FACT CHECK: Who’s to blame for high grocery, energy, other costs?

With inflationary costs reaching a 40-year high under the Biden-Harris administration, President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and others in their administration have repeatedly blamed businesses, livestock producers, grocery stores, oil and natural gas companies and others for high prices.

At the same time, a record number of businesses closed, declared bankruptcy and laid off hundreds of thousands of workers, citing high inflationary costs. In a recent report, nearly half of all small businesses said they won’t survive a second Harris term, higher costs and increased taxes, The Center Square reported.

Despite this, Harris says she plans to implement price controls, increase taxes on businesses and allow the 2017 tax cuts to expire, creating a $6 trillion chasm between her plan and former President Donald Trump’s, the Wall Street Journal reported.

As Americans struggled with increased grocery costs, including the high cost of meat, producers were faced with higher fuel, feed, grain and hay costs, driving up their operational costs that were passed onto consumers, according to multiple reports. In response, in 2021, the White House National Economic Council blamed high meat prices on “dominant corporations in uncompetitive markets taking advantage of their market power.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce disagrees, arguing that market concentration in the meat packing industry had been virtually unchanged for 25 years at the time. It then asked “if high prices are the result of corporate greed, why did these ‘greedy’ companies wait two decades to raise prices?” It clarified that increased meat prices were driven by supply and demand and overall inflation, largely created by increased federal spending and debt.

With costs increasing across the board, some companies adjusted by selling less product for more, referred to as shrinkflation, The Center Square first reported in 2022. However, Biden and Harris blamed companies for higher costs, reportedly in response to Democratic operatives advising them to do so, The Washington Post reported.

“What we said is, ‘You need a villain or an explanation for this. If you don’t provide one, voters will fill one in. The right is providing an explanation, which is that you’re spending too much,’” one Democratic operative told the Post. “That point finally became convincing to people in the White House.”

“And thus began the effort to wrongly blame employers for high prices,” the chamber’s executive vice president Neil Bradley said in a report identifying examples of the White House “wrongly blaming businesses for high prices.”

Also in 2022, Biden publicly blamed container companies for high shipping costs. News reports pointed to supply chain issues impacted by worker shortages, changes in customer spending that resulted in more cargo arriving in ports that the ports couldn’t handle, and port fines and fees contributing to higher costs.

The chamber notes that increased prices “resulted from consumers shifting their spending from services to goods” during the COVID-lockdown era, causing increased cargo demand. “Increased demand created backlogs at the ports, raising prices even higher. As supply and demand normalized, prices fell.”

By 2023, the president again publicly blamed the U.S. oil and natural gas industry for gas prices reaching a seven-year high. This was after he took more than 200 actions against the U.S. oil and natural gas industry, U.S. House Democrats introduced a bill that would have added a 50% per barrel tax, and the U.S. Treasury Department proposed a $110 billion tax hike on the industry, The Center Square reported.

But the industry doesn’t control the market, it’s subject to it like everyone else, Texas Independent Producers & Royalty Owners Association President Ed Longanecker said. The Biden-Harris administration could have lowered costs by expediting permits, lifting the federal leasing ban and creating “a more stable regulatory environment that provides certainty to producers and investors,” he told The Center Square. “Overburdensome regulations, increased taxes and anti-oil and natural gas rhetoric” exacerbated high energy prices and raised consumer costs, he said.

The administration has also repeatedly sued the industry and Texas, which leads U.S. production, exports and energy creation. In response, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has aggressively fought to protect the Texas industry from Biden policies, the governor argues.

Also in 2023, the chair of Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers said grocery sector profit margins “were elevated” and needed to “pass-through” to consumers. Earlier this year, Biden again claimed, “there are still too many corporations in America ripping people off: price gouging, junk fees, greedflation, shrinkflation.”

The chamber refutes these claims, pointing to federal data, arguing that “higher grocery prices are a result of inflationary pressure across the supply chain and basic supply and demand dynamics,” explained by Department of Agriculture and Government Accountability Office economists.

Biden and Harris blaming businesses for high prices is “entirely backward,” Bradley says. “The truth is the Administration’s own fiscal and regulatory policies are driving inflation, and the American consumer is left holding the bag.”

Related Topics:#Alberta'sFutureInTheCanadianFederation #CalgaryRingRoad #EnergyPrices #GroceryPrices #Inflation #TheCenterSquare USEconomy

Up Next

Energy transition will be much longer and more arduous than they’re telling you

Don't Miss

Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trump warns U.S. automakers: Do not raise prices in response to tariffs

Business / 7 hours ago

Labor Department cancels “America Last” spending spree spanning five continents

Health / 7 hours ago

RFK Jr. says ‘everything is going to change’ with CDC vaccine policy in Michael Knowles interview

Automotive

Trump warns U.S. automakers: Do not raise prices in response to tariffs

Published on March 29, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Quick Hit:

Former President Donald Trump warned automakers not to raise car prices in response to newly imposed tariffs, arguing that the move would ultimately benefit the industry by strengthening American manufacturing. However, automakers are signaling that price increases may be unavoidable.

Key Details:

Trump told auto executives on a recent call that his administration would look unfavorably on price hikes due to tariffs.
A 25% tariff on imported vehicles and parts is set to take effect on April 2, likely driving up costs for U.S. automakers.
Industry analysts predict vehicle prices could rise 11% to 12% in response, despite Trump’s insistence that tariffs will benefit American manufacturing.

Diving Deeper:

In a conference call with leading automakers earlier this month, former President Donald Trump issued a stern warning: do not use his new tariffs as an excuse to raise car prices. While Trump presented the tariffs as a boon for American manufacturing, industry leaders remain unconvinced, arguing that the financial burden will inevitably lead to higher costs for consumers.

Trump’s administration is pressing ahead with a 25% tariff on all imported vehicles and parts, set to take effect on April 2. The move is aimed at reshaping trade dynamics in the auto industry, encouraging domestic manufacturing, and reversing what Trump calls the damaging effects of President Joe Biden’s electric vehicle mandates. Despite this, automakers say that rising costs on foreign parts—which many depend on—will leave them little choice but to pass expenses onto consumers.

“You’re going to see prices going down, but going to go down specifically because they’re going to buy what we’re doing, incentivizing companies to—and even countries—companies to come into America,” Trump stated at a recent event, reinforcing his stance that the tariffs will ultimately lower costs in the long run.

However, industry insiders are pushing back, warning that a rapid shift to domestic production is unrealistic. “Tariffs, at any level, cannot be offset or absorbed,” said Ray Scott, CEO of Lear, a major automotive parts supplier. His concern reflects broader anxieties within the industry, as automakers calculate the financial strain of the tariffs. Analysts at Morgan Stanley estimate that vehicle prices could increase between 11% and 12% in the coming months as the new tariffs take effect.

Automakers have been bracing for the fallout. Detroit’s major manufacturers and industry suppliers have voiced their concerns, emphasizing that transitioning supply chains and manufacturing operations back to the U.S. will take years. Meanwhile, auto retailers have stocked up on inventory, temporarily shielding consumers from price hikes. But once that supply runs low—likely by May—the full impact of the tariffs could hit.

Within the Trump administration, inflation remains a pressing concern, though Trump himself rarely discusses it publicly. His economic team is aware of the potential for tariffs to drive up costs, yet the administration’s stance remains firm: automakers must adapt without raising prices. It remains unclear, however, what actions Trump might take should automakers defy his warning.

The auto industry isn’t alone in its concerns. Executives across multiple sectors, from oil and gas to food manufacturing, have been lobbying against major tariffs, arguing that they will inevitably result in higher prices for American consumers. While Trump has largely dismissed these warnings, some analysts suggest that public dissatisfaction with rising costs played a key role in shaping the outcome of the 2024 election.

With the tariffs set to take effect in just weeks, automakers are left grappling with a difficult reality: absorb billions in new costs or risk the ire of a White House determined to remake America’s trade policies.

Business

Labor Department cancels “America Last” spending spree spanning five continents

Published on March 29, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Quick Hit:

The U.S. Department of Labor has scrapped nearly $600 million in foreign aid grants, including $10 million aimed at promoting “gender equity in the Mexican workplace.”

Key Details:

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer and Deputy Secretary Keith Sonderling were credited with delivering $237 million in savings through the latest round of canceled programs.
Among the defunded initiatives: $12.2 million for “worker empowerment” efforts in South America, $6.25 million to improve labor rights in Central American agriculture, and $5 million to promote women’s workplace participation in West Africa.
The Department of Government Efficiency described the cuts as necessary to realign U.S. labor policy with national interests and applauded the elimination of all 69 international grants managed by the Bureau of International Labor Affairs.

Diving Deeper:

The U.S. Department of Labor on Wednesday canceled $577 million in foreign aid grants, including a controversial $10 million program aimed at promoting “gender equity in the Mexican workplace,” according to documents obtained by The Washington Post. The sweeping decision to terminate all 69 active international labor grants comes as part of a larger restructuring effort led by John Clark, a senior DOL official appointed during the Trump administration.

Clark directed the department’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB) to shut down its entire grant portfolio, citing a “lack of alignment with agency priorities and national interest.” The memo explaining the cancellations was first reported by The Washington Post and highlights a broader shift in federal labor policy toward domestic-focused initiatives.

Among the eliminated grants were high-dollar projects that had drawn criticism from watchdog groups for years. These included $12.2 million designated for “worker empowerment in South America,” $6.25 million targeting labor conditions in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, and $5 million to elevate women’s workplace participation in West Africa. Other defunded programs involved $4.3 million to support foreign migrant workers in Malaysia, $3 million to improve social protections for internal migrants in Bangladesh, and $3 million to promote “safe and inclusive work environments” in Lesotho.

The Department of Government Efficiency, also involved in the review, labeled the grants as “America Last” initiatives, and pointed to the lack of measurable outcomes and limited benefits to American workers. The agency commended the leadership of Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer and Deputy Secretary Keith Sonderling for securing $237 million in savings during this round alone.

The cuts mark the second major cost-saving move under Chavez-DeRemer’s leadership in as many weeks. Just days earlier, she canceled an additional $33 million in funding, including a $1.5 million grant focused on increasing transparency in Uzbekistan’s cotton sector. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, was confirmed as Labor Secretary on March 11th by a bipartisan Senate vote of 67-32.