United States Politics and Government

More stories

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Infrastructure Improves, but Cuts May Imperil Progress, Report Says

    by

    A report card from an engineering group found that American roads, ports and other infrastructure got better last year but could be hurt if federal funding is reduced.Increased federal spending in recent years has helped to improve U.S. ports, roads, parks, public transit and levees, according to a report released on Tuesday by the American Society of Civil Engineers.But that progress could stagnate if those investments, some of which were put on hold after President Trump took office in January, aren’t sustained.Overall, the group gave the nation’s infrastructure a C grade, a mediocre rating but the best the country has received since the group’s first report card in 1998. Most infrastructure, including aviation, waterways and schools, earned a C or D grade; ports and rail did better. The group also projected a $3.7 trillion infrastructure funding shortfall over the next decade.“The report card demonstrates the crucial need for the new administration and Congress to continue sustained investment in infrastructure,” Darren Olson, the chairman of the society’s committee on America’s infrastructure, said on a call with reporters. “Better infrastructure is an efficient investment of taxpayer dollars that results in a stronger economy and prioritizes American jobs.”The report, which is now released every four years, has long noted that the United States spends too little on infrastructure. But that started to change in 2021, the group said, thanks to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which authorized $1.2 trillion in funding under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. That investment is showing results, with grades having improved since the last report, in 2021, for nearly half the 18 categories that the group tracks.But in January, Mr. Trump froze much of the funding under that law and another aimed at addressing climate change, pending a review by his agencies. That halted a variety of programs, including those intended to help schools, farmers and small businesses.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    Trump to Impose Tariffs Against Countries That Buy Venezuelan Oil

    by

    President Trump issued an executive order on Monday to crack down on countries that buy Venezuelan oil by imposing tariffs on the goods those nations send into the United States, claiming that Venezuela has “purposefully and deceitfully” sent criminals and murderers into America.In the order, the president said the government of Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan leader, and the Tren de Aragua gang, a transnational criminal organization, posed a threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.On or after April 2, a tariff of 25 percent may be imposed on all goods imported into the United States from any country that imports Venezuelan oil, either directly or indirectly through third parties, the order said.The order said the secretaries of state, Treasury, commerce and homeland security, as well as the trade representative, would determine at their discretion what tariffs to impose. The tariffs would expire one year after the last date the Venezuelan oil was imported, or earlier if Trump officials so chose, it said.This unconventional use of tariffs could further disrupt the global oil trade as buyers of Venezuelan oil seek alternatives. The United States and China have been the top buyers of Venezuelan oil in recent months, according to Rystad Energy, a research and consulting firm. India and Spain also buy a small amount of crude from the South American country.But in the case of China, Venezuela’s oil makes up such a small portion of the country’s imports that the threat of higher tariffs will probably cause China to look elsewhere for oil, said Jorge León, a Rystad Energy analyst.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    US Exporters Vie to Shape Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs Ahead of April 2

    by

    Ahead of President Trump’s next big trade move, his administration invited companies to weigh in on the economic barriers they faced abroad.The list of complaints was both sprawling and specific. In hundreds of letters submitted to the administration in recent weeks, producers of uranium, shrimp, T-shirts and steel highlighted the unfair trade treatment they faced, in hopes of bending the president’s trade agenda in their favor. The complaints varied from Brazil’s high tariffs on ethanol and pet food, to India’s high levies on almonds and pecans, to Japan’s longstanding barriers to American potatoes.Mr. Trump has promised to overhaul the global trading system on April 2, when he plans to impose what he is calling “reciprocal tariffs” that will match the levies and other policies that countries impose on American exports. The president has taken to calling this “liberation day,” arguing that it will end years of other countries “ripping us off.”On Monday, Mr. Trump appeared to suggest a potential softening to the tariffs, saying, “I may give a lot of countries breaks.” He added, “It’s reciprocal, but we may be even nicer than that.”“They’ve charged us so much that I’m embarrassed to charge them what they’ve charged us,” he said at an event at the White House. “But it’ll be substantial.”Mr. Trump also signaled that the White House could finalize tariffs on foreign-made cars before April 2, teasing that an announcement could come “fairly soon, over the next few days probably.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Could Run Out of Cash by July, Analysis Finds

    by

    The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that the so-called X-date could fall between mid-July and early October if Congress does not lift or suspend the nation’s debt limit.The United States could run out of cash to continue paying its bills by mid-July if Congress does not take action to raise or suspend the nation’s debt limit, according to an analysis on Monday by the Bipartisan Policy Center.That deadline, known as the “X-date” — the moment when the United States is unable to meet its financial obligations and might default on its debt — is a fiscal milestone that’s among the most closely watched in Washington and on Wall Street.The date is subject to considerable uncertainty. It relies on estimates of how much wiggle room the Treasury has to use accounting maneuvers — known as “extraordinary measures” — to keep paying the government’s bills by shifting money around. The Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank, provided estimates suggesting that the X-date could come as late as the beginning of October.Efforts to address the debt limit will likely consume Congress and the Trump administration later this year as Republicans race to enact trillions of dollars of tax cuts.The debt limit is a cap on the total amount of money that the United States is authorized to borrow to fund the government and meet its financial obligations.Because the federal government runs budget deficits — meaning it spends more than it brings in through taxes and other revenue — it must borrow huge sums of money to pay its bills. Those obligations include funding for social safety net programs, salaries for members of the armed forces and paying investors who have bought U.S. government debt in exchange for interest payments.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Why the Shipping Industry Isn’t Rushing Back to the Red Sea

    by

    The companies that operate large container ships say they plan to keep going around Africa as violence flares in the region.When President Trump ordered military strikes last weekend against the Houthi militia in Yemen, he said the militia’s attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea had harmed global trade.“These relentless assaults have cost the U.S. and World Economy many BILLIONS of Dollars while, at the same time, putting innocent lives at risk,” he said on Truth Social.But getting shipping companies to return to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal could take many months and is likely to require more than airstrikes against the Houthis. For over a year, ocean carriers have overwhelmingly avoided the Red Sea, sending ships around Africa’s southern tip to get from Asia to Europe, a voyage that is some 3,500 nautical miles and 10 days longer.The shipping industry has largely adapted to the disruption, and has even profited from the surge in shipping rates after the Houthis began attacking commercial ships in late 2023 in support of Hamas in its war with Israel.Shipping executives say they do not plan to return to the Red Sea until there is a broad Middle East peace accord that includes the Houthis or a decisive defeat of the militia, which is backed by Iran.“It’s either a full degradation of their capabilities or there is some type of deal,” Vincent Clerc, the chief executive of Maersk, a shipping line based in Copenhagen, said in February.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Administration Lifts Ban on Sugar Company Central Romana Over Forced Labor

    by

    Labor groups said working conditions had not changed enough to warrant the removal. The company is partly owned by donors to President Trump.The Trump administration on Monday quietly rescinded an order that had blocked a major Dominican sugar producer with political ties to President Trump from shipping sugar to the United States because of allegations of forced labor at the company.U.S. Customs and Border Protection modified a “withhold release order” that had been issued in 2022 for raw sugar and sugar products made by the Central Romana Corporation, blocking exports to the United States from the company. The Customs website now lists the order as “inactive.”Labor right groups expressed frustration at the change, saying that Central Romana, whose sugar had been sold in the United States under the Domino brand, had not significantly improved its labor practices.“We haven’t seen a significant enough change to warrant modification,” said Allie Brudney, a senior staff attorney at Corporate Accountability Lab, which has been monitoring working conditions on Dominican sugar farms. “This is a disappointing outcome, but we will continue to support workers in their fight for better conditions.”A U.S. official, who declined to be named because the person was not authorized to speak publicly, said that the decision to rescind the rule and allow the company to begin exporting had not followed established processes. The official cited Central Romana’s powerful ownership, and said that the decision was most likely made at the top levels of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.Hilton Beckham, an assistant commissioner of public affairs for Customs and Border Protection, confirmed that the order had been modified, saying that the decision followed “documented improvements to labor standards, verified by independent sources.” She declined to disclose those sources, citing confidentiality reasons.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Primed to Clash With Fed After Key Rate Decision

    by

    President Trump has never been shy about criticizing the Federal Reserve, frequently seeking to pressure the nation’s central bank into reducing interest rates more swiftly.“Interest Rates should be lowered, something which would go hand in hand with upcoming Tariffs!!!,” Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social last month, adding: “Lets Rock and Roll, America!!!”But the Fed is expected to see things differently on Wednesday — choosing to hold rates steady in the face of rising prices and slowing growth — in a move that seems destined to stoke Mr. Trump’s anger.At the heart of the tension are Mr. Trump’s tariffs, which he has promised to apply more expansively beginning April 2. The White House contends its protectionist policies can rejuvenate American manufacturing and reduce the country’s reliance on imports, but economists believe that Mr. Trump risks touching off a protracted global trade war that will badly harm the U.S. economy.The latest dour projection arrived Tuesday, when Fitch Ratings cut its U.S. growth forecast for this year to 1.7 percent from 2.1 percent. It explicitly pointed to Mr. Trump’s tariffs — and the “huge uncertainty” around them — as two of the drivers behind a potential economic slowdown and short-term rise in prices.The uncertainty is likely to freeze any rate cutting at the Fed, perhaps straining an already tortured relationship between Mr. Trump and Jerome H. Powell, the man he handpicked to serve as chair of the central bank in 2017.In his first term, the president described Mr. Powell as the “enemy,” and blasted his colleagues as “boneheads,” in a bid to browbeat the Fed into slashing interest rates. Mr. Trump at one point even considered firing Mr. Powell, raising fears that the White House might try to undermine the Fed’s political independence.Soon after returning to the White House, the president revived his attacks: He said, again, that he would “demand that interest rates drop immediately,” and one of his leading advisers — the tech billionaire Elon Musk — signaled support for an audit of the central bank. When the Fed chose to hold rates steady at its last meeting, Mr. Trump charged anew that Mr. Powell and the Fed had “failed to stop the problem they created with inflation.”“If the Fed had spent less time on DEI, gender ideology, ‘green’ energy, and fake climate change, Inflation would never have been a problem,” Mr. Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Says a Recession Would Be Worth It, but Economists Are Skeptical

    by

    President Trump and his advisers say his policies may cause short-term pain but will produce big gains over time. Many economists are skeptical of those arguments.Presidents usually do all they can to avoid recessions, so much so that they avoid even saying the word.But President Trump and his advisers in recent weeks have offered a very different message. Yes, a recession is possible, they have said. Maybe one wouldn’t even be that bad.Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, has said Mr. Trump’s policies are “worth it” even if they cause a recession. Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, has said the economy may need a “detox period” after becoming dependent on government spending. And Mr. Trump has said there will be a “period of transition” as his policies take effect.Such comments may partly reflect an effort to align political statements with economic reality. Mr. Trump promised to end inflation “starting on Day 1” and declared, in his inaugural address, that “the golden age of America begins right now.”Instead, inflation has remained stubborn, and while Mr. Trump has been in office less than two months, economists warn that his tariffs are likely to make it worse. Measures of consumer and business confidence have plummeted and stock prices have tumbled, attributable in large part to Mr. Trump’s policies and the uncertainty they have caused.“It’s the kind of language that you use when your policy isn’t going great and you can see that it’s actively harming people,” said Sean Vanatta, a financial historian at the University of Glasgow in Scotland.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More