President-elect Trump’s mass deportation proposals threaten to gut the U.S. economy, shrinking growth and the labor force while juicing inflation, according to a report released Thursday by Democrats in the Congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC).

Sourcing data from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the report found that deporting 8.3 million immigrants in the country illegally would reduce GDP by 7.4 percent and reduce employment by 7 percent by 2028, likely resulting in zero overall growth throughout Trump’s second term.




Trump has proposed deporting all such immigrants in the United States — currently an estimated 11 million — and millions more currently protected by humanitarian programs such as Temporary Protected Status, who could lack legal status if those programs were cut.

According to an American Immigration Council (AIC) estimate sourced by the JEC report, deporting at a clip of 1 million people per year — echoing a proposal by Vice President-elect JD Vance to “start with 1 million” — could generate a 4.2 percent to 6.8 percent loss in GDP. The U.S. economy shrank by 4.3 percent during the Great Recession, the report’s authors noted.

“Trump’s plan to deport millions of immigrants does absolutely nothing to address the core problems driving our broken immigration system. Instead, all it will do is raise grocery prices, destroy jobs, and shrink the economy. His immigration policy is reckless and would cause irreparable harm to our economy,” JEC Chair Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) said.



'Mass deportation will crash US economy': Senators clash on Trump’s illegal migration curb plans

Beyond the economic fallout of mass deportations, the AIC estimates Trump’s plan would cost upward of $88 billion, about four times the budget of NASA.

And the JEC report cites multiple studies that mass deportations are likely to reduce employment for U.S.-born workers by virtue of reducing the country’s customer base, removing a population that’s on average more entrepreneurial and gutting a labor force uniquely qualified to work in certain industries.

Between 4.4 percent and 5.4 percent of the overall labor force is made up of workers who are in the country illegally, and industries such as construction, agriculture, health care and hospitality depend on their labor, according to the report.

Many of those jobs, though categorized as unskilled labor, require specialized training and physical stamina that is not readily available in the existing U.S. workforce.




Livestock farmers, for instance, have long fought to expand the visa process to keep their existing, specialized workforce of immigrants lacking legal status.

“The labor shortages that result from mass deportations would raise costs for all Americans. With unemployment near a historic low, employers in sectors like agriculture and construction would produce less, resulting in shortages and higher prices,” the JEC report reads.

“Economists at the Peterson Institute for International Economics estimate that deporting 1.3 million immigrants would raise prices by 1.5% by 2028, while deporting 8.3 million immigrants would raise prices by 9.1%. Additionally, mass deportations would reduce consumer spending, as undocumented workers are not just workers but also consumers. If demand for certain goods and services slows enough, demand for workers in those sectors may also slow, and some businesses may be forced to lay off workers.”

Yet Trump’s rationale for mass deportations, as explained to Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, is that the immigrants “are costing us a fortune.”

The JEC report contests that logic, citing a Brookings Institution report that found foreign-born people pay on average $1,300 more in annual taxes and over a lifetime pay $237,000 more in taxes than they receive in services from federal, state and local governments.

And a New American Economy study cited by the JEC Democrats found that, between 2012 and 2018, the average immigrant contributed $166 more to the Medicare Trust Fund than they received in return. Over that time, U.S.-born residents cost the fund $51 on average.

Immigrants in the country illegally who work pay into Medicare and Social Security but are not eligible to withdraw benefits, a factor in driving the programs’ surplus among the group.


Heinrich, who has pushed for immigration reform, won reelection to a third term in November.

“As a son of an immigrant, I know how hard immigrants work, how much they believe in this country, and how much they’re willing to give back. They are the backbone of our economy and the driving force behind our nation’s growth and prosperity,” he said.

A majority of the Supreme Court appeared sympathetic on Tuesday to the Biden administration’s restrictions on kits that allow people to make untraceable homemade guns.
The case centered on whether the federal agency responsible for regulating firearms had acted lawfully in enacting a rule to address a surge in “ghost guns,” weapons made from kits available for purchase online and heralded as easy enough to assemble in less than an hour.
Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar told the justices that the agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, had responded to “an explosion in crimes” connected to ghost guns.
“The reason you want a ghost gun is specifically because it’s unserialized and can’t be traced,” Ms. Prelogar said.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT


Among the limits the agency imposed on the kits: requiring gun makers and sellers to be licensed to sell the kits, ensuring the products are marked with serial numbers so they can be traced and having would-be buyers pass a background check.
In recent years, the conservative wing of the court has proved skeptical of allowing federal administrative agencies too much leeway without specific authorization from Congress. Last term, it overturned a Trump-era ban on bump stocks, firearm attachments that enable semiautomatic weapons to fire at nearly the rate of a machine gun.
But at least five of the justices on Tuesday seemed to favor the limits imposed by the Biden administration, with at least two conservatives, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, showing skepticism toward the plaintiffs, gun manufacturers and owners who argued they should be able to purchase ghost gun kits.
When Peter A. Patterson, the lawyer for the gun groups, argued that gun enthusiasts might enjoy building firearms from the kits, Chief Justice Roberts, who had until then been largely silent, questioned whether the kits were really aimed at hobbyists. He drew an analogy to people who love tinkering with cars.
“Drilling a hole or two,” Chief Justice Roberts said, “doesn’t give the same sort of reward as working on your car on the weekends.”



Mr. Patterson responded by pointing to an effort by a reporter in California who ordered a gun kit to assemble. That reporter enlisted friends to help, Mr. Patterson said. (The news article Mr. Patterson appeared to refer to described the process of buying and building a ghost gun “shockingly easy.”)
The chief justice appeared skeptical of Mr. Patterson’s response.
“I don’t know the skills of a particular reporter,” Chief Justice Roberts replied, to laughter.
Got a news tip about the courts?
If you have information to share about the Supreme Court or other federal courts, please send us a secure tip at nytimes.com/tips.

Although it centers on guns, the case before the court is not about the Second Amendment, but rather about the limits of the power of administrative agencies. At issue is whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives acted outside its bounds in issuing a regulation in 2022 to expand the definition of “firearm” under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene after lower courts blocked the 2022 regulation.
The case, Garland v. VanDerStok, No. 23-852, was brought by gun owners and gun rights groups who argue that the Biden administration rule exceeded the bounds of the federal agency’s power under the legislation.

Some really good stuff from Luke and his head coach here.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

The U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee placed an employee on administrative leave Thursday after The Associated Press reported that one of its coaches was accused of sexually abusing a young biathlete, causing her so much distress that she attempted suicide.

Rocky Harris, USOPC chief of sport and athlete services, sent an email to U.S. Biathlon national team members to address the “concerning allegations of abuse” raised by several biathletes in the AP report.

“We want to commend these athletes for their immense courage and strength in coming forward,” the email said. “Effective immediately, we have placed a USOPC staff member on administrative leave pending an internal investigation.”

Harris did not name the employee, but Gary Colliander was the only USOPC coach named in the AP report. Jon Mason, a USOPC spokesperson, told the AP that no additional information would be released while the inquiry is underway.

Login to view embedded media

I know how to make Carver a better environment. FIRE FRAN!!

Might make you laugh too. Watch it multiple times if you must.

Login to view embedded media

,

Made from solid brass, finished in 24-karat gold, and screen printed with exquisite color, the Official 2024 White House Christmas Ornament honors President Jimmy Carter.

The ornament’s anchor shape, an iconic symbol of hope, represents Carter’s service in the United States Navy. The design also highlights historic moments from his life and presidency.

Every ornament ships in a keepsake box with a ribbon for hanging and an illustrated booklet on the Carter presidency.

Buy yours NOW here:

Guyana is revisiting a dark history nearly half a century after U.S. Rev. Jim Jones and more than 900 of his followers died in the rural interior of the South American country.
It was the largest suicide-murder in recent history, and a government-backed tour operator wants to open the former commune now shrouded by lush vegetation to visitors, a proposal that is reopening old wounds, with critics saying it would disrespect victims and dig up a sordid past.
Jordan Vilchez, who grew up in California and was moved into the Peoples Temple commune at age 14, said in a phone interview from the U.S. that she has mixed feelings about the tour.




Jordan Vilchez, who grew up in California and was moved into the Peoples Temple Guyana commune at age 14, is shown in Richmond, Calif., on Nov. 5, 2018. She said recently that Guyana has every right to profit from any plans related to Jonestown, "… but I just feel like any situation where people were manipulated into their deaths should be treated with respect."
Jeff Chiu, Associated Press
She was in Guyana's capital the day Jones ordered hundreds of his followers to drink a poisoned grape-flavored drink that was given to children first. Her two sisters and two nephews were among the victims.

​

"I just missed dying by one day," she said.
Vilchez, 67, said Guyana has every right to profit from any plans related to Jonestown.

"Then on the other hand, I just feel like any situation where people were manipulated into their deaths should be treated with respect," she said.
Vilchez said she hopes the tour operator would provide context and explain why so many people went to Guyana trusting they would find a better life.
The tour would ferry visitors to the far-flung village of Port Kaituma nestled in the lush jungles of northern Guyana. It's a trip possible only by boat, helicopter or plane; rivers instead of roads connect Guyana's interior. Once there, it's another 6 miles via a rough and overgrown dirt trail to the abandoned commune and former agricultural settlement.





The Peoples Temple compound is shown in November 1978 after the bodies of the Rev. Jim Jones and more than 900 of his followers were removed.
Associated Press
Neville Bissember, a law professor at the University of Guyana, questioned the proposed tour, calling it a "ghoulish and bizarre" idea in a recently published letter.

"What part of Guyana's nature and culture is represented in a place where death by mass suicide and other atrocities and human rights violations were perpetuated against a submissive group of American citizens, which had nothing to do with Guyana nor Guyanese?" he wrote.

Despite ongoing criticism, the tour has strong support from the government's Tourism Authority and Guyana's Tourism and Hospitality Association.
Tourism Minister Oneidge Walrond said the government is backing the effort at Jonestown but is aware "of some level of push back" from certain sectors of society.






U.S. military personnel place bodies in coffins at the airport in Georgetown, Guyana, after collecting the remains of more than 900 members of the People's Temple who committed suicide in Jonestown, Guyana on Nov. 18, 1978.
Associated Press
She said the government already helped clear the area "to ensure a better product can be marketed," adding that the tour might need Cabinet approval.
"It certainly has my support," she said. "It is possible. After all, we have seen what Rwanda has done with that awful tragedy, as an example."

Rose Sewcharran, director of Wonderlust Adventures, the private tour operator who plans to take visitors to Jonestown, said she was buoyed by the support.
"We think it is about time," she said. "This happens all over the world. We have multiple examples of dark, morbid tourism around the world, including Auschwitz and the Holocaust museum."

Blackhawks, Bulls, and White Sox will be available free across “most of Iowa” with a digital antenna…

Garbage in, garbage out.

Login to view embedded media

Only the worst people, eh, @Menace Sockeyes? 🤡 🤣🤣 >

https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/BTC.CM=

Summit Carbon Solutions has demanded that opponents of its carbon dioxide pipeline project retract certain “false and defamatory” statements and cease further similar comments about the company.



Those statements “have now exposed you to significant legal liability,” according to a letter the company’s attorneys sent to Jess Mazour, of the Sierra Club of Iowa, in November. “Summit Carbon Solutions and its investors have invested over $1 billion in this project to date.”


The Sierra Club said Thursday that Summit has sent at least six of the letters, but it declined to reveal the other recipients.




“This isn’t going to stop us from doing what we’ve been doing for the last three years because we haven’t been doing anything illegal,” Mazour told The Gazette. “We’ve been working with impacted Iowans to protect our state from hazardous carbon pipelines, and we have every right to do that.”


Summit wants to build a sprawling pipeline system in five states that would transport captured carbon dioxide from more than 50 ethanol plants to North Dakota for underground sequestration.


It has gained route permits in three of them — including in Iowa — but not in South Dakota, where voters recently squashed new legislation that would have made it easier for Summit to gain a permit in that state. The company reapplied for a South Dakota permit last month after being denied last year.


The letter sent to Mazour targets her quote about the company in a newspaper article last year, in which she said: “Summit is using its power to take away democracy and people’s rights. They are in collusion with the Iowa Utilities Board to do so.”





ADVERTISING


Pipeline opponents have accused the three-member board — now called the Iowa Utilities Commission — of favoring Summit over the public in its permit proceedings, which were accelerated after Gov. Kim Reynolds appointed a new chair and the previous chair resigned from the panel.


They also allege the use of eminent domain to force landowners to host the company’s pipe violates their constitutional rights, which is the subject of ongoing litigation.


Summit said Mazour’s statements are “factually incorrect and defamatory” and caused the company to “suffer significant economic and legal harm.”


The letter was not more specific about the harms suffered, and a company spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


Trent Loos, a Nebraska farmer, said last week on his podcast “Across the Pond” that he had also been threatened by Summit in a letter dated the day before Mazour’s.


Loos admitted he had no proof that Summit had been recently threatening landowners on its proposed route with eminent domain, as he had claimed, but said two of his other statements the company objected to were accurate. That included his claim that the “kill zone” near a carbon dioxide pipeline breach extends for 3 miles.


“I stand by that,” he said.


Safety concerns about the pipeline system have led to numerous county ordinances that attempt to restrict the placement of Summit’s pipe. The company has sued six Iowa counties that adopted them, including Bremer.


“Summit is just really frustrated that the opposition group continues to grow, and they’re trying to hamper our free speech rights,” Mazour said.


Summit’s proposed system would span about 2,500 miles and cost an estimated $8 billion. The company had initially hoped to have it operational this year but has delayed that goal to 2026. Construction cannot start in Iowa until South Dakota issues the company a permit.


Two other companies that also proposed CO2 systems withdrew their permit requests in Iowa.