By David Enna, Tipswatch.com
It’s Day One of the U.S. government shutdown, and the crucially important, non-partisan Bureau of Labor Statistics now has one working employee: acting commissioner William Wiatrowski. The other 2,054 employees have been (or will soon be) furloughed.
The Labor Department last week published a contingency plan for the shutdown, which included these details:
- The Labor Department’s working employees will be reduced from 12,916 to 3,141.
- The BLS is listed in the group that will “completely cease operations.”
- No economic data will be released.
- All active data collection activities for BLS surveys will cease.
- The quality of data collected in the future could be impaired.
- The BLS website will not be updated.
The one qualification for the BLS was that activities related to backing up systems may take up to three days.
Coinciding with the shutdown, President Trump on Tuesday withdrew the nomination of E.J. Antoni to lead the BLS. A White House official offered the New York Times no reason for the sudden change, saying only that Antoni was a “brilliant economist” and that Trump would announce a new nominee soon.
Antoni turned out to be an extremely controversial choice for a job typically filled by non-partisan, lifelong government statisticians. Trump chose him for the job after firing Erika McEntarfer in August and claiming the BLS “rigged” data to make his administration look bad.
Antoni, who authored parts of Project 2025, has been critical of how the BLS collects data. He also called for McEntarfer’s firing during an appearance on Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, agreeing with the host that they needed a “MAGA Republican” at BLS.
That was a bad look for a non-partisan job, but Antoni’s nomination was further hurt by photos and video showing he was in the crowd at the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. Antoni contends he was a “bystander.” And then his nomination was doomed after CNN’s KFile investigative team discovered Antoni ran a since-deleted X account with sexually degrading and bigoted attacks.
All of this made me wonder if Antoni would even get to a confirmation hearing, where a lot of this inflammatory material would be discussed and Antoni would have to respond under oath. The hearing was “scheduled” for September but was continuously delayed. Apparently Republican senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski refused to even meet with Antoni and others said privately they were not likely to confirm him, according to CNN.
So the nomination was pulled, and this is a good thing for the BLS on a day when 2,054 workers are being furloughed. Trump will name another nominee soon and I have a suggestion: Elevate William Wiatrowski, the interim commissioner, to the job. He was acting BLS commissioner from January 2017 to March 2019, during Trump’s first term.
The BLS shutdown
About 11 a.m. the BLS.gov website finally posted a notice about the shutdown: “This website is currently not being updated due to the suspension of Federal government services. The last update to the site was Wednesday, October 1, 2025. Updates to the site will start again when the Federal government resumes operations.”
These economic reports, among others, will not be issued during the shutdown:
- Oct. 3: September employment report
- Oct. 15: Consumer Price Index for September
- Oct. 16: Real earnings for September
- Oct. 17: Producer Price Index for September
The Bureau of Economic Analysis, which is part of the Commerce Department, has posted a notice on its site: “Due to a lapse in appropriations, this website is not being updated.” The BEA issues the Personal Consumption Expenditures Index, the Federal Reserve’s favored measure of inflation. The next report is due Oct. 31. Let’s hope the shutdown has been resolved by then.
Things are going to get tense if the BLS cannot release a CPI report for September, which is the last month of data needed to determine next year’s Social Security cost-of-living adjustment and the new variable rate for the U.S. Series I Savings Bond. In addition, that September data is important in calculating next year’s Medicare rates, IRMAA levels and even 2026 income tax brackets.
The Federal Reserve is going to be flying blind until the shutdown is resolved, with both jobs and inflation data being locked down. From the New York Times:
“It pains me that we wouldn’t be getting official statistics at exactly a moment when we’re trying to figure out is the economy in transition,” said Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and a voting member on this year policy-setting committee.
What’s ahead?
It’s difficult on day one to see how this crisis will be resolved, since the Trump administration seems perfectly willing to embrace the shutdown and Democrats won’t take action to end it.
Assuming the White House doesn’t go “nuclear” by implementing widespread firings of federal workers, Democrats could possibly work out a separate deal (outside of the continuing resolution) assuring consideration of legislation to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies. A lot of Republicans want those ACA subsidies extended, as noted by the Wall Street Journal:
GOP leaders are already hinting that they are open to negotiating, and some are floating ideas that would give Democrats much of what they want. “I don’t love the policy, OK?” Speaker Mike Johnson said recently. “But I understand the political realities.”
My opinion is that the GOP has the upper hand in the “spin war,” and that is why you see Republican after Republican on television extolling their “clean 7-week continuing resolution,” without any baggage they’ve added in the past (build the wall, abolish Obamacare, etc.)
Any solution is going to take time, ticking toward that crucial Oct. 15 inflation report. From the Wall Street Journal:
House lawmakers aren’t expected to return to Washington until next week and any compromise funding proposal would need their approval. Congress hasn’t passed any appropriations bills, so unlike during the 34-day partial shutdown that ended in 2019, no government offices have been funded.
Nothing about this shutdown is good news.
NOTE: While this posting has triggered ‘healthy debate,’ I have decided to shut down commenting so we can go back to focusing on real yields, inflation and safe investments.
—————————
Donate? This site is free and I plan to keep it that way. Some readers have suggested having a way to contribute. I would welcome donations. Any amount, or skip it, your choice. This is completely optional.
—————————
Follow Tipswatch on X for updates on daily Treasury auctions and real yield trends (when I am not traveling).
Feel free to post comments or questions below. If it is your first-ever comment, it will have to wait for moderation. After that, your comments will automatically appear. Please stay on topic and avoid political tirades. NOTE: Comment threads can only be three responses deep. If you see that you cannot respond, create a new comment and reference the topic.
David Enna is a financial journalist, not a financial adviser. He is not selling or profiting from any investment discussed. I Bonds and TIPS are not “get rich” investments; they are best used for capital preservation and inflation protection. They can be purchased through the Treasury or other providers without fees, commissions or carrying charges. Please do your own research before investing.
Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities 
After some digging I found an answer about what do do when CPI data is not reported. It is at:
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-31/subtitle-B/chapter-II/subchapter-A/part-359/appendix-Appendix%20C%20to%20Part%20359
“(d) If the CPI-U for a particular month is not reported by the last day of the following month, we will announce an index number based on the last 12-month change in the CPI-U available. Any calculations of our payment obligations on the inflation-indexed savings bonds that rely on that month’s CPI-U will be based on the index number that we have announced.”
This applies to I-bonds. I am not sure what “based on” means. At least the government has thought about it. Will they change it back to the actual CPI number when it becomes available? Sounds like no.
David, I always enjoy your site. Your site about Tips and I-bonds, and Harry Sit’s site about IRMAA are must reads for anyone over 65. Assuming the shutdown goes past October, what is your best guess as to what Treasury is going to do about missing a month of inflation data to calculate the new variable rate? I read something about this in the comments. Treasury has to do something. I wonder if they have a “contingency plan” and if they do, what is it.
My view is that BLS, despite all its problems, should be considered an “essential service” and should be excluded from shutdown problems. It produces numbers that are essential for Social Security, I-bond holders, and the general state of the US economy.
To replace MacEnfarter (?) Trump should hire a stodgy old academic statistician, who has written many peer-reviewed papers, is still sharp, and has a history of integrity. He should bring in a similarly qualified team to help him with the statistical and data collection problems with BLS. Same with the census. I actually know a few people like that, but it is unlikely they would want the job.
BTW, I just experienced the horrors of IRMAA where I was $100 into the first bracket which will force me to pay almost $1000 in Medicare tax (yes, it is a tax). Those step function brackets are $%^^##& ridiculous. Aside from whether IRMAA should exist or not, its implementation is one of the worst I have ever seen.
Have you gotten the IRMAA letter for 2026 payments? It usually arrives in October but I thought they needed the September inflation report to complete it.
“We have all 12 data points needed for the IRMAA brackets in 2026 (based on 2024 income). These will be the 2026 numbers when Medicare makes the official announcement (usually in October).” – Harry Sits
“We have no data point right now out of the 12 needed for the IRMAA brackets in 2027 (based on 2025 income). We can only make preliminary estimates and plan for some margin to stay clear of the cutoff points. If annualized inflation from September 2025 through August 2026 is 0% (prices staying flat at the latest level) or 3% (approximately a 0.25% increase every month), these will be the 2027 numbers:” -Harry Sits
https://thefinancebuff.com/medicare-irmaa-income-brackets.html
I have not received any communication and you can be sure I won’t be asking Medicare about it.
“Instead of calling me a “leftist” and criticizing the site, please tell us what you like about the president’s policies, in detail. Make the case for those policies. That’s what we need.“
David, I’ll take your request seriously. Here’s a start:
We can all agree that the US is in economic trouble, mostly due to what’s going on in Washington DC: we are facing a huge debt plus out of control government spending. There are two ways out of this: grow the economy, or raise taxes. Trump wisely chose the former: Raising taxes would tank the economy and make things worse.
The Trump admin’s strategy is twofold: (1) reduce spending via initiatives such as Dodge; and (2) grow the economy via reducing regs and eliminating trade barriers to enable the country to afford to service its debts.
To reduce spending, Trump was able to gather together a hugely impressive group of businessmen (you might want to look at Bret Baier’s interview of them), headed by Elon Musk, arguably the most important entrepreneur of the century. (Your posts portrayed them as a bunch of wild-eyed chain saw welding nutcases.) Dodge found a slew of crazy spending, such as Tracy Abram’s multi-billion dollar “Climate” slush fund. I wish they had found much more, but their efforts are ongoing.
Regarding the economy, Trump has already addressed a number of structural issues. He renegotiated the international tariff structure which unfairly penalized US businesses, keeping them uncompetitive. This renegotiation was long overdue, but your posts painted this as an out of control free for all. The inflation you repeatedly warned of has yet to appear, if it ever will. (I wonder, if it does not appear at what point will you admit you were wrong?)
Despite all your dire warnings, the US economy is chugging along nicely. Compare and contrast with the EU, which is struggling under the same burdensome regs Trump is getting rid of.
Regarding the shutdown: Illegal immigration, which we were assured by the Biden Admin required Congressional legislation to be addressed, has stopped completely. (So get this: the Biden admin, and the Dems were lying about this all along.) In the current budget impasse, the dems are also lying about benefits going to Illegals. OF COURSE the Dems want benefits to illegals -they all ran for office on it. And VP Vance is entirely correct; benefits are fungible and increased Federal benefits will allow states to use their own funds to pay illegals.
I mean, My God: we are $37 trillion in debt and the Dems want to add another $1.5 trillion, and you’re okay with that? It defies belief.
I could go on, but that’s enough for now.
Thanks for posting this. If you read my article, you can see I don’t say I am in favor of increasing the U.S. debt by $1.5 trillion (which would happen if the Medicaid cuts are reversed, and they won’t be.) I am in favor of extending the ACA subsidies (which by law can’t go to illegal immigrants), just as the GOP extended expiring tax breaks earlier this year, at a cost of about $5 trillion over 10 years. (Tariffs will make up part of that cost). I was not a fan of Biden’s free immigration policies, the repeated “Covid payouts,” and I criticized the Inflation Reduction Act, which would result in higher inflation, not lower inflation. I also said the GOP has the better talking points in this current debate. There is a middle ground, but that middle ground increasingly is called “leftist.”
Great, let’s do this!
We have a high debt because spending is higher than revenue. What’s actually out of control is the gap between the two, not one or the other.
In order to solve this problem, created by both political parties over the past four decades, you have to eliminate the annual deficit so you can pay down the debt.
Every GOP president in that time period has handed off a higher deficit to his successor, and every Democratic president in that time period has handed off a lower deficit to his successor. That is true from Reagan all the way to Biden and every president in between.
There are four ways to address our debt, not two: 1) grow the economy, 2) increase revenue, 3) cut spending, or 4) a combination of the other three. It isn’t popular, but #4 is really the only viable solution.
Doge was the right intent with disastrous execution and poor results, like other initiatives of this administration (crime, deportation, etc). There’s a collaborative way to find wasteful spending with a thoughtful process (see Clinton and Gore’s reinventing government initiative) and Doge was certainly not it. The end result was way below their lofty predictions and harmful in many ways such as denying critical approved foreign aid to millions of people in need of vaccines, food, and clean drinking water.
The Abrams-affiliated funding was congressionally authorized and legal, not a slush fund. It reflected a different priority in a bill passed and signed into law, which is inherent in different administrations.
Trump’s tariff policy is the most ridiculous fiscal policy of my lifetime. It is based on a foundation of lies, starting with the falsehood that foreign countries pay them, calculating tariffs with imaginary nonsensical math, and tariffing penguins, allies, and enemies alike. Tariffs are a tax on US companies and American consumers. If you think raising taxes are harmful, then you must oppose tariffs or you are not being intellectually consistent. The only reason interest rates were not cut months ago by the Fed was the dumb Trump tariffs. How nonsensical are the tariffs? Here’s just one example. There are currently 15% tariffs on Toyota and 25% tariffs on American car companies who source their parts from Canada and Mexico. That is the opposite of America First.
You stated the inflation warned about has yet to appear. That’s incorrect. Since the April tariff announcements, the inflation rate has gone from 2.4% to 2.5% to 2.7% to 2.9% largely due to the tariffs. Many prices have gone up across the board, not down as promised, and once again, farmers are going to be bailed out by you and me because of tariffs. The U.S. has been the most prosperous nation in world history since WW II without indiscriminate tariffs except in targeted cases.
Presidents should not be bullying and penalizing American companies. Republicans used to believe in free markets; but not any more. Here we have a president who tells (bullies/threatens) Apple where to make iPhones, Coca Cola what ingredients to use in its soda, universities how they should handle their policies, takes a government stake in a publicly traded American chip maker, tell states how they should handle law enforcement, media who they should fire, journalists and comedians what they should say, and the Justice Department which political enemies it should prosecute. It’s outrageous!
You indicate it defies belief that Democrats want to restore the ACA subsidies that make healthcare affordable for millions of Americans, but you make no mention of the fact that the budget bill passed with only GOP votes is estimated to add $3.4 trillion to the U.S. national debt over the next ten years so that the majority of the tax cuts can benefit the very people who are doing well at the expense of those who are not.. I’ve given up on expecting any consistency by the defenders of this totally hypocritical, corrupt, and cruel administration.
“lifelong government statisticians”
I can only dream of having a qualification like that on my resume.
Maybe unrelated, but the ‘My Social Security’ .gov site seems to be on the blink too.
Regarding the TIPS themselves (Yes! On Topic!), my guess is your next report on a TIPS auction will be “to weak demand.” I don’t see how people can look past the chaos.
If weak demand means higher yield, I’m all for it! I plan to be a buyer of a small amount of 5-year TIPS at auction in a couple weeks. But if real yields sink lower before then, I may make a few more I Bond gift purchases instead.
“Higher yield…” That’s what I’m thinking about. It’s a tradeoff between trust, accurate inflation adjustments and a higher base yield. I buy one to four Treasury obligations each month. I think I will be buying one or two TIPS at the next 10 year auction.
I have read mixed information whether a weak demand results in higher yield or high demand results in a higher yield. The explanation has differed between varying responders and also from the same responder at different times.
I can tell you for certain that higher demand results in lower real yields and lower demand results in higher real yields. The best measure of this is the bond-trader’s “when-issued” yield prediction issued just before the auction’s close. (I can’t see that until just after the close.) If the auctioned yield is higher, then demand was low. If the yield is lower, then demand was high. Things can get confusing based on what we see as “current market yields,” especially in reopening auctions. The October 5-year auction (a new TIPS) is going to get a real yield lower than the market might assume, because the market is looking at the most recent 5-year TIPS issued in April. The April auction gets a higher real yield because that April closing date is exposed to potential late-year deflation in non-seasonally adjusted inflation.
Here’s a version of your post, as Fox News might have written it… Versus the CNN (leftist) version you gave us. See if you can see the difference. Same “facts”, just a different political leaning …,
Bureaucratic Shutdown Chaos: Only One BLS Employee Still Working Amid Government Furloughs
It’s Day One of the federal government shutdown, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) — the agency Americans rely on for employment and inflation data — has been reduced to a single working employee, acting commissioner William Wiatrowski. The remaining 2,054 career bureaucrats are furloughed, a stark reminder of how Washington’s bloated bureaucracy grinds the economy to a halt.
The Labor Department’s contingency plan lays it out clearly:
Even during a crisis, the government is prioritizing bureaucratic “backups” over serving the American people.Trump Pulls Politically Targeted Nominee — Right Move for the BLS
Coinciding with the shutdown, President Donald Trump wisely withdrew E.J. Antoni’s nomination to lead the BLS. Antoni had been a highly qualified economist, but Washington elites and media radicals turned him into a target over past associations and social media activity.
Antoni’s nomination had been controversial because the Left prefers ideologically “safe” bureaucrats who tow the party line. He supported Trump’s firing of Erika McEntarfer, who many argued politicized BLS data against the administration, and called for a MAGA Republican to ensure non-partisan truth in reporting. That earned him the wrath of career bureaucrats and partisan journalists.
In true Washington fashion, opposition Senators delayed or refused to meet with him. With confirmation increasingly unlikely, Trump’s decision to withdraw Antoni was both prudent and necessary. The common-sense solution: elevate interim commissioner William Wiatrowski, a proven veteran of the BLS who served during Trump’s first term.Economic Reporting on Hold — Another Example of Government Dysfunction
As of 11 a.m., BLS.gov displayed a blunt notice:
Key economic reports that affect jobs, wages, and Social Security will not be issued, including:
The Bureau of Economic Analysis has also halted updates, leaving the Federal Reserve flying blind on inflation and consumption data.Why This Matters to Americans
Without these reports:
This is the direct consequence of career bureaucrats and obstructionist Democrats refusing to negotiate.
The Path Forward
Washington could resolve this quickly if Democrats would stop holding government operations hostage. Some Republicans are already signaling willingness to negotiate ACA subsidy extensions, showing that GOP leaders are putting practical solutions ahead of political theater.
Until then, Americans face bureaucratic shutdowns, frozen economic reporting, and uncertainty, while career civil servants and partisan media bemoan the very fiscal discipline that is keeping the federal government in check.
The Trump administration, in contrast, is focused on ensuring transparency, accountability, and economic stability, even amid a broken system.
Craig, thanks for this comedy moment.
“See if you can see the difference. “
I could have saved Craig the trouble.
The Administration and its puppets have been continually lambasting the Democrats for holding the government hostage to provide medical care for illegal aliens over the last week or two.
Setting aside for a moment, the New Testament story about the Good Samaritan, a book which supposedly informs the GOP, and the larger question of whether or not we *should* provide medical care to people, no matter their status, the Democrats are NOT demanding medical care for illegals in return for a budget. They’re asking for services to our own people to be restored. And the GOP has not been at all interested in meeting to discuss… anything.
Personally, as a Democrat, I’m in favor of the Senate Democrats just letting the budget go forward. The Red States can begin the FO stage of the FAFO for which they voted.
You might also look at Trump’s recent remarks concerning soybeans. The Midwest had a pretty good thing going with China on soybeans and he blew it up. So, out of the taxes newly levied on our own people (yes, tariffs), he’s going to subsidize the bean farmers. While bailing out the Argentinians who are supplying beans to China.
Buttery, actually quite a few moderate Republicans have been talking with moderate Democrats about some sort of concession on the ACA subsidies. The result would probably be a deal to allow a near-future vote on the Senate floor, but outside the continuing resolution. I think this will end up being the compromise. The GOP would have to commit to not filibustering the bill. Many moderate Republicans know ending the ACA subsidies could result in a strong voter backlash.
In your article about the August CPI report that was released in mid-September, you had this to say about the prospects for the next I Bond inflation rate:
For I Bonds. The August report is the fifth of a six-month string that will determine the I Bond’s new inflation-adjusted variable rate, which will be reset November 1 and eventually roll into effect for all I Bonds. Inflation from April to August has increased 1.31%, which would translate to a variable rate of 2.62%. One month of data remains and we are probably looking at a new variable rate of 3.0% to 3.2%, higher than the current 2.86%.
As we get closer to mid-October possibly without a September CPI report, we will need to guesstimate this number as you did above. Is there any other data you can use to firm that up? Do you still predict a composite rate of 4.1%-4.3%?
What I “think” would happen is that the Treasury would continue paying the current variable rate until a new one is set. That would be for existing I Bonds. It might make adjustments afterward when the numbers roll in. I have no idea what would happen for sales after November 1.
If no CPI-U value is released by October 31, 2025, I believe the CPI-U for calculating Series I Bonds for September 2025 would be set to 324.753.
This is based on: 31 CFR Appendix-C-to-Part-359 1.(d), pertaining to Series I Bonds:
There’s an explicit formula for TIPS, though it’s a bit blurry, and I can’t link to the exact paragraph:
Appendix B to Part 356, Title 31, I. B. 4.(iv) (a):
(Hopefully this formats right, and I accurately transcribed the formula)
So, for September 2025 CPI-U:
September 2025 = August 2025 * (August 2025 / August 2024)^(1/12)
= 323.976 * (323.976/314.796)^(1/12) = 324.753
Other uses of C-CPI-U/CPI-U/CPI-W presumably have later deadlines and may have separate contingencies.
You wrote:
If no CPI-U value is released by October 31, 2025, I believe the CPI-U for calculating Series I Bonds for September 2025 would be set to 324.753.
Assuming that’s true and what in fact happens, what would that make the variable inflation rate on November 1?
If this 324.753 number is correct, the variable rate would be 3.10%. This formula is meant to create inflation accruals for TIPS and I don’t think it has ever been applied to I Bonds. Everything is a mystery right now.
Thank you for staying steady with your dispassionate, evidence-based analysis.
Your site has remained a beacon of reliable information for years, despite massively disruptive events ranging from epidemics to wars though political upheaval. Your prognostications are as trustworthy as ever.
You’re still at the top, above the fray and valued by your readers.
It’s your choice what kind of site you host, but I appreciate that you choose to embrace the 100% who come here for the cold hard financial facts. Last I checked, dollars didn’t denominate differently by ideology. If I were sensitive to political triggers, and seeking comfort in my prior beliefs, I know not to seek it here.
Whether you realize it or not, you are a blessing in a world turned upside down of late.
Very encouraging.
Thank you for your support and readership.
Well said. Keep up the good work, David. Here’s hoping we get that CPI data before the end of the month.
You’re turning this website into an echo chamber for the hard left.
It hasn’t always been that way. IIRC, your tone seems to have inflected with an earlier blog maybe 6 months or so ago, where you opened it with a line something to the effect, “this is not a political site…”….
It’s gone downhill ever since.
If you choose to host a cite that alienates over 50% of the country, just declare it loud and proud in your “About us”, and the rest of us can all stay clear.
Whether you realize it or not, you have an enormous blind spot.
Very disappointing.
Thanks for this feedback. I am simply reacting to the world we all see. I try hard to be fair and give perspectives from all sides. Your view of the world is obviously different. I am taking the side of rule of law and truth in statistical reporting. That is not negotiable.
Craig,
I see a post with factual reporting backed up by multiple sources, with opinions about possible or probable impacts based upon those facts along with experience. I do not see anything in the post that is skewed toward or against any actor or ideology. I reread the post critically to see if my initial impression was correct, and came away with the same impression.
I also don’t perceive any change in the posts over time, other than an increase in uncertainty explained by a marked increase in change, with uncertain rationales and effects, at agencies. The author has described these dispassionately but accurately.
Perhaps you can stimulate my critical thinking. Can you point out specific instances where the author echoes talking points or impugns parties or individuals of any political stripe? Can you describe the “blind spot” dispassionately and factually?
I do find your comment uses non-neutral language and guilt by association in the terms “hard left” and “echo chamber” so while it might be, I’m not sure it is in good faith and the tradition of honest debate. I come here for that so I can make investment decisions, and I will continue to do so. There are forums for spin and hit pieces, this blog is blessedly not one of them, and the latest post appears to me to continue that trajectory.
David’s stated position has been to avoid partisan politics in the comment section. My opinion is that the website is brushing up against the practical limitations of hosting a politically neutral website dedicated to investing in government instruments. In addition it appears that either not many right leaning investors have discovered this site or else they choose to remain silent on the politics. I come here for the news-you-can-use and there is much of that.
I would love to never have to write another “political” post in my life. But the focus of this website is real yields and investments that provide inflation protection, or near-total safety like with T-bills. The two most important divisions of government for this site are the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Reserve, and both have seen their independence *somewhat threatened*.
I would bet that a majority of readers here voted for Trump over Harris, but they are uneasy about potential manipulation of inflation statistics and interest rates. Reasonable views are accepted in the comments.
Instead of calling me a “leftist” and criticizing the site, please tell us what you like about the president’s policies, in detail. Make the case for those policies. That’s what we need.
I’m always astonished to see a comment, like Craig Tester’s above, that this site has been taken over by “the hard left.”
On the contrary, I think it’s a sign of how far the country has swung to the right that people who think nobody should be bankrupted by medical problems; that we ought to do something about global warming before it kills us; that everyone should have the right to vote without interference or suppression; that the vote should mean something which hasn’t been gerrymandered away; that people should have unpunished freedom of speech even when we disagree with what we say; that Americans of all ages should be able to depend on the future soundness of Social Security; that government ought to be run without grift and corruption; that American workers should be treated honorably by their employers . . . and so on . . . are now considered “left.” For most of my life, those kinds of positions were just considered part of being humane, of creating an ethical society, of democracy; of trying to practice The Golden Rule through public policy.
So, in the current climate, when I hear the feckless Democrats described as “radical leftists” or “Marxists,” I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
The word is “site,” not “cite.” But let’s talk about “cite,” as in citing evidence to support your conclusions. The only quote you provided was “this is not a political site” which is a non-partisan statement of David’s intent. You say “it’s gone downhill ever since” but cite nothing that documents that assertion. In fact, I disputed his take that the GOP has the high ground in this government shutdown. When I did that, I didn’t accuse him of right wing bias. That was his take and I gave him mine. That’s what blog comments are for. David’s tone is factual, reporting what is happening and the possible ramifications. If you are getting vibes of bias, perhaps it is you who are interpreting statements of financial facts and real governmental actions that don’t jive with your rooting political interest.
One of the strengths of the US markets is confidence in the information provided. The Trump Administration is tearing away at this strength on 3 fronts. First, discouraging SEC investigation and prosecution. Second, shifting from quarterly to semi-annual reporting. Third, reducing the amount of economic information and creating uncertainty about its validity.
The big financial firms that are heavily involved in the markets should be screaming about this but I suppose they aren’t because they all know they’re guilty of something and lack of enforcement and transparency is their friend.
JD Vance came out in the press room and cited illegal immigrants getting ER treatment as “health care.” Only someone desperate for a reason to cite that as having a benefit is a fool, but unfortunately many Americans will think that is the case. Suppose that person has a communicable disease. Do you not want to treat them?
The Democrats have been horrible in responding to this issue. It should be said on every TV network, no matter if its conservative or liberal.
Yes, the jobs data is long since done for September, but probably Trump doesn’t want the bad news on his watch to come out now. ADP already reported a job loss on Wednesday. Once the shutdown is underway Trump can blame the Democrats even if he is firing people. And I truly believe Trump and Vought want this as an excuse to fire federal workers. Again, it should be illegal, but with this Supreme Court seems to wrong that the president does.
The Supreme Court also delayed until January any news on Fed Governor Lisa Cook, so she has at least two more meetings where she can vote. Oral arguments will be made and a decision may take a little time after that. I believe this is one Trump will lose; otherwise SC may have issued a stay and let Trump fire her. But there hasn’t even been a case of fraud filed against her and its come out that there are documents backing up her claim that it was a clerical error. Meanwhile. his Treasury and two other Secretaries apparently have the same issue. What a hypocrite.
David,
Is there any information on how the shutdown will affect the Bureau of the Fiscal Service?
I have had a hard time nailing this down. The Treasury’s contingency plan isn’t as comprehensive as the Labor Department’s: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/266/Treasury_DO_Lapse_Plan.pdf The Treasury had 2,714 employees before the shutdown. Of those, 1,855 will continue working. (The IRS has separate funding for 72,000 employees.) The plan says Treasury will “continue Treasury borrowing/debt programs to meet the Government’s financial obligations and avoid, or minimize, disruptions to Treasury’s financing schedule.” Not much else. The TreasuryDirect.gov site continues to operate and there is not notice of a shutdown.
And who is preparing the lawsuit for the failure of TD to update the operative interest rate for outstanding ibonds and/or new issue ibonds on November 1st if that is the case?
Good luck with that.
Pure breach…court of claims will be inundated. No free lunch!
Thanks for the additional research. I hope it benefits others interested in the issue. For what it’s worth, I found the same contingency plan document and nothing else.
I sent in paper bonds for electronic conversion a few months ago and I got an e-mail acknowledgement that they have the bonds. With these developments I might be waiting a while for the conversion to get done.
There was this section on Retail Services
Retail and Wholesale Securities Services – An alternate appropriation is available to fund expenses related to Treasury’s borrowing responsibilities when there is a lapse in Fiscal Service’s annual appropriation.
Actually, I found a different document specific to BFS.
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/266/Treasury_BFS_Lapse_Plan.pdf
Robt, thanks for finding the specific Bureau of Fiscal Services document. The furlough level is less than 10%, which is encouraging, compared with 99.9% at the BLS. TreasuryDirect and Savings Bonds are not specifically mentioned. TD appears to be operating as normal.
Likely unrelated to the shutdown (but maybe not, who knows), treasury.gov indicates the I Bonds I just redeemed will take likely 2 business days to post to my checking account. I redeemed I Bonds a few different times in the past 2 years and the interest and principal as always transferred to my checking account the next business day. Anyone have info on a change from 1 day redemption to something longer?
I also wonder if I Bond purchases will continue to go through the next business day as has been my experience every time across multiple purchase dates or if I Bond purchases may also take longer. Something to consider if planning to buy I Bonds at the end of a month.
As always, it will be wise to avoid redeeming I Bonds on the last day of the month. Instead, shoot for a couple days early, such as Oct 28 or 29 this month.
Redeeming Ibonds should be done right after the first of the month and one would have got the interest for the current. Similarly the purchase of same should be done so it is completed before the end of the month with interest accruing for that entire month.
What is funny is that I heard a good interview where they said all the jobs data is complete and all they have to do is push the send button on Friday. It is ridiculous that they are not allowed to push that send button if the government is closed.
In the case of the jobs report, that is almost certainly complete. When finished, the head of the BLS and White House economic advisers get a chance to review it before the release. The inflation report, however, is probably just beginning to be processed.
“Things are going to get tense if the BLS cannot release a CPI report . . .”
Well, yes, and a matter of concern for numerous other federal agencies and for everyone who owns TIPS and I Bonds.
But more generally, of course, for federal civil service employees (I’m a long-ago federal employee myself) things have been “tense” ever since inauguration day. And that is a feature, not a bug, of this administration’s approach to governance. Trump’s budget director, Vought, a major contributor to Project 2025, is on record as saying that he wants federal employees to feel traumatized (“trauma” was his word, not mine), to be viewed as villains, and to dread coming to work. Now, with the shutdown, they can’t come to work even if they want to.
As for what the Federal Reserve will do, I hope it will cite the disruption and absence of reliable economic data as a reason for staying the course at current interest rates until updated information again becomes available, rather than granting Trump the further rate cuts he has been so hysterically demanding as a matter of policy instead of fact-based decision-making.
I disagree that Republicans have the upper hand in this government shutdown. They are in charge. It’s their job to lead. Instead, we get Mike Johnson lying on interview after interview that Democrats want illegals to get healthcare by advocating for the extension of the ACA subsidies — programs they are ineligible for by law. And we have a president threatening to permanently fire government employees caught in the crossfire which is an unprecedented threat and escalation, not to mention cruel and uncalled for, Unlike the last time when they caved, Democrats are standing up for an important policy difference. They have a point, they have some leverage, and they are using it.
Circling back to inflation, what exactly happens if the September CPI Report is not released in mid-October? Will you still be able to buy I Bonds before November 1? Will the Treasury be able to announce the new I Bond rate on November 1 even if they don’t issue the CPI Report? IS there any historical precedent for this?
I feel confident that I Bond sales will continue through the end of October at the current rate. Once you get into November, there will be no way to know the new variable rate without the September inflation report. So, who knows what would happen then?
Marce, on the spin control … I cringe every time Republicans (usually J.D. Vance) say Democrats want to shut the government to give ‘illegal aliens’ subsidies for health care under the Affordable Care Act. Not true. https://factually.co/fact-checks/health/illegal-immigrants-medicaid-eligibility-ce4cb5 In some states, however, some illegal immigrants may be eligible for some state-run benefits. If they show up in an emergency room, most likely they will be treated and the hospital will bear the cost, passing it on to the consumer.
Agreed on both counts, although the latter is up to the states and Emergency Room services are just one subset of healthcare coverage. One could also easily argue that the cost of Emergency Room expenses passed along to the consumer are exacerbated by having a system that leaves millions of people, citizen or not, without healthcare Coverage and disease prevention — which cutting ACA subsidies will certainly worsen..