Yesterday, as I garnered the news, I was struck by two stories; in each, the discussion was of women. Do they count? Do men? The answer is, it depends on who is doing the counting. It is also dependent on when the counting occurs. As of July 2005, the
feds will no longer count women. As of May,
Harvard President Lawrence Summers, a man that once counted women out, will now count them in.
The history of these two stories is an interesting one and each addresses the reliability of counting. If counting occurs under the guise of the Bush presidency, it may ultimately be suppressed. This administration is known to repeal routine reports that are contrary to their agenda. If an unfavorable light could be cast upon their mission, it will be dimmed. If counting causes a rumble outside the reach of the Bushites the results may be different.
In late 2003, the administration chose not to release a monthly review of
Mass Layoff Statistics. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics was known to study and report on factory closings throughout the country every thirty days. In November 2003 the report disclosed massive layoffs, close to a quarter-million people were dismissed during the sacred holiday season. These findings conflicted with the message that Bushites were sending. Their banter was of economic growth, the administration was in the process of proudly proclaiming, `businesses are building, and hiring is on the rise.' Nonetheless, the facts told a different story. Expecting repercussions from this and future reports the quasi-autocrats chose to cancel the studies completely. Who knew what accounts such as these might generate?
The announcement came quietly on Christmas Eve; it appeared in a footnote. When asked why the administration might end a long-standing practice, the Bush Band stated that the "report was a victim of budget cuts." [Slate 2003] However, there were questions. The Washington Post made note of the suppression, publicly it posed other possibilities then the one the Whitehouse offered. Were budget cuts really the reason for this elimination? Discussion began and ultimately, in embarrassment, the BLS reinstated the review.
Then there was the time that the federal economic team, on behalf of the administration chose to eradicate its own assessments. They found them unsatisfactory. They knew that exposing their evaluations and projections would counter the agenda that the administration was promoting. The White House was in the process of pushing a tax-cut. Economists and financial experts were critical of the proposed reductions; they warned that these would greatly expand future deficits. Nonetheless, the Bush boys and girls marched on.
[Then] Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill agreed. He predicted huge budget deficits well into the future. O'Neill expressed his concern. He asked the administration to consider that health care and retirement costs would increase as the baby-boomers aged. He stated that these expenses would deplete U.S. reserves. He suggested that these issues be addressed. While not disputing the validity of the O'Neil opinion, the economic team chose to drop these assertions from a budget summary package. Later, the administration was successful in silencing skeptics. O'Neill; was asked to leave his cabinet position.
Now, another report is being eliminated. For four decades the Federal government collected data on women, they looked at employment numbers, the quality of positions, the type of positions women held, salaries, and women's increasing role in supporting their families. While the statistics had long been helpful to businesses, industries, and educational institutions, recently, the Bureau of Labor Statistics questioned the relevancy of these reviews. According to the Bureau "the data is of little use." Apparently, knowledge of women in the work force has no impact on business, on labor, or on our greater society. Therefore, they announced that they would no longer collect it.
All of this from an administration that when speaking of our schools and students, touts the importance of "accountability." In addressing the issues of economics and women in the workplace, they seem to hold a different standard. In these areas, they believe that there is no need for "accountability." In the world of Bush, businesses, industries, and professional institutions need not answer to anyone. They may hire, fire, and assign salaries at their own digression and no one will be the wiser, or so some would hope.
Possibly, President Summers of Harvard University once held this hope. He discovered that the populous is wiser. In January 2005, Mr. Summers spoke of women in the workplace. Specifically he speculated on the reasons that so few sought tenure-tracked positions. He wondered why only a handful pursued the studies of math and science.
President Summers counted women out! He said they preferred to stay home, to sit on the sidelines, and follow the family path. Lawrence Summers noted that women were not well represented in any professional positions. President Summers attributed this to innate differences in the sexes. He speculated; women are not able think in a deep and detailed manner. Disciplines such as math and science require this, as does an "authentic" career.
The Harvard professor was publicly condemned for his words. There were repeated cries for his resignation. The media covered this debate nationwide. Mr. Summers offered numerous apologies, though he refused to leave his exalted position. Ultimately, Mr. Summers survived scathing criticism after his remarks. He even survived a historic no-confidence vote by undergraduate faculty earlier this spring. Now, in retrospect he relents. Possibly, he misspoke.
In conjunction with the story of the fed's not counting women, there was news of President Lawrence Summers. The senior provost had announced plans to spend $50 million. The goal is to increase the number of women and people from minority groups in his faculty.
Mr. Summers now proclaims that investing in women and minorities, will "have the power to make Harvard not only more welcoming and diverse, but a stronger and more excellent university overall." His vision is to improve the climate for women on the campus. He expects to increase training, develop better recruiting practices, and advance undergraduate faculty to positions that are more senior. Harvard President Lawrence Summers now wants to count women. Possibly, the Bureau of Labor Statistics could learn from him. He may even teach them how to count.
Please visit me at Be-Think and share your thoughts.
Betsy L. Angert