Jacob Sullum

According to a report from a shoe store in Campbellsville, Ky., the Army Corps of Engineers "created or saved" nine jobs when it used money allocated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to buy nine pairs of work boots.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the store's owner, frustrated by the government's confusing online forms, enlisted the help of his 42-year-old daughter, who figured nine -- the number of people who would use the boots on the job -- made as much sense as any other answer.

Going Rogue by Sarah Palin FREE

The economic kick supposedly delivered by those work boots is emblematic of the errors and exaggerations that pervade the job numbers proudly cited by the Obama administration as evidence that the Recovery Act is working. The highly labor-intensive boots also illustrate the goofy logic of government-goosed employment, which aims to maximize jobs and therefore prizes inefficiency.

Last month, the Obama administration bragged that $160 billion in spending authorized by the $787 billion Recovery Act had "created or saved 640,329 direct jobs" as of Sept. 30. Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that 58,386 of these jobs were tied to projects that had not spent any money yet. Whoops.

Meanwhile, newspapers across the country have been digging up one example after another of erroneous job numbers, including premature reporting, double counting, stray zeros, raises counted as new jobs, jobs created in congressional districts that do not exist, phantom jobs attributed to housing assistance for low-income renters and minor purchases that, like the Army Corps' boot order, are implausibly credited with creating several jobs each.

David Freddoso and Mark Hemingway of The Washington Examiner are keeping track of these reports, and as of this writing they count 90,489 jobs "not really created or saved."

The biggest source of uncertainty about these numbers is the very notion of a job "saved." While "recipients are expected to report accurately on their use of funds," the GAO notes, "what they are less able to say is what they would have done without the benefit of the program."

Since the Obama administration mixes the mushy jobs "saved" in with the firmer jobs "created," it's hard to tell which is which. But two-thirds of the jobs are attributed to Education Department spending, and these are overwhelmingly public school positions that allegedly would have been lost to layoffs without federal aid.

Jacob Sullum

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason magazine and a contributing columnist on Townhall.com.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jacob Sullum's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate