October 2, 2024 - 7:00am
Far from the brawl that some expected during tonight’s vice-presidential debate, J.D. Vance and Tim Walz gave Americans a civil and substantive display of policy differences. On everything from abortion to guns to democracy protection, both men held their ground but at times also noted where the other came from a different perspective in good faith.
They also proposed different policies for handling the economy, which voters consistently list as their top issue. But present in these conversations was an unstated but notable shift in the two parties’ economic philosophies: a rebuke of the neoliberal consensus, or an unwavering commitment to market-driven solutions, which has had a hold on both Republicans and Democrats for decades.
Republicans began shifting away from neoliberalism during the Trump era, in which the former president challenged the idea that “what’s good for markets is good for America”. In tonight’s debate, Vance echoed many of the same themes. He pledged, for example, that in a second Trump term, their administration would penalise companies that ship jobs overseas. And in one memorable moment, he ridiculed Ph.D. economists who had criticised Trump’s economic plans, saying these people were the same ones who said 30 years ago that sending jobs abroad would benefit America. Vance additionally highlighted his support for one specific Biden policy: the president’s decision to keep some Trump-era tariffs in place.
But Walz took multiple opportunities to depart from the old consensus as well. He touted the Biden administration’s signature policy accomplishment, the Inflation Reduction Act, as the “biggest investment” in creating jobs across the country by “taking the EV technology that we invented and making it here.” He agreed that the US needs fair trading partners and, like Vance, lamented the outsourcing of American manufacturing jobs. Both men also notably agreed with the idea that “housing is not a commodity”.
We don’t have to reach too far back to find a time when politicians of both parties were far more reticent to embrace this approach to the economy. During the Obama presidency, the Tea Party backlash to government interventions in health insurance prompted the president to avoid more sweeping reforms and instead create a marketplace system in coordination with insurers to help expand coverage. His 2012 Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, memorably said that “corporations are people,” and his running mate was best known for an unwavering devotion to shrinking the size and role of government.
However, both Vance and Walz — and the two parties more broadly — have begun to understand that many Americans are not happy with the status quo that has enriched corporations and big banks as wages everywhere else have stagnated. Polling shows that voters in both parties hold dim views of free trade, and many support tariffs to protect US businesses from unfair trade practices as well as workers from unfair labour policies. They also want the government to prioritise “getting tougher with China” on economic issues rather than trying to build a relationship with them.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe