SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
June, 03 2011, 03:33pm EDT
Friday June, 03 2011, 03:33pm EDT
Contact:
Statement: Chad Stone, Chief Economist, on the May Employment Report
Today's employment report should be a wake-up call to policymakers who continue to say the budget deficit is a more immediate threat to the economy than the jobs deficit. Nearly two years after the economy technically turned the corner from recession to recovery, job growth was disappointing in May and unemployment remained high. At the same time, interest rates are very low (see chart), indicating that financial markets are far more concerned in the near term about a sluggish recovery than about deficits, debt, or inflation.
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON - Today's employment report should be a wake-up call to policymakers who continue to say the budget deficit is a more immediate threat to the economy than the jobs deficit. Nearly two years after the economy technically turned the corner from recession to recovery, job growth was disappointing in May and unemployment remained high. At the same time, interest rates are very low (see chart), indicating that financial markets are far more concerned in the near term about a sluggish recovery than about deficits, debt, or inflation.
You wouldn't know that from the current debate in Washington, which is focused largely on the size of budget cuts that must accompany legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling in order to secure the votes of enough members of Congress. Lawmakers must raise the debt ceiling so that the United States does not default on its obligations arising from tax and spending legislation that was previously enacted. If implemented now, those budget cuts would drain purchasing power from the economy at a time when the recovery is already losing momentum and forecasters expect another quarter of sluggish growth.
Adding insult to injury, a number of states have cut or are thinking about cutting the number of weeks of unemployment insurance (UI) they will provide to newly unemployed workers, while congressional Republicans have proposed legislation that would allow states to prematurely end federal benefits for the long-term unemployed. UI is one of the most effective means of boosting demand in a weak economy, and cutting UI benefits will be a drag on an already flagging economic recovery.
About the May Jobs Report
Job growth slowed sharply in May, and other indicators show that the labor market remains in a deep slump.
- Private and government payrolls rose by 54,000 jobs in May. Private employers on net added 83,000 jobs, while local government employment fell by 28,000 jobs (state government employment fell by 2,000, and federal government employment rose by 1,000).
This is the 15th straight month of private-sector job creation, with payrolls growing by 2.1 million jobs (a pace of 143,000 jobs a month) since February 2010; total nonfarm employment (private plus government jobs) has grown by 1.8 million jobs over the same period, or 120,000 a month. Growth of 200,000 to 300,000 jobs a month or more is typical in strong economic recoveries, so the mere 54,000 total nonfarm jobs added in May is quite disappointing. - In May, despite 15 months of private-sector job growth, there were still 6.9 million fewer jobs on nonfarm payrolls than when the recession began in December 2007, and 6.7 million fewer jobs on private payrolls.
- The unemployment rate edged up from 9.0 percent to 9.1 percent in May, and the number of unemployed rose to 13.9 million. The unemployment rate was 8.0 percent for whites (3.6 percentage points higher than at the start of the recession), 16.2 percent for African Americans (7.2 percentage points higher than at the start of the recession), and 11.9 percent for Hispanics or Latinos (5.6 percentage points higher than at the start of the recession).
The recession and lack of job opportunities drove many people out of the labor force, and we have yet to see the return to labor force participation (people working or actively looking for work) that marks a strong jobs recovery. The labor force participation rate (the share of the population aged 16 and over working or looking for work) remained depressed at 64.2 percent for the fifth straight month, the lowest it has been since 1984. So far this year, labor force growth has merely kept up with population growth and many potential workers remain on the sidelines while job prospects remain weak. - The share of the population with a job, which plummeted in the recession from 62.5 percent in December 2007 to levels last seen in the mid-1980s, was 58.4 percent in May and has not been above 58.5 percent in 12 months. Prior to the current slump, the last time it was lower was August 1983.
- It remains very difficult to find a job. The Labor Department's most comprehensive alternative unemployment rate measure -- which includes people who want to work but are discouraged from looking and people working part time because they can't find full-time jobs -- was 15.8 percent in May, not much below its all-time high of 17.4 percent in October 2009 in data that go back to 1994. By that measure, almost 25 million people are unemployed or underemployed.
Long-term unemployment remains a significant concern. Over two-fifths (45.1 percent) of the 13.9 million people who are unemployed -- 6.2 million people -- have been looking for work for 27 weeks or longer. These long-term unemployed represent 4.0 percent of the labor force. Prior to this recession, the previous highs for these statistics over the past six decades were 26.0 percent and 2.6 percent, respectively, in June 1983.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is one of the nation's premier policy organizations working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.
LATEST NEWS
Keystone, 'Safest Pipeline in the World,' Ruptures—Again
President Donald Trump wants to revive Keystone XL, a highly controversial extension of the tar sands pipeline system, despite three massive leaks over the past eight years.
Apr 08, 2025
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
The Keystone pipeline—which carries hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil nearly 2,700 miles from the Alberta tar sands to refineries in Illinois and Oklahoma daily—was abruptly shut down Tuesday morning following a rupture in North Dakota, marking yet another accident along what proponents have called the "safest pipeline in the world."
South Bow, the Canadian company that manages the Keystone system, said it shut down the pipeline—which transports an average of around 624,000 barrels of crude oil per day—after detection systems sounded the alarm on a pressure drop. The company said the spill is confined to an agricultural field about 60 miles southwest of Fargo.
"The affected segment has been isolated, and operations and containment resources have been mobilized to site," the company said, according toThe Associated Press. "Our primary focus right now is the safety of onsite personnel and mitigating risk to the environment."
As the AP reported:
It wasn't clear what caused the rupture of the underground pipeline or the amount of crude oil released into the field. An employee working at the site near Fort Ransom heard a "mechanical bang" and shut down the pipeline within about two minutes, said Bill Suess, spill investigation program manager with the North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality. Oil surfaced about 300 yards (274 meters) south of the pump station in a field and emergency personnel responded, Suess said.
A proposed extension known as Keystone XL would have carried more tar sands oil—widely considered the world's dirtiest fuel—to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico. Opponents warned of the danger of leaks, with a 2021 report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office noting that there were 22 accidents along the conduit between 2010 and 2020. These include leaks of more than 100,000 gallons per spill in 2017, 2019, and 2022.
"Keystone's incident history illustrates the problematic pipeline's systemic issues," Bill Caram, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, said in a statement Tuesday. "The Keystone pipeline appears to be on track to hit its average of about a significant failure every year. It's time to address this pipeline's shortcomings."
Following more than a decade of pressure from climate, environmental, Indigenous, and other groups, then-President Joe Biden revoked Keystone XL's permit on his first day in office in January 2021. President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a "drill, baby, drill" platform, now wants to revive Keystone XL.
Trump's Vision for US Now Includes Allowing Gun Sellers to Skip Background Checks
"These aren't just policy changes—they're deliberate choices that prioritize gun industry profits over American lives," said one gun violence prevention advocate.
Apr 08, 2025
A reported Trump administration plan to eliminate a "zero tolerance" policy for firearm sellers who violate gun safety regulations is aimed at benefiting two groups, said one gun violence prevention advocate: "The gun sellers knowingly endangering communities, and the gun CEOs getting rich off of weapons sales to criminals."
"It absolutely does not benefit the American people," said Emma Brown, executive director of Giffords.
Attorney General Pam Bondi is expected this week to announce the reversal of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) policy, which was implemented by the Biden administration to hold gun sellers accountable for falsifying records, skipping background checks, and otherwise disobeying regulations meant to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a danger to others or themselves.
As The New York Timesreported Monday, President Donald Trump plans to order FBI Director Kash Patel, the interim leader of ATF, to move toward eliminating a ban on pistol braces, which can convert handguns to weapons that resemble rifles, and a rule requiring background checks for private gun sales.
Enforcement of the rules has been down since Trump took office in January, with federal courts moving to freeze and weaken the two ATF rules.
"This administration is systematically dismantling the safeguards designed to keep weapons out of dangerous hands."
But Brown said the official repeal of the regulations would embolden "reckless" gun sellers.
"The impact here is simple: Putting gun dealers who break the law back in business will increase crime," said Brown. "Dealers who are willing to sell guns to traffickers and criminals have been given our president's seal of approval at the cost of Americans' safety."
Under the Biden administration, the rules helped empower the ATF to revoke 170 gun seller licenses—more than the agency revoked in the previous three years combined, said Giffords.
"With the reversal of the 'zero tolerance' policy federal firearms licensees who are violating the law will stay in business, allowing more illegal firearms to flow into communities," warned the group.
The gun violence prevention group Brady called the planned repeal "a gift to the gun industry," noting that homicide rates soared during Trump's first term and projecting that gun crimes will once again "skyrocket" after Bondi ends the zero tolerance policy.
"The data is clear and compelling—90% of crime guns come from just 5% of dealers," said Kris Brown, president of Brady. "By dismantling this policy, the Trump administration is deliberately empowering these irresponsible gun dealers to operate without accountability, effectively arming criminals who will use these weapons to terrorize our communities."
"This administration is systematically dismantling the safeguards designed to keep weapons out of dangerous hands," she added. "These aren't just policy changes—they're deliberate choices that prioritize gun industry profits over American lives."
US Supreme Court's Right-Wing Majority Sides With Trump on Fired Federal Workers
"Today's order by the U.S. Supreme Court is deeply disappointing but is only a momentary pause in our efforts to... hold the federal government accountable," said a group of nonprofits and unions.
Apr 08, 2025
A coalition of nonprofits and unions representing federal workers said Tuesday that it would remain "unwavering" in fighting to protect thousands of civil servants who were fired by the Trump administration, after the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the White House in a case regarding the mass dismissal of 16,000 people from various agencies.
In the 7-2 ruling, the court did not rule on whether the employees were unlawfully fired, as the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and other plaintiffs argued they were.
Instead, the unsigned opinion—approved by every member of the high court except Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson—held that the nonprofit groups that sued President Donald Trump's administration had not demonstrated they suffered "injury" due to the firing of 16,000 probationary employees, and that the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to sue and try to pause the firings.
The majority on the court sided with Trump's administration, which had argued that a lower court judge—Senior Judge William Alsup in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California—had overreached by ordering the reinstatement of people who had been fired from six federal agencies including the Pentagon, the Department of Energy, and the Department of the Treasury.
AFGE and other plaintiffs—including the Main Street Alliance and the American Public Health Association—suggested that the technical ruling, which will stand while the case regarding the probationary employees moves forward, does not change the fact that "thousands of public service employees were unlawfully fired in an effort to cripple federal agencies and their crucial programs that serve millions of Americans every day."
"Today's order by the U.S. Supreme Court is deeply disappointing but is only a momentary pause in our efforts to enforce the trial court's orders and hold the federal government accountable," said the coalition. "Despite this setback, our coalition remains unwavering in fighting for these workers who were wronged by the administration, and in protecting the freedoms of the American people. This battle is far from over."
The plaintiffs argued that the Trump administration not only acted outside its authority by dismissing 16,000 federal workers, but based the firings on a false claim by Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
They said Ezell ordered the termination of the probationary employees in a template letter that falsely claimed they were being fired for poor performance; federal employees are protected from at-will firings, and their supervisors must have a complaint about performance or misconduct to immediately dismiss them.
Many of the workers who learned they had been fired last month had not been at their jobs long enough to receive any performance reviews, or had only received positive feedback about their work.
In his earlier ruling last month, Alsup wrote that while "each federal agency has the statutory authority to hire and fire its employees, even at scale, subject to certain safeguards," OPM does not have that authority.
"Yet that is what happened here—en masse," said Alsup.
"The conservative Supreme Court stepped in and used a technical excuse to let Trump have his way."
The plaintiffs said in their lawsuit that other recent court rulings ordering the administration to reinstate fired employees bolstered their view that the dismissals were illegal. Last week, another federal judge in Maryland ordered the reinstatement of federal workers in 19 states and the District of Columbia.
The coaliton also denounced the government's claim that calling the workers back after terminating their employment would be onerous.
"The scale of the task is simply a reflection of the scale of the government's own unlawful action and its 'move fast and break things' ethos," the plaintiffs wrote. "Accepting the government's argument would mean that it can act lawlessly as long as it acts quickly and destructively enough that restoring the status quo would be an 'enormous' task. That is not and cannot be the law."
The administration's argument was reminiscent of its claim in another case that the Supreme Court ruled on Monday—that of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was expelled from the country by immigration officials and sent to El Salvador's prison system, despite having no criminal record and having proven to a judge earlier that he could face persecution and torture in El Salvador.
White House officials have claimed in recent days they have no way of bringing Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., as a lower coirt judge demanded. On Monday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily blocked District Judge Paula Xinis' order demanding that he be returned.
On Tuesday, Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.) said that regarding the fired workers, "the conservative Supreme Court stepped in and used a technical excuse to let Trump have his way."
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.