Get unlimited digital access to $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion

The California conspiracy: The convoluted path to unemployment rate disbelief

Immediately after the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the nation's unemployment rate dropped to 7.8 percent in September, conservatives started attacking the agency for producing figures that sounded a little too convenient for the Obama administration. The most prominent doubter was former GE chairman Jack Welch, who tweeted shortly after the announcement, "Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers." But he was hardly alone.

Now the conspiracy theorists are abuzz on the web with an explanation of exactly how they think the books were cooked: The BLS numbers, they claim, did not include California because the nation's most populous state failed to report its data in time.

That is, of course, preposterous. The unemployment rate is calculated based on a monthly survey of 60,000 households called the Current Population Survey. It asks how many members of the household are employed and how many are looking for work. The states have no role in the process whatsoever.

The confusion appears to stem from the misinterpretation of an item published last week by Henry Blodget, the CEO and editor of Business Insider, a business and tech news website. He wrote a series of posts on Thursday about a surprisingly good report from BLS that initial jobless claims had dropped to 339,000 from 369,000 a week before. Early reporting indicated that the drop was mostly due to unexpectedly low numbers from a single, large state.

Later in the day, Mr. Blodget reported on an interview he had with an unnamed BLS analyst who said it appeared that California was the culprit and that it might not have processed all of its claims in time for the reporting deadline.

Both the California labor department and BLS later said that wasn't true and that the state had reported all of its data, though California's numbers for the week were particularly good. (State officials credited a strengthening economy and unusually good weather, which may have delayed normal seasonal effects on employment patterns.)

It is possible that what happened in California was a mere statistical fluctuation that will be ironed out by higher numbers in subsequent weeks, or it could be the start of a trend. It's impossible to know from one data point. But, as Mr. Blodget later reported, even if California's data had been at a more normal level, the national jobless claims still would have declined somewhat.

The bottom line, though, is this: The national jobless claims data did include California, and the 7.8 percent unemployment rate is unrelated to the jobless claims report. So the idea that the 7.8 percent rate doesn't include California is wrong on every level.

--Andrew A. Green

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Obama is a socialist, not a 'populist'
    Obama is a socialist, not a 'populist'

    President Barack Obama is a populist? How about cradle-to-grave socialist? There is no area of your life where government will not intrude, impose its will and dissipate any sense of individual responsibility you might have had left ("Obama turns populist in State of the Union speech," Jan....

  • Mr. Obama's tax plan
    Mr. Obama's tax plan

    It's a pretty safe bet that Congress is not going to react to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address by immediately turning around and agreeing to his priorities like free community college and mandatory sick leave. When was the last time any presidential initiative got that kind...

  • If it's bad, Obama did it; if it's good, he didn't
    If it's bad, Obama did it; if it's good, he didn't

    Thank you Peter Morici ("Blame Obama for movie's censorship," Dec. 23) for helping all of us to understand that it was President Barack Obama's fault that Sony initially canceled the release of "The Interview" because he didn't rally around this stupid movie and left the movie industry to...

  • How Republicans are ruining America
    How Republicans are ruining America

    On the national level, the cost of citizens not voting is quickly becoming apparent. Economically, the seeds of the next recession have been sown by the Republican weakening of financial controls so once again the greedy of Wall Street can gamble on dangerous financial derivatives with...

  • Regulate the banks
    Regulate the banks

    Dan Rodricks' recent column attributing amnesia to our Congress and president for dispensing with the requirement that big banks refrain from making risky investments with taxpayers' deposits was right on target ("For too many in Washington, a phantom recession," Dec. 21).

  • It's not the size of the government that's the problem
    It's not the size of the government that's the problem

    Some believe the central political issue of our era is the size of the government. They're wrong. The central issue is whom the government is for.

  • Do Democrats run the economy better than Republicans? Of course not
    Do Democrats run the economy better than Republicans? Of course not

    I read John Hanger's commentary "Democrats run the economy better" (Oct. 30) and it should have been titled "Democrats run the economy into the ground."

  • Democrats have run the economy (and everything else) into the ground
    Democrats have run the economy (and everything else) into the ground

    Was John Hanger's recent commentary supposed be run on April's Fools Day instead of Halloween ("Democrats run the economy better," Oct. 30). Surely his supposed reasoning on the subject of why Democrats run the economy better than Republicans was with tongue in cheek.