Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist

[OrByte]

I know Paturanus is that ignorant, but I'm surprised you're joining him. The problem is NOT knowing where the money went. The problem is taking thousands and thousands of detailed records and forcing them into pretty little buckets for summary reporting.

My guess (based on years of actual, real world IT experience instead of a bunch of school kids whose only computer experience is games and posting here) is that Congressional District is a required field. Unfortunately, places like the Virgin Islands have no Congressional Districts, yet the poor clerk filling out the form there has to put in something. Consequently, he puts in a 1 or a 99 (or a 999 if it was a three-digit field) to fit a simplistic, one-size-fits-all reporting requirement. A detailed report (as well as the original application) will show where the funds went. The web summary does not. It's a pretty simple concept once you get past the blind partisan attack mentality.

If you're looking for valid criticisms, look to the "data" for jobs created. That's more subjective and easy to game ... as administrations from both political persuasions have regularly demonstrated. Getting hysterical about trivial reporting artifacts like this is a pointless distraction and just makes you look like an idiot. Paturanus can't help it. I think you can.

You are right on the money regarding Congressional District being a required data element.

 

[bfdd]

The virgin islands recieved the money obviously, they just dont have congressional districts, and the site is defaulting the figure to 1 or 99.

The arizona one is likely just a data error.

They shouldn't even have the option to mess up the data and the data shouldn't be able to be wrong, that's a flaw in the systems design. You know you're creating something for idiots, so you have to make it easy enough for a monkey to do it. If a monkey can't do it, then you can't expect it to work properly.

My work is part of this reporting system. I can tell you that data entry errors are running rampant.

I can tell you that interpreting ARRA from the Fed down to the city/county level is a monstrous task.

I can tell you that in an attempt to collect a MASSIVE amount of data from ARRA recipients, in a manner that is transparent and rapid, has created an incredibly complex reporting system that is really going thru the audit ringer as we speak.

I am meeting with auditors tommorow about this very issue...it is, quite frankly, the most difficult reporting assignment I have ever seen taken on by public agencies. From the Fed down to the local gov level.


So no it is not "laughable" to consider that many of these errors stem from data entry. The real problem is multiple interpretations of the regulations..which result in recipients sending bad/incorrect data to the recovery websites.

Still sounds laughable. I work for a market research firm we get TONS of data in all the time, we have some data problems every now and then. Most of these problems stem from the fact we have two different systems and one doesn't support everything the other does. That isn't a data problem, it's a problem with the system. You guys were paid 18 million dollars and you came up with something as bogus as that? Come on bud... There's plenty of developers out there who could of made more for less. They never should of had the option to fudge up the data entry.

 

[bfdd]

I know Paturanus is that ignorant, but I'm surprised you're joining him. The problem is NOT knowing where the money went. The problem is taking thousands and thousands of detailed records and forcing them into pretty little buckets for summary reporting.

My guess (based on years of actual, real world IT experience instead of a bunch of school kids whose only computer experience is games and posting here) is that Congressional District is a required field. Unfortunately, places like the Virgin Islands have no Congressional Districts, yet the poor clerk filling out the form there has to put in something. Consequently, he puts in a 1 or a 99 (or a 999 if it was a three-digit field) to fit a simplistic, one-size-fits-all reporting requirement. A detailed report (as well as the original application) will show where the funds went. The web summary does not. It's a pretty simple concept once you get past the blind partisan attack mentality.

If you're looking for valid criticisms, look to the "data" for jobs created. That's more subjective and easy to game ... as administrations from both political persuasions have regularly demonstrated. Getting hysterical about trivial reporting artifacts like this is a pointless distraction and just makes you look like an idiot. Paturanus can't help it. I think you can.

Like I said I work with developers everyday. The fact we spent 18 million dollars on something I'm sure plenty of developers out there could of done more for less on is ridiculous in itself.

 

[OutHouse]

Your spreading more of your mis-information i see.......you are way too funny.....hahaha

umm how is that misinformation? it sound exactly right to me and pretty much most of the nation and news networks. are you special and know something we dont?

 

[OrByte]

They shouldn't even have the option to mess up the data and the data shouldn't be able to be wrong, that's a flaw in the systems design. You know you're creating something for idiots, so you have to make it easy enough for a monkey to do it. If a monkey can't do it, then you can't expect it to work properly.



Still sounds laughable. I work for a market research firm we get TONS of data in all the time, we have some data problems every now and then. Most of these problems stem from the fact we have two different systems and one doesn't support everything the other does. That isn't a data problem, it's a problem with the system. You guys were paid 18 million dollars and you came up with something as bogus as that? Come on bud... There's plenty of developers out there who could of made more for less. They never should of had the option to fudge up the data entry.

Wow, we need you to be in charge. Can you please go to the White House Office of Management and Budgets and sign up?

you rock.

I already said the problem isn't with the development/programming. Alot of people can create what is currently being created.

The problem is in the requirements and the rapid rollout. Requirements changing from one control agency to another. Each control agency revamping requirements on almost a monthly basis. We rolled out the first version reporting tool for our Federal Division and on that very day, the requirements changed and the tools needed revision before the next months reporting. 2 months after the first version reporting tool we get another control agency (OMB) with it's new requirements. Then factor in state OCIO requirements, now we are building interfaces for 3 reporting systems (2 Fed, 1 state) and updating our own data entry reporting tool. yeah...it does get complex.

Like I said earlier....it is a wild ride.

Ask any of the IT people involved and most of them will respond in a similar cocky/condescending fashion....that the tools are easy to develop...just tell them what the requirements are. But on the business side, it isn't that easy.

 

[OutHouse]

These are probably data entry errors, but embarassing none the less. That said the whole idea about "saved" jobs is like proving God exists. Nobody can prove anything was "saved". I even question if anybody can prove jobs are "created" by a limited supply of funds.

no i dont think so. when 5 jobs for a contract turns into 400 jobs its sounds like somebody along the long chain of people who enter that data my feel obligated or have a sense of duty to inflate those numbers to show that the stimulus plan is working.

 

[bfdd]

OrByte, like I said I know developers who could of handled it in the short time required to get it up and running and for less money too. I don't understand how a company paid 18 million dollars could make a system so flawed. I understand the business side isn't easy, but even then it shouldn't have these glaring problems. They shouldn't even have the option to input bad data and that's what they gave them. Sorry if that offends you professionally, but there are plenty of developers out there who wouldn't have made the mistakes that were made in this design.

 

[shira]

You can't prove it didn't create jobs... now can you?

And this proves that jobs weren't created how?

You DO realize, don't you, that you're accepting the "Without Recovery Plan" projection as being accurate (even though the "With Recovery Plan" projection was obviously inaccurate), and you're comparing it with the actual numbers.

What if "Without Recovery Plan" projection understated reality by at least as much as the "With Recovery Play" projection did? In that case, didn't the recovery plan save a TON of jobs?

So what Lunar Ray wrote is true: You can't prove that the recovery plan didn't save jobs, didn't bring us back from the brink, wasn't actually a brilliant economic maneuver by the federal government. All you have is your insufferable bias and stupidity to convince you otherwise.

 

[cubeless]

what this proves is that the same stooges will probably be doing the numbers for the healthcare program... pretty funny that the clowns can't even be bothered to be sure that bo's premier propaganda site is correct...

 

[OrByte]

OrByte, like I said I know developers who could of handled it in the short time required to get it up and running and for less money too. I don't understand how a company paid 18 million dollars could make a system so flawed. I understand the business side isn't easy, but even then it shouldn't have these glaring problems. They shouldn't even have the option to input bad data and that's what they gave them. Sorry if that offends you professionally, but there are plenty of developers out there who wouldn't have made the mistakes that were made in this design.

I don't take offense. As a matter of fact I appreciate the fact that people are frustrated with the output.

I also appreciate the enormous amount of man hours and effort put into this reporting need.

You can put in all the validation rules you want...people will still find a way to enter crappy data.

 

[cubeless]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/34018175

now the gao is out to get bo...

 

[Siddhartha]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091118...uX2hlYWRsaW5lX2xpc3QEc2xrA2ZhY3RjaGVja3N0aQ--

FACT CHECK: Stimulus money to 'phantom' districts?

Delicious Digg Facebook Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Twitter Yahoo! Bookmarks Print Play Video CNBC – Small Biz Stimulus: Cut Payroll Tax?
Play Video Video:Stimulus Money and Phantom Jobs ABC News Play Video Barack Obama Video:Obama, Holder defend NY 9/11 trials Reuters Related Quotes Symbol Price Change
^DJI 10,426.31 -11.11
^GSPC 1,109.80 -0.52
^IXIC 2,193.14 -10.64

Reuters – The U.S. economy grew in the third quarter for the first time in more than a year as government stimulus … By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 46 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Did the Obama administration really pump billions of dollars into "phantom" congressional districts?

Republicans, bloggers and conservative think tanks have been circulating reports suggesting that money intended to create jobs and shore up the economy was unaccounted for, misused or lost in some sort of bookkeeping black hole.

The problem is real. Its significance is overstated, and in some instances, fabricated.

THE CHARGE: Using stimulus reports available on Recovery.gov, New Mexico attorney and political activist Jim Scarantino reported on his blog Monday that millions of dollars were being spent in New Mexico congressional districts that don't exist. Republicans on Capitol Hill quickly began circulating the report and reporters and bloggers began searching for other nonexistent districts.

Soon, the "phantom" congressional district story became shorthand for government waste.

The Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, a government watchdog group led by former Republican staffers, put out a report showing $6.4 billion in stimulus money had been spent in hundreds of nonexistent congressional districts.

Columnist D.K. Jamaal, writing on the Web site of the Washington Examiner, reported that "the dunderheads running Washington can't find it and don't know where it went."

___

THE FACTS: Scarantino's original report was correct, and his analysis was the latest discovery of problems in the massive database of stimulus spending.

Jobs have been overstated or counted multiple times. Jobs in multiple cities have been logged under the same city. Some businesses and local governments didn't follow the guidelines for counting jobs. And temporary, part-time jobs have been counted as full-time, full-year positions.

Those problems raise questions about how accurate the administration is when it claims more than 640,000 jobs saved or created so far.

Earl Daveny, chairman of the stimulus oversight board, told Congress this week he could not say for certain that the job total displayed by Recovery.gov and touted by the White House is accurate. And a government watchdog report to be released Thursday found 58,386 jobs that were created for projects that have yet to receive money.

There are other problems, too, like the misnumbered congressional districts, that make it harder to analyze the data but don't undercut the administration's claims. For instance, dozens of ZIP codes have also been entered incorrectly. One recipient listed the ZIP code for Birmingham, Ala., as 35025. It is actually 35205.

The origin of all these problems is the same. When thousands of businesses, local governments, universities and nonprofit groups entered information into the massive government database, they didn't always do it right. And the government oversight group collecting the data didn't catch the errors.

But anyone with a computer can still easily find out the name of the business or agency that received the money, which city and state it is located, where the money came from, how much it received, and what it's for.

ZIP code 35025 doesn't exist. Neither does Virginia's 12th District.

But it's easy to find out that the mistyped ZIP code was Birmingham, submitted by a subcontractor working on an Air Force repair contract. And that the Triangle Volunteer Fire Department in Nathalie, Va., spent $50,000 in grant money on a dozen masks and tanks for rescue crews.

Scarantino said Wednesday that his initial blog post was just trying to show problems in the data. The nonexistent congressional districts amount to a "huge red flag," he said. If the oversight board that released the data can't catch that, what else is missing?

"I'm not going to say it went into a black hole," Scarantino said.

And people who are using the error to suggest the money has been misused or lost? "They should do some of their own research," he said.

There are problems with the stimulus data being reported, problems that call into question how accurate the job count is. But the "phantom congressional districts" are being used as a phantom issue to suggest that stimulus money has been misspent.

 

[squirrel dog]

buying a lawn mower and showing 30 jobs created or saved is horseshit . Along with all the other acornish accounting in this administration .

 

[bfdd]

And this proves that jobs weren't created how?

You DO realize, don't you, that you're accepting the "Without Recovery Plan" projection as being accurate (even though the "With Recovery Plan" projection was obviously inaccurate), and you're comparing it with the actual numbers.

What if "Without Recovery Plan" projection understated reality by at least as much as the "With Recovery Play" projection did? In that case, didn't the recovery plan save a TON of jobs?

So what Lunar Ray wrote is true: You can't prove that the recovery plan didn't save jobs, didn't bring us back from the brink, wasn't actually a brilliant economic maneuver by the federal government. All you have is your insufferable bias and stupidity to convince you otherwise.

Well first of shira obviously jobs are being "created." But we losing more jobs than are being "created", that's the problem. Hell most probably aren't being created, they're just moving around. Fire Tom and hire Bill at a lower cost etc. Also, that chart just shows how fucking wrong they were regardless of the fact we may or may not of been better off with out the stimulus. You also can't prove that the recovery plan did ANYTHING at all. I can of done more harm than good or it could of slowed the process down, either way it doesn't matter they were WAY fucking wrong and spent a SHITLOAD of money in the process.

People flip out over the last time a President was wrong(Bush on Iraq) and that has cost us 700 billion so far, the stimulus is around the same and Obama was just as wrong, where's your outrage?

 

[Pocatello]

Let's go to China and ask for another stimulus package, oh, Obama is already doing that.

 

[Bowfinger]

My mistake. You can't help it either.

It's hardly a "trivial artifact" that the site even allows someone to report that x.6 jobs were created.

Yes dear, but then that's not what you were wailing about nor what I was explaining. You said, and I quote, "So, in the name of transparency, the government has outdone itself by creating the most convoluted reporting system in history, thereby ensuring that no one can follow the trail to where the money actually went? Brilliant!" I then explained how the artifacts in the summary reporting had nothing to do with being able to account for each individual report at a detailed level. (Something others have since confirmed.)

I also expressly stated, "If you're looking for valid criticisms, look to the "data" for jobs created. That's more subjective and easy to game ..." While it's great you seem to recognize your initial hysterics were way off the mark, have the integrity to admit you adopted my position instead of acting like you're rebutting it. The issue of Congressional Districts is, in fact, a trivial artifact ... just as I said.

As someone with "real world IT experience," I would expect you to understand that data validation is something even us "school kids" have done and is trivial to implement. It is therefore hardly an unrealistic expectation that an $18 million website should have such validation.

It is easy ... if it was recognized as a design requirement and established as a development priority. If not, you get a system like this where a data element that makes sense for 99% of the data is mandated even for the 1% where it doesn't. I never suggested the system couldn't be improved. I was simply explaining why there were bogus Congressional Districts in the data.

Thus far, I've only posted facts and excerpts from the website, hardly making myself sound "hysterical." The only hysteria going on here is your defense of this nonsense.

"the most convoluted reporting system in history"

Let's let those words sink in a bit. Now tell us again how you "only posted facts and excerpts" and how you don't sound like a hysterical ninny. Man up and take accountability for your own behavior.

Your argument amounts to saying, "Don't worry about it - just wait for the final report to come out."

No dear. My explanation addressed why the data had bogus Congressional District numbers in those cases where there were no districts. Everything else is your straw man attack.

To that, I respond that Obama promised real-time accountability and access to this data, something that isn't hard to achieve in practice. Your litany of explanations is simply making excuses in light of the fact that you have "real world IT experience," as I can therefore only assume that you know how trivial it would be to ensure that this data were properly entered.

"Trivial" is a naive word from someone whose only experience is class projects, but I certainly agree it is feasible. My guess is this was a rushed project with poor requirements and design, by people who didn't consider how political hacks would obsess over every little imperfection they could find, real or imagined. material or not. Before you launch another straw man attack, let's be clear ... I'm not excusing, I'm explaining. If they really spent $18 million developing this system, I'd hope to see better quality data as well.

If the reporting process is so impossible,

For example, straw man attacks just like that one. Nobody said it was impossible, I didn't even suggest it was difficult. As a matter of fact, I didn't suggest a single f'ing thing about the difficulty or lack thereof of the reporting process. This is just bullshit you pulled out of your ass in lieu of any sort of an honest argument.

then why did they implement it in the first place?

To attempt to provide an unprecedented level of transparency into how tax dollars were used. What's your proposal, that they shouldn't have even attempted to put this information out for public view? That's so prior administration.

Because they are woefully incompetent, out of touch with reality,

I think you're projecting.

or want to hide the flow of money? If you can suggest an alternative option, I'm all ears.

By all means, do close with your grand fallacy that this somehow hides the flow of money. We know it went to the Virgin Islands, but we're all too stupid to figure out that "District 99" there is irrelevant noise. It's such a huge place after all, and we just can't grasp the concept of looking at the details if we want to know more. Wait, that's just you and the other wing-nuts who are faux-outraged at everything the Obama administration does. Tools.

 

[Bowfinger]

Like I said I work with developers everyday. The fact we spent 18 million dollars on something I'm sure plenty of developers out there could of done more for less on is ridiculous in itself.

I agree ... if the $18 million is the cost to develop and host the reporting system. I wonder if it also encompasses other aspects of the program, e.g., staff costs, facilities, support for all the people submitting data, etc.

 

[Bowfinger]

Well first of shira obviously jobs are being "created." [ ... ]
People flip out over the last time a President was wrong(Bush on Iraq) and that has cost us 700 billion so far, the stimulus is around the same and Obama was just as wrong, where's your outrage?

Seriously? Don't destroy your credibility with a crap argument like that. While the cost of attacking Iraq is certainly a concern, the "flipping out" was focused on little things like, oh, the thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed, the fact we defied international law and invaded another country on false pretenses, the way we reportedly increased the risk of terrorism by inflaming anti-U.S. hatred around the world, trivial stuff like that.

(By the way, the actual cost of the Iraq "war" is projected to be well over a trillion dollars.)

 

[dmcowen674]

buying a lawn mower and showing 30 jobs created or saved is horseshit . Along with all the other acornish accounting in this administration .

Better than the destruction of the country your hero did the last 8 years.

 

[Ldir]

What is the site that lets you put any face into a cut out picture? They should have this one so we could put every politician's face on it.

 

[bfdd]

I agree ... if the $18 million is the cost to develop and host the reporting system. I wonder if it also encompasses other aspects of the program, e.g., staff costs, facilities, support for all the people submitting data, etc.

The staff for the data input and collection I would guess was already in place. Same with the facilities for hardware and staff. Now you have 18 million dollars to find developers and pay for hardware and software licensing... That's a shitload of developers, hardware, and software you can buy with 18 million dollars.

Seriously? Don't destroy your credibility with a crap argument like that. While the cost of attacking Iraq is certainly a concern, the "flipping out" was focused on little things like, oh, the thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed, the fact we defied international law and invaded another country on false pretenses, the way we reportedly increased the risk of terrorism by inflaming anti-U.S. hatred around the world, trivial stuff like that.

(By the way, the actual cost of the Iraq "war" is projected to be well over a trillion dollars.)

You're right I left out the part about soldiers dying and innocent Iraqis being killed. So I'll take that one, but the stimulus hasn't helped people, people are still losing their jobs and people are still being hurt.

 

[Budmantom]

buying a lawn mower and showing 30 jobs created or saved is horseshit . Along with all the other acornish accounting in this administration .

Obama saved or inflated 1 billlllion jobs.

 

[ayabe]

So I'll take that one, but the stimulus hasn't helped people, people are still losing their jobs and people are still being hurt.

You are flat out wrong about that. Stimulus money is being used for road construction, big time. I do work every day with State DOT's and they are going flat out. The contractors they employ would be sitting idle otherwise or would be unemployed.

No one, Obamao included, ever said that the stimulus was going to stop unemployment from increasing. So you seem to be trapped by some unreasonable expectations thus leading to disappointment and bitterness when they are left unrealized.

 

[bfdd]

ayabe, some places need new roads that's great and all, that doesn't counter act the burden this money has put on the nation. we're at negative job growth and according to our white house predictions the stimulus has not helped at all. that's what im going by. we don't know what would of happened if they never did it, we don't have time machine technology, but by their predictions we are WAY off from where they said we should be.

 

[OrByte]

I agree ... if the $18 million is the cost to develop and host the reporting system. I wonder if it also encompasses other aspects of the program, e.g., staff costs, facilities, support for all the people submitting data, etc.

I think that 18 million is just for the cost to develop and host the federal reporting system.

All other resources for ARRA reporting...at least for my state/agency...have been "redirected."

Edit: one other thing to mention...perhaps Program staff costs could be included in this figure. I know of federal employees that are not associated with development, but are involved with ARRA reporting. Maybe their payroll is coming out of this figure too...shrug