Bi-County Airport Board hears report on May 7 roll-out of REAL ID
"Customers without REAL ID will still be able to fly, but the process will be twice as long to get through security," Bailer said.
With federal REAL ID enforcement beginning May 7, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Secretary Mike Carroll, along with officials from the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport, and the American Automobile Association, recently encouraged Pennsylvanians to prepare now.
Getting a REAL ID is optional in Pennsylvania, but beginning May 7, travelers will need a REAL ID driver's license or ID card, or another form of federally-acceptable identification — such as a valid passport or military ID — to board a domestic commercial flight, and enter a military base or other federal facilities that require ID at the door.
More than 2.6 million Pennsylvanians have gotten a REAL ID driver's license or ID card since they became available in the state in 2019.
A passport is still needed for international travel.
Federal REAL ID regulations require that PennDOT must verify the following documents:
—Proof of identity.
—Proof of Social Security number.
—Two proofs of current, physical PA address.
—Proof of all legal name changes.
When a customer gets their first REAL ID, they will pay a one-time fee of $30, plus the renewal fee, which is $39.50 for a four-year non-commercial driver's license and $42.50 for a photo ID.
In other business, the Airport Board:
—Heard a report from Carl R. Beardsley Jr., executive director, on passenger activity.
"As you can see, we are experiencing significant growth," Beardsley said.
Beardsley said passenger enplanements for the month of March 2025 increased 27.7% to 21,475 — up from 16,814 in the month of March 2024.
In March 2025, 3 departing flights were cancelled — 2 for weather and 1 for maintenance. Beardsley said this accounts for 130 (.5%) out of a total of 26,986 departure seats. Also, five arriving flights were cancelled — four for weather and one for maintenance.
—Approved the Airport Use Agreement between the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport and Breeze Aviation Group, effective April 1, 2025.
—Authorize the advertisement for bids for HVAC Maintenance Services.
—Approved the financial report of Chris Dalessandro, Director of Finance, that showed for the month of March 2025, Airport Operations had an income totaling $135,640 compared to an income of $5,571 in March 2024 — a difference of $130,069.
Dalessandro said year to date, the profit is $294,388, compared to a loss in 2024 of $267,577 — a difference of $561,965.
Invoices received since the last meeting for supplies and services totaling $738,644.95 were approved by the Board. These invoices include major construction project costs of $316,5636.73.
—Approved three appointments presented by Michelle Aigeldinger, Director of Human Resources:
— Anthony Constantine, Dunmore, Maintenance 2, to be effective once confirmation of airport clearances and approved physical are received.
— Bryan Cadwalder, Old Forge, to Maintenance 2, to be effective once confirmation of airport clearances and approved physical are received.
— Jonathan Crawn, Dupont, to Maintenance 2, to be effective once confirmation of airport clearances and approved physical are received.
—Heard updates from Stephen Mykulyn, P.E., director of engineering, on engineering projects.
Reach Bill O'Boyle at 570-991-6118 or on Twitter @TLBillOBoyle.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Over 900,000 hit in massive healthcare data breach — names, addresses and Social Security numbers exposed online
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Hackers and especially ransomware gangs have been on a rampage targeting and attacking healthcare organizations this year. Now, one of the largest dialysis providers in the U.S., DaVita, has fallen victim to a massive healthcare data breach. As reported by Comparitech, the kidney dialysis company DaVita has revealed that it suffered a data breach earlier this year when hackers gained unauthorized access to servers, primarily located in its laboratories. While DaVita became aware of this security incident in mid-April, the hackers behind the attack first gained access to its systems on March 24. During which time, they stole all sorts of sensitive personal, financial and medical data. DaVita hasn't come out and said which hackers are responsible but after news of the breach was made public, the Interlock ransomware gang took credit for the attack, claiming it managed to steal 1.5TB of data including 683,104 files and 75,836 files according to a previous report from Comparitech. Whether you, a family member or someone you know gets dialysis treatment at one of DaVita's centers, here's everything you need to know about this latest data breach along with some tips on how you can stay safe and what to do now. Exposed personal and medical info Now that the dust has settled and DaVita has carried out a full investigation into the security incident, the company has begun sending out data breach notification letters to affected to DaVita's latest notice (PDF), the following patient data was stolen in the breach: Names Addresses Dates of birth Social Security numbers Health insurance info Medical info (conditions, treatments and test results) Tax ID numbers Images of checks made out to the company It's worth noting that the types of stolen data are different for all impacted individuals. While some people may have had all of the data listed above stolen in the breach, this may not be the case for everyone. How to stay safe after a data breach and what to do next If you or someone in your household gets dialysis treatments at DaVita, then chances are you may have received a data breach notification letter in the mail or one is on its way out to you. Inside this data breach notification letter, you can find out exactly what data on you was exposed as a result of the breach. However, you're going to want to hold onto this letter as DaVita is providing free access to one of the best identity theft protection services for a set amount of time. I say this as the sample data breach notification letter (linked above) that I looked at doesn't say a specific time frame but usually, companies provide access to one of these services for either 12 or 24 months. Don't worry though, as your own letter will definitely include the exact timeframe. In this case, DaVita is offering impacted individuals access to Experian IdentityWorks. While we haven't reviewed this particular identity theft protection service yet, it is considered a reliable and worthwhile service. Inside your data breach notification letter, you'll find a code which you can use to activate your IdentityWorks subscription. However, you will need to do so by November 28th of this year if you wish to claim this free offer. If your Social Security number or other stolen data is used to commit fraud or identity theft, IdentityWorks has experts standing by to help you regain any lost funds or to restore your identity. In fact, the plan offered by DaVita includes up to $1 million in identity theft insurance. Besides signing up for this identity theft protection service, you're also going to want to keep a close eye on your financial accounts for signs of fraud and if you're really worried, you can also freeze your credit so that hackers or scammers with your stolen information can't take out loans in your name. Likewise, you're going to want to be extra careful when checking your inbox, text messages and even when answering the phone. The reason being is that your stolen information could be used in targeted phishing attacks. In addition to DaVita, the Interlock ransomware gang has also gone after other healthcare organizations in previous data breaches including Texas Digestive Specialists, Kettering Health and Naper Grove Vision Care back in May. Given that the pace and scope of the group's attacks seem to be increasing, I don't see them slowing down anytime soon. Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button. More from Tom's Guide 200,000 passwords, credit card data and more stolen by this dangerous new malware Email security features are being hijacked to steal Microsoft 365 logins Google just fixed two high-severity Qualcomm bugs used by hackers in their attacks Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
How Much Makes Someone Wealthy, and Why It Can Pay to Delay Social Security
In this podcast, Motley Fool retirement expert Robert Brokamp speaks with Michael Finke, a professor of wealth management at the American College of Financial Services, about claiming Social Security early. Also in this episode: How much money do you need to be financially comfortable, and how much makes you wealthy? Which countries' stock markets are performing the best in 2025. A unique way to measure the stock market's valuation. To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy. A full transcript is below. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $462,306!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,522!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $619,036!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of August 4, 2025 This podcast was recorded on August 02, 2025. Robert Brokamp: How much does it take to be considered wealthy in America, and why most people should delay claiming Social Security? You're listening to the Saturday Personal Finance edition of Motley Fool Money. I'm Robert Brokamp, but this week, we speak with Dr. Michael Finke about the recent trend of Americans claiming Social Security earlier, and why most economists think that's probably not a good idea. But first, let's start with our last week in money segment. I have a question for you. What net worth does someone need to be considered financially comfortable, and what net worth makes someone wealthy? Schwab asked those questions, and its recently published Modern Wealth Survey. The average responses to those questions were that, to be considered comfortable, it takes a net worth of $839,000, and to be wealthy, you need $2.3 million. I first heard about this survey from USA Today journalist Daniel Davis, who asked for my take for an article that he wrote on the survey, and here's what I said. "There's no right number for every single person, of course. What really matters is that, if you can meet the four criteria for financial well being as laid out by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and they are, Number 1, having control over day-to-day and month-to-month finances. Number 2, having the capacity to absorb a financial shock. Number 3, being on track to meet your financial goals, and Number 4, having the financial freedom to make the choices that allow you to enjoy life. If you meet all those criteria, I'd say, you're comfortable. If you're significantly exceeding them, perhaps by being well ahead in terms of meeting your financial goals, then I think you could consider yourself wealthy. For our next item, I have another question for you. Which country's stock market is performing the best so far in 2025? Did you say Poland or Greece? Well, you're right. I'll accept either answer, because they both have returned almost 60% this year. Then you have the stock markets in Spain, South Korea, and Austria, which have returned more than 40%, and the markets in Vietnam, Germany, and Italy, which have returned more than 30%. Overall, the entire international stock market has returned 18% this year, while the US stock market has returned 8%. There are a lot of reasons for this year's outperformance of international stocks, but the biggest probably are that many countries are choosing to invest more in their own economies, and perhaps, even more important, the decline of the US dollar, which had its worst first half of the year since 1973, and a falling dollar is like a tailwind to international stocks. It is nothing new for international stocks to take the lead. According to a report from Morgan Stanley, "International stocks have outperformed US stocks in four of the eight decades since World War II." We're talking in the 50s, 70s, 80s, and the first decade of the 2000s. During these cycles, international equities beat the US by a median of 4.9% per year. All that said, last week saw a bit of a reversal of this trend. Trade deals were announced with Japan, South Korea, and the EU that are generally considered favorable to America, and the US stock market responded by having a better week than international stocks, and closing near all time highs. At least, as of this taping after the markets closed on Thursday, July 31st. As the stock market goes up, so does its valuation, which brings us to the number of the week, and it is 218. That is the number of work hours at the current average wage required to have enough money to purchase one unit of the S&P 500 according to the Leuthold Group. They calculated this number all the way back to 1947, and the current figure is the highest over that almost eight decade period. In other words, it takes more labor these days for the working woman or the working man to earn enough to invest in a single share of an S&P 500 index fund. Now, this may say as much about whether work or income has kept pace over the decades as it does about stock valuations, and for their calculation, Leuthold used the average hourly wage of the manufacturing sector, which has grown from $1.04 in 1947 to $28.87 today. But more traditional stock market valuation measures are also at high levels. Both the trailing and forward price to earnings multiples for the S&P 500 are significantly above average, and the cyclically adjusted P/E, also known as the Shiller P/E, after Economist Robert Shiller is now just about at his second highest level ever, with the highest being the peak of the .com boom. You can claim Social Security at age 62, but for every month you delay up to age 70, you'll get a bigger benefit. While most beneficiaries still claim in their early to mid 60s or so, more had been delaying, but there's evidence that trend is reversing. Here to talk about why delaying still makes sense is Dr. Michael Finke, Professor at the American College of Financial Services. Michael, welcome back to Motley Fool Money. Michael Finke: Great to be here. Robert Brokamp: You recently wrote an article for, I think, about the concerns that higher income folks are claiming earlier, which you believe is a mistake. Let's start with why you think some people might be more reluctant to delay nowadays. Michael Finke: Well, obviously, some of the messaging about Social Security is scaring people. It's apparently a ponzi scheme, and it's not surprising that there is this general temptation to just want to take it early. Now a lot of this negative messaging about Social Security is making people feel like they're justified. They just want to get the money now. But to those of us who study retirement income planning, there's no better retirement income source than Social Security, because it is what we consider to be the holy grail. It's annuitization, which is generally, well, not generally, it's acknowledged by economists that is the most efficient way to generate lifetime income. It's getting rid of the risk of not knowing how long you're going to live. Annuities are all else equal, the most efficient way to generate retirement income. Social Security is really the holy grail of annuities, because it is not just a stream of income that lasts for a lifetime. It gets rid of that risk of not knowing how long you're going to live, but it's also inflation protected, and that doesn't exist in the private sector. It seems like a strange way to think about it, but the best way to think about delayed claiming is that, you're buying more of an inflation protected annuity. It costs money to buy it, and the money that it costs is the bridge of spending that you need to withdraw probably most efficiently from your traditional qualified assets, like a traditional IRA, pull the money out, fill up those tax buckets before the age of 70 in order to provide that income, and then delay claiming is a way of getting a higher inflation protected base of income to cover your expenses. I feel like it's very often not characterized that way. To an economist, it makes perfect sense that delay claiming is buying Social Security. But what I hear when I look at conversations about delayed claiming of Social Security are things that are irrelevant. One of the things that's relevant is, well, I really want to live it up in my mid 60s. After I retire, I want to spend more money, so I'm going to claim Social Security now. This is what blows people's minds, you can spend more money early in retirement if you know that you're going to get a higher inflation protected income later. It just means that you have to psychologically get over this hurdle of spending more out of your IRA or whatever you're going to be spending the money from, you can spend more money in your mid 60s to late 60s if you get that higher Social Security payment for the rest of your life. You can live better at every period of retirement if you're disciplined enough to delay claiming Social Security. Robert Brokamp: In your article, you make the point that it's even more compelling argument for people who have higher incomes. I don't know exactly what you mean by higher income, but basically anyone who's listening to a financial podcast has above average income and wealth. What is it about income level that makes delaying even more compelling? Michael Finke: We did this study a few years ago, David Blanchett and I, where we actually dug into the data on anybody that contributes to a 401(k) plan versus those who don't have a qualified retirement plan. That's about half of Americans who don't have a qualified retirement savings plan and the ones who have a 401(k). In other words, if you've contributed to a 401(k) in your working life, you're on this longer live side. They'll live maybe 4-5 years longer than the other half of Americans. In other words, when Social Security estimates how long people are going to live, they use the entire population of Americans, including all the people who keep the fast food joints in business. If that's not you, if you exercise, if you eat a little bit more healthily, as a lot of higher income earners do, you're going to live longer. What that means is that by delaying Social Security, you're going to get an actuarily unfair benefit from delaying claiming, which means you're going to live longer. You're going to cash more Social Security paychecks than the average American, which is why you should do it. Now, I've actually had an interesting policy conversation with people about this, and they say, well, delay claiming is actually going to put Social Security on a more precarious footing because it's going to cost the US government more. I say, well, that's true, but I feel like a lot of people who delay claiming are going to continue working, and they'll continue contributing to payroll taxes. It's probably going to be a wash anyway, but if you really want to stick it to the government, the best way to stick it to the government is to delay claiming, not to claim at 62. The government wants you to claim it 62, especially if you're healthy, because then they're going to pay you in present value terms a lot less. Robert Brokamp: You point out in your article that the boost you get from delaying isn't equal from ages 62-70. At some ages, you actually get a slightly bigger bump than others. Generally, what are those ages? Michael Finke: Whenever that benefit goes up by a higher percentage. In other words, if you're thinking actuarily, so you've got a table and you're estimating if you wait to claim an annuity, how much more money can you get? Now, this is already built into annuity pricing. If you claim at age 66, you're going to get more income than if you claim at age 65, because you're not going to live as long. You're not going to get as many checks. Whoever it is, the insurance company, Social Security Administration, they know that. They know that they're going to pay you a little bit less if you claim at a later age. That's totally fair. However, Social Security built in the formula using a shortcut. The shortcut is, it's the same percentage up to the age of 64 or 65, then it starts out at 5% is the increase. Then it goes up to six and two-thirds percent. Then if you're born after 1960, it goes up to 8% per year after full retirement age at the age of 67. You get an additional 8% bump from 67-68, another 8% from 68-69 and another 8% from 69-70. But that's not actuarily the way it should be. It should be maybe 7.5% between 67 and 68. It should be maybe 8% between 68 and 69, maybe 8.5% between 69 and 70. But the government created a shortcut, and that shortcut means that the year after that bump in income is the most valuable year. When it goes from 5%-6 and two-thirds percent, that is either the most valuable or the second most valuable year. Between full retirement age of 67 and 68, if you can just delay that one year, that is the most valuable in present value terms, and it's even more valuable for women. Now, the other big caveat here is that, if you're a higher earning spouse and you have a lower earning spouse that is younger than you. Let's just give as an example because in older generations, it was more common that the male was the higher earning spouse. Not necessarily so much in younger generations, but older generations. The male was the higher earning spouse, oftentimes married a woman that was younger than him. In which case, that guy can be in rough shape. He can be overweight. He can be diagnosed with heart disease, just gone through a triple bypass, and we'll ask you, why should I wait to claim till 67? Because your longevity doesn't matter. What matters is the surviving spouse who gets your benefit after your death. You should base your claiming decision on the lower earning spouse, and especially if the lower earning spouse is expected to live longer than you, if they're younger, if they're in better health, then you definitely want to delay claiming, because that spousal benefit is hugely valuable. Robert Brokamp: That's because it's not just your benefit you're thinking about. When you pass away, your spouse will get your benefit, and so if you claimed earlier, you've reduced the benefit your spouse is going to get. Michael Finke: That's right, forever. If your spouse is younger, then when you die, they're stuck with that lower benefit forever. Now, the other big question I get is, well, Social Security is going bankrupt, and in 2033, it's going to go away. A lot of people just don't understand the way the Social Security system works, which is that it is a pay-go system, which means that anybody who's working contributes through payroll taxes to Social Security, that money goes to beneficiaries. The problem is that the benefit is scheduled to be reduced by a little over 20% in 2033 or so if the government doesn't do anything. Now, I don't know about you, but I can't even imagine what would happen to the political landscape if all baby boomers saw their Social Security check decline by 23%,. Nobody would ever get reelected again, who is currently in Congress. That's never going to happen. What's going to happen is some combination of borrowing more money, I think probably taxes are going to have to go up a little bit. Maybe we change the inflation adjustment so that it's a little bit less generous because many have argued that it's actually too generous, especially after people who are Social Security age, if the price of gasoline goes up, then they can just travel a little bit less. Workers don't have the same amount of budget flexibility, therefore, it's probably the most politically palatable way to help at least reduce some of the problems that Social Security has by adjusting that inflation or changing the inflation adjustment to more closely represent the way people actually spend money. But it's not going to go away. But even if, in the worst case scenario, everybody's benefit gets cut, even those who claimed at the age of 62 and have this lower benefit, they're going to get cut by the exact same percentage as someone who waited to claim, which is one of the reasons why everybody who's modeled this out has found that, in the worst case scenario, it still makes sense to delay claiming. Robert Brokamp: Let's say someone agrees that delaying is the right move. Let's say, they retire at 65. They have a diversified portfolio. Should they be spending down their stocks or their bonds or both while they wait to delay to age 70? Michael Finke: That is such a great question. This is one of those points that I have to continue to make to even financial advisors. When you delay claiming, you're buying an inflation protected annuity, which a good way to think about this is, it's an annuity that's constructed with treasury inflation protected securities. You are buying more bonds, which means that you should take the bonds from your portfolio to fund your spending during that bridge period until those higher Social Security benefits start. Then once they start, if you think about a balance sheet that includes the value of Social Security, you're increasing the value of that asset on the balance sheet, which means you can actually reduce your allocation to bonds that are held directly in investments as opposed to a bond which is held in a somewhat theoretical sense in the value of your Social Security, but it's still there. In fact, it's even more valuable than bonds, because it also provides inflation and longevity protection. The allocation to stocks then should be higher once you've delayed claiming so there is not this trade. A lot of people say things like, well, if I just would have invested the money, I could have been better off. Well, most people probably have a balance of bonds and stocks in their portfolio. Take the money from your bonds to delay claiming Social Security. Don't touch the allocation to equities. Don't sell your equities in order to make that bridge. There's no downside. Even if equities go up, you have just as many equities as you did before. The other thing is that once the Social Security payment starts, the higher Social Security payment, you're now withdrawing less from your investment portfolio, which takes the pressure off the portfolio to fund your lifestyle. If you have a down year in the equity market, then you're going to have to pull a lot of money out of stocks to fund your lifestyle if you've claimed it 62, because you're going to have to rely on that portfolio more to fund your spending. But if you delay claiming Social Security, you're going to have this long period where you're going to get substantially more, the difference between 62 and 70 is like 72% higher income. That's substantial. For a lot of retirees, especially as they get older, that's going to cover a big chunk of their expenses. Robert Brokamp: It's time for our get it done segment. Earlier in the show, I said that a sign that you're at least financially comfortable is that you are on track to beat your financial goals, so are you? Well, one way to find out is to use an online tool. Last Saturday's episode, I highlighted the CalcXML retirement planning module that's Calc, C-A-L-C, XML, retirement planning module, which you can find just by doing an online search, but also check out any retirement calculators offered by your brokers, your IRA provider, your 401(k) account provider. In fact, you really should do a few analyses with a few different tools because you want to get different opinions, and no single free online tool is perfect. For more general goals like saving for a new car or a home, just a regular online savings calculator would do, and you'll find plenty of those scattered about the Internet. If you're saving for college, check out any calculators found on the website of your state's 529 plan, and also do an online search for the Invite Education College Savings Estimator, which is very customizable and can pull in the cost of a college your kid may be considering. Finally, if you work with any financial advisor, she or he should be able to use their professional grade tools to see if you're on track to make all your financial dreams come true. That's a show. As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or it gets. Don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content, and are provided for informational purposes only. You see our Fool advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes. I'm Robert Brokamp. Fool on, everybody. As always, The Motley Fool cannot and does not provide personalized investing or financial advice. This information is for informational and educational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional financial advice. Always seek the guidance of a qualified financial advisor for any questions regarding your personal financial situation. Robert Brokamp has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. How Much Makes Someone Wealthy, and Why It Can Pay to Delay Social Security was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Boston Globe
4 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Why the Bureau of Labor Statistics regularly revises jobs data
But they also say the bureau, like statistical agencies around the world, is struggling to measure a rapidly changing economy and needs to adopt new techniques to produce reliable data. Advertisement Those concerns, normally the stuff of statistics conferences and economics podcasts, burst into public view Friday — first with the shocking size of the revisions, which shaved more than a quarter-million jobs off the recent total, and then with Trump's decision to fire the official in charge of the agency, Erika McEntarfer. Trump claimed without evidence that McEntarfer had 'rigged' the numbers to hurt him politically. His aides, in TV interviews over the weekend, argued that she had deserved to lose her job because the agency had failed to produce accurate statistics on her watch. Economists across the political spectrum decried McEntarfer's firing, and dismissed the notion that she would, or even could, meddle with the monthly jobs figures. They said that while it was understandable that revisions — especially large ones — could foster skepticism, the data produced by the agency remained reliable. Advertisement The challenges facing the agency, they added, long predate McEntarfer's leadership and will be difficult for her successor to address without increased funding. Instead, the Trump administration has proposed further cuts to the agency's budget. 'The solution to that is not to fire the head of BLS but to make the immediate investments in the federal statistical system,' said Nancy Potok, who served as chief statistician of the United States during the first Trump administration. Measurement challenges There is a fundamental tension inherent in all economic data: accuracy vs. timeliness. Policymakers, investors and businesses want information as quickly as possible so it can inform their decisions. But the most complete data is often based on tax returns, Social Security filings or other records that aren't available until months or years later. Revisions are the imperfect solution to this problem. Statistical agencies release preliminary estimates of job growth, inflation, gross domestic product and other measures, then revise them as more complete data becomes available. 'If we waited for perfect data, our statistics wouldn't be timely,' said Jed Kolko, who oversaw economic data at the Commerce Department during the Biden administration. 'If we only looked at timely statistics, they wouldn't be accurate. Revisions are how we get timely statistics and accurate statistics.' In the case of job growth, the statistics bureau conducts a monthly survey of more than 100,000 employers to collect data on how many people they employ, hours worked and wages paid. It revises the numbers twice in subsequent months, as data comes in from employers that responded late. Advertisement Once a year, the agency releases a larger 'benchmark revision' that aligns the survey data with more definitive — but much less timely — records from state unemployment insurance offices. Regular users of the jobs data know to expect revisions and adjust accordingly, averaging the monthly data over time and combining multiple sources to get a more complete picture. The downward revisions Friday helped bring the monthly payroll numbers more closely in line with other measures of the labor market. But to people who don't follow economic news closely, such big changes can be shocking. 'These numbers are intended to speak to lots of different audiences,' said Guy Berger, a labor economist who has followed the monthly jobs reports for years. 'It's hard to communicate to normies.' Shifting patterns The revisions announced Friday were the biggest in decades, outside the pandemic. But on the whole, revisions have grown smaller over time, according to an analysis by Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics for the Yale Budget Lab. The average revision during Trump's first six months in office is almost identical to the average during the four years of the Biden administration. What has been unusual during the early months of Trump's term is that the revisions have been consistently in the same direction: down. That was true for much of President Joe Biden's term as well, other than a period of large positive revisions in the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. A pattern of negative revisions is often a bad sign for the economy. The initial monthly payroll estimates repeatedly understated job losses early in the Great Recession, for example, and did the same during the pandemic. Some forecasters have suggested that the recent revisions could be a sign that the labor market is weakening again. Advertisement There could be other factors at play, however. To produce timely estimates, statistical agencies have to make assumptions to fill in the gaps left by incomplete data. But the pandemic and its chaotic aftermath disrupted hiring patterns. Big shifts in immigration did the same. It is possible that the models used by the statistics bureau haven't kept up with rapid changes in the labor market in recent years. 'Given the atypical features of this cycle, it is not surprising to me that we've had some large revisions,' Berger said. 'There are fundamental issues that are worth talking about finding ways to improve.' Trying to adapt The statistics bureau has acknowledged a need to modify its methods, and has already begun making changes. Response rates to government surveys have been falling for years, a decline that accelerated during the pandemic. Lower response rates don't yet seem to have had a major effect on the reliability of the statistics, but experts say it is only a matter of time before they do. And existing measures don't always reflect the reality of the modern labor market, such as the rise of gig work. 'It would be better if we were doing a better job capturing some of the changes in the economy,' said Katharine G. Abraham, who led the agency during the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. Federal statistical agencies have been trying to improve response rates and rely less on surveys. Major companies can now report their payroll numbers directly to the statistics bureau, for example, rather than needing to fill out a survey form. And the bureau is using private-sector data on prices for cars, gas and medical services rather than relying on traditional survey methods. Advertisement Such approaches may prove to be more accurate and less expensive. But not right away — changing methods is painstaking, requiring experimentation and testing to make sure that the new data sources are comparable to the old ones. That requires resources and expertise. The bureau's budget has declined about 18 percent in inflation-adjusted terms since 2009, according to a 2024 report from the American Statistical Association, a professional group. That report warned that budget cuts were making it hard for the bureau and other statistical agencies to modernize their operations. The problem has grown worse since Trump took office. A federal hiring freeze, combined with the buyout and early retirement programs offered to many government workers, has led more professionals to leave federal agencies. Trump also disbanded advisory committees through which private-sector experts provided feedback and guidance to the statistical agencies. And his budget proposed steep cuts to the bureau's funding. A Labor Department spokesperson, who declined to be named, said the administration had offered options for addressing declining response rates and other challenges, and had provided funding to prevent the cancellation of an annual survey on displaced workers, at the bureau's request. In June, the bureau said it had stopped collecting price data in three cities, and cut back data collection across the country because of funding constraints. That forced the agency to rely more on statistical techniques to fill in the gaps, potentially reducing the reliability of its data. (The Labor Department spokesperson said the department had learned about the cuts through media reports.) Advertisement 'If you were serious about modernizing and improving official statistics, you would be spending more money, you would invest in this, you would make sure that the experts who work at these agencies are given incentives to stay and you would take every advantage of opportunities to get feedback and input from the private sector,' Kolko said. This article originally appeared in .
