The Stimulus Suspicious Minds Tour

"One year later, it is largely thanks to the Recovery Act that a second depression is no longer a possibility. It's one of the main reasons the economy has gone from shrinking by 6% to growing at about 6%."      Barack Obama

Unfortunately for Obama, only 6% of the American public believes the stimulus has created jobs according to a recent  CBS News poll.  More people believe Elvis is still alive than the stimulus has created jobs.  Nevertheless, the Obama administration is on a full-fledged resurrection tour to promote the the wonders of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act better known as the stimulus, porkulus if you prefer.    The New York Times is in full cheerleader mode as the the Obama loving media does their level best to help lay to rest the fears of your suspicious minds.   I guess they're caught in a trap

Why can't you see

What you're doing to the One

When you don't believe a single word he says

Via Memeorandum

Baghdad Bob Gibbs Spins the Stimulus Created or Saved Jobs

Baghdad Bob Gibbs has his hands full lately spinning the created or saved jobs stories that are supposed to prove the $787 billion stimulus wasn't a complete waste of taxpayer's money.  Yesterday the AP noted that a report of 30,000 jobs created or saved by the stimulus was full of problems:

"The AP review found some counts were more than 10 times as high as the actual number of jobs; some jobs credited to the stimulus program were counted two and sometimes more than four times; and other jobs were credited to stimulus spending when none was produced."

The White House blog did a fact check on the AP report, yes seriously they did.  Of course the mistakes  found by AP weren't the government's fault, the mistakes were caused by the stupid people who received the money:

Governors, mayors, county executives, private businesses and community organizations across the country submit reports to Recovery.gov so that you can get an unprecedented look at how your taxpayer dollars are being spent creating jobs and boosting the economy through the Recovery Act. These reports are not from the federal government – but from the very people putting Recovery funds to work. 

Well that's a relief that is!  I feel so much better now knowing that it was just the people who got the money who gave the inflated figures on jobs created or saved.   The White House then reported they would release an exact accounting of jobs "created and saved" on Recovery.Gov today at 3:00, it's now 3:59 and still no report.   Jake Tapper got an advance on the report and writes:

The numbers come from Congressionally-mandated reports submitted earlier this month by tens of thousands of state and local governments, private companies, colleges, universities, and community organizations nationwide, administration officials said, with the majority of the funds coming from state governments.

Factoring jobs indirectly created from the stimulus -- not reflected in these numbers -- an administration official says in a statement that "because these reports show that less than half of the spending through that date created or saved about 650,000 jobs, they confirm government and private forecaster’s estimates that overall Recovery Act spending has created and saved at least 1 million jobs."

So the new numbers come from the same people who received the money but these are Congressionally mandated reports so I guess they are supposed to be reliable this time.   Jake Tapper asked Gibbs today why the American people should believe these numbers:

TAPPER:  How credible should the American people consider these numbers, given that in many cases they're rough estimates and there has been some reporting problems in the past?

GIBBS:  Well, I -- there -- there were -- there was a reporting problem with one of the contracting numbers because that paperwork went up quite quickly.  They've had a chance to go through the numbers over the past couple weeks and address any confusion or errors.  This is paperwork directly from a project that money has been appropriated for, so I think the American people can have confidence in them.

Say what?  Here is the latest screen shot from Recovery.gov that shows the new "created or saved" magical jobs numbers:

Jobs Created or Saved as Reported by Recipients that were misleading before but now have the Federal government seal of approval.   Does anyone else think it is not a coincidence these numbers are coming late on a Friday?

Via Michelle Malkin Republican.Senate.Gov has a top ten list of "Created or Saved Jobs" stories spun by this administration to prove the $787 billion stimulus was not a complete waste of taxpayer's dollars.

Posner to Romer: Where Are Your Academic Scruples?

Judge Richard Posner wrote a piece for "The Atlantic" yesterday questioning Christina Romer, chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, on her August 6th presentation to the Economic Club of Washington DC titled, "So is it Working? An Assessment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act at the Five-Month Mark."

Posner challenges Romer on her answer to the group of economists as to whether the stimulus package, passed in haste in February by Congress, was in fact working. Romer answered "Absolutely." Posner finds this answer irresponsible coming from an academic and goes on to question why those who leave academia to pursue a public role don't retain their academic scruples:

I do not think her analysis is responsible, and I am concerned with the fact that academic economists, when they become either public officials or public intellectuals (like Paul Krugman), leave behind their academic scruples. (This is one of the themes of my book Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline [2001])--and Krugman was one of my examples of the phenomenon.

and then again here:

This raises the question of the ethical responsibility of academic economists, such as Romer (and Krugman, and Lawrence Summers, and many others), who write for the media or join the government, either to adhere to academic standards in their nonacademic work or to make clear to the public that they are on holiday from those standards and that what they say in their public-intellectual or governmental careers should not be thought identical to their academic views.

Ouch! Posner makes it clear he agreed with the stimulus, at least in theory, but found the design lacking and the delivery "lazy." He challenges on a variety of levels Romer's claim the stimulus is working. I won't rehash the whole article because it is a worthy read. I have read a number of Judge Posner's legal opinions and found them straightforward and readable even for someone without a law background like myself. His economic blog is not always as straightforward, at least to this layperson anyway. I think this piece in the Atlantic is more approachable, however.

I respect Judge Posner immensely, he gives an honest assessment and puts his political opinions to the side. I appreciated reading why the stimulus could have worked had it been designed better. I have held the opinion it would have been preferable to do the tax holiday or no stimulus. Because I believe him to give fair assessments though, I give his opinion more weight than a partisan assessment.

This leads to his larger point, Krugman, Romer, Summers and Buffet, lent their credibility to Obama during his campaign. As Obama had no governing experience, their backing gave his economic plans some weight. When these same high profile academics allow their scruples to "take a holiday" in service of a political agenda, the layman will have difficulty discerning political spin from solid academic opinion. For example, the other night Krugman wrote an opinion on the public option and its significance to the Progressives. On Americablog, Krugman's opinion was touted because it agreed with a political point of view but given great weight because of his academic pedigree:

Not that Nobel laureates aren't intrinsically smart folks, but I think this analysis of the politics of the public option is particularly insightful.

Now that the Nobel laureate finds Obama's willingness to sacrifice the "public option" to come up short, the commenters start questioning Obama's intelligence:

He was a lecturer and has no published or scholarly academic papers.

I don't know where the meme came from that he is "brilliant" and "all seeing" and "highly intelligent." It probably came from the same place as "he's playing eleventy dimensional chess" and "he's 25 steps ahead of everybody else."

I think this whole "constitutional scholar" thingy is way overrated.

What is the definition of "scholar" when it comes to Obama?

Those comments look as though I might have plucked them straight from a right wing blog. In fairness, most left and right wing blogs become echo chambers to varying degrees. Opinions that agree are "genius" while those that don't are "stupid." This can certainly contribute to political discourse that becomes frenzied. Obviously there is more at play in our heightened political discussion, not the least of which is hyperpartisan media-types who both lament and ridicule an uninformed public. Still, Posner's point is an excellent one. An academic "on scruples vacation" might fool an uninformed public but they can't get past their peers. Posner didn't need a disclaimer to weed through Romer's discussion, but it would be nice if Posner didn't need to advise the "uninformed public" Romer's academic scruples were in Cancun for spring break.
UPDATE: Brad DeLong of Grasping Reality with Both Hands defends Romer.
Judge Posner's response to Prof. DeLong