Make us your home page
Instagram

Today’s top headlines delivered to you daily.

(View our Privacy Policy)

PolitiFact: Did Wasserman Schultz deny a rise in unemployment under Obama?

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, did not deny the unemployment rate went up under Obama.

Getty Images

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, did not deny the unemployment rate went up under Obama.

Bloggers could not believe it. South Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, insisted on national television that unemployment did not increase under President Barack Obama.

"Denial — it ain't just a river in Egypt," wrote HotAir.com blogger Ed Morrissey. "Appearing on Fox News this morning, DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz insisted that unemployment didn't go up in Barack Obama's term of office, a hilarious argument on several levels."

Morrissey blogged about a 4-minute interview last week between Wasserman Schultz and Gretchen Carlson, co-host of Fox and Friends. Their back-and-forth over unemployment inspired the Republican National Committee press team to package Morrissey's post with several other accounts in an email blast to political reporters.

"This morning Delusional Debbie denied unemployment went up under Obama — a claim now gracing Drudge Report and a number of other news sites," the RNC email read. "Either Wasserman Schultz needs to study up …or she's deliberately trying to deceive Americans."

We think the interview — and what exactly Wasserman Schultz and Carlson said — warrants another look.

Here's the full exchange.

Carlson: "Unemployment has gone up precipitously since he (Obama) took office."

Wasserman Schultz: "That is simply not true."

Carlson: "Yes it is."

Wasserman Schultz: "In fact, unemployment has now dropped below 9 percent. It's continuing to drop. He's been focused on …"

Carlson: "But it's higher than when they promised that the stimulus would lower it to 8 percent …"

Wasserman Schultz: "See, that narrative doesn't work for you anymore, though, because when President Obama …"

Carlson: "It's not my narrative. I'm just talking about facts, where the unemployment numbers are."

Wasserman Schultz: "You just said that the unemployment rate has been going up since he took office, and it hasn't."

Carlson: "Is unemployment higher now than when President Obama took office?"

Wasserman Schultz: "What's happened since President Obama took office …"

Carlson: "Is unemployment higher than he took office?"

Wasserman Schultz: "Unemployment is nearing right around where it was when President Obama took office and it's dropping. You just said that it's been increasing, and that's not true."

There is no denying the unemployment rate is higher now (8.6 percent in November 2011) than it was in February 2009, Obama's first full month in office (8.2, which itself was up .4 percentage points from January 2009).

But is that what Wasserman Schultz said?

The host and guest's back-and-forth is pretty muddy, stuffed with implications and ignored points. It's confusing because Carlson and Wasserman Schultz refuse to share a frame of discussion. Carlson wants to talk about how unemployment is higher since Obama took office, but she uses a misleading word, "precipitously," to start it off. Wasserman Schultz ignores Carlson's point and reacts instead to her interpretation of what Carlson said, that unemployment is rising.

The word "precipitously" could be a fair choice to describe the jump from the April 2008 unemployment rate of 4.9 percent, with President George W. Bush at the nation's helm, to the Obama-led October 2009 rate of 10.1.

But the word is not accurate if you interpret Carlson as saying unemployment is rising precipitously now, as Wasserman Schultz did and as most people would, said Alec Marantz, New York University linguistics and psychology professor.

"If Carlson meant, 'Unemployment is significantly higher than when Obama took office,' what she said doesn't convey that," Marantz said. "The use of the adverb 'precipitously' suggests a steady, steep upward slope, which corresponds only to the beginning of Obama's presidency, not to a period between 'since he took office' and now."

The jobless rate has tapered off since its October 2009 peak, lingering mainly within the range of 9.2 and 8.8 percent. The most recent rate available is 8.6 percent, its lowest point since March 2009.

Later in the interview, Carlson tries to adjust her point so that it's about "where the unemployment numbers are." So she asks Wasserman Schultz, "Is unemployment higher now than when President Obama took office?"

The answer is an unequivocal yes.

But Wasserman Schultz does not offer a direct answer. Her response, "Unemployment is nearing right around where it was when President Obama took office and it's dropping," implies the rate has increased but articulates that unemployment is going down. It's not a denial; it's a dodge.

Our ruling

The enemy of clarity is cross-talk.

Did Wasserman Schultz really insist that unemployment did not go up during Obama's term, as propagated by the Republican National Committee? No. Wasserman Schultz insisted something else — that it hadn't gone up precipitously and that it is not going up. We rate the RNC's claim Mostly False.

The statement

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz "denied unemployment went up under Obama."

Republican National Committee, Dec. 12, in an email to reporters

The ruling

Politifact ruling: Mostly False

Wasserman Schultz never said that unemployment did not go up during Obama's term. She insisted that it hadn't gone up precipitously and that it is not going up. Those are different things. So we rate this claim Mostly False.

PolitiFact: Did Wasserman Schultz deny a rise in unemployment under Obama? 12/22/11 [Last modified: Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:45pm]
Photo reprints | Article reprints

© 2017 Tampa Bay Times

    

Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

Loading...
  1. Support for gay marriage surges, even among groups once wary

    Nation

    NEW YORK — In the two years since same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide, support for it has surged even among groups that recently were broadly opposed, according to a new national survey.

    People gather in Washington's Lafayette Park to see the White House lit up in rainbow colors on June 26, 2015, the day the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage legal. In the two years since same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide, support for it has surged even among groups that recently were broadly opposed, according to a new national survey released on Monday, June 26, 2017. [Associated Press]
  2. June 26 marks the 20th anniversary of the Harry Potter series.
  3. Air bag recalls, lawsuits lead Takata to file for bankruptcy

    Autos

    Shattered by recall costs and lawsuits, Japanese air bag maker Takata Corp. filed Monday for bankruptcy protection in Tokyo and the U.S., saying it was the only way it could keep on supplying replacements for faulty air bag inflators linked to the deaths of at least 16 people.

    Japanese air bag maker Takata Corp. CEO Shigehisa Takada bows during a press conference in Tokyo on Monday. Takata has filed for bankruptcy protection in Tokyo and the U.S., overwhelmed by lawsuits and recall costs related to its production of defective air bag inflators.
[(AP Photo/Shizuo Kambayashi]
  4. Philando Castile family reaches $3 million settlement in death

    Crime

    MINNEAPOLIS — The mother of Philando Castile, a black motorist killed by a Minnesota police officer last year, has reached a nearly $3 million settlement in his death, according to an announcement Monday by her attorneys and the Minneapolis suburb that employed the officer.

    A handout dashboard camera image of Officer Jeronimo Yanez firing at Philando Castile during a traffic stop in Falcon Heights, Minn., July 6, 2016. [Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension via The New York Times]
  5. From the food editor: Almond-Crusted Chicken Tenders

    Cooking

    I decided my almond chicken obsession was becoming a bit much.

    Almond Crusted Chicken Tenders. Photo by Michelle Stark, Times food editor.