Farmers and Economists Weigh In on Presidential Candidates' Impact on Agriculture as Election Approaches
Source: DairyNews.today
As the U.S. presidential election approaches on November 5, attention turns to how each candidate may influence agriculture, particularly in areas like farming policy, trade, biofuels, and inflation.
Recent polling indicates a strong preference among rural voters for Trump, yet the agricultural community remains divided. Farm Journal’s Washington correspondent, Jim Wiesemeyer, emphasizes that farmers’ support varies widely, shaped by policy preferences and personal values.
Farmers’ Perspectives on Trump vs. Harris
Farmers favor Trump for several reasons:
Rural Understanding: Many believe Trump has a stronger grasp of agricultural issues and rural concerns.
Trade Policies: Despite concerns about his confrontational approach to China, some farmers feel his policies protect U.S. agriculture.
Border Security: Trump's stance on immigration resonates with those worried about border control and labor issues.
Energy Costs: Many expect Trump’s policies to lower energy costs, which directly impacts farming expenses.
Political Views: Farmers who are wary of perceived socialist policies from Democrats generally align with Trump.
Conversely, those supporting Harris cite different priorities:
Environmental Focus: Harris’s policies on renewable energy and sustainability appeal to environmentally conscious farmers.
Labor Rights: Farmers supporting Harris often appreciate the administration’s efforts to enhance farmworkers' rights.
Nutrition Policies: Harris’s stance on food and nutrition resonates with those prioritizing public health.
Economic Support: Her economic policies aimed at working-class Americans align with those seeking more equitable growth.
Economists’ Views on Trade Policies
The September Ag Economists Monthly Monitor, a Farm Journal survey of nearly 70 agricultural economists, presents a nuanced view of the candidates’ impact on trade. Michael Langemeier, an agricultural economist from Purdue University, noted that concerns about trade are widespread among farmers. While tariffs have been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations, Langemeier points out that many farmers are now more pessimistic about export prospects than they have been in recent years.
The Debate on Tariffs: Do They Work? The Ag Economists Monthly Monitor highlighted mixed opinions among economists regarding the efficacy of tariffs as a trade policy tool. While some economists acknowledge that tariffs can offer short-term protection, others argue that tariffs are ultimately detrimental to free trade and can lead to retaliatory measures.
Economists agree that the cost of tariffs is often distributed across various stakeholders:
Short-Term Impact: Consumers may initially face higher prices if tariffs are passed down the supply chain.
Long-Term Effects: Tariffs could alter supply chains, potentially increasing costs but also encouraging domestic manufacturing.
Shared Costs: Both exporting nations and importing consumers often bear some of the tariff costs, depending on market flexibility.
Trump’s Stance on Tariffs and John Deere
In a recent policy roundtable, Trump suggested that John Deere might face a 200% tariff on products manufactured in Mexico if it proceeds with relocating operations there. This potential policy stance underscores Trump’s approach to protecting U.S. industries and reshoring jobs, but it also raises questions about the impact on the agriculture sector, which relies heavily on such equipment.
As election day nears, the agricultural community continues to evaluate each candidate's policies, weighing the potential implications for trade, sustainability, and economic stability. Both Trump and Harris offer contrasting visions that reflect broader political divides, leaving farmers and economists to assess which path will best serve the future of U.S. agriculture.
Farmers’ Perspectives on Trump vs. Harris
Farmers favor Trump for several reasons:
Rural Understanding: Many believe Trump has a stronger grasp of agricultural issues and rural concerns.
Trade Policies: Despite concerns about his confrontational approach to China, some farmers feel his policies protect U.S. agriculture.
Border Security: Trump's stance on immigration resonates with those worried about border control and labor issues.
Energy Costs: Many expect Trump’s policies to lower energy costs, which directly impacts farming expenses.
Political Views: Farmers who are wary of perceived socialist policies from Democrats generally align with Trump.
Conversely, those supporting Harris cite different priorities:
Environmental Focus: Harris’s policies on renewable energy and sustainability appeal to environmentally conscious farmers.
Labor Rights: Farmers supporting Harris often appreciate the administration’s efforts to enhance farmworkers' rights.
Nutrition Policies: Harris’s stance on food and nutrition resonates with those prioritizing public health.
Economic Support: Her economic policies aimed at working-class Americans align with those seeking more equitable growth.
Economists’ Views on Trade Policies
The September Ag Economists Monthly Monitor, a Farm Journal survey of nearly 70 agricultural economists, presents a nuanced view of the candidates’ impact on trade. Michael Langemeier, an agricultural economist from Purdue University, noted that concerns about trade are widespread among farmers. While tariffs have been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations, Langemeier points out that many farmers are now more pessimistic about export prospects than they have been in recent years.
The Debate on Tariffs: Do They Work? The Ag Economists Monthly Monitor highlighted mixed opinions among economists regarding the efficacy of tariffs as a trade policy tool. While some economists acknowledge that tariffs can offer short-term protection, others argue that tariffs are ultimately detrimental to free trade and can lead to retaliatory measures.
Economists agree that the cost of tariffs is often distributed across various stakeholders:
Short-Term Impact: Consumers may initially face higher prices if tariffs are passed down the supply chain.
Long-Term Effects: Tariffs could alter supply chains, potentially increasing costs but also encouraging domestic manufacturing.
Shared Costs: Both exporting nations and importing consumers often bear some of the tariff costs, depending on market flexibility.
Trump’s Stance on Tariffs and John Deere
In a recent policy roundtable, Trump suggested that John Deere might face a 200% tariff on products manufactured in Mexico if it proceeds with relocating operations there. This potential policy stance underscores Trump’s approach to protecting U.S. industries and reshoring jobs, but it also raises questions about the impact on the agriculture sector, which relies heavily on such equipment.
As election day nears, the agricultural community continues to evaluate each candidate's policies, weighing the potential implications for trade, sustainability, and economic stability. Both Trump and Harris offer contrasting visions that reflect broader political divides, leaving farmers and economists to assess which path will best serve the future of U.S. agriculture.
