It may seem rather wonky, but the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) is a pretty important government report. As Dean Baker explained a while back, it’s the “only major longitudinal survey that tracks the same families over time…. [It is] especially useful for examining the impact of TANF, Medicaid, and other anti-poverty programs.”
With poverty rising, more families declaring bankruptcy, and political fights over domestic spending on the way, the SIPP is the kind of report that can offer valuable information about the nation’s economic well-being.
Naturally, therefore, the administration wants less information. (via Steve M.)
[P]roposed Bush administration budget cuts to the Survey on Income and Program Participation, known as SIPP, will significantly reduce the amount of information it generates for the next four years.
“We’ll have the statistical equivalent of a Katrina on our hands if the OMB [Office of Management and Budget] refuses to request funding for the SIPP,” Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. “We need the SIPP to determine which government programs are working and how to best make use of taxpayer dollars in tight fiscal times.”
The Census Bureau, which oversees the survey, plans to reduce the number of people questioned nationwide from 45,000 to 21,000. The result will mean that detailed data will be generated for just three states — California, Texas and New York — instead of the more typical 31 states, said Preston Jay Waite, deputy director of the Census Bureau.
The survey will still produce national data, but the ability of state officials and lawmakers to learn how programs are working on a state level will largely evaporate, he said.
“They are essentially destroying it if they’re not fully funding it,” said [Heather Boushey, an economist with the Center for Economic Policy and Research], who relies on the data from the SIPP for about one-third of her work. “If the goal is for us to have a data set that allows us to understand the effectiveness of government programs in helping American families, a half-sample is not going to give us enough observation to answer questions that we and people on the Hill have.” Even the Heritage Foundation believes this is a mistake.
It’s part of a pattern of the administration sticking its head in the sand.
* This week, the administration cut funding for the next generation of climate instruments, so the government will have less information about global warming.
* In 2005, after a government report showed an increase in terrorism around the world, the administration announced it would stop publishing its annual report on international terrorism.
* After the Bureau of Labor Statistics uncovered discouraging data about factory closings in the U.S., the administration announced it would stop publishing information about factory closings.
* When an annual report called “Budget Information for States” showed the federal government shortchanging states in the midst of fiscal crises, Bush’s Office of Management and Budget announced it was discontinuing the report, which some said was the only source for comprehensive data on state funding from the federal government.
* When Bush’s Department of Education found that charter schools were underperforming, the administration said it would sharply cut back on the information it collects about charter schools.
For that matter, TPMM readers found a few more, including:
* The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has to date failed to produce a congressionally-mandated report on climate change that was due in 2004. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has called the failure an “obfuscation.”
* The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced plans to close several libraries which were used by researchers and scientists. The agency called its decision a cost-cutting measure, but a 2004 report showed that the facilities actually brought the EPA a $7.5 million surplus annually.
* On November 1st, 2001, President Bush issued an executive order limiting the public’s access to presidential records. The order undermined the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which required the release of those records after 12 years. Bush’s order prevented the release of “68,000 pages of confidential communications between President Ronald Reagan and his advisers,” some of whom had positions in the Bush Administration. More here. (Thanks to Roger A. and nitpicker below.) Update: TPMm Reader JP writes in to point out that Bush did the same thing with his papers from the Texas governorship.
* A rule change at the U.S. Geological Survey restricts agency scientists from publishing or discussing research without that information first being screened by higher-ups at the agency. Special screening will be given to “findings or data that may be especially newsworthy, have an impact on government policy, or contradict previous public understanding to ensure that proper officials are notified and that communication strategies are developed.” The scientists at the USGS cover such controversial topics as global warming. Before, studies were released after an anonymous peer review of the research.
* A new policy at the U.S. Forest Service means the agency no longer will generate environmental impact statements for “its long-term plans for America’s national forests and grasslands.” It also “no longer will allow the public to appeal on long-term plans for those forests, but instead will invite participation in planning from the outset.”
* In December 2002, the administration curtailed funding to the Mass-Layoffs Statistics program, which released monthly data on the number and size of layoffs by U.S. companies. His father attempted to kill the same program in 1992, but Clinton revived it when he assumed the presidency.
* In 2004, the Internal Revenue Service stopped providing data demonstrating the level of its job performance. In 2006, a judge forced the IRS to provide the information.
* Also in 2004, the Federal Communications Commission blocked access to a once-public database of network outages affecting telecommunications service providers. The FCC removed public copies and exempted the information from Freedom of Information Act requests, saying it would “jeopardize national security efforts.” Experts ridiculed that notion.
* In 2002, Bush officials intervened to derail the publication of an EPA report on mercury and children’s health, which contradicted the administration’s position on lowering regulations on certain power plants. The report was eventually leaked by a “frustrated EPA official.”
* In 2003, the EPA bowed to White House pressure and deleted the global warming section in its annual “Report on the Environment.” The move drew condemnations from Democrats and Republicans alike.
* For more than a year, the Interior Department refused to release a 2005 study showing a government subsidy for oil companies was not effective.
* The White House Office of National Drug Policy paid for a 5-year, $43 million study which concluded their anti-drug ad campaigns did not work — but it refused to release those findings to Congress.
* In 2006, the Federal Communications Commission ordered destroyed all copies of an unreleased 2004 draft report concluding that media consolidation hurt local TV news coverage, which runs counter to the administration’s pro-consolidation stance.
* In early 2001, the Treasury Department stopped producing reports showing how the benefits of tax cuts were distributed by income class.
When government reports conflict with the White House’s agenda, the Bush gang has a choice — deal with the problem or change the reports. Guess which course they prefer?