Congressional Research Service Report On Tax Cuts For Wealthy Suppressed By GOP (UPDATE) 29OKT&1NOV12

FOR more than two years I have been a member of the choir asking and demanding the gop and tea-baggers show us the AMERICAN jobs that should have been created by the bush tax cuts. They have only responded with obstructionism in Congress and a propaganda campaign of lies, deceptions and misrepresentations of their plans for the US economy and about the Democrats and Pres Obama's administration. Whoever at CRS caved to repiglican demands that this report be held until after the election should be fired and Congress should investigate the agnecy for violating it's nonpartisan mandate. This from HuffPost....

The New York Times reported on Thursday that Senate Republicans applied pressure to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) in September, successfully persuading it to withdraw a report finding that lowering marginal tax rates for the wealthiest Americans had no effect on economic growth or job creation.
"The pressure applied to the research service comes amid a broader Republican effort to raise questions about research and statistics that were once trusted as nonpartisan and apolitical," the Times reported. Democrats in Congress, however, have resurfaced the report and published it in full. It can be read below.
Republicans told the Times they had issues with the tone, wording and scope of the report, but they clearly objected most strongly to its findings, which undermine the governing fiscal philosophy of the party, that tax cuts for the wealthy will spur growth and benefit everybody.
GOP officials told The Times that the decision by the CRS came after a cooperative discussion, but Democrats have suggested that the move is part of a broader effort by Republicans to squelch legitimate research that runs counter to their economic principles.
The CRS report, by researcher Thomas Hungerford, concluded:

The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.

Rep. Sandy Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, demanded the CRS explain its decision. "The impartial research and advice provided by CRS experts informs and strengthens the work of Congress. However, this valuable role hinges on the impartiality of CRS analysts and their freedom from political pressure. As with other non-partisan institutions, subjecting CRS analysts to political considerations undermines the legislative process and the American people’s trust in it," Levin wrote in a letter to CRS. "Therefore I was deeply disturbed to hear that Mr. Hungerford’s report was taken down in response to political pressure from Congressional Republicans who had ideological objections to the report’s factual findings and conclusion."
(Scroll down for Hungerford's response in the UPDATE.)
The report is extensive, but the reasoning behind its conclusion is fairly straightforward. The richest Americans are the least likely to spend extra money they get as a result of a tax cut, and are more likely to save it or invest it offshore. Those on the lower end of the economic spectrum, meanwhile, are the most likely to spend transfer payments they receive from the government.
A release by the Democratic Policy & Communications Center on Wednesday accused Republicans of attempting to bury the report because its "findings undermine a central tenet of Republican party orthodoxy on taxes." They included a copy of the original report, which is available below:
CRS Report: Top Tax Rates
UPDATE: 5:45 p.m. -- Thomas Hungerford, the CRS researcher who produced the report, told HuffPost that he stands by it. "Basically, the decision to take it down, I think The New York Times article basically got it right, that it was pressure from the Senate minority to take it down," Hungerford said. "CRS reports go through many layers of review before they're issued and as far as the tone and the conclusions go, people who specifically look at the writing and the tone said it was okay. So it's not going to be that and as I can tell you outright, I stand by the report and the analysis in the report."
Hungerford said that he had never experienced suppression like this before, and he pushed back on the GOP argument that he had only looked at the effect of tax cuts in the year immediately following enactment. Regardless, he said, Republicans argue that tax breaks for the rich will bring an immediate benefit to the economy, so their criticism is inconsistent. "I checked out three years and then five years and found that no, it doesn't change the results or the conclusion of my paper. So in a way, I find it interesting that they keep talking about the need to lower the top tax rate in order to stimulate the economy now," he said. 'It sounds like they're being a little inconsistent here."
Despite the pressure, Hungerford said he'll continue doing his job in a nonpartisan way. "I'm not going to change. My job is to do economic analysis on issues that the Congress is comparing and quite frankly, I'm going to continue doing that. That's my job," he said.
The Times reported that Hungerford has given $5,000 this election cycle to Democrats. HuffPost asked if that biased his report in any way. "I leave any political baggage at the door when I walk into my office and pick it up on my way out. I'm there to provide help to members of both parties, which I do," Hungerford said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/congressional-research-service_n_2059156.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Unemployment Rate Ticked Up To 7.9 Percent; 171,000 Jobs Added & Economic Growth Picked Up Slightly In Third Quarter & US economy adds 171,000 jobs in October, unemployment rate ticks up to 7.9 percent & US recovery remains tepid as economy expands at 2 percent pace, too slow to stir much hiring 2NOV&26SEP12

THE jobs numbers show continued growth as does the economic growth figures released last week. Unemployment is up .10% due to people coming back into the labor market looking for jobs again, optimistic because the country sees the nation continuing the economic recovery....from NPR and the Washington Post, and see my earlier post.... Republicans Filibuster Everything, Romney Blames Obama for Not Working With Congress 25OKT12

by Mark Memmott

How many signs like this were there in October? We got a clue today.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The nation's unemployment rate edged up to 7.9 percent in October from 7.8 percent in September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says.
But private and public employers added 171,000 to their payrolls — nearly 50,000 more than economists had expected.
So the news is somewhat mixed: While the jobless rate remained stuck near 8 percent, job growth was better than forecast.
We'll have more from the report and reactions to it as the morning continues. Hit your refresh button to be sure you're seeing our latest updates.
Update at 8:45 a.m. ET. Why Did The Jobless Rate Go Up?
When job growth is stronger than forecast but the unemployment rate still rises, economists look at whether more people joined the labor force — hopefully because many of them are optimistic about being able to find work.
According to BLS, "the civilian labor force rose by 578,000 to 155.6 million in October, and the labor force participation rate edged up to 63.8 percent [from 63.6 percent]." Meanwhile, "there were 813,000 discouraged workers in October, a decline of 154,000 from a year earlier." Discouraged workers are those folks who aren't looking for work "because they believe no jobs are available for them."
Those figures may signal that the jobless rate stayed near 8 percent in part because of good news — that more Americans are feeling better about the economy and have decided to start looking for work. That increased the size of the labor force, though, and helped lift the jobless rate a tenth of a point.
Update at 8:40 a.m. ET. September Job Growth Revised Up:
There were 148,000 jobs added to payrolls in September, BLS now says. That's up from the agency's initial estimate of 114,000.
Our original post (from 7 a.m. ET). "Jobless Rate Likely Edged Up In October, Job Growth Was Likely Modest":
The last major economic report before Election Day is due at 8:30 a.m. ET and economists say we should expect to hear that the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9 percent in October from September's estimated 7.8 percent and that payrolls grew by just 125,000 jobs.
Whatever the Bureau of Labor Statistics says, the news is sure to be a hot topic on the campaign trail and among political pundits. As you've surely heard many times:
— Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney says President Obama's economic policies haven't done enough to spur job growth and bring down unemployment.
— The president has been touting the slow job growth and gradual decline in unemployment since the jobless rate's recent peak of 10 percent in October 2009. He says they're signs the economy is on the right track.
They're likely to hit those themes again today.
Meanwhile, some skeptics — such as former General Electric CEO Jack Welch — will be watching closely to see if the BLS report fits with their view of how the economy is doing.
We'll update this post with the news after the report is released, and follow with highlights and reactions. Also check Planet Money for economic analysis and It's All Politics for more on how the report might affect the campaign.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/02/164160789/october-unemployment-rate?sc=nl&cc=brk-20121102-0837

Economic Growth Picked Up Slightly In Third Quarter

by Mark Memmott

October 26, 2012 8:35 AM

A GM assembly line in Lansing, Mich.

Bill Pugliano/Getty Images

The U.S. economy grew at a 2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the Bureau of Economic Analysis says.
That follows growth (at annual rates) of 1.3 percent in the second quarter and 2 percent in the first.
At 2 percent, the third-quarter estimate is a bit better than the 1.8 percent that economists were expecting, Bloomberg News says. But this is just the first of three estimates of third-quarter growth, and it's likely there will be revisions in coming months.
In 2011, GDP expanded at:
— A scant 0.1 percent annual rate in the first quarter.
— 2.5 percent in the second quarter.
— 1.3 percent in the third.
— 4.1 percent in the fourth.
The economy, of course, is the top issue in this year's presidential campaign. The last major economic news due before Election Day on Nov. 6 is the October employment report, which the Bureau of Labor Statistics is scheduled to release next Friday — Nov. 2 — at 8:30 a.m. ET.
The nation's official unemployment rate declined to 7.8 percent in September, BLS said earlier this month.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/10/26/163695543/economic-growth-picked-up-slightly-in-third-quarter?sc=nl&cc=brk-20121026-0841

US economy adds 171,000 jobs in October, unemployment rate ticks up to 7.9 percent

By Associated Press, Updated: Friday, November 2, 8:53 AM

WASHINGTON — U.S. employers added 171,000 jobs in October and hiring was stronger over the previous two months than first thought. The unemployment rate inched up to 7.9 percent from 7.8 percent in September because the work force grew.
The Labor Department’s last look at hiring before Tuesday’s election sketched a picture of a job market that is gradually gaining momentum after nearly stalling in the spring.
Since July, the economy has created an average of 173,000 jobs a month, up from 67,000 a month from April through June.
Still, President Barack Obama will face voters with the highest unemployment rate of any incumbent since Franklin Roosevelt. The rate ticked up because more people without jobs started looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-jobs-report-is-forecast-to-show-modest-hiring-and-uptick-in-unemployment-before-election/2012/11/02/a5a925e0-24bb-11e2-92f8-7f9c4daf276a_print.html

US recovery remains tepid as economy expands at 2 percent pace, too slow to stir much hiring

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The latest snapshot of economic growth shows the U.S. recovery remains tepid.
Growth in the July-September quarter climbed slightly but was still too weak to stir significantly more hiring. The pace of expansion rose to a 2 percent annual rate from 1.3 percent in the April-June quarter, led by more consumer and government spending.
Voters who are still undecided about the presidential election aren’t likely to be swayed by Friday’s mixed report from the Commerce Department.
“For the average American, I don’t think changes in quarterly GDP” make a big difference in their perception of the economy, said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. “It’s certainly good for the president that the number is not bad because that would resonate.”
With 11 days until the election, the economy is being kept afloat by a revitalized consumer and the early stages of a housing recovery. But more than three years after the Great Recession ended, the nation continues to struggle because businesses are reluctant to invest, and slower global growth has cut demand for American exports.
Republican nominee Mitt Romney is telling voters that President Barack Obama’s policies have kept the economy from accelerating and have even slowed growth in the past two years. The 1.7 percent annual growth rate for the first nine months of 2012 remains slightly behind last year’s 1.8 percent growth. And both are below 2010’s growth of 2.4 percent.
The economy contracted at a 5.3 percent annual rate in the first three months of 2009, just as Obama took office during the worst downturn since the Great Depression. Obama says his policies stabilized the economy later that year and argues that the stimulus package and auto bailout helped it grow in 2010.
The White House points to an economy that’s expanded for 13 straight quarters. Yet this year’s third-quarter growth is slightly below the 2.2 percent average pace since the recession ended in June 2009.
The economy’s health is most closely tied to consumers, whose spending drives 70 percent of economic activity.
The latest report showed some progress.
Consumer spending rose at an annual rate of 2 percent in the July-September quarter, up from 1.5 percent in the previous quarter. And a survey by the University of Michigan released Friday found consumer confidence increased to its highest level in five years this month. That suggests spending may keep growing.
Americans spent more on cars, adding nearly 0.2 percentage point to growth. Housing added to growth for the sixth straight quarter.
“Those are the sectors that reflect growing consumer confidence and greater lending,” said Joseph Carson, U.S. economist for AllianceBernstein, an asset management firm.
Still, more jobs and better pay are needed to sustain that growth, he added. After-tax, inflation-adjusted income rose at only a 0.8 percent annual rate in the third quarter. That was down from a 3.1 percent rate in the previous quarter.
Income includes not only wages but also dividends, rental income and government or workplace benefits, among other items.
With businesses nervous about the economic outlook, hiring isn’t likely to pick up soon.
Many companies worry that their overseas sales could decline further if recession spreads throughout Europe and growth slows further in China, India and other developing countries. Businesses also fear the tax increases and government spending cuts that will kick in next year if Congress doesn’t reach a budget deal.
That’s caused them to invest less in new buildings and equipment. Business spending on equipment and software was flat in the July-September quarter, the first quarter it didn’t increase since the recession.
“Uncertainty at home and abroad is holding back the business sector,” Nigel Gault, an economist at IHS Global Insight, said in an email. “How quickly those uncertainties clear up ... will determine how quickly the overall growth rate can pick up.”
One big driver of growth was a sharp increase in defense spending, which rose by the most in more than three years. That was likely a one-time boost.
Growth was held back by the first drop in exports in more than three years. It was also slowed by the effects of the drought that struck the Midwest last summer. The drought cut agriculture stockpiles and reduced the economy’s annual growth rate by nearly a half-point.
In a healthy economy, growth between 2.5 percent and 3 percent is usually sufficient to keep the unemployment rate low. But the unemployment rate is 7.8 percent. Growth needs to top 3 percent to generate enough hiring to lower the rate steadily.
The government’s report covers gross domestic product, which measures the nation’s total output of goods and services — from restaurant meals and haircuts to airplanes, appliances and highways. Friday’s was the first of three estimates of third-quarter GDP.
Analysts were doubtful that the report would sway many undecided voters in battleground states.
Since the recovery began more than three years ago, the U.S. economy has grown at the slowest rate of any recovery in the post-World War II period. And economists think growth will remain sluggish at least through the first half of 2013.
Some analysts believe the economy will start to pick up in the second half of next year.
By then, economists hope the tax and spending confrontations that have brought gridlock to Washington will be resolved. That could encourage businesses to invest and hire.
The Federal Reserve’s continued efforts to boost the economy by lowering long-term interest rates may also help by generating more borrowing and spending by consumers and businesses.
But the economy is still being slowed by consumers’ efforts to spend less, increase their savings and pay off debts, economists say. And banks remain cautious about lending in the aftermath of the financial crisis. That’s why recoveries after financial crises are usually weak.
“There’s just a reality here,” said Paul Edelstein, an economist at IHS Global Insight. “You don’t recover from these types of events as quickly as you’d like.”
___
AP Economics Writers Paul Wiseman and Martin Crutsinger contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economists-think-us-remains-stuck-in-sluggish-recovery-unable-to-generate-robust-job-growth/2012/10/26/3a7ed0b0-1f22-11e2-8817-41b9a7aaabc7_print.html

Paul Begala:What's Mitt Romney Hiding in His (ECONOMIC) Record as Governor 30APR12 & Economy added 115,000 jobs in April; unemployment rate fell to 8.1 percent 4MAI12

mitt romney will make much of the report from the Dept of Labor today, but he isn't going to discuss his economic record in Massachusetts because it was anything but a miracle. This from The Daily Beast.....

What’s Romney hiding in his record?

Jae C. Hong / AP Photos

In his speech on April 24 kicking off his general-election campaign, Romney began, sensibly enough, by promising to tell us a little bit about himself. He bragged about his picture-perfect family. He spoke with pride of how his father had lifted himself from struggling salesman to CEO and governor. Then he recounted his time as a businessman, helping build companies like Staples and Bright Horizons. Finally, he launched into how Barack Obama couldn’t organize a one-car parade and how he (Romney) would make a much better president.

Wait a minute, Mitt. You missed something. Family: check. Wealth: got it. Gonna be a keen president: right. Wasn’t there something else on the résumé? Oh, yeah: Mitt Romney served as governor of Massachusetts.

It’s weird. Most governors who seek the presidency can’t shut up about how great their states are. Right now, there’s an even-money chance that Bill Clinton is telling someone that Hope, Ark., produces the biggest, juiciest watermelons in the world. But not Mitt. In the most important speech of his presidential campaign thus far, he ignored the only time he has ever held public office.

That is a mistake. Romney should be defining his record in Massachusetts before his opponents can define it for him. Two days before Romney’s kickoff speech, appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press, Obama strategist David Axelrod began carpet-bombing the Massachusetts record, noting that Romney is touting his business acumen, but also that he did the same when he ran for governor. “He said, ‘I’m going to get the economy moving again. I’m a businessman. I know how to create jobs.’ [The state] went from 37th in the nation in job creation to 47th in the nation in job creation. So we’ve tested the Romney acumen when it comes to creating jobs, and he’s been found wanting.”

Perhaps that’s why Romney doesn’t dwell on his record as governor. His state really was 47th in job creation, behind only Ohio and Michigan, both of which were being ravaged in the manufacturing meltdown, and Louisiana, which had been devastated by Katrina. Romney even trailed Mississippi and Alabama in job growth, breaking the iron law that Mississippi and Alabama have to be last in pretty much everything except cockfights and kissin’ cousins. While the country as a whole enjoyed 5 percent growth, Romney’s Massachusetts grew at 0.9 percent.

It wasn’t supposed to be that way. Romney sold himself to the voters as a turnaround artist—a CEO who could lure jobs to the Bay State. He pledged to use his business skills to “encourage businesses to come grow and thrive in the most robust portion of the economy, Massachusetts.” Not so much.

Romney’s economic failure in Massachusetts is especially problematic because the central premise of his presidential campaign is the same as it was when he ran for governor: that he can apply his business skills to our economic problems. Massachusetts was the guinea pig for Romney economics. The results weren’t pretty. In addition to almost zero job growth, the state saw a modest decline in real median income, meaning that the folks who had jobs were bringing home less.

Romney did close the $3 billion budget gap he’d inherited (although he then left a projected shortfall of up to $1 billion). The methods he used are instructive. He slashed higher education, cut revenue to local governments, and raised fees on everything from college students to mortgages, from buying a boat to opening a bar.

Romney’s cuts to education and job training were especially severe. Fees for university students shot up 63 percent as Romney hammered college funding. Robert Karam, former chair of the UMass Board of Trustees, was a Romney backer. But no more. “I think higher education really stood still” under Romney, he has said. Romney even annoyed the business community—his core constituency—by cutting job training, workforce development, and trade assistance.

The Romney recipe of cutting education and job training, forcing higher fees on the middle class, and protecting the rich from tax hikes didn’t work in Massachusetts. But his approach to health care did. Paradoxically, the best thing Romney did as governor—and it was a great thing—is the one thing he dares not talk about as a presidential candidate. Too bad, because a solid 62 percent of the folks who actually live under Romneycare—and its dreaded individual mandate—say they like it.

The Romney record in Massachusetts suggests that Romney’s campaign has it backward: instead of talking up jobs and running away from health care, Mitt ought to be bragging about Romneycare and avoiding scrutiny of the one time his economic theories were actually put to the test.

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Paul Begala is a Newsweek/Daily Beast columnist, a CNN contributor, an affiliated professor of public policy at Georgetown, and a senior adviser to Priorities USA Action, a progressive PAC.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/29/paul-begala-what-s-mitt-romney-hiding-in-his-record-as-governor.html

Economy added 115,000 jobs in April; unemployment rate fell to 8.1 percent

By Peter Whoriskey

The unemployment rate dropped a notch to 8.1 percent in April, the Labor Department reported on Friday, but the pace of job growth has fallen off, amid other signs that the economic recovery may be losing momentum.
The economy added 115,000 payroll jobs last month, a meager showing compared with earlier this year when the jobs tally was rising at twice that rate and sowing optimism about the nation’s economic prospects.
Some of the most quoted figures from the jobs report suggested good news. The unemployment rate dropped to 8.1 percent in April from 8.2 percent the month before, and the number of unemployed people declined to 12.5 million from 12.7 million.
But at least part of the reason for the decline in the ranks of unemployed is that many people decided to stop looking for a job. People who have stopped looking for work are no longer counted as unemployed.
The labor force, defined as the number of people working or seeking work, declined by 342,000 in April, Labor Department said.
“The decline in the unemployment rate is principally because a lot of people gave up looking for a job in April,” said Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist for Capital Economics. “The economy has created so few jobs that people are disillusioned with trying to find a job and they’ve just given up.”
The number of long-term unemployed, those who’ve been out of work for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 5.1 million in April. That group makes up more than 40 percent of the jobless rolls.
The unemployment numbers, which may be the most closely watched economics barometer to come to bear in the presidential election, were seized upon by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who called Friday’s report “terrible and very disappointing.”
Romney suggested that job growth in a recovery should be closer to 500,000 jobs a month.
“This is way, way, way off from what should happen in a normal recovery,” Romney said on Fox News. “It’s a terrible and very disappointing report this morning.... We seem to be slowing down, not speeding up. This is not progress.”
Yet an economy that is consistently adding 500,000 jobs a month has rarely been achieved in U.S. history, according to Labor Department figures. Over the last 20 years, there have been only two months - once in 1997 and 2010 - when the economy added nonfarm payroll jobs at that rate.
Over the last 20 years, the average annual monthly growth in those payroll jobs has been about 200,000.
“Today’s employment report provides further evidence that the economy is continuing to heal from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but much more remains to be done to repair the damage caused by the financial crisis and the deep recession,” Alan B. Krueger, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said in a statement.
Stock prices dropped with the news of the jobs report. The Dow Jones industrial average was down 56.91 points, or 0.43 percent.
While the month of April falls well short of the trend that economists would like to see, Krueger and other analysts suggested that taking a broader view, the recovery seems healthy.
Over the last four months, the number of nonfarm payroll jobs has climbed 200,000 a month on average.
Economists attributed at least part of the recent fall-off in April to the good weather in January and February: Employers hired people then, boosting the numbers for January and February but depleting them in March and April, which have show relatively weak reports.
The 200,000 average monthly job gains “is actually not a bad jobs number,” Ashworth said. “There’s no reason to think the economy just fell of the rails.”
In April, employment rose in professional and business services, retail trade, and health care. Transportation and warehousing lost jobs over the month.
Staff Writers Philip Rucker, Amy Gardner and Ed O’Keefe contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/economy-adds-115000-jobs-in-april-unemployment-rate-drops-to-81-percent/2012/05/04/gIQAjdq70T_story.html?hpid=z1