President Trump’s position on consumer issues

The president's opinions on consumer issues

Like many of his other positions, the president's opinions on consumer issues depend on whether one looks at his deeds or his words. He is a businessman who regards the consumer as a source of wealth. But, now that he is president, it will be interesting to see what he believes about customers and their rights. Because the problem is complex and contentious, this paper will include his thoughts and activities about consumer rights. It is critical to do both because that is the only way that one can achieve clarity and completeness. In doing so, the paper shall include words from his campaign, the White House, academics, and news sources. The aim is to present the president's position as clearly as possible because it is an issue that is critical to all Americans.

Pro

On the campaign trail, the president was adamant that he was fighting for middle-class Americans and consumers. He did focus a lot on jobs but he did speak about consumers occasionally. For example, he said that the Affordable Care Act made healthcare more expensive than it should be. He asserted that consumers were getting a raw deal because tariffs kept on rising and they were restricted in their choices (Luhby, 2017). In this particular case, he did present himself as defending the consumers. However, it is rare that the president spoke about consumer rights on the campaign trail. It is clear that they were not as important to him and quite obviously to his supporters. It is, therefore, difficult to get evidence of words he said that support and protect consumer rights. The opposite, however, is quite easy as the next paragraphs will show and prove.

Con

Financial regulation

The president promised to roll back regulation in the financial sector not because the consumers suffered, but because it 'hamstrung' the stock market (Hatchenburg et al, 2016). In his presentation to the people numerous times, he said that the Dodd-Frank legislation and other regulations had gone too far (Sharf, 2017). Neither he nor his people have acknowledged that the regulations and rules were put in place to protect consumers. The administration has refused to consider the fact that deregulation eventually hurts the consumer. In the 2008 crash, those who lost were the members of the middle class who saw savings disappear and homes lose value. It is the consumer who suffered after a deregulated financial sector inevitably collapsed (Barry, 2017). The president knows this, but he is forging ahead with deregulation. With this case, it would not be unfair to say that he does not care about consumer rights. In fact, that analysis is the only logical conclusion based on the evidence.

FDA

Consumer rights also extend to them having access to healthy food and drugs; a position the president has seemed to oppose. The Food and Drug Administration is the principal consumer protection agency when it comes to edible products. The agency relies on laws and regulations passed by congress to do its job. It also relies on funds provided by the federal government. However, the president has repeatedly said that the FDA has overregulated (Singletary, 2017). He has asserted that he wants to roll back the regulations and remove restrictions placed on manufacturers. A look at his argument shows that it has nothing to do with consumers; it is about cutting costs for manufacturers. The FDA and its sister agencies represent the vanguard that protects Americans from harmful edible products. A president who intends to constrain such an agency is quite obviously not thinking about the rights of the consumers.

TPP

President Donald Trump has been opposed to the Trans-Pacific Pact from the very beginning, though experts say that the pact is good for the consumers. One of the most critical tenets was that countries that joined the pact had to raise their safety and health standards (Barry, 2017). Additionally, the cooperation would have surely reduced prices of many imported goods in the country. The consumers would have more choice at better prices. However, the country has now pulled out of the pact. The President's justification is, once again, the protection of jobs. He sees the pact as a way of getting jobs out of the country, and he wants nothing to do with it. Once more, there is little or no mention of consumer rights in the conversation. The administration has not weighed in on how the action will affect consumers, but it is clear they will not get the benefits they would have.

Trade wars

For a consumer in this global world, there is nothing as bad as a trade war; especially one with a major trading partner. However, that is what will happen if the president aggressively pursues his 'America First' policy. For one, the administration has been quite vocal when it comes to China. The president at one time even proposed increased tariffs. Additionally, the administration has proposed increasing taxes on goods coming from Mexico to pay for the border wall. There have also been calls by the president to increase taxes on German vehicles. If he goes ahead with the plans, the nations will have to reciprocate. Manufactured goods from China will be more expensive, and so will farm products from Mexico (Tuerck, Bachman, & Conte, 2016). Supply lines will become unsustainable, and many will collapse. The result will be American consumers paying more for their goods in an economy that is stagnant.

Analysis

The topic is complicated and presents a myriad of issues because of the fact that many of the president's attitudes have to be inferred from his actions. He has spent very little time speaking about consumer rights and safety. When he speaks about the economy, he is mainly speaking about manufacturing jobs. Therefore, the issues presented are by no means exhaustive.

Conclusion

President Donald Trump has said that he supports consumer rights, but his actions have almost seemed to be at odds with the words. Most of his focus is on jobs and getting businesspeople to work without government obstruction. However, that effort has resulted in moves that would hurt the consumer. For example, the rolling back of financial regulation in no way supports the retail investor. Just like it happened in 2008, deregulation will lead to the hurting of consumers. The administration has also proposed rollbacks of regulations instituted by the FDA and similar agencies. In that action, there is the potential of exposing consumers to dangerous or sub-standard goods while helping the manufacturers make more profits. Finally, actions by the administration threaten to plunge the nation into a trade war that will be detrimental to consumers.

References

Barry, E. (2017) The trickle-down effects of Trumponomics. CNBC. http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/22/the-trickle-down-effects-of-trumponomics-.html

Hachenberg, B., Kiesel, F., Kolaric, S., & Schiereck, D. (2016). The impact of expected regulatory changes: The case of banks following the 2016U. S. election. Finance Research Letters.

Luhby, T. (2017) Trump makes changes to ObamaCare that could cost consumers more. CNN. http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/15/news/economy/trump-obamacare/

Sharf, S. (2017) How President Trump could affect the value of your home. Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/samanthasharf/2016/11/15/how-president-trump-could-affect-the-value-of-your-home/#53e398c75796

Singletary, M. (2017) Trump’s election does not bode well for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/get-there/trumps-election-does-not-bode-well-for-the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/2016/11/15/70618360-ab48-11e6-977a-1030f822fc35_story.html?utm_term=.b4325665cdff

Tuerck, D., Bachman, P., & Conte, F. (2016) The Trump tariffs: A bad deal for Americans. National Foundation for American Policy. http://nfap.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Impact-of-the-Trump-Tariffs.NFAP-Policy-Brief.May-20161.pdf