Tag Archives: trump

Making America Weak Again

Let’s review some of the ways that the Trump Administration is eroding America’s global influence, reputation, and competitiveness.

Soft Power

A 2024 Pew Research survey found that America’s average approval rating across residents of 34 countries was 54%, as opposed 31% who disapproved. A year later, the U.S. approval rating had dropped modestly to 49%, but the disapproval rating jumped to 49% among 24 countries surveyed. Moreover, only 34% of respondents expressed confidence in Donald Trump to “do the right thing” in world affairs, as opposed to 62% who lacked confidence (compared with 49% who lacked confidence in Joe Biden in 2024).

Foreign Aid

The Trump Administration has dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development, fired most of its employees, and transferred a handful of remaining programs to the Department of State. A research report published in the Lancet, a British medical journal, projected that the Trump Administration’s 85% cut to U.S. humanitarian assistance abroad would result in an estimated 14 million premature and preventable deaths in low-income countries. The abandonment of foreign aid as a tool of American foreign policy will result in a loss of influence abroad and fuel political instability in poor countries that previously depended heavily upon American assistance.

Diplomacy

In July, 2025, the Trump Administration announced the firing of over 1300 civil servants and diplomatic staff in the State Department. Trump has proposed closing ten U.S. embassies and seventeen consulates abroad. The Trump Administration has sought to eliminate funding for the National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Institute for Peace. This unilateral diplomatic disarmament will hinder our visibility into potential threats abroad, forego fruitful collaborations, and lessen our diplomatic capacity to resolve conflicts.

Public Diplomacy

The Trump Administration has sought to defund the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which is the host agency for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Marti, Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East Broadcasting Network. These agencies provide access to accurate news and information for people living in countries lacking a free press. They also support American soft power.

Science and Innovation

America’s economic competitiveness, especially in relation to China, depends upon robust support for science and innovation. Yet the Trump Administration has carried out dramatic cuts to research funding by the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. Overall, basic science funding has been cut by one third and research universities are being pummeled in a multi-front assault by the Trump Administration, that includes higher taxes on endowments, lower overhead reimbursement rates on Federal grants, and caps on Federal loans for graduate study. Innovation is also connected to America’s traditional ability to attract the best and the brightest from around the world. Indeed, half of billion dollar startups in the U.S. are founded by immigrants. Unfortunately, international student flows to the US are being hampered an anti-immigrant climate and a threat to deny visas to applicants who may have posted critical remarks about the U.S. or the Trump Administration on social media.

Multilateral Organizations

Shortly after taking office, the Trump Administration announced U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), and the World Health Organization. The Trump Administration has zeroed out funding for U.N. peacekeeping. U.S. funding previously accounted for 27% of the U.N.’s peacekeeping budget. Overall, Trump’s FY 2026 budget request cuts U.N. funding by 87%.

Trade and Tariffs

The Trump Administration’s global tariff war is not only disrupting global supply chains and raising costs for American consumers, but also prompting our trade partners to seek out closer trade ties among themselves and to lessen dependence upon the United States. While many continue to explore trade deals with the U.S., they do so aware that any agreement could be quickly overturned by Donald Trump and so is worth little more than the paper on which it is written.

Alliances

While the administration deserves some credit for pushing NATO allies to spend more on defense, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine played a bigger role in prompting a rethinking of European defense needs. Though Trump’s threats to pull the U.S. out of NATO seem to have receded for now, European confidence in America’s commitment to the continent’s security remains at a low ebb. As a result, Germany, Britain, and France have begun strengthening formal and informal ties as a hedge against American isolationism.

Intelligence

Trump appointees have carried out ideological purges of top officials in various intelligence agencies. In early May, the Trump administration announced plans to cut thousands of positions in the CIA, NSA, and other intelligence organizations.

Trump has repeatedly cast public aspersions on the findings of the intelligence community. During his first term, Trump publicly declared his faith in Vladimir Putin’s denials of Russian interference in the 2016 election in direct contradiction of his own intelligence community’s assessment. In March, 2025, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified before Congress that the intelligence community had concluded that Iran had not made a decision to assemble a nuclear weapon and had not reconstituted weaponization efforts abandoned in 2003. Later, when asked about Gabbard’s statements, Trump declared: “I don’t care what she said” and claimed that Iran was close to possessing a bomb. After the bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, Trump denounced a preliminary assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency that the attack left Iraq in a position to reconstitute its nuclear enrichment program within months. Trump called the report “flat out wrong” and contended that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated.”

The politicization of intelligence and the loss of a great deal of institutional memory and knowledge will undercut the reputation of the U.S. intelligence community and weaken the willingness of allied countries to share information with the U.S. or to rely upon intelligence that the U.S. shares with them.

Overall, the foundations of American leadership built over the past century are quickly being eroded. “America First” threatens to make “America Last.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Trump’s Assault on Rural America

Rural people are among Donald Trump’s most loyal supporters. So why is he pursuing policies that will cause rural communities irreparable harm?

Farmers are getting hammered the hardest. Under current plans, the Department of Agriculture will lose over one-third of its employees. These include major reductions in agricultural research and marketing services. Cuts to meteorological services and programs that track the impacts of climate change will reduce the information available to farmers to plan for adverse weather events.

Reductions in food aid abroad, SNAP (food stamps) at home, and school nutrition programs all reduce demand for farm goods. Not to mention that low-income rural communities themselves rely heavily on SNAP funding. Trump’s tariff wars risk retaliation by other countries against U.S. agricultural exports. Plus, higher tariffs will raise the cost to farmers of imported agricultural inputs, as well as many consumer goods.

Iowa farmers profit from the placement of wind turbines on their land, yet Trump’s elimination of Federal incentives to further expand wind energy will choke off this income source. And, like city dwellers, rural people will pay higher electricity bills as many low-cost wind and solar projects stall. Since 80% of the green energy projects planned under the previous administration’s Inflation Reduction Act funding were to be sited in Red States, many rural areas will lose access to the good-paying manufacturing jobs that would have been created had funding not been cut in Trump’s recent budget bill.

Cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting will lead to the closure of many public television and radio stations in rural news deserts, where there are few other outlets for covering local news. Similarly, the loss of funding for Planned Parenthood will reduce the availability of low-cost reproductive and women’s health services.

Rural communities also disproportionately rely upon Medicaid, so the $1 trillion cut to that program will hit these areas hard. Beyond the harm caused when individuals lose Medicaid coverage, the Medicaid cutbacks will force the closure of many rural hospitals. Thus, even many people who have private insurance or Medicare will now have to travel great distances to obtain medical services.

In short, the coming years will bring severe economic pain and social distress to communities that are already reeling. These disruptions will be directly attributable to Donald Trump’s assault on rural America. So what will be the political fallout?

If rural voters were swayed by pocketbook issues, then Republicans would pay a heavy political price for the policies and impacts reviewed above. Yet voters have become more and more deeply attached to tribal identities rooted in cultural divides. Rural resentment toward urban America, which is equated with the Democratic Party, and its values, drives political allegiances. Beyond this, many have developed intense loyalty toward Donald Trump, not because he has delivered for them in material terms, but because he positions himself as their defender against groups and forces that many people find threatening. Moreover, many voters, whether urban or rural, have a difficult time connecting adverse developments in their lives and communities to the political sources that are responsible for those problems.

Despite this reality, the dire consequences of Trump’s policies for rural America need only trim his support among rural voters by modest amounts to make a difference to electoral outcomes in swing states and districts. For Democrats, the challenge is to develop a strategy that clearly assigns responsibility for rural woes to Republican policies and offers positive alternatives for rebuilding rural economies. Democrats would also be wise to mute cultural issues and while building a big tent that can attract and welcome people to the party who do not agree with the Democratic mainstream on every issue.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Class Warfare Act

What Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans refer to as their “Big, Beautiful Bill” should instead be called the “Class Warfare Act.” Masquerading as a budget and tax measure, this legislation would enact the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in American history.

Yes, under the bill passed by the House, the bottom 60% of income earners would, on average, avoid the $500 bump in taxes that would have resulted from the expiration of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts. But the top 1% of income earners would, on average, come out $60,000 per person better off. A feast at the top and crumbs for those below. But even the crumbs are illusory.

To partially fund the tax cut extension, along with a host of new tax cuts, Republicans plan to cut almost $300 billion from the food stamp program over the coming decade. Add to this an $800 billion reduction in Medicaid spending, which would result in between 10 and 13 million people losing health insurance.

It gets worse. Most of the tax cuts are not matched by spending cuts, which means that they are funded through increases in the national debt, estimated at roughly $4 trillion. This will add to the existing $36 trillion in Federal debt. A decade ago, the Federal debt was manageable in size and interest rates were low. No longer. The debt has ballooned as a result of pandemic-era spending while interest rates have risen.

As a result, annual interest payments on the debt are approaching $1 trillion annually, exceeding even the defense budget. Reflecting worries about the sustainability of this trend, the credit rating agency Moody’s just downgraded U.S. treasuries for the first time in over a century. That move alone will cause investors to demand a higher risk premium when buying government securities. You can see the potential for a downward financial spiral.

There is more. By slashing green energy credits, the House bill would put the brakes on the massive surge in renewable energy investment of recent years and cede such industries to China while the U.S. remains wedded to the inferior and massively polluting technologies of the fossil fuel era. That means foregoing the millions of good-paying jobs that building out a post-fossil fuel economy would have created.

As with many of the moves that Trump and the Republican Party have taken over the past few months – including poisoning U.S. alliances, isolating the U.S. economy from global supply chains, undercutting U.S. leadership in higher education, diminishing American soft power, and much more – this peculiarly vicious piece of legislation seems surgically aimed at curtailing American power and prosperity.

The biggest irony, however, is that Republicans are engaged in a frontal assault on the very working-class voters who twice put Trump in the Oval Office. Indeed, Trump, his billionaire friends, and their loyal servants in the U.S. Congress are in the process of pulling off the greatest bait-and-switch in American history. Will Trump’s MAGA followers finally figure out that they got hoodwinked?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Resistance 2.0

Heady from Joe Biden’s triumph, I penned a piece for the Des Moines Register on November 22, 2020, arguing that “the Resistance worked.” In the face of Trump’s norm-breaking presidency, judges defended the rule of law, the media fearlessly reported on Trump’s transgressions, Congressional Democrats blocked some of his most damaging policies, public servants did their jobs, whistleblowers exposed wrongdoing, fact-checkers corrected lies, protesters took to the streets, donors funded Democratic campaigns, and voters removed Donald Trump from office after four years of turmoil and trouble. America’s democratic institutions survived one of the most serious tests of the past century

Alas, less than two months later, Donald Trump directed both an insurrection and a false elector scheme designed to deny Biden the White House. While these shocking moves failed, so did subsequent efforts to impeach Trump or to hold him accountable in court. Instead, Trump is back, and so too are the threats to our democracy.

This time, the dangers are far worse. Trump’s lesson from his first term’s failures is that no independent centers of power must go unchallenged.  

Trump is attacking universities, the media, elite law firms, and the Federal Reserve. Republicans are challenging the tax status of non-profits, withdrawing Federal grants, launching partisan investigations, robbing government agencies of congressionally mandated independence, weakening civil service protections, kneecapping media organizations, and mobilizing the anger of MAGA nation against perceived enemies.

In authoritarian fashion, Trump seeks to intimidate opponents, drain their funds, undermine their legal status, discredit critics, and dismantle the eco-system that supports the Democratic Party and the broader liberal and progressive movements.

Some steps are explicitly partisan. Republicans have forced the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue to spend precious time and money defending itself against dubious Congressional and Justice Department investigations. Even if no legal action is taken, a wounded ActBlue could hamper the ability of Democrats to raise competitive war chests ahead of the 2026 midterm elections as the whiff of scandal scares off donors.

Trump has long sought to delegitimize the mainstream media, which he perceives to have a liberal bias. His efforts to limit the Associated Press’s White House access and to intimidate the corporate owners of CBS’s 60 Minutes aim to undermine media independence and make reporters and editors think twice about critical coverage.

Likewise, Trump is using the withholding of Federal grants, threats to the non-profit tax status of universities, Title IX investigations, impediments to the enrollment of international students, and legal attacks on accreditation bodies to undermine academic freedom and remold higher education in a MAGA image.

Trump is blackmailing elite law firms that represent his perceived enemies: hire conservative lawyers, drop liberal clients, and provide pro bono legal representation for Trump-approved groups, or else lose access to Federal agencies and courts. Trump has directed the Justice Department to bring legal sanctions against lawyers who sue him or his government. This misuse of state power threatens to dry up the pool of high-quality attorneys available to pursue the more than 150 (and counting) lawsuits brought against Trump’s illegal executive orders.

While lower courts have upheld challenges to many of Trump’s Executive Orders, it remains to be seen how far the Supreme Court will go to rein in our rogue president. The Justices have shown a reluctance to draw clear red lines in response to Trump’s lawless behavior, perhaps fearful that their orders will be ignored. The reality is that the judicial branch has limited tools for compelling a lawbreaking president to comply with its edicts, especially since the Supreme Court ruled that presidents have criminal immunity for official acts.

The real brake on an authoritarian president is political. The good news is that effective opposition to Trump 2.0 is emerging. Massive protests have been mounted. The stock and bond markets have punished Trump’s wacky tariff policies. Firms that rely upon imports are challenging the legally of Trump’s tariffs in court. Following the lead of Harvard University, which is suing the administration, higher education is mounting a defense of academic freedom. Four hundred college and university presidents issued a public letter denouncing government intrusion into higher education. The faculty senates at Big Ten universities have begun exploring mutual defense pacts. While some elite law firms quickly caved to Trump’s pressure tactics, others are taking him to court. Democrats and progressive non-profits have attracted a flood of donations. Small cracks have even begun to appear within the Republican Party and among Trump’s advisers.

Most importantly, the public is quickly souring on Trumpian chaos and cruelty. Trump’s approval rating is falling fast. Majorities disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, tariffs, inflation, immigration, and the Ukraine war. Voters are rejecting Trump’s threats to democracy. In a New York Times/Siena poll, 54% of respondents felt Trump was exceeding the power of the presidency. Overwhelming majorities insist that the president obey Supreme Court decisions.

Two-thirds described his first months as chaotic and 59% as scary. Only 44% expressed confidence that Trump “understands the problems facing people like you.”

Neither is Trump impervious to resistance. He pulled back on the most extreme tariffs and the threat to remove Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell after the stock and bond markets tanked. Trump rescinded orders to terminate international students in the face of skeptical judges. And he appears to be distancing himself from Elon Musk. Trump has a record of buckling when the political heat becomes too intense.

Trump’s initial whirlwind of pressure on major institutions has been destructive on a historic scale. Opposition has taken time to mobilize and has yet to fully recover from Trump’s early blows. But it is rapidly building now. As is clear from the Signal-gate scandal and Trump’s erratic tariff policies, the incompetence and incoherence of Trumpworld undercuts the president’s ability to sustain his MAGA revolution.

The Resistance worked once. Together, we can ensure that it works again. We can’t afford to fail.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Trump’s Trade War is Threatening American Financial Power

Donald Trump’s trade war is ostensibly meant to resurrect the United States as a manufacturing powerhouse. There is little chance of that. Half of U.S. imports are intermediate goods. As those prices rise, U.S. manufacturers will face higher input prices while firms in export industries will be hit by retaliatory tariffs abroad. U.S.-produced goods will cost more and be less competitive in global markets.

What Trump’s tariffs are instead accomplishing is to destabilize the one sector where the U.S. remains dominant: finance. Traditionally, the U.S. banking system has stood at the center of the world economy. American stock markets have provided the world’s deepest and most liquid capital pool. Investors sought out U.S. Treasuries as a safe and reliable investment asset. And the dollar has served as the closest thing to a global currency. As a result, the U.S. attracted cheap capital from the rest of the world, which in turn financed U.S. government deficits and high rates of consumer spending.

That is why, during times of political and economic turmoil, investors typically buy dollars and Treasuries as safe havens. Not now. Since Trump mounted his trade war with the world, stock prices have fallen, the dollar has slumped, and investors have demanded higher yields in return for holding U.S. government securities.

These trends amount to a deepening vote of no confidence in the political and economic leadership of Washington, D.C. The Trump Administration appears determined to collapse the liberal international order and return the world economy to the kind of zero-sum mercantilism reminiscent of the 18th century.

This crisis of faith in American leadership arises against the backdrop of pre-existing challenges to U.S. financial pre-eminence. The U.S. has used its financial leverage against adversaries (essentially denying countries such as Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela access to the global banking system) in such an aggressive fashion as to make even friends wonder whether these weapons might someday be turned against them. Further stress on the dollar-based international financial order arises from China’s efforts to promote internationalization of the renminbi – especially in cross-border trade and lending – and its creation of the Cross-Board Interbank Payment System (CIPS) as a China-centered alternative to the SWIFT messaging system that connects the world’s banks.

A long-time pillar of U.S. financial dominance has been the key role of the Federal Reserve in balancing inflation and unemployment while serving as a lender of last resort during crises. Yet the confidence inspired by the Fed rests upon its relative independence from direct political interference. Only a Fed capable of resisting pressures to juice the economy for the political benefit of presidents will retain credibility among investors as an inflation-fighter. This too is being undermined by Donald Trump’ s criticisms of Fed Chair Jerome Powell and his implied threats to replace Powell before his term is up – a power previously considered beyond a president’s reach, but one that could be endorsed by the Supreme Court in a pending case (Trump vs. Wilcox).

In August 2023, Fitch downgraded the rating attached to American government securities based upon concerns about both growing U.S. debt levels, which have reached 137% of GDP, and the periodic standoffs in the Congress over raising the debt ceiling. Another such game of financial chicken may be in the offing in the coming months if enough Democrats, seeking leverage over budgetary policy, join with fiscally conservative Republicans to delay a raise in the debt ceiling past a point of no return.

Vulnerabilities also arise from the heavy dependence of the U.S. on foreign investors, including sovereign states, to finance government debt. China alone holds $750 billion in U.S. Treasuries. The Chinese have been gradually whittling down this total, but could accelerate the process as a means to pressure the U.S. to relent on trade restrictions aimed at Chinese goods. The same is true of other governments that hold large quantities of American debt.

Even if no one of these stressors would be alone capable of inciting financial instability, the combination has created conditions ripe for disruption. Enter Donald Trump’s trade war, which has deepened worries about the recklessness and volatility of U.S. policy. Friends and adversaries alike are considering ways to “derisk” by lessening their exposure to U.S. trade and finance. This could mean a flight from the dollar and an unwillingness of investors to continue financing the U.S. Federal deficits except at an interest premium.

The Economist underscores the shaky fundamentals that underlie American vulnerability: “In the past 12 months, America has disbursed 7% of GDP more than it raised in revenue, and spent more on interest payments than on national defence. Over the next year officials must roll over debt worth nearly $9trn (30% of GDP).”

Vice President J.D. Vance has argued in favor of a weaker dollar while one top Trump economic adviser – Stephen Miran – has suggested taxing foreign Treasury holdings, a move that would likely prompt a bond sell-off

Foreigners hold $32 trillion in U.S. stocks and bonds. A sell-off of bonds and a retreat from the dollar could spike inflation, as a weak dollar pushes up import prices on top of tariffs, and swell the interest payments that the U.S. must pay on its massive debt obligations. The stock market would likely plunge, leading to a vicious downward spiral as investors liquidate assets to meet margin calls, thus further undermining asset prices and so on.

While the dollar remains dominant for now, the proportion of dollars in foreign reserves has gradually fallen from 73% to 58%. A more precipitous decline is not out of the question.

In the long run, a weaker dollar might make U.S. manufacturing for both the domestic and export markets more competitive, but this would be blunted if an ongoing trade war meant higher trade barriers overseas against American goods.

Any advantages from a weaker dollar would also be offset by the blows that Trump’s policies are inflicting upon American service industries in which, unlike manufacturing, the U.S. holds a surplus with the rest of the world. A weakening of the U.S. banking sector would undermine revenue from U.S. financial services abroad. Tourist revenue from overseas visitors has already plummeted, due to the trade war, rising political tensions, slower visa processing, and harsh immigration policies. The revenue that American colleges and universities (and surrounding communities) gain from the enrollment of international students is endangered by high-profile deportations and the unfriendly climate facing visitors from around the world. The administration’s attack on the independence of institutions of higher education also threatens to tarnish the brand of the sector, resulting in diminished flows of international students and high-quality scholars.

The burdens of American leadership in the world have been outweighed by the benefits of global interdependence and financial stability. But leaders can lead only when other are willing to follow. That requires a minimum of trust in the wisdom and reliability of the leader. As the Trump Administration trashes the international and domestic norms and institutions that have underpinned the liberal international order, other states and private actors will seek to derisk their relationship to the U.S., leading to growing American isolation. The short-run gains that might be had from bullying U.S. trade partners into one-sided “deals” pale in comparison with the long-run costs of destroying the bonds of trust that are the true source of American and global prosperity.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Is the GOP Now Pro-Worker? Not Really

Led by billionaire Donald Trump and former venture capitalist J.D. Vance, the Republican Party now proclaims itself the party of working-class people. Vance, referring to himself as a “working-class boy,” hit this theme hard in his speech at the Republican Convention. Vance lauded Trump as “a leader who’s not in the pocket of big business, but answers to the working man, union and non-union alike. A leader who won’t sell out to multinational corporations.” He went on to lament lost jobs, stagnant wages, and closed factories, which he attributed to free trade, corporate outsourcing, and illegal immigration.

The convention featured an address by Teamster President Sean O’Brien, once an unthinkable choice for Republicans. Following the convention, Republican Senator Josh Hawley published a piece in Compact magazine titled “The Promise of Pro-Labor Conservatism.”

How seriously should we take this turnabout from a party once looked upon as home to the country-club set? In short, the answer is not much. This is evident by looking at Trump’s record during his stint as president as well as his promises for a second term.

Referring to his cabinet, Trump declared in 2016: “I want people who have made a fortune.” He delivered, as one lineup of cabinet officials had a net worth of $3.2 billion. Trump’s affinity for the rich was also evident from his 2017 tax cuts, which will save the top 1% of earners an average of more than $60,000 in 2025, compared with average savings of only $500 for the bottom 60% of earners. Trump has suggested that he would double down on this generosity toward the rich by cutting the corporate tax rate from 21% to 15% in a second term.

On the other hand, Trump’s National Labor Relations Board made rulings that made it harder for unions to organize and curtailed union bargaining rights. In 2017, Trump also tried, but failed, to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which provides health benefits to 40 million Americans.

A Trump-appointed judge recently blocked a Biden Administration rule that would have outlawed non-compete clauses in employment contracts. Meanwhile, Trump-appointed justices on the Supreme Court have weakened the power of Federal agencies to enforce workplace health and safety regulations.

Looking forward, Project 2025, a blueprint for Trump’s next term compiled by the Heritage Foundation and other groups closely associated with Trump, proposes to revoke civil service protections from vast swathes of the Federal workforce, allowing workers to be fired at will and replaced by political loyalists. This greatly expands upon a similar executive order issued near the end of Trump’s first term but reversed by Joe Biden.

Trump has promised a 10% across-the-board tariff increase on imported goods and a 60% increase on Chinese goods.  Since importers would simply pass on the increased costs to consumers, economists estimate that increased tariffs would cost Americans $1700 per year, on average.

Donald Trump’s marquee issue has been immigration, which Trump has proposed to curtail. Trump claims that immigrants – especially illegal immigrants – steal jobs from American workers and lower wages for unskilled work. J. Daniel Kim of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School has summarized the results of his recent co-authored study: “What we find … is that immigrants act more as job creators than they act as job takers in the United States.” Immigrants are more entrepreneurial than native-born Americans. Less-skilled immigrants often take jobs that few native-born Americans want. Amidst a period of high levels of both legal and illegal immigration, the unemployment rate has hit record lows and wages have grown faster than prices, with the biggest gains at the bottom of the pay scale. By expanding the workforce, immigration stimulates economic growth, increasing the pie for everyone.

Trump plans to deport 10 million undocumented residents in a second term, 79% of whom have been in the United States for at least 12 years (and 44% for more than 20 years). Aside from the unthinkable human toll from mass deportation, the economic effects would be disastrous. The construction industry would lose 1.5 million workers, the hospitality industry 1.1 million workers, and the agricultural sector 283,000 workers. Overall, Trump’s plan would eliminate 4.5% of the U.S. workforce, which could produce a 9% drop in national income while also costing one million jobs among native born Americans.

Mass deportation would force up prices on many goods. Trump’s immigration policies combined with tax cuts for the wealthy and higher tariffs would create tremendous inflationary pressures.

None of this benefits American workers. Whatever Trump and Vance’s new Republican Party may be, it is not pro-labor.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized