About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox's Jarrett invents GDP contraction in latest stimulus attack

August 30, 2010 7:19 pm ET — 13 Comments

Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett falsely claimed U.S. gross domestic product "contracted over the last three quarters" to suggest that the stimulus failed. In fact, GDP has increased for four consecutive quarters, and economists agree that GDP and employment levels are higher than they would have been without the stimulus.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Jarrett falsely claims GDP "contracted over the last three quarters"

Jarrett claims GDP "contracted over the last three quarters" and asks "would yet another stimulus be a waste of taxpayer money?" During the August 30 edition of Fox News' Happening Now, Jarrett claimed that the economic recovery act "failed to keep unemployment under 8 percent" and that "GDP has not grown but decelerated -- actually contracted over the last three quarters." Jarrett went on to ask, "[W]ould yet another stimulus be a waste of taxpayer money?"

GDP has increased in each of the last four quarters

Bureau of Economic Analysis: GDP has grown for the last four quarters. In an August 27 report, the Bureau of Economic Analysis estimated that GDP increased by 3.7 percent in the first quarter of 2010 and 1.6 percent in the second quarter of 2010. According to the BEA, GDP has increased during each of the past four quarters.

Fox News itself has acknowledged as fact that the economy has grown for the last four quarters. An August 27 FoxNews.com article reported that "[t]he economy has grown for four straight quarters." After Jarrett falsely claimed that GDP "contracted," Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, said that "the economy is not going down, it's growing, it's growing slowly," adding that this was "not terribly surprising."

Independent and private analysts agree stimulus significantly raised GDP, employment

CEA: Recovery act raised GDP by at least 2.7 percent in the second quarter of 2010. In its fourth quarterly report on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) stated that "the ARRA has raised the level of GDP as of the second quarter of 2010, relative to what it otherwise would have been, by between 2.7 and 3.2 percent."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised GDP. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing the GDP. Included in these figures is the estimate by the nonpartisan CBO, which estimated that the stimulus raised GDP "by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent." CEA included the following chart in its report:

stimulus

CEA: Recovery act has raised employment "by between 2.5 and 3.6 million." In its fourth quarterly report on the ARRA, the CEA stated: "The CEA estimates that as of the second quarter of 2010, the ARRA has raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.5 and 3.6 million. These estimates are broadly consistent with the direct recipient reporting data available for 2010:Q1."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised employment. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing employment:

stimulusjobs

Economists say stimulus helped economic recovery

WSJ: 70 percent of economists surveyed said stimulus helped. The Wall Street Journal reported on March 12 that 38 of the 54 economists it surveyed "said the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act boosted growth and mitigated job losses, while six said the legislation had a net negative effect."

ABC News: Most on panel of economists "think the economy would be worse" without the stimulus. ABC News reported on February 18 that "most" of the economists on its panel "think the economy would be worse today without the big aid package, which totaled $787 billion and was signed into law by President Obama on Feb. 17, 2009."

NABE: 83 percent say stimulus raised GDP. A February survey of 203 members of the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) found that "[e]ighty-three percent believe that GDP is currently higher than it would have been without the 2009 stimulus package (ARRA)."

USA Today: Surveyed economists said "stimulus package saved jobs." USA Today reported on January 25:

President Obama's stimulus package saved jobs -- but the government still needs to do more to breathe life into the economy, according to USA TODAY's quarterly survey of 50 economists.

Unemployment would have hit 10.8% -- higher than December's 10% rate -- without Obama's $787 billion stimulus program, according to the economists' median estimate. The difference would translate into another 1.2 million lost jobs.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by wookie (August 30, 2010 8:35 pm ET)
      3  
      During the August 30 edition of Fox News' Happening Now, Jarrett claimed that the economic recovery act "failed to keep unemployment under 8 percent" and that "GDP has not grown but decelerated -- actually contracted over the last three quarters." Jarrett went on to ask, "[W]ould yet another stimulus be a waste of taxpayer money?"


      Typical Fox dishonesty. Unemployment was 7.6% when Obama took over and was adding a point a month. And of course they take advantage of the stupidity of their audience to portray a slower gain as a loss.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by null1fy (August 30, 2010 10:51 pm ET)
          2
        That makes him look even worse. *shrug*
        Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (August 31, 2010 10:02 am ET)
          3 1
          As Krugman says there should be more stimulus. The effects are clearly there but we need more jobs programs like infrastructure. Cash for Clunkers helped but Obama has been too timid to take on our corporate congress.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ScienceBuff (August 31, 2010 10:32 am ET)
            1  
            That's something that's had me puzzled on how the stimulus has been spent. I've been hearing for decades about the country's crumbling infrastructure. No one's been willing to approve spending what would be necessary to bring roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, sewer systems, etc. up to reasonable standards. This seems like an opportunity to help improve those things that need to be done anyway while generating jobs. Infrastructure projects are something that will absolutely need to be done eventually, so it's not as though they're make-work projects. Why isn't there more of those projects?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by all your eyes (August 31, 2010 11:03 am ET)
              2  
              The problem is that the public is woefully misinformed when it comes to deficit spending, why it should be used and when. Right now, with inflation near zero (deflation is a real possibility), interest rates near historic lows, and an economy that is clearly sputtering, there is no good reason not to take another $1 trillion, have the Fed buy up about half of those bonds, and pour it into large-scale projects like sewage systems and mass transit, that will yield real benefits for years to come. The money is basically free in this environment. The only reason we can't do it is because Fox and hate radio have been so effective in confusing a large segment of the voting population.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by rsinebada7366 (September 01, 2010 6:36 pm ET)
              1  
              Go to WH.gov to find all the projects now underway on infrastruc-
              ture. It is happening all over the country. In many areas, it could not begin until early to late spring. Check it out.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by raddave43 (August 31, 2010 10:38 am ET)
          2  
          Yeah it does make Jarrett look worse, I agree with you.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by GreenLantern (August 30, 2010 11:16 pm ET)
      3  
      http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//12-16-09bud-rev6-28-10-f1.jpg

      Enouf said about the deficit!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (August 31, 2010 3:22 am ET)
      3  
      When Faux does this kind of "reporting", it is not a matter of a difference of OPINION, but of FACT, in this case, an outright LIE. The table provided PROVES that the stimulus aided growth. Jarrett is a liar; simple as that. Even if on another Faux program the economy was reported improved for the past four quarters, Jarrett lied to HIS audience and perhaps THAT group will be convinced of the failure of the stimulus. Very smart of Faux. Grudgingly tell the truth on one program and tell the lie on another. This is what the News Corp means by "balanced".
      Report Abuse
    • Author by grmce (August 31, 2010 6:05 am ET)
      3  
      The difficulty in dealing with this style of "journalism" is that unlike differences of opinion this involves outright lying.

      The increasing proclivity for right-wing proselytisers to simply make-up falsehoods to make their case is most disturbing. The failure of journalists who lay some claim to responsible journalism to bell the cat and call these lies for the lies that they are is the greatest threat to democracy we currently face. Until they stop reporting lies as opposed to reporting that certain figures are propagating lies the threat will continue and public discourse will be debased.

      There is an old axiom about rights: If you abuse it, you lose it. This applies no less to freedom of the press than any other right. There are laws about truth in advertising - how about laws concerning truth in reporting?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (August 31, 2010 7:13 am ET)
        2  
        The fact that freedom of the press and any speech for that matter is the apron behind which Fox and others hide. We will NEVER curb free speech in this country, and rightly so. The unfortunate thing is liars take advantage of that. Notice the recent reactions from the right whenever a "liberal" criticizes their outright lies: "Oh, they are trying to censor us! They want to take away our rights to different opinions...etc." Since when is an obvious lie protected? If I tell you that Barak Obama is a Muslim, that is a lie, not an opinion.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by rsinebada7366 (September 01, 2010 6:39 pm ET)
          1  
          One reason for Fox's success when lying - stupidity and lack of education of too many Americans. Suggested reaction when you hear that it has been believed? Baaaaaaaaaaaaa. That is for all the sheep.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by diamonds (September 02, 2010 5:02 pm ET)
         
      Spend more tax less... Isn't this what Bush was hammered for (and rightly so) with the Iraq war?
      Report Abuse