of new jobs — commonly referred
to as the Establishment Survey.)
Last
week I offered to give all the information I have, including names, dates and
charges to Labor’s inspector general.
I’m waiting to hear back
from Labor.
I
hope the next stop will be Congress, since manipulation of data like this not
only gives voters the wrong impression of the economy but also leads lawmakers,
the Federal Reserve and companies to make uninformed decisions.
To
cite just one instance, the Fed is targeting the curtailment of its so-called
quantitative easing money-printing/bond-buying fiasco to the unemployment rate
for which Census provided the false information.
So
falsifying this would, in essence, have dire consequences for the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment