Tag: joe biden
Rising Gas Prices Enraged Republicans Under Biden, But Not Any More

Rising Gas Prices Enraged Republicans Under Biden, But Not Any More

When the price of gas skyrocketed in 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine, Republicans fell over themselves to blame then-President Joe Biden in hope of hurting his reelection bid as well as Democrats in the midterms—even though Biden was not at fault for the spike.

But now, with President Donald Trump squarely responsible for the exponential increase in oil and gas prices after he launched an ill-conceived war on Iran, Republicans have completely reversed course, claiming that high gas prices are a cost that they're willing to pay.

It’s a message taken directly from Dear Leader, who had the gall to argue this week that higher oil prices are actually good for Americans.

Get a load of Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, who said Thursday that he’s totally fine with higher gas prices in order to let Trump wage war in Iran.

"If that means prices go up for a short time, I think Americans understand we can live with that," Jordan said on CNN.

But in 2022, Jordan was one of the loudest voices criticizing rising gas prices.

"Real America doesn’t care about the January 6th Committee,” he wrote on X at the time. “Gas is over $5 per gallon!”

And he was still on a tear about gas prices in 2023.

"Gas prices are up 63 cents this year. Groceries prices are still at record highs. Good luck affording a house with 7% interest rates. Bidenomics!" Jordan wrote on X at the time.

But Jordan is not singing the same tune today, with gas prices up 69 cents over the last month, grocery prices rising, and mortgage rates at more than six percent—all directly thanks to Trump’s war and illegal tariffs wreaking havoc on the economy.

Then there’s Rep. Mark Alford of Missouri, who told CNN this week that “there may be sacrifices to be made at the pump on a temporary basis."

"I think the people in my district are [willing to pay higher prices at the pump],” Alford said. "I'm willing to pay 30 percent or 30 cents more at the pump to make sure Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon that's going to hit the U.S."

ALFORD: There may be sacrifices to be made at the pump on a temporary basisRAJU: Do you think Americans are willing to make it?A: I think the people in my district are. I'm willing to pay 30%, or 30 cents more at the pump to make sure Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon that's going to hit the US

[image or embed]
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 11, 2026 at 2:50 PM

Just a few weeks ago, Alford was praising Trump for lowering gas prices.

"President Trump and House Republican’s [sic] America-First energy agenda is working—and it’s working so well that even networks usually quick to criticize are reporting the relief with a smile. When gas prices go down, American families go forward,” he wrote on X.

So then does Alford think that skyrocketing gas prices thanks to trigger-happy Trump make Americans go backward?

Sen. Rick Scott of Florida also said that Americans just have to get over surging gas prices because Trump's war is more important.

“We’d love to get gas prices back down, but the most important thing is [to] destroy Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon, destroy their military, their ballistic missile capability," Scott told CNN. “We all want gas prices to come down. Nobody wants gas prices higher. This president doesn’t want gas prices higher. But we have to be realistic."

Of course, Trump said in June that the United States “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities, so it’s unclear how in just a few months the country became such a massive threat that war was necessary.

Given that a majority of Americans don't support Trump’s war and only wanted to see prices in the United States come down, it's hard to imagine that being a winning message for the GOP.

But that didn’t stop Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas from pushing the same message.

"Freedom is not free. Americans are gonna have to make some sacrifices," Marshall said, even though the war in Iran has nothing to do with freedom in the United States.

However, there is one Republican sounding the alarm on Trump's war.

“If we are still bombing Iran with kinetic action—people don’t want to call it war—if there’s still kinetic action that causes oil to be over $100, I think you’re going to see a disastrous election [for Republicans],” Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky told Fox Business.

Rand Paul: "The 2026 elections, already we are behind the 8 ball. If you add in high gas prices, high oil prices, and if we're still bombing Iran with kinetic action -- people don't want to call it war -- I think you're gonna see a disastrous election."

[image or embed]
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 10, 2026 at 9:00 AM

Paul’s right: Rising gas prices are Trump's fault, and voters will punish the GOP for it come November.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

Inherited Conditions: Biden Left Trump The Best Economy In Half A Century

Inherited Conditions: Biden Left Trump The Best Economy In Half A Century

Donald Trump may not be able to remember what things were like five years ago, when he handed the economy and the country to Joe Biden, but it is important that the rest of us do. As in so many other areas where Trump tries to turn reality on its head, he pushes the story of Biden inheriting a great economy, which he then wrecked. The reality is the opposite, Biden turned around an economy in shambles due to the pandemic, and handed off an economy that was widely touted as the envy of the world.

The most important reversal was in the labor market. More than 19 million people were laid off in the pandemic shutdowns in the spring of 2020. Many quickly came back to work in the summer and fall, but the huge bounce back had stopped by the time Biden took office.

Job growth averaged just 150,000 in the last three months of the Trump administration. In fact, the economy actually lost jobs in December of 2020, so it is clearly wrong to imagine that there was a surge of rehiring at the time Biden took office. Employment was still 9.4 million below its pre-pandemic peak in January of 2021. The unemployment rate stood at 6.4 percent.

Biden’s recovery package quickly turned the economy around. Unemployment was down to 4.0 percent by the end of 2021. Employment levels regained the lost ground by June of 2022. It would have taken more than six years to get back to pre-pandemic employment levels at the rate of job growth in the last three months of the Trump administration.

One cost of Biden’s aggressive recovery package was a surge in inflation. The year-over-year inflation rate began to rise rapidly from pandemic lows, peaking at 9.0 percent in June of 2022. Clearly the recovery package contributed to this increase, but most of the story is the world-wide supply chain crisis stemming from the pandemic. (The surge in energy prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was also a big factor pushing inflation higher.)

The story here is straightforward. As a result of the pandemic, people were not spending money on services like restaurants and travel. Instead, they spent it on goods, like appliances, television sets, and cars. The world could not meet this huge surge in demand, especially at a time when many production and shipping facilities were still crippled by the pandemic.

It is also important to recognize that this shift from services to goods was not the result of governmental restrictions. It was due to people not wanting to go into crowds and risk getting a potentially deadly disease that they could then transmit to friends and family members. Service spending did not return to its pre-pandemic share of consumption until early 2024.

However, the rate of inflation fell quickly. By the fall of 2024 the year-over-year rate was down to 2.5 percent, only slightly above the Fed’s 2.0 percent target. It’s also important to note that wages outpaced inflation over the Biden years, with the lowest paid workers seeing the largest real wage gains in more than half a century. It’s also important to note an increase of 20 million in the number of people who work from home, which is estimated as equivalent to a wage gain of 8 percent.

Finally, there is the question of overall economic growth. The economy had an unprecedented plunge in the spring of 2020 associated with pandemic shutdowns. It shot back in the summer and fall, but it had lost momentum by the end of the year. GDP in the fourth quarter was still 0.9 percent below its year ago level.

The recovery package quickly ramped up growth. The economy had some shaky times due to supply chains issues, two subsequent and unanticipated waves of covid in the summer of 2021 and winter of 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the sharp rate hikes by the Fed beginning in March of 2022. But it had settled down to a healthy pace of growth by 2024, with a year-over-year rate of 2.4 percent in the fourth quarter. That is the economy Joe Biden handed off to Donald Trump.

Source: BLS and BEA

It would be foolish to say everything was great when Biden left office. The United States has a badly undeveloped system of social supports. Tens of millions of people struggle to put food on the table, pay the rent, and cover medical bills. But by almost every measure most of the country was doing better in 2024 than they had been doing in 2020 or even before the pandemic in 2019.

Donald Trump might want people to forget this fact, but just because he has memory problems, it doesn’t mean the rest of us should.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Dean Baker.

Inflation Surge

Tariffs Spike Inflation -- And A Cut In Workers' Real Wages

It no longer is deniable that we are seeing a surge in inflation due to Trump’s tariffs. Last fall the Fed was projecting that inflation would be back close to its 2.0 percent target in 2025. It now looks like we will be above 3.0 percent, and possibly considerably higher.

This realization has shifted the debate from whether we will see tariff-induced inflation to how enduring the uptick will be. Trump supporters are assuring us that the rise in inflation will be transitory, with inflation settling back down to its pre-tariff pace after a period of time. On the other hand, we have the possibility that we will see a persistently higher rate of inflation, and possibly even an inflationary spiral.

As a card-carrying member of Team Transitory a few years back, I think it is worth distinguishing what “transitory” means in the context of tariff driven inflation, as opposed to inflation driven by supply-chain bottlenecks.

The big factor in determining whether inflation is transitory or enduring is whether it leads to a faster path of nominal wage growth. If the pace of wage growth increases in response to higher inflation, the more rapid rate of inflation is likely to persist. The higher wages will then get passed on in higher prices, and this continues until something like a recession and a big jump in unemployment breaks the pattern.

When the Trump crew tells us that their tariff-induced inflation is transitory, they are saying that there will be no pick-up in wage growth. In effect workers will be forced to eat the tariffs in the form of less purchasing power for their paychecks.

If we get an uptick in the inflation rate of 1.0 percentage point for two years, they are looking at a 2.0 percent drop in their real wage. If the uptick averages 1.5 percentage points, that would mean a drop of 3.0 percent in purchasing power. For a worker making the median wage of roughly $25 an hour, this would mean a cut of between $1,000 and $1,500 a year in their real wage.

By contrast, the claim of Team Transitory during the supply chain inflation was that the bottlenecks driving up prices would be resolved and that prices of the affected goods would stop rising and possibly even fall back toward their pre-pandemic level. In that story, workers would not see an enduring cut in their real wages.

The transitory story on supply-chain inflation turned out to be largely correct. It took longer for the bottlenecks to resolve themselves than most of us expected. This was primarily because subsequent waves of Covid both disrupted shipping, and continued to steer consumption from services to goods, as people continued to be scared of going to restaurants and movies, and other forms of service consumption. In any case, we clearly didn’t see the inflationary spiral that some feared, nor did we need a big jump in unemployment to push inflation back down.

The story of Trump’s Team Transitory (TTT) is far less benign. It’s a story where workers have permanently lower real wages and living standards than they would have in the absence of the tariffs. That might be good news on the inflation front, but it is not especially good news for the people who depend on their paycheck for their livelihood.

Dean Baker is an economist, author, and co-founder of the Center for Economic Policy and Research. His writing has appeared in many major publications, including The Atlantic, The Washington Post, and The Financial Times.

Reprinted with permission from Substack.

migrants border fence

How Trump's Immigration Cruelties May Finally Force Real Reform

It's with some discomfort that I consider the possibility that Trump's radical immigration agenda will lead to better immigration policies. The discomfort comes from the cruelty involved: the roughing up of good people who've been quietly working, the celebrations of brutal incarceration, the racially tinged rhetoric.

Hope comes in the form of changed perspective. Outside of agriculture, the existence of an illegal workforce is no longer openly tolerated. The chaos at the border is stopped. And a resulting labor shortage may force leaders to adopt a rational immigration program that legally admits the workers we need. Such changes would include legalizing the status of many otherwise law-abiding migrants now working without papers.

Politicians from both parties have for decades blocked reform. We can start with George W. Bush, who subscribed to a Republican cheap-labor agenda. (A supportive cry from The Wall Street Journal was "Let there be open borders!") In 2004, Bush called for a temporary worker program that would "match willing foreign workers with willing employers when no Americans can be found to fill the job." Little mention was made about what those willing employers were willing to pay their workers.

In 2013, serious immigration reform cleared the Senate in a bipartisan vote. It offered a pathway to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants, while requiring employers to check a national database for the right of new hires to work in this country. It was known as E-Verify.

The president at the time was Barack Obama. He pursued a muscular deportation program that removed illegal-migrant criminals. Obama clearly wanted to reassure the public that the bill wouldn't be just another amnesty without beefed-up enforcement. House Republicans brushed off the new policy while members of Obama's own party condemned him as "deporter in chief."

Joe Biden seemed blind to the awful situation on the border. It was political malpractice to believe that the sight of caravans of migrants charging over the border wouldn't alarm the American public. Never mind the need for labor. Toward the end of his term, Biden recognized the political damage the chaos was doing his party and fixed the problem. Calm came over the border before Trump became president again, but it was too late for Biden to get the credit he could have claimed.

But solving that problem without serious immigration reform has created new problems. For one thing, many undocumented workers pay into a Social Security system that will not provide them benefits. These contributions boost the program's trust fund by billions of dollars a year, according to estimates, extending the fund's solvency.

Trump's aggressive deportation campaign has already resulted in a labor shortage and hurt consumer spending, according to the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Immigrants' spending power in 2023 is believed to have approached $300 billion.

Then there's inflation. The construction workforce is heavily made up of immigrants, many undocumented. Losing these workers will hit the supply of housing, already too expensive for many Americans. That could cut economic growth by 0.4 percent.

Donald Trump could continue his campaign to replace solid government statistics with phony economic numbers more to his liking. But there's no hiding the cost of things from ordinary Americans.

Who knows? Trump might force acceptance of higher immigration numbers. Recent history suggests that he still exerts mind control over many Republicans who formerly stood in the way of legally admitting more immigrants, let alone fixing the status of the undocumented.

Add the trade war to a reduced workforce and you have higher inflation flashing in neon. Trump was happy to employ undocumented workers at his various businesses, so he may be open to letting some currently illegal workers stay. After all, he's full of surprises.

Froma Harrop is an award winning journalist who covers politics, economics and culture. She has worked on the Reuters business desk, edited economics reports for The New York Times News Service and served on The Providence Journal editorial board.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World