E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
In an effort to bolster his sagging poll numbers with female voters, Mitt Romney and his campaign have made this new charge: that women have accounted for 92 percent of the job losses since President Obama took office.
Here’s what Romney said yesterday while campaigning in Delaware:
"There's been some talk about a war on women. The real war on women has been waged by the Obama administration's failure on the economy. Do you know what percentage of job losses during the Obama years of have been casualties of women losing jobs as opposed to men? Do you know how many women, what percent of the job losses were women? 92.3 percent of the job losses during the Obama years have been women who've lost those jobs."
The Romney campaign also held a conference call making this same point. "The number of unemployed women has increased by nearly a million under Barack Obama," surrogate Bay Buchanan said. "Ninety-two percent of the jobs lost since he took office are women."
But First Read contacted the Bureau of Labor Statistics to get to the bottom of this 92 percent charge. The conclusion: The Romney campaign’s figures don’t tell the whole story.
The campaign, in a research document circulated yesterday and on its website, said the numbers come from the “Current Employment Statistics” database at BLS. The document notes that there was a net change of -740,000 nonfarm payroll jobs from January 2009 to March 2012 -- and that women accounted for 683,000 of those jobs.
That is accurate, according to BLS. But Brian Davidson, an economist at BLS, told First Read: “The math they use is correct; the terminology is completely wrong.”
Davidson noted that women actually make up a larger share of the workforce now than they did in Jan. 2008 before the financial meltdown, and since January 2009, it is a statistically insignificant change.
In January 2008, women made up 48.8 percent of the workforce; in January 2009, 49.5 percent; now 49.3 percent.
“Do we still have the same amount of women workers relative to men in the ‘net-change’? Yes we do,” Davidson said.
He added, “It’s like trying to pull a bunny out of a hat, but there’s no bunny inside.”
Independent fact-checkers like Politifact and the Washington Post’s Fact Checker also took on the claim.
Giving the claim a “Mostly False,” Politifact called it “misleading”: “We found that though the numbers are accurate, their reading of them isn’t.”
“One could reasonably argue that January 2009 employment figures are more a result of President George W. Bush’s policies, at least as far as any president can be blamed or credited for private-sector hiring,” Politifact wrote. “We reached out to Gary Steinberg, spokesman for the BLS, for his take on the claim. He pointed out that women’s job losses are high for that period of time because millions of men had already lost their jobs. Women were next. … [I]f you count all those jobs lost beginning in 2007, women account for just 39.7 percent of the total. … There is a small amount of truth to the claim, but it ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.”
The Washington Post’s fact checker, Glenn Kessler, begins this way: “[W]e frown on the somewhat arbitrary dividing line of measuring jobs statistics by presidential terms. It is a common journalistic — and political — metric. But restarting the employment clock from the moment the president takes the oath of office doesn’t tell you much about a his performance, especially since it takes time for the new president’s policies to take effect.”
In fact, he writes, “[T]here is less to this stat than meets the eye. … If you start the data in February, then the overall job loss is just 16,000 jobs—while women lost 484,000 jobs. … How could women lose more jobs than the overall total? It’s a function of the dates one picks.”
And notably: “[T]he picture becomes clearer if you start running the data from the date the recession began — December 2007. With that starting point, the total decline in jobs was just over 5 million, with women accounting for nearly 1.8 million of those jobs. Now look what happens when we just look at the past year, March 2011 to March 2012. Men gained nearly 1.9 million jobs while women gained 635,000 jobs.”
*** CORRECTION *** An earlier version of this post noted that the Romney campaign used numbers from January 2009. The campaign has reached out to First Read and notes that it used January 2009 as a "baseline."
"We use January 2009 as the baseline, which means the first month of losses charged to Obama is the decline in February vs. January," said campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul.
*** UPDATE *** Saul also passes along a letter written by its policy director, Lanhee Chen, to dispute the Politifact story (and "Mostly False" rating) that attempted a fact check on a Tweet by Saul referencing the numbers. Chen accuses Politifact of a "failure to focus on the appropriate context."
"First, why should it matter that men had already lost millions of jobs?" Chen wrote. "Was it now women’s 'turn'? Is this part of the President’s conception of “fairness” that he talks about so frequently? If the data showed the opposite (i.e. that women had been disproportionately hurt prior to the President taking office), we imagine you would have used that as an indictment of Ms. Saul by arguing that the trend was inherent to the recession and predated the President."
Chen concluded, "In summary, your piece confirms Ms. Saul’s claim as accurate, and then relies on a direct contradiction with a prior Politifact piece and incorrect claims from two publicly acknowledged Obama supporters (including one Administration official!) as the basis for rating it “Mostly False.” I hope you will agree that this rating was inappropriate and that the piece does not reflect the journalistic standards to which your organization intends to hold itself. Please retract the piece and issue a correction as soon as possible."
Leave a Comment:
You are all welcome for the truth for once...
plenty of truth in the article itself..like how inane and deceptive romney's claim is. lol. Its easy to randomly cherrypick selected numbers and "prove" anything you want to..except such silliness doesn't prove a thing, except to the mindless partisan hacks who WANT to believe it. :)
Why should it matter that men had already lost millions of jobs?" Chen wrote. "Was it now women’s 'turn'?
___________________________________________
In that case, why does it matter what percentage of the jobs lost due to the GOP'S great recession were men, or women at all.
All that matters is that the GOP's asinine ideology of unregulated wall street greed, plus tax cuts for the rich, plus endless warfare decimated the economy.
And Mitt Romney advocates a return to those policies.
His desperate attempts to attack President Obama who has worked hard to repair the damage done by the GOP will go nowhere.
Romney is a repulsive creature, and will lose the election in a landslide.
If it took us 15 years to start recovering from the Great Depression of 1929, AND if 2008 B.O.(before Obama) was the next worse financial collapse, why are we pissed off that Obama didn't create an "App" to fix the problem in 3 years?.. How many filibusters happened in the last 4 years? Repub strategy: say NO to everything, then accuse the President of not accomplishing anything.
Wow, it is truly amazing to read this many posts about the same thing in so many way's.
Here we go right out of the gate what does Romney do
Lie Lie
He even brings two Republicans congresswomen who both voted against the equal pay for equal work for Women
And you say the Republicans are not waging a War on Women
This is why Romeny will never be President, you have to tell the truth and have facts to back it up.
Not make up your own facts and Lies
No more CEO's or business men for president. Remember Bush and Cheney!
Romney is living proof that the republican know damn well that their die-hard voters will not check anything they say, but will accept whatever lie they tell them as if it's the gospel truth. Romney himself is well aware of all the lies and distortions he has made since the primary started because when you look at his record on all the lies he has told, and all the misdeeds he has done, he has turned them around and now is saying President Obama did those things. Every lousy thing he has done in his life from running to France to avoid military service, to the republican war on women, he is now saying the president did it. When he says negative things about the president, look at his record, he's really talking about his own life. He knows die-hard republican voters won't check what he says, they will simply believe him.
They believe what Rush Limbaugh tells them to believe, get it straight. They believe what Sean Hannity tells them to believe. Facts are irrelevant to republicans, its become the party of angry white men trying to maintain control in a country that has a black president who is by far smarter than any of them.
They are losing women because we don't respond well to having our rights taken away and we really don't want to hear about their hatred for the scary black man in the white house. We want to hear what they can do for us and so far the only thing republicans are doing to women, is systematically removing our rights in any state they have control.
Obamas war on women. Now for some truth.
"Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show."
"According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000)."
www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2011
You are a certifiable idiot.
If you really think women are going to sit around and watch state after state go after every law protecting womens rights and take them away by republicans and then care about what Obamas administration makes, you are wrong.
Republicans have gone after our rights to birth control, our healthcare, our equal pay, they have openly said that women don't need money like men do. Gotta love Herman Cain who says women just don't understand policy like men do. Guess what morons, its educated women that are flocking to Obama and uneducated blue collar angry white men that are flocking to republicans.
Jan-21270, you are 100% right on both of your posts, but it seems to me that cgent and ronpal are die-hard republican voters with no valid reason for voting republican, but who needs to think for themselves when republicans do it for them. Jan, what cgent and ronpal don't understand is, republicans are not just attacking women, if they are poor or middle class, republicans have placed a target on their backs as well.
The Bain Project was Romney's cash cow. Although it only made profits with 35 of 68 companies it loan sharked, he made more than millions. Bain would strike a deal using debt, primarily, and approach companies having trouble making profits. That generally meant that the company being acquired had to borrow huge sums to stay afloat, and there was the Emperor Romany, with his friend's purses open afterwards. This is classic 20th century fiscal irresponsibility: force loans and laugh all the way to the banks for more campaign contributions. Now he says its all the opposition's fault. Yeah...right.
why shouldn't he blame the democrats ?? ---- the democrats do the very same thing when the republicans are in power. ----- what both parties need to do is stop blaming each other, and start looking at solutions that make sense.
how can anyone make any assessments about the number of men or women unemployed ?? ---- the data available is so susceptible to inaccuracy, that any conclusions are meaningless. ---- i don't know whether romney's claims have any basis in fact or not, nor whether the unemployment numbers have anything to do with administration policies. ---- does it matter ?? --- what matters is that many milliions of men and women are unemployed, and frankly, i don't see that changing anytime soon, regardless of whoever is in the whitehouse.
Yo Bobby boy in Virgina - fact is, the creative, ingenious, stewardship policies put forth by FDR's New deal failed to take positive hold until late in 1938. He took office in 1932. At this moment in our history, unemployment is down a bit, but down, job numbers are increasing and layoffs decreasing, Iraq is finally over (the second reason for the recession), soon we will be out of that sh--hole in Afghanistan (saving even more taxpayer dollars), women have always took the brunt of job dismissals when things go bad due to the Christian ethic that a man should support his family - check the firing statistics that occurred after the end of WWll, when the women who built the military aircraft, worked assembly lines were the first to be laid off. This is a cultural trend, and has nothing to do with politics or a particular administration.
You are from the Presidential State? You sound more like a sharecropper from Mississippi. Get your crying towel in place Bobby Boy cause is gonna be Obama/Biden in 2012. Your candidates are stuck in their own bias, bigotry and their loads of cash from the right.
From the beginning, Romney has been spouting anything and everything he wants to,,facts never got in the way. He will continue to do the same right thur the election, he has no other choice. His back ground in business is great, for him, not for anyone else. Romney made money by making the unemployment lines bigger, not smaller. Romney knows how to eliminate jobs, not create them. His stance against women will kill any chance he may have had, no matter how he tries to spin his way out of his own mess.
I would like to see the fact checking on all the bull s--- coming out of the administration.
If you call yourselves a news agency, it should be non biased and balanced...., but I won't hold my breath.
Get off your lazy butt and check it for yourself,,,don't just sit there and imply it's bogus.
Of course it's an 'incomplete picture.
The complete picture is that Romney & his court think women are too stupid to interpret this as the veiled attempt it is to counter recent news that Obama is leading in the polls with women.
Romney does not care one whit for women, unless they're in the kitchen making dinner, standing by his side looking adoring, or pumping out more babies.
It seems that all politicians use facts with incomplete pictures. At least the article give credit that the facts and math are correct it is just incomplete. How many times has Obama made statements that are just not true? Included in these are his statement that if you don't sign my stimulus package unemployment could go over 8%, his statement about not signing any legislation that would raise the debt even 10 cents, and his statement about if the supreme court declared the health bill unconstitutional. The list goes on.
With Perry, Bachmann, Cain, and Santorum gone somebody has to stand in front of the mic and just make crap up!!
Willard is very good at doing that,,the B/S never stops flowing from his mouth.
Unfortunately politics today is all about who is the"MOST BELIEVABLE LIAR" not the truth. Politicians don't care about their constituents, only about lining their own pockets. The Tea Baggers and the rest of the GOP are scared to death that Romney will be no different than Obama and they have just cause to be scared. It's time for us to kick every incumbent out of office and keep doing so until they realize why they were elected in the first place. Then we need to pass a constitutional amendment allowing only one six year term in any federal or state, or county or local political office. If these morons weren't so GD concerned about winning re-election they just might be more motivated to do what needs to be done, rather than spend four years making up more lies to tell.
What a liar. This mormon will go to any depths to get to jerk Obama, it is not working it will never work and it wont work. Shame on you and your phony math, go down and pray to your GOD for forgiveness.
So the White house got a waver from the lilly ledbetter law so they could pay women 18% less than men doing the same job? How is that not war on women waged by the Obama administration?
Yea Joyce. At least the article give credit that the facts and math are correct it is just incomplete. How many times has Obama made statements that are just not true? Included in these are his statement that if you don't sign my stimulus package unemployment could go over 8%, his statement about not signing any legislation that would raise the debt even 10 cents, and his statement about if the supreme court declared the health bill unconstitutional. The list goes on.
I didn't see a reference to a waiver from the law, got a link?
the lilly ledbetter act doesnt say that a collection of women have to have the same average salary as a collection of men, it refers to the same pay for the same job. I'm guessing that men have higher level jobs, on average, than the women in the white house and that explains the difference, not pay discrimination.
but if you can show that obama violated the act, by all means, feel free to sue!
cksm: at 759 you posted the exact same thing. Are you going to repost it every 30 minutes or so and bore us to tears?
Women are watching both parties closely.
Yes, Obama now has 60% of the vote of women like me.
Keep your hands off of Planned Parenthood and Title 10.
We don't need these things now, but we will fight for our daughters and our less affluent sisters and their freedom to choose what happens inside their bodies.
We are not swallowing your religious baloney and your percentages that amount to deception and diversion.
Get your hands off women's rights, Romney, and keep them off.
vermontguy, if you cry that easily, then by all means go ahead. They are not exactly the same, but I give you credit for at least reading the comments and not distorting them. Since Joyce called Romney a liar I could not resist responding with almost the same comment.
well, except for the fact that 'bored to tears" doesn't really imply actual crying, your statement is right on.
BTW, your "example" of the 8% stimulus effect isn't valid, unless you can prove it was intentionally wrong. It was a prediction, not a promise (no one can promise unemployment rates), and it didn't come true.
so unless it was intentionally misleading, it isn't the same as romney's obvious misuse of stats.
if all it was was a prediction, then it certainly wasn't a very good one.
Well teapublicans -- your numbers just keep getting worse ans worse every day. Even Rasmussen has Romney tied with Obama and that's the most right wing poll in the nation.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html
So, Romney LIED!! Even if it was true, What has the GOP done to fix it?? Vote no,obstruct,no vote , lie, propose more TAX CUTS for the millionairs, and shut off funds for anything that would help. Oh, and try to kill our seniors. What a lame tool.
Before you start believing any statistics, please read "How To Lie With Statistics" by Darrell Huff 1954 or “Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists” by Joel Best 2001. And, no, I don't have stock in either.
I also have a comment about msnbc.com. I am somewhat put off by the way comments are allowed on articles that are presented on msnbc.com. Some allow comments via Newsvine logon. However, many articles are now only allowing comments by Facebook or Twitter. I refuse to subscribe to those social media, because their only reason for existence is for advertising and not social interaction. I also find that some articles have no vehicle to comment. Why does msnbc.com continue to not have a consistant policy on this?
Microsoft"s information technology is fueled by oursourcing. Americans are not administrating this website.
Just try talking about outsourcing, you will end up with MSNBC making you enter a captcha code everytime you post.
Also, use IN PRIVATE browsing on this site or your computer will be assaulted with cookies.
In response to Ann Romney's comments that rearing 5 boys his hard work. She does not have a clue. Rearing 5 children with household help, housekeeper, cook, etc. Try rearing children without household help, working 40 hours a week, going to all the children's activities and going to night school to improve employment opportunities. Then Ann you will have a clue.
Rosen, don't apologize.
You are right. You hit the nail right on the head.
Romney does not see women as equal to men.
His religion forbids it. Reminds me of the Taliban.
The republicans try to lie their way back into power, destroy the economy again by giving all the money to their friends.
Why do you vote for them? If you make more than$200,000 a year then ok, the republicans are working for you.
If you make less and vote republican, then you are shooting yourself in the foot.