U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

55–564 2010

S. HRG. 111–383 

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: OCTOBER 2009 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOVEMBER 6, 2009 

Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee 

( 

(II) 

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

[Created pursuant to Sec. 5(a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress] 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Chair 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, M.D., Texas 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

SENATE 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Vice 

Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas, Ranking Minority 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

NAN GIBSON, Executive Director 

JEFF SCHLAGENHAUF, Minority Staff Director 

CHRISTOPHER FRENZE, House Republican Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MEMBERS

Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney, Chair, a U.S. Representative from New York .......... 1 

Hon. Kevin Brady, a U.S. Representative from Texas ......................................... 3 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ......................................... 4 

Hon. John Campbell, a U.S. Representative from California .............................. 6 

Hon. Michael C. Burgess, M.D., a U.S. Representative from Texas ................... 7 

Hon. Maurice D. Hinchey, a U.S. Representative from New York ...................... 8 

Hon. Elijah E. Cummings, a U.S. Representative from Maryland ...................... 10 

WITNESSES

Dr. Keith Hall, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department 

of Labor, Washington, DC; Accompanied by: Dr. Michael Horrigan, Associate Commissioner for Prices and Living Conditions, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics; and Mr. Philip Rones, Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics ............................................................................................................... 11 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Prepared statement of Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Chair .................... 28 

Prepared statement of Representative Kevin Brady ............................................ 28 

Prepared Statement of Dr. Keith Hall, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, together with Press Release No. 09–1331 .................................................. 30 

Chart titled ‘‘Monthly Change in Nonfarm Payrolls’’ ........................................... 60 

(1) 

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: OCTOBER 

2009 

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2009 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE, Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:34 a.m. in Room 106, 

Dirksen Senate Office Building, The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney 

(Chair) presiding. 

Representatives present: Maloney, Hinchey, Cummings, Snyder, Brady, Burgess, and Campbell. 

Senators present: Klobuchar. 

Staff present: Gail Cohen, Elisabeth Jacobs, Justin Ungson, 

Colleen Healy, Robert O’Quinn, Ted Boll, Jeff Schlagenhauf, Lydia 

Mashburn, and Rachel Greszler. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CAROLYN B. 

MALONEY, CHAIR, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK 

Chair Maloney. The committee will come to order. The Chair 

recognizes herself for five minutes for an opening statement, and 

we’ll recognize other members, who likewise would like to make an 

opening statement. 

Last week, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that real 

Gross Domestic Product grew by 3.5 percent in the third quarter, 

and this is a welcome indication that we are moving toward economic recovery. 

Recently, we heard compelling evidence from Christina Romer, 

Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, that the 

economy is rebounding, largely because of the Recovery Act that we 

passed last year. 

Despite the progress, this morning’s employment report of 

190,000 jobs lost, and a unemployment rate of 10.2 percent, is a 

clear indication of the work we have left to do on behalf of our nation’s families. 

The current Administration took office just ten short months ago. 

The economy was facing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. In January alone, over 700,000 jobs were lost. 

But job losses of about 600,000 or more per month, started as far 

back as November of 2008. Those punishing job losses continued 

for five straight months, and you can see that on the chart. 

However, thanks to the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act, we are seeing signs of recovery. Last week, the White House 

released reports from stimulus grant recipients. Those grant recipients account for just one-fifth of the total $787 billion in spending 

2 

and tax relief, but they alone have directly created or saved over 

600,000 jobs. 

These numbers confirm we are on track to create or save at least 

3.5 million jobs over the life of the Recovery Act, and job creation 

in the temporary help sector is a leading indicator of progress in 

the labor market. Since July, temporary help services has added 

44,000 jobs—34,000 in October alone. While we have brought the 

economy back from the brink, we are not where we need to be yet, 

in terms of job creation. 

Although the pace of job loss has slowed substantially in recent 

months, the labor market continues to shed jobs. More than 15.7 

million Americans are unemployed. More than a third of the jobless 

have been out of work for at least six months, and almost three 

million workers have been unemployed for a full year or longer. 

These long-term unemployment numbers reaffirm the need for 

extending unemployment benefits, which Congress has passed and 

the President will soon sign into law. Out-of-work Americans will 

soon have 14 additional weeks of unemployment benefits to help 

them weather the ongoing economic storm. 

Workers in the hardest-hit states will receive additional weeks of 

benefits. There are 9.3 million people working part-time because 

they have been unable to find full-time jobs, an alarming increase 

since the recession began in December of 2007. 

The growth of involuntary part-time work indicates that the job 

market recovery may be a slow process. As the economy rebounds, 

firms are likely to increase the hours of workers already on their 

payrolls, before they begin hiring new workers. 

The conversion of a part-time job into a full-time job means that 

the labor market will improve, while the standard indicators of 

progress, job creation and the unemployment rate, remain stalled. 

We have early indicators that this part-time to full-time conversion is already beginning to happen in some sectors of our economy. The manufacturing sector has increased callbacks, suggesting 

that workers whose hours had been cut are returning to full-time 

work. 

This is good economic news, but it also foreshadows a long, slow 

labor market recovery. At the Joint Economic Committee, we estimate that over four million Americans have seen their employment-sponsored health insurance coverage evaporate because of 

losing a job. 

By passing comprehensive health insurance reform, we will help 

lay the groundwork for assuring that losing a job no longer means 

losing access to affordable, quality health insurance coverage. 

Let there be no doubt that the road to a full labor market recovery will be long, and it will not be easy. We will be discussing ideas 

that will put Americans back to work, including aid to the states, 

that will create education and health jobs and infrastructure back, 

that will boost construction employment, and targeted tax credits 

that will support small businesses. 

Together, we can move this country toward new paths of prosperity for all. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Maloney appears in 

the Submissions for the Record on page 28.] 

Chair Maloney. I yield to Ranking Member, Mr. Brady. 

3 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE KEVIN BRADY, A 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS 

Representative Brady. Madam Chairwoman, thank you for 

this hearing, and, like you, I welcome Dr. Hall before the Committee. 

Today’s numbers are bad news for American workers. The unemployment rate has reached 10.2 percent, a 26-year high. 

The economy has shed another 190,000 payroll jobs in October. 

The jobless rate for men is at an all-time high of 10.7, an all-time 

high. 

Manufacturing and construction, the area that the White House 

promised the most job gains would occur, because of the stimulus, 

have actually shed another 60,000-plus jobs, and, overall, the economy has lost an astounding 2.89 million jobs since the stimulus 

was passed. 

Today’s numbers are further proof that the Obama economic policies are a failure. In housing, in stimulus, and financial efforts, 

America continues to shed jobs. 

In comparison to our counterparts in Europe, in Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and, of course, China, whose recoveries 

are much stronger and much quicker than America’s, we are falling 

behind, we are losing jobs. 

A good example is looking at the President’s own numbers. At 

this point, according to the White House, our unemployment rate, 

due to the stimulus, should be 7.8 percent. Today it is 10.2 percent 

and rising. 

Clearly, we have a problem. Regarding the stimulus claims of 

650,000 new jobs created or saved, there have been a series of investigative reports that reveal false reporting and corrupt data, 

that raise serious questions about the reliability of these White 

House claims. 

These investigations by the Wall Street Journal, the Associated 

Press, Chicago Tribune, Dallas Morning News, among others, are 

disturbing, and reveal numerous cases where job claims were exaggerated by thousands of workers, as many as ten times those actually impacted. 

Many jobs were counted twice, if not four times, and thousands 

don’t exist at all. Starting Small, a shoe company in Kentucky, sold 

nine pairs of boots, the Army Corps of Engineers claimed that nine 

new jobs were created. 

In Texas, one of every four education jobs, supposedly created, 

were part-time summer jobs. The White House reported over 5,100 

such jobs; it turns out to be closer to 25 permanent jobs. 

In Illinois, the Stetson University reported 483 jobs created, 

every part-time work study student was claimed. It turns out that 

about 18 had full-time employment. 

In the Willamette Public Schools—and this one’s a kicker—the 

state claimed that the stimulus had created 166 new jobs, but 

when the paper and reporters contacted the school superintendent, 

he said the number should be zero. 

One contractor, according to the Associated Press, claimed 4,000 

new jobs; it turned out to be a quarter of that. In many instances, 

workers were given a meager cost-of-living raise, and then reported 

that hundreds of jobs has been supposedly saved. 

4 

Back in the President’s own state, one school district was reported to have saved 665 jobs, in a district where they only have 

600 workers. 

In my state, a Housing Authority received a grant for $26,000, 

enough to buy a medium-priced car, and reported they had created 

450 new jobs. Beaumont, Texas, is using stimulus money to pay for 

childcare for workers who already have jobs. 

And you wonder if these are isolated instances? According to 

Health and Human Services, nearly nine of ten jobs reported by 

Head Start programs were inaccurately reported, nearly nine of 

ten. 

This raises disturbing questions about the claims of the White 

House, and I think it underscores what we’ve said all along, that 

this Administration has lost all credibility about stimulus claims 

and the numbers today, the 10.2 percent and growing unemployment, underscore that. 

Madam Chairwoman, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Kevin Brady appears 

in the Submissions for the Record on page 28.] 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. Before I recognize Senator Klobuchar, I just want to express our sympathy for the Ft. Hood community. Our prayers go out to the wounded, with hopes for their 

full and speedy recovery, and our prayers are there for their families, too. 

Senator Klobuchar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and 

thank you. We all share just the tragedy—it’s not just a tragedy 

for these soldiers’ families who feel it so deeply; it’s for our entire 

country. 

Here they were, having, many of them, come back from battle or 

heading out to battle, in a place that they thought was safe, and 

this was just a senseless act of violence, and our thoughts are with 

them today. 

Chair Maloney, nearly two million Americans, including more 

than 13,000 Minnesotans, face the prospect of exhausting their unemployment benefits by the end of the year. As we know, in the 

past 28 days alone, over 200,000 Americans lost their unemployment benefits. 

That is why I’m glad that this Congress—it took too long for my 

tastes, but finally has been able to pass a bill that the President 

will be signing, to extend the unemployment benefits for those 

Americans who still struggling to find a job. 

I think the statistics are that for every job that’s out there, there 

are six unemployed workers, and we know that there are also a 

number of people who have been looking for jobs, who have given 

up, and also people who have less hours. 

I think I said last month that I read somewhere a quote that 

when Wall Street gets a cold, Main Street still has pneumonia. 

That’s what’s been happening here. 

And when we look to the root causes of this, I think Congressman Brady can try to point fingers at this Administration, but I 

5 

think you have to go back a lot farther to what got us to where 

we are today. 

There’s many people to blame, from the decisions that were made 

on Wall Street, with highly-leveraged deals that no one understood, 

to loopholes that were opened up by Congress, to Administration 

officials in the last Administration, that let things go and let people 

like Bernie Madoff rip off people by $65 billion, without prosecuting 

a case or listening to whistleblowers when they came in. 

There is plenty of blame to go around. Individuals who decided 

to buy homes that were too expensive for what they could afford— 

but, to me, the issue is not pointing blame at either the Republicans or the Democrats or the President; the issue, for me, is going 

forward and what we do here. 

Clearly, as Chairman Maloney pointed out, there are some glimmers of hope in this economy, from the GDP to what we’re seeing, 

at least a stemming of—when you look at the monthly job losses, 

way back when President Obama took over, to where they are now, 

my state, the unemployment is now down to 7.3 percent. 

I think we should take note that we have a diverse economy that 

helps, but we’ve had a major focus on energy and clean energy jobs. 

In the last decade, our job growth, overall, has been 1.9 percent, 

but in the clean energy area, 11 percent. Why? We enacted one of 

the strongest renewable electricity standards in the country, and 

it’s created a whole new generation of jobs. 

There are many things at play here, but I do believe that we— 

what we need to do, is to keep our eye on protecting and creating 

that safety net for the American people, as well as jump-starting 

our economy. That means that what we did yesterday with the unemployment benefits—which, by the way, I’m so pleased that we 

pushed on the Senate and that the House has now voted on—that 

we include not just states with high unemployment rates, but all 

states. 

As someone who wrote to me a few months ago, said, you know, 

the unemployment rate in Minnesota, at the time, it was eight percent, may be eight percent, but in my household, it’s 100 percent. 

That’s what we’ve heard across the board, so I’m glad that we were 

able to agree. The vote in the Senate was 98 to zero, so don’t ask 

me why it took a month and why it was stalled out, but we were 

able to get that bill passed, along with an extension of the firsttime-home-buyers tax credit, which has been very successful with 

jump-starting the housing market, as well as an additional $6500 

tax credit for people that have lived in their homes for five years, 

and are ready to buy a new home. 

So that’s what we’re dealing with here, and as we talk about the 

numbers today, you know, Commissioner Hall, I always try to remind people, is that behind the numbers are real people, whether 

it’s 7.3 percent unemployment or, as we’re seeing nationally now, 

10.2 percent. 

People like Jill, from White Bear Lake, Minnesota, who wrote to 

me, ‘‘I am a 38-year old single mother of two. I have been applying 

for jobs from entry level to management within my field and otherwise, and I have yet to produce anything more than a couple 

rounds of interviews. That time is ticking away, my boys are looking forward to school starting, so they’ll have a good breakfast and 

6 

lunch offered to them each day, easing up on our own cupboards, 

which have been pretty bare. All I want is the opportunity to provide for my family.’’ 

We know there are many Americans saying that today, and 

that’s why it was so important, the move that this Congress made 

this week, to extend unemployment benefits. 

Thank you, and I’m looking forward to getting into the nitty-gritty of these statistics, and always remembering that it’s real people 

we’re dealing with. Thank you. 

Chair Maloney. Mr. Campbell. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN CAMPBELL, 

A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA 

Representative Campbell. Thank you, Madam Chair. These 

numbers tell us that last month, nearly 10,000 Americans lost their 

jobs, every business day in October, and the unemployment rate is 

10.2 percent. 

This is very bad news, but it is, frankly, not that surprising, as 

this Administration and this Congress continue to pursue an ideological job-killing agenda, rather than an agenda trying to reverse 

this trend and trying to create jobs. 

This Administration and this Congress are still pursuing a government-run healthcare plan that even its proponents cannot, with 

any credibility, make an argument that it would create jobs, when, 

in fact, it will kill many jobs in one of the sectors in the economy 

where jobs have held up reasonably well. 

There is a global warming energy bill out there, which would artificially raise the cost of domestically-produced energy and evaporate millions more jobs in the energy sectors and all across businesses in America and a so-called stimulus plan that costs nearly 

$500,000 per job per year, if you accept the number of jobs that the 

Administration says they created or saved, and, as Mr. Brady 

clearly pointed out, those numbers are significantly and highly inflated. 

No, Madam Chair, every single government job is paid for by jobs 

in the private sector. If there are not jobs in the private sector to 

pay taxes, then there are no government jobs. 

Jobs need to be created in the private sector, and those are created by independent private businesses. When businesses hire 

someone, they take a risk. 

Now, that’s what businesses do; they take risks, but when you 

hire someone and take that risk, you’re expecting to spend some 

money to hire that person, that your revenue will increase by at 

least the amount of what you are spending to hire that individual. 

Right now, there’s a lot of uncertainty out there. There’s uncertainty in the general economy, uncertainty in the market. 

But this agenda of this Administration and Congress are adding 

additional uncertainties. Is the cost of hiring that person going to 

be even higher than their salary and benefits are today? Am I 

going to have additional taxes on that person? Am I going to have 

additional cost requirements, lawsuits generated by hiring that 

person? 

If that person uses energy in the businesses, is the cost of that 

energy going to continue to go up? There are so many additional 

7 

uncertainties that I hear from many businesses, both large and 

small, in my District, that they just aren’t sure where their costs, 

as driven by government policy, are going to go, so that adds to the 

uncertainties that are out there, and makes them less and less 

willing to take that risk of hiring another person and putting that 

person on payroll. 

Madam Chair, these numbers are bad. I hope that this is a 

wakeup call to the Administration and to the Congress, that the 

number-one priority in this country for all Americans, for both parties, and for the Administration and this Congress, should be jobs, 

jobs, and, again, jobs. I yield back. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. Mr. Snyder, for five minutes. 

Representative Snyder. Madam Chair, in the interest of hearing Commissioner Hall, I think I will defer, although it’s taking a 

lot of my fortitude to resist having a debate with Mr. Campbell 

about the importance of moving ahead on healthcare reform this 

weekend, but I will forego that in the interest of this discussion. 

Thank you. 

Chair Maloney. Okay, Mr. Burgess, for five minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MICHAEL C. 

BURGESS, M.D., A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS 

Representative Burgess. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I 

thank Dr. Hall, the Commissioner, and the members of the panel 

for being here with us today. 

Like Mr. Campbell, I wish there were better news to report to 

the American people. You know, two weeks ago, we had a hearing 

in the Joint Economic Committee where we were told that the 

third-quarter earnings were so improved that we could now tentatively, hesitantly, timidly, but assuredly say that the recession 

was behind us. 

I couldn’t help but feeling what we’d done was advanced fourth 

quarter earnings to the third quarter through the miracle of Cash 

for Clunkers, and we’ll have to await those numbers at the end of 

the fourth quarter to see if this was true recovery or just a manufactured recovery. 

Elizabeth Warren, this morning, on one of the news shows, stated that we’d saved the people at the very top and forgot the folks 

at the bottom. You know, I can’t help but feel that we don’t need 

another federal program, we don’t need another federal policy, we 

certainly don’t need a second or third or fourth stimulus, whichever 

it would be, but I agree with Mr. Campbell, we do need to stop 

punishing success in this country. 

And the longer we do it, the longer we are going to see reports 

like the ones we have before us this morning. I think Congress 

needs to realize that the reason that unemployment continues to 

go up is because of the actions we’ve taken. 

In some of the legislation that we’re working on today and this 

weekend, we’re creating an environment in which employers are 

genuinely frightening. From the Consumer Product Improvement 

Act that we passed in December of last year, to this Financial Protection Act, from the energy tax, domestically-produced energy tax 

in the Cap-and-Trade bill, to this healthcare bill that is before Congress this weekend, we continue to unbalance and destabilize the 

8 

very environment that employers are expected then to take those 

risks and go out and hire those individuals and create those new 

jobs. 

But they don’t know what we’re going to do to them next, and, 

certainly, our track record so far is nothing to give them any comfort. 

Now, Mark Twain once said, ‘‘No man’s life, liberty, or property 

is ever safe when the United States Congress is in session.’’ His 

words were true a hundred years ago; they are true today. 

And we continue to produce these gargantuan bills without any 

regard to what we’re doing to the environment that employers have 

to exist in to create jobs. These gargantuan bills that are laden— 

laden with unintended consequences. 

I reference the Consumer Product Safety Act that we passed, 

H.R. 4040, that was passed in December of last year, a necessary 

piece of legislation. We were all concerned about lead in toys, but 

we passed a lead standard that no one could even measure. 

Now we have libraries and secondhand shops and even printers’ 

ink companies that are unsure of what the future holds for them, 

and so they’re holding back on their inventories, they’re holding 

back on their hiring. 

In my District, I’ve heard from multiple motorcycle dealers who 

have had to sequester their inventory, lest some child pull the battery out of a motorcycle, consume it, and die of lead poisoning. 

The healthcare bill that we’ve got before us this weekend, I think 

Mr. Campbell is right, the one sector of the economy besides the 

Federal Government, federal employment, the one sector that’s 

growing, is in healthcare. And we’re going to change that. 

And as we look at the statistics in front of us today, we see that 

unemployment has hurt men worse than women. Women are disproportionately represented in the healthcare sector. The 

healthcare sector employs more women than men, so perhaps, indeed, Congress will be an equal opportunity offender in this case, 

and we will allow that catch-up to occur in the unemployed—the 

gender discrepancy that’s in the reported unemployment rates. 

We do have to help the unemployed. Again, quoting Elizabeth 

Warren this morning, on one of the news shows, ‘‘We helped out 

Wall Street, and we left everyone else hanging.’’ 

This time, the Administration needs to be focused, and we do 

need to help Main Street. I’ll yield back the balance of my time. 

Chair Maloney. The gentleman yields back. There seems to be 

a little revisionist history here. When President Obama took office, 

we were losing 700,000 jobs per month, from November 2008 to 

roughly March 2009, and this month’s job report is under 200,000. 

That’s not good. Every job lost is a tragedy, particularly to that 

individual and their families, but we are moving in the right direction with 3.5 GDP and an improved job loss. 

Mr. Hinchey. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MAURICE D. 

HINCHEY, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK 

Representative Hinchey. Well, thank you very much, Madam 

Chairman, and thank you, gentlemen, for the analysis that you do 

9 

on the circumstances that we are obliged to deal with here. We 

thank you very much for the information that you are providing. 

This increase in the unemployment rate to 10.2 percent, which 

is up four-tenths of one percent, is, as I remember, the highest 

we’ve had since the 1980s, during the Reagan Administration, and 

so this is something that really needs to be dealt with and dealt 

with effectively. 

The deep economic circumstances that we’re confronting have 

now been with us for at least 22 months, beginning in December 

of 2007, when this deep recession occurred during the Bush Administration. The actions that have been taken indicate that there is 

a substantial amount of effectiveness because the unemployment 

rate is not climbing as rapidly as it was, and the situation that 

we’re confronting is becoming a bit more milder. 

This is something that we are going to have to understand and 

to deal with effectively. As we know from experience of economic 

circumstances such as this, including those dating back to the early 

1930s, it is essential for the government of this country to deal 

with the economic conditions that we’re facing. 

There’s no question that the government, back several years ago, 

had a major responsibility for the conditions that we’re confronting 

now, particularly with that huge wasteful spending of billions and 

billions and billions of dollars in Iraq in that illegal way. 

Nevertheless, the situation that we’re dealing with today is critical and must continue to be dealt with. It’s very obvious the stimulus bill which was passed has had a major positive effect. 

It has brought about an increase in jobs and increase in general 

economic conditions. That program has to continue. 

We know that only about 25 or 30 percent of that stimulus bill 

has actually been spent so far. More of that has to get out there, 

and to be dealt with effectively in the context of this recession, 

which we inherited and have now an obligation to deal with effectively. 

So, we thank you very much for the information that you are 

providing because it is absolutely essential to this Congress to continue to struggle to deal with this issue effectively. 

One of the issues that we’re attempting to bring about now, of 

course, is this healthcare bill. The passage of this healthcare bill 

is, in and of itself, going to have a positive effect on the economic 

circumstances that we’re dealing with. 

It’s going to promote jobs and it’s going to broaden the economic 

development that we’ve initiated over the course of these last seven 

or eight months. 

So, this has got to continue. We have got to have the strength 

to understand that investments internally in this country are absolutely essential to the maintenance of the economic circumstances 

here, and we haven’t had adequate investment internally in this 

country in decades, and this is something that we have to continue 

to do, until this economy is brought back to its normal circumstances. 

We’ve also got to deal with this banking situation, which manipulated the economic conditions that we’re confronting. 

So we thank you very much for all the information that you are 

providing to us, and the very, very important work that you do on 

10 

a regular basis, and the information that you provide to us in this 

way every single month. 

Thank you very much. Let’s just see if this Congress is going to 

continue to be strong enough to deal with this issue, and to stimulate this economy and bring it back to normality. Thanks very 

much. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. Mr. Cummings, for five minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ELIJAH E. 

CUMMINGS, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM MARYLAND 

Representative Cummings. Thank you very much, Madam 

Chair. I want to thank you very much for holding this hearing. 

Certainly all of our condolences go to the soldiers and their families 

at Ft. Hood, Texas. 

This terrible tragedy, as President Obama has said, is something 

no soldier should have to endure on American soil. However, the 

heroism displayed at the scene by Army personnel and others, instantly turning to the injured, is a testimony to the courage and 

the readiness of the American military. 

The continued job losses suffered this past month are a stark reminder that, despite the progress we have achieved, we’re still in 

the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. 

Americans, as we say over and over again, are out of work 

through no fault of their own. They stand ready, willing, and able 

to work, and yet they have no place to report to in the morning. 

In my home state of Maryland, there are 25,000 people ready to 

go to work. To make matters worse, earlier this week, Black & 

Decker, one of the few remaining Fortune 500 companies in the 

state, announced plans to merge with Stanley Tool Works, and despite a move that will combine two of the largest toolmakers in 

America, the people in my state may lose hundreds, even thousands of jobs from this corporate combination. 

There are, however, green shoots in the economy. The stock market, despite dropping significantly since this recession began, has 

entered recovery. The Dow topped 10,000 points earlier this year, 

and, according to the New York Times, moved up 192 points yesterday, on reports of two consecutive months of retail sales increases, 

as well as lower-than-expected initial jobless claims. 

We know that jobs are the trailing indicator. They will not begin 

to return until employers believe we have recovered. 

The market acts as a barometer on that recovery, and indicators 

are hopeful. Both housing prices and stock portfolios are moving 

upward, and the thought of retirement brings hope for many, not 

fear. 

In the meantime, we have a duty as Congress to take the actions 

necessary to ensure recovery for all Americans. Yesterday, we continued our commitment to doing just that. 

After receiving Senate amendments to a bill introduced by Mr. 

McDermott to extend unemployment insurance benefits, the House 

approved the measure by an overwhelming margin. The 403 to 12 

vote was a comment on our priorities as a representative government. We can and we will provide for our constituents. 

11 

Further, tomorrow we will attempt to make a truly historic proclamation about the nation’s future and what we know to be an essential part of that future. 

I look forward to casting my vote for a healthcare system that 

keeps our nation healthy, keeps our citizens solvent, and places the 

priorities of Main Street above all. 

As happy as I was yesterday to ratify the actions of our counterparts here in the Senate to extend unemployment benefits, I know 

tomorrow will make me as proud as I have been at any point in 

my 13 years in the Congress. 

Along with hearings like this one, these are other actions that reinforce why we are here and what our responsibilities are to our 

constituents and, indeed, to our country. 

I welcome Dr. Hall’s testimony and a productive discussion on 

the state of the labor force and the challenges remaining before us, 

and, with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you so much. I join you in welcoming 

Commissioner Hall. Dr. Keith Hall is the Commissioner of Labor 

Statistics for the U.S. Department of Labor. 

Prior to that, he served as Chief Economist for the White House 

Council of Economic Advisers. Prior to that, he was Chief Economist for the U.S. Department of Commerce. 

He also served ten years at the U.S. International Trade Commission. 

Welcome, Commissioner Hall, and you are recognized for as 

much time as you may consume. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF DR. KEITH HALL, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF 

LABOR STATISTICS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; WASHINGTON, DC; ACCOMPANIED BY: DR. MICHAEL HORRIGAN, 

ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER FOR PRICES AND LIVING CONDITIONS, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS; AND MR. PHILLIP 

RONES, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS 

Commissioner Hall. Thank you. Madam Chair and members of 

the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the employment and unemployment data we released this morning. 

In October, the unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent, the 

highest rate since April of 1983, and non-farm payroll employment 

declined by 190,000. Since the start of the recession, payroll employment has fallen by 7.3 million. 

Job losses have averaged 188,000 over the past three months. 

The declines were much smaller and less widespread than they 

were last Fall and Winter; nevertheless, some industries are still 

experiencing notable employment declines. 

In October, construction lost 62,000 jobs; manufacturing, 61,000 

jobs; and retail trade, 40,000 jobs. 

In construction, October job losses were concentrated among nonresidential specialty trades and heavy construction. Earlier in the 

recession, the residential components of construction accounted for 

the majority of job losses in the industry. 

In manufacturing, there were notable job cuts in machinery, nonmetallic minerals, computer products and printing, in October. 

12 

Retail job losses were concentrated in sporting goods and bookstores and in department stores. Earlier in the downturn, large job 

losses were spread across a wider range of retail industries. 

One of the few industries where employment continued to grow 

during the recession has been healthcare, which added 29,000 jobs 

in October. 

The employment in temporary help services rose by 34,000 over 

the month, the first significant increase in that industry since the 

start of the recession. 

Turning to measures from the Survey of Households, the unemployment rate increased from 9.8 to 10.2 percent over the month. 

Since the recession began, the jobless rate has increased by 5.3 percentage points, while the number of unemployed has more than 

doubled to 15.7 million. 

The numbers of long-term unemployed remain high. In October, 

5.6 million workers had been jobless for six months or more. 

Among the employed, there were 9.3 million persons working 

part-time in October, who would have preferred full-time work. The 

number of such workers has doubled since the start of the recession. 

Among those outside the labor force, that is, persons neither 

working nor looking for work, the number of discouraged workers 

in October was 808,000, up from 484,000 a year earlier. 

These individuals are not currently looking for work, because 

they believe no jobs are available for them. 

In summary, non-farm payroll employment fell by 190,000 in October and the unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent. My colleagues would now be glad to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Commissioner Hall appears in the 

Submissions for the Record on page 30.] 

Chair Maloney. Thank you, Commissioner Hall. What are the 

bright spots in this month’s jobs report? 

Commissioner Hall. I would say that, although 190,000 jobs is 

significant and is not a trivial loss, the last three months, the loss 

has been more moderate than the prior three months or the prior 

six months before that. 

The last three months, job losses averaged 188,000, and that is 

significantly lower than the unprecedented six-month period where 

we lost about 645,000 jobs per month. 

It’s less widespread, the job loss. The job loss this month was 

concentrated in construction, manufacturing, and retail trade. 

However, most other industries still aren’t producing jobs. Even 

though they’re not losing jobs, they’re sort of on hold and not really 

gaining jobs, either. 

In terms of bright spots, one of the reasons that I mentioned 

temporary help is that in the temporary help industry, although 

it’s a one-month increase and we shouldn’t read too much into that, 

that can be a leading indicator of coming job growth, but, obviously, we’ll have to wait and see. 

Chair Maloney. Are there any indicators that overall job losses 

will continue to slow in coming months? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, we seem to have been in a phase for 

the last three months, where the job loss was remarkably steady 

in those three particular industries that I mentioned. 

13 

I think, going forward, again, I think maybe the temp help is the 

best piece of news, potentially, going forward, and, then, of course, 

if you look at some of the non-labor-market data, some of that is 

consistent with an eventually-strengthening labor market. Industrial production was up, the GDP numbers strong, especially the 

consumer spending portion of that, and that was encouraging, and 

then, of course, initial EOI claims, while they continued, the level 

dropped a bit. 

Chair Maloney. Are there any signs that in certain industries 

they’re going to start expanding in the near future? Do you see any 

indicators in that direction? 

Commissioner Hall. I would say that for most industries, with 

the exception of, of course, healthcare and education, we either 

seem to be losing jobs or most have been in a holding pattern, so 

it’s really hard to say whether they’re going to start showing increases in the future. 

Chair Maloney. And what is the typical amount of time, after 

a contraction ends, before labor markets start showing signs of recovery? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, signs of recovery can lag a bit. In the 

last two recessions, the labor market lagged a fair amount, although I would say, though, there was much less lag in one sense. 

Once the last two recessions ended, it was a matter of a few 

months before there was a significant moderation in job loss, although job loss didn’t end for quite a while. 

And then prior to the last two recessions, the labor market did 

start showing growth fairly soon after the end of the recession, so 

I’d say that the answer is that it depends. 

The last few recessions, it was fairly lagging, but in some prior 

recessions, it wasn’t. 

Chair Maloney. Recently, some economists have estimated that 

it will take 10.7 million jobs created to get us back to the pre-recession unemployment rate, and, assuming that jobs are created at 2.8 

million jobs per year, which was the best job creation record for 

any Administration, achieved by President Clinton, how long would 

you expect it to take to get back to full employment? 

Commissioner Hall. Let me first say that there’s no guarantee 

where the unemployment rate is eventually going to go down to. 

So, what’s considered the full employment unemployment rate 

seems to be something that isn’t constant over long periods of time, 

so we don’t know what the unemployment rate is eventually going 

to go down to after this recession is over. 

But to answer your question, we’re talking about in excess of 

three years. 

Chair Maloney. Wow. Thank you. My time is expired. Mr. 

Brady. 

Representative Brady. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would 

note that we probably ought not be revising history on this panel, 

although Reagan apparently didn’t inherit a recession from Carter, 

Bush did—or Obama did from Bush. We probably ought to pick one 

side and one story and stick to it. 

I think the American public is tired of excuses. The truth is, this 

is President Obama’s stimulus, it is his budget, it is his bailout, it 

14 

is his housing programs, and it’s time, I think, to take responsibility for those actions. 

I think that earlier this week we saw two gubernatorial candidates run on a blame-Bush platform and they’ll not be taking the 

oath of office in their statehouses any time soon. The truth is, right 

now, we are seeing hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. 

Before I ask Commissioner Hall about some of the corrupt data 

within the stimulus reports, I want to ask, obviously, the size of 

the increase in the unemployment rate is devastating news. The 

loss of payroll jobs also exceeds expectations, yet, other countries, 

some of whom started with a higher unemployment rate than us, 

have lower unemployment rates than we do today. 

What is it about this Administration’s policies, where our growth 

in jobs is poor, by comparison? 

Commissioner Hall. I wouldn’t want to comment on a policy 

sort of question like that, what’s the impact of current policy, since 

I want to try to stick to sort of the current state of the economy. 

Representative Brady. Okay, how about the role of increase in 

male unemployment? It’s at an historical high for both adult men 

and men 16 years and over. When was the last time—do you know 

of any time where we’ve had unemployment that high for men, especially, as you noted, manufacturing and construction, which was 

supposed to be boosted by the stimulus, is seeing, again, more and 

more, 60 some thousand more jobs lost? What does that say about 

the economy? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I don’t have the data in front of me 

to focus on adult men, but the job loss has been very substantial. 

Right now, the job loss has been about 5.3 percent of the payroll 

jobs. 

That is the biggest job loss since the 1945 recession. 

Representative Brady. One of the reputations you have, and 

this Agency does, the Bureau has, is providing reliable data. Knowing, of course, that unreliable data underscores policy and credibility of the Bureau, we are seeing a lot of corrupt data coming out 

of the stimulus claims. What would you put in place, what policies 

would you put in place, to create reliable data, so that the American public isn’t misled, that these numbers aren’t falsified or 

misreported? 

How can we create a stimulus reporting process that actually 

tells the truth? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I wouldn’t want to comment on or 

offer advice on policy matters, on something like that. 

I can say that the Bureau, because we’re an independent agency 

and we have a—we’re very proud of our reputation as being objective, we try to focus on the basic state of the economy as it is now. 

All of our surveys, for the most part, focus on the current state of 

the economy, and we typically don’t try and we certainly don’t try 

in these surveys to separate out the effects from policy versus other 

things that are affecting the labor market. 

Representative Brady. Would it be helpful—I hadn’t thought 

of this—would it be helpful to have an independent agency looking 

at these stimulus reports? Clearly, the panel, the way it’s composed 

today, is basically run through the White House. They’ve lost credibility on this issue. 

15 

Would an independent look at these stimulus numbers, maybe 

give the American public a little more assurance that they’re accurate? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, again, I wouldn’t want to comment 

on that. I can say that the Federal Economic Statistical Agencies 

work very hard to be independent and offer our best objective estimates of things. 

But I wouldn’t want to comment on what should be done. 

Representative Brady. All right, thank you, Commissioner. I 

appreciate it. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. Senator Klobuchar. 

Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, and, thank you, 

Commissioner Hall. 

As you know, we just passed, as several of the members here 

have mentioned, the unemployment benefit bill, which we felt was 

very important to continue the safety net for workers who, through 

no fault of their own, are unable to find work. 

Could you discuss why that’s important, as you look through history, to have that safety net in place, and why this type of benefit 

can carry some bigger bang for the buck than some other things 

we could be doing? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I think I’m in the same boat as the 

last few questions, where I don’t want to comment on policy or 

what would be an appropriate policy for something like an unemployment benefit insurance. 

Senator Klobuchar. Do you know if, through history, if we 

have extended them in cases like this, even when there was less 

unemployment? 

Commissioner Hall. Oh, I believe that is true, yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay. One of the things I usually do is ask 

you some focus questions, which I’m sure I will do this morning, 

but I wanted, as a new line of questions here, as I’ve heard increasingly from small businesses about the difficulties that they’re having, and that’s why a number, 32 Senators, we recently sent a letter to the President asking him to help small businesses obtain the 

credit that they need. Do you have any numbers on the unemployment situation with small businesses? 

Commissioner Hall. We do. It’s not real current. These surveys 

don’t have enough detail for that, but we do have some that lag behind a few quarters, and we do have some data on that. 

We’ve probably got it through maybe the first quarter. 

Chair Maloney. Do you want to just send it to me? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, I’d be glad to. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, thank you. You went through some 

of the hardest-hit sectors of the economy. I think you mentioned retail, manufacturing, and construction. Where have we seen increases? 

Commissioner Hall. We had increases in temporary help services, and we had an increase in education and health services. 

Those were the main ones. 

There were some increases, but they weren’t necessarily significant, and, by that, I mean statistically significant. 

Senator Klobuchar. How about the parts of the country? I 

know we always talk about that, with Michigan. Is Michigan still 

16 

having the most difficulty, sort of the manufacturing states, and 

have you seen any improvements? 

As I mentioned, our state actually has gone down to 7.3 percent 

after a high of 8.4 percent. 

Commissioner Hall. Let me see. 

Senator Klobuchar. And do you continue to see that kind of 

polka-dot, as opposed to regional issues where certain states seem 

to be doing better, but they’re not as much concentrated in regions? 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. I would say that we still see sort of 

the polka-dot, you know, where different states have sort of different experiences. 

One of the issues that sometimes happens is our sample in particular states means the unemployment rate jumps around a little 

bit, so you don’t want to read too much into one or two months. 

I don’t mean to speak just to Minnesota for this. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, very good. What are the some of the 

states with the highest unemployment rates? 

Commissioner Hall. The highest unemployment rate is Michigan. That’s 15.3 percent last month. 

Senator Klobuchar. And this is the last month’s results? 

Commissioner Hall. Right. Michigan, Nevada, Rhode Island, 

California, South Carolina, Oregon, District of Columbia, Florida, 

these are double-digits. I know I’m reading off a long list. 

Senator Klobuchar. No, that’s fine; it’s helpful. 

Commissioner Hall. It’s a long list. There’s Florida, Kentucky, 

North Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee. 

Senator Klobuchar. And then what are the states with the lowest unemployment? 

Commissioner Hall. North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Utah, 

Iowa, so you can see there’s no real regional pattern. 

Senator Klobuchar. Right, exactly. One of the things that you 

mentioned, which I think is most disturbing for people, is just the 

marginal unemployment rates or the people that—discouraged 

workers, the people that have been looking for a job and then have 

sort of given up. 

So if you add those people in—can you also add in the people 

that have had their hours reduced—where are we really? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, that’s our broadest measure of underutilization. The unemployment rate that I quoted is just one. 

We have actually six different measures of labor underutilization. 

The broadest one includes people who are part-time, who want 

to be full-time; and people who were discouraged and they’ve 

dropped out of the labor force, but they want to work, but they’re 

just discouraged that they can’t find a job. When you include those 

two groups, the unemployment rate—or the labor underutilization 

rate, goes up to 17.5 percent. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, and of that 17.5 percent, we know 

that—well, what number—10.2 percent is the classic unemployed 

people who are looking for work and can’t find it, and then what 

part of it is our part-time workers? 

Commissioner Hall. Part-time, for economic reasons, I can give 

you the number. There are about 9.2 million people who are in that 

boat. 

17 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, and then the discouraged workers, 

the ones that have—can’t find the work right now? I’m just trying 

to figure out, go from 10.2 to 17.5, right? 

Commissioner Hall. Sure, sure, yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. So, of that difference, is it, like, half of 

these part-time people or half discouraged or what’s the breakdown? 

Commissioner Hall. The marginally attached is about 2.4 million, and the part-time is around 9.3 million. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, and so most of it is people that have 

had their hours reduced? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. All right, thank you very much. 

Chair Maloney. Okay, thank you. Mr. Campbell. 

Representative Campbell. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, a 

regional question: California’s unemployment rate? 

Commissioner Hall. It is 12.2 percent. 

Representative Snyder. Is that for September? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes, that’s the month before. The statelevel data lags a month, so this is September data. 

Representative Snyder. Thank you. 

Representative Campbell. Thank you, thank you for the clarification. 

Following up on the Senator, I’m trying to understand this as 

well. You mentioned in your testimony that there are 808,000 discouraged workers. Are those people included in the 10.2, or have 

they dropped out of the base? 

Commissioner Hall. They’ve dropped out of the base; they’re 

not included in the 10.2. 

Representative Campbell. Okay, so that’s where you’re saying 

that 17.5 percent of the workforce is either the 10.2 percent unemployed or they have dropped out of the workforce, because they’re 

discouraged, either now or this month or previously, or they are 

significantly underemployed; is that correct? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Campbell. Okay, so that means, really—how 

long have we been keeping statistics like that? Because, basically, 

that’s saying that nearly one out of five people in this country is 

either out of work or significantly underemployed. 

Commissioner Hall. We’ve had that full measure only since 

1994, I believe, but we have kept data on the people who are involuntary part-time. We’ve kept that number for a long time. We’ve 

kept that for a number of years. 

Representative Campbell. And where is then that, on an historical basis—I mean, obviously, since 1994, I’m sure this 17.5 is 

going to be the highest we’ve ever recorded since that period, since 

we had a strong economy from, you know, ’94 to 2006 or 2008, really, so where—how does that underemployed, part-time, involuntary 

part-time currently relate to its historical levels? 

Commissioner Hall. That has increased—it may have increased 

more than any other recession. It certainly increased more than in 

any other modern recession, so it’s gone up tremendously. 

Representative Campbell. Okay, all right. You mentioned 

manufacturing losing jobs, but yet there’s been a lot of publicity in 

18 

the last couple of weeks about this manufacturing index ticking 

over. I believe it’s 50 or something. So how do you reconcile—I understand that job losses can and job losses can trail, but how do 

you reconcile the fairly significant losses in the manufacturing sector with all this kind of Wall Street publicity that manufacturing 

is getting better? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, those two things don’t often—don’t 

work differently for too long, my point being that if the manufacturing numbers continue to stay strong, I do expect to see that certainly the job loss in manufacturing should moderate. 

It’s not uncommon—I don’t know that we’re in this position—it’s 

not uncommon, during the early stages of an expansion, to have 

productivity gains, which means, basically, that output increases 

faster than the labor market hours increase, so it wouldn’t be surprising to see that get out ahead of the labor market. 

Representative Campbell. Another thing—and I supported the 

unemployment benefit bill yesterday on the floor, but there’s been 

a lot of—I’ve heard a lot of anecdotal reports that many people 

don’t really start looking for a job until their unemployment benefits run out, and that extensions in unemployment benefits actually 

exacerbate the unemployment situation. 

Is there any statistical evidence of that, or is it all anecdotal? 

Commissioner Hall. I believe I’ve seen some statistical evidence of that. I don’t know that we have it, but I believe I’ve seen 

some economic work on that in the past. 

If you like, we can see what we can find on that? 

Representative Campbell. Yeah, I’d be curious. 

So, based on what you’ve seen or you know, there is some evidence that that, in fact, is the case, so that if we do extend unemployment benefits by 12 months, that we actually are to some degree perpetuating the unemployment of those people? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, I don’t know; I don’t know that I 

would characterize it that way, either, but—and this is just from 

my memory. I do believe, though, that the reemployment rates do 

go up near the end of benefits. 

One of the issues, though, of course, is, when people are getting 

back to work, are they getting back in jobs that they really want? 

So there’s an issue there about that. 

Representative Campbell. Final question: I don’t know if you 

have a thought on this, but when we looked up here, I mean, the 

Obama Administration totally blew their estimates on unemployment by, like, 30 percent, on what it would be now or what it was 

before. 

Why did they blow it so bad? 

Commissioner Hall. Having not been part of their forecasts, 

I—— 

Representative Campbell. Then, a final question would be, 

most estimates were that unemployment wasn’t going to be this— 

that you weren’t going to come in here with 10.2 today, that you 

would come in with 9.9 or something like that. 

Any thoughts on what went wrong, just in the last month? 

Commissioner Hall. No, actually, there’s not an obvious explanation to me. The unemployment rate is a pretty reliable number, 

as is the payroll jobs numbers, so my experience sometimes is, if 

19 

our two surveys, anyway, start to tell a little bit of a different 

story, give it a little time and they’ll start to tell the same story, 

but that remains to be seen now. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. Congressman Snyder. 

Representative Snyder. Following on to Mr. Campbell about 

the jump, given that this is a report for October, is there any seasonal variation? I mean our state certainly had a pretty wet construction season in September. Is there any seasonal variation that 

accounts for that jump? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, we do seasonally adjust our numbers, and what we’re looking for when we seasonally adjust them 

is what normally happens at this time of year, so almost any number that we quote is relative to what we sort of expect from normal 

seasonal patterns. 

Representative Snyder. You had talked a bit ago, I guess it 

was also with Mr. Campbell—I know, in your—if I have a small 

family business and I work at it 20 hours a week, like a little antique shop or something, and I guess your surveyors call me up and 

I say, yeah, I was putting in my usual 20 hours a week, didn’t 

make a dime, nobody bought an antique from me, you still count 

me as being employed, is that correct? 

Commissioner Hall. We’ve got two different surveys: The payroll survey takes advantage of the unemployment insurance 

records. That’s where we survey establishments that pay unemployment insurance. 

What you describe sounds like somebody who’s maybe not paying 

unemployment insurance, but our other survey, the one that we 

use to calculate the unemployment rate, is the household survey, 

where we get people on the phone. 

And under that circumstance, we would count that person as employed. 

Representative Snyder. Employed, even though he didn’t 

make any money. 

Have you had to adjust how you look at this, since we have had 

more and more Internet-based businesses? I mean, I know a lot of 

folks that get out there and tinker on the Internet in terms of 

going to garage sales and putting stuff online and selling stuff. It’s 

more of a hobby. My guess is that none of them would think that 

that’s much of a business, but, according to your numbers, if they 

did more than 15 hours a week, that would count as a business for 

them and that would be employment. Is that correct? Have you had 

to—— 

Commissioner Hall. There wouldn’t be an hours restriction. I 

think it’s just a matter of, if I’m correct, a matter of whether they 

answer the phone survey as to whether they’re employed or not. 

Representative Snyder [continuing]. All right, well, I was 

going by the information you put here. I thought that it said 

Household Survey. ‘‘People are classified as employed, if they work 

without pay at least 15 hours in a family business.’’ 

Commissioner Hall. Oh, okay. 

Representative Snyder. And so if I have—if I go to garage 

sales and pick up textbooks and put them online and I spend six 

hours at the garage sales and six hours packaging books and three 

hours counting my money, that’s 15 hours. 

20 

Mr. Rones. That category is really designed for family members 

who are working in a family business, so, for instance, if you had 

a restaurant and your son worked there for—— 

Representative Snyder. So it would not be for the sole practitioner of an Internet business. 

Mr. Rones [continuing]. Right. So that person, if the intent is 

to run that as a business, and as any business person would know, 

you know, sometimes you make money and sometimes you don’t, 

when you have a business, but if the intent is to—if you perceive 

that as a job, and the intent is to run that as a business, then 

there’s no hours restriction on that. 

Representative Snyder. As to the question about healthcare, 

healthcare is one of those countercyclical industries. What happens 

three years from now when we’re at whatever we consider full employment in the United States, do people start quitting their 

nurse’s aid jobs and their orderly jobs and their custodian jobs in 

the nursing home, can go get a construction job, and so we start 

seeing the Help Wanted signs go up? What happens? 

We’ve had several months now where we’ve got jobs added to 

healthcare. What happens when we get to full expansion? 

Commissioner Hall. You know, we don’t have enough surveys 

that follow people, the same people, over time. That’s actually one 

of the very difficult things for us to do. We just don’t have that sort 

of longitudinal survey, so it’s hard for us to know, for example, 

when the healthcare jobs stop, if they don’t grow as quickly during 

an expansion. It’s hard for us to know exactly what happened to 

those folks. 

Representative Snyder. All right. 

Commissioner Hall. They just sort of drop off. 

Representative Snyder. We’re having the same phenomenon, I 

guess, in Arkansas, that Senator Klobuchar has in her state, which 

is, Arkansas’s unemployment rate went from 7.4 to 7.1, and, of 

course, we don’t have the number yet for September. 

I guess, just a technical—I guess we’re one of the spots, and I 

would like to think that we’re the canary that tells us that maybe 

we’re going to head in the right direction as a country, but, just 

technically, why do the state rates come out a couple weeks later? 

Why don’t they all come out at the same time? 

Commissioner Hall. A lot of it is that our national numbers, we 

do—this is a very high-volume survey, and we turn it around very 

quickly, and so what we’re doing, is, we’re focusing on the national 

number first. 

To give you an idea—— 

Representative Snyder. It’s the same data, though. 

Commissioner Hall [continuing]. It’s the same data, exactly. 

Mr. Rones. The data that we report today from the Household 

Survey come directly from the Household Survey. We basically 

process them, put the report together in a couple of days, and report it to you. 

The state unemployment rates take that as an input to a statistical model. There’s not enough sample in the survey itself, stateby-state. We use that as an input to a model, so at this point, now 

we’re starting to develop the state models. 

21 

We’re working with the state labor market information shops to 

do that, so it takes a couple weeks beyond when we put these national data out, to put the state unemployment statistics out. 

Representative Snyder. Thank you, gentlemen, thank you, 

Madam Chair. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. Congressman Burgess. 

Representative Burgess. Thank you. Dr. Hall, just to go back 

to some of the things that Mr. Campbell was asking you, my office 

also would be interested in that data on whether or not reemployment rates begin to increase or improve at the end of the benefit 

stream, so if you could make that generally available to the Committee, I think that would be very helpful. 

I was also struck that there really was not an ability for you to 

follow some of this data longitudinally. It seems like that would be 

helpful, but I guess just given the constraints of how you collect the 

data you cannot do that? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

One of our difficulties is that we actually pay states to collect 

data for us. And while states can with the data they have collected 

they can follow people longitudinally somewhat, once they cross 

state borders we lose track of them. 

Representative Burgess. I see. Since we are talking about 

states, I am going to ask the obvious question, too: The Texas unemployment rate? 

Commissioner Hall. 8.2 percent in September. 

Representative Burgess. Which is obviously very significant. 

On the issue of the figure of the people who were unemployed, 

or long-term unemployed, discouraged, stopped looking for work, 

and that is a startling number. Let me just be sure I understand. 

Is that number additive to the baseline 10.2 percent? Or does that 

include the 10.2 percent? 

Commissioner Hall. It is slightly different in that the 10.2 percent is based on the labor force. When we get to 17.5 percent we 

are actually expanding. We are not using the labor force for—we 

are adding the labor force to the marginally attached to the labor 

force, people who are not normally part of the labor force. 

Representative Burgess. So for the average person who was 

nominally interested in how the economy is doing and what is happening as far as recovery is concerned, what is a better figure for 

them to follow month to month? 

Commissioner Hall. To be honest, I would look at both. 

Representative Burgess. Look at both? 

Commissioner Hall. They generally tell the same story, but it 

is one of the reasons why we do these different measures of labor 

utilization. You can get interesting information from both measures. 

Representative Burgess. Well certainly the under-employed 

and discouraged/stopped looking for work is a much more startling 

number than even, as bad as the 10.2 percent, as Mr. Campbell 

said almost 1 of every 5 Americans now are falling into that underemployed or discouraged/stopped looking for work is significant. 

On some of the things that were brought up during my opening 

statement and the opening statements of others, the things that we 

are doing legislatively, the things we are doing in the regulatory 

22 

environment, the things that employers, whether they are small or 

large employers, where they try to look out over the horizon, they 

are unsettled. 

What are we going to do with domestically produced energy? 

What is going to happen to the price of domestically produced energy? What are we going to do as far as the payroll tax if we enact 

an employer-mandate, or even an individual mandate on health insurance? Do you get a sense that is—that is having any effect on 

employers looking at adding or creating jobs within their respective 

places of employment? 

Commissioner Hall. I would not want to comment on that. It 

is hard to get a feel for something like that when we are collecting 

real basic data. 

Representative Burgess. Well I thought that was going to be 

your answer, and I appreciate the position that you take. I will just 

offer. 

This was some very recent polling data collected by a group 

called Woman Trend that surveyed primarily women-owned businesses which are—may have a higher propensity of small businesses, and the question asked about federal legislation proposed 

to require small business owners with payrolls greater than 

$500,000 to provide health insurance to their employees or face 

penalties, as a small business owner which of the following would 

you need to do? 

And 20 percent said reduce the number of employees at their 

company, 19 percent said not hire any new employees. So 40 percent of those employers felt that it would affect their decisions as 

to whether or not to hire or add jobs at their places of employment. 

I have no other data for energy, financial regulation, but I do 

know that I see a steady stream of constituents into my office who 

voice such concerns of, yeah, I would like to do something in my 

business because things may be picking up in our area, but I don’t 

know what you guys—meaning Congress—are going to do. 

Now we have seen some stuff from the Stimulus Bill last week. 

The big push was to articulate the number of jobs created by the 

Stimulus. Many of those highway construction jobs really seemed 

to be hit-or-miss. 

Historically do you have a sense, when we do a highway reauthorization bill, which we are supposed to do this year but which 

we will not do, do you see an effect on jobs created or saved when 

we do a highway reauthorization bill? 

Commissioner Hall. We are very much focused on just getting 

the overall number correct. And frankly there are thousands of 

things that could be at play in what has affected a number from 

month to month. So it is really hard for—would be hard for me— 

I would be very reluctant to sort of attribute changes to—— 

Representative Burgess. But we do this on a recurring sixyear cycle, and I just wondered if you had ever observed a trend 

with Congress passing the highway reauthorization. 

Commissioner Hall [continuing]. Yeah, there might be a trend 

in the data. It’s not something, the sort of work that we would naturally do. 

There might be somebody who might have done some work with 

our data on that, but I don’t know. 

23 

Representative Burgess. Are you able to define a job saved in 

economic terms? 

Commissioner Hall. Inherently the notion of jobs saved, you’re 

sort of dealing with a counter-factual. You know, what would have 

been the data without something happening? And we are very 

much focused on just what the data is, not on that sort of approach. 

Representative Burgess. So we do not have a figure for jobs 

saved in your analysis? 

Commissioner Hall. Well for what we do with our surveys, no. 

We are only focusing on actual job counts. 

Representative Burgess. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I yield 

back. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you, very much. 

Mr. Hinchey for five minutes. 

Representative Hinchey. Thank you very much, Madam 

Chairman. 

And thank you very much for all the information that you are 

providing. It is very useful to us, and actually very essential. 

I was interested in what you were saying on a number of things, 

including the numbers of unemployment for the various states. 

What is the situation in New York? 

Commissioner Hall. The unemployment rate in New York is 

8.9 percent. 

Representative Hinchey. 8.9? And that was up from 8 

point—— 

Commissioner Hall. It has actually been steady for a couple of 

months at 8.9. 

Representative Hinchey [continuing]. Steady at 8.9? Yeah, 

okay. The number I had was 8.8, but 8.9 is the actual number. 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah. Sometimes there is a little difference because, if you’re looking at the State. Sometimes the 

states release a number that is a little bit different from our number. 

Representative Hinchey. Okay. Could you give us an indication of the change in unemployment in the context of this economic 

recession since it began in the end of 2007? 

Commissioner Hall. Would you like just an overall picture? Or 

would you like a characterization of the job loss? 

Representative Hinchey. An overall picture. 

Commissioner Hall. Okay. 

Representative Hinchey. If you could do that. 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. Since the recession began we have 

lost 7.3 million jobs, and that is about 5.3 percent of the payroll 

jobs in the country. And this has been a 22-month recession. So 

what you have is the longest recession, and maybe the second-biggest percentage decline in payroll jobs of any recession. 

Representative Hinchey. And the rate of decline in employment since December of 2007 has fluctuated, and as I understand 

it based upon well, for example, this little chart here, the drop in 

unemployment rate reached its maximum in January of ’09. And 

apparently since then the unemployment rate has continued, but it 

has continued at a slower rate. 

24 

[The chart titled ‘‘Monthly Change in Nonfarm Payrolls’’ appears 

in the Submissions for the Record on page 60.] 

What is the situation there? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah. I would say for this recession about 

the first eight months I think at the time I would have characterized it as a mild recession, maybe borderline recession. 

Then we had about six months of almost unprecedented job loss. 

That was 645,000 jobs per month at the very worst part which is 

a huge job loss. 

Since then we have had about three months of moderation, then 

another three months of moderation. At least the last three months 

we have been at a job loss level of about 188,000 per month over 

the last three months. 

So it is significant, and it is job loss that is consistent with a recession anyway, but it is certainly a moderation over where it was. 

Representative Hinchey. So the moderation is something that 

is interesting and has some significance to it in and of itself. 

Have you done any kind of an analysis or examination of the significance of the so-called Stimulus Bill with regard to the moderation of this unemployment? 

Commissioner Hall. We haven’t, and our surveys just are not 

designed to pick up something like that. 

Representative Hinchey. Pardon me? 

Commissioner Hall. Our surveys that we base this data on, 

they just are not designed to pick up something like what you are 

asking. 

Representative Hinchey. They are not designed to pick up 

something like that? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I mean the effects of the Stimulus 

are in our numbers somewhere, but our surveys are not designed 

to sort of pull out the Stimulus effect from other things that are 

going on in the economy. 

You know, just to put it in perspective, our payroll jobs survey, 

we are measuring over 130 million payroll jobs every month. 

It is a large survey. We are sending it out to over 400 thousand 

establishments that represent about 40 million people. And we 

turn it around in an average of about 12 days. So we are doing 

quite a lot to get a very good, accurate measure of the monthly 

jobs. To be able to try to separate out the Stimulus’s effect from 

other effects, we just could not do it with our current survey. 

Representative Hinchey. Okay. One of the interesting things 

that you pointed out, however, was that healthcare generated 

29,000 jobs in October, and then subsequent to that you said that 

also education had been positive in generating a number of jobs. 

And of course the so-called Stimulus Bill focused on those two 

areas of the economy, health care and education, in addition to a 

number of other things. But most of the funding that has gone out 

so far—I think it is roughly 30 percent—do you have any close 

analysis of that? Have you looked at that? 

Commissioner Hall. No, we have not. 

Representative Hinchey. You don’t? Okay. My estimation is it 

is something in the neighborhood of 30 percent of the Stimulus Bill 

that has actually gone out into play, leaving 70 percent of it to be 

used over the course of hopefully the next several months. 

25 

The impact of that Stimulus Bill seems to have had positive effects on health care and education. Do you have any analysis of 

that? Or are you just seeing that, yes, there was a concentration 

on healthcare and education of the Stimulus Bill and there was 

also an increase in jobs in those areas, but you don’t make any connection between the two? 

Commissioner Hall. No, we haven’t tried to make a connection. 

Representative Hinchey. You have not made a connection? 

Okay. 

Well thanks very much. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Cummings. 

Representative Cummings. Yes. What is our rate in Maryland? 

Commissioner Hall. The unemployment rate is 7.2 percent. 

Representative Cummings. Let me first of all thank you very 

much for your testimony. As usual you have done an outstanding 

job. 

Mr. Hall, some industries such as construction and manufacturing have been seeing sharp job losses for some time. Construction has been losing jobs since January of 2007, wiping out all of 

the jobs gained during the housing boom. 

This summer, however, construction job losses appeared to be 

slowing. Did this trend continue through October? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. The job loss of 62,000, it’s been in the 

same range now for about six months. But at the worst it was 

about almost double that. 

Representative Cummings. And were these losses concentrated in residential or nonresidential building? 

Commissioner Hall. Lately the concentration has been in nonresidential. 

Representative Cummings. And I notice, on another note, that 

retail trade—and you have here, department stores in particular 

I’m looking at—I think you say in your report that they lost 11,000 

jobs? Is that right? Is that accurate, on page 2 of your report? 

Commissioner Hall. On retail trade actually we have a loss of 

40,000. 

Representative Cummings. 40,000? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Cummings. And I know—— 

Commissioner Hall. Oh, I’m sorry. Yes, the department store 

is 11,000, yes. 

Representative Cummings [continuing]. Just the department 

stores, yes. 

Commissioner Hall. Yes, I’m sorry. 

Representative Cummings. Now consumer confidence. You 

would think that that would probably be linked to that figure? Is 

that right? Is that a reasonable conclusion? 

Commissioner Hall. It is, although I will say that with my experience it is not closely linked. Big changes in consumer confidence really effect spending. Sometimes consumer confidence can 

move for maybe non-economic reasons that does not translate into 

higher or lower sales. But they are clearly linked. 

26 

Representative Cummings. Now, Dr. Hall, can you discuss the 

differing unemployment rates across the education backgrounds? 

For example, what is the unemployment rate for those without a 

high school diploma? Those with a high school diploma? Those with 

a college degree? 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. For those without a high school diploma, the unemployment rate is currently 15.5 percent. High 

school graduates but not college, 11.2 percent. Some college, 9 percent. And bachelor’s degree and higher, 4.7 percent. So it is a very 

large difference. 

Representative Cummings. Interesting. And going back to my 

question that I always ask you, if you were—if the President were 

to call you today, right after this hearing, and ask you what the 

situation was in the country, in a 30-second explanation what 

would you tell him? 

Commissioner Hall. I would say the labor market continues to 

shed jobs, a significant number of jobs. And the bright spot, if it 

is a bright spot, is that the job loss has moderated over the last 

three months. 

Representative Cummings. And if he asked you what seems 

to be, if the trend continues at the rate we are going, knowing that 

you do not have a crystal ball, but just based upon your expertise 

in looking at these trends over the years, what would you say? 

Commissioner Hall. I would say that recessions do seem to 

have phases where the job loss moves in phases, but there is no 

guarantee that we are in a phase right now where the job loss is 

significant but not nearly as bad as it was before. Going forward, 

it would be hard to say. 

If some of the non-labor market data continues to look a bit 

stronger like it does now, I would think that eventually it would 

start to impact the labor market and we would start to see a moderation in job loss further. 

Representative Cummings. Now with regard to unemployment 

benefits, I know you are not trying to do policy, but logic tells us 

that if we have people who were getting no money and then we— 

you know, because they have lost their jobs—and then we have 

people who are getting unemployment benefits, in other words 

some money, that this should have some type of effect on unemployment with regard to other industries. Do you follow what I am 

saying? In other words, people will be spending? Is that a logical 

conclusion? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. Although I have no expertise in the 

effects of the Unemployment Insurance Program, but logically that 

makes sense. 

Representative Cummings. Thank you, very much. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much, Commissioner Hall, for 

being here with us today to talk about the labor market, and we 

will continue to focus on this important monthly review, and we 

appreciate your time, and this meeting is adjourned. 

Commissioner Hall. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., Friday, November 6, 2009, the hearing was adjourned.] 

(27) 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

28 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROLYN MALONEY, CHAIR, JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE

Last week, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that real gross domestic 

product grew by 3.5 percent in the third quarter. This is a welcome indication that 

we are moving toward economic recovery. 

Despite the progress, this morning’s employment report of 190,000 jobs lost and 

an unemployment rate of 10.2 percent is a clear indicator of the work we have left 

to do on behalf of our nation’s families. 

The current Administration took office just ten short months ago. The economy 

was facing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. 

In January alone, 741,000 jobs were lost. But jobs losses of about 600,000 or more 

per month started as far back as November of 2008. Those punishing job losses continued for 5 straight months. 

However, thanks to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we are seeing 

signs of recovery. 

Last week, the White House released reports from stimulus grant recipients. 

Those grant recipients account for just one-fifth of the total $787 billion in spending 

and tax relief, but they alone have directly created or saved nearly 650,000 jobs. 

These numbers confirm we are on-track to create or save at least 3.5 million jobs 

over the life of the Recovery Act. And, job creation in the temporary help sector is 

a leading indicator of progress in the labor market. Since July, temporary help services has added 44,000 jobs—34,000 in October alone. 

While we have brought the economy back from the brink, we are not where we 

need to be yet in terms of job creation. 

Although the pace of job loss has slowed substantially in recent months, the labor 

market continues to shed jobs. More than 15.7 million Americans are unemployed. 

More than a third of the jobless have been out of work for at least six months. 

And almost 3 million workers have been unemployed for a full-year or longer. 

These long-term unemployment numbers reaffirm the need for extending unemployment benefits, which Congress has passed and the President will sign into law 

soon. 

Out-of-work Americans will soon have 14 additional weeks of unemployment benefits to help them weather the ongoing economic storm. Workers in the hardest-hit 

states will receive additional weeks of benefits. 

9.3 million people are working part-time because they have been unable to find 

full-time jobs—an alarming increase since the recession began in December 2007. 

The growth of involuntary part-time work indicates that the job market recovery 

may be a slow process. 

As the economy rebounds, firms are likely to increase the hours of workers already on their payrolls, before they begin hiring new workers. 

The conversion of a part-time job into a full-time job means that the labor market 

will improve while the standard indicators of progress—job creation and the unemployment rate—remain stalled. 

We have early indicators that this part-time to full-time conversion is already beginning to happen in some sectors of the economy. 

The manufacturing sector has increased ‘‘callbacks,’’ suggesting that workers 

whose hours had been cut are returning to full work schedules. 

This is good economic news—but it also foreshadows a long, slow labor market 

recovery. 

At the Joint Economic Committee, we estimate that over 4 million Americans 

have seen their employment-sponsored health insurance coverage evaporate because 

of losing a job. 

By passing comprehensive health insurance reform, we will help lay the groundwork for assuring that losing a job no longer means losing access to affordable, quality health insurance coverage. 

Let there be no doubt that the road to a full labor market recovery will be long, 

and it won’t be easy. 

We will be discussing ideas that will put Americans back to work—including aid 

to the states that will create education jobs, an infrastructure bank that will boost 

construction employment, and targeted tax credits that will support small businesses. 

Together, we can launch our nation onto a new path of prosperity for all. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEVIN BRADY, SENIOR HOUSE REPUBLICAN

I am pleased once again to join in welcoming Dr. Hall before the Committee this 

morning. 

29 

Today’s employment report is bad news for American workers. During October, 

another 190 thousand payroll jobs were lost, and the unemployment rate increased 

to 10.2 percent. For adult men, their unemployment rate of 10.7 percent is an alltime record since 1948 when this series started. 

Last week’s preliminary report estimated that real GDP increased by 3.5 percent 

in the third quarter. Although I am hopeful that economic growth will continue this 

quarter, I am concerned about very sluggish economic growth next year and the deleterious effects of such a slowdown on jobs and the unemployment rate. 

For American workers, a jobless recovery is no recovery. Indeed, I fear that we 

may well be facing a ‘‘job-loss’’ recovery as U.C.L.A. economist Lee Ohanian recently 

warned. 

The October 2009 Blue Chip forecast predicts that the unemployment rate will average 10 percent or more through the first half of 2010 and will still be 9.6 percent 

at year-end. Moreover, the Blue Chip forecast also predicts that the unemployment 

rate will average 8.1 percent in 2012. If this forecast were to prove true, the United 

States would still have a significantly higher unemployment rate during the next 

presidential election than when President Obama took office. 

In January, two of President Obama’s top economists forecast that if the Congress 

were to enact the Obama stimulus bill, then the unemployment rate would remain 

at or below 8.0 percent during 2009. However, since President Obama signed the 

stimulus bill into law on February 17th, the unemployment rate has been far above 

8 percent. 

Obama Administration officials continue to make extravagant, statistically dubious claims about how many jobs their stimulus plan has allegedly created or saved. 

In a blog on the White House website on Friday October 30th, Jared Bernstein 

claimed that the stimulus had created at least 650,000 jobs. This claim rests on a 

calculation prepared by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board and 

posted on Recovery.gov. 

On September 10, 2009, the Board’s Chairman Earl E. Devaney, who had previously been Inspector General for the Department of the Interior, stated in his testimony before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Operations: 

Although the Board and Inspectors General will play a role in data quality—chiefly by reviewing agencies’ processes for ensuring quality of the 

data—the Board’s main goal will be one of data integrity. That is, the Board 

will strive to ensure that the data on Recovery.gov is a true reflection of what 

recipients report . . . The responsibility for data quality, however, rests with 

the recipients of the funds and the agencies distributing the funds. 

In other words, the Board will not make sure that the underlying data reported 

by government agencies and recipients of stimulus funds are accurate and truthful, 

just that the data, which may be inaccurate or even false, are compiled correctly. 

This does not give the American people much confidence in any job creation reports 

posted on Recovery.gov. 

Disturbingly, many press reports have alleged that the Administration has counted some jobs that may not be connected to the stimulus at all and counted other 

jobs multiple times: 

• On October 29th, the Associated Press reviewed the Administration’s claim of 

30,000 contract jobs ‘‘created or saved.’’ The AP found that the Child Care Association of Brevard County, Florida, reported that it had used $98,669 of stimulus funds to save 129 jobs when the organization actually used these funds to 

give its 129 employees a 3.9-percent pay raise. The AP also found that East 

Central Technical College in Douglas, Georgia, reported creating 200 jobs when 

it had used its stimulus funds to buy trucks and trailers for commercial driving 

instruction, and a modular classroom and bathroom for a health education program. 

• On November 4th, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Administration 

had overstated the number of jobs claimed by at least 20,000. For example, the 

Journal found that a Kentucky shoe store reported saving 9 jobs from an 

$889.60 contract to supply work boots to the Army Corps of Engineers. 

• On November 5th, the Chicago Tribune uncovered inaccuracies in the Administration’s claim that stimulus funds ‘‘created or saved’’ over 14,000 education 

jobs in Illinois. For example, one Illinois school district reported saving 473 

teaching jobs even though it employs only 290 teachers, while another reported 

saving 665 jobs even though it employs only 600 workers. 

In contrast to these difficult-to-substantiate Administration claims, Bureau of 

Labor Statistics employment data show that the United States lost a net of 2.9 milVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:55 Apr 26, 2010 Jkt 055047 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 C:\DOCS\55564.TXT SHAUN PsN: DPROCT
30 

lion payroll jobs since the Obama stimulus bill was signed into law. Moreover, the 

number of payroll jobs has declined in 49 of the 50 states. 

Dr. Hall, I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEITH HALL, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF LABOR

STATISTICS

Madam Chair and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the employment and unemployment data 

we released this morning. 

In October, the unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent, the highest rate since 

April 1983, and nonfarm payroll employment declined by 190,000. Since the start 

of the recession, payroll employment has fallen by 7.3 million. 

Job losses have averaged 188,000 over the past 3 months. The declines are much 

smaller and less widespread than they were last fall and winter. Nevertheless, some 

industries are still experiencing notable employment declines. In October, construction lost 62,000 jobs, manufacturing 61,000, and retail trade 40,000. 

In construction, October job losses were concentrated among nonresidential specialty trades and heavy construction. Earlier in the recession, the residential components of construction accounted for the majority of the job losses in the industry. 

In manufacturing, there were notable job cuts in machinery, nonmetallic minerals, 

computer products, and printing in October. Retail job losses were concentrated in 

sporting goods and book stores and in department stores. Earlier in the downturn, 

large job losses were spread across a wider range of retail industries. 

One of the few industries where employment continued to grow during the recession has been health care, which added 29,000 jobs in October. Employment in temporary help services rose by 34,000 over the month, the first significant increase in 

that industry since the start of the recession in December 2007. 

Average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers in the private 

sector were up by 5 cents in October to $18.72. Over the past 12 months, average 

hourly earnings have risen by 2.4 percent. From September 2008 to September 

2009, the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 

(CPI-W) declined by 1.7 percent. 

Turning to measures from the survey of households, the unemployment rate increased from 9.8 to 10.2 percent over the month. Since the recession began, the jobless rate has increased by 5.3 percentage points, while the number of unemployed 

has more than doubled to 15.7 million. 

The number of long-term unemployed remained high. In October, 5.6 million 

workers had been jobless for 27 weeks or more. 

Among the employed, there were 9.3 million persons working part time in October 

who would have preferred full-time work. The number of such workers has doubled 

since the start of the recession. 

Among those outside the labor force—that is, persons neither working nor looking 

for work—the number of discouraged workers in October was 808,000, up from 

484,000 a year earlier. These individuals are not currently looking for work because 

they believe no jobs are available for them. 

In summary, nonfarm payroll employment fell by 190,000 in October, and the unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent. 

My colleagues and I now would be glad to answer your questions. 

31 


Insert offset folio 1 here 55564.001
32 


Insert offset folio 2 here 55564.002
33 


Insert offset folio 3 here 55564.003
34 


Insert offset folio 4 here 55564.004
35 


Insert offset folio 5 here 55564.005
36 


Insert offset folio 6 here 55564.006
37 


Insert offset folio 7 here 55564.007
38 


Insert offset folio 8 here 55564.008
39 


Insert offset folio 9 here 55564.009
40 


Insert offset folio 10 here 55564.010
41 


Insert offset folio 11 here 55564.011
42 


Insert offset folio 12 here 55564.012
43 


Insert offset folio 13 here 55564.013
44 


Insert offset folio 14 here 55564.014
45 


Insert offset folio 15 here 55564.015
46 


Insert offset folio 16 here 55564.016
47 


Insert offset folio 17 here 55564.017
48 


Insert offset folio 18 here 55564.018
49 


Insert offset folio 19 here 55564.019
50 


Insert offset folio 20 here 55564.020
51 


Insert offset folio 21 here 55564.021
52 


Insert offset folio 22 here 55564.022
53 


Insert offset folio 23 here 55564.023
54 


Insert offset folio 24 here 55564.024
55 


Insert offset folio 25 here 55564.025
56 


Insert offset folio 26 here 55564.026
57 


Insert offset folio 27 here 55564.027
58 


Insert offset folio 28 here 55564.028
59 


Insert offset folio 29 here 55564.029
60 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 30 here 55564.030