Edward Lotterman

God may be “the Great Unknowable,” but eggs at $7.49 a dozen at our local supermarket in Roseville certainly shows that God has a wicked sense of humor and irony.

A year ago, high egg prices were the poster child of public dissatisfaction with President Joe Biden. Then-candidate Donald Trump excoriated his opponent for having caused the highest inflation in nearly 40 years. He also made sweeping promises to lower prices generally “starting on day 1.”

But in January, the month Trump was inaugurated, egg prices averaged $4.25 a dozen, nearing their 2022 high point of Biden’s term. Adjusted for inflation, we were at the historic high of the 1984 bird flu epidemic.

Then things rapidly got worse.

In its weekly “Egg Markets Overview” for Feb. 21, USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service listed prices near double January’s average:

• “Nationally, “White Large shell eggs increased $0.33 to $8.07 per dozen.”

• “The wholesale price on the New York market for Large cartoned shell eggs delivered to retailers rose $0.24 to $8.47 per dozen”.

• “In the major Midwest production region, wholesale prices for Large, white, shell eggs delivered to warehouses increased $0.28 to $8.09 per dozen, while prices paid to producers for large cartoned shell eggs increased $0.28 to $7.92 per dozen.

• “The California benchmark for Large shell eggs rose $0.05 to $9.22 per dozen.”

• “Delivered prices on the California-compliant wholesale loose egg market increased $0.99 to $9.68 per dozen.”

How do we unpack all that? What are the prospects for the weeks and months going forward? And what will USDA’s newly announced $1 billion program to curb the spread of the avian flu virus and lower egg prices do for consumers?

Start with the program announced by Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins.

It is heavily weighted toward traditional poultry disease control measures USDA has used for decades. Half goes for “biosecurity.” This largely means stopping contact between laying flocks and the wild birds that serve as a vector for the virus. It includes ending any possible transmission by humans, feed trucks and egg pick-up trucks that have been on farmsteads with infected flocks.

Nearly as much, $400 million, will go to pay producers for the value of birds killed to limit the spread of the disease. Without this compensation, there is an incentive for farmers who suspect they have sick birds to continue to produce and sell eggs rather than inform health officials promptly. So a control program based on killing infected birds needs this compensation.

The remaining $100 million will go to research into vaccines, encouragement of egg imports and research. It also threatens to dismantle state programs, such as that instituted in California by a statewide ballot initiative, that require producers to keep laying hens in more spacious conditions than the cages used elsewhere. Producers have accepted the new standards and have spent tens of millions of dollars on compliant facilities, ones that are being studied by producers elsewhere. Their state producers’ association has taken a position against federal overrule of this ongoing effort.

Now consider the Feb. 21 market news:

There are regional variations. Prices are higher in the Northeast than in the Midwest. But the 38-cent differential is larger than the long term average. In a tumultuous situation with poor information, markets become less efficient.

Also note the Midwest’s narrow 17-cent margin between the wholesale price of eggs and that paid to producers. What we are seeing now is not a case of processors using a health scare to pad margins. In fact it is the opposite.

As with milk, California is in many ways its own market. Its animal-rights rules do keep prices above national averages. But it is a premium that many are happy to pay and that substantial numbers of people in other states would support. As in Europe, after initial opposition lasting years, producers have found they can live with the new standards and are investing accordingly.

It is noteworthy that, despite Trump administration rhetoric about overhauling government procedures at all levels, the measures announced this week are long-standing practice. That is understandable because we have had several bird flu epidemics in the last 50 years that raised egg prices. In all cases, measures directed by USDA’s animal health specialists brought the epidemics to an end in a matter of months. Prices rapidly returned to usual levels.

One in 1984 was particularly severe. In February of that year, prices were 50% higher than six months earlier. But by July, prices were below the starting point. Adjusted for inflation, that February 1984 high of $4.12 would not be reached again until December of 2022 through February 2023.

In December 2003, prices were 50% higher than in September 2002. But eight months later, they were back to the previous low. Similarly, in August 2015, the price of $2.97 a dozen was 50% higher than $1.95 10 months earlier. Yet in another 10 months, prices had collapsed by half to $1.49.

Thus the historic pattern of high egg prices is that they correct themselves in rather predictable periods if sanitary measures are effective.

What else can be extrapolated about this from this week’s news?

Many people don’t really realize the scale of our country or the necessary size of programs to address problems. To many, $1 billion sounds like a lot of money. But Americans collectively buy $180 billion in eggs yearly. And on a per-capita basis covering over 338 million of us, $1 billion in added USDA outlays is $2.96 per person, about the same as four and a half eggs.

Similarly, the announced increase in annual imports from Turkey from 70 million to 420 million eggs amounts to an added 1.04 eggs per person. In 2023, we produced 109.5 billion eggs, so the increment in imports from that largest foreign supplier is about a third of 1% of our usual output. It will be useful, but not to a degree that will really show up in prices.

And why the huge spike from a measured $4.95 average per dozen for the month of January to spot prices $4 per dozen higher just three weeks later? Future researchers may tease this out with sophisticated modeling, but one factor has to be the unprecedented amount of policy uncertainty engendered by the new administration’s slash and burn approach to Cabinet agencies. Perhaps there is waste in our human- and animal-health agencies, and perhaps this waste is detrimental to consumers, but firings of personnel have not been targeted nor explained in any way. The population, including MAGA voters, have been taken by shock. One could expect that individual and collective actions taken both by producers and consumers to protect themselves might collectively push up prices.

Moreover, the toboggan has just been pushed away from the top of the hill. The moguls still lie ahead. History of the last 50 years tell us that egg price spikes are self-correcting, but all the rules of the game now are in flux.

And how does this all affect Minnesota farmers? Our state is 10th overall in total value of poultry production, but this is driven by our leadership in turkeys for meat. For eggs, we are 14th. The 2.4 billion eggs we produced in 2023 put us just over 2% of the national total. Our broiler production is tiny, about two-thirds of 1% of the U.S. total. So for producers, the avian flu is relatively less important here than in many other states.

There were no reported cases from June through November 2024, but then nine in November and December and four more so far in 2025. Five were not in poultry at all and nine in turkeys being raised for meat. None have been in chickens.

And how will this spike in egg costs affect general inflation? Less than most people might think. In December 2024, all food made up 13.6% of the total household spending. Food eaten at home is 8.04% and eggs only 0.172%. So even a month-to-month doubling in egg prices does not move the overall needle much even if it causes shock and anger for consumers.

It also hurts the profit margins for restaurants specializing in breakfast, especially ones with “egg” in their names, and may turn off bargain consumers. But if you’re already willing to pay the relatively higher prices for someone to cook your eggs, bring them to the table, pour your coffee and do the dishes, versus doing it all at home, the higher prices for the experience probably shouldn’t phase you.

Related Articles

Real World Economics: Shaky politics make for a shaky economy

Real World Economics: Contemplating the interconnectivity of things and ideas

Real World Economics: The Fed cannot save our wayward economy

Real World Economics: Understanding inflation will lead to trust in economic policies

Real World Economics: Steelmaking faces clash of new tech, obsolete values

St. Paul economist and writer Edward Lotterman can be reached at stpaul@edlotterman.com.

By Shalina Chatlani, Stateline.org

More states are loosening vaccine mandates, scaling back vaccine promotion efforts and taking other steps likely to lower vaccination rates — even as a major measles outbreak spreads in Texas.

Meanwhile, public health experts worry that the confirmation of vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services could add fuel to such efforts, leading to the resurgence of long-tamed infectious diseases. Kennedy has made numerous baseless or false claims about vaccines, including linking them to autism and cancer and saying there is “poison” in the coronavirus vaccine.

This week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which Kennedy now oversees, canceled the upcoming meeting of a scientific panel that was slated to discuss next year’s flu vaccines. Also this week, an unvaccinated child died of measles in Texas— the country’s first measles death in a decade. The outbreak, which has spilled into neighboring New Mexico, has now grown to more than 130 cases.

Related Articles

Losing a pet can cut deeper than many people realize. Here’s how friends can help

An ice rink to fight opioid crisis: Drug-free fun vs. misuse of settlement cash

Texas measles cases rise to 146 in an outbreak that led to a child’s death

Measles is one of the world’s most contagious viruses. Here’s what to know and how to avoid it

Harsh flu season has health officials worried about brain complications in children

Already, vaccination rates are lower than they were before the pandemic. The COVID-19 vaccines saved millions of lives, but many Americans bristled at vaccine mandates, and disinformation and rapidly evolving public health advice undermined many people’s trust in scientific authorities.

Changing attitudes have had an impact: Vaccination rates among children born in 2020 and 2021 declined by between 1.3 and 7.8 percentage points for recommended shots, compared with children born in 2018 and 2019, according to a September report by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The anti-vaccination trend is “the antithesis of public health,” Dr. Scott Rivkees, a pediatric endocrinologist who served as Florida’s surgeon general and health secretary from 2019 to 2021, told Stateline.

“The role of people in departments of health and the role of people in health care and medicine is to promote health and make sure the public is safe,” Rivkees told Stateline. “There’s such a rich history of legal precedent, such a rich history of public health precedent, saying that society benefits by having individuals vaccinated.”

In all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, children must receive certain vaccines to attend school. Every state offers an exemption for children who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. Thirty states plus the district allow families to skip the vaccinations for religious reasons, 13 states grant exemptions for religious or personal reasons, and two states — Louisiana and Minnesota — don’t require people to specify whether their objection is religious or personal.

Five states — California, Connecticut, Maine, New York and West Virginia — don’t allow nonmedical exemptions.

Republican officials in more than a dozen states have introduced legislation to loosen vaccine rules or otherwise reduce their use.

Legislation in Arizona would make it easier to claim a school exemption, while GOP-sponsored bills in Connecticut, Minnesota, New York and Oregon would limit or prohibit vaccine mandates for adults.

In Idaho, a Senate panel last week debated a bill that would ban mRNA vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, for a decade. Montana and Mississippi lawmakers considered but defeated similar proposals. And in West Virginia — one of the five states that currently does not allow nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine requirements — lawmakers are advancing a bill that would allow religious and philosophical objections.

“Public health will always, to some extent, involve politics, because it requires resources,” said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Offit serves on the FDA panel that was supposed to discuss next year’s flu vaccines.

“But it doesn’t have to be partisan, which is what has happened.”

A shift in Louisiana

Earlier this month, Dr. Ralph Abraham, Louisiana’s first-ever surgeon general, sent a memo to staff at the Louisiana Department of Health saying they should no longer recommend that Louisianans get “any and all vaccines.” The memo also said the agency will “no longer promote mass vaccination.” Instead, Abraham said, health workers should encourage residents to discuss the risks and benefits of vaccines with their doctors.

The memo puts an end to the Louisiana health department’s robust history of promoting vaccinations through local public health departments, community health fairs and media campaigns.

“Vaccines should be treated with nuance, recognizing differences between seasonal vaccines and childhood immunizations, which are an important part of providing immunity to our children. … Getting vaccinated, like any other health procedure, is an individual’s personal choice,” the memo states.

The agency did not respond to multiple requests for comment via email and phone call. But in a letter posted to the department’s website earlier this month, Abraham wrote that the state had made several missteps during the pandemic, including: promoting “inaccurate and inconsistent guidance on masking, poor decisions to close schools, unjustifiable mandates on civil liberties, and false claims regarding natural immunity.”

Abraham wrote that vaccinations can be good for some, but can be harmful for others, and that for decades public health has been driven by an ideology that “the sacrifice of a few is acceptable and necessary for the ‘greater good.’”

“We should reject this utilitarian approach and restore medical decision-making to its proper place: between doctors and patients,” he wrote.

Louisiana Republican lawmakers have embraced this sentiment, saying that after the COVID-19 pandemic, they want to see less government involvement in vaccinations.

“I’m pleased that Dr. Abraham has taken this approach,” said Republican state Rep. Kathy Edmonston, who last year authored laws prohibiting Louisiana schools from requiring COVID-19 vaccinations and mandating that they provide exemption information to parents. “I’m not against vaccinations. He’s not against vaccinations. I’m for people being able to make up their own mind.”

Jill Hines, co-director of Health Freedom Louisiana, a group that opposes vaccine mandates, dismissed the significance of ending mass vaccination campaigns, because “everybody should have a primary care physician if they want one, and nobody is really denied access to a vaccine.”

But Kimberly Hood, former assistant secretary of the Louisiana Office of Public Health, noted that the state is largely rural, and many residents don’t have easy access to a health care provider.

“Failing to promote vaccination may not sound like a huge deal, but it actually invalidates what we in public health have seen and learned for many, many years, which is that you have to make it easy, affordable, accessible,” Hood told Stateline.

“It’s not just stepping away from vaccination; we’re stepping away from our kind of obligation together, what it means to live together in a society.”

Staying the course in Mississippi

But in neighboring Mississippi, which is also Republican-dominated, GOP leaders are staying the course — at least so far. More than two dozen anti-vaccine bills have died in the Mississippi legislature in the past two years, including this year’s proposed ban on mRNA vaccines.

The state struggled with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic, and in 2022 Republican Gov. Tate Reeves signed into law a measure banning COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

But for years, Mississippi maintained one of the highest childhood vaccination rates in the nation. The state slipped from first to third between 2023 and 2024, after a federal judge ruled that the state must allow religious exemptions. Its current childhood vaccination rate is 97.5%, well above the 91% national average but lower than the 99.3% rate it had in 2019.

“Our law is still in effect, and if you don’t have a medical or religious exemption, then you must be fully vaccinated to attend school or go to day care in Mississippi,” said Dr. Daniel Edney, Mississippi’s state health officer. “The science is clear and in Mississippi we stand on the science.”

Edney said he hasn’t faced any political pressure to reverse course. Unlike in Louisiana, where Republican Gov. Jeff Landry tapped Abraham — a former three-term Republican congressman who co-chaired his transition committee — as surgeon general, Edney was selected by the 11-member Mississippi State Board of Health. The governor chooses the members of that panel, but they serve staggered four-year terms.

“I have zero pressure from the governor or legislative leadership regarding our approach to vaccines,” Edney told Stateline. “We’re not focused on politics. We don’t blow in the wind based on what administration is in power.”

©2025 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By Andrew Dehan, Bankrate.com

If you qualify for a no-down-payment mortgage, you could get a loan for the full purchase price of a home. Here’s what you need to know.

A no-down-payment mortgage doesn’t require you to make a down payment at closing. With rising home prices, it’s more and more difficult for many buyers to save up for the upfront costs of homeownership. No-down-payment loans eliminate one of the biggest upfront costs.

One-fifth (20%) of aspiring homeowners believe they won’t ever be able to save enough to buy a home, according to Bankrate’s 2025 Down Payment Survey.

The two most prominent no-down-payment mortgages are VA and USDA loans.

VA loans

If you’re a military service member, veteran or surviving spouse, you might qualify for a VA loan guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Unlike a conventional loan, VA loans don’t typically require a down payment, and they don’t charge mortgage insurance. However, you will pay a funding fee, either at closing or by financing it into your mortgage. This fee ranges from 1.25% to 3.3% of the loan amount, and it varies depending on the down payment amount and whether you’ve used a VA loan before. Those who don’t make a down payment, as well as repeat VA loan applicants, pay higher funding fees.

USDA loans

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) guarantees USDA home loans for lower- to moderate-income buyers purchasing homes in eligible rural areas. These loans don’t require a down payment, but there’s an upfront fee — also known as a guarantee fee — of 1% of the principal loan amount which can be financed into the mortgage. On top of that, there’s an annual fee of 0.35% of the loan amount which lasts for the life of the loan. The only way to remove this annual fee is to refinance to a non-USDA loan.

Other zero-down mortgage options

New York-based Sunmark Credit Union offers a no-down-payment option — known as a Dream Bigger mortgage — without permanent mortgage insurance.
If you’re in the medical field and have school debt, you may qualify for a no-down-payment physician mortgage. These allow higher debt-to-income DTI ratios, provided you have the income to afford monthly payments.
Most loan types allow gift funds as part of the down payment — or the whole thing. If you have a family member or friend willing to give you money toward your home, you may be able to avoid putting money down.

If you aren’t eligible for a true no-money-down home loan, you might still qualify for a low-down-payment mortgage.

3% conventional loans

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the two government-sponsored enterprises underpinning mortgages in the U.S. — back several 3-percent-down conventional loan programs: Conventional 97, HomeReady, Home Possible and HomeOne.

You will be required to pay for private mortgage insurance (PMI). PMI varies in cost depending on your down payment amount and credit score. Once you reach 80% loan-to-value (LTV) on your home, you can request the lender remove PMI. Otherwise, it will automatically come off once you reach 78% LTV.

FHA loans

Insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), an FHA loan requires only 3.5% down with a credit score as low as 580. If you have a credit score between 500 and 579, you’ll need to put 10% down.

Similar to PMI, you’ll pay FHA mortgage insurance with an FHA loan. However, unlike conventional PMI, you’ll pay both an upfront mortgage insurance premium (MIP) at closing and an annual MIP divvied up between your monthly payments. The upfront MIP equals 1.75% of your loan amount, and the annual MIP varies depending on your down payment and other factors. If you make a down payment of 10% or more, you’ll pay the annual MIP for 11 years. Otherwise, you’ll pay it for the life of the loan.

1% down mortgage programs

Some mortgage lenders offer conventional mortgage programs that require only 1% down, including Rocket Mortgage’s ONE+ program. In this case, the lender pays 2% of the required 3% down payment for a HomeReady or Home Possible loan, and you need only provide the remaining 1%.

Good Neighbor Next Door

The Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) program is for borrowers who work in select public service professions — teachers, firefighters, law enforcement and emergency medical technicians — and plan to buy a home in a qualifying area. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the program provides a discount of up to 50% on the list price of a qualifying home.

Pros and cons of a no-down-payment mortgage

The ability to buy a home with no or very little money down can be appealing, but there are drawbacks, too.

The pros of no-down-payment mortgages include:

You can buy a home now instead of later. When you don’t have to come up with a substantial down payment, you won’t have to save up as much money to buy a home.
You can keep more cash on hand. Even if you have enough to make a sizable down payment, you might want to keep that money liquid for things like emergency savings, remodeling or investing.

The cons of no-down-payment mortgages include:

You’ll have no or little equity. Home equity is the portion of your home that isn’t financed by a mortgage. When you start with a low- or zero-down loan, you’ll have little to no equity. If home values fall, you could end up owing more on the home than it’s worth, making it difficult to sell or refinance.
Your interest rate might be higher. You might pay a higher interest rate for a no- or low-money-down loan. That’s because, with less money tied up in the home, a mortgage lender might view you as more of a risk. Of course, the higher your interest rate, the more you’ll pay overall.
You’ll need a bigger mortgage. The less you put down, the more you’ll need to borrow, which means you’ll pay more in interest over the life of the loan.
You’ll pay fees. Both VA and USDA loans come with fees, which add to the cost of the loan.

No-down-payment mortgages are geared toward buyers with limited savings who want the security of owning a home. While they’re a great option for those who qualify, they also come with extra fees. You’ll pay less for your loan over time if you can afford to make a down payment.

FAQ

What credit score do I need to buy a house with no money down?

The Department of Veteran Affairs and the U.S. Department of Agriculture don’t set a minimum credit score requirement for VA and USDA loans, respectively. However, most lenders offering these loans do, and they’d want them to be at least in the “fair” range: 620 for VA loans, 640 for USDA loans.

What are my alternatives if I don’t qualify for a low-money-down loan?

If you don’t qualify for a no- or low-down-payment mortgage, a down payment assistance program might help. These programs typically offer loans or grants to first-time or repeat homebuyers within certain income thresholds based on location. The money can often be applied to both the down payment and closing costs.

©2025 Bankrate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.