by Evan Ramstad
There’s a change happening in how Americans view the economy that goes beyond their anger about inflation.
A consensus seems to be forming that it really is time to constrain the excesses of the free market. Just look at social media to understand the economic angst; you’ll see plenty of memes flying around showing the difficulty young adults have compared to previous generations with buying houses, cars and child care.
Republicans and Democrats both see it. One reason Vice President Kamala Harris on Tuesday chose Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate is because his economic policies have been aimed at workers and families more than at business. They include free lunches for all public school kids and a child tax credit.
That’s also where former President Donald Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, has been pushing the Republicans.
“The ideal outcome for the country is if both the Republican and Democratic parties are genuinely competing for working class votes on policy grounds,” Chris Griswold, policy director of American Compass, told me in a conversation before Harris made her choice.
Formed in 2020, American Compass is small think tank in Washington that influenced several important right-wing politicians, including Vance, to focus on workers and families.
“Both parties pitching themselves as trying to give workers the best deal, that’s an amazing space to be in,” Griswold added. “I hope that’s where we’re headed. That will require the right elements of both parties to win the fights in those respective parties. That remains ongoing.”
Vance and a handful of other GOP members of Congress, including Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Tom Cotton of Arkansas, in the last two years challenged the GOP’s relentless pursuit of lower taxes, deregulation and free trade. In doing so, they found common ground at times with Democrats and even with the person in government who business leaders fear the most, FTC Commissioner Lina Khan.
Their efforts at times confused other Republicans, talking heads and journalists. The search began for boxes, containers and labels for these politicians. “New Right” and “neopopulism” and “national conservatism” are all being taken for a spin.
As different as it is to see more interaction between labor unions and Republicans, so it is to hear Republicans like Vance calling for an increase in the federal minimum wage, aggressive antitrust enforcement and a tax credit to families with children.
Vance and this New Right-or-whatever-it-is-called group aren’t winning in the GOP, though. Last Thursday, Republican senators blocked a bill to expand the child tax credit. Vance didn’t vote.
Walz, in an interview with Ezra Klein of the New York Times last week, said the biggest pro-family move of his time as Minnesota’s governor — paid family medical leave for all workers — should be a top goal for a Harris presidency.
“We’re the last nation on earth basically to not do this. It is so foundational to just basic decency and financial well-being. And I think that would start to change both finances, attitude — strengthen the family,” Walz told Klein.
He then mentioned his now-opponent’s focus on the difficulties workers and families face in declining small towns. Walz said: “If JD Vance is right about this: that we should make it easier for families to be together, then make sure that after your child’s born, that you can spend a little time with them. That’d be a great thing.”
Minnesota’s paid family medical leave program is still in being constructed and won’t start until at least 2026. And so, while Walz demonstrated how to get an idea turned into law, voters won’t be able to judge him on implementation. Early this year, he told me he gets weekly updates on its progress. Republicans have complained its estimated cost has risen since the legislation passed last year.
The groups like American Compass and politicians like Vance, with some of their ideas, are challenging fundamental theories in economics. One of them is the idea, called comparative advantage, that nations should produce the goods and services they are best at and buy the rest from others. This approach, they argue, hollowed out the United States’ manufacturing base and robbed opportunities from workers.
One of the knock-on effects was that economic mobility required actual mobility, which played out with Americans leaving small communities for suburbs and cities.
“The free market fundamentalists, especially on the right, lionized moving for opportunity, as if workers needed to accommodate themselves to what the economy demands instead of policy making sure that the economy is serving what workers want,” Griswold said.
Both Walz and Vance grew up in small towns and are veterans. They bring a balance of geography and experience to their running mates, who spent their whole lives in urban areas.
Walz also represented a mostly rural district in Congress. In his 2022 re-election as Minnesota’s governor, however, he didn’t win any county that lost population during the 2010s.
Vance, of course, has his own weaknesses. His stance on social matters, including suggesting that people with children should have more voting power, are so extreme they make it less likely that helpful compromises on economics will materialize.
The top of the ticket is another matter. Harris is sure to be aligned with Walz’s economic views. However, Trump is so unpredictable that no one can be sure he supports Vance’s.
