'Selective screenshotting': Economist busts Vance’s claim about immigration and inflation
During Tuesday night's vice presidential debate on CBS, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) claimed that immigration was a driving force for inflation, and cited a Federal Reserve "study" as his proof. But one economist just debunked the Ohio senator in a series of tweets.
Vance promised to post the "study" to his social media after the debate, and in a tweet early Wednesday morning the Hillbilly Elegy author followed through. but University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers — who is also a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution — took a closer look at the source Vance cited and found that the Ohio senator hid several major flaws from his followers.
In his tweet, Vance quoted Federal Reserve Board of Governors member Michelle Bowman, who wrote in May of this year: "Given the current low inventory of affordable housing, the inflow of new immigrants to some geographic areas could result in upward pressure on rents."
READ MORE: 'Pretty straightforward verdict': 13 writers offer views on Vance-Walz debate — and who won
However, Wolfers countered that the 2024 Republican vice presidential nominee was cherry-picking the data to suit his particular viewpoint. He further elaborated that when factoring Bowman's quote in the full context of the link Vance provided, he effectively undermined his entire argument.
"Senator, it's best to avoid selective screenshotting," Wolfers wrote. The prior paragraph (which your staff omitted), suggests that inflation has *fallen* partly due to immigration. You only screenshotted the second paragraph, which says the effect *could* go the other way."
In the paragraph Wolfers referenced, Bowman noted that "much of the progress" on inflation in 2024 was the result of "supply-side improvements, including easing of supply chain constraints; increases in the number of available workers, due in part to immigration; and lower energy prices." She also observed that rather than immigration, some key factors to higher inflation in the future were issues outside the scope of U.S. control, like foreign wars.
"It is unclear whether further supply-side improvements will continue to lower inflation. Geopolitical developments could also pose upside risks to inflation, including the risk that spillovers from regional conflicts could disrupt global supply chains, putting additional upward pressure on food, energy, and commodity prices," she wrote. "There is also the risk that the loosening in financial conditions since late last year and additional fiscal stimulus could add momentum to demand, stalling any further progress or even causing inflation to reaccelerate."
READ MORE: Harris ad showing Vance refusing to say Trump lost gets one million views in just hours
Wolfers also took issue with Vance characterizing those paragraphs as a Federal Reserve "study." He instead described the source material as entirely irrelevant to the Ohio senator's central argument about immigration, housing and inflation.
"Read the whole thing and you'll discover: This was not a study, it was not by economists, it's not really about immigration, it's also not about housing prices, and it does not make the point he claimed," Wolfers wrote. In a subsequent tweet, the economist wrote that "this speech was about 'the current bank regulatory environment.'
"It only mentions of[sic] 'immigration' twice: The first says it may have led to lower inflation, and the second says that it may lead to higher inflation," Wolfers tweeted, with the caveat that it was "hard to know [because] immigrants boost both demand and supply."
Click here to read Wolfers' entire thread.
READ MORE: Trump mutters 'take a look' when asked to prove aid denial for Helene victims
