Many posts have cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
At WP, Former CEA chairs N. Gregory Mankiw and Cecilia Rouse explain why it was a mistake to fire the head of the BLS:
The collection and analysis of federal statistics is complex. Often, the first numbers produced are revised as more information is gathered. And sometimes the revisions are quite large. This can lead to questions about the process, so it is crucial that the users of the data (which is really all of us!) trust that those collecting and analyzing these statistics are not swayed by politics. After all, if data are only considered “good” when they support a particular politician’s worldview and “bad” when they do not, why should anyone believe them? And if we don’t believe them, we know less about what is happening in the economy.
Economists such as Nicholas Bloom at Stanford University have documented that uncertainty about economic prospects and policy reduces economic growth. Further, Nobel Prize winners Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson have identified the strength of a nation’s institutions as a source of economic growth. We have little doubt that part of the success of the U.S. economy over the past century is due to its strong and independent federal statistical agencies, which generate the kind of information leaders need to make smart decisions.
Federal statistics may seem like an arcane topic that interests only econ wonks like us. But the truth is that these statistical agencies have made it possible for business leaders and policymakers alike to analyze credible data and plan for the future. And that is something everyone should care about.
Politicians spin — it is what they do. But when their spin undermines the integrity of the numbers we have come to rely on, the consequences are real. We will all pay the price.
