« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The CDC Coverup Now Turns to Bureaucratic Panic

“The CDC told us last week there were ‘no plans’ to release the data. The CDC now says it is scheduled for ‘this month’. Did the CDC just not bother looking at the editorial calendar it now tells us is booked ‘well in advance’?”

It’s never the action, it’s the cover up.

Yesterday RedState broke a significant story which points to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the nation’s premier public health organization, making a conscious decision to stop publishing the only federal report on abortion.

To briefly recap, for 40 years the CDC has published the Abortion Surveillance Report. For 40 years that report has appeared in the last November or first December issue of CDC’s journal, the Morbidity and Mortality Report Weekly Report. This year it didn’t. A RedState tradition has been to use this report for our annual retrospective on abortion. When it didn’t appear in November… or December… or in January we decided to ask why.

That inquiry and its response led to our article yesterday.

The internet is an amazing thing. After weeks of checking and phone calls and emails … no report. Then one blog post at RedState later, and suddenly the CDC is falling over themselves to produce something. Funny how that works. Two hours and six minutes after the post went live we had an official response from CDC. The full response is posted below the fold.

According to the CDC we should move along because there is nothing to see here. Really? We’re not so sure.

One thing the government does well is routine. If you have any doubt witness the difference between how the government reacts to an emergency and how it delivers Social Security checks or collects taxes. A low intensity statistical report that has been produced at the same time for the past 40 years would strike most of us as the epitome of routine. “Wait,” says their reply, “it isn’t that simple”. Here is their “explanation”. (Full text of statement below the fold):

My understanding is the population data needed to develop rate/ratio statistics was not available at the time we normally prepare the ASR. It is these data that are often desired by many to track trends and changes in a most precise way possible.

Possible. But is it likely? Another key fact is that the report in question covers abortions conducted in the United States in 2007. So the population data has been extant for at least two years because the Census Bureau – which has done routine real well for, oh, 200 years – had that particular data aggregated on July 1, 2008. That’s pretty “available” by our standards.

But let’s just pretend for a moment the data was somehow not “available” to the CDC. Why? It was available to the Census. Indeed, it was available to anyone with internet access. But somehow the CDC was out of the loop? A more likely and obvious reason the data weren’t available is that a decision had been made to not acquire the data.

Now we’re assured that the 2007 Abortion Surveillance Report is “tentatively” – CDC’s response has this word in bold so we’re assuming the real context is “not going to happen but we’re counting on you guys forgetting about it” – scheduled to be published this month. By “this month” they are saying that it will appear in one of the next three issues of the MMWR.

But wait. The response also says the editorial calendar is booked “well in advance.” Most of us would assume “well in advance” is more than three weeks, especially as the report in question will have to proceed through various levels of clearance from the authors through final approval at the Department of Health and Human Services. So if it isn’t on the calendar… which is implied by the CDC response… and the calendar is locked in well in advance … how do we make the trip from there to here?

The short answer is that now CDC is about to do the other thing bureaucracies do frequently but not well: panic.

After all, the CDC told us last week there were ‘no plans’ to release the data. The CDC now says (at least as of late yesterday) it is scheduled for ‘this month’. Did the CDC just not bother looking at the editorial calendar it now tells us is booked ‘well in advance’?

We have very little doubt what happened it this case. An inconvenient report was quietly killed. The interview we had with the CDC press office confirmed that not only had the report not been written but that there were no plans to do so. This was confirmed by the CDC. The person who confirmed it was not confused. She did not misunderstand. She answered that the report hadn’t been produced, that she didn’t know why, and that she would find out. She then later called back to confirm that it was not an oversight, and that the report would not be forthcoming.

The distance between that response and the current position of it being ready to go to press at seemingly a moment’s notice is difficult to bridge without a skyhook.

The CDC did not run the report. They confirmed that they were not going to run the report. Only after we brought attention to it have they begun scrambling to appear as if they were going to do it all along. At RedState, we’re reminded of the guy who trips on a curb and, embarassed, explains, “totally meant to do that.”

Full text of CDC response:

Our office prepares the Abortion Surveillance Report (ASR). The next report (for calendar year 2007) is tentatively scheduled for release this month, pending no problems with the publishing schedule for CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Report (MMWR).

The ASR is published annually as a MMWR Surveillance Summary. My understanding is the population data needed to develop rate/ratio statistics was not available at the time we normally prepare the ASR. It is these data that are often desired by many to track trends and changes in a most precise way possible. This created a change in the schedule for MMWR Summary release as the “editorial calendar” is booked well in advance.

Also, please know the ASR is compiled from aggregate data reported by several states and reporting areas. We do take great pains to be sure the data reported is as accurate as possible. Our website presents general information about the ASR – and perhaps might be helpful in the future. www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/Data_Stats/Abortion.htm is the “launch page” for information about this topic.

I apologize for any misunderstanding about the report’s release.

COMMENTS

  • http://www.riversedgealliance.org Robin Smith

    Gee…budget cuts looming, a commitment to reduce deficit spending & the national debt and a government agency becomes suddenly responsive. Accountabilibty!

  • ss396

    Our website presents general information about the ASR ? and perhaps might be helpful in the future. www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/Data_Stats/Abortion.htm is the ?launch page? for information about this topic.

    Translated: “We’re not going to publish it next year, either. All you’re going to have from now on some summary data that we might or might not bother to update.”

  • kpbenware

    to anyone who understands the motives behind it, why the report was conveniently ‘unavailable’. Once this agency is questioned about why they are not issuing a report that they’ve provided for 40 years, the stammering cover-up begins while they begin making excuses for their ‘oversight’.

    I hate asking for new laws, but the congress should enact legislation that will dictate congressional oversight in the dis-continuance of any established reporting by federal agencies. This would serve to ensure a guaranteed level of transparency through public disclosure of collected/compiled data.

    The withholding of information, in itself, not a lie, but it does enable liars to run free with their mis-information. The absence of this report on abortion could be calculated to do just that. Allow those who would profit from lying about abortion to further line their own pockets, at taxpayer expense.

  • YnotNOW

    for an immoral industry is caught immorally trying to cover up immorality.
    Go figure….
    Nothing to see here, folks, move along….

    (did anyone notice the acronym for the original report Abortion Surveilance Statistics?)

  • YnotNOW

    for an immoral industry is caught immorally trying to cover up immorality.
    Go figure….
    Nothing to see here, folks, move along….

    (did anyone notice the acronym for the original report Abortion Surveilance Statistics?)

  • itrytobenice

    It gives me hope when the Make Believe Media once again ignores something, the internet covers it, and something gives.

    We the people are reclaiming our power over our gov’t, with or without the partisan press.

  • gekster

    they couldn’t publish the report because Obama said abortion was going down, and the report would show it’s going up.
    This is what the most transparent administration in history does.
    I do recall the old Soviet Union wouldn’t publish bad reports also.

  • http://www.yankeeairpirate.com Pterodactyl33

    In Erick’s email heads-up about this article, he closed with the sinister statement that: “According to the CDC we should move along because there is nothing to see here. Really? We?re not so sure. It’s never the action, it’s the cover up.” [sic]
    Eerily similar, and most likely equally accurate, to a line out of the terrifying movie “Edge of Darkness.” It has to do with how “realities” can be shaped, morphed, configured to however a power wants reality to be. I eliminated only the name “Tommy” from the quote to make it more universally applicable, which it deserves to be:
    “It isn’t what it is. It is never what it is. It is what it can be made to look like.”
    And if that doesn’t send a shiver of reality up your spine, you must still believe in fairy tales.

  • gandalfthewhite

    As the Redstate article points out, the source data comes from the Census (why the Census Bureau is collecting abortion data is another interesting question — is it needed to determine Congressional districts and allocation?) and is publicly available on the Internet. We can do our own report, if CDC chooses not to … and then let CDC react to the numbers and information being disseminated.

    Nothing scares a bureaucrat or a politician as much as a public that has facts at hand … and can dispute whatever mis-statements the government chooses to make.

    A public “shout out” to Redstate for having the gumption and perseverance to call CDC on this “oops”. You stood eye to eye with the Feds … and they blinked!

  • swvapatriot

    which I hadn’t considered resulting from the Tea Party/ Repubs winning back the House, is the power built into congressional oversight by the Constitution. Requiring different departments and agencies of the administration to testify, under oath, before oversight committees, with supporting documentation, could place those testifying in jeapordy of prosecution for giving false testimony, thus exposing these lies.

    I fervently hope that Issa and others will ramp up hearings into the policies and workings of this administrarion, exposing the blatant un-truthfulness it has shown to the American citizen.

    Falsehood can exist only in darkness, and is easily exposed in bringing it into the light.

  • objectivist

    It’s obvious that this was intentional, and kudos to RedState for exposing the CDC’s duplicity. Nothing this administration does is accidental. As Rush Limbaugh has been saying for two years – the current destruction of the economy is INTENTIONAL.

    Now – I’m a conservative of a stripe that believes that abortion should not be a major concern of the federal government. Call me a conservative libertarian if you like. Hurts the Republicans more than it helps them to be virulently anti-abortion if you ask me, though morally I do think it is wrong. So are a lot of things that aren’t the federal government’s business. Nonetheless I commend Erick for exposing the cover-up.

  • lineholder

    objectivity, no pun intended.

    Believe it or not, you have more in common with SoCons than you might think, because those of us who are small government SoCons want the government OUT of these kinds of issues.

  • streiff

    Census doesn’t collect abortion data, they provide population stats that are used to calculate abortion rates.

  • talgus

    the below the break “CDC response”

  • Locked and Loaded

    Your first comment here is quite underhanded and falls very flat as a compliment.

  • al003

    Why no report? Obama is the reason. He is who he is. Abortion is one of his agendas, the more the better according to his thoughts. Partial Birth – no problem. Full birth – - maybe, but this would be pushing the political envelope.

  • cam1

    thank you for this information. This is typical of what the CDC did when AIDS erupted in the US. They cooked the numbers to suit their political advantage.

    Now that Planned Parenthood has been uncovered in New Jersey and Virginia abetting sex trafficking of minors, the abortion figures should be interesting to those who have been elected to cut government spending and repealing obamacare.

  • gekster

    from the opinion article:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102197.html

    excerpt:
    But Obama’s record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion — a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called “too close to infanticide.” Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban.
    (the money quote)
    “In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion.”
    And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be “punished with a baby” because of a crisis pregnancy — hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life.

    To him it is ok to kill a baby.
    Why punish a promiscuous girl with a baby.

  • rubicon01

    Basically, abortion is a issue many conservatives feel requires serious attention at every level. Whether the number of abortions has gone up or down affects how those who oppose it respond. Now many will get angry with me, but I am more concerned with why we are reporting on facts about our porous southern border w/ Mexico that are untrue than I am about the number of abortions. I am concerned that we are being told alls just fine down there, when in fact, we are in serious trouble. I do know the “old establishment media” has failed to do any serious articles on the fence.
    The fence? Many say “isn’t that old news and a dead issue for you guys who panic & are mean cause you want to block off America from those who just want to feed their families?”
    Well, not exactly! You see, many coming in ARE taking jobs from Americans. Just ask carpenters, drywallers, electricians, plumbers, etc., on construction projects. In some cases, federal construction projects. The truth is, many illegal aliens ARE doing jobs Americans would do, but those Americans must compete with illegal alien workers who work for minimum wage, not construction rates.
    But even that is not my point! OK, you say, WHAT is your point?
    My point is, the fence….. is being erected by… Mexico!!!
    You see, Mexico is erecting a fencing system along its southern border with Guatemala. Seems the excuse is, they want to stop those illegal drugs from coming in. Now, earlier reports by the Mexican government indicated most illegal drugs were being flown into Mexico from other Central American nations… but they want a fence w/ Guatemala.
    Now, why is it the Mexican president was cheered & applauded by members of congress when he scolded America for building her fence??? The hypocrite is now saying, nothing at all!!! But, neither is Janet Napolitano!
    In fact, no one in our government is saying anything about this & in fact, I’d bet none will comment about this.
    In short, government bureaucrats acting as hyper partisan activist insiders in our federal bureaucracy, say & do whatever makes the causes they support while supposedly doing their jobs for th American public, will say & do whatever is necessary to protect & promote their partisan political causes! Less feds means, less info. Or is it, less inaccurate & less contrived info??

  • southernpatriots

    According to Dr. Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. there is a concerted effort by Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry to commit genocide on African-Americans. Abortion clinics are located in or near the traditional African-American areas of cities. The alarming rate at which African-American babies are aborted should be an alarm to Rev. Jackson, Rev.Sharpton, but they are more interested in racial politics and making money from anything they can degrade to a racial discrimination level. May the CDC publish the race of murdered babies? What is the worse place for a child to be today? In Haiti, Cairo, Bangladesh.. no. The worse place for a child to be in his or her own mother’s womb. Tragic horror!

  • Joshua Persons
  • Flagstaff

    write up a diary about it.

    Send me an email when you do so I won’t miss it.

  • elizabeth bennet

    Silly us! :nervousgiggle:

  • redt

    as the dead appear to be staunch Democrats and very reliable voters, and the dead babies will be voting age in 18 years, the census bureau might collect the data to establish statistics for determining Congressional districts. Just thinkin’….