[link removed]

FAIR
View article on FAIR's website ([link removed])
'These Changes Are Reducing Our Power to Effect Positive Change for Families': Janine Jackson ([link removed])


Janine Jackson interviewed the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' Cara Brumfield about erasing federal data for the October 17, 2025, episode ([link removed]) of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

[link removed]


CBPP: Federal Data Are Disappearing as Statistical Agencies Face Budget Cuts and Political Pressure

CBPP (9/29/25 ([link removed]) )

Janine Jackson: Everywhere there is government, there is dispute about how government should work. How do we leverage the power of the state to support the people? The only thing you can say about such arguments in advance is that, wherever they land, they have to be grounded in information. We can disagree about outcomes or implications, but if we don't start from the same data, we're not actually in conversation.

That's why our next guest has been raising the alarm bell on the Trump administration's gutting of the accuracy and availability of federal data and official statistics.

Cara Brumfield is vice president for housing and income security at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ([link removed]) . She reported ([link removed]) , with Victoria Hunter Gibney, on the diversion from mission of federal statistical agencies under Trump. She joins us now by phone; welcome to CounterSpin, Cara Brumfield.

Cara Brumfield: Thank you for having me.

JJ: It's one thing to say, for example: People need food support, and we need to figure out how to address that. It's entirely another thing to say: Well, we don't know how many people need food support, so we'll just say whatever we want to say, and other people can dispute it, and it'll just come down to, I don't know, who shouts the loudest? Who has the wealthiest donors and the most media space?

In terms of policymaking, there's hardly a more keystone issue than data collection, but it's the sort of thing where you don't notice its absence. So just starting where the piece that the Center put out starts, one way you can eliminate that information-gathering, that data collection, is just to stop funding it, right? And that's something that we're seeing today.
NPR: USDA cancels survey tracking how many Americans struggle to get enough food

NPR (9/22/25 ([link removed]) )

CB: Yeah, that's exactly right. We're seeing cuts to all sorts of federal data collections that we use to make informed policy decisions. And one of the most recent, of course, being the defunding of our annual survey on food security ([link removed]) , which is happening at the same time that we're seeing the largest-ever cuts to food assistance ([link removed]) through SNAP.

So how will we be able to measure the impact of those cuts to SNAP, our country's extremely successful ([link removed]) food support program? How will we measure the impact of these cuts on families who rely on those benefits to be able to put food on the table? We won't. We won’t be able to do that without reliable access to accurate and unbiased federal data—in this case, through our survey questions on food security, which have just been cut.

There are a variety of data collections that are being cut or that are facing proposed cuts. I'll talk a little bit about the 2030 census. The Decennial underpins all of our federal data collection, because it's the only time that we attempt to collect information about every person living in the country. And so without fully funding the Decennial Census, we're putting the accuracy of that really important, fundamental, foundational, constitutionally mandated data collection at risk. And that has knock-on effects for all of the other federal surveys that we do.

And it's not just these funding cuts, which are deeply problematic for a lot of reasons, but it's also the politicization of the federal statistical system. In order for us to have a federal statistical system that works, that does what we need it to do, it has to be unbiased. It can't be politicized, and it has to be sufficiently funded, because, like you say, we need to be able to make decisions based in facts, and not just based on who's the loudest voice in the room, or who has the deepest pockets.

So when it comes to funding, a lot of things happen. One: We lose staff capacity. We have brilliant minds in the federal statistical system who have been innovating on how to collect information in the best ways, to serve all of the uses. And the Census Bureau, for example, is experiencing some brain drain; we're losing some of those folks from those positions because of this administration's actions. And further, if we want to keep up, improve, modernize, meet the evolving needs of our nation, we have to invest in the research that's necessary to keep up.

Now, changes like this mean that not only can we not modernize and improve on the way that our federal statistical system collects these data, but we're taking some huge steps backwards, and losing some fundamental, really core information that we've relied on for decades, in ways that are just completely unprecedented.

JJ: Please expand, because I think to some people, this sounds like a bland, bureaucratic issue, and it's actually an issue with people at the sharp end. So when you talk about “we're stopping to collect data,” there are impacts of that. And I would ask you to talk a little more about that.

CB: So for example, if the Survey of Income and Program Participation, or the SIPP, as it's called, is cut, we'll lose really important information about families’ experiences with benefits programs like Medicaid, SSI, WIC—which is the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children—SNAP, school breakfast, school lunch—just all kinds of programs that support the needs of families in this country. And we use that information to make decisions about how to change or improve the policies around these programs. And so if we want these programs to be effective in meeting people's needs, and efficient in how they're run, we need to have high-quality, reliable, unbiased data on how they're working, what's working, what's not working, and what needs to change.

It's cliché, but it's true, that knowledge is power. In this case, it's very true, because by taking control of our access to accurate, unbiased information, these kinds of changes are reducing our power to effect meaningful, positive change for families in this country through evidence-based policymaking.

And what that means is, it's reducing our ability to ensure that every family has the support they need to have food on the table, that they don't have to make decisions between buying diapers and paying the rent or buying medicine. This is very real for people, and it can feel disconnected when we're talking about data, and surveys, and there are so many acronyms. But at the end of the day, this is information that we use to make good decisions that have huge impacts on a huge number of people's lives in this country, and can be the difference between having the support you need and facing real, avoidable hardship.

JJ: Thank you for that. And I just want to ask a final question about media, because I often try to avoid saying things have been “politicized,” only because I understand how, for some people, political means partisan, and partisan means “our guys versus them guys,” and then everything gets lost in this understanding of partisan grievances. So whatever is at hand, “Well, if Democrats want it, then I think I don't want it.” And I blame media for a lot of that, for not disaggregating that kind of conversation, and talking about what people need and the place of power. And I have just a lot of concerns about the way particular issues are presented to the public through the news media, which I know is where a lot of people are getting their understanding of what's going on. And so I just wonder if you have thoughts about how journalists could be helpful in terms of explaining what's at stake, explaining what's happening, and taking it outside of Democrat/Republican, and just making it about
people.

CB: Yeah, I certainly agree. When it comes to facts, when it comes to understanding the reality of what's going on in our country, it really shouldn't matter which end of the political spectrum we fall on, because we should all share the value of wanting to make decisions that are based in evidence and based in reality. But, unfortunately, because information is so powerful, it gets manipulated for political gain.

And I think the role of the media is just what you said: presenting information about what's going on, not because of which side of the aisle, so to speak, is raising the alarm, but because it's something that affects all of us, and it's something that is going to have repercussions that reverberate for years to come.

And I'll add that it's not just progressives who are worried about the federal statistical system. Conservatives as well have spoken out, and shared concerns about the reliability and the accuracy and our access to this really important information.

JJ: If we're going to have a conversation, we have to start from a basis of information. That shouldn't be—and I don't want to say, like, “let's be bipartisan,” because that language is very coded and weird to me now, but I really am just saying, for reporters, get the actual information, start from the actual information bed. That shouldn't be too much to ask from journalists.


CBPP's Cara Brumfield

Cara Brumfield: "Manipulating the Decennial Census for political gain is so deeply undemocratic, and we need to talk about it in those terms."

CB: Yeah, journalists are just so important to the functioning of our democracy, because, like you said, they're the gatekeepers, in some ways, of information, and how we understand what's going on in the world. And this is an issue of democracy. When you think about the Decennial Census, for example, it's congressionally mandated because it's used to determine apportionment and to draw voting districts. And so what that means is that it's deeply tied to fairness and political representation and political power. So manipulating the Decennial Census for political gain is so deeply undemocratic, and we need to talk about it in those terms.

So a fair and accurate census is key to making sure that everyone has that political power that they're entitled to. And, at the same time, journalism has an important role to play in our democracy, by making sure that people have access to the accurate, factual information that they need to be able to exert their political power, in ways that align with their own best interests.

JJ: Thank you so much, Cara Brumfield. We've been speaking with Cara Brumfield, vice president for housing and income security at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Thank you so much, Cara, for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

CB: Thank you for having me.


Read more ([link removed])

Share this post: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Twitter"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Twitter" alt="Twitter" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Facebook"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Facebook" alt="Facebook" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Pinterest"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Pinterest" alt="Pinterest" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn" alt="LinkedIn" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Google Plus"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Google Plus" alt="Google Plus" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Instapaper"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Instapaper" alt="Instapaper" class="mc-share"></a>
​

© 2021 Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up for email alerts from
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

Our mailing address is:
FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING
124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201
New York, NY 10001

FAIR's Website ([link removed])

FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today ([link removed]) .

Follow us on Twitter ([link removed]) | Friend us on Facebook ([link removed])

change your preferences ([link removed])
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]
unsubscribe ([link removed]) .