Concerns Surround Data Reporting Changes Under Trump Administration
Business leader and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has gained attention for his stance on data management, famously stating, “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.” This idea is crucial across American society, from businesses to government and nonprofits.
Clear and reliable data is essential for making informed choices about what initiatives to maintain or cut. In fact, factual information should govern decisions regarding budgets, staff, and program designs.
This is why the Trump administration’s moves to politicize and even dismantle trusted government data collection are concerning and detrimental to the economy. For instance, in August, President Trump dismissed Dr. Erica McEnterfer shortly after a report indicated a slowdown in national employment.
Moreover, journalists recently uncovered that the administration plans to halt the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 27-year practice of collecting and publishing data on food insecurity. This means that households unable to consistently afford food will not have their situations formally tracked anymore.
The USDA is expected to release its final report on this issue under President Biden in 2024, but after that, no future data collection on food insecurity will occur under the Trump administration.
If that weren’t alarming enough, the USDA permitted a dozen employees to take paid leave for a sort of “witch hunt” to identify the whistleblower who leaked information on the cancellation of this research.
Following public outcry, the USDA issued a press release justifying the termination of the annual survey, claiming that the data on household food security was “redundant” and that other “more timely and accurate” data sets were available.
However, the USDA hasn’t clarified what these other data sets are, leaving the status of food security measurement unclear. As it stands, the USDA’s household food security data is the only remaining federal source for tracking hunger and food insecurity.
Additionally, the department’s claim of the survey being “costly” is debatable; there’s no precise allocation in the federal budget for this function. In reality, the financial resources devoted to monitoring food insecurity are relatively modest.
Some of this data is drawn from existing Census Bureau surveys, and it takes only a handful of individuals from the Economic Research Service to compile and publish the yearly report.
It’s also misleading for the USDA to assert that the food insecurity measure was “originally created by the Clinton administration” to aid in SNAP eligibility. In fact, this study was sanctioned by legislation signed into law by Republican President George H.W. Bush in 1990, and the first food insecurity statistics were published in 1997 during the Clinton administration.
Interestingly, the Trump administration has also claimed that the annual food insecurity report contains only “subjective” material. Yet, the data was consistently gathered and analyzed by dedicated civil servants who have worked through various presidential administrations.
According to the USDA, the 2023 report included feedback from “30,863 households,” making it a reliable representation of the U.S. civilian population. Such data should not be dismissed as “subjective.”
Yearly findings from this report are referenced by diverse stakeholders, including members of Congress, local leaders, scholars, and nonprofit organizations. It’s not politically biased to acknowledge the number of individuals experiencing food insecurity.
Given the false explanations for eliminating the USDA Annual Hunger Report, it raises questions about whether the objective is to obscure the reality of rising hunger and food insecurity tied to inflation and significant cuts to nutrition assistance programs.
I mean, ignoring these issues certainly won’t make them disappear. Denial isn’t a viable approach to addressing hunger or any other pressing concerns facing the nation.
