Firing BLS Director Over Weak Jobs Report Is 'Banana Republic' Behavior
If a Democratic president tried to so directly politicize an independent agency, Republicans would be screaming about the coming tyranny.
I grew up in the 1970s in and around one of the "safest" big cities in the United States, Philadelphia. That might be news to you given the City of Brotherly Love—now a relatively placid place—was known during that era for its gang-related murders and social dysfunction. It was news to residents, too, given that the streets felt so menacing. But why argue with statistics?
A year after law-and-order populist Mayor Frank Rizzo won his election to clean up Philly, he bragged about the drop in crime. But as news reports made clear at the time, the administration likely gamed the statistics by reclassifying serious crimes as simple assault. "The chances of being victimized on the street are much greater now than ever before," a top criminologist told The New York Times in 1973.
I thought of that experience in the light of Donald Trump—and not just because his divisive style mirrors Rizzo. Last week, Trump fired Erika McEntarfer, the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). It's a statistical job, which oversees the compilation of economic data about jobs, labor costs, and productivity. The BLS reports to the labor secretary, but operates independently.
Trump didn't like the latest jobs report, which showed meager jobs growth as the nation heads toward a tariff-imposed recession. "I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY," posted Trump on social media. He called her numbers "RIGGED." Never mind that previous BLS jobs data—released before the November election—offered bad news for Kamala Harris.
As with any bureaucracy, the agency is fair game for criticism. BLS has plenty of flaws. But we know how Trump and MAGA play the game: Any results that are good for them are the truth—and anything not to their liking is evidence of rigging or conspiracy. Their take on any news is the one that advances their interests.
I've seen this before, especially when my daughter was playing youth soccer. Honest teams accepted referees' verdicts (even when we thought they got it wrong). Some other teams insisted every call should go their way—and bullied the referees who disagreed. Those teams usually were the ones that had no problem cheating. But it's hard to play the game without ground rules.
Likewise, the feds need an independent body to analyze statistics. The New York Times quoted Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell: "Good data helps not just the Fed, it helps the government, but it also helps the private sector." Trump has indicated he'd like to replace Powell—presumably with someone who will juice interest rates to help his political goals. Any intelligent person, though, can see why good policy flows from an accurate understanding of reality.
These are banana republic moves, backed by MAGA and the Banana Republican Party. Had any Democratic president tried to so directly politicize these independent agencies, Republicans would be screaming about the coming tyranny. Democrats aren't immune to politicizing independent bodies—consider the troublesome plan to expand the U.S. Supreme Court—but they didn't dare meddle in statistical counting.
Consider how budget matters are handled in Democratic-dominated California. The governor issues his budget and revenue/deficit predictions, which, of course, make the most optimistic projections. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) does its analysis, which typically is less sanguine. The governor might take issue with those results—but he doesn't try to remove the head of the LAO and replace him with a political hack who issues only good news.
In national or state economies, reality always sets in anyway. That's why it's odd that despots always try so hard to control the economic data. The Times points to other countries that have done this, such as formerly populist Argentina. In that case, "the international community eventually stopped relying on the government's data," which "drove up the country's borrowing costs, worsening a debt crisis that ultimately led to it defaulting on its international obligations."
Ironically, Argentina is now run by a free-marketeer who is creating an economic miracle. Meanwhile, the United States—typically the world's beacon of economic freedom—is run by a Peronist who believes only his great, stable genius can dictate the ins and outs of a complex economy. Trump recently claimed he's cut drug prices by 1,500% and lowered gas prices to $1.99 a gallon. Who are you going to believe: the great leader and his sycophants or your own lying eyes?
We're all used to this administration "defining deviancy down," as we all lower our standards for acceptable presidential behavior (free jet from Qatar, anyone?). So I guess this will be just another deviant action that the Republican Party will eagerly defend. Let's not even worry about it. This is the best economy we've ever seen in the history of the world, and job growth is the greatest. Soon enough, the official statistics will prove it.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
