U.S. President Donald Trump recently fired Director General Erica McEntarffer of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) immediately after the release of employment data. This is not the first time Trump has taken direct action questioning the reliability of employment statistics. Since the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump has claimed that "employment statistics are all fake," and last year he criticized the Labor Department for manipulating employment figures ahead of the elections under the Democratic administration. This dismissal continues that trend, reigniting the controversy over the credibility of the statistics and the independence of the agency, as well as political interference.
On the 3rd (local time), according to foreign media such as ABC News and Time, BLS reported that the new jobs in July totaled 73,000, which is half of the previous month's figure of 147,000, and the figures for May and June were downwardly revised by a total of 258,000. Trump claimed regarding this number, "The economy is booming, yet the figures keep being distorted," adding that "there were such revisions before the 2024 election, and the same thing happened this time."
This is not the first time Trump has expressed distrust in statistics. Since the 2016 presidential election, he has criticized labor indicators as "fake numbers" and has at times changed his stance, claiming measurements favorable to him are "now real."
Trump reiterated his claim that "the statistics were manipulated around August 2024" ahead of last year's presidential election. It is argued by Trump's side that McEntarffer intentionally manipulated the figures to instill the impression that the Biden administration and then-Vice President Kamala Harris revived the economy.
The fact that Trump, who has criticized the statistics office multiple times in the past, has now dismissed the Director General of the statistics office is due to heightened political tensions in the U.S. surrounding recent job figures. Kevin Hassett, chief economic advisor to the White House, stated, "The BLS needs improvement," adding, "The extent of the revisions is excessive, which undermines public confidence." Although he did not directly mention accusations of manipulation, he suggested the need to review the approach to statistics.
Some in the Republican Party have also raised questions about the way BLS presents its statistics. Senator Roger Marshall stated, "If there are changes of this magnitude, Congress needs to directly inspect it," demanding related witnesses to appear, while Representative David Schweikert claimed that "the Democratic administration embellished statistics to hide past economic conditions."
In contrast, former BLS Directors General and staff expressed concerns that "the dismissal of McEntarffer is a serious threat to an independent statistical system." William Beach, a former Director General appointed during the Trump administration, pointed out, "This sets a dangerous precedent of the president trying to politically control statistical agencies." The BLS employees' association emphasized, "The Director General is merely a transmitter of the results and has no authority to manipulate the figures."
Economists and statistical experts are also rebutting Trump's claims as merely political framing. They explain that the statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics result from a broad survey of over 120,000 enterprises, and differences between preliminary and finalized figures every month are statistically natural occurrences. Particularly, these figures are regularly revised to reflect external factors such as response delays, and the Director General cannot arbitrarily change the figures.
This controversy extends beyond mere statistical interpretation, raising fundamental questions about how much the U.S. government can guarantee the autonomy and transparency of statistical agencies. During a Q&A with reporters, Trump emphasized, "I fired her, and I did the right thing," asserting the need for statistical agencies to operate responsibly to earn public trust. The administration stated that the repeated downward revisions of employment statistics have created confusion in economic policy judgments, intending to use this as an opportunity to check the reliability of data production.
In contrast, criticism has emerged among political circles and statistical experts that this action dismissed the person responsible for releasing 'uncomfortable figures' for the administration. There are claims that a statistical agency, which should uphold independence and transparency as core principles, may be swayed by political interests.