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:
Does anyone have the number of women that have lost jobs in education and the public sector due to budget cuts in states?
Statements like the "92% of Women" are right out of the Lee Atwater Republican playbook which is still being used tothis day. If you have a problem with a particular issue then accuse your opponent of having the issue and keep pounding away at it until you convince the voting public that it is his/her problem. Carl Rove and other disciples of Atwater have used this ruse very effectively during past elections and it appears they will continue into the future.
LOL, there is only one person going around dividing people and living off the blame game and that is the Great Divider, the guy who hid behind a mask called "Hope & Change" and has brought only hate/division and change no one expected.
The GOP Republicans under Bush brought us fear and shame.
Shame for our country; this great country was almost completely ruined by the Republicans in their last occupation of the Oval office.
Hope and change and President Obama is all we have to hang onto to keep from falling back into the Republican abyss.
Republicans under Bush hijacked the election and almost ruined America.
President Obama saved Americans from the Republican seige and the fear and shame and dread we were feeling.
You can LOL all you want, but it was not funny.
Dan the hate and division came from the Republicans that vowed not to work with him and to make him a one term President. This occurred from day 1 of his Presidency.
BSNBC, if they're not campaigning for Obama they are making excuses for him. Too bad their fact checks go down a one-way street. I don't remember a time in history where journalism has taken a back seat to a political/social agenda by a news network. While Fox News is always accused of political reporting/hack jobs it's BSNBC who is actually doing it.
Dan G. "while Fox News is always accused of political reporting/hackjobs"... That's because they're ALWAYS doing it. Have you actually watched that cesspool?
Fox News is nothing but the Republican's poodle.
that may be true, but a person could also make the same claim about the other media outlets always whitewashing everything the democrats do. ---- as an unaffiliated voter, i find this all very amusing.
Republicans attacking Rosen is just another tactic to keep women from speaking up.
Leave Ms. Rosen and the candidate's women and children alone.
Some of us work and raise children and some of us stay home and raise children.
Are Republicans trying now to divide women and conquer them?
That is kind of Talibanesque.
Hilary Rosen, a Democratic operative with SKD Knickerbocker, touched off a Twitter storm tonight after she went on CNN and said that Ann Romney has "never worked a day in her life." When will we read this on MSNBC or hear it on NBC?
Leave Hilary and Ann alone.
Get back to the real issues and quit trying to personalize the election around two women.
Women are not fighting with each other.
We are trying to defend our rights against a Republican onslaught.
Its been on MSNBC all morning. What have you been listening to?
Its also in the Politics section of MSNBC on line.
Anne Romney had and has a perfect right to choose to marry her high school sweetheart, live in wealth, stay home, raise her children, drive two cadillacs and build car elevators at one of their multiple mansions. She has the right to participate in her church, do charity work and take vacations. She has the right to have access to the best health care money can buy to treat her breast cancer and MS. Anne is one of the lucky ones and good for her.
There is not, however, much hope that she is the best person to advice Mitt on the conditions that the vast majority of women today face. That is actually supposed to be Mitt's job - Anne is not running for anything - know who you want to lead and what is important to them. If either one of them think that jobs are so important that women are willing to ignore the attacks on their rights and freedoms in exchange for those jobs, they are completely out of touch.
Women know there is a rhythm to the business and economic cycles, and this recession will end, but oppressive laws last for decades and longer. Jobs will return but if women are impeded in accessing control over their reproduction it won't matter. They will not be able to work in anything but the most menial of jobs.
I doubt Romney has strong beliefs one way or the other about issues important to most women and that makes him dangerous because state legislatures all over the country are demonstrating how much we need a strong advocate - and how much we need to vote the neanderthals out of office.
...and note that Mitt can not even give a clear answer to whether he supports equal pay for equal work for women AND that women have a right to take legal action when that right is violated. His campaign, when asked about it, had to tell the questioner they would "get back to you" on that! How hard is it to say "yes if you do the same job you should get the same pay."
Saying you may believe in something but hedging on whether you have a right to pursue it legally is just another weasel position and puts corporations ahead of people. It says it would be nice if business paid equal wages but we don't want to inconvenience the "job creators" with anything so difficult as actually making them responsible for doing so.
Two major problems with Romneys claim that make it completely false on its face, first: Most of the job losses occurred during or were caused by a meltdown that happened when a republican George W Bush remember him??? was president, second the numbers have been twisted and tortured to do the same thing to Obama that Romney did to Gingerich and Santorum in essence make them look bad by spreading lies and half truths. Romney is a flip flopping empty shirt. I am really looking forward to seeing him debate president Obama. In the meantime the press needs to be vigilant calling him on his lies, except for FOX the republican News.
great, another party supporter with nothing better to do than blame everything on the opposing party ---- you partisan people from both parties are a joke.
I have, and will vote democrat because I believe they care more about the "average" people than Republicans do. However that does not give me the right to call people who disagree with me names, that's the whole problem today, far too many loud mouths and not enough people willing to discuss and compromise. This is what will kill the great American experiment.
Only in politics can a lie be termed an "incomplete picture".
The GOP has lost almost all of the independent voters, especially the women's vote. They are just too dumb to realize that. It's too late to try and convince women that you didn't mean what you said, etc etc.
Sorry flip flopper Mitts, this is one vote you won't be receiving, and as much as I hate to have to do it, for the first time, I will be voting a straight D ticket. The clown road show sure showed the public what they want to do.
Like Fiesty said, if Mitt wins, we will be able to party like it's 1959.
says who ??? ---- i've been attending unaffiliated voter meetings for over a year now, in several states, and if anything, the trend is going the other way. ------ there are 8 swing states ---- if the republican candidate takes florida and ohio, it will be a very close finish. ----- and it will be the unaffiliated voters in those states who will be the determining factor.
Out of curiosity, where does one find 'unaffiliated voter meetings" and who or what organizations schedule them?
Only those actively in engaged in politics attend such meetings. I.E. the Republicans that are concerned with how the primary is going. I doubt you met a single independent voter.
on the contrary, there were no people there who belonged to either the democrat or republican party ---- that is the whole point..... we are against the conventional parties, and we support candidates from either party who show the promise of breaking away from their party's traditional platform, or at the least, represent a change from a politician who has held that office too long.
ronpal, could Ron Paul fall into that category of 'change from a politician who has held that office too long'? I think so..
yes ---- however, my name is ronpal ..... i am NOT a ron paul supporter.
Mitt Romney no job creator, says a man who knows
"I find it personally insulting when Romney says his work at Bain created jobs," said Kastenbaum, a registered Republican who lives in Lafayette. "That's not what my experience was." http://tinyurl.com/89a5t52
How about a tally of # of jobs Romeny sent overseas or eliminated vs jobs created....
Romney is very comfortable with not telling the truth - he is a liar and does not care who calls him out.
Liar, liar pants on fire!
The magic undies are flame retardant. Sorry, I don't really mean to poke fun at anyone's religion. That one was just to tempting to pass up.
So according to THE FACTS, there have been LESS THAN 750,000 jobs lost during the 3 years of the Obama Administration? That's GREAT news!
Why are the current Republicant "candidates" saying 4 million jobs lost?
Are they all just flat-out liars?
Answer to rhetorical question: DUH!
They are counting all jobs lost and not jobs gained. I believe the 750,000 counts both.
We were hemoraging jobs when Obama took office. Almost a million jobs a month. We are back in positive numbers now, but the biggest problem is that as the population grows we have to add more and more jobs just to keep up with new people entering the work force. Thus, all the discussion about college graduates who can't find work in their chosen fields.
Do the political editors at MSNBC ever do a "fact check" on thet lying fool in the Whitehouse?
Lying is easiest when one simply omits a relevant fact or two. For example, I saw you drive right through a traffic light yesterday. True statement. Relevant fact - the traffic light was green at the time.
All you angry, hurtful people amaze me. What really demonstrates your ignornace is that ALL native-born Americans live in the wealthiest 1% of all people who have ever lived. Just by virtue of being born here, now and not in the Third World or in a different time in history you are wealthy beyong compare. Your vitriol evidences the fact that you have little understanding of how fortunate you are.
Actually, our standard of living has fallen behind quite a few other developed countries. We got lazy and stagnated as a society while other nations over took us.
Never assume that you are the greatest. It only makes you lazy.
For the sake of argument, let's say that the 92% figure is accurate (yeah, I know, bear with me). Unless the President has magical powers to tell businesses who to hire and fire, wouldn't the job loss numbers by women be more reflective of the attitudes of "job creators"?
Just sayin'...
and do you believe administration policies have nothing to do with hiring attitudes of those job creators ???
Of course policies matter. Now, tell me which policy would encourage "job creators" to fire nearly 100% of all women.
Any way you look at Romney's claim it looks ridiculous. Now believe his bogus numbers if you wish, some of us would prefer to question idiotic misinformation.
well.... if you institute or promote social programs such as one that gives extended leave to women who have a child, that does not give incentive for any employer to hire a woman of child-bearing age. ------ i don't really care what romney thinks --- i'm just saying that administratiion policies might make a difference in who employers decide to hire. ---- another for instance, almost all my employees are older people, because there is a tax break for hiring the elderly.
Figures don't lie; but Mormons figure.
I am guessing the Romney assumes that all American women as just dumb bit.. and will listen to him, and obey - like an obedient Mormon wife. Don't question the Great White Horse Prophecy.
From the article:
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.
More women are in the workplace now, than Romney says. I was wondering, because if 92% of the job losses were women, I see many qualified, American women working as cashiers at Walgreens, Walmart, CVS, Save-a-Lot, almost all medical office staffs for the ten plus doctors offices that my wife and I visit are exclusively women, except for the doctors.
I'm holding off and behaving and not saying:
"Liar, Liar, pants on fire,"
Between Mormons and Mormon/Republicans they can't help themselves - it is just too easy for Mormons to lie, and have no shame.
Knock, knock "Have you heard about the Book of Mormon?"
"Yes, Isn't that the book Mormon Romney pushed in France for two years to avoid military service, after dropping out of Stanford?"
Mighty white, and mighty Mormon of Romney to have a black, inner city youth's name on the Vietnam War in the place of a White, Mormon.
Mr Romney supposedly represents the business community with a degree from Harvard.
Does he know the meaning of the words "trend" baseline" With his administration in charge together with Mr Ryan they will be cooking the books. Does he fact check information before reading info given to him. Maybe this is how he made his millions left it all up to his sidekicks who are now running his campaign i.e did his campaign know aout the Lilly Ledbetter Law
Regarding, the Lilly Ledbetter Law, he did what someone who is uncertain of an issue should do. He said he would look into it and get back to us. He researched (or had his staff research it), made a decision and responded after reviewing the facts.
I will find out is better than some off the cuff answer.
That is the type of leadership that we need.
It is Harry Reid, a Democrat, that has failed to try to end the deficits. You may not agree; however, Paul Ryan's House budget has tried to address the issues. The President's budget was killed 414 - 0 in the House and also killed in the Senate.
You cannot blame the Republicans for the downgrades to our credit.
I could blame the Pubs for refusing to raise the debt ceiling which is what triggered the credit rating drop. I will remind you that raising that debt ceiling was approved 17 times during the first 8 years of this century without a furor. This was the first time the posibility of the US defaulting. What changed?
The only thing Ann Romney knows about work is how to use someone else's mother to raise her kids. Having nannies to raise 5 boys who never served in the military is not work.
Do Obama supporters really want to talk about not serving in the military? You know, what John McCain did.
Many folks never served in the military, so I won't badmouth anyone that did not. I applaud those that did serve, but do not condemn those that did not.
Wow! Talk about having your cake and eating it too. The numbers are right but it's George W. Bush's fault. The numbers are accurate but the conclusion is wrong. Genius. It not only isn't true, it's Bush's fault. Talk about heads I win, tails you lose.
Breaking News:
Managers don't have to ensure lunch, court rules
Wonder how fast this will fly across the country and into how many States. Well it continues more employees rights are being taken away; soon we will be like China, 15-20 hour work day, at 1.50 an hour, no overtime, and only an allotment for a certain amount of food and housing.
Things may well get tougher as foreign competition increases and American companies need to compete.
I notice MSNBC criticizes Romney for not telling the whole story, but I never see them doing this to the president, who as far as I can see almost never seems to tell the whole story.
I almost always find relevant fact missing that deceive folks.