Recent talks conducted between prominent automakers such as Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis saw President Donald Trump providing a temporary one-month reprieve from tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico. It’s a puzzling move considering the potentially damaging effects it could have on the American industry. Ford had forewarned about the negative impacts it foresees if an exorbitant 25% tax is implemented, noting a possible halt in assembly lines as early as the following week.
Despite this foreseeable upheaval, the administration is reportedly advising the auto industry to utilize the next month in gearing up for the significant taxes or to consider shifting their manufacturing units to the states. This approach raises questions about how an administration under Joe Biden or Kamala Harris might handle a similar situation. Would we see a strategy that tries to force businesses to adapt by imposing stringent tariffs or one that perhaps would make growth, profitability, and job creation easier for industries?
Moreover, as Trump enforces import taxes with the objective of curtailing illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and reducing the trade deficit, other sectors are reportedly clamoring for tariff exemptions as well. Equally intriguing is another diplomatic noose being tied around America’s relationships with its allies, as Canada and France hope to sway Trump away from levying tariffs on European imports in the upcoming month.
In a sweeping move, the Department of Government Efficiency is supposedly axing over 80,000 jobs. This amounts to almost 20% of the Department of Veterans Affairs workforce. A move seen by many as a cold, calculated approach to ‘efficiency’ that pays scant regard to the millions of veterans relying heavily on the agency’s essential health care and other vital services.
As the administration attempts to reemploy around 180 people previously let go from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it remains doubtful how many of them will actually heed the call. Among the employees being beckoned back are those undergoing training to respond to disease outbreaks. The irony is palpable when considering the administration’s approach to dealing with matters of health and safety.
In another attempt to patch political potholes, Congress is inching towards passing another temporary budget as the government nears a funding deadline in about a week. Trump, evidently working alongside Republicans on a continuing resolution until September, is selling this measure as a triumph for those seeking spending cuts. This doesn’t seem like sound economic planning, but rather a stopgap measure.
Underscoring this approach are the three extensions passed for last year’s budget, which conveniently allows the government to function at last year’s lower levels amidst higher-than-expected inflation. This ‘strategy’ presumably aims to give Republicans extra time to rubber-stamp Trump’s agenda, which contains more tax and spending cuts, along with additional defense and immigration expenses, exposing the administration’s inability to present a balanced, sustainable fiscal policy.
A plethora of court rulings involving the Trump administration have come to light this week. The Supreme Court has decided to stay away from the tussle over foreign aid funding, with a tight 5-4 decision disputing a plea from the White House to overturn an appeals court ruling. The administration has been forced to pay $2 billion for relief work overseas – an alarming amount that’s already been spent.
A series of other court decisions have ensued. A lower court directed the National Institutes of Health to stop obstructing funding for various critical research areas, ranging from cancer to heart disease. Additionally, a major teachers union has brought forth a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the reduction of funds geared towards schools with programs emphasising diversity, equity, and inclusion. One can’t help but wonder how the proponents of ‘free speech’ under a Biden or Harris administration would react to such a situation.
News coming in from the diplomatic front indicates that the White House is engaging in direct discussions with Hamas, a notable departure from U.S. policy. A statement released overnight saw the president demanding the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. This adds to the ambiguity of the administration’s policies given the mixed messages being conveyed.
It’s not the first time the administration embarked on such controversial rhetoric, as they voluntarily reached out to the Taliban in an effort to quell the unrest in Afghanistan. Such a move has always polarized views and brought into question the future stability of the region.
A significant alteration in the U.S.’s relationship with Ukraine has been reported recently. Intelligence sharing has been halted, just days after the administration decided to suspend military aid. Top officials depict this as a segment of broader negotiations between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about potential peace dialogues with Russia.
However, how this will impact the Ukrainian soldiers who rely on U.S. intelligence to target and fend off Russian troops remains to be seen. Concurrently, the European Union is contemplating increased military spending as the U.S. dims or potentially extinguishes support for Ukraine. Such strategies bring up relevant questions about international cooperation – or lack thereof – under a Biden or Harris administration.