Journal-Sentinel: PolitiFact ruling fails a logic test

I was surprised to read PolitiFact’s assessment of the accuracy of a recent statement of mine. I pointed out that “President Obama has increased the federal workforce 192,000 individuals – about 10% since he’s taken office – while we’ve lost 2 million jobs.”

PolitiFact acknowledges that “Johnson is on target on the 2 million jobs lost overall, and accurate or very close on the federal workforce trend – at least using FedScope,” but rates my assertion “half true.” But Politifact’s justifications for not acknowledging that this is true do not hold up to scrutiny.

First, PolitiFact says that I am “comparing apples and oranges”‘ in my utilization of FedScope data for federal payrolls and Bureau of Labor Statistics data for private sector payrolls. But if your goal is to produce the most accurate counts of both, you use the most accurate data for each. For federal payrolls, the most accurate data comes from FedScope.

As PolitiFact itself notes, “FedScope is considered reliable and is used by researchers who prefer an actual head count to the sample-based approach” of the BLS. This is precisely the point: to get an actual head count. Is PolitiFact really arguing that relying on a statistical sample would be more “true” than an actual count?

FedScope does not provide data on private sector payrolls, so it is impossible to meet Politifact’s “apples to apples” standard by using FedScope’s data for both. Instead, I used BLS data for private sector payrolls because it is the gold standard for employment levels, unemployment rates and economic trends. With an economy worth $15 trillion, BLS must use best-available and correlative data collected through survey methods.

PolitiFact also implies that I should have included Postal Service payrolls in my estimates of the federal workforce. The Postal Service is a quasi-independent federal agency, whose employee levels are outside the direct control of both the administration and Congress. Had I included those payroll levels in my counts, PolitiFact likely would have criticized me for suggesting that the president had control over them. This is an inappropriate argument.

I stand by my statements, which are justified. PolitiFact seems inclined to rate my assertion as half true out of concern that it’s not fair to hold the president accountable for his policies. It’s legitimate to argue with my conclusion that those policies have made our economic situation far worse. But it is incorrect to conclude that my facts are anything but completely true.

Ron Johnson is a U.S. senator from Wisconsin.

This article was published on The Journel-Sentinel web site.

calendar

A Message of Appreciation

Today, we lost a close vote. The press is reporting that the final vote in the Senate Republican Vice Chair race was 25-22.

I sincerely appreciate the grassroots support from people who understand that Washington is broken – and the conservative community is high on that list. Without your strong and clear voice, the vote today would not have been as close as it was. The message you are sending about the need to rein in spending, to repeal Obamacare, to prevent excessive regulation, and to take advantage of America’s own energy resources, is beginning to get through. Your work is important and it is appreciated; please keep it up.

Notwithstanding the Senate vote, we need to be focused on the election ahead. In 2012, the American people will have a clear choice between two competing visions. Republican candidates for the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House, should commit to drawing a clear contrast.

President Obama’s agenda has failed. The American people know that we cannot spend our way into prosperity. Instead, we need to make the tax code simpler, flatter, and fairer. We must repeal Obamacare, reduce spending, and cut harmful federal regulations.

As long as I serve in the Senate, I will do all that I can to fix our problems and strengthen America. The American people deserve a clear choice in 2012. Let’s give it to them.

Ron Johnson

calendar

Political Lowe-down: FOX6′s Mike Lowe sits down with Senator Ron Johnson

WITI-TV, WASHINGTON D.C.—  Ron Johnson is the former number one guy at a plastics company who went to a Tea Party rally, where the seeds of a political career were sewn, and a month later, he joined the race for U.S. Senate. Johnson won, and since that victory in November 2010, he’s been in Washington D.C., on a mission to shrink the size of the federal government by slashing spending, and reducing regulations. He’s also not letting his freshman status get in the way of his ambition, applying for the vice-chair of the Senate Republican Conference, and if he were to win, he’d be the Senate’s fifth-ranking Republican.

FOX6′s Mike Lowe traveled to Washington D.C. recently to sit down and talk with Johnson one-on-one. Johnson says there are a lot of changes he’d like to make, and one of his goals is to repeal every policy passed under President Obama. Another goal: to get Congress to do business out in the open, as he says most of it is done in the dark corners that the public never sees.

“I didn’t know what was happening behind closed doors, and neither did the American public,” Johnson said.

On one day in Congress, Johnson sat through a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing, examining efficiency. While other senators barely masked their boredom, Johnson listened intently, taking copious notes. His bright blue eyes cast a skeptical stare upon the witnesses, and he asked questions with the purpose of protecting taxpayers.

Later in the day, Johnson was back at the Capitol, listening to a round-table discussion of small business owners. Johnson says government regulations are stifling private businesses, and he’s introduced legislation to repeal these regulations – his first piece of legislation as senator.

“At this point, we’re trying to preserve jobs. What the bill would do is just halt the creation of new rules and regulations until unemployment falls below the level it was when President Obama took office,” Johnson said.

Johnson is waging a battle against government, and one of the items in his sparsely-decorated office reflects that. It’s a statue of Atlas, holding up the world, saying “fight to be free.” It’s a reference to the book “Atlas Shrugged” by conservative author Ayn Rand, whose philosophy holds that capitalism is the only way to protect individual rights.

“The book is obviously a fictionalized account of what happens when government begins to grow, and starts crowding out the private sector. It starts removing our freedoms. In the end, this is a fundamental fight for freedom that we’re engaged in here,” Johnson said.

Johnson says eliminating the nation’s debt is what he came to Washington D.C. to do, and he wants more influence to do it.

“My obligation is to communicate how urgent, how dire our financial situation is to the voters of Wisconsin and America. I didn’t come here to sit back and wait for my seniority to kick in when I would have maximum effectiveness. Our nation doesn’t have a whole lot of time to wait here on this financial situation,” Johnson said.

Johnson says he plans to keep the only promise he made during his campaign process: to never vote with re-election in mind.

This article appeared on Fox 6′s website.

calendar

Op-Ed: Reduce spending to rein in debt

The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction faces a reporting deadline of Nov. 23. However, the United States will reach a dubious financial milestone before the “supercommittee” finishes its work. Within the next few days, our total federal debt will surpass $15 trillion. This amount of debt would not be a problem if our economy were $100 trillion – but it’s not; it’s about $15 trillion. As a result, our debt to Gross Domestic Product ratio has reached 100%, a very dangerous metric.

To demonstrate why this is a problem for our economy, just think about what happens when a family goes deep into debt. How can that family grow its personal economy? How can family members increase their consumption when any extra money they have is spent servicing their debt?

The answer is they can’t. Their consumption is constrained, and their standard of living declines. The same dynamic is at play with our nation’s economy – on a far larger scale.

It’s helpful to bring some historical perspective to the debt, spending and deficit debate. From 1992 to 2001, the federal government spent $16 trillion. Over the past decade, we spent $28 trillion. The current debate over the next 10-year total is whether to spend $46 trillion (President Barack Obama’s budget) or $40 trillion (Republican House budget). Neither of these figures represents a cut.

Let’s consider annual spending. In 2001, the federal government spent $1.9 trillion. Last year, we spent $3.6 trillion. We basically doubled spending in the past 10 years. Ten years from now – in 2021 – Obama’s budget proposes spending $5.7 trillion, while the House budget proposes spending $4.7 trillion. Neither figure is lower than the $3.6 trillion we spent last year – again, no cut.

In 1987, our total national debt was $2.3 trillion, and our debt-to-GDP ratio was 50%. This was the accumulation of all the debt from our nation’s founding until almost the end of the Reagan administration – a period of two centuries. August’s budget agreement will result in raising the debt ceiling by about the same amount – $2.4 trillion – but instead of two centuries, this will only last us about two years.

In each of the past five years, our national debt has grown faster than our entire economy. On average, we are spending about $100 billion more per month than we are taking in. And there is literally no end in sight. In fact, current government projections probably understate future deficits and debt by trillions of dollars.

For example, because employers are highly incentivized to drop expensive health coverage in favor of paying Obamacare’s $2,000 penalty, their employees will become eligible for generous subsidies that can exceed $10,000 per year. This will likely add trillions to the 10-year deficit projections. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office reports that missing economic growth projections by just 1% would increase the deficit by $3.1 trillion over the next 10 years.

When Obama was elected, our total debt was $10 trillion, our debt-to-GDP ratio was approximately 70% and federal spending was 20.7% of GDP. By the end of his first term, we will have added $6 trillion to our debt, and federal spending will be 24% of GDP. Add in state and local spending, and we have reached 40% of GDP, the lower threshold of European-style socialized government. Is it any wonder we are experiencing European-style structural unemployment of 9% and anemic economic growth?

What I have described above is a problem of spending too much, not taxing too little. So the solution lies in finding ways to limit the growth in government, not figuring out how to take more from hardworking Americans. Recent reports out of the supercommittee are not encouraging. Even though there have been hundreds of suggestions for common-sense ways to restrain spending and limiting the growth of government – including $1.4 trillion in reductions that I have recommended – it appears Democrats are insisting on tax increases as the price for any meaningful spending restraint.

I realize that it might be politically popular to insist on tax increases for the “rich.” But I hope Americans – and supercommittee members – ask a simple question regarding any proposed tax increase: How many jobs will that tax increase create and how will it help our economy grow?

When you take a “little bit more” from job-creating businesses, you reduce their ability to invest in new plants and equipment, increase wages and retirement contributions and pay for rising health care benefits. In other words, you harm economic growth, and you make it harder to create jobs. We should reduce spending, not increase taxes.

Ron Johnson, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Wisconsin.

This Op-Ed ran in The Journal Sentinel Online.

calendar

Pierce County Herald: Johnson discusses federal issues

Wisconsin U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Oshkosh) was in Hudson Saturday morning and took questions from reporters at the Hudson cable access studio on Fourth Street.

By: Doug Stohlberg, Pierce County Herald

HUDSON–Wisconsin U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Oshkosh) was in Hudson Saturday morning and took questions from reporters at the Hudson cable access studio on Fourth Street.

Johnson addressed several issues, including the perception Republicans are blocking progress in Washington, the Stillwater (Minn.) bridge, jobs, pulling out of Iraq, Social Security-Medicare-entitlements and the federal budget.

“The Republicans control only the House,” Johnson said. “Democrats control the oval office and the Senate. Over 100 bills have been approved in the House and were stopped in the Senate. The Democratic Senate has not approved a budget in two years.

“I refute the idea that the Republicans are the blocking party,” Johnson said. “Our government has evolved to the point where it needs presidential leadership. President Obama has not been leading. His budget lost in the Democratic-controlled Senate 0-97.”

Bridge

Johnson was complimentary to representatives from both parties for their support of the Stillwater bridge project.

“Republicans and Democratic representatives in both Minnesota and Wisconsin have been supportive of the bridge construction,” Johnson said. “I’m fiscally conservative, but I’m not against government. We need government for many things–including infrastructure like the proposed new bridge.”

Economy

“What are we doing to help people get back to work? What’s holding the economy back?” Johnson asked. He answered his own question by saying this is an area where less government is needed.

“Look at two examples–President Reagan and President Obama,” Johnson said. “Reagan came in with the approach that government is not the solution–government is part of the problem. He advocated less government and fewer regulations. Obama came in with the approach that government is the answer.”

Johnson said the best thing the government can do is to remove the uncertainty. He said tax increases harm the growth of the economy.

“We have to show businesses, people and the globe that we have control over the economy,” Johnson said.

The senator showed a couple of charts to illustrate he’s not against government growth, but it has to be contained. A one-year spending chart showed a budget of $1.9 trillion in 2001 and $3.6 trillion in 2011. The same chart showed the Obama budget showed a budget of $5.8 trillion in 2021–the proposed Republican budget was $4.8 trillion.

“It’s not a budget cut, it just decreases the amount of the increase,” Johnson said.

A similar 10-year spending chart showed similar numbers. The Obama 10-year budget showed $46.1 trillion in spending between 2012 and 2021. The Republican proposal showed $40 trillion–both a healthy increase over the 2002-2011 figure of $27.9 trillion.

Iraq

Johnson said the withdraw date for troops from Iraq could be a “short-sighted” decision.

“I hope it turns out okay, but we have lost 4,500 lives and American always seeks freedom for others–I think we’re seeing the results in the Middle East,” Johnson said. “I think President Obama’s decision may be purely political. The lost lives and money may be for naught.”

Jobs

Johnson praised the job climate in Wisconsin, but said Wisconsin and the United States have to recognize we are competing globally.

“Japan is about to lower its business tax–do you realize that when that happens, the United States will have the highest business taxes in the world?” Johnson said. “Not a good thing.”

He said job creation involves taxes, a good work force and regulations.

“We have a great work force, but we’re heavy on taxes and regulations,” Johnson said. “We need some regulations, but we are over-regulating.”

This was published on the Pierce County Herald Website.

calendar

Federal Workforce Savings Made Easy

BY QUIN HILLYER , Center for Individual Freedom
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27 2011

No good reason exists, none whatsoever, for Congress’ budgetary “supercommittee” to fail to identify at least $1.2 trillion in ten-year cuts without raising taxes. Wisconsin’s freshman Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson alone has recommended ways to save $1.4 trillion over ten years just by more sensible management of the federal workforce. Almost all of Sen. Johnson’s recommendations are eminently reasonable.

Johnson’s plan contains 58 separate proposals for savings. Let’s just take the 12 easiest to understand. For instance:

Cut the federal workforce by 15 percent through 2015 and freeze pay for federal civilian employees through 2015. Since Barack Obama took office, the feds have added 192,000 jobs. About 400,000 federal civilian employees are now eligible for retirement. If just over half of them retire without replacement, the workforce reduction will be achieved. Meanwhile, total compensation for government workers is more than 30 percent higher than compensation for comparable private-sector jobs. A three-year pay freeze (not including raises for promotions) is surely reasonable. Savings: $248 billion.

Reduce the government’s “match” for the Federal Employee Retirement System’s defined benefit plan. This will blow your mind: Right now the government provides about $14 in “matching funds” for every dollar contributed by the employee. In the private sector, and even in Social Security and the federal thrift savings investment plan, the usual match is 1-to-1. FERS also should reduce its match to 1-to-1.Savings: $133.27 billion.

Phase out the FERS Basic Benefit Plan. The basic plan, says Johnson, “is no longer comparable to private sector retirement plans that afford greater flexibility and cost savings through 401(k) and stock option plans.” Anybody already in the system can remain, but Johnson would close it as an option for new federal employees. Savings: $75 billion.

Change the calculation of the baseline for FERS basic benefits. The retirement benefit formula now is based on the three highest-salaried years of an employee’s tenure. Most state governments and private plans base their benefits on the average of the five highest years instead, which tends to be lower. The feds should do the same. Savings: $5 billion.

Freeze bonus pay for the Senior Executive Service for three years. These professionals already rank high on the federal pay scale, and the perks are excellent. In a time of busted budgets, it makes sense to eliminate bonuses, just as happens in the private sector during bad times. Johnson claims savings of $50 billion; perhaps it might make sense to allow small bonuses to encourage excellent work, so let’s cut this estimate by just a tad. Savings: $40 billion.

Cut the federal civilian travel budget by 75 percent. Ever heard of teleconferencing, or Skype? Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, has detailed the reasons this is a reasonable reform in his publication “Back in Black.” Savings: $43.3 billion.

Change the cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) for the Civil Service Retirement System. This change, often suggested for programs throughout government, would adjust payments based on price inflation rather than wage inflation. The Congressional Budget Office endorses it. Savings: $24 billion.

End duplication at the Department of Homeland Security. When DHS was created by combining 22 agencies, there was no reason for each agency to keep separate, full public affairs offices, procurement offices, civil liberties offices and numerous other separate sinecures for functions that, under one department, can now be consolidated. Savings: $10 billion.

Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. Okay, this one will be tough to accomplish against determined union opposition, but it really makes sense. Davis-Bacon requires that government construction workers be paid at the locally “prevailing wage.” In practice, this means such workers get paid as much as 62% more per hour than they otherwise would. Savings: $6 billion.

Reduce the federal vehicle fleet by 20 percent. Governors and state legislators nationwide have found that most governments own far too many cars for government employee use, so reduction of vehicle fleets has become a favorite savings measure. The federal government hasn’t made such reductions, even with cars sitting on lots, unused. It should. Savings: $5.6 billion.

Reduce government printing. Again, technology should ride to the rescue. There’s often no need for automatic printing of paper documents now that so much can be done online. Savings: $4.9 billion.

Re-allow privatized airport security. Federal law allows airports to contract out screening services to private companies, and a number of airports did so without danger to the public. The Department of Homeland Security, however, halted the program by administrative fiat. Travelers reported confidence in the private screeners, plus better, friendlier customer service. Savings: $2 billion.

Cut the number of limousines owned by the government. Gotta love this one. Self-explanatory. Savings: $115.5 million.

Total ten-year savings, even after modifying one item downward: $597.1855 billion. Johnson has 46 other suggestions – concentrating on merely one small segment of the federal behemoth. The question shouldn’t be whether the supercommittee can find $1.4 trillion in savings; the question should be why it can’t find at least twice as much.

calendar