Trump is proposing massive new tariffs—or taxes on imported goods—that will drive up costs for Americans while hurting the overall economy. Despite Trump’s claims that foreign countries pay for tariffs, evidence from Trump’s previous tariffs shows that it was actually domestic importers and American families who faced higher costs after they took effect. If Trump actually imposes his proposed tariffs, economists expect they would cost a middle-class household thousands of dollars per year, and result in billions of dollars in losses for the national economy.
Dec 19 2024
Update: The Economic Costs of a GOP Shutdown
A Republican-led government shutdown would have serious impacts on the U.S. economy. It would reduce economic output and harm consumer confidence as many important government functions would shut down due to lack of funds. Americans would face disruptions to important benefits, many private businesses would have to alter their operations, and federal workers across the country would be furloughed and go unpaid. Congress must act to prevent this avoidable harm to the U.S. economy.
Throughout 2023, both policymakers and advocates warned that the labor force participation rate (LFPR) for women was about to drop. The main reason? Much of the American Rescue Plan’s (ARP) child care funding was slated to expire in September 2023. This “child care funding cliff” was expected to put 3.2 million children at risk of losing child care, which would subsequently cause many women to drop out of the workforce to take care of their kids.
Instead, the LFPR for prime-age women (ages 25 to 54) continued to rise after the funds expired and reached a record high of 78.4% in August 2024. While at first glance this challenges the hypothesis around the funding cliff and women’s LFPR, a closer look at the data by the JEC Dems finds a more nuanced conclusion. Among all prime-age women, those whose youngest kid is under age five saw both the largest increase in LFPR while the child care funds were available, and the largest decrease once the funds expired.
Instead, the LFPR for prime-age women (ages 25 to 54) continued to rise after the funds expired and reached a record high of 78.4% in August 2024. While at first glance this challenges the hypothesis around the funding cliff and women’s LFPR, a closer look at the data by the JEC Dems finds a more nuanced conclusion. Among all prime-age women, those whose youngest kid is under age five saw both the largest increase in LFPR while the child care funds were available, and the largest decrease once the funds expired.
Dec 16 2024
Economic Update - December 16, 2024
Climate-exacerbated disasters, such as wildfires, hurricanes, floods, drought, and excessive heat, are increasing risk and causing damage to homes across the country. Rising premiums and this issue of uninsurability could seriously disrupt the housing market and stress state-operated insurance programs, public services, and disaster relief.
Dec 13 2024
Progress Made in Infrastructure Funding for Native Communities is at Risk Under a Trump Presidency
While recent investments championed by JEC Chairman Martin Heinrich direct essential resources to Tribes for resilient infrastructure, the President-elect Trump will turn his back on the need for large-scale infrastructure, climate resilience, and equity. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and recent years’ appropriations made historic levels of funding available for energy, water, and internet infrastructure upgrades to Tribes and the Native Hawaiian Community. Much of that work is now at risk given President-elect Trump’s antagonistic approach to Indigenous affairs and federal protections of the environment during his prior administration, as well as his disregard for meaningful engagement with Native communities.
Dec 12 2024
The Exclusion of U.S. Territories in Federal Data Leaves Policymakers With an Incomplete Picture
The five U.S. territories—American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI)—are treated unevenly across the federal statistical system and are often excluded from important data releases. Without these data, U.S. policymakers and stakeholders lack complete and accurate information about the territories, contributing to the underrepresentation of territorial residents and underfunding in federal programs.
The federal government can do more to include the territories in federal data products. Policymakers, federal statistical agencies, and the territories themselves should work to identify the gaps in data coverage that are most important to fill. Prioritizing and addressing these data gaps will provide a more accurate picture of the territories, support economic development, and help the federal government better target its funding and resources. Ultimately, a coordinated federal approach by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget will be an important step towards providing better data coverage for the U.S. territories.
The federal government can do more to include the territories in federal data products. Policymakers, federal statistical agencies, and the territories themselves should work to identify the gaps in data coverage that are most important to fill. Prioritizing and addressing these data gaps will provide a more accurate picture of the territories, support economic development, and help the federal government better target its funding and resources. Ultimately, a coordinated federal approach by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget will be an important step towards providing better data coverage for the U.S. territories.
La administración entrante de Trump planea llevar a cabo deportaciones masivas que afectarían comunidades enteras y tendrían graves consecuencias económicas. Las deportaciones masivas reducirían el crecimiento económico y la fuerza laboral, les costaría el empleo a los trabajadores nacidos en Estados Unidos, aumentaría los costos para casi todos los estadounidenses y podría provocar inflación.
The incoming Trump administration plans to conduct mass deportations that would upend entire communities and have severe economic fallout. Mass deportations would reduce economic growth, shrink the labor force, cost U.S.-born workers their jobs, raise costs for nearly all Americans, and risk igniting inflation.
