BLS Data Misinterpretation Fuels 'Soaring Native-Born Employment' Claims, Economist Jed Kolko Explains 3.5 Million Population Adjustment Impact

Economist Jed Kolko has challenged recent claims by conservatives suggesting a surge in native-born employment, asserting that such interpretations stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data. The discussion, highlighted by Jordan Weissmann on social media, centers on the complexities of annual revisions to federal labor statistics, particularly the household survey, which can lead to misleading conclusions if not properly understood.

The assertion that "while overall job growth may be slowing, native-born employment is soaring" has been a prominent talking point among some conservative circles. However, Jed Kolko, a distinguished economist and former Under Secretary for Economic Affairs in the Department of Commerce, explicitly states that this analysis is "not true" and constitutes a "multiple-count data felony," ignoring official warnings from statistical agencies. His recent analysis aims to clarify these methodological nuances.

The core of the misunderstanding lies in the annual adjustments made to the Current Population Survey (CPS), also known as the household survey. Each January, the CPS aligns its data with the latest official population estimates produced by the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau recently revised its population estimates upward by approximately 3.5 million people for December 2024. This significant adjustment is largely due to a new methodology for counting immigrants, leading to much higher estimates.

Crucially, despite this 3.5 million population increase being primarily driven by immigration, the way the CPS adjusts its population controls means that a substantial portion of the resulting reported employment increase will appear within the native-born category. Kolko calculates that an estimated 1.9 million additional employed people will be reported, with approximately 1.34 million appearing as native-born workers and 540,000 as foreign-born workers. This occurs because nativity (native-born or foreign-born status) is not a direct control variable for the CPS; instead, the increase flows through demographic shifts (age, sex, race/ethnicity) that are often predominantly native-born in the U.S. population.

Kolko strongly advises against interpreting changes in the levels of native-born versus foreign-born employment from the CPS data. Instead, he recommends focusing on rates and ratios, such as the unemployment rate or labor force participation rate, which provide a more accurate picture of how these groups are faring in the labor market. Furthermore, the upcoming January jobs report is also expected to include a downward revision of approximately 818,000 jobs in the payroll survey. This, combined with the upward adjustment in the household survey, is anticipated to bring the two primary employment surveys into better alignment, closing a recent divergence where the payroll survey estimated millions more employed people than the household survey.

Kolko emphasizes that these annual revisions and adjustments are well-telegraphed and transparent processes by U.S. statistical agencies, designed to balance timeliness with accuracy. He underscores the importance of understanding these methodologies to prevent misinterpretations and maintain public trust in official economic data.