Publications

Publicaciones

Search Publications

Buscar publicaciones

Filters Filtro de búsqueda

to a

clear selection Quitar los filtros

none

Article Artículo

Will Immigration Reform Do Wonders for the Budget? Does Anyone Who Reads the NYT Article on the Topic Have Any Idea?

Yesterday I got to make fun of the NYT for telling readers that food stamps was a $760 billion program. I thought they were giving the 10-year cost, but apparently they had just made a mistake and added a zero to the annual cost, as they later acknowledged in a correction.

This helped make my point. No one, apparently including the editors at the NYT, has any idea what these budget numbers mean. If the original article had told readers that spending on the food stamp program was roughly 1.8 percent of this year's budget it would have immediately conveyed meaningful information to readers. And the editors at the NYT probably would have noticed if the piece had said that food stamps were 18 percent of the budget.

Anyhow, today the NYT obliged us with another example of meaningless budget numbers in reporting on the budgetary consequences of immigration reform. According to a new report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO):

"The report estimates that in the first decade after the immigration bill is carried out, the net effect of adding millions of additional taxpayers would decrease the federal budget deficit by $197 billion. Over the next decade, the report found, the deficit reduction would be even greater — an estimated $700 billion, from 2024 to 2033."

Okay, are we in for a budget bonanza from immigration reform? After all, those are pretty big numbers.

Dean Baker / June 19, 2013

Article Artículo

Latin America and the Caribbean

Venezuela

World

A Timeline of Venezuelan Opposition Reactions to the Recent Elections
October 5, 2012

Henrique Capriles’ campaign coordinator Leopoldo López is quoted in the press saying, "We have been and will continue to be respectful of the established processes," ahead of the October 7 presidential elections.

October 7, 2012

Capriles assures voters that their vote is secret.  His election campaign tweets, “Remember that the vote is secret, only you and God will know who you voted for! Vote without fear” and similar messages during election day.

 

Ignacio Avalos, director of the independent Venezuelan Election Observatory is quoted in the press saying "The government and the opposition both agree that the electoral system is good in general," and, "Opposition experts concluded that you cannot cheat the system."

 

When going to vote, Capriles tells reporters “if I had any doubt whatsoever of the transparency of this process I wouldn’t be here.”

 

Following the National Electoral Council’s (CNE) announcement that President Hugo Chávez has won re-election, Capriles promptly concedes defeat, accepting the electoral results even though other members of the opposition reject the results, citing alleged fraud and “irregularities.”

March 5, 2013

President Chávez dies.

March 8, 2013

The MUD boycotts the swearing-in ceremony of Vice President Nicolás Maduro as interim president, and most of the opposition does not attend.

March 9, 2013

The CNE announces that elections for a new president will take place April 14.

March 25, 2013

Opposition legislators Ricardo Sánchez, Carlos Vargas, and Andrés Avelino announce they are breaking with Capriles’ campaign, warning of a MUD plan to reject the election results, and saying the Capriles campaign was “encouraging a climate of instability and violence, where the terrible and painful consequence ...intensifies the perverse division between Venezuelans.” They also referred to some opposition members’ acceptance of illegal campaign funds.

Dan Beeton and / June 18, 2013