The consistent tension between political rhetoric and independent economic data has once again erupted, as former President Donald Trump’s long-standing skepticism regarding official jobs reports culminated in his recent decision to fire Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. This move reignites debates over the integrity of federal statistical systems and highlights Trump’s historical pattern of challenging economic indicators when they do not align with his narrative.
Trump’s public disdain for the government’s employment statistics stretches back to his 2016 presidential campaign, where he famously dismissed what he called “phony numbers” during his New Hampshire victory speech. This early challenge set a precedent for his subsequent criticisms, often delivered without verifiable evidence, against the very data used to gauge the health of the US economy.
More recently, in August 2024, Trump baselessly alleged that the Biden administration had “fraudulently manipulated” jobs data. His claims followed a public disclosure from the BLS that indicated the economy had created approximately 818,000 fewer jobs between April 2023 and March 2024 than initially estimated. Trump characterized this revision as unprecedented, suggesting a deliberate attempt to conceal economic realities.
In response to similar past criticisms, then-Labor Secretary Julie Su defended the employment statistics, clarifying that revisions are a standard part of the BLS process. Su also noted that external factors, such as Hurricane Helene’s impact on the southeastern United States and various labor strikes, could influence the initial figures, underscoring the dynamic nature of economic data collection.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics, utilizing multiple surveys, routinely revises its employment statistics; these updates are a common and transparent aspect of its reporting methodology. Monthly jobs reports typically include a notice about revisions for the preceding two months, based on more complete data. Notably, similar downward revisions in jobs data also occurred during Trump’s own first term, under a different BLS commissioner.
Despite his frequent denouncements, Trump has selectively embraced jobs data when it suited his political objectives. For instance, before the 2024 election, he raised no objections to a BLS report from McEntarfer’s tenure that showed a modest gain of 12,000 jobs in October. This stark contrast highlights a pragmatic approach to economic indicators, where acceptance is often conditional on their perceived political utility.
The catalyst for McEntarfer’s recent dismissal was the July jobs report, which indicated a significant slowdown in hiring, with the U.S. adding only 73,000 jobs, a notable decrease from the previous month’s 147,000. This report also included substantial downward revisions for May and June, suggesting a broader slowdown in US employment growth, potentially linked to recent tariff implementations.
The “Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics,” an organization composed of former BLS commissioners, swiftly condemned Trump’s decision, issuing a statement that described it as an “unprecedented attack on the independence and integrity of the federal statistical system.” They emphasized that the Commissioner’s role is to report data objectively, not to determine the outcomes, urging Congress to investigate and protect the nonpartisan nature of the position.
When questioned about McEntarfer’s abrupt departure, Trump reiterated his belief that the latest employment statistics were “phony,” drawing parallels to earlier revisions he controversially claimed were politically motivated. Despite previously using some of these same numbers in his campaign rhetoric, he concluded his justification by asserting, “So you know what I did? I fired her. And you know what? I did the right thing.”
