Bush Administration Hides Economic Data

We’ve long complained that you have to take a lot of the statistics put out by our government with a handful of salt, but even worse is simply deep-sixing information that makes it look bad.

Outsourced to Think Progress:

The U.S. economy is faltering. Family debt is on the rise, benefits are disappearing, the deficit is skyrocketing, and the mortgage crisis has worsened. Conservatives have attempted to deflect attention from the crisis, by blaming the media’s negative coverage and insisting the United States is not headed toward a recession, despite what economists are predicting.

The Bush administration’s latest move is to simply hide the data. Forbes has awarded EconomicIndicators.gov one of its “Best of the Web” awards. As Forbes explains, the government site provides an invaluable service to the public for accessing U.S. economic data:

This site is maintained by the Economics and Statistics Administration and combines data collected by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, like GDP and net imports and exports, and the Census Bureau, like retail sales and durable goods shipments. The site simply links to the relevant department’s Web site. This might not seem like a big deal, but doing it yourself–say, trying to find retail sales data on the Census Bureau’s site–is such an exercise in futility that it will convince you why this portal is necessary.

Yet the Bush administration has decided to shut down this site because of “budgetary constraints,” effective March 1:

Economic Indicators is particularly useful because people can sign up to receive e-mails as soon as new economic data across government agencies becomes available. While the data will still be available online at various federal websites, it will be less readily accessible to members of the public.

In its e-mail announcement on the closing of Economic Indicators, the Department of Commerce acknowledged the “inconvenience” and offered “a free quarterly subscription to STAT-USA®/Internet™” instead. Once this temporary subscription runs out, however, the public will be forced to pay a fee. So not only will economic data be more hidden, it will also cost money.

It’s ironic that the Economic and Statistics Administration is facing “budgetary contraints,” considering Bush recently submitted a record $3.1 trillion budget to Congress for FY ‘09.

Steve Bennen at the Carpetbagger Report provides more exampless of the Bush Administration hiding information it doesn’t like:

As long-time readers may recall, I started keeping track of instances in which the Bush administration would hide inconvenient data quite a while ago. Some of my favorite examples include:

* In March, the administration announced it would no longer produce the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation, which identifies which programs best assist low-income families, while also tracking health insurance coverage and child support.

* In 2005, after a government report showed an increase in terrorism around the world, the administration announced it would stop publishing its annual report on international terrorism.

* After the Bureau of Labor Statistics uncovered discouraging data about factory closings in the U.S., the administration announced it would stop publishing information about factory closings.

* When an annual report called “Budget Information for States” showed the federal government shortchanging states in the midst of fiscal crises, Bush’s Office of Management and Budget announced it was discontinuing the report, which some said was the only source for comprehensive data on state funding from the federal government.

* When Bush’s Department of Education found that charter schools were underperforming, the administration said it would sharply cut back on the information it collects about charter schools.

My friends at TPM took this even further, and compiled a comprehensive list, through a project they called, “What You Don’t Know Can’t Hurt Us.” Paul Kiel published the latest version a couple of months ago, and it’s chuck full of mind-numbing examples like these.

When public information conflict with the White House’s agenda, the Bush gang has a choice — deal with the problem or hide the information. Guess which course they prefer?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Anonymous

    OT, but Gads,

    What retards!

    The plan, which appears to be unprecedented in modern financial history, seeks to separate FGIC’s profitable municipal insurance business from its collapsing structured product insurance operations. Details were scarce Friday, but top Wall Street executives said the move was aimed at protecting the steady cash flows from FGIC’s muni bond unit from burgeoning defaults and downgrades in the firm’s risky and massive structured product portfolio.

    FGIC’s move was born out of desperation.

    They run a business based on risk management and screw it up with massive casino gambles and then out of desperation want to walk away from the bad bets and hold on to the winnings…..please, please let God strike down the idiots and market manipulation crooks that are embracing anarchy and running wild; these are financial terrorists and they are being told to use the left nostril for more coke, while the right nostril takes a breather, while they dip their shaking spoon back in the pile offered by regulators……..thanks for the free high man, we promise to do a better job man……

  2. Jojo

    Bushco has to go down as one of the worst and most underhanded administrations in modern history.

    These statistics should be managed and published by an independent, politically neutral organization created by the Congress to do what is best for the PEOPLE of the USA, not the political party in power.

    I only wish that we could speed up time and get rid of this guy and his cohorts sooner. It is going to be one hell of a job cleaning up the mess that Bushco created (if that is even possible)!

  3. Anonymous

    The world looks to America and shakes his head.
    What a mess.
    Land of the…What???
    They will bring freedom and democracy to other people(irak)?
    Free yourself first.

  4. Anonymous

    If the data is available on various other government websites, and if this existing site is heavily used, then one enterprising individual can set up a replacement site. No need to go on complaining about bad government, etc. (Yes, these jokers are bad, but that’s besides the point.)

  5. Tom

    Why in the f*** should we pay some ‘enterprising individual’for information that is collected at our expense FOR us?

Comments are closed.