White House Prepares for Lackluster January Jobs Report

Top White House officials are bracing for a disappointing January jobs report, scheduled for release by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Analysts predict that the report will reveal a modest addition of approximately 70,000 jobs, a slight increase from the 50,000 jobs added in December. This anticipated slowdown in hiring reflects a broader trend of “low hire, low fire” in the labor market, characterized by stagnant job growth and rising layoffs.

Quartz

In light of these expectations, President Donald Trump’s economic advisers have begun to downplay the significance of the forthcoming report. Peter Navarro, the president’s senior trade adviser, emphasized the need to adjust expectations for job growth, suggesting that the monthly job numbers should be viewed in the context of the administration’s immigration policies. Navarro stated, “We have to revise our expectations down significantly for what a monthly job number should look like,” attributing potential job losses to the deportation of undocumented workers.

The Hill

Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council, echoed Navarro’s sentiments, indicating that the combination of high productivity and a declining labor force due to deportations could lead to lower job numbers. Hassett advised against panic over potentially disappointing figures, framing them as consistent with current economic conditions.

The Hill

Despite the administration's reassurances, some economists challenge the White House's rationale. Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM US, criticized the notion that demographic changes alone account for the weak labor market. He pointed to a significant decline in manufacturing jobs and suggested that immigration and trade policies are more influential factors. This perspective highlights a growing discontent among the electorate, with a recent NPR/PBS News/MARIST survey indicating that 59% of respondents disapprove of Trump’s economic performance.

The Hill

Economists have varied predictions regarding sector performance in the upcoming report. While some anticipate a rise in services employment, particularly in healthcare and retail, others foresee continued declines in manufacturing. Oxford Economics predicts a modest addition of 30,000 jobs in January, significantly below the consensus forecast. Nancy Vanden Houten, lead U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, noted that severe winter weather could have impacted economic activity but likely did not affect the employment report significantly.

The Hill

As the White House prepares for the January jobs report, the implications of a lackluster outcome could be politically significant for President Trump, particularly with midterm elections approaching. The administration's efforts to manage expectations reflect a broader concern about the economy's trajectory and its impact on public perception. The report will not only provide insight into the current state of the labor market but also serve as a critical indicator of the administration's economic policies as they face increasing scrutiny from both the public and economists alike.

The Hill

• “We have to revise our expectations down significantly for what a monthly job number should look like,” — Peter Navarro, Senior Trade Adviser

New York Times

• “I think that you should expect slightly smaller job numbers that are consistent with high GDP growth right now,” — Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council

The Hill

• “The idea that slower hiring is simply a function of long-term demographics is both unsatisfactory and an attempt to distract from immigration and trade policies — see the 72,000 decline in manufacturing jobs last year that will likely look worse following the upcoming benchmark revision,” — Joe Brusuelas, Chief Economist at RSM US

The Hill