Correction: An earlier version of this story misattributed statements made by Reps. Darrell Issa and Blake Farenthold
It’s time for the Census Bureau and the Commerce Department to be investigated by a special independent prosecutor.
Thursday, the Commerce Department’s own Inspector General, Todd Zinser — a political appointee — issued a 61-page report which concluded that (my) allegations that the Census’ Philadelphia office manipulated the unemployment survey around the time of the 2012 Presidential election were “unsubstantiated.”
But the report admitted that survey supervisors at Census “do not consistently use the tools available to them for detecting and preventing survey data falsification.”
That last admission by the Inspector General drew a rebuke from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the US Postal Service and Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who said, “The Census Bureau must address the systemic deficiencies in preventing and identifying falsification of data revealed in the [Commerce IG’s] report, including inadequate employee training and data review processes.
“The IG’s findings identify serious shortcomings and highlight an uncomfortable truth: Data quality assurance procedures across the Census Bureau are ripe for abuse,” added Issa.
Census Chairman Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) added that “the Inspector General’s report confirms our concerns about the process the Census Bureau uses to collect unemployment data.” The Oversight Committee said it is continuing to investigate and is “demanding answers from Census officials on its procedures for collecting survey data.”
Now it’s my turn to speak. My own investigation over the past six months has found the following facts:
- In 2010 a Census worker named Julius Buckmon filed an age and race discrimination claims against Census. While those claims were being looked into Buckmon revealed that he had falsified a lot of data that went into the nation’s unemployment and consumer inflation survey.
- In fact, Buckmon regularly did 100 more interviews than could possibly have been completed by one man — representing over 500,000 households in the scientific sample — without being caught. Buckmon alleged, including to the IG in the recent investigation, that he was told to do so by higher-ups.
- A pair of Census supervisors backed up Buckmon’s statement and the IG polygraphed the higher-ups that Buckmon blamed. The IG’s report Thursday mentioned the lie detector tests but did not give the results.
- The race and age discrimination accusations were investigated thoroughly back in 2010 and a report was done by Susan Grimes Associates Inc, Washington. (I have copy.) But Census doesn’t seem to have bothered to thoroughly look into Buckmon’s falsification claims.
- One Census investigator did question a couple of supervisors about Buckmon but she doesn’t appear to have written anything up. That investigator, Rachel Ondrik, is scheduled to go on trial soon for fraud against the Census. Ondrik’s plea deal in her case was thrown out by an exasperated judge.
- Ondrik or her predicament isn’t mentioned in yesterday’s IG report.
- In the course of my own investigation several whistleblowers have come forward to allege that Census workers regularly fabricate or fudge economic data. In addition to the Philadelphia Census office, whistleblowers who work in the Chicago and Denver regions have alleged that data was regularly falsified and higher-ups told them to shut up about it.That casts a shadow on three of the six regions in the newly aligned Census organization. I don’t know if workers in the other three regions will make similar claims because I have spoken to any yet.
- One of those whistleblowers has told me — and has also told the Oversight Committee and the IG — that supervisors in Philadelphia were particularly concerned about the unemployment data during the last Presidential election. And this source has said Buckmon wasn’t the only one messing with data.The IG’s report said “we found no evidence of systemic data falsification in the Philadelphia Regional Office.” And it concluded that moving the national unemployment rate would simply be too hard to do.
- The word “systemic” is loaded. As I mentioned, Buckmon’s actions alone could have affected the results for half a million households. If two or three others were also falsifying data that would have changed the results for 2 million households. Would that have constituted a problem with the “system?”
- One of those whistleblowers has told me — and has also told the Oversight Committee and the IG — that supervisors in Philadelphia were particularly concerned about the unemployment data during the last Presidential election. And this source has said Buckmon wasn’t the only one messing with data.The IG’s report said “we found no evidence of systemic data falsification in the Philadelphia Regional Office.” And it concluded that moving the national unemployment rate would simply be too hard to do.
- The word “systemic” is loaded. As I mentioned, Buckmon’s actions alone could have affected the results for half a million households. If two or three others were also falsifying data that would have changed the results for 2 million households. Would that have constituted a problem with the “system?”
- Since I’ve been reporting on data falsification at Census, the Bureau has had trouble reaching the quota required by the Labor Department, which puts out the unemployment and inflation reports. The Labor Department wants a successful response from 90 percent of the households approached for the survey.In the employment report that will be released Friday only two of the regions met the 90 percent or better mark. Before I called into question Census’ data gathering procedures all the regions except New York regularly exceeded 90 percent. Why isCensus now having such trouble hitting 90 percent now its practices are being questioned?
- And why is Census fighting the disclosure of e-mails between various people that the Inspector General questioned for his report? The Obama Administration has professed a policy of transparency yet I’ve received only ten pages of emails out of thousands that were promised.The Census Bureau changed its mind on producing 2,000 pages of e-mails between regional supervisors in Chicago (Obama’s hometown) and Philadelphia (where falsification is alleged to have occurred) after saying it would comply. What is Census hiding?
- And why was the Chicago supervisor I just mentioned suddenly transferred after I requested his e-mails? Why did an even higher official at Census suddenly retire after I began poking around about his communications? And why was a lowly Freedom of Information Act clerk suddenly transferred after she promised me documents that Census later decided not to deliver. Was the Inspector General’s report a whitewash? I believe so, after six months of investigating this with the help of whistleblowers.However, there were some key admissions of data-gathering defects in the report, so maybe this report was a little short of a whitewash — an off-white wash, perhaps.
There will be more in the months ahead, especially when my other whistleblowers come forward.