The Inspector General who investigated the falsification of unemployment data at the Census Bureau allowed the subjects of his probe to have a sneak peek at his results — but didn’t extend that same courtesy to the whistleblowers trying to end the fraud.
That’s the punch line for a six-month investigation, which now continues at the House Oversight Committee.
Todd Zinser, IG for the Commerce Department — which is in charge of Census — also listed six reforms that he believes will stop fraudulent data from being reported in the future, including this obvious one: “Bureau of Labor Statistics and other survey sponsors … should be informed” of falsification, even if the incidents don’t have a “statistical impact.”
Zinser’s probe was a whitewash in two very important areas: first, it concluded that Julius Buckmon, the Census worker from the Philadelphia region who got caught submitting falsified data, was lying when he said higher-ups told him to cheat; and second, that there was no fudging (as my whistleblower claims there was) of the unemployment rate during the last Presidential election.
“I found the report predictable and contradictory,” said my whistleblower, who is now in these pages getting a first chance to respond to the IG report. “It had multiple inaccuracies in it.”
The whistleblower has spoken with both the IG’s office and the Oversight Committee.
The Oversight Committee said last week that it was continuing to investigate the matter and that the “IG’s findings identify serious shortcomings and highlight an uncomfortable truth: data quality assurance procedures across the Census Bureau are ripe for abuse.”
My whistleblower, who is still requesting anonymity, has a lot more faith in Congress than the IG. So what did Zinser and his staff get wrong? Too much for me to list them all here.
But one thing, Buckmon was first caught falsifying data in 2010 — September 2010 to be precise. And he was initially snagged fibbing on the Consumer Expenditure Survey by a supervisor named Joal Crosby.
That’s the Census survey that goes into the Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index and is used, among other things, to calculate Cost of Living Adjustments for Social Security recipients.
Despite Crosby’s role in uncovering Buckmon’s actions, her name is never mentioned in the IG’s report. She is believed to have been interviewed by both Zinser’s office and Congress. And despite the fact that he was caught cheating on the inflation survey, the work Buckmon was doing on other surveys wasn’t double checked.
In fact, in an internal memo from September 2010, Crosby was asked about this. Crosby wrote that she was “unable to determine why an investigation was not done for CPS,” which is the abbreviation for the Current Population Survey. That survey is used by Labor to determine the monthly unemployment rate.
If someone is found cheating on any Census statistics, all of their work is supposed to be reviewed — automatically.
My whistleblower says that Buckmon was told by a supervisor to put in month-old interviews as completed, new interviews and that “he would cover him at re-interview.” (Buckmon couldn’t be reached last week to answer my questions.)
The IG investigation didn’t find Buckmon’s allegations convincing, even though they were backed up by at least one superior in the Philadelphia region.
The IG’s report says people passed polygraph exams, although it didn’t say who or what these people were asked.
Still, if Buckmon was a guy in serious trouble, he ended up with a pretty sweet deal. I’m told he was given a choice to resign, retire or wait to be fired. When he left quietly, Buckmon — I’m told — was allowed to cash in unused vacation time and sick leave. And Census didn’t challenge his claim for unemployment insurance.
His unemployment benefits were eventually extended for two full years.
And Buckmon’s employment didn’t end until August 2011 — nearly a year after the first accusations of falsification.
Buckmon kept cranking out the interviews through 2011, even when he was under suspicion: 61 interviews in May; 56 in June; and, 54 in July. That was double a normal work load, according to IG figures.
But that was nothing compared to the 99 cases Buckmon completed in January 2010 and the 95 two months later, in March. “Having an abnormally large work load can be an indicator of potential falsification,” the IG report deadpanned.
Thirty interviews, I’m told, would be considered a lot.
So why would a supervisor or two or three approve overtime for all the fake interviews Buckmon was conducting unless someone was indeed covering for him?
The supervisors that Buckmon blamed told the IG that they didn’t realize his work load. And he was kept around for so long only because Buckmon had made accusations against superiors.
Huh? So, Census let the guy continue to falsify statistics even though he admitted his crimes and fingered others as being co-conspirators?
Does that make sense?