Listen to the article
Manufacturing Jobs: Examining Claims from Harris and Trump
In the heated battle for the White House, both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have staked claims to being champions of American manufacturing, while accusing their opponent of damaging the sector. A closer examination of their assertions reveals a more complex picture, with both candidates selectively using data to bolster their positions.
During a recent Pennsylvania rally, Trump declared, “Together, we will reclaim our nation’s destiny as the No. 1 manufacturing superpower in the world,” claiming his administration created “more than a half a million manufacturing jobs in less than three years” while accusing the Biden-Harris administration of losing 13,000 manufacturing jobs since the start of 2024.
Harris has countered with her own narrative, stating at a North Carolina campaign event that “Donald Trump tries to claim he brought back American manufacturing. The fact is, under Donald Trump, America lost tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs… Meanwhile, President Joe Biden and I have created nearly 800,000 new manufacturing jobs.”
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides important context to these competing claims. Trump correctly noted a loss of manufacturing jobs in the year before he took office – approximately 7,000 jobs were lost between December 2015 and December 2016. However, he omitted that manufacturing employment had been steadily increasing for nearly six years prior, adding over 900,000 jobs following the Great Recession.
The Trump administration did see 462,000 manufacturing jobs added in its first two years, but this growth stalled in 2019. Before the pandemic hit, the manufacturing sector lost 43,000 jobs that year – what Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg referred to as a “manufacturing recession” even before COVID-19.
When the pandemic struck, manufacturing employment plummeted, losing nearly 1.4 million jobs between January and April 2020. Though roughly 770,000 of those positions returned before Trump left office, his presidency ended with a net loss of 188,000 manufacturing jobs.
The Biden-Harris administration initially benefited from a strong post-pandemic recovery in the sector, with 754,000 manufacturing jobs added in their first two years. By mid-2022, manufacturing employment had surpassed pre-pandemic levels. As of July 2024, the administration has overseen 765,000 new manufacturing jobs, putting employment 173,000 positions above February 2020 levels.
However, this growth has significantly slowed. Between January 2023 and July 2024, only 11,000 manufacturing jobs were added, and as Trump correctly stated, 13,000 jobs have been lost in 2024 alone. These figures may deteriorate further after the Bureau of Labor Statistics issues final revisions in February, with preliminary estimates suggesting the BLS may have overestimated manufacturing jobs by 115,000.
Both administrations show a similar pattern: two years of growth following an economic downturn, followed by job losses in the third year. The Biden-Harris administration has averaged about 18,200 new manufacturing jobs monthly, compared to 11,600 monthly under Trump before the pandemic – though upcoming revisions will likely reduce Biden’s average.
Beyond employment figures, other metrics offer additional perspectives on manufacturing’s health. Industrial production rose under Trump from 2016 to 2018 before declining, while under Biden it increased until fall 2022 before stagnating. The trade deficit for manufactured goods has generally increased under both presidents, and manufacturing productivity growth has been poor during both administrations.
The Biden administration has directed significant investments toward manufacturing through the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act, which together provide billions for clean energy development and semiconductor manufacturing. Bureau of Economic Analysis data shows private investment in manufacturing has surged about 90% since late 2022, though these investments may take years to translate into employment gains.
Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, offers a sobering assessment: “Neither administration did particularly well… Neither party should claim any credit regarding manufacturing.”
With manufacturing’s future influenced by evolving demand for products like electric vehicles and U.S.-made semiconductors, along with lingering pandemic effects and policy changes, manufacturing analyst Alan Tonelson concludes: “We will have to wait quite a while longer before we see the full effect.”
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
Intriguing to see the back-and-forth between Trump and Harris on manufacturing jobs. I’ll be interested to see what the data actually shows once it’s thoroughly analyzed.
Interesting to see the differing narratives from Trump and Harris on the manufacturing job numbers. I wonder if the BLS data will back up their respective claims or reveal a more nuanced reality.
As someone interested in the mining and commodities space, I’ll be watching this debate closely. Manufacturing is closely tied to demand for metals and minerals, so these policies could have ripple effects.
Manufacturing is a critical sector for the US economy, so I’m glad to see both candidates prioritizing it. But it’s concerning if they’re using selective data to make their cases. Fact-checking is key here.
This is an important debate for the mining and energy industries. Curious to see how the candidates’ proposals could impact demand for commodities and minerals if implemented.
This is an interesting clash between Trump and Harris over manufacturing policies. I’m curious to see how the data compares to their claims. It’s important to look at the full picture rather than cherry-picking statistics.
As a mining professional, I’ll be following this clash closely. Manufacturing is a key driver of commodity demand, so the policy outcomes could significantly affect my industry.
As a mining investor, I’ll be keeping a close eye on this debate. The manufacturing sector is a key driver of demand for commodities, so the policy proposals could have significant impacts.
The mining and energy sectors are closely tied to manufacturing, so the outcome of this debate could impact those industries as well. I hope the candidates stick to the facts and avoid partisan rhetoric.