Obama Official Admits Stimulus Jobs Numbers Unreliable

Barack Obama lied about jobs

Since advancing the idea of a stimulus President Obama has touted the expenditure of stimulus dollars as a job creator. As the months have gone by since the stimulus funding was approved by Congress and the President, the President and other Democrats have repeatedly thrown out numbers of jobs created, claiming considerable success. The figure of 640,000 jobs created has been the most recent number claimed by the Obama administration.

Critics, including Republican leaders, have retorted that the numbers are not real and that part of the proof of that is the rising numbers of unemployed in the United States, now in excess of 10% nationally. Some light has been shed on the subject of stimulus job creation by recent testimony before a Congressional Committee

The New York Times has reported that Earl E. Devaney, the Chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, testified Thursday on the subject of job numbers at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that he could not vouch for the Obama administration’s recent claims that the money had saved or created 640,000 jobs. He suggested that the administration should have treated the number with more skepticism.”

The article also quotes Devaney as saying “I think it could be above or below 640. I think missing reports might drive the job numbers up, and I think there’s enough inaccuracies in here to question if the 640 number might go down.” An unnamed Administration spokesman also said the 640,000 job figure could be high, or it could be low.

Politicians in Congress on both sides of the aisle seem aghast at the uncertainty of the numbers, given that the White House formally issued the figure of 640,000 about 3 weeks ago. It seems anger and distrust abounds on this issue in D.C.

At the risk of being labeled a cynic, one has to wonder if we can believe anything coming out of Washington.

About Over But Not Out

A retired Orange County employee, and moderate Republican. The editor seriously does not know OBNO's identity as did not the former editor, but his point of view is obviously interesting and valued.