The Brief

During President Donald Trump's first term, the economy was a relative strength of his. During the 2024 presidential campaign, his promises to lower prices in a country grappling with post-COVID inflation propelled him back into office.

But toward the end of his first year in office this term, just 36% of Americans approve of his handling of the economy, according to the latest NPR/PBS News/Marist poll. It's his worst mark in the six years that Marist has been asking the question.

The only time in that span that Americans had a similarly negative view of a president's handling of the economy in the poll was in February 2022, when Joe Biden was president. Now Democrats are slightly more trusted to handle the economy than Republicans — 37% to 33%. That's not a wide margin, but it's a sharp turnaround from the 16-point advantage Republicans had on the question in 2022.

There are a number of other stark findings in this wide-ranging survey that focused on the economic pressures Americans are facing. The poll found that many Americans are having difficulty making ends meet, they worry about the economic outlook for themselves and the country, and most believe the country is already in a recession — with notable divides by race, age and gender on many questions.

The White House recognizes the challenge the current economy poses and is trying to make it a focus of events going forward. But the president has his work cut out for him to convince Americans his administration will make it better. He has struggled to do so, often returning to culture war arguments, particularly immigration, instead.

Trump's political standing is at the nadir of his presidency

Trump's handling of the economy has him under water with several key groups, including some that are important to his coalition. For example, 49% of people who live in rural areas disapprove of the job he's doing on the economy, while just 43% approve; 48% of white women without college degrees disapprove vs. 41% who approve. In the suburbs, which are often critical in swing districts, more disapprove by a 60%-33% margin.

In addition to Trump's low approval for his handling of the economy, his overall job approval rating stands at a meager 38%. That's the lowest of his second term and the lowest number he's seen in Marist's surveys since April 2018.

That year, his approval rating did not go much higher. It sat at 41% in the last Marist poll before the 2018 midterm elections. Republicans lost 40 seats in the House that year.

The intensity of disapproval of the president is particularly high — 50% of registered voters said they strongly disapprove.

Just 30% of independents and 8% of Democrats approve of the job Trump's doing. But, as has been the case for the entirety of Trump's time on the political stage, he retains robust support from Republicans. In this survey, 84% of Republicans approve of the job he's doing. That's down 5 points from last month, but within the margin of error.

Prices leap out as the top economic concern

By far, the biggest financial factor straining Americans is prices.

Asked for their top economic concern, 45% of respondents said prices. Nothing else came close — housing was second at 18%, followed by tariffs at 15% and job security at 10%.

Tariffs are certainly closely tied to higher prices in this administration. Two-thirds in this survey said they're very concerned or somewhat concerned about tariffs' impact on their personal finances.

That's down from 81% in June, but still a significant majority. The decline is driven by Republicans. In June, 70% of Republicans said they were concerned about tariffs' potential impact. Now, it's just 38%, while overwhelming majorities of independents and Democrats continue to say they're concerned about them.

Most say the country is already in a recession

When a country is in a recession is not always clear, but it is marked by a significant downturn in economic activity. The technical definition is two consecutive quarters of negative growth as measured by the country's gross domestic product, or GDP.

That's not where the country is right now, though there are signs of a slowing labor market. Just 64,000 jobs were added in November, as of the delayed jobs report released Tuesday, for example, and the unemployment rate ticked up to 4.6%.

For many, especially those who are Black, Latino and under 45 years old, times feel particularly tough. Latinos, for example, were 22 points more likely than those who are white to say the country is in a recession.

Respondents under 45 were 17 points more likely than those over 45 years old to say the country was in a recession. Women were also 15 points more likely to say so than men.

Prices in many sectors remain high and, overall, people say affordability is a major issue. In fact, 70% in this survey said the area where they live is not very affordable or not affordable at all for the average family. That's up from 45% when Marist asked the same question in June, a whopping increase and a sign of how much people are feeling the economic pinch.

Republicans and independents were sharply more negative now than they were in June on affordability of the area they live in. In June, by a 64%-36% margin, Republicans said the cost of living was affordable or very affordable. But in this survey, they were split, 51%-49%.

Independents in June were more positive, with 54% saying the area they live in was affordable. But that has cratered, down 30 points.

A strong majority also say the economy simply isn't working for them

Roughly 6 in 10 said the economy is not working well for them personally, and more said their financial situation has gotten worse in the past year than better (35% vs. 21%).

There was a sharp partisan divide; it's become common over the past decade or so for the strength of the economy to be viewed through a political lens, like so many other things.

In this survey, most Democrats and independents said the economy isn't working well for them personally, while two-thirds of Republicans said it is.

Here, again, there were also significant divides by race, age, income, education and gender. For example, three-quarters of those who are Black and two-thirds of Latinos said the economy isn't working for them, compared to 56% of white people who said so.

Notably, there was also a sharp divide between men and women without college degrees — 69% of white women without degrees said the economy wasn't working for them, compared to 51% of white non-degreed men. This split was evident on several questions among this group, which is core to Trump's coalition.

Many are barely getting by, and they're worried about health care costs

Seven in 10 people surveyed said their expenses either match or exceed their income every month, and it's far worse for non-whites and younger people. While 68% of people who are white fall into this category, a far higher percentage of those who are Black (77%) and Latino (78%) said so.

It was a similar story for those who are younger, lower income or don't hold a college degree.

A quarter of people said their expenses consistently exceed their income, which translates to roughly 64 million adults who are accruing debt month to month. That was highest among people who make less than $50,000 a year, white women without college degrees, Millennials, those who are Black, Latino and those who have children under 18 years old.

This socioeconomic divide shows up throughout the survey, including on the question of whether people are satisfied with their savings. Fifty-four percent of those who are white are at least somewhat satisfied with the amount of money they currently have saved, versus just 41% of those who are Black and 40% of Latinos.

Similar gaps are clear by age and education, with a particularly wide chasm between those who have college degrees (60% satisfied with their savings) and those who do not have college degrees (41%).

The cost of health care is a major concern. In fact, a majority (54%) said they're concerned that their household will be unable to pay for needed health care services in the next year. Again, this was highest for those who are Black (69%), Latino (65%), make less than $50,000 a year (67%), are under 45 (61%), especially those 18-29 (63%) and women (61%).

People are pessimistic about the future and the state of the country

As the new year approaches, almost 6 in 10 said they are more pessimistic about what's ahead for the world in 2026.

Among those most pessimistic were Democrats, white women with college degrees, independents and Latinos. Those most optimistic included Republicans, white evangelical Christians, people who live in rural areas and whites without degrees (particularly white men) — all generally solid pro-Trump groups.

A significant share of respondents said the country is headed in the wrong direction — 63% — though there were similar demographic splits.

The survey was conducted from Dec. 8-11, reaching 1,440 adults through live interviewers, text and online. The survey has a margin of error of +/- 3.2 percentage points. The survey includes 1,261 registered voters. Where voters are mentioned, there is a +/- 3.4 percentage point margin of error.
Copyright 2025 NPR

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday placed on the June ballot a proposed temporary half-cent sales tax increase to fund the county’s struggling health care system, which has been hit hard by federal funding cuts.

If passed by voters, the increase would bring the county’s tax rate to 10.25%. It is projected to raise one billion dollars annually over five years.

The tax would expire in five years.

The background

County health officials said Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” will cut $2.4 billion from county health programs over three years, threatening closure of some of the county’s 24 clinics and an array of public health programs.

Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who co-authored the proposal, said the county faced a “federally imposed crisis” that in the absence of state action, could only be addressed by raising taxes on county residents.

“This motion gives the voters a choice, given the stark realities that our county is facing,” Mitchell said.

The vote was 4-1, with Supervisor Kathryn Barger the lone dissenter. Barger is the board’s sole Republican. She worried shoppers would go to Orange County, where the sales tax is 7.75%. She also said the state should take the lead on addressing federal funding cuts to county health care systems.

Public reaction

More than 700 people showed up Tuesday to speak out on the proposal. Health care providers pleaded with the board to place the measure on the ballot, saying federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal had hit them hard.

“This is a crisis,” said Louise McCarthy, president and CEO of the Community Clinic Association of L.A. County. “Medi-Cal accounts for over half of clinic funding. So these changes will lead to clinic closures, longer wait times, overcrowded E.R.’s and higher costs for the county.” 

Others opposed any plan that would increase the sales tax.

“Our city is opposed to the adding of this regressive tax to overtaxed residents and making it even more difficult for cities, especially small cities, to pay for the increasing cost of basic resident services,” said Rolling Hills Mayor Bea Dieringer. “The county needs to tighten its belt further.”

Details on the proposed plan

Under the plan, up to 47% of revenue generated will be used by the Department of Health Services to fund nonprofit health care providers to furnish no-cost or reduced-cost care to low-income residents who do not have health insurance. 

Twenty-two percent would provide financial support to the county’s Department of Health Services to safeguard its public hospital and clinic services. Ten percent would be allocated to the Department of Public Health to support core public health functions and the awarding of grants to support health equity.

The rest would be sprinkled across the health care system, including to support nonprofit safety net hospitals and for school-based health needs and programs.

A last-minute amendment by Supervisor Lindsey Horvath set aside 5% of funding for Planned Parenthood.

The spending would be monitored by a nine-member committee but ultimately would be up to the discretion of the Board of Supervisors.

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass is directing staff to keep ICE off of city property and asking the Los Angeles Police Department to increase its monitoring of federal immigration agents.

The mayor issued the instructions in an executive directive Tuesday. She's also directing the Los Angeles Police Commission to ensure the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies operating in the city are complying with new state laws attempting to reign in federal immigration enforcement.

The move comes after a public showdown between the police chief and public officials over the LAPD's response to federal immigration agents. Chief Jim McDonnell faced heat after recently saying his department would not enforce a new California law banning federal agents from wearing masks.

That ban was temporarily blocked by a federal judge yesterday — but the mayor wants the police chief to issue guidance to his department complying with the law once legal concerns are resolved.

Mayor directs city departments to ban ICE

The mayor is ordering all city departments to identify property that could be used as staging areas for the Department of Homeland Security, and asking them to put up signs banning federal agents.

She's also directing the city to lock gates and doors where possible to block agents from gathering in city-owned spaces like parking lots and garages. The order gives departments less than a month to make the changes.

"The City has a responsibility to continue to safeguard public spaces," Bass wrote in her directive. "Now, we must assert our authority and actively guard against acts of brazen federal overreach."

The city already bars federal agents from non-public city spaces without a judicial warrant or court order. This executive directive takes aim at public spaces where ICE might gather before conducting immigration enforcement, such as a parking lot at a public park.

L.A. County passed similar guidance last month, designating county property as "ICE Free Zones" and directing county staff to put up signs on county property.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli responded at the time on X, saying that the county cannot exclude federal agents from public spaces.

Mayor asks LAPD to step up monitoring of federal agents

The mayor's directive also asks the Los Angeles Police Department to increase its monitoring of federal agents detaining people, including by recording the name and badge number of the supervising officer at the scene.

The directive requests that the Board of Police Commissioners update the LAPD's guidance for interactions with federal immigration officers. Those updates include requiring that LAPD officers turn on their body cameras when they are at the scene of an immigration enforcement action and inform members of the public at those scenes that they are not there to assist the operation.

Bass is also asking the LAPD to regularly issue public data reports of incidents in which police officers witness or receive reports of federal agents acting unlawfully.

The LAPD did not respond to LAist's request for comment on the mayor's new executive directive.

The Los Angeles City Council approved a ballot measure Tuesday that will ask voters to increase the city’s hotel tax by 2% before millions of tourists visit for the 2028 Olympic Games.

The move would boost Los Angeles’ transient-occupancy tax from 14% to 16% through 2028 and then set it permanently at 15% in 2029.

If approved by voters, the tax increase would bring in an additional $44 million annually before the Olympics and $22 million afterward, according to city estimates.

“I do think that there is a logic that we can explain to the electorate, and to ourselves, that the Olympics create an opportunity to add some jet fuel to our visitor-serving community,” said Councilmember Tim McOsker, who voted in favor of the increase.

The council voted 13-2 in favor of putting the measure on the June ballot. Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and John Lee voted no.

Lee told LAist he thinks it’s the wrong time to make it harder for hotels to do business in Los Angeles.

“The hospitality sector is already navigating significant pressures, and increasing the tax would only make it more difficult,” he said.

Rodriguez said she worried about any city policy that might discourage tourists from staying in hotels and instead choose short-term rental properties in private homes.

“To be able to have access to that residential housing stock, we need to create some disincentive for the expansion of short-term rentals,” Rodriguez said.

The council considered a larger hotel tax increase —  a temporary 4% and permanent 2% bump — but voted it down.

On Tuesday, several representatives from hotel industry and pro-business groups spoke against raising the transient-occupancy tax.

“While these events will be temporary, any tax increase would be permanent, further undermining the city's ability to compete for budget, budget-conscious conventions and family travelers,” Jackie Filla, president and CEO of the Hotel Association of Los Angeles said.

Nearby cities have varying hotel tax rates. Burbank’s transient-occupancy tax is at 10%, Glendale and Pasadena’s 12% and Long Beach’s 13%. Santa Monica and West Hollywood’s hotel tax rates are more than 15%.

James Finney-Conlon with the L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce said L.A. could lose out.

“We are concerned these taxes will fall onto potential tourists who are looking to come to our great city and discourage them from visiting the city of L.A. and contributing to our economy,” he said.

Councilmembers also approved a separate ballot measure to close what they say is a tax loophole exploited by online travel agencies and platforms.

If voters approve that measure, those companies would be responsible for collecting the transient occupancy tax on the full amount they charge customers, including booking and service fees, not just the discounted rate they pay hotels.

The L.A. City Administrative Officer estimates that change would generate an additional $5 million annually.

Both measures are expected to appear on L.A. city ballots in primary elections June 2.

The deadline to adopt final ballot language is Feb. 11.

The Los Angeles Conservancy is working on a full record of historic sites in Altadena — and you can help make sure its heritage is remembered.

The nonprofit has spent a year documenting significant spots that were lost in the January fires, but that’s been hard to do because of gaps in official information. Altadena has plenty of historic areas, but there hasn't been a comprehensive survey.

That’s why the conservancy has expanded its fire-related tracking to cover all of the community — with residents’ help. Its first public meeting is expected to be announced this month. Here’s what you should know.

Taking stock of Altadena

What makes something significant? Historic resource surveys help determine that. Like the city of L.A.’s robust survey, these are usually comprehensive documents that assess a community’s built heritage by researching and identifying important buildings.

They can influence land use planning and essentially lay out the case for preservation, taking into account things like design, time period and cultural importance.

But official tracking of significant sites in Altadena is fairly slim. CEO Adrian Scott Fine says the L.A. Conservancy ran into this while working on its Eaton Fire impact map.

“What it realized for us is that in the city of L.A., there had been good survey data that existed prior to the fire,” Fine said. “In Altadena, it was much less so. In many ways, we didn’t even know what we lost.”

Some of the existing records have helped. There’s a county-run African American historic resources survey from 2020 and a volunteer-led database from Altadena Heritage, focused on architecture. Some sites have also been put on local, state and national registries, but Fine says doing a full review of the community will create a clearer picture of Altadena.

“ This is the way for us to now go forward and say, OK, here’s what is still surviving. What’s the story? Why is it important to acknowledge that and tell that story?” Fine said.

Finding more historic resources could also help prevent future losses in a disaster, he said. L.A. County planning documents show just 12 historic resources within the Eaton Fire’s perimeter — three of which were destroyed.

Reimagining heritage

The L.A. Conservancy already has mapped hundreds of historic resources in the Eaton Fire. Since expanding that work, Fine says it’s helped them redefine what heritage is.

“We traditionally are focused on the built environment — historic buildings, communities, neighborhoods,” he said. “We will continue doing that, but I think it’s amplified even more so for us [that] real heritage comes from people.”

That’s why the project will document important sites, along with what they call “intangible heritage” — community traditions, oral histories and cultural practices.

They’ll also do “cultural asset mapping,” which goes beyond standard historic places to track things like where artists lived and legacy businesses.

Altadena residents and local organizations are encouraged to participate across the initiative to share what matters to them. A date for the public meeting is expected to be announced soon.