A tight labor market with steady growth and historically low unemployment - those are the findings in the new "State of Working Pennsylvania" report.
In July, Pennsylvania's unemployment rate was 3.5%, compared with 4.3% a year ago.
Report co-author Stephen Herzenberg, an economist and executive director of the Keystone Research Center, said the strong economy should benefit workers even more looking forward. When there are more job openings than unemployed workers, he said, it gives workers greater choice and leverage in the job market.
"Because of the tight labor market, even though inflation was high, workers' wages have actually kept up," he said, "and they're beginning to see increases in real wages in their pay packets. And that should continue into the next year."
He said the tight labor market appears to be driven by continued job growth plus long-term demographic factors which are shrinking the growth rate of the working-age population.
The good news now, Herzenberg added, is that inflation is no longer high and has come down in the last 12 months.
"While inflation was coming down - from the 9% to the current 3% - workers kept up because of that tight labor market," he said. "There's some industries - low-wage industries, like restaurants and hospitality, and retail sector - where you've seen robust wage increases."
He noted that Pennsylvania has been a leader in some areas of workforce training, such as growing apprenticeship programs, and said the state should build on that strength and expand training for the kinds of apprenticeships that connect people to well-paid jobs.
Disclosure: Keystone Research Center, Inc. contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy & Priorities, Livable Wages/Working Families. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Ahead of Tax Day, a national receipt shows where some Ohio tax dollars were spent in 2024.
War and weaponry remain top federal expenses, with the average tax filer paying more than $3,700 to maintain America's military arsenal.
Lindsay Koshgarian, program director of the Institute for Policy Studies, said that cost could increase for 2025, since President Donald Trump has said he wants a $1 trillion military budget.
"We've been expecting to see it hit a trillion dollars some time in the near future," said Koshgarian, "but I don't think we were expecting it quite so soon as this."
She said the military budget decreased slightly after the 2008 recession, but has been noticeably increasing the past few years. A $1 trillion military budget would be the largest on record.
The average tax filer paid under $18,000 in federal taxes last year, with the greatest share supporting Americans' health through Medicaid, Medicare, the National Institutes of Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Trump and billionaire Elon Musk have vowed to cut at least $1 trillion in spending.
But Koshgarian warned that eliminating smaller agencies - which work to alleviate homelessness, for example - won't reap much reward.
"And so, I think what we're likely to see next year is a lot less money for things like that," said Koshgarian, "without necessarily any appreciable savings for most of us."
Americans on average pay just one penny to help keep people off the streets. The average cost for deportations and border enforcement is just under $100.
Koshgarian said that cost could jump next year as well, as Trump continues to call for the deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants.
This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.
get more stories like this via email
Groups that fight for greater access to health care are criticizing the Republican budget blueprint currently before the
U.S. House of Representatives, claiming it could lead to huge cuts to Medicaid -- known as Medi-Cal in the Golden State. Republicans can only afford to lose a couple of votes in order to use reconciliation to pass the bill on a simple majority vote.
Kiran Savage-Sangwan, executive director of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, is asking voters to get in touch with their local members of Congress.
"Devastating health-care cuts can still be stopped," she said. "With the slimmest of a majority in the House of Representatives, it would take less than a handful of House Republicans to vote 'no' on this plan to save health care for 15 million Californians who count on Medi-Cal."
The House version of the budget blueprint calls for $880 billion in cuts to the part of the government that funds health care for low-income families, seniors and people with disabilities. House Speaker Mike Johnson has said the savings are necessary to fund President Donald Trump's other budget priorities.
Adriana Ramos-Yamamoto, a senior policy analyst with the California Budget & Policy Center, said the administration's priorities stand to hurt average Californians.
"Republicans want to cut funding for basic health care and nutrition programs that millions of people rely on, all in order to help pay for tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy and corporations," said Ramos-Yamamoto. "These cuts would be a major hit to California, where federal dollars make up about a third of the state budget."
Amanda McAllister-Wallner, interim executive director of the nonprofit Health Access, notes that Congress will soon adjourn for a two-week break, sending lawmakers back to their districts.
"When these members are home in their district, we want to make sure that they're hearing from constituents -- and that they are accountable when they go back to D.C. and they start talking about the details of this plan," she explained.
Details of the campaign to protect Medi-Cal are online at fightforourhealth.org
Disclosure: Health Access contributes to our fund for reporting on Health Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Plans to slash funding for the Institute of Museum and Library Services have drawn swift opposition from library and union leaders, as cuts threaten Michigan's nearly 400 libraries, as well as libraries across the nation, with rural areas expected to be hit hardest.
A lawsuit has been filed on behalf of the American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees by Democracy Forward and co-counsel Gair Gallo.
The suit asks the court to block the dismantling of the Institute, as directed by presidential executive order.
Cindy Hohl, president of the American Library Association, said the institutions are critical.
"Libraries are a trusted anchor institution, providing Americans with access to the internet and technology - and especially in small and rural areas where people may not be able to afford those services or access in their homes," she said.
Around 125,000 libraries across the nation may be affected. Supporters of the cuts maintain that reducing federal spending is essential for budget efficiency. They believe local governments should take on more responsibility and that cuts will push libraries to find alternative funding and improve efficiency.
In Michigan, libraries provide vital community programs, including job training, literacy initiatives, and senior support services. Cuts to library funding could disrupt these services, which mainly assist underserved populations, such as those in rural communities. Hohl highlighted the consequences these communities could face from cuts.
"When we're looking at our small and rural communities, if we see a decrease in federal funding to the point of where it's a third or even a half of their budget, those libraries will have to make difficult decisions and they may have to close," she added.
The American Library Association recently sent a letter urging the acting director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services not to cut federally mandated library programs.
get more stories like this via email