Search This Blog

Showing posts with label statistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label statistics. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Polling Averages

Many posts have discussed the problems of surveying public opinion in the 21st century.

At Strength in Numbers, G. Elliott Morris discusses polling averages:

In our 50+1 generic ballot average, the published Democratic margin across polls read about D+7 a couple of weeks ago and reads D+5 today — a paper loss of two points that reader Tyler was asking about. But take the raw numbers for the parties (Democrats at 48.9% and Republicans at 43.4; a change from 49.1 and 42.4 two weeks ago), and the drop is only from D+6.7 to D+5.49 — a drop of about one point, not two.

Unfortunately, this incident of exaggeration is inherent to a tradeoff we made when deciding how to present the data. The general practice in polling analysis is not to show decimals on differences between percentages, because a number like “D+5.4” implies a precision the polls just don’t offer (see: 2024, 2020, 2016, etc). Or, if you’re going to publish decimals, you should include a margin of error either visually it in the text.

The tradeoff is that a small move in the margin between the parties sometimes looks bigger than it is, which is exactly what caught Tyler’s eye here. A 1-point change became 2.

...

But much of that 1-point decline is likely mechanical — a product of what data is available for the average. Over the last 2 weeks, new polls have tended to come from firms that lean to the right and produce numbers that are typically on the lower end for Democrats — Quantus Insights, McLaughlin & Associates (Trump’s pollster), and Morning Consult are a few examples. The average I publish for 50+1 tries to account for some of this availability bias (see my methodology) but there is only so much you can do if your trend is being bogged down by biased data. The high-quality New York Times/Siena poll that had Democrats up 10 points is now over a month old.

This is a dynamic of poll-aggregation that people often miss or ignore. A smart polling average can remove a lot of noise from polling data, but the tool inherently still wiggles around from sampling error and house effects even when the “truth” of public opinion is stable. A poll of 1,000 people has a margin of error of roughly three points — and you’re blending at best half a dozen of those from the last week, and usually less.

This doesn’t mean polls are useless — they are still the best tool we have for predicting elections, and the only one we have for directly measuring how people feel about public life. But it does mean that averages tend to move around somewhat predictably. So how much movement is worth paying attention to? Let’s boot up the historical polling averages and take a look.


Monday, June 8, 2026

Religion, Well-Being, and the State of the States


The State of the States Report of the State of the Nation Project has valuable data on states.

 

Saturday, June 6, 2026

AI Is Fallible -- Very Fallible

Artificial intelligence is an increasingly important topic in politics, policy, and law.

It is better than a couple of years ago -- but still very fallible.

Chris Cillizza:

What do people use A.I. for when it comes to the news?

To check facts, according to new polling from Katie Harbath.

And A.I. is (still) not good at doing that.
“I would not use it as a fact-checking mechanism,” Harbath, a former GOP operative and longtime Facebook executive who now writes Anchor Change with Katie Harbath, told me in a Substack Live on Wednesday.
Writing on that topics, Harbath noted:
Ask one of the leading AI chatbots a question about the upcoming midterm elections, and there is a 90% chance the response will be flawed in some material way: a factual error, a clear partisan lean, a citation to a foreign state-controlled outlet, or some combination of all three.
In our conversation on Wednesday, Harbath added:
I am always double-checking what numbers [the AI is] pulling in…I do not just blindly trust. We’ve seen so many examples of that — like there was a story recently about a book where the AI generated a bunch of fake quotes that the person put in.
(Sidebar: Katie is referring to “The Future of Truth” by Steven Rosenbaum — a book about truth in A.I. that, wait for it, had fake quotes in it that A.I. had made up.)

So….not great!

Katie and I had an in-depth conversation about both how the average voter uses A.I. as well as how campaign pros are using artificial intelligence to do their jobs.

This is the first in a series of conversations Katie and I are going to have about the transformative power of A.I. — and how it is playing out in the realm of campaign politics.


Sunday, May 3, 2026

Spending, Taxes, and Deficits: A Book of Charts from Brookings

Many posts have discussed federal deficits and the federal debt.

Jessica Riedl at Brookings:

Debates over federal taxes, spending, and deficits will always be contentious due to deep disagreements over fiscal priorities, ideologies, and values. Yet these debates are often further hampered by an inability to agree on even the most basic underlying budget data. Simply put, standard liberal and conservative fiscal frameworks are often defended with fallacies regarding the current and projected makeup of taxes and spending, the trends in budget deficits and debt, and the fiscal records of recent presidents.

The new 2026 version of this annual chart book once again provides a standard, non-partisan look at the trends in spending, taxes, and deficits in hope of addressing common fallacies and providing a common starting point for fiscal debates.

The 132-page chart book begins by broadly examining the rising budget deficits and national debt and then dives deeper to show the policies driving the $138 trillion in new CBO-projected deficits over the next three decades—and how drastically the picture worsens if interest rates remain elevated. Next, the chart book shows the size of the reforms needed to stabilize the debt, and how the common “easy solutions” would fail to provide sufficient savings towards that goal. Finally, it examines trends in tax revenues and tax progressivity, slays common budget myths, and offers a full accounting of the fiscal records of Presidents Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden.

These charts—most of which rely on publicly-available data from the Congressional Budget Office, Office of Management and Budget, Census Bureau, and U.S. Treasury—nevertheless defy conventional wisdom about spending, taxes, and deficits.

Friday, April 24, 2026

Threats to Econ Stats

number of posts have discussed presidential documentsofficial data, and government websites.

David S. Johnson at Brookings:

Since the founding of the country, the nation’s economic statistical system has produced timely, accurate, and relevant statistics that are used by policymakers and the public to make critical decisions. However, in recent years, the nation’s economic statistical agencies have been increasingly threatened by political and technical challenges. Having dealt with continually falling budgets, staff shortages, and increasing pressures to modernize their statistical infrastructure, these agencies are now experiencing a period of unprecedented staff reductions, budget cuts, and criticisms of their statistical credibility. This social and political environment has put federal statistical agencies into a state of crisis, furthering distrust of government statistics among the American people and reducing the availability of statistics on various aspects of the nation’s economy, people, and well-being.

The specific threats to the Federal Statistical System (FSS) can be placed into two broad categories. First, some threats are internal within the FSS, including declining survey response rates, changing technology, and the use of blended data. Second, other threats arise from external factors or political structures, including declining public trust, political interference, falling agency budgets, and staffing limits.

This paper provides an overview of internal and external threats and suggests a key mechanism for how agencies can survive in this challenging climate: keeping the staff motivated. After reviewing the structure of the FSS and headline economic indicators (or Principal Federal Economic Indicators), the paper focuses on the internal threats of falling response rates and difficulties in innovation and the external threats of decreasing budgets, staff, trust, and increasing political interference. This analysis shows that falling response rates are a concern if they bias the statistics, demonstrates the challenges faced by agencies in modernizing their statistics, highlights the recent reductions in staff, and discusses the implications of decreasing financial resources over the past 15 years. The conclusion examines whether attempts to limit the independence of the agencies could harm the statistics.

Download the full report

Friday, March 20, 2026

Leftward Trend in Social Science Research?


Manzi, J. The ideological orientation of academic social science research 1960–2024. Theor Soc 55, 25 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-026-09690-2
This study analyzes approximately 600,000 English-language social science abstracts published between 1960 and 2024 to estimate the long-run ideological orientation of disciplinary research output. Large language models (LLMs) were applied to each abstract using a fixed 2025 U.S. ideological spectrum, enabling consistent coding across six decades. Five key findings emerged. First, roughly 90 percent of politically relevant social science articles leaned left 1960–2024, and the mean political stance of every social science discipline was left-of-center every year during the period. Second, all disciplines showed leftward movement between 1990 and 2024. Third, policy-proximal disciplines generally showed limited rightward moderation between roughly 1970 and 1990, though policy-distal disciplines did not. Fourth, disciplines with greater leftward orientation generally displayed greater ideological homogeneity Fifth, sociocultural content was more consistently left-leaning than economic content, and that gap widened over time. Robustness checks using a wide assortment of alternative datasets and analytical methodologies indicated that these findings were unlikely to be artifacts of idiosyncratic assumptions. Methodologically, the study demonstrates the capacity of LLM-based text classification to deliver reliable, large-scale ideological measurement over time, a task previously impractical with human coding alone. Taken together, the analysis provides the first systematic, cross-disciplinary evidence of the long-run political orientation of anglophone social science scholarship, revealing both the persistence and the intensification of its leftward tendencies, particularly in sociocultural domains.

Huge caveat, from the article:In this study, ideology was operationalized as the relative positioning of a given text along a left–right spectrum of U.S. political thought. This includes economic and sociocultural dimensions, each characterized by their association with recognizable ideological actors and institutions. To ensure interpretive consistency over a 65-year period (1960 to 2024), political stance was evaluated against a fixed 2025 reference frame, derived from contemporary U.S. political categories.

This approach involved trade-offs. Using a static ideological scale, anchored to notions such as the 2025 political positions of Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, or the Heritage Foundation, ensured that the LLM’s judgments were grounded in stable, well-defined anchor points. It avoided the problem of ideological drift, in which the meaning of ‘left’ or ‘right’ might evolve over time due to shifting partisan alignments or cultural contexts. However, this came at the cost of temporal anachronism. Texts written in earlier decades may have been judged by standards they would not have recognized.

There is no doubt that the academy leans left, and has done so for a long time.  But the core problem with Manzi's analysis is that the entire US political spectrum has moved to the left, especially on cultural issues.  On abortion, civil rights, marriage, gender equality and a range of other issues, positions that were once radical left (e.g., support for same-sex marriage) are now mainstream.  Judge Glock at National Affairs:

The interaction of politics, policy, and public opinion should change how we look at polarization. In one sense, some conservative Republicans have indeed moved away from what we now consider the center. But the center itself has also changed, and veered emphatically to the left. Both parties, to varying degrees, have followed this shift over time. The changing context helps explain why each party can see the other as "radical" relative to what it considers the center, and why the argument that the right has moved rightward more than the left has moved leftward is unpersuasive.


 

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

Goodbye, CIA World Factbook

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984

number of posts have discussed presidential documentsofficial data, and government websites.  The Trump administration has killed off or limited access to many such resources, including now the CIA World Factbook. 

 David A. Graham at The Atlantic:

Memories are now the only place the World Factbook resides. In a post online yesterday, the agency noted that the site “has sunset,” though it provided no explanation for why. (The agency did not immediately reply to my inquiry about why, nor has it replied to other outlets.) The Associated Press noted that the move “follows a vow from Director John Ratcliffe to end programs that don’t advance the agency’s core missions.”

The demise of the World Factbook is part of a broad war on information being waged by the Trump administration. This is different from the administration’s assault on truth, in which the president and the White House lie prolifically or deny reality. This is something more fundamental: It’s a series of steps that by design or in effect block access to data, and in doing so erode the concept of a shared frame for all Americans. “Though the World Factbook is gone, in the spirit of its global reach and legacy, we hope you will stay curious about the world and find ways to explore it … in person or virtually,” the CIA wrote in the valedictory post. Left unsaid: You’re on your own to figure it out now.

If the World Factbook was indeed shut down because it didn’t meet Ratcliffe’s standard for core CIA functions, that reflects the Trump administration’s impoverished view of the government’s role. The World Factbook was a public service that helped Americans and others around the globe be informed, created a positive association with a shadowy agency, and spread U.S. soft power by providing a useful service free to all. I’ve been unable to determine how much it cost the government to maintain, but there’s no reason to think it would be substantive.

 

Wednesday, February 4, 2026

Disappearing Data

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984

Shifra Dayak and Anna Kramer at NOTUS:

NOTUS verified dozens of instances of lapsed federal data to capture the range of information that is no longer being collected, has been paused or is now not available to the public. This is only a small sample of the data collection the Trump administration has made changes to:The Department of Agriculture terminated a report on household food security in September, claiming it was “redundant, costly, politicized, and extraneous.” Feeding America said it relied on this survey to guide its programs.

  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stopped releasing data on maternal and infant mortality in April 2025 after the administration placed all of the agency staff managing the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System on administrative leave. The data collection resumed in at least some states in July 2025, but recent data contains gaps.
  • Trump directed the Justice Department last year to suspend a Biden-era database tracking misconduct by federal law enforcement officers.
  • The administration removed questions on gender identity from the National Crime Victimization Survey, the National Health Interview Survey and other surveys. Homeless shelters, mental health hotlines and substance use recovery programs all used this data for policymaking and planning.
  • The Department of Homeland Security ended public access in October to its public safety and infrastructure dataset, called Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data.
  • The National Center for Education Statistics missed a mandated deadline to release its annual report on the condition of the American education system, and the materials released were lacking in data compared to previous years.
  • The Health and Human Services Department’s 2024 National Survey on Drug Use and Health omitted information about drug use based on race and ethnicity. HHS laid off the team that collected the data, though the agency is reportedly working with a contractor to resume its collection.
  • The Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Education and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration no longer allow researchers to apply to access and study their data.
  • The Bureau of Labor Statistics produces fewer calculations for its producer price index program and has cut down where it collects data from.
Some of these cuts were made without any public fanfare, like the administration’s decision to end DAWN. [Drug Abuse Warning Network]  In other cases, agencies slipped the news into routine announcements. And occasionally, like when the White House mandated that questions about gender identity be removed from federal surveys, the administration touted the deletions as quelling “gender ideology extremism.”

Friday, January 2, 2026

Vaccines: Information Gaps and Disinformation

 Many posts have discussed myths and misinformation.The greatest spreader of vaccine misinformation is the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Lauren Weber, Caitlin Gilbert, Dylan Moriarty and Joshua Lott at WP:

The share of U.S. counties where 95 percent or more of kindergartners were vaccinated against measles — the number doctors say is needed to achieve overall protection for the class, known as “herd immunity” — has dropped from 50 percent before the pandemic to 28 percent, according to The Post’s examination of the public records from 44 states and the District of Columbia.

Most of the counties that previously lacked herd immunity for kindergarten classrooms got worse, according to the Post analysis, which in most cases compared the academic years 2018-2019 and 2024-2025.

 ...

Data collection efforts by states are uneven. Public health authorities in some places are flying blind, without adequate data to guide policy decisions, The Post found, because vaccination records have not been uniformly collected. Many school districts are unable to keep track of which kids have received shots.

In Kentucky, state data shows that the measles vaccine rate in Jefferson County, which includes Louisville, was below 60 percent for kindergartners.

Data collection efforts by states are uneven. Public health authorities in some places are flying blind, without adequate data to guide policy decisions, The Post found, because vaccination records have not been uniformly collected. Many school districts are unable to keep track of which kids have received shots.

In Kentucky, state data shows that the measles vaccine rate in Jefferson County, which includes Louisville, was below 60 percent for kindergartners.

“It leaves parents very confused about who they should trust and what information they should rely on,” she said. “And ultimately, often families are choosing not to vaccinate because that feels safer, or it’s easier to not do something out of fear than it is to choose to make a decision.”

The federal vaccine advisory committee Kennedy remade with his appointments voted in December to eliminate a long-standing recommendation for every newborn to receive a hepatitis B shot, which the CDC approved. And more changes could be ahead for the vaccine schedule.
The number of parents questioning vaccine safety in Anita Chandra-Puri’s Chicago pediatric practice has doubled in the last few years, she said. Many of them are highly educated, but they keep coming across misleading information on social media, she said.

Across schools in Chicago, the measles vaccination rate has dropped 6 percent on average since the pandemic.

“They have access to every resource, and they think that they can become the expert at something because they’ve seen it multiple times” on social media, Chandra-Puri said.

 

Tuesday, December 2, 2025

Erasing Black History

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984

 Delano Massey at Axios:

  1. $3.4 billion in grants for HBCUs, public health research and Black entrepreneurs have been cut or frozen, according to the Blackout Report, from the nonprofit Onyx Impact.
  2. 6,769 federal datasets have been deleted, including those tracking maternal mortality and sickle cell disease, which disproportionately affect Black Americans, per the Blackout report. Also removed: data on workforce diversity and environmental exposure in historically redlined neighborhoods — information that directly informs racial equity policy.
  3. 591 books by Black authors have been banned from Pentagon-run schools and libraries, Onyx Impact notes. The removed titles include works by Toni Morrison, Maya Angelou and Ibram X. Kendi.
  4. The Trump administration is reviewing national museums, including the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History & Culture, after President Trump criticized the museums as being "out of control" and focusing on "how horrible our country is."
  5. Government websites have deleted content related to Black history. Some deleted material — including National Park Service pages about Harriet Tubman and Medgar Evers — was restored after public backlash, but researchers say most erasures remain uncorrected.
  6. The unemployment rate for Black women has risen sharply to 7.5%, according to the most recent government data. That's significantly higher than the overall unemployment rate, and is partly a result of Trump's cuts to the federal workforce, which have disproportionately hit Black women, Axios' Emily Peck reports. A backlash in the diversity, equity and inclusion space has also hit this group.
  7. Colleges across the country have shuttered cultural centers, including those that are geared toward Black students, The Washington Post reports.

Friday, November 21, 2025

Posting Lies, Deleting Facts

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984


Scientific information on the CDC's website was replaced this week with anti-vaccine talking points, including false claims that link autism and vaccines. It's the latest move by the Trump administration to alter longstanding US vaccine policy and cast doubt on vaccinations. "We are updating the CDC's website to reflect gold standard, evidence-based science," Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon said Thursday. But abundant evidence has shown that there is no connection between vaccines and autism. In a CNN interview, a former top CDC official called the website changes "a national embarrassment" that could leave parents confused.
In August, Trump’s decision to fire Erika McEntarfer, the BLS commissioner, grabbed headlines,2 but the top job is hardly the only hole this administration has blown in that agency. At the time of McEntarfer’s firing, a third of senior BLS leadership positions were already vacant. (That’s still the case, in fact.)

The rest of the agency has been swiss-cheesed too. Some regional field offices—such as the consumer price index offices in Buffalo, New York; Lincoln, Nebraska; and Provo, Utah—have been shuttered entirely. Meanwhile, post-COVID, the agency was already struggling with reduced survey-response rates, which have made its numbers noisier and more susceptible to big revisions. The administration’s response has been to disband the task force working to fix these problems.

The result is that federal data are being degraded—or deleted altogether. And deletion is especially common when statistical series measure issues that this administration would rather not track.

In September, for instance, the administration canceled a three-decade-old annual survey that measures how many Americans struggle to get enough food. A few months earlier, HHS eliminated the team that produces the poverty guidelines, which determine how we count the number of people in poverty and eligibility for benefits such as SNAP, Medicaid, Head Start, and childcare subsidies. But hey, if you never determine who’s eligible for benefits, maybe that means no one is.

Over the past ten months, I’ve been tracking similar cuts to federal data collection on substance abuse, natural disasters, children’s literacy, climate change, race, crime, immigration, gender identity and other issues. (My non-exhaustive, running list lives here; please send me examples I may have missed.)

Friday, October 17, 2025

Rose Research Fall 2025

Watch this clip from The Wire.

It is the best description of research, ever.

The big stuff:

Finding the literature: https://consensus.app/

Great resources at Honnold Library -- which students usually overlook! 
  • Nexis Uni: news sources and law journals
  • Political science journals
  • Dissertation abstracts (search for "California" and "redistricting" in abstracts, and you will see a couple of Rose Institute names)
The Internet Archive -- if there is a broken link to what you need, this site might help you find it. Especially helpful in finding pages that the administration has taken down:

California 

General State Policy and Politics
General Public Policy and Finance
National Elections, Parties, Campaign Finance

Crime

Sunday, October 12, 2025

Malevolence and Incompetence at HHS

Many posts have discussed the chaos at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Apoorva Mandavilli and Sheryl Gay Stolberg at NYT:
The Trump administration on Saturday raced to rescind layoffs of hundreds of scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who were mistakenly fired on Friday night in what appeared to be a substantial procedural lapse.

Among those wrongly dismissed were the top two leaders of the federal measles response team, those working to contain Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo, members of the Epidemic Intelligence Service, and the team that assembles the C.D.C.’s vaunted scientific journal, The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

After The New York Times reported the dismissals, two federal health officials said on Saturday that many of those workers were being brought back. The officials spoke anonymously in order to disclose internal discussions.

The mistakes rocked an agency already in tumult, and which has been a particular target of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The C.D.C. lost about a third of its staff in April; many were rehired weeks later.

Monday, September 29, 2025

Disappearing Data

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984

 Liza Featherstone at TNR:

To declare that Trump has been right and the scientists have been wrong about climate change is so counterfactual that it requires a massive suppression of available data. Good thing Trump has thought of that. Through a combination of layoffs and weird directives, his administration has dramatically reduced its ability to collect data on industrial pollution that causes climate change, extreme weather caused by climate change, greenhouse gases contributing to climate change—really any facts related to the climate crisis. To take just one example, an effort launched by the Biden administration to collect emissions data was canceled by Trump on his first day in office. The same could be said about his Tylenol claims; lucky for him he has made significant cuts to autism research.

...
Trump’s commitment to falsehood—and to eradicating facts at their roots—is not limited to science and public health. This summer he claimed that his policies were leading America into “another golden age” and that economic growth under his presidency “shatters expectations.” The data said otherwise: Whether you’re talking about job growth, inflation, or just about any other measure, the numbers did not chart in a direction favorable to the president. Here again, Trump is not willing to tolerate the facts: When the Bureau of Labor Statistics last month reported numbers that contradicted his sunny narrative, he fired the head of the agency
...
Trump’s administration has greatly reduced its own ability to collect and disseminate accurate information about crime, removing research staff, as well as impeding the public’s access to crime data, making it increasingly easy for Trump and his administration officials and supporters to freely fearmonger about any vulnerable minority.

 ...

This week, Trump’s Agriculture Department cut its annual food insecurity survey, so Americans won’t know how many people are going hungry as a result of Trump’s cuts to food stamps and other vital assistance programs, not to mention his inflationary tariffs.

...

We won’t know how badly our children are faring in school as a result of the massive cuts to K-12 education, since he has gutted the Department of Education’s research offices, including the irreplaceable National Center for Education Statistics.


Friday, September 19, 2025

Detailed Map of the 2024 Election

 

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

DOGE Failed

Many posts have discussed federal deficits and the federal debt. Like previous efforts to reduce the deficit by cutting "waste, fraud, and abuse," DOGE was a failure.

 Jessie Blaeser at Politico:

The Trump administration’s claim that it is saving billions of dollars through DOGE-related cuts to federal contracts is drastically exaggerated, according to a new POLITICO analysis of public data and federal spending records.

Through July, DOGE said it has saved taxpayers $52.8 billion by canceling contracts, but of the $32.7 billion in actual claimed contract savings that POLITICO could verify, DOGE’s savings over that period were closer to $1.4 billion.

Despite the administration’s claims, not a single one of those 1.4 billion dollars will lower the federal deficit unless Congress steps in. Instead, the money has been returned to agencies mandated by law to spend it.

DOGE’s latest figures on contract cuts ticked up to $54.2 billion in an update posted on Tuesday.

POLITICO’s findings come on top of months of scrutiny of DOGE’s accounting, but the magnitude of DOGE’s inflated savings claims has not been clear until now.

David Lawder at Reuters:

 The U.S. government's budget deficit grew nearly 20% in July to $291 billion despite a nearly $21 billion jump in customs duty collections from President Donald Trump's tariffs, with outlays growing faster than receipts, the Treasury Department said on Tuesday.

The deficit for July was up 19%, or $47 billion, from July 2024. Receipts for the month grew 2%, or $8 billion, to $338 billion, while outlays jumped 10%, or $56 billion, to $630 billion, a record high for the month.

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Violent Crime Is Down

  Many posts have discussed crime in the United States.

From the FBI:

The FBI released detailed data on over 14 million criminal offenses for 2024, reported to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program by participating law enforcement agencies. More than 16,000 state, county, city, university and college, and tribal agencies, covering a combined population of 95.6% United States population, submitted data to the UCR Program through the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the Summary Reporting System.

The FBI’s crime statistics estimates, based on reported data, show a violent crime occurred, on average, every 25.9 seconds in 2024. The breakdown shows on average a murder occurred every 31.1 minutes and a rape occurred every 4.1 minutes. National violent crime decreased an estimated 4.5% in 2024 compared to 2023 estimates:
  • Murder and non-negligent manslaughter recorded a 2024 estimated nationwide decrease of 14.9% compared to the previous year.
  • In 2024, the estimated number of offenses in the revised rape category saw an estimated 5.2% decrease.
  • Aggravated assault figures decreased an estimated 3.0% in 2024.
  • Robbery showed an estimated decrease of 8.9% nationally.
In 2024, 16,419 agencies participated in the Hate Crime collection, population coverage of 95.1% of the U.S. population. Law enforcement agencies submitted incident reports involving 11,679 criminal incidents and 13,683 related offenses as being motivated by bias toward race, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, sexual orientation, disability, gender, and gender identity.

To publish a national trend, the FBI’s UCR Program used a dataset of reported hate crime incidents and reported zero incidents submitted by participating agencies reporting six or more common months of hate crime data to the FBI’s UCR Program for both 2023 and 2024. According to this dataset, reported hate crime incidents decreased 1.5 percent from 11,041 in 2023 to 10,873 in 2024.

“Reported Crimes in the Nation” comprises five parts—“Crime in the United States, 2024,” “NIBRS, 2024,” “Hate Crime Statistics, 2024,” Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted 2024 assault tables, and “UCR Summary of Reported Crimes in the Nation, 2024.” The compilation’s name has been changed to best reflect the UCR Program’s products, which are based on data reported by participating law enforcement agencies to the FBI.

The violent crime estimate published as part of “Crime in the United States” comprises murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault offenses. For the first time, the 2013 through 2024 violent crime estimates are based on the rape offenses reported using the 2013 revised rape definition. The violent crime figures will still be based on the legacy rape definition for years 2005 to 2012. The revised rape definition (https://le.fbi.gov/cjis-division/cjis-link/ucr-program-changes-definition-of-rape) encompasses additional circumstances beyond the parameters of the legacy definition. In 2016, the FBI Director approved the recommendation to discontinue the reporting of rape data using the UCR legacy definition beginning in 2017. Since 2017, table one of the “Crime in the United States” was the only table using the legacy definition to publish the historic trend. This year’s change streamlines the publication of reported rape.

The complete analysis is located on the FBI’s Crime Data Explorer.

Sunday, August 10, 2025

The Need for Trustworthy Data

Many posts have cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

At WP, Former CEA chairs  N. Gregory Mankiw and Cecilia Rouse explain why it was a mistake to fire the head of the BLS:

The collection and analysis of federal statistics is complex. Often, the first numbers produced are revised as more information is gathered. And sometimes the revisions are quite large. This can lead to questions about the process, so it is crucial that the users of the data (which is really all of us!) trust that those collecting and analyzing these statistics are not swayed by politics. After all, if data are only considered “good” when they support a particular politician’s worldview and “bad” when they do not, why should anyone believe them? And if we don’t believe them, we know less about what is happening in the economy.
Economists such as Nicholas Bloom at Stanford University have documented that uncertainty about economic prospects and policy reduces economic growth. Further, Nobel Prize winners Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson have identified the strength of a nation’s institutions as a source of economic growth. We have little doubt that part of the success of the U.S. economy over the past century is due to its strong and independent federal statistical agencies, which generate the kind of information leaders need to make smart decisions.

Federal statistics may seem like an arcane topic that interests only econ wonks like us. But the truth is that these statistical agencies have made it possible for business leaders and policymakers alike to analyze credible data and plan for the future. And that is something everyone should care about.

Politicians spin — it is what they do. But when their spin undermines the integrity of the numbers we have come to rely on, the consequences are real. We will all pay the price.

 

Saturday, August 2, 2025

BLS Firing


Ben Casselman and Tony Romm at NYT:
President Trump unleashed his fury about weakness in the labor market on Friday, saying without evidence that the data were “rigged” and that he was firing the Senate-confirmed Department of Labor official responsible for pulling together the numbers each month.

In a long post on social media, Mr. Trump said he had directed his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was confirmed on a bipartisan basis in 2024.

Emily Liddel, an associate commissioner for the bureau, confirmed late Friday that Dr. McEntarfer had been fired and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as acting commissioner.

The president fired Dr. McEntarfer after the bureau released monthly jobs data showing surprisingly weak hiring in July and large downward revisions to job growth in the previous two months. Economists widely interpreted the report as evidence that Mr. Trump’s policies were beginning to take a toll on the economy, though the president insisted in a subsequent post that the country was “doing GREAT!”

From Friends of the BLS:

Today, President Trump called into question the integrity of the Employment Situation report that the BLS released this morning. He accused BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer of deliberately reporting false numbers to reflect poorly on this administration. This baseless, damaging claim undermines the valuable work and dedication of BLS staff who produce the reports each month. This escalates the President’s unprecedented attacks on the independence and integrity of the federal statistical system.

The President seeks to blame someone for unwelcome economic news. The Commissioner does not determine what the numbers are but simply reports on what the data show. The process of obtaining the numbers is decentralized by design to avoid opportunities for interference. The BLS uses the same proven, transparent, reliable process to produce estimates every month. Every month, BLS revises the prior two months’ employment estimates to reflect slower-arriving, more-accurate information.

This rationale for firing Dr. McEntarfer is without merit and undermines the credibility of federal economic statistics that are a cornerstone of intelligent economic decision-making by businesses, families, and policymakers. U.S. official statistics are the gold standard globally. When leaders of other nations have politicized economic data, it has destroyed public trust in all official statistics and in government science.

BLS operates as a federal statistical agency and is afforded autonomy to ensure the data it releases are as accurate as possible. To politicize the work of the agency and its workers does a great disservice not only to BLS but to the entire federal statistical system which this country has relied on for almost 150 years. We stand firmly behind the BLS, Commissioner McEntarfer, and the data they work hard to produce. Commissioner McEntarfer is a widely-respected economist who has devoted her career to public service. She has an impeccable record. Over ninety percent of U.S. Senators supported her confirmation.

We call on Congress to respond immediately, to investigate the factors that led to Commissioner McEntarfer’s removal, to strongly urge the Commissioner’s continued service, and ensure that the nonpartisan integrity of the position is retained. The statement from the President undermines these tenets and politicizes data which cannot and should not be used for political points.

The Friends of BLS Co-Chairs: William Beach, Erica L. Groshen and Paul Schroeder

The Friends of BLS Steering Committee Members: Tom Beers, Demetra Nightingale, Mary Jo Mitchell, Steve Pierson, Ken Poole, Aaron Sojourne

 

Monday, July 28, 2025

Fake Numbers

Many posts have discussed myths and misinformation

 Naftali Bendavid at WP:

President Donald Trump made a promise at a reception last week for Republican lawmakers that was as impossible as it was specific: He would drive down drug prices by as much as 1,500 percent — “numbers that are not even thought to be achievable,” he said.
A price cannot drop by more than 100 percent, but Trump went on to make several other precise but clearly false numerical claims. The cost of gasoline had fallen to $1.99 a gallon in five states, he said; according to AAA, it was over $3 in every state. Businesses had invested $16 trillion in America in the past four months, he added; the entire U.S. economy last year was worth less than $30 trillion.

Trump even congratulated Veterans Affairs Secretary Douglas A. Collins for having an approval rating of 92 percent. In this polarized moment, it is unlikely any U.S. political figure enjoys a figure close to that, and the White House provided no source for the claim.
...
Trump tangled with numbers again last Thursday in an appearance with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell, whom he has hinted he might fire. The president complained that a renovation of two Fed headquarters buildings was expected to cost $3.1 billion, prompting Powell to shake his head and respond, “I’m not aware of that.”

Trump handed Powell a sheet of paper, saying the $3.1 billion figure number had just come out. “You’re including the Martin renovation,” Powell said, looking at the paper. “You just added in a third building, is what that is.” Trump said, “It’s a building that’s being built,” and Powell countered: “No, it was built five years ago. We finished Martin five years ago.”

...

Trump was also specific in the weeks before the July 3 passage of his sweeping budget bill, which extended tax cuts from his first term. If his bill did not pass, he warned on May 30: “You’ll have a 68 percent tax increase. That’s a number nobody’s ever heard of before. You’ll have a massive tax increase.”
He reiterated that figure in a June 26 speech from the White House, adding, “Think of that: 68 percent.”

Financial experts were predicting taxes would go up about 7.5 percent if the legislation failed — still a substantial hike but far from the 68 percent figure. The White House has declined to comment and several fact-checkers tried unsuccessfully to determine where Trump’s number was coming from, speculating that Trump was conflating it with the proportion of Americans who would see their taxes go up.