The potential Harris/Walz administration may bring a fresh approach to trade, differing notably from the current Biden/Harris administration. Both Vice President Kamala Harris’s past record and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s trade experiences suggest a possible shift that some trade advocates are watching closely.
Gary Hufbauer, a trade expert from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, commented on the potential shift, noting, “It might be slightly more friendly to the trade outlook than the Biden administration.”
Unlike President Biden and former President Donald Trump, who have both increased tariffs, Harris enters the race with fewer established positions on trade, giving her what Hufbauer describes as a “clean slate.”
Harris’s absence at a Rose Garden ceremony in May, where President Biden announced new tariffs on $18 billion in Chinese imports, exemplifies her focus on different issues recently. While Trump promises historically high duties, including a 60% tariff on Chinese imports, Harris’s stance remains less defined.
Walz’s Perspective on Tariffs
Governor Walz brings a unique perspective, having witnessed the impact of tariffs on his agriculture-heavy state. Representing a rural district in Congress and governing Minnesota during the imposition of Trump’s tariffs, Walz has highlighted the adverse effects on farmers. In 2019, he urged Trump to “end the trade war with China,” noting its detrimental effects on his constituents.
Walz’s experience includes promoting trade links during travels to Japan, South Korea, and Canada. He emphasized the importance of stable trade relationships amid global trade unrest, saying in 2019, “Our Japanese and South Korean partners are looking for solid relationships with states, and Minnesota in particular, that share their values.”
Hufbauer suggests Walz’s background might make him a proponent for some trade liberalization, potentially influencing future trade talks if he becomes vice president.
Shared Skepticism of Free Trade Agreements
Both Harris and Walz have shown skepticism towards certain free trade agreements. Walz voted against giving President Obama the authority to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, while Harris voted against the Trump-negotiated USMCA trade deal. Their objections were rooted in the need for greater worker and environmental protections.
Walz’s extensive personal experience with China, including teaching English there in 1989 and serving on the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, adds another layer to his trade perspective. He has expressed that the U.S. relationship with China need not be “adversarial” but has criticized China’s human rights record and its stance on the Ukraine war.
Potential Debate on Trade Policies
The evolving dynamics of the Harris/Walz campaign could lead to significant discussions on trade policies. Hufbauer anticipates a debate, noting the potential for differing viewpoints within the administration. As the election approaches, the trade policies of a possible Harris/Walz administration will be closely scrutinized, particularly in comparison to the current administration’s approach.
