US economy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares181 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Zombie-like’: the US trade agreement that still haunts Democrats

      by

      More than 30 years have passed since President Bill Clinton persuaded Congress to ratify the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) and yet the trade agreement still infuriates many voters and hangs over Kamala Harris’s – and the Democrats’ – chances in this year’s elections.Zombie-like, Nafta just keeps coming back, decades after many Democrats believe it should have died. At the Republican convention, Donald Trump attacked Nafta, calling it “the worst trade agreement ever”. In speech after speech, Nafta is a topic Trump turns to as he seeks to woo the voters in the pivotal blue-collar communities of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – many of whom remain angry about the job losses it caused.There were early warning signs. “A lot of people were saying Nafta was going to be a disaster economically,” said David Bonior, a former Democratic congressman from Michigan who led the congressional fight to defeat Clinton’s push for Nafta. “I could see it was going to be a disaster politically, too.”Nafta acted like a slow-motion poison for Democrats. After Congress ratified it in 1993, year by year more factories closed and more jobs disappeared as manufacturers moved operations to Mexico to take advantage of that country’s lower wages. The Economic Policy Institute, a progressive thinktank, estimates that the US lost 682,000 jobs due to Nafta, which largely eliminated tariffs between the US, Mexico and Canada.“It’s a lingering issue in Michigan,” said Ron Bieber, president of the Michigan AFL-CIO, the US’s largest federation of unions. “Everyone knows someone here in Michigan who lost their job due to Nafta. The door was cracked open to outsourcing before Nafta, but Nafta threw the door open after it was passed.”JJ Jewell, who works at a Ford axle plant in Sterling Heights, Michigan, was born two years before Nafta was ratified. The trade pact has been part of the background of his life, he says. Jewell said he often discussed trade problems with other auto workers, even when they didn’t directly discuss Nafta. “It’s an issue,” he said. “Nafta helped expedite the loss of jobs from our country to a country where wages are cheaper. I have friends, family members, neighbors who lost their jobs as a direct result of Nafta. It still affects things decades later.”While Trump talks tough on trade and protecting factory jobs, Jewell said that Trump, while president, fell badly short in his vows to bring back manufacturing jobs. “It’s empty promises,” he said.Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO, the country’s main labor federation, agreed, saying that Trump’s tough words on trade have done little for workers. “This is an example of Trump’s rhetoric not matching reality,” Shuler said. “He talks a good game, but there’s no action to back it up. When he had the ability to make a difference, when he was president, he went to different places and pretended to be a savior, and you followed up and you saw that those plants closed and jobs were moved to Mexico. He did nothing to fix it.”Seeing all the lingering discontent about Nafta, many Democrats say it’s unfair for Trump and others to blame their party for the agreement. The idea for Nafta arose under Ronald Reagan, they say, and George HW Bush negotiated the deal, both Republicans. More Republicans in Congress voted to ratify Nafta than Democrats. The vast majority of Senate Republicans also voted for it, while most Democratic senators voted against ratification.Still, Bonior said that Clinton and his administration “get the blame because their top guy was for it”, he said. “Clinton was instrumental in making it happen.”Many workers who lost jobs due to Nafta were able to find other jobs, said Bonior, but their pay was 20% less on average. “Lifestyles were enormously downgraded in my district,” said Bonior, who served as House majority whip. “Clinton bought into Nafta, but a lot of working-class people saw that as a betrayal.”On Nafta, Clinton won strong backing from economists and corporate America. Brushing aside labor’s warnings that Nafta would speed the loss of jobs to Mexico, nearly 300 economists on the right and the left, including several Nobel Prize winners, signed a pro-Nafta letter, saying: “The assertions that Nafta will spur an exodus of US jobs to Mexico are without basis.”Many economists argued that Nafta would increase the number of manufacturing jobs in the US because the nation had a higher-skilled, more productive workforce than Mexico and would thus, in theory, gain factory jobs in an expanded free-trade zone. Pro-Nafta forces also argued that the closer economic integration of the US, Mexico and Canada would create a North American powerhouse to counter China’s fast-growing economic power.Jeff Faux, a former president of the Economic Policy Institute, said many economists failed to realize something important that was happening when Nafta was negotiated: “The US was losing its manufacturing base. It was deindustrializing.”Faux, one of the most outspoken economists against Nafta, said Clinton embraced Nafta because he was eager to present himself as a different type of Democrat and “was trying to ingratiate himself with the business community”. “Clinton saw Nafta as an opportunity to present himself as not just another liberal Democrat,” Faux said. “It was the beginning of the notion that came to dominate the Democratic party that its future is not in working people, that it’s in professionals, in women, in minorities and various ethnic groups. They wanted to put together a new coalition, and labor would be a thing of the past.”Michael Podhorzer, a former AFL-CIO political director, said many blue-collar workers remain angry about Nafta because it was such a departure from President Franklin Roosevelt’s emphatically pro-worker Democratic party. Podhorzer said: “Nafta is the catchall for a series of things that Democrats did that showed they had a greater concern for business interests and a kind of insensitivity to the consequences that accelerating deindustrialization would have on people’s lives.”Trump was shrewd to seize on Nafta, he said: “It’s a way for him to sort of wave a flag, but it doesn’t actually mean he’s on the workers’ side. It channels pretty effectively the frustration that many Americans feel in seeing their jobs go offshore or to Mexico or seeing their communities hollowed out or seeing fewer economics prospects for their kids.”In the view of many labor leaders and workers, the Democrats doubled down on misguided trade policy when Clinton successfully pushed Congress in 2000 to approve normal trade relations with China. That move encouraged many US corporations to outsource operations to lower-wage China, with one study finding that the country lost 2m jobs, including 985,000 factory jobs, because of the normalized trade relations with China. The number of factories in the US also declined by 45,000 from 1997 to 2008, with many workers blaming Nafta and the China trade deal.What’s more, many unions faulted Barack Obama for pushing for another free trade agreement: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a pact with 12 Pacific Rim countries. TPP’s supporters said the deal would increase US exports and build a powerful economic bloc to counter China. TPP was signed in 2016 under Obama’s presidency, but soon after Trump became president, he withdrew the US from TPP, preventing it from taking force.“Obama wasn’t great shakes on trade either,” Bonior said. “A lot of working people said they had enough. They decided we’re not going to be with the Democrats any more, and Trump came along and filled the void. That was very smart for Trump to do.”In a 2016 campaign appearance in Pittsburgh, Trump made a major speech on trade that denounced Nafta and cited several Economic Policy Institute studies that criticized the trade pact. Lawrence Mishel, who was the institute’s president at the time, said: “Trump never really explained what he would do about Nafta or trade. He ended his speech with a call for deregulation and tax cuts for the rich, which was far more pro-Chamber of Commerce than pro-worker.”While Joe Biden voted to ratify Nafta when he was a senator, labor leaders say the president’s current pro-worker stance on trade shows that he recognizes his Nafta vote was a mistake. For Bonior, it might be too little too late.“Biden has been very good on working-class issues. Biden is trying to make up for his vote on Nafta,” Bonior said. “But a lot of working-class people are turned off so much to the Democrats that they’re not hearing of the things Biden and Harris have done for them. They’re not listening. They’re gone. I don’t know if we’ll ever get them back.“They’re to some degree mesmerized by Trump even though Trump has never been for working people,” Bonior continued. “Those plants he said he would restore – he never did any of that.”Many union leaders slam Trump for a speech he gave in Youngstown in which he told thousands of workers that he would bring back all the factory jobs that Ohio had lost. “They’re all coming back,” he said. They didn’t. And when General Motors closed its huge assembly plant in nearby Lordstown, Ohio, in 2019, Trump did little to stop the plant closing or bring back the lost jobs.“He said all those jobs would be coming back, and then he did nothing,” said Shawn Fain, president of the United Auto Workers (UAW). “The auto industry abandoned Lordstown, and Trump did nothing.”When Trump was running for president in 2016, he vowed to renegotiate Nafta, and he followed through, reaching a new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2018. Labor leaders had attacked Nafta not only for encouraging companies to move factory jobs to Mexico and but also for failing to effectively protect Mexican workers whose employers had violated their right to unionize or other rights.Union leaders agree that USMCA created a stronger mechanism to crack down on labor violations by Mexican companies, although the Trump administration negotiated that improved enforcement mechanism only after the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and House Democrats demanded that Trump go further in the negotiations. But under USMCA, often called “Nafta 2.0”, US companies have continued moving manufacturing operations to Mexico.Even though USMCA made only minor changes to Nafta, Trump called it, “the best trade deal ever made”. For her part, Harris was one of 10 senators to vote against USMCA, saying it didn’t improve Nafta sufficiently.Faux said many workers applaud Trump on trade because “he did something” about it by renegotiating Nafta, while “the Democrats did nothing”.Labor leaders have differing views of USMCA. David McCall, president of the Pittsburgh-based United Steelworkers, said: “I think Nafta 2.0 was helpful. It’s gotten some better labor protections.”But the UAW’s Fain was merciless in attacking USMCA. “I like to call it Trump’s Nafta,” Fain said. “Trump’s Nafta only made problems worse. Trump’s Nafta only gave the billionaires more profits. Trump’s Nafta only killed more American jobs. Trump’s Nafta only shipped more work to Mexico.”Both Harris and Trump say they will renegotiate USMCA if elected. Trump also says he will protect factory jobs by imposing a 20% tariff on all imports, but the Steelworkers’ McCall says that’s a terrible idea. “I don’t think the solution to the problem is to have tariffs for the sake of having tariffs,” McCall said. “That’s protection. I think trade is a good thing. It’s an economic stimulator.” He said the US should use tariffs not in a blunderbuss way, but to “punish cheaters or countries that dump their various products”.McCall said the Biden-Harris administration had had a far better strategy for protecting factory jobs. “It’s the first time in generations that we’ve had an industrial policy in this country,” he said, praising three important laws passed under Biden: the infrastructure law, the green energy law and the Chips Act to encourage semiconductor production. McCall said those laws, along with Biden’s targeted tariffs “against countries that cheat”, give the US “an opportunity to be the most productive producers of many products”.While many blue-collar workers like Trump’s views on trade, McCall said: “He’s not a friend of unions or labor. For Trump it’s all about him, not about the person that’s working on the job: the steelworker, the electrical worker, the teamster or the UAW member.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s economic legacy could decide the presidential race in Scranton

      by

      From the north, motorists pull into Scranton via the Joseph R Biden Jr Expressway. Cutting through the scenic Pocono Mountains, now at the start of autumn color season, they are greeted with a towering, electric billboard, blaring an encapsulating – if divisive – message to this working-class town: “Democrats for Trump,” it reads. “Economy,” it continues, with a green checked box next to the word.The sign in Biden’s hometown is the perfect fall 2024 welcome mat in this crucial swing state filled with voters whose economic anxiety or satisfaction will decide next month’s election.The US has staged a remarkable recovery since the pandemic and Biden has successfully pursued an economic agenda, Bidenomics, that should benefit Scranton and the state – $13bn has been earmarked from his infrastructure bill for repairing highways and bridges alone. But poll after poll shows deep-seated worries about the economy – worries that could sink Democrats’ chances of keeping the White House come November.Like many mid-sized upper midwest cities that have faced post-industrial decline, Scranton, a longtime Democratic stronghold, has grown more conservative in recent elections. With the city’s native son leaving office, and pocketbook issues top of mind, some believe Trump could finally take Scranton – a more-than-symbolic win.But with Kamala Harris, Biden’s successor, and Donald Trump tied in the polls, guessing who will take Scranton, Pennsylvania, and the White House is a fool’s errand. And this politically split town shows why the race is so close. On the street, one person’s economic reality may be entirely different to the next.The complicated political mix of fears about the local economy, faith and mistrust in both Harris and Trump and shifting political allegiance was evident at the Marketplace at Steamtown, a downtown mall filled with local mom-and-pop shops.Pete, 78, a swing voter who declined to provide his last name, said inflation had been a problem over the last four years, but added prices were coming down, the stock market was high, and said he didn’t blame Biden for the economic challenges.“Every president is stuck with what happened before, and the pandemic happened, so Biden was in a hole to begin with,” Pete said. But the veteran added the main issue driving him to Harris was Trump disrespecting veterans: “He called us suckers and losers.”The argument for Trump’s economics is ironclad, said Lori Higgins with a scoff: “Look at the last four years – everyone is paying more for everything. What more do you need to know to make a decision?” Now 52, she voted for Democrats until Trump convinced her to switch sides in 2016.Even on the most basic details, there is disagreement: Pete said he had just paid $2.99 for gas, citing it as evidence that inflation was coming under control. Two Trump supporters said they paid as much as $3.50 for gas, evidence, they said, that inflation is still squeezing Scranton.Trump and Harris have made close to 50 visits to Pennsylvania so far this election cycle and poured nearly $1bn into ads – a record spend that reflects how crucial its 19 electoral votes, the biggest prize of any battleground, make the keystone state. Trump made his second visit to Scranton in as many months last week. “Go get everyone you know and vote immediately,” he urged rallygoers.But persuading any part of the deeply divided electorate to swap their vote looks difficult.View image in fullscreenHarris may yet hold Scranton, said Berwood Yost, a Pennsylvania pollster, but that is “surprising” given the level of economic discontent in the city and the county. “The dissatisfaction with Biden is really high and views on personal finances are very negative, so Trump should be clearly ahead,” Yost said. And yet polling averages show Harris ahead by a point in Pennsylvania, (firmly within the margin of error) which “speaks in part to some voters’ concerns about Trump and his personal character”.Since 2000, Democrats have won the county with as much as 63% support, but Hillary Clinton narrowly won with less than 50% of the 2016 vote. Biden’s home-field advantage may have buoyed Dems in 2020 – he was born and raised in Scranton until the age of 10, when his family moved to Delaware, and he has name-checked the city throughout his long career and is still nicknamed “Pennsylvania’s third senator”. Biden beat Trump in the county by 53.7% to 45.3%.Still, Scranton has become “ground zero for demonstrating the appeal of Trump and the Maga movement, and places that traditionally voted Democrat and ended up changing their stripes in a significant way”, Yost said.‘Way more optimistic’Once a powerhouse city in the nation’s coal capital, Scranton’s economy is now driven by small business, retail, healthcare, education and the service sector, said Satyajit Ghosh, a University of Scranton economist. Though there is no shortage of empty storefronts downtown, it is noticeably livelier than many similar Rust belt urban cores.University of Scranton’s surveys of downtown businesses found owners in April had concerns about the current economic climate but were decidedly more optimistic about the next six months: “Way more optimistic than they were a year ago,” Ghosh said.View image in fullscreenYost’s most recent polling put Harris up three points statewide and found the economy to be the top issue for 34% of residents. Other recent polling found 60% of Pennsylvanians said their economic situation was worse compared with 40% who say it was better or no different.James Simrell is part of the latter group. As he closed up his boxing gym in Steamtown, the lifelong Democrat was upbeat about Scranton’s economy. His gym is just one of his three businesses, and all stay busy – he also designs jewelry and runs a small farm that produces butternut squash and pumpkins. He sells pumpkins to Blackwatch Cafe, and squash to Abe’s Delicatessen, which uses it in their soup. “Everyone is doing well,” Simrell said.In contrast, the Trump economy was “falling apart” as the former president left office amid a poorly managed pandemic, Simrell said. He has other reasons for not voting for Trump. His two adopted children are Black and Trump is “a little bit prejudiced – it drives my wife crazy”.Echoing longtime Democratic voters’ sentiment, he added: “My mom and dad were Democrats and I follow what they believe, and Kamala’s the best person to be president – she’s not crazy.”But lingering inflation is still a drag for Eric Flesher, who runs a collectibles and vintage store, Rock-N-Models. He likened the economy to a “tightening sphincter”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe declined to talk about politics, but said everything remained expensive: “I’m in a business that sells stuff that nobody needs unless they have disposable income, so it gets much more difficult” when there is inflation, Flesher said.Flesher added that he disagreed with the “mindset here that I should vote for someone because that’s how my mom and dad voted – then you’re just voting for a party and not a person”, he added.‘She’s not the kind you can trust’The economic indicators in Scranton track those of the wider US. Inflation, which peaked at an annual rate of 9.1% in mid-2022, has eased to 2.4%. Prices are similarly down in Scranton, the economist Ghosh said. Unemployment in the region was 4.8% in August, above the 4.1% national average but down from 9.2% when Biden took office in January 2021.“In this area, which I’ve covered for many years, I really haven’t ever seen this strong of a performance in terms of employment,” said Ghosh. Still, there’s an after-effect of inflation that consumers feel, Ghosh added, and some high prices, like those for rent or food, are still hurting.Outside a Walmart in Dickson City, a retail hub just north of Scranton, husband and wife John and Carol Gardner still feel the pinch. The Mount Cobb residents used to pay $150-$200 a month on groceries, and now they pay twice that. Carol is out of a job on disability, while John assembles buffet trays for $12 an hour to make ends meet, even though he said he should be retired.View image in fullscreen“Trump at least made sure we could go shopping, and Biden is making sure we can’t,” Carol said. “I hope the lady doesn’t get in because we’re going to go straight downhill – she’s not the kind you can trust.”The view is different at Bethel AME, a 153-year old Black church on downtown’s west side. Pastor Mark Alexander sees an improving economy, and blames inflation on Trump.“Inflation was more so because of Covid, and how the former president handled that situation, because when you have supply chain interruptions and poor leadership guiding the nation, it exacerbates things,” he said.The Federal Reserve, not the president, decides rates, Alexander noted, and he pointed to low unemployment, the Chips Act – which is pouring billions into domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors – and Biden’s infrastructure bill as evidence of the president’s economic success.Moreover, at Bethel AME, there is “excitement for someone who looks like us and has experienced some of things we have gone through and comes from a middle-class upbringing”, Alexander added. “As opposed to a billionaire who has no clue what it is like day to day for middle-class people,” he said. That’s especially true with younger people because Harris “speaks their language”, Alexander added.For others, neither candidate is appealing. Mike Gilson owns a flooring business, a maintenance company, and manages artists and chefs. He said the economy was strong locally because its economic backbone was made up of longtime small businesses, and it fared better during the last session than most other areas because of that composition.View image in fullscreenBut the city’s relatively strong economic standing is not persuading Gilson to vote for Harris. He said the president was a “ceremonial position” and big corporations run the nation. “If the president actually wielded the power that people think they do then voting would make a lot more sense to me,” Gilson said.History will decide which of Scranton’s many voices will decide this election. Right now it is unclear whether the legacy of the city’s most famous son will be enough to carry Harris over the line or finally hand Scranton and the state to Trump.With the race essentially a toss-up at this point, the key for either party is going to be turnout, Yost said. But in that battle, Trump may have an advantage – people who are less likely to vote have in recent elections voted for Trump.“Democrats have to counter that by getting their voters to the polls,” Yost said. “Think about the election as a mosaic – there are many pieces and some are bigger than others, but they’re all going to matter.” More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump vows to impose tariffs as experts warn of price hikes and angry allies

      by

      Donald Trump doubled down on his promise to levy tariffs on all imports in a bid to boost American manufacturing, a proposal that economists say would probably mean higher prices for consumers while angering US allies.“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs’,” Trump said in an often-combative conversation with John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, at the Economic Club of Chicago on Tuesday. “It’s my favorite word.”Trump was grilled on the potential impacts of tariffs, and often dodged questions about the tangible impacts of the levies on inflation and geopolitics. Trump is proposing an at least 10% blanket tariff on all imports, with tariffs as high as 60% on goods from China.“You see these empty, old, beautiful steel mills and factories that are empty and falling down,” Trump said. “We’re going to bring the companies back. We’re going to lower taxes for companies that are going to make their products in the USA. And we’re going to protect those companies with strong tariffs.”

      Don’t miss important US election coverage. Get our free app and sign up for election alerts
      Though speaking in Chicago, Trump repeated many of the claims he made at the Detroit Economic Club last week. At the time, Trump bashed the city, saying it has a high crime rate and few job opportunities.“We’re a developing nation, too,” he said on Tuesday. “Take a look at Detroit.”Trump centered the auto industry, claiming that tariffs would encourage car manufacturers to build plants in the US – an assertion some economists have suggested amounts to wishful thinking.“The higher the tariff, the more you’re going to put on the value of those goods, the higher people are going to have to pay,” Micklethwait told Trump.“The higher the tariff, the more likely it is that the company will come into the United States and build a factory,” Trump said in response, to applause from the audience.Micklethwait pointed out that economists have estimated Trump’s economic proposals would add $7.5tn to the US deficit, twice the amount as Kamala Harris’s proposals. He also pointed out that the tariffs would also be targeting American allies.“Our allies have taken advantage of us, more so than our enemies,” Trump said.When asked whether he had talked to Vladimir Putin after the end of his presidency, Trump said that he doesn’t “comment on that, but I will tell you that if I did, it’s a smart thing”.“If I’m friendly with people, if I can have a relationship with people, that’s a good thing, not a bad thing,” he said.Trump was also asked about his stance on the Federal Reserve, specifically on comments he has made against Fed chair Jerome Powell, whom Trump first appointed in 2018.“I think if you’re a very good president with good sense, you should at least get to talk to [the Fed],” Trump said. “I think I have the right to say, as a very good businessman … I think you should go up or down a little bit.“I don’t think I should be allowed to order it, but I think I have the right to put in comments as to whether or not interest rates should go up or down.”Even a recommendation from the White House as to what the Fed should do with interest rates would amount to a significant step away from the central bank’s long-established independence.Trump frequently made personal jabs at Micklethwait, saying “I know you’re an anti-tariff guy” and at one point: “This is a man who has not been a big Trump fan.” More

    • 225 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      This is the future for Kamala Harris: unless she solves this economic mystery, Trump wins | Aditya Chakrabortty

      by

      The defining question in US politics was asked 44 years ago this month. One week before the 1980 presidential election, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter squared up to each other for a televised debate. A former Hollywood actor, Reagan was also proving a lethal Washington aphorist. At the close, he spoke into the camera: “Next Tuesday, all of you will go to the polls. You’ll stand there in the polling place and make a decision.” Watching at home were more than 80 million Americans. “When you make that decision … ask yourself: are you better off than you were four years ago?” Is it easier to buy things, he asked, is unemployment lower?A few days later, voters gave their answer, handing Reagan a 44-state landslide. Every presidential contest since has been framed in large part by his simple, deadly question. Ask it in the final stretch of this election and you get to the great mystery of why the race remains so close.Are Americans better off than they were four years ago? Pretty much every mainstream economist would say: you bet. Many go further. “I’ve hesitated to say this at the risk of sounding hyperbolic,” wrote Mark Zandi, the respected chief economist at Moodys, just a few days ago. “But … there is no denying it: this is among the best performing economies in my 35+ years as an economist.” Growth: up. Jobs: up. Wages: rising. The value of your home: up. Share prices: booming. Inflation: falling. Borrowing rates: dropping.In 2020, Donald Trump warned that his defeat would produce “a depression”. Today, even while Germany and Japan face recession, magazines toast the US economy’s “superstar status”. Yet ask Americans if they feel better off, and many answer: no.Under Reagan’s law, this election ought to be in the bag for Kamala Harris. As Joe Biden’s number two, she can claim co-authorship for this boom. Instead, she is neck and neck with a convicted criminal (never forget: three weeks after polling day, a judge will decide if Donald Trump should be jailed over the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels). On the economy, Trump regularly polls ahead of Harris. The issue that ought to be winning for her is instead losing.How come? It ranks among the most consequential questions of our time, yet, however hard they scratch their heads Washington’s finest can’t give a good answer. Many on the centre left paint it as a PR problem: that Biden has failed to claim the credit or that voters are too dumb to realise how good things are. But another suggestion emerges in a new report from a progressive thinktank, the Democracy Collaborative. And its argument should be heeded by Keir Starmer and the European left.The authors examine much the same economic dashboard as everyone else – growth, jobs, wages – but over a far longer timeframe. Behind each graph lies the implicit question: are you, your family, your community better off than you were not four years ago, but two, three, four decades ago? And for many people the numbers say: no.Take the biggest one: pay. For teachers, clerical workers, sales reps and the great bulk of US employees, whether white or blue collar, wages have flatlined – not for four or even 20 years – but for most of the past half century. Strip out inflation and average hourly earnings for seven out of 10 US employees have barely risen since Richard Nixon was in the White House.For the average US employee, and their families and their towns, the economy has kept on tanking whoever wins the White House, whichever judges make it to the supreme court, whether the analysts decree it to be boom or bust.Biden has spent trillions on boosting the economy and adapting to the climate crisis. He has bolstered unions and intervened in strikes. The graphs show it has had an impact – but it is a tiny uptick at the end of a line that otherwise points remorselessly down. Americans are better off than they were four years ago, it’s just that many were in distress in 2020.Reagan destroyed their unions, Bill Clinton threw open their trade barriers, George Bush Jr dispatched their kids to fight and die abroad, Barack Obama bailed out Wall Street and Trump ran a glorified protection racket. Only in 2020 did real wages for “production and non-supervisory employees” rise above where they were in 1973. This was not because they were unproductive: the US economy continues to do more with less almost every year. It’s just that most of the gains from that have gone to the top.“Even if Trump loses, America remains very vulnerable to a far nastier imitation winning next time,” says Joe Guinan, president of the Democracy Collaborative. The only way to see off Trump, JD Vance and the pluto-populists is to make the economy more equal, to give workers more of a stake in the riches they produce.To see how that plays out, I checked in on Mike Stout. We first talked in a diner in Pittsburgh in 2012, the year Obama won re-election. Mike and his wife, Steffi, had worked in Pennsylvania’s steel industry, with good union pay and pensions. They’d gone to Washington for the first inauguration of Obama, and stood in the freezing January cold. They had hopes.The Stouts did everything right. Worked hard and saved, and spent $50,000 to get their kids through university. In 2012, their daughter Maura was working in a downtown hotel for $14 an hour, the same as her father had earned in 1978. Even then she doubted whether she and her husband would ever enjoy the same standard of living as her parents.She’d lost that hotel job during the pandemic, said Mike, and was working from her one-bedroom flat. Her job was chasing people for their debts, even though at $18 an hour she was only just keeping her head above water. Now in her 30s, she’d split from her husband, and Mike thought much of the blame lay in money problems. As for his son, Mike, he was looking after his wife, who has stage 4 cancer, and their kids. Mike has health insurance, which counts as good fortune in the US, but the top-up fees are eye-watering, and now he works two jobs.“They are teetering on a ledge 60 floors up,” said Stout. “The slightest nuance – a recession or prices going up again – and they’re pushed out of the window.”Life for the Stouts has been frozen for years. At the root of democratic capitalism is an old promise: tomorrow will be better than today. But that promise was broken long ago for Mike’s family and many of his friends’ households, too. He knew plenty of former steelworkers in this swing state who next month would vote Trump. Sure he was a liar, “but at least he lies to their faces, rather than ignoring them”.And what about Mike? “Trump or Harris: it’s just one big uni-party,” he said. “It’s Wall Street that runs this country.”

      Aditya Chakrabortty is a Guardian columnist More

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is falsely blaming Harris for high prices. His plans will cause huge inflation | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      As the presidential campaign enters the home stretch, one of Donald Trump’s most dishonest – and effective – attacks is that Kamala Harris is to blame for inflation.That attack makes no sense. Several things caused a surge in inflation, but the US vice-president wasn’t one of them. Blame inflation on the pandemic or on Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine, but don’t blame it on Harris. Blaming her for inflation makes as much sense as blaming her for the leak in your roof. In seeking to blame Harris for inflation, Trump is absurdly trying to turn her – a vice-president who, like other veeps, has very little power – into some all-powerful economic tsar who somehow controls everything from egg prices to gasoline prices.Any American who is truly concerned about inflation should be much more worried about Trump than about Harris. She is far more serious about fighting inflation and helping households cope with the high cost of living. What’s more, Trump’s plan to impose steep tariffs on all imported goods will significantly push up prices and hit consumers hard, especially less wealthy consumers.If Trump is elected and implements his tariffs and other plans, inflation will probably – and quickly – rise to an uncomfortable 6% to 9.3% per year (from the current 2.5%), according to a respected thinktank, with prices climbing a very painful 20% to 28% during Trump’s four years in office. That means there’s a good chance that inflation would rise more in a second Trump term than it has under Joe Biden. Not only that, economists say the higher prices caused by Trump’s tariffs will cost the typical American household from $2,600 to $3,900 a year. Ouch.Trump blames Harris for causing “the worst inflation in American history”. Comments like that insult everyone’s intelligence and show that Trump knows zilch about American history. Inflation was far worse in the years immediately after the second world war and far worse in the late 1970s and early 1980s.More absurdity: JD Vance recently blamed Harris for higher egg prices, even though we’ve been repeatedly told that bird flu and the loss of more than 100 million chickens were what caused egg prices to soar. (In fact, the not-always-truthful Vance embarrassed himself by blaming Harris for $4-a-dozen egg prices while he stood in front of egg cartons marked $2.99 for a dozen.)Instead of listening to Trump’s attacks about inflation, every American should be rejoicing that inflation has come way down – back to nearly 2%. If we look honestly at inflation, we see that two main factors fueled the spike in inflation back in 2021 and 2022. (Neither of those factors is named Kamala Harris.)The first factor was the pandemic, which closed thousands of factories worldwide and badly disrupted supply chains, causing prices of everything from furniture to cars to soar.The second factor was Putin’s war against Ukraine, which pushed up agricultural prices around the world because Ukraine is a major grain and fertilizer exporter. That war also caused oil and gas prices to soar because Russia is a huge energy exporter and the war disrupted energy exports.There was another important factor behind inflation. Many corporations took advantage of the situation by raising prices far higher than necessary. This “greedflation” jacked up corporate profits while hammering consumers. The Economic Policy Institute, a progressive thinktank, said these moves to boost corporate profits caused one-third of the growth in prices since the pandemic began.Under Biden, Congress enacted the American Rescue Plan, which gave an important boost to our pandemic-plagued economy and sent checks to millions of households to help them weather the pandemic. Thanks to that ambitious plan, the US under Biden has had far stronger economic growth than other G7 countries while also having the lowest average unemployment rate under any president since Lyndon Johnson. Indeed, the 16.2m jobs added under Biden are a record, far more than were added under any previous president in a four-year term.The American Rescue Plan was a huge success: the billions of dollars it put in people’s pockets contributed modestly to inflation, but far less than other factors did. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, has said: “There’s a long list of reasons for the high inflation. At the top of the list is the pandemic and the Russian war … [the American Rescue Plan is] at the bottom of the list.”The truth is, the US economy is in good shape, even though many people are unhappy because prices are considerably higher than when the pandemic began. Many Americans fail to realize that wages have been rising faster than prices.As for what will happen to prices in the future, economists are far more worried about Trump than Harris. They fear that Trump’s promised tariffs will send prices shooting upwards and trigger a huge trade war that could drag the US economy into recession. Trump has talked up two economic policies: big tax cuts for the richest 1% and corporations and, second, steep tariffs – up to 20% on all imports, from TVs to shoes to bananas – and a 60% tariff on imports from China.Trump says foreign companies will pay for those tariffs even though economists keep saying he’s 100% wrong on that. American consumers will pay for those tariffs in the form of higher prices. Economists warn that a second Trump term will dangerously increase inflation through his tariffs, through his plans that will cause the budget deficit to soar, and through his threats to limit the Federal Reserve’s ability to reduce inflation. Sixteen Nobel-prize winning economists have warned that Trump’s policies “will reignite” inflation and have a “destabilizing effect” on our economy.Unlike Trump, Harris has serious plans to fight against higher prices. Seeing how housing prices have soared (largely because builders haven’t built enough homes since 2008), Harris has a bold plan to build 3m new housing units nationwide. She also wants to give a $25,000 down payment subsidy to first-time homebuyers.To battle high grocery prices, Harris has vowed to crack down on price-gouging by food suppliers and supermarket chains. She also wants the government to do more to reduce bloated prescription drug prices, in the same way Biden has chopped insulin prices to $35 a month for seniors.Recognizing how expensive it is to raise a family, Harris has called for creating an annual $3,600 tax credit per child and a $6,000 credit in a newborn’s first year. She is also pushing for a trailblazing measure: to subsidize childcare so that no family spends more than 7% of its income on childcare.Trump is once again attacking people for what he’s guilty of. He is falsely attacking Harris for causing inflation, while he is the one whose economic plans will cause inflation to climb skyward.

      Steven Greenhouse, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, is an American labor and workplace journalist and writer More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘This man is everything’: how devoted Trump supporters took over the Republican party in a Michigan city

      by

      Debra Ell opened her Trump Shoppe in a dingy Saginaw strip mall back when establishment Republicans and TV pundits were still scoffing at the man who was about to remake US politics.Ell latched on to Donald Trump as a winner not long after he declared his run for the presidency in 2015. But she understood that the key to his success in her corner of swing state Michigan was to keep a distance from the local Republican party, which Ell regarded with almost as much hostility as she did the Democrats.So the Trump Shoppe was born, soon drawing in people who had never voted Republican in their lives. Ell recalls the car factory workers struggling after General Motors closed the plants that propped up Saginaw county’s economy.“There’s no way union workers were going to go into Republican offices but they came in here because Trump’s name was on the sign and said: ‘There’s no way in hell I’m voting for Hillary Clinton.’ So we had that gift, and then they wanted to know more about Trump,” she said.“We’d educate them in what he was saying and they liked it because he’s a phenomenon. We’ll never ever see anybody like Donald Trump again, ever. It’s not going to be fun anymore when he’s not around. Even if you don’t support him, it’s fun, don’t you think?”View image in fullscreenNearly a decade later, the Trump Shoppe is still in business, squeezed between Lovely Nails and an insurance company. These days, it’s busy with people buying “vote Trump” signs sporting slogans tailored to military veterans, bikers, union members, Black people and Latinos. “Cats and Dogs for Trump” signs have done well since the former president accused Haitian immigrants of eating people’s pets in Springfield, Ohio.A blanket imprinted with a picture of Trump raising his fist in the moments after the July assassination attempt is for sale near the entrance. T-shirts carry the words Trump shouted as he walked away with blood running down his face: fight, fight, fight.But besides serving as a shrine to Trump, the office is now also the local Republican headquarters after Ell led a campaign to purge the Saginaw county party of those she derided as “Rinos” – Republicans in name only – for their lack of total fealty to Trump.She led a takeover last year by packing the local party with delegates aligned with the America First movement, a populist political philosophy embraced by Trump that promotes a nationalist agenda of unilateralism and protectionism but has frequently been accused of being underpinned by racism.Amid accusations of intimidation that on one occasion resulted in the police being called to an official party meeting, Ell’s husband, Gary, who voted for Barack Obama in 2008, was installed as chair of the county Republican party.View image in fullscreen“The Saginaw county Republican party were old guard, traditional establishment people. When Debra started a Trump office here, we grew a following of people that supported Trump strictly as Trump. We built up a continual base to the point where none of the previous executive committee or officers who were not loyal to Trump are now in any leadership capacity,” said Gary Ell.But for all her success in taking control of Saginaw’s Republican machinery, Debra Ell now faces a critical question: does any of this help get Trump elected in five weeks?Saginaw is a bellwether county. Trump narrowly won it in 2016, and took Michigan by less than 11,000 votes. He lost the county and the state four years later, helping to send him to defeat in the presidential election. Victory for Trump in Saginaw and Michigan in November would be a major blow to Kamala Harris’s campaign.But some Republicans have questioned the wisdom of what they see as the Saginaw party leadership’s obsessive focus on conspiracy theories claiming the 2020 election was stolen and denial of Trump’s role in the January 6 storming of the US Capitol.Thomas Roy was forced out as vice-chair of the county party by Ell and America First supporters in late 2022. “A lot of us don’t believe the election was stolen in 2020. They basically do, 100%,” he told WJRT television afterward.Roy then founded a Republican “club” to act as a rival to the local party by fundraising for more reasoned candidates – some of whom won their primaries against the America First challengers.Ell also led a campaign to unseat the director of the Michigan Republican party, Jason Roe, after just six months in office when it emerged that he had said not long after the 2020 election that Trump was responsible for his own defeat.“The election wasn’t stolen, he blew it. Up until the final two weeks, he seemingly did everything possible to lose. Given how close it was, there is no one to blame but Trump,” Roe told Politico at the time.Since his unseating, Roe has warned that America Firsters are damaging Trump’s chances for victory this year and has described some of its candidates in Michigan state races as “kooks”.Another former local Republican official, who remains a Trump supporter, said that repeatedly “harping on about election fraud and January 6 only reminds people of the most disruptive threat to democracy in modern American history – with Trump at the heart of it”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionView image in fullscreenHe added: “He lost then because of the chaos. Reminding voters of that chaos is not the way to win this election. We should stick to talking about his strength, the economy.”Ell is having none of it. She said America First politicians are only voicing Trump’s own views. But is that the way for him to win back Saginaw county after his defeat by just a few hundred votes in 2020?View image in fullscreen“I don’t think he lost it to begin with. I was here. I was on the ground. We walked out of our office in 2020 at about 10 o’clock at night and he was 75% ahead in Saginaw County, and we were just on a cloud. There’s no way that that could change. I think they cheated,” she said.In the Trump Shoppe, cardboard cutouts of former presidents Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower serve as a reminder of Republican royalty. But most of those who walk in the door are there for the man, not the party. Their views are better represented on a large television streaming Real America’s Voice, a rightwing channel peddling election conspiracy theories, which has displaced Fox News as the trusted source for America First supporters.Ell, too, is a Trump supporter first and a Republican second.View image in fullscreen“We are America First. That’s what Trump’s all about, is America First. And that’s not an arrogant, racist statement. America First is what our constitution is about,” she said.“They like to say that we’re so divided. I don’t think so. Trump’s brought up so many issues that have been buried for so long. He’s saying: ‘Why are these illegals coming in?’ He’s actually bringing us together by talking about these things. We were the silent majority that felt the hurt and the pain of what was happening to our country. We saw it and we knew it, but we didn’t have an advocate to do anything about it, so we didn’t talk about it until Trump came along.”Asked if she really believed that the US is more united because of Trump given the national political discourse and the divisions in her own party, Ell said whatever differences there may be are a result of the “left spreading disinformation”.Still, she agrees with her critics that the constant talk about alleged election fraud and the Capitol insurrection are not what most voters care about. Opinion polls consistently show that Trump is more trusted on the economy and inflation, a key issue for many voters after years of rising prices, although a recent poll for the Guardian showed that, in a blind test, Harris’s specific economic proposals – including some price controls and higher taxes for the wealthy – were more popular.Perhaps that should be the focus of the Saginaw Republicans campaign?“We talk about it plenty. Biden gave us the gift of this economy. And who, for the last three-and-a-half years, gave us that? Kamala Harris was his VP. This is her fault,” she said.For all that, recent polls consistently put Harris ahead in Michigan, albeit by the low single digits. Ell is dismissive.“In 2016, Trump was an unknown to the political world, and that’s why the Democrats and Hillary took him for granted: ‘Oh, he can’t win.’ All the polling was way off base. They thought the election was over. They did it then, they’re doing it now. The polling is similar. It’s wrong,” she said.“He’s going to win. Look at his rallies. Everyone there, including me, would take a bullet for that man because he’s going to save this country for my grandchildren. This man, at this time in history, is everything.” More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Running away from good news’: why is Harris distancing herself from Biden’s record?

      by

      As Joe Biden walked on the set of The View, one of America’s most popular daytime television programmes, he was greeted by Hail to the Chief and a studio audience erupting in wild applause and cheers. “They love you!” said the co-host Joy Behar. The US president replied wryly: “It’s always better when you’re leaving.”During the ABC show, filmed live in a New York studio where digital screens showed images from Biden’s career, he claimed to be “at peace” with his decision not to seek re-election in November. Yet he also insisted that he could have beaten “loser” Donald Trump. And the co-host Whoopi Goldberg criticised the way Democrats forced Biden’s hand: “I didn’t like the way it was done publicly.”The wistfulness might be owed in part to Biden supporters’ faith that, for all the concerns over his age and mental acuity, his record should be viewed more as an asset than a liability. Their argument has been bolstered of late by trends that could neutralise three scourges of his presidency.Inflation has been tamed. Illegal immigration has stabilised. Violent crime is down. In theory it is a perfect recipe for electoral success. Yet it is a gift that the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris, seems reluctant to accept. Far from embracing her role in Biden’s White House, the 59-year-old is presenting herself as a change agent who will “turn the page” and offer “a new way forward”.Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said: “A new way? She’s been part of a very successful administration and she was chosen by Joe Biden as VP and then essentially chosen to be his successor.“But she has to pretend that she’s going to be forging a new path because she can’t afford to be too closely associated with Biden. I know one person on the inner campaign staff who cringes every time Harris and Biden have to appear together because the visual reinforces the tie they don’t want people to make. It’s nonsensical.”View image in fullscreenTravelling by motorcade, helicopter and Air Force One, the Guardian accompanied Biden for two days this week, from his daytime TV slot to a Ukraine event with the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, from a glamorous reception at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art to a gun safety event with Harris where the audience chanted: “Thank you, Joe!”There were reminders of the 81-year-old’s struggles, which culminated in a career-ending debate performance against Trump in June. “Welcome to Washington!” he told a room full of world leaders, diplomats and journalists at the InterContinental New York Barclay hotel in New York, New York.But this was also a man seeking to cement his legacy, calling for a 21-day temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, pledging $8bn in military aid for Ukraine and signing an executive order to combat emerging firearms threats and improve active shooter drills in schools. That legacy will also include economic growth, low unemployment and a string of legislative wins.Biden’s tenure has been overshadowed, however, by inflation – in 2022 the prices of gas, food and most other goods and services surged by 9%, a 40-year high – insecurity at the southern border and fears over crime. His approval rating has hovered below 40%. But with less than four months left in office, there are clear signs of the tide turning.Inflation has returned to close to where it was shortly before the Covid pandemic, defying predictions of recession and giving the Federal Reserve confidence to cut interest rates. Petrol prices, always a key indicator of discontent, have been coming down for months; in August the national average for a gallon was $3.38 – about 47 cents lower than the same time a year ago.Border security, long Trump’s signature issue, is also improving. After the former president compelled Republicans in Congress to block a border security bill, Biden stepped in to partially suspend asylum processing. In July the number of people illegally crossing the southern border dropped to 56,400, the lowest level in nearly four years, according to government figures.View image in fullscreenMoreover, Trump recently claimed that crime was “through the roof” under Biden’s administration. But this week the FBI released statistics that showed violent crime in the US declined an estimated 3% in 2023 from the year before, part of a continued trend since the Covid pandemic. Last year witnessed the biggest ever decline in the homicide rate, now 16% below its level in 2020. And for all Trump’s rhetoric, violent crime is now at a near 50-year low.Yet in a polarised political atmosphere, with rightwing media constantly attacking him, Biden is receiving little credit. Opinion polls showed him trailing Trump badly when voters were asked which candidate they trust to handle the economy, immigration and crime (Trump has a narrower lead over Harris on these issues).Sabato said: “Everything’s getting better except the American public thinks we’re in a recession and there are thieves outside their door every evening and those immigrants are trying to eat their pets. It’s insane. A classic case of the failure of civic education. I know that’s basic and people laugh about the term but it’s absolutely the root cause of all this.”In this climate, Harris appears to have concluded that, whatever the headline economic figures say, people are not feeling it. She has acknowledged many families are struggling with the cost of living, including the price of groceries and the dream of buying a home. She has promised to focus on basics such as being able to save for a child’s education, take a holiday and buy Christmas presents without financial stress.View image in fullscreenWendy Schiller, a political scientist at Brown University, noted that in the last quarter of 2023 and first quarter of 2024, every state in the country had growth in real disposable income. “The problem for the Democrats is that inflation eroded the power of that income up until, you could argue, the late spring of 2024. Do consumers now feel like their wages are buying them something and that things are less expensive?”She added: “You can tell them things are better but, unless they’re feeling it, it won’t help the Democrats in November. There’s a disconnect between voter impression of the economy and personal voter feelings about the economy. But certainly having a series of indicators and the news feed going from negative to positive can help sustain Kamala Harris’s campaign message that she, in fact, will produce a good economy.”Harris, as the incumbent vice-president, will be hoping to avoid a repeat of the Republican president George HW Bush’s fate in 1992. Economic indicators improved over the spring and summer but too late to save him from defeat by Bill Clinton, whose lead strategist, James Carville, memorably summed up: “It’s the economy, stupid.”Bill Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution thinktank in Washington DC, said: “When it comes to the economy people believe their own eyes and they will make their judgments on that basis. This is a lesson I have learned in the six presidential campaigns I’ve wandered in and out of: if you have statistics on the one hand and personal experience on the other, it’s no contest.”Galston, a former policy adviser to Bill Clinton, acknowledged that inflation, immigration and crime are heading in the right direction. “The political damage is done and I wouldn’t say that these developments are too little but I would say they are too late,” he added.View image in fullscreen“That’s especially true for immigration because, as far as I can tell, there’s nothing that President Biden did eight months ago that he couldn’t have done four years ago. I’m ever mindful of the fact that immigration is the issue that Trump rode to the presidency the first time in 2016.”Harris has accused Trump of killing the bipartisan Senate compromise that would have included tougher asylum standards and hiring more border agents, immigration judges and asylum officers. She says she would bring back that bill and sign it into law. Trump promises to mount the biggest domestic deportation in US history, an operation that could involve detention camps and the national guard.As for Biden, a memo released by the White House this week said he intended to “aggressively execute” on the rest of his agenda and hit the road to highlight the Biden-Harris record. At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, he delivered an address on the sidelines of the UN general assembly while surrounded by sculptures from antiquity; a moment, perhaps, to consider his own place in history.“I’ve seen the impossible become reality,” he told guests, recalling how he saw the fall of the Berlin Wall, end of South African apartheid and war criminals and dictators face justice and accountability for human rights violations.Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said: “There’s a very strong argument that we will hear from historians about Joe Biden getting a bad break. He was a better president than was appreciated in his time. If Kamala Harris loses, one of the major critiques is going to be that the Democrats were too quick to turn on Biden and that Harris ran a campaign running away from the good news.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Kamala Harris decries Trump’s abortion comments in first solo TV interview

      by

      Kamala Harris sat for her first solo interview as the Democratic presidential nominee on Wednesday, laying out her plan to boost the middle class and condemning her rival Donald Trump on his comments over abortion.During the interview with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle, which was held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the vice-president painted Trump as a candidate focused on the rich at the expense of the middle class, and herself as better equipped to handle the economy.“The top economists in our country have compared our plans and say mine would grow the economy, [and] his would shrink it,” she said during the interview.On his economic record, Harris said: “Donald Trump made a whole lot of promises that he did not meet.”Harris also showed disdain over Trump’s comments over abortion, expressing he needs to trust women to make their own reproductive decisions. Her comments came after Trump, at a Pennsylvania rally, called himself a “protector” of women, claiming American women will not be “thinking about abortion” if he is elected.“Donald Trump is also the person who said women should be punished for exercising a decision that they, rightly, should be able to make about their own body and future,” Harris said.On a lighter note, Harris confirmed that she worked at McDonald’s, pushing back against Trump’s allegations that she did not.“Part of the reason I even talk about having worked at McDonald’s is because there are people who work at McDonald’s who are trying to raise a family,” she said, alluding to her economic policy plan to help working-class families.“I think part of the difference between me and my opponent includes our perspective on the needs of the American people and what our responsibility, then, is to meet those needs,” Harris added.The interview comes at a time when Harris faces harsh criticism over the lack of media interviews she has done. Earlier this month, Axios reported that the Harris-Walz campaign has so far given fewer interviews than any other candidates in modern history.Trump and JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential pick, have used it as ammunition during their campaign speeches. On X, Vance responded to news of Harris’s interview by saying: “This is legitimately pathetic for a person who wants to be president. Ruhle has explicitly endorsed Harris. She won’t ask hard Qs. Kamala runs from tough questions because she can’t defend her record. If you want open borders and high groceries, vote for status quo Kamala.”In August, Harris was interviewed on CNN alongside Walz. The interview was hosted by Dana Bash and was aired as a one-hour primetime special. After the interview, Republicans criticized the joint interview with Walz for being pre-recorded and not live.Since then, Harris has given a handful of interviews, mostly with local outlets or more niche forums, including an appearance with Stephanie “Chiquibaby” Himonidis, a Spanish-language radio host and podcaster.Harris also appeared in a live-streamed “Unite For America” event with supporters hosted by Oprah Winfrey last week. More