Numbers can be used to sell falsehoods about Obama, or anyone else

Re “Obama among the great presidents? Don’t make me laugh” letter by Joe Macellaro.

This is not an endorsement of President Obama, but a rebuttal of how numbers on first look can be used improperly to support a point of view.

The writer stated the national debt rose from $10.6 trillion to $20.7 trillion, seemingly all attributable to Obama. Let’s look at a few reasons why spending is outpacing revenue.

First, according to the U.S. Constitution, all bills for raising revenue must originate in the House of Representatives, and that Congress has the power to borrow money. So let’s share the debt between Obama and the Republican controlled houses of Congress.

Second, the Great Recession. Because of it, less tax revenue was collected and debt-financed government spending during the depths of a recession was used to mitigate the impact of the crisis and helped return the country to economic growth.

Third but not last, debt carryover as a result of laws already in place when Obama took office. The Congressional Budget Office says this was about $3.3 trillion of the debt number.

As for the labor force participation rate declining, it has been declining since 2000. Most recent declines are due mainly to the Baby-boom generation retiring, not to Obama.

So when you see or hear numbers being used to support a claim, be wary. There is usually more behind the numbers.

This story was originally published March 18, 2017 at 7:00 AM with the headline "Numbers can be used to sell falsehoods about Obama, or anyone else."