October 12, 2009 11:01 AM

Job Losses Stoke Mid-Term Fear for Dems

(AP)  A distressed economy is widely blamed for President George H.W. Bush's re-election defeat in 1992, and a decade earlier, for the loss of 26 House seats in midterm elections by Ronald Reagan's Republicans. Yet in both instances recession had already ended or was winding down.

It's a point or his fellow Democrats headed into next year's congressional elections. The stock market may be up, U.S. service industries may be recovering, banks may be lending again and housing prices holding. But one major piece of the recovery puzzle is still missing: a brighter employment picture.

And that's bad news for the party in power, whether the recession is officially over or not.

Job losses are expected to continue at least into the middle of next year, likely driving the unemployment rate above 10 percent from . It could take three or four more years for it to fall to normal levels.

The longest and deepest downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930s has claimed 7.2 million jobs since it began in December 2007. Analysts figure 750,000 more jobs could disappear over the next six months.

If you add in people who have stopped looking for work, or who are working part time when they want a full-time job, the unemployment rate is a whopping 17 percent, according to the Labor Department.

"If you've got an effective unemployment rate of 17 percent and if this goes on for any length of time, a year or more, then everyone's cushion will run out," said Republican consultant Rich Galen. "There are going to be serious implications, culturally and politically."

Galen said it's understandable that Republicans would use the state of the economy to pound Mr. Obama and Democrats who control Congress. Still, "it's not something we should either make fun of, be amused by or play politics with," he said.

Republicans already see a "jobless recovery." In a letter to Mr. Obama and House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Republican leaders asked, "Where are the jobs?"

Another sign of continuing distress: Applications for Social Security retirement benefits are up 23 percent from last year, a much larger jump than in other recessions.

The surge is due to a rush of baby boomers filing for early retirement. Signing up for Social Security benefits as early as age 62 can be an immediate source of income for laid-off older workers, but it's also a troubling sign of the scarcity of jobs.

Despite some signs of recovery, the economy remains fragile. Consumer spending - which powers two-thirds of economic output - remains weak. Yet the widespread view among economists is that the recession has ended and that the economy grew in the just-ended third quarter

So how can it be over if things are still so bad?

A recession is most simply defined as a period when the gross domestic product falls for at least two quarters. It had been doing that since the July-September quarter of 2008, although most economists believe the GDP has now reversed course and rose in the past few months.

The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research is generally seen as the authoritative arbiter for dating U.S. recessions. It takes other things into account besides GDP, including employment levels, real personal income, industrial production, and wholesale and retail sales.

It dated the beginning of the current recession as December 2007 - and hasn't yet called an end.

Economists agree that unemployment is a lagging indicator and can remain high long after a recession is pronounced over, continuing to inflict pain on those still out of work or worried about their jobs. That why it's hard for such workers to understand how the recession can be deemed over.

It's an important political dynamic as 2010 congressional elections approach.

At some point, continued job losses could easily push the economy back into negative territory, for a "double-dip" recession.

Hedge fund manager Doug Kass, founder and president of Seabreeze Partners Management, questions the ability of the economy to mount a self-sustaining recovery under continued elevated joblessness and wage deflation. "The consumer remains the Achilles' heel of the economy," he wrote recently.

Republicans claim continuing job losses signal a failure of the $787 billion Obama-driven stimulus legislation. "That is not what the American people were promised," said House Republican leader John Boehner.

White House aides concede they missed the mark with their January estimate that the stimulus package would keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent. But they insist things would be far worse had the stimulus not passed.

White House Budget Director Peter Orszag suggested the stimulus package added 2 to 3 percentage points, on an annualized basis, to U.S. economic activity from April through September. "If the economy remains fragile, ," he said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

Among measures being studied by the White House and congressional Democrats: extending and expanding a for first-time home buyers due to expire at the end of next month; and tax breaks for companies that add jobs.

Rob Shapiro, an economist who was a top official in President Bill Clinton's Commerce Department, sees "substantial, continued job losses" for some time if the government doesn't take more aggressive steps to foster job growth.

In the meantime, the Obama administration should "prepare the American people to wait a while for real results," said Shapiro, now with a Democratic think tank called NDN.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 54 Comments
by jxknowles October 13, 2009 2:04 PM EDT
The country is a lot smarter than when it voted for Bush. They know Republicans and Democrats are both responsible for the mess. They will vote for the candidate they see taking action to help businesses fuel employment. Americans are no longer banking on campaign promises for jobs, healthcare or assistance.

The economy is broke for a lot of Americans. It's going to take a lot longer than 2010 to fix what ails them.
Reply to this comment
by quapawsix October 13, 2009 11:45 AM EDT
Don't blame Washington We the People elected these educated failures to office and for some unknown reason We the People keep electing them in. Neither party listens to us they only listen to the top greedy 2%.
Reply to this comment
by quapawsix October 13, 2009 11:22 AM EDT
That right they had better worry after all when the Republicans. regain power then the balance will be rest. We all know the Need of the greedy few out weigh the needs of the many.
Reply to this comment
by book134 October 13, 2009 7:16 AM EDT
We are in the process of seeing a job-less economic recovery but it has little to do with Obama & his current economic policies.

It takes time for government economic policies to work their way through a nation's economic system & the larger & more complicated the system is, (the US economy has been integrated into the world economy,) the longer it takes for the economic system to readjust.

Actually, 95% of the blame for this minor economic depression is due to the Trickle-down economic & governmental policies put into effect by Reagan/Bush I, Clinton, & Bush II & past Congresses during those regimes.

If people want to place blame, they need to place the blame where it belongs.
Reply to this comment
by ahrats October 13, 2009 6:20 AM EDT
Democrats are you guy's stupid? You want to raise taxes (health care)before you get the economy growing in ALL sectors, 2010 will be your down fall IF you do not wake-up soon, repubicans will take back both houses. Wall Street is rebounding but that's about it for economic growth. What happened to the JOBS programs we were promised? Improving roads & bridges put some people back to work but not all sectors like manufacturing, the ARTS! How long will it be before all the people collecting un-employment will run out of benefits, before there are real JOBS out there?
Reply to this comment
by gramto8 October 13, 2009 3:53 AM EDT
by Marc_1986 October 12, 2009 3:18 PM EDT
@stuart-johns

I think most Republicans will agree that employment is a lagging factor and we shouldn't place blame on Barack Obama for 10% unemployment. By that same token though, Republicans will also agree that because unemployment lags, Reagan is to thank for cleaning up the mess Carter created back in the late 1970's.
______________
Unemployment had already started decreasing before Carter left office. The rate was down to 6% from a high of 6.4 in 1978. By the middle of 1983, two and a half years after Reagan took office, it was peaked around 10.8% and finally started dropping again.
Reply to this comment
by pjk12354 October 12, 2009 11:14 PM EDT
Big Deal.........so the pendelum swings back the other way. Does it really change anything? No. There will be some more tax cuts for the rich..........the defecit will continue to grow.........there will be a new group of elected official with their faced of optimism bought & paid for by new group of special interest lobbyests........meanwhile people like me, who have been out of work a long time, will wait for something that probably will never come........
Reply to this comment
by loginos October 12, 2009 9:38 PM EDT
All the stimulus did was bail out rich people and make them richer.
There were no jobs added.
Reply to this comment
by rhs648 October 12, 2009 11:03 PM EDT
loginos - If that is the case, which political party should we support in the next election? Do we vote for the rich Democrats or the rich Republicans?
by wfw3536 October 12, 2009 5:08 PM EDT
Just a few month's ago Obama said if we spent 788 billion in a bill that no one read was all about "jobs,jobs,and jobs". Well guess what, when the bill was passed we come to find out most of it is for pork to keep politicans in office who don't really represent us.

I just feel sorry for the 17 or 18 percent of our population who are unemployed or underemployed that were lied to by the administration.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-16 October 12, 2009 4:28 PM EDT
by Marc_1986 October 12, 2009 3:27 PM EDT
@ianlou

Actually a more accurate cycle would be:

Fiscal conservatives get elected, capitalism booms, people start to make money.







Fiscal conservatives?!?!

What mythical creature are you referring to?!?!


You have a better chance of seeing unicorns, than you do "fiscal conservatives"!!!
Reply to this comment
See all 54 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook