Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The election may turn on inflation, but do we even understand it?

Opinion

Cartoon of a person pushing a shopping cart up a line graph

Grocery prices jumped by 25 percent over the past four years, and by 9 percent in 2022 alone before softly landing at a more reasonable 3.4 percent in December 2023, writes Hill.

Malte Mueller/Getty Images

H ill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America.

How big of a role will inflation play in the upcoming presidential election? That’s anybody’s guess, but one thing is certain: Democrats will cite facts and statistics that they hope will lead voters to think inflation is under control, while Republicans will focus on facts and statistics that counter the “it’s all good” narrative.

As they say, you are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own set of facts.


I just experienced for the umpteenth time the sticker shock of paying for a takeout lunch. This one was a Philly cheesesteak, which when I was growing up in the Northeast was kind of a poor man’s refuge for something tasty and cheap. Not anymore. I bought a classic Philly cheesesteak, plus fries and a Diet Coke, and it came to almost $24!

Prices are not just shockingly high in restaurants but also in the grocery store, in Home Depot, Macy’s, in housing and utilities. A post-pandemic inflation surge, stimulated by supply-chain disruptions, saw the nation’s fastest burst of price increases in four decades. It's these everyday, over-the-counter shockers that Republicans will try to exploit during the upcoming elections.

Yet President Joe Biden’s team insists that the economy is doing great and, by most conventional measurements, they're right. Unemployment is low, consumer confidence and spending have picked up, certain types of manufacturing are humming, the stock market is setting records, recovery from the pandemic is in full swing.

But still, a $15 hamburger? That’s probably why Donald Trump has a 22-point lead when voters are asked which candidate will do a better job handling the economy. The numbers are starting to trend a bit for Biden, but he has a big gap to make up.

So who’s right? What’s the real truth? Here are a couple of “scratch your head” perplexities to consider.

First, we have to distinguish between inflation and prices. When the Biden administration says the inflation rate is down, that just means prices are not rising as fast as before. That does not mean price levels have declined. Instead, prices for many products have gotten stuck at the elevated level they rose to post-pandemic.

Second, when it comes to inflation, not all products and services are the same. Research indicates that consumers are much more likely to remember the prices of the things they buy frequently – like groceries and gas – and forget the price of the laptop computer or giant screen TV they bought last month.

The prices of more expensive goods like furniture and consumer electronics have actually been falling for over a year. However food prices are still high, whether it’s in the supermarket checkout line or in a restaurant. Grocery prices jumped by 25 percent over the past four years, and by 9 percent in 2022 alone before softly landing at a more reasonable 3.4 percent in December 2023.

While less than a tenth of an average household’s budget is spent at the supermarket, the prices paid there dominate the perception of consumers because grocery shopping is a near-daily activity. So we are constantly reminded of the high food prices and those experiences play an outsize role in shaping our views of inflation.

Certainly the continued high cost of housing, both for home buyers and renters, also contributes to the volatile electoral brew. But it’s the daily price reminders that add up when you’re still paying a lot more for that jar of peanut butter or bananas or a hamburger. And those prices are not likely to come back down.

Greedflation

However there is more to the story. During the pandemic, corporations got away with what some have called “greedflation,” when companies increase prices to boost corporate profits and create windfall payouts for corporate CEOs. Economist Robert Reich attributes inflation to “monopolistic corporations jacking up prices to maximize profits.”

The data seems to support this view. Corporate profits skyrocketed during the pandemic, zooming by 23 percent in 2021 alone, reaching a peak of over $12 trillion in 2022. Yet most workers’ wages failed to keep up, despite some recent wage gains (after decades of stagnation). A study by the Pricing Lab at Harvard Business School found that big companies have been raising prices more frequently, effectively running tests to see what maximum prices consumers are willing to pay before they stop buying. Another recent analysis from the White House Council of Economic Advisers suggests that elevated profit margins among large grocery retailers could be contributing to the stubbornly high price of food on store shelves.

What can a poor president do?

So what can the Biden administration do? That’s like Mick Jagger asking in “Street Fighting Man,” “But what can a poor boy do, ‘cept to sing for a rock ‘n’ roll band.” It’s a tough question to answer, because even the mighty president can only control so much about the economy.

Biden has begun to use his bully pulpit to pressure large grocery chains to slash food prices for American consumers, accusing the stores of padding their profit margins through price gouging and junk fees. It’s not clear if such rhetoric will lower prices, though it might at least give undecided voters a sense that the president has their back.

But maybe there’s more that can be done. Back in 1971, President Richard Nixon issued Executive Order 11615 to counter inflation by imposing a 90-day freeze on virtually all prices and wages in the economy. That was the first time the U.S. government had enacted extensive wage and price controls since World War II. The controls worked initially, but when the first Arab oil embargo hit, prices started soaring again.

Supply and demand is a funny business. A price freeze likely won’t work for every product and service, but unless Biden wants to end up on the wrong side of the electoral passions that come with a $15 burger, he might want to mandate, at the very least, a hamburger price freeze.


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less