Jobs growth data for December 2004 was recently released. Below are the facts. This data comes from the Economic Policy Institute's JobWatch web feature. Click here for background documents.

Job creation failed to meet the administration's projections in 15 of the past 18 months.

Job growth over the last 18 months has fallen short by 1,703,000. This number is more than one-third less than the number of jobs the administration said would be created, even without the tax cuts.

The administration expected the tax cuts to generate 1.4 million jobs. This did not happen. The administration expected a little over 5.5 million jobs to be created between June 2003 and December 2004. In reality, only 2.4 million jobs were created.

Job growth in December of 2004 fell almost 150,000 jobs short of projected estimates for that month alone. In other jobs related news, an article in yesterday's New York Times discusses the fact that even though overall unemployment levels may have dropped, the number of workers who have been jobless for over a period of 6 months has remained very high. Six months is the point at which unemployment benefits run out for people, and as of November 2004, one in five unemployed workers were jobless for more than 6 months. A total of 3.6 million workers ran out of unemployment insurance last year, and according to the Times, this statistic is higher than it has been in at least three decades. President Bush and prominent members of Congress seem to believe that tax cuts will create more jobs. The numbers, however, do not appear to be lining up.

This morning President Bush announced nine members to his long-awaited tax panel that will recommend changes and simplifications to the U.S. tax system, picking former Senators Connie Mack and John Breaux to lead the panel. The president has highlighted tax reform as one of his top priorities in his second term. Officially titled the "President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform," the other members of the panel include:* former Representative Bill Frenzel, a Minnesota Republican and visiting scholar to the Brookings Institution;* former Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rossotti;* Liz Ann Sonders, chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab & Co. Inc.;* University of Southern California Professor Elizabeth Garrett;* former Federal Trade Commission Chairman Timothy Muris;* Stanford University Economics Professor Edward Lazear;* MIT professor James Poterba. The panel will be charged with investigating changes and simplification to the tax code. Bush has given the panel until July 31st to report its recommendations. Click here and here to read more about the announcement of the panel members.

The Department of Labor reported today a suprising jump in new unemployment claims. For the last week in December, jobless claims rose by 43,000 to 364,000, the highest level since mid-September. While unemployment claims tend to be more volitle around the holiday season, the four-week moving average for claims, which is more stable, also rose to 333,000. The continuing surprising unemployment claims increases and disappointing job creation results continue to cast doubt on claims by the Bush administration that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are moving the economy forward and will eventually create move jobs. Analysts predict the economy will add 175,000 jobs in December - slightly more than needed to to keep up with population growth - but it is certainly possible that number may not be met. The Labor Department will release December job numbers tomorrow.

In 2001 Bush appointed a commission to look at social security, and this commission came up with three proposals. One of the proposals, called Option 2, is currently receiving a lot of attention on Capitol Hill, with Bill Frist recently stating that "[It's] on the table, and it makes sense to me." Option 2 would link future social security benefits to increases in inflation over a worker's lifetime, rather than wages. One of the major problems with this proposal is that in our economy wages rise faster than inflation. According to this Washington Post article, the new benefits formula would "stunt the growth of benefits, slowly at first but more quickly by the middle of the century." While the proposal would work towards solving the problem of social security's long term deficit, the program does not show signs of reaching the level of "crisis" that many in the government are claiming. In fact, as Krugman points out in a New York Times column, if these proposals are put in place it "will do nothing about the real fiscal threat and will instead dismantle Social Security, a program that is in much better financial shape than the rest of the federal government." These overhauls would also come with a stinging cost to future retirees. The average middle class worker retiring in 2022 would see a benefits cut of 9.9 percent, while in 2042 benefits would fall by more than a quarter. These cuts would be detrimental considering that over the past 60+ years the social security program has done more to stave off poverty than any other program. In a recently released report, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorites highlighted the fact that other policies embraced by this administration will end up costing the country a lot more than the social security shortfall in the future, particularly the cost of Bush's tax cuts and Medicare prescription drug benefits. The report can be found here.