Antoni’s appointment in the US tests republican reaction to the crisis

Recent data show slow growth and inflation above the goal, but the political reaction seems more linked to the president’s image

EJ Antoni’s recent nomination to lead the Department of Labor Statistics (BLS) by President Donald Trump rekindles debates on two risks that surround the American economy: an imminent deceleration and a party that seems to be reluctant to admit that the crisis approaches.

Antoni’s trajectory quickly became the target of analysis on the internet. Heritage Foundation’s chief economist, he completed his doctorate just five years ago and has no relevant publications or citations in the area. Its curriculum lacks experience in large public research, data survey methodology and management of BLS size organizations, which has about 2,000 employees. For an economist, Antoni also shows little knowledge about the functioning of recessions, something considered essential to the position he occupies.

Also read:
High prices and interest rates remove Americans from home ownership
Ukraine claims to attack the Russian oil station
Morgan Stanley projects $ 30 billion boom in Brazilian titles

Despite his uncomposed profile, Antoni’s appointment deserves attention because it symbolizes greater issues: the approaching economic slowdown and the posture of a party that seems willing to ignore it.

Recent evidence reinforces this slowdown. In the last three months, the US economy has generated an average of only 35,000 jobs per month, a reflection of a GDP that shows growth in family and business investment in half the pace of the previous year. At the same time, prices continue to rise above the target of 2%, creating a dangerous combination of slow growth and high inflation – a scenario historically associated with stagflation. The US is now closer to this scenario than in four decades.

However, this is just one side of the question. Historically, slowdown and recessions are not unpublished and there have always been political mechanisms to relieve the population. Since 1957, Congress has expanded unemployment benefits in all recessions. During the 2008 financial crisis, the economic stimulus law and the recovery and reinvestment law arose, while Covid-19 pandemic has brought the 2020 Cares Law and the 2021 American rescue plan. In addition to immediate relief, measures were implemented to attack the structural causes of seizures, such as the reform, recovery and execution of the 1989 financial institutions. 2008 Problems and Warp Speed Vaccination Operation during the pandemic.

Not all aid packages, of course, were perfect. Economists debate whether they were too large or too small, if they arrived sooner or later, if they were large or limited. But all these efforts have a central premise: Congress recognizes the economic crisis and seeks to act to contain it.

Today, this premise is in check. Evidence suggests that Congress Republicans are more devoted to protecting the president’s image than dealing with the challenges of the economy. Allegations of fraud in Trump’s repeated employment numbers were little contested, and concern for imminent deceleration seems secondary. If the economy comes into recession and Republicans continue to deny reality, they will hardly approve measures to support millions of Americans who will suffer from the crisis.

In this context, Antoni’s confirmation becomes a symbolic test: can Republicans put the country’s economic interests above loyalty to the president? If the appointment is approved, the message will be clear: millions of Americans may face difficulties not to contradict the chief executive. If rejected, there is still a possibility that, in the future, effective measures in defense of the population prevail, even if the economy is recovering.

Antoni’s choice, therefore, goes beyond the curriculum of an economist. It is a thermometer about the political willingness to face economic slowdown before it is too late.

Trump dismisses head of labor statistics, generating concerns about the integrity of data

Hours after a report showing weak growth in employment, President Donald Trump announced the resignation of Erika McNTAFER, head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) appointed by Joe Biden. The measure caused immediate reactions from economists, legislators and experts, who point to risks to the credibility of economic data in the United States.

In a social media publication, Trump said he ordered resignation “immediately” and justified that “important numbers like these should be fair and accurate, they cannot be manipulated for political purposes.” However, the decision raised questions about the president’s real motivation, as the report indicated that the economy had created only 73,000 jobs in July, after aluto -down revisions in the previous two months – an average of 35,000 jobs in the last three months, the lowest rate since pandemic.

Experts from both parties have spoken in defense of McTaFerfer and BLS, recognizing the agency as a global reference in labor statistics. For economists and statistics, the impartiality of the BLS is essential: millions of economic decisions and trillion dollars in investments depend on trust in these numbers.

William Wiatrowski, BLS’s deputy commissioner, will take over the agency’s lead, the Secretary of Labor said Lori Chaveram-Deemer. Although the position of Commissioner is nominated by the president, the BLS describes itself as “independent” and “non -party”, and experts warn that the agency’s politicization may compromise its historical credibility.

The resignation generated immediate criticism from Democrats and former BLS Commissioners. William Beach, appointed by Trump in his first term, classified the action as “totally unfounded” and stated that he creates a “dangerous precedent.” The Friends of Bls Group, which he co -pity, said: “Politizing the work of the agency and its employees is a great disservice not only to the BLS, but to the entire federal statistical system on which this country has depended on almost 150 years.”

Conservative experts also spoke. Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute said that “there is absolutely no evidence” that McTentfer tried to manipulate data, which would be “impossible.” Diana Furchtgott-Roth, who held positions in the Reagan, Bush and Trump governments, recognized the president’s right to choose her team, but highlighted BLS professionalism, citing November 2024 data, released before the election, were consistent and accurate, even under political pressure.

BLS faces additional challenges due to budget and personnel restrictions. Since 2010, its funds adjusted by inflation have fallen about 20%, and the 2026 tax budget proposal provides for additional 8%cuts. Reviews in employment data, often targeted by Trump criticism, are common practices and aim to provide a more complete work market overview, including seasonal adjustments for education and local governments.

In addition, economists point out that the low initial response rate of companies – below 60% in recent months, compared to 70% or more before pandemic – may affect preliminary numbers. Largest annual reviews, released in February, help compare data with more accurate sources, ensuring greater long -term reliability.

While Trump criticizes revisions and accuses manipulation, the financial market already reacts: operators now estimate nearly 90% chance of reducing interest rates by Federal Reserve in September, reflecting concern for economic slowdown. At the same time, Fed governor Adriana Kugler announced her departure, making room for Trump to appoint a new board member.

McENTFER’s resignation, therefore, is not just an administrative change: it is a test on the integrity of US economic statistics and the government’s ability to separate political interests from fundamental data to the economy. Analysts warn that if politicization deepens, public and market confidence in BLS reports can be seriously shaken – a risk with repercussions on millions of Americans and the economy’s own functioning.

With information from Kathryn Anne Edwards, labor economist, independent policy consultant for Bloomberg*