Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump Frames Economy As ‘Stronger than Ever Before’ in State of the Union, but Lawmakers Question the Claim

Entering an election year with low approval ratings, Trump used the joint address to convey a message of national strength.

News

Trump Frames Economy As ‘Stronger than Ever Before’ in State of the Union, but Lawmakers Question the Claim

President Donald Trump delivered his State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night.

(Cayla Labgold-Carroll/MNS)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump used the longest State of the Union address in U.S. history on Tuesday night to argue that Americans are already experiencing “a turnaround for the ages” thanks to his agenda. But moments of disruption inside the House chamber and reactions from lawmakers afterward suggested Democrats and even some Republicans dispute his claims.

Trump’s address offered a snapshot of how the White House is trying to frame the economy heading into an election year. The administration sought to present easing inflation, falling prices, and rising wages as settled facts.


“He talked about affordability and how everything is cheaper now — beef, vegetables, gas, automobiles — none of which is true,” Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., told reporters on her way out of the chamber.

Throughout the address, Trump repeatedly argued that inflation is no longer a defining economic problem. He said inflation is “plummeting,” arguing that after one year in office, Americans are already benefiting from lower everyday costs, including groceries, gasoline, and housing.

“After just one year, I can say with dignity and pride that we have achieved a transformation like no one has ever seen before and a turnaround for the ages,” Trump said.

Recent inflation data showed some cooling, but prices continued to rise. According to the latest Consumer Price Index, headline inflation eased from 2.7% in December 2025 to 2.4% in January 2026, indicating that price increases were slowing rather than outright falling. Core inflation, which excludes food and energy, remains elevated, underscoring that many household costs are still rising, just at a slower pace. Still, slower inflation does not translate into lower prices, particularly for goods and services that surged during the peak inflation period.

The White House reinforced the president’s message during the speech. At 9:37 p.m., while Trump was addressing Congress, the administration released an article declaring that “Trump is delivering real relief” and “reversing Biden’s economic disaster.” The release closely mirrored the president’s remarks, signaling a coordinated effort to frame the economic moment as one of improvement rather than transition.

Inside the chamber, Democrats reacted skeptically to that portrayal. Some visibly shook their heads as Trump listed examples of falling prices. The pushback reflected a broader dispute over whether aggregate economic indicators align with voters’ lived experiences.

After the address, Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., said the president’s description of affordability did not match what she hears from businesses and families in her district. Small business owners continue to report the risk of closure due to higher costs, she said.

Questions about credibility extended beyond domestic policy. When Trump claimed to have ended eight wars during his time in office, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., shouted that the statement was false. The president was referring to the Cambodian-Thai border crisis, which escalated into a direct armed conflict on July 24, 2025.

That tension resurfaced later in the speech when Trump turned to Russia and Ukraine. While he said he was working to bring an end to the war, he did not explicitly name Russia as the aggressor. The omission drew visible reactions from both parties, particularly given that the address coincided with the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

“He did not call out who is the aggressor and say that we stand with Ukraine,” Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., told reporters in the Capitol's National Statuary Hall.

Criticisms were also raised inside Trump’s party.

“If I had to pick two items of the speech that were on the bad side, that would be one of them,” Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., told reporters in the Capitol.

The economic and foreign policy moments underscored the stakes of the address in an election year. Public opinion data suggests he faces a skeptical electorate. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 61% of Americans disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job as president. A separate CNN/SSRS poll conducted in mid-February showed a similar pattern, with 63% disapproval

The same CNN/SSRS survey found that 57% of Americans said the economy and cost of living were the issues they most wanted Trump to address in his State of the Union.

André Hiroki covers business for Medill on the Hill.

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. Learn how by clicking HERE.



Read More

U.S. Capitol

A shrinking deficit doesn’t mean fiscal health. CBO projections show rising debt, Social Security insolvency, and trillions added under the 2025 tax law.

Getty Images, Dmitry Vinogradov

The Deficit Mirage

The False Comfort of a Good Headline

A mirage can look real from a distance. The closer you get, the less substance you find. That is increasingly how Washington talks about the federal deficit.

Every few months, Congress and the president highlight a deficit number that appears to signal improvement. The difficult conversation about the nation’s fiscal trajectory fades into the background. But a shrinking deficit is not necessarily a sign of fiscal health. It measures one year’s gap between revenue and spending. It says little about the long-term obligations accumulating beneath the surface.

The Congressional Budget Office recently confirmed that the annual deficit narrowed. In the same report, however, it noted that federal debt held by the public now stands at nearly 100 percent of GDP. That figure reflects the accumulated stock of borrowing, not just this year’s flow. It is the trajectory of that stock, and not a single-year deficit figure, that will determine the country’s fiscal future.

What the Deficit Doesn’t Show

The deficit is politically attractive because it is simple and headline-friendly. It appears manageable on paper. Both parties have invoked it selectively for decades, celebrating short-term improvements while downplaying long-term drift. But the deeper fiscal story lies elsewhere.

Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the debt now account for roughly half of federal outlays, and their share rises automatically each year. These commitments do not pause for election cycles. They grow with demographics, health costs, and compounding interest.

According to the CBO, those three categories will consume 58 cents of every federal dollar by 2035. Social Security’s trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033, triggering an automatic benefit reduction of roughly 21 percent unless Congress intervenes. Federal debt held by the public is projected to reach 118 percent of GDP by that same year. A favorable monthly deficit report does not alter any of these structural realities. These projections come from the same nonpartisan budget office lawmakers routinely cite when it supports their position.

Keep Reading Show less
A New Democratic Approach: Guardrails That Speed, Not Stop, Progress

A take on permitting reform, deregulation, and DHS accountability—arguing for economic growth with guardrails that protect communities, health, and the environment.

Getty Images, Javier Ghersi

A New Democratic Approach: Guardrails That Speed, Not Stop, Progress

For far too long, our national conversation has been framed around a false choice. On one side, Republicans frequently argue that the best way to strengthen the economy and improve the lives of everyday Americans is to give businesses maximum freedom by having fewer rules, fewer constraints and more incentives to grow. On the other side, Democrats have stressed the need for guardrails to protect our environment, our health, and our communities from the unintended effects of unchecked growth.

But this debate has always been too narrow. It assumes that we must choose between action and accountability, between getting things done and doing them responsibly.

Keep Reading Show less
The Many Victims of Trump’s Immigration Policy–Including the U.S. Economy

Messages of support are posted on the entrance of the Don Julio Mexican restaurant and bar on January 18, 2026 in Forest Lake, Minnesota. The restaurant was reportedly closed because of ICE operations in the area. Residents in some places have organized amid a reported deployment of 3,000 federal agents in the area who have been tasked with rounding up and deporting suspected undocumented immigrants

Getty Images, Scott Olson

The Many Victims of Trump’s Immigration Policy–Including the U.S. Economy

The first year of President Donald Trump’s second term resulted in some of the most profound immigration policy changes in modern history. With illegal border crossings having dropped to their lowest levels in over 50 years, Trump can claim a measure of victory. But it’s a hollow victory, because it’s becoming increasingly clear that his immigration policy is not only damaging families, communities, workplaces, and schools - it is also hurting the economy and adding to still-soaring prices.

Besides the terrifying police state tactics, the most dramatic shift in Trump's immigration policy, compared to his presidential predecessors (including himself in his first term), is who he is targeting. Previously, a large number of the removals came from immigrants who showed up at the border but were turned away and never allowed to enter the country. But with so much success at reducing activity at the border, Trump has switched to prioritizing “internal deportations” – removing illegal immigrants who are already living in the country, many of them for years, with families, careers, jobs, and businesses.

Keep Reading Show less
Close up of stock market chart on a glowing particle world map and trading board.

Democrats seek a post-Trump strategy, but reliance on neoliberal economic policies may deepen inequality and voter distrust.

Getty Images, Yuichiro Chino

After Trump, Democrats Confront a Deeper Economic Reckoning

For a decade, Democrats have defined themselves largely by their opposition to Donald Trump, a posture taken in response to institutional crises and a sustained effort to defend democratic norms from erosion. Whatever Trump may claim, he will not be on the 2028 presidential ballot. This moment offers Democrats an opportunity to do something they have postponed for years: move beyond resistance politics and articulate a serious, forward-looking strategy for governing. Notably, at least one emerging Democratic policy group has begun studying what governing might look like in a post-Trump era, signaling an early attempt to think beyond opposition alone.

While Democrats’ growing willingness to look past Trump is a welcome development, there is a real danger in relying too heavily on familiar policy approaches. Established frameworks offer comfort and coherence, but they also carry risks, especially when the conditions that once made them successful no longer hold.

Keep Reading Show less