In the U.S. presidential campaign, it is easy to become distracted by the stark differences in personalities, and the daily invective that now passes for routine conduct. Observers should focus on the ideological differences between the two candidates.
These differences will be on display on September 10, when the two candidates, former president Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, face each other in a debate. The principal ideological questions facing them will be mostly, but not entirely, domestic: the extent of the private sector or government intervention to deliver solutions; federal control versus delegation to the states; how resources should be allocated to domestic or international needs; how engaged the U.S. should be in free trade and climate activism; the extent of unilateral or multilateral approaches to foreign affairs; and how forceful the country should be in addressing the aggressiveness of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
Right after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump on July 13, it seemed that he had become a survivor and national hero, with victory in November assured. However, two weeks later, the withdrawal of President Joe Biden and entry of the telegenic Kamala Harris, former U.S. senator and attorney general of California, shifted the sands, with a Reuters poll of August 29 now showing her four points ahead of Trump,[1] and a Wall Street Journal poll the following day showing a one-point lead. [2] Harris did not have to compete in primaries, since there was not enough time to mobilize Democratic candidates once Biden had pulled out of the election race. Indeed, it appears that Harris was selected and propelled into the nomination by the elders of the Democratic Party.
With their selection of running mates, Tim Walz, governor of Minnesota and J.D. Vance, senator from Ohio, respectively, both Harris and Trump are doubling down to consolidate their existing base – a marketing move that reveals their focus on voters in the Rust Belt region of the U.S. Midwest. This strategy seems unlikely to expand the reach of either the opposition or independents.
Harris, having served as vice president for almost four years, is identified with the Biden Administration, known for various domestic and foreign policy failures, and with California’s progressive social policies. Inflation and immigration policy are top of mind with the electorate, and Harris will need to distance herself from Biden years to be her own person, even though she shares similar beliefs on the need for an expanded role of government.
The year-over-year rate of inflation was 1.4% at Biden’s inauguration in January 2021, and it peaked on his watch at 9.1%. Cost-push factors such as the Russia-Ukraine war and supply chain congestion are beyond the control of the Administration. However, some observers believe that the $2 trillion stimulus known as the American Rescue Plan of January 2021, had little bearing on COVID-19 relief and was a massive monetary stimulus to increase the role of government. [3]
As vice president, Harris was assigned the responsibility for mitigating the crisis at the southern border. [4] However, under Biden, says the House Committee on Homeland Security, there have been 6.2 million illegal crossings, plus 1.7 million “gotaways”. Moreover, in FY2023 alone, there were 169 attempted crossings by individuals on the terrorist watchlist of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.[5]
Now that Harris is a presidential candidate, there are policy reversals as she tries to move toward the centre. In 2019, Harris wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings. [6] She is now in favour of a border wall, an initiative of the Trump Administration that she once opposed. [7] While Harris favoured “defunding the police” during the riots of 2020, her campaign is trying now to walk that back. [8] In the past, Harris supported an electric vehicle (EV) mandate but now is also walking that back, along with her earlier position against fracking. [9]
In general, Harris has believed in a robust and interventionist role for government. She has favored single-payer health care, namely a government entity funding health care for citizens, rather than various insurance companies. She also favours subsidies for homebuyers, tax credits for developers and renters, and increased child tax credits for parents. She has stated that in some instances her views on public policy have changed, but her values have not.
Harris, like Biden, is an activist for intensified regulation of the corporate sector – which lobbies and funds both parties. Harris has called out corporate America for grocery price-gouging – and she has called for price controls. The U.S. Department of Agriculture advises that food prices rose 25% for the four years ending in 2023[10], although no evidence has been produced to support systemic price-gouging. Harris is also expected to keep the pressure on lowering drug prices. The Biden FY2025 budget that Harris generally endorses calls for the corporate rate to increase from 21% to 28% (tax cuts from Trump’s 2017 tax law expire at the end of 2025). The top marginal rate for the top 1% would increase from 37% to 39.6%. Harris’ plan to impose a tax on unrealized capital gains for those with a net worth over $100 million is highly controversial. Individuals making less than $400,000 per year would not be subject to tax increases. [11]
Harris also endorses the foreign policy of the Biden years. Biden has maintained the pressure on NATO initiated during the Trump administration and, in a welcome development, 23 of the 32 NATO member nations now spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense. [12] In other areas of foreign policy, however, the administration’s record has been problematic. The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was an operational calamity done without enough consultation with allies. [13] Further, it signalled disarray and lack of resolve by the U.S., undoubtedly encouraging President Vladimir Putin of Russia to invade Ukraine in 2022. China’s belligerence shows no signs of abating, particularly the bullying of Asian neighbours, and missile test provocations by North Korea continue. Iran has unrelentingly continued to enrich uranium to near weapons-grade – and its proxies and militias in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen have intensified attacks against the U.S. and its allies.
Harris has voiced her support for having the strongest military in the world.[14] Expect debate as to whether technology would give the U.S. an edge over China’s superior naval numbers. On Gaza, Harris is expected to continue the approach of the Biden Administration.[15]
Unlike Harris who is trying to define her position, Trump is certainly a known but polarizing commodity. Should Trump win, the U.S. should expect a continuation of the 2017 tax cuts, a benign regulatory environment for private enterprise, accountability for the fall of Afghanistan, increased U.S. oil production, relaxed environmental policy, scepticism toward international alliances and multilateral bodies, import tariffs, outreach to Russia but more limited engagement in foreign affairs, and efforts to vindicate himself against his opposition. Trump’s record on the military budget contains contradictions.[16] The extent of support for Ukraine would be debatable, versus Biden’s so-called blank cheque. Trump has avowed support for Israel but of late seems at odds with that position.[17]
Trump’s record on the economy while he was president is strong, with unemployment dropping to 3.5% before COVID-19 struck. Biden’s record on job creation and average pay are also noteworthy,[18] with nearly 16 million jobs created during his presidency, as advised by the White House.[19] The Republican Party has alienated itself from women who are unhappy with its stance on reproductive freedom. This has cost the party in midterm elections,[20] and the resentment continues.
Trump’s legal travails do not seem to have weakened support from his base. The sentencing for falsifying business records is expected on September 18, just after the debate. The likely legal outcome with regard to allegations of attempting to reverse the 2020 presidential election is not clear.
Statistics can always be challenged, poll sampling can be biased, and COVID-19 has affected the U.S. economy in unimaginable ways. However, this campaign has produced two stunning developments: the attempted assassination of Trump and the withdrawal of Biden, under severe pressure from leaders of the Democratic Party.
A majority of the American electorate believes that the country is moving in the wrong direction.[21] The election in November may be a chance to fix that. A wild card is the likeability factor. Some will vote based on emotion and whom they simply like. The debate of the candidates on September 10 may be influential in this regard.
Given the ideological differences between Harris and Trump, the November election assumes great importance for the future direction of the United States. Will it become more socialist – with an expanded administrative state? And will it become less engaged in international affairs?
The West needs strong, credible leadership in the face of a continuing array of threats, domestic and foreign. Great Britain and major countries on the Continent are badly polarized by immigration. Both Britain and France are moving to the left while in Germany, the right-wing AfD has recently shown much strength in Thuringia and Saxony. The increasing influence of Russia and the Global South is posing a challenge to the world order for trade, investment and the rule of law that has prevailed since the end of World War II.
The stakes in this election are high. Observers would be wise to look beyond the gushing, sycophantic press and form their own conclusions, based on their ideological preference.
Frank Schell is a business strategy consultant and former senior vice president of the First National Bank of Chicago. He was a Lecturer at the Harris School of Public Policy, University of Chicago and is a contributor of opinion pieces to various journals.
This article was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive content here.
For permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in.
Support our work here.
©Copyright 2024 Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. All rights reserved. Any unauthorised copying or reproduction is strictly prohibited.
References
[1] Jason Lange and Bo Erickson, “Exclusive: Harris widens lead over Trump, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds,” Reuters, Aug 30, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-widens-lead-over-trump-with-boost-women-hispanics-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-08-29/
[2] Aaron Zitner, “Harris Has Taken Narrow Lead Over Trump, WSJ Poll Finds,” Wall Street Journal, Aug 29, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/trump-harris-poll-august-election-2024-e6fa024e?mod=hp_lead_pos1
[3] Jason Smith, “One Year Later: Why Biden’s “American Rescue” Failed,” White House Budget Committee, Mar 15, 2022, https://budget.house.gov/press-release/smith-op-ed-one-year-later-why-bidens-american-rescue-failed
[4] Mark E Green, “‘Border Czar’ Kamala Harris ‘unburdened’ herself of responsibility to secure the country,” New York Post, Aug 8, 2024, https://nypost.com/2024/08/08/opinion/border-czar-kamala-harris-unburdened-herself-of-responsibility-to-secure-the-country/
[5] “FACTSHEET: Final FY23 Numbers Show Worst Year at America’s Borders—Ever,” US Department of Homeland Security, Oct 26, 2023, https://homeland.house.gov/2023/10/26/factsheet-final-fy23-numbers-show-worst-year-at-americas-borders-ever/#:~:text=Since%20President%20Biden%20took%20office,to%201.7%20million%20known%20gotaways.
[6] “Kamala Harris can beat Donald Trump. But how would she govern?”, The Economist, Aug 22, 2024, https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/08/22/kamala-harris-can-beat-donald-trump-but-how-would-she-govern
[7] “MAGA Blasts Kamala Harris’ New Border Wall Position,” Newsweek, Aug 29, 2024, https://www.newsweek.com/maga-blasts-kamala-harris-bipartisan-border-bill-1946266
[8] Arit John and Kayla Tausche, “Harris recalibrates policy stances as she adjusts to role atop Democratic ticket,” CNN, July 30, 2024, https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/30/politics/harris-shifts-policy-stances/index.html
[9] Mike Lillis and Mychael Schnell, “5 issues where Harris has shifted to the center,” The Hill, Aug 29, 2024, https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4852729-harris-issues-center-shifted/
[10] “As Kamala Harris Slams Grocery Price Gouging, Democrats Rake in Grocer Cash,” Newsweek, Aug 26, 2023, https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-democrats-grocery-prices-economy-2024-election-1944065
[11] Robert W Wood, “Kamala Harris Has Big Plans For Your Taxes. Here Is What You Could Pay,” Forbes, Aug 29, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2024/08/28/kamala-harris-has-big-plans-for-your-taxes-here-is-what-you-could-pay/
[12] Liana Fix and Caroline Kapp, “As NATO Countries Reach Spending Milestone, Is 2 Percent Enough?,” Council on Foreign Relations, Jun 28, 2024, https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/nato-countries-reach-spending-milestone-2-percent-enough#:~:text=NATO%20Secretary%2DGeneral%20Jens%20Stoltenberg,target%2C%20including%20France%20and%20Germany.
[13] Lara Seligman, “Biden heads to NATO amid friction over Afghanistan withdrawal,” Politico, Jun 13, 2021, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/13/biden-nato-afghanistan-withdrawal-493580
[14] “Will ensure America always has strongest, most lethal fighting force: Harris,” Hindustan Times, Aug 23, 2024, https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/will-ensure-america-always-has-strongest-most-lethal-fighting-force-harris-101724388369106.html
[15] Clarissa Jan-Lim, “Let’s dispel the myth that Harris will be any different from Biden on Gaza and Israel,” MSNBC, Aug 30, 2024, https://www.msnbc.com/top-stories/latest/kamala-harris-israel-gaza-cnn-biden-rcna168949
[16] James N Miller and Michael E O’Hanlon, “Quality over quantity: U.S. military strategy and spending in the Trump years,” Brookings, Jan 2019, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/quality-over-quantity-u-s-military-strategy-and-spending-in-the-trump-years/
[17] Lauren Gambino, “What would Trump’s Israel-Gaza policy be if he were re-elected?,” The Guardian, Apr 25, 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/25/trump-presidency-israel-gaza-middle-east-crisis
[18] Derek Saul, “How The Economy Really Fared Under Biden And Trump–From Jobs To Inflation,” Forbes, Aug 19, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/08/19/how-the-economy-really-fared-under-biden-and-trumpfrom-jobs-to-inflation/
[19] The White House, “Statement from President Joe Biden on the June Jobs Report,” July 5, 2024, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/05/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-the-june-jobs-report/
[20] Seth Masket, “Republicans Paid a Price for Overturning Roe. It May Have Been Worth It.” Politico, Nov 19, 2022, https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/11/19/republicans-roe-abortion-midterms-00069484
[21] Carleen Johnson, “Majority of American voters say country is heading in wrong direction: poll,” New York Post, Jul 16, 2024, https://nypost.com/2024/07/16/us-news/majority-of-american-voters-say-country-is-heading-in-wrong-direction-poll/