The Democrats’ convention was a well-oiled machine. Now comes the hard part

Robert F Kennedy Jr. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

By J Brooks Spector

25 Aug 2024

With the Democratic Party convention now history, the focus shifts to campaigning — especially the candidates’ ideas about economic policies. Here is a primer on the views of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.

Over the past week, the Democrats held their national nominating convention in Chicago. To no one’s surprise, the party selected Vice-President Kamala Harris as its nominee for president and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate.

democratic convention harris walz Democratic presidential candidate and US Vice-President Kamala Harris and her running mate, vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Michael Reynolds)

For many delegates, observers, political strategists and ordinary citizens, it was a question of whether this convention in Chicago would be a repeat of the debacle of its infamous 1968 predecessor, the one with the massive anti-Vietnam protests and the heavy-handed police response.

People seemed to forget that Chicago had hosted two dozen party conventions, largely without accompanying riots — including the 1860 convention by the new Republican Party that nominated Abraham Lincoln as its candidate for president.

This year’s issue for protesters was the terrible events in Gaza and US support for Israel in its military campaign — and how disruptive that could be at Harris’ convention. Would a small body of uncommitted delegates, together with protesters outside the venue, coalesce into real disruptions in or near the convention, scuppering the Democrats’ hopes of a smooth launch for Harris’s campaign?

As it turned out, the Chicago police restrained protesters with no serious injuries to protesters or police. Meanwhile, the convention’s floor managers decided not to permit a representative of the uncommitted caucus to have a speaking slot on behalf of the Gazans. Problem solved, sort of — although the actual conflict continues.

There was also the looming question of whether the newly chosen nominee could build upon the initial enthusiasm for her candidacy — after the doom and gloom of Joe Biden’s re-election bid — and transform that into a growing wave of support lasting into the election.

democratic convention harris trump Democratic presidential candidate, US Vice-President Kamala Harris, at a campaign rally at Fiserv Arena in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US, 20 August 2024. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Justin Lane)

Would she be overshadowed by the other speech-givers, including the incumbent president, two former presidents and their spouses?

Further, would Harris be able to use her speech to explain to a nation who she is, what events and people have shaped her, and what were her guiding principles in public life? Lurking in the background was how her Republican opponent would respond and whether he would effectively attempt to preempt her airtime, taking up all the oxygen.

Hope and patriotism

However, the convention turned into something of a lovefest, at least for the vast majority of attendees. The definition of this candidate’s convention and the upcoming campaign became one that expressed “joy,” as former president Bill Clinton called it. By contrast, if Donald Trump was looking backwards towards some mythic past where the right people ruled and things were always for the best, as Voltaire’s Professor Pangloss might have said, Harris’ candidacy was becoming one of “hope” and “the future”.

“Hope,” of course, is an echo of the 2008 promise from Barack Obama, the other former president who spoke at the convention.

This convention was awash in US flags being waved enthusiastically at virtually every possible moment; and the chant “USA, USA!” was frequently heard throughout all four days. Americans who have served in the military were praised repeatedly. An evocative a cappella rendition of the country music-inflected Star Spangled Banner from The Chicks (previously the Dixie Chicks) and, inevitably, Beyonce’s anthem, Freedom, were big hits. Patriotism is back among the Democrats with a vengeance.

Read more: As Kamala the Happy Warrior surges past Trump, things are about to get nasty

Former First Lady Michelle Obama blew the roof off with her takedown of Trump, in particular, the destruction of his idea that some jobs were “black jobs” under threat by waves of illegal immigrants. Instead, she teased that the presidency could well become one of those “black jobs” too — given that it had been her husband’s job and it might go to a certain black woman in just a few months.

Former US first lady Michelle Obama speaks on the second night of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago, Illinois, on 20 August 2024. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Caroline Brenham)

By the time Harris walked to the podium for her formal acceptance speech, her praises had been sung by her sister, her husband, her stepchildren and several others. In her speech, she passed the test of introducing herself and explaining what makes her tick to a national audience — the rhetorical equivalent of a perfectly stuck, Simone Biles-style gymnastics landing.

Whether this era of warm feelings towards Harris will become baked in, right through to 5 November, remains to be seen. At this point, Harris does seem to be gaining a slight edge in polling nationally and among voters in some of the key swing states, but 2½ months remain before election day. One unknown variable is that advance voting in some states will begin within a month, shortly after the Harris-Trump debate.

The odd couple

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Sean Meyers)

Meanwhile, over in Trumpland, the former president has been issuing a tsunami of personal attacks and comments on his social media account. In yet one more surreal moment in a year already full of them, Trump welcomed Robert F Kennedy Jr’s decision to suspend his third-party campaign effort and endorse Trump.

Kennedy is a vaccine denouncer and a conspiracy theory spinner, as well as an environmental activist — making this political marriage very odd. At least for now, it is unclear whether his decision will help or hinder either Trump or Harris — or end up being of zero consequence.

At this point, we need to quote the satirical blogger Andy Borowitz, saying, “Robert F Kennedy Jr. endorsed Donald J Trump on Friday night in order to lend ‘much-needed sanity’ to the GOP campaign, the former third-party candidate said. ‘You spend any amount of time with Trump and you realise he’s a whack job,’ Kennedy told reporters. ‘I decided that somebody needed to tell him to get a grip.’

Robert F Kennedy Jr. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

“Stating that he hoped to be ‘the voice of reason’ in the Trump campaign, Kennedy ticked off a list of the Republican nominee’s obsessions that he called ‘just plain nuts.’

“‘Windmills, sharks, Hannibal Lecter,’ Kennedy said.’And why does he keep exaggerating about how big his crowds are? I would never lie about the size of my worm.’”

Their combined campaign meetings would be worth paying admission to attend.

Aside from RFK Jr’s move, not everything has gone entirely Harris’s way, even after her successful convention. Amid all the love, Harris is now taking flak from the media for not making herself available to them for interviews and press conferences. In such encounters, the flow of discussion inevitably moves beyond scripted speeches or media releases.

In her attempt to square the circle of US policy positions and objectives on the Gaza conflict in her acceptance speech, many have approved her balancing support for Israel’s self-defence and security with the need for compassion for the suffering of Gaza residents and the right of Palestinians to self-determination. Nevertheless, some commentators have complained it is unclear what, exactly, she has in mind to achieve those goals, given the leaders involved and the terrible realities on the ground.

Tips and tax cuts

Economic policy should be crucial for judging the merits of a candidate. In response, the two candidates vying to become the US’s next president have begun to set out the broad outlines of their economic policy agendas.

Trump, however, kept interrupting what had been billed as an economic policy speech with his usual repertoire of nasty personal insults directed at his opponent.

By contrast, Harris has released the outline of an economic plan for her administration. Those limited specifics have been dubbed a kind of middle-class populism. After Harris announced a part of her plan, the Trump campaign complained she had appropriated it from them.

The proposal was the elimination of income tax on tips received by service workers — waiters, bartenders, hotel attendants and the like — income that is supposed to be declared for tax purposes. Many economists argue this would generate a need for the revenue department to make up that forgone income tax revenue with new taxes gleaned from elsewhere.

In Trump’s case, the idea seems to be an effort to counter criticisms that he would continue other current tax cuts past their expiry date, thus making his potential administration far too benevolent towards the rich. Behind that policy is the Republicans’ old friend “trickle-down economics” as a presumed driver of economic growth, even though it has never been clear that such tax savings are directed into growth-producing investment by corporations and individuals.

Another idea floated by Trump has been a near-constant with him for years — imposing a 10% tariff on all imports. The logic behind this is to punish those nefarious exporting nations taking advantage of US companies and gullible consumers, and stealing US jobs. At times, his statements have veered to saying tariffs on Chinese exports could be set at 20%.

The Trump forces insist these costs would be borne by exporters, even though the standard view of economists is that tariffs are a tax paid by purchasers, even if some exporters try to offset at least some of these charges and thus save market share by shaving their production costs. Some are calling this the Trump national sales tax — not the right label for someone pandering to consumer anger over prices.

The net effect would make foreign-made goods more expensive, increasing pressure on family incomes. Goodbye to any thoughts of Adam Smith and David Ricardo on trade, it seems. In today’s international atmosphere (think China), such tariffs would almost certainly provoke retaliatory responses by countries exporting to the US and importing products from the US. The lessons of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in the 1920s that contributed to a global shrinkage of trade that helped lead to the Great Depression seem to be ignored by Trump’s advisers.

A further Trump idea is to ramp up US oil production by encouraging fracking and new oil leases on government land. The chant of “Drill, baby, drill” has been appropriated from the once famous ex-Alaska governor Sarah Palin, to lessen the price of petrol for US drivers. The petrol price has been a real source of pain for consumers during much of the Biden administration. But now, US petroleum production is at its high point and the pump price of petrol is declining due to the conditions of the global supply chain and production, and the US is a net exporter.

The real point is to demonstrate support for fracking, a major economic activity in the swing state of Pennsylvania. This would be in opposition to Harris’ previous opposition to fracking on environmental grounds, putting her at an electoral disadvantage there.

One other part of Trump’s plans is a massive effort to deport millions of immigrants, presumably those not holding legal status, to free up all those low-income, entry-level, difficult, dangerous and dirty jobs for Americans and legal immigrants. Without it being said directly, the Trump view may be these are “black jobs” and it makes electoral sense to promise to steer those jobs to a demographic that might shift towards voting for him.

According to analysis from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Trump’s tax cuts could add $7-trillion to the government’s deficit over a decade — and only some of that could be offset by tariffs or a repeal of tax breaks signed by Biden. Moreover, economists warn that such higher deficits could fuel inflation, even as Trump’s aides insist his agenda would magically lower prices.

Additionally, he has also pledged to continue cutting taxes, including extending those cuts for rich individuals he signed in a 2017 tax overhaul and also eliminating federal income taxes on Social Security benefits, beyond that tip income exemption. Not surprisingly, Trump has also promised to roll back numerous federal regulations of business, including environmental regulations and restrictions on oil drilling on some public lands. (One wonders: How does RFK Jr feel about those ideas?)

Assistance for the middle class

And what of Harris’s economic plans, beyond that shared idea of tax-free tips? The Friday before the Democratic Party’s convention, Harris gave a speech that explained the key to her thinking is that the federal government must act to foster competition and correct distortions in private markets.

As Jim Tankersley of The New York Times reported, Harris’s “…approach seeks large tax increases on corporations and high earners, to fund assistance for low-income and middle-class workers who are struggling to build wealth for themselves and their children. At the same time, it provides big tax breaks to companies engaged in what Ms Harris and other progressives see as delivering great economic benefit — like manufacturing technologies needed to fight global warming, or building affordable housing.

“….She pledged to send up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance to every first-time home buyer over four years, while directing $40-billion to construction companies that build starter homes. She said she would permanently reinstate an expanded child tax credit that President Biden temporarily established with his 2021 stimulus law, while offering even more assistance to parents of newborns.

“She called for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries and for new federal enforcement tools to punish companies that unfairly push up food prices. ‘My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that exploit crises and break the rules,’ she said, adding: ‘We will help the food industry become more competitive, because I believe competition is the lifeblood of our economy.’”

Underpinning this is a continuation of the Biden administration’s industrial policy of resurrecting or introducing new hi-tech and infrastructure investment, but now married to some serious assistance to the middle class.

As the historian Heather Cox Richardson, in her daily Letters From an American blog, described this orientation, “Under the direction of President Joe Biden, over the past three-and-a-half years the Democrats have returned to the economic ideology of the New Deal coalition of the 1930s. This week’s convention showed that it has now gone further, recentering the vision of government that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s secretary of labor, Frances Perkins, called upon to make it serve the interests of communities.

“When the Biden-Harris administration took office in 2021, the United States was facing a deadly pandemic and the economic crash it had caused. The country also had to deal with the aftermath of the attempt of former president Donald Trump to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election and seize the presidency. It appeared that many people in the United States, as in many other countries around the world, had given up on democracy.

“Questions remain over the rest of Ms Harris’s agenda, including which tax increases she would favor to offset those tax cuts and spending programs. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget … estimated on Friday that the plans she unveiled would raise the federal deficit by $1.7-trillion over the next decade, if not paid for…

But “…Gene Sperling, a former economic aide to three Democratic presidents who is a senior economic adviser to Ms Harris, put it: ‘Her focus on an opportunity economy and her stress on homeownership show she is focused like a laser on both lowering costs to help families make ends meet and being able to get ahead by owning a home or starting a small business.’ ”

Read more: Harris-Walz ticket may have the upper hand — but can they keep it?

There have been two criticisms directed at Harris’s economic agenda. The first is there has been little serious effort to calculate the costs of her programme and its effects on government tax revenues.

The second, more powerful criticism has been directed at efforts against what was termed price gouging. Critics argue there is little real evidence of deliberate food industry price gouging now, as opposed to the more general economy-wide inflation now receding, and that was a legacy of supply chain disruptions derived from Covid lockdowns that ratcheted up prices in the aftermath of the pandemic.

Catherine Rampell, an economic commentator for The Washington Post, criticised the proposal, writing, “ ‘Price gouging’ is the focus of Vice-President Kamala Harris’s economic agenda, her presidential campaign says. She’ll crack down on ‘excessive prices’ and ‘excessive corporate profits,’ particularly for groceries.

“So what level counts as ‘excessive,’ you might ask? TBD, but Harris will ban it.… Voters want to blame someone for high grocery bills, and the presidential candidates have apparently decided the choices are either the Biden administration or corporate greed. Harris has chosen the latter.

“…It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food. Supply and demand would no longer determine prices or profit levels. Far-off Washington bureaucrats would. The FTC would be able to tell, say, a Kroger in Ohio the acceptable price it can charge for milk.

“At best, this would lead to shortages, black markets and hoarding, among other distortions seen in previous times countries tried to limit price growth by fiat…”

Inevitably, Trump accused Harris of going “full communist” with her price-gouging proposals. Over the next two months, the candidates will be pushed hard to clarify, refine and specify their economic ideas, as they should be.

We should expect increasing clashes between them over economics, in addition to deeper analysis by experts. Even before the election, Americans should demand these economic plans become a major feature of the candidates’ 10 September debate. DM

Categories:

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

World

Hope and patriotism

The odd couple

Tips and tax cuts

Assistance for the middle class