By James J. Devine
The 2024 presidential race remains highly competitive, with polls showing a virtual deadlock between Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and disgraced former Republican President Donald Trump.
Surprisingly, Trump maintains a narrow lead among voters concerned with economic issues, a domain where his multiple business bankruptcies and White House tenure should undermine confidence if not entirely disqualify the reckless Republican spendthrift.
A recent survey revealed that 55% of voters express confidence in Trump’s ability to manage the economy, compared with only 45% who feel similarly about Harris.
Despite his apparent edge, Trump’s track record on economic policy raises concerns.
Trump has a history of business bankruptcies, an inconsistent economic track record, and a tumultuous tenure in the White House, yet he has retained a slim lead among voters focused on economic issues, according to recent polling.
Trump’s business career has been marked by multiple high-profile bankruptcies, including casinos, hotels, and other ventures that failed to sustain profitability. His companies declared bankruptcy six times between 1991 and 2009, casting doubt on his self-proclaimed image with evidence of his inability to manage complex financial enterprises.
During his presidency from 2017 to 2021, Trump added $8 trillion to the national debt, largely due to tax cuts and increased spending that went unfunded and unnoticed as Republicans in Congress meekly approved three credit ceiling increases.
Trump has consistently pursued deregulation, tax cuts, and aggressive trade practices during his time in office but these irresponsible efforts have had a deleterious economic impact.
Trump’s administration pursued an aggressive deregulation agenda, particularly in finance and energy, at the expense of public safety, environmental sustainability, and economic stability.
“Deregulation threatened both environmental sustainability and financial stability, his 2017 tax cuts exacerbated the national debt and inequality, and aggressive taxes on imports harmed both domestic industries and international relations,” said Lisa McCormick, a consumer advocate known for her 2018 Democratic primary challenge to New Jersey’s corrupt US Senator, Bob Menendez. “Trump’s tariffs triggered inflation, his cash giveaways nearly broke the bank, and he has been personally adjudicated guilty of fraud.”
Trump’s tariffs on imports from China and other countries ultimately translated into higher prices for everyday goods, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income households that suffered from inflation. The increased cost of materials, such as steel and aluminum, also hurt U.S. manufacturing sectors that rely on these imports, reducing competitiveness and profitability.
While many Americans credit him for policies aimed at stimulating business, Trump inherited a stable economy from President Barack Obama, who guided the nation out of the 2008 financial crisis. Trump’s incompetent response to the COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread business closures, the highest unemployment rate since the 1980s, and over one million American deaths.
Trump’s withdrawal from multilateral agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), weakened America’s global trade alliances and reduced its influence in shaping global economic policy.
During Trump’s presidency, Congress raised the debt limit with bipartisan support and no budget-cut preconditions on three occasions — in 2017, 2018, and 2019 — although the 2019 budget bill did require a commitment to $77 billion in administrative “offsets” to partially make up for sharp increases in defense and domestic spending.
On April 26, 2023, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed budget legislation raising the federal government’s legal debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion and threatening default for partisan gain on the condition that broad-based spending cuts totaling $4.5 trillion would be used to create an economic crisis.
Since 1960, Congress has acted 78 separate times to permanently raise, temporarily extend, or revise the definition of the debt limit – 49 times under Republican presidents and 29 times under Democratic presidents.
Trump also reduced worker protections by curbing the number of Americans eligible for overtime pay, and he consistently opposed raising the federal minimum wage, which remains stagnant at $7.25 per hour. These policies disproportionately hurt low-income workers while benefiting corporations and billionaires.
In July, Trump delivered a keynote speech at a cryptocurrency conference in Nashville, promising support for the Bitcoin mining sector, despite concerns over its environmental and economic risks.
Cryptocurrency mining consumes up to 2.3% of U.S. electricity, hindering efforts to transition to renewable energy sources, while the extreme volatility of fake money can create financial instability, foster speculative bubbles, and enable crimes like money laundering and tax evasion, which reduce government revenue. Cryptocurrency is a destabilizing force for the U.S. economy due to the risk of fraud.
The crypto industry is spending more than $160 million to influence this year’s elections, while digital asset firms have faced tough enforcement actions from Democratic President Joe Biden’s regulators and Sen. Elizabeth Warren has argued that crypto poses major risks to consumers, the financial system, and the fight against money laundering.
Harris, in contrast, has proposed a more worker-centric economic agenda.
Harris advocates raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, expanding labor protections, and investing in infrastructure and green technologies to create new jobs.
The Democratic Vice President also supports initiatives to reduce income inequality, such as tax reforms targeting the wealthiest Americans and expanding healthcare access. Her platform focuses on long-term growth and stability, addressing rising living costs, and ensuring that workers benefit from economic expansion.
While Trump’s perceived strength on the economy continues to resonate with a significant portion of the electorate, questions remain about the long-term sustainability of his policies.
Harris, meanwhile, faces the challenge of convincing voters that her approach to economic management will not only continue the recovery but ensure a more equitable future.
With voters heavily focused on the economy in this election, the race remains a tight contest, with both candidates positioning themselves as the solution to America’s financial future.
As the campaign intensifies, the contrast between Trump’s pro-business policies and Harris’s worker-focused agenda will likely shape the outcome.