President Trump recently ignited a political firestorm by ordering the immediate dismissal of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. This decisive action followed the release of a July jobs report that revealed a significant slowdown in hiring and substantial downward revisions to previous months’ employment figures, provoking a furious reaction from the former president who claimed the numbers were inaccurate and questioning the integrity of economic data.
In a public statement on social media, Mr. Trump vehemently questioned the accuracy of the labor statistics, asserting, “No one can be that wrong? We need accurate Jobs Numbers. I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY.” He further stated his intention to replace Erika McEntarfer with someone “much more competent and qualified,” emphasizing the critical importance of fair and accurate economic numbers, free from perceived political manipulation by the Trump administration.
The controversial July jobs report indicated that employers added a weaker-than-expected 73,000 jobs, a figure Mr. Trump described as “a shock.” Compounding his dismay were the dramatic downward revisions, showing 258,000 fewer jobs created in May and June than initially reported, which he labeled a “major mistake.” These revisions fueled his unsubstantiated claims of data undermining accuracy for US politics.
Despite Mr. Trump’s assertions, the Bureau of Labor Statistics routinely revises its previous job numbers to incorporate new information. Such adjustments are a standard practice and can result in both upward and downward changes, as evidenced by the June jobs report, which revised April and May’s figures higher. This context highlights the routine nature of data adjustments within the agency, ensuring economic data remains current.
McEntarfer’s abrupt dismissal drew immediate and widespread condemnation from prominent economists and policy experts. Critics argued that the move severely jeopardizes the integrity of crucial economic data provided by a trusted federal agency. The consensus among these experts was that such an action sets a dangerous precedent for political interference in independent statistical reporting related to the jobs report.
Lily Roberts, managing director for Inclusive Growth at the Center for American Progress, articulated this sentiment, stating, “Mr. Trump is firing the messenger because he doesn’t seem to like jobs numbers that reflect how badly he’s damaged the economy.” Similarly, Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, emphasized that the dismissal was “basically unprecedented and will raise concerns about U.S. data integrity going forward,” particularly noting BLS’s role in inflation, wages, and productivity data under the Trump administration.
Even some Republican voices, like Senator Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, expressed concern, telling CBS News, “The statistics are what they are. It’s not the statistician’s fault if the numbers are accurate and that they’re not what the president had hoped for.” Conversely, Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer supported the firing, announcing Deputy Commissioner William Wiatrowski as acting commissioner and citing a “recent string of major revisions” as cause for concern regarding Biden-appointed leadership at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Erika McEntarfer, a labor economist with over two decades of federal government service, including roles at the U.S. Census Bureau and the Treasury, was appointed the 16th commissioner of Labor Statistics in January 2024, following her nomination by President Biden in 2023. Her firing coincided with broader signals that the labor market, potentially impacted by policy uncertainty, was stalling, a trend also supported by anecdotal evidence from the Federal Reserve’s “Beige Book” regarding the overall economic data.
The July data appeared to corroborate insights from businesses documented in the Federal Reserve’s report, indicating that many companies were postponing hiring decisions “until uncertainty diminished.” Laura Ullrich, director of economic research for North America at Indeed and a former Federal Reserve official, noted, “Based on what I was hearing from a lot of employers, I kept expecting to see a stagnant jobs report at some point, that’s what we got today.” This situation highlights the complexities and political sensitivities within US politics when dealing with sensitive economic indicators.
