{"id":3749,"date":"2024-12-05T15:41:16","date_gmt":"2024-12-05T21:41:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/?post_type=podcast&p=3749"},"modified":"2024-12-05T15:41:27","modified_gmt":"2024-12-05T21:41:27","slug":"this-is-democracy-episode-285-tariffs-trade-and-supply-chains","status":"publish","type":"podcast","link":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/podcast\/this-is-democracy-episode-285-tariffs-trade-and-supply-chains\/","title":{"rendered":"This is Democracy – Episode 285: Tariffs, Trade, and Supply Chains"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Jeremi and Zachary sit down with Dr. Meg Reiss to discuss what kinds of protections the United States should initiate through tariff measures on open trade. The discussion covers the complexities of the supply chain security and the dangers of open trade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Zachary sets the scene with his poem, “On the Border.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Meg Reiss received her Ph.D. from the LBJ School of Public Affairs. She was the national security advisor to Senator Mitt Romney from 2019 to 2023. Dr. Reiss is the founder and CEO of SolidIntel, a company using artificial intelligence to help manage global supply chains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Jeremi and Zachary sit down with Dr. Meg Reiss to discuss what kinds of protections the United States should initiate through tariff measures on open trade. The discussion covers the complexities of the supply chain security and the dangers of open trade. Zachary sets the scene with his poem, “On the Border.” Dr. Meg Reiss […]","protected":false},"author":94,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":true,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","episode_type":"audio","audio_file":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/17\/2024\/12\/2024-12-04_This-is-Democracy_master.mp3","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"38:37","filesize":"53.03M","filesize_raw":"55607744","date_recorded":"2024-12-05 14:31:31","explicit":"","block":"","itunes_episode_number":"","itunes_title":"","itunes_season_number":"","itunes_episode_type":""},"tags":[],"categories":[],"series":[2,891],"class_list":{"0":"post-3749","1":"podcast","2":"type-podcast","3":"status-publish","5":"series-this-is-democracy","6":"series-default-podcast","7":"entry"},"acf":{"related_episodes":"","hosts":[{"ID":301,"post_author":"10","post_date":"2019-01-15 11:25:23","post_date_gmt":"2019-01-15 17:25:23","post_content":"I am a child of the global transformations that re-made societies in the last century\u2013war, migration, nation-building, and mobility through higher education. All of my research, writing, and teaching seeks to explain these transformations\u2013their diverse origins, their contradictory contours, and their long-lasting effects. My scholarship is therefore an extended inquiry into the workings of power at local and international levels, and the interactions across these levels. Like other historians, I treat power as contingent, context-dependent, and often quite elusive. Like practitioners of politics, I view power as essential for any meaningful achievement, especially in the realms of social justice and democratization.\n\nMy hope is that my work will reach a broad and diverse audience of citizens. Scholarship cannot substitute for real-lived experience, but I believe it can enhance our contemporary understanding of the choices we confront in the allocation of our resources, the structuring of our communities, and the judgment of merit. In this framework, international, transnational, and global history should contribute to better thinking about current international, transnational, and global problems. I am a proponent of historical and political studies that are broad, compelling, creative, and, ultimately, useful. We should research with Monkish rigor, as we write (and lecture) with novelistic flair.\n\nResearch interests\nThe formation and spread of nation-states; the emergence of modern international relations; the connections between foreign policy and domestic politics; the rise of knowledge institutions as global actors.\n\nCourses taught\nInternational History since 1898; The Past and Future of Global Strategy; American Foreign Relations\n\nAwards, Honors\nRecognized as one of \"America's Top Young Innovators\" by Smithsonian Magazine; Class of 1955 Distinguished Teaching Award, University of Wisconsin","post_title":"Jeremi Suri","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"jeremi-suri","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2022-06-02 13:27:50","post_modified_gmt":"2022-06-02 18:27:50","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/?post_type=speaker&p=301","menu_order":0,"post_type":"speaker","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":820,"post_author":"10","post_date":"2019-08-19 13:47:33","post_date_gmt":"2019-08-19 18:47:33","post_content":"\n

Zachary Suri is a host, co-producer, and poet-in-residence for This is Democracy.\u00a0Zachary is an undergraduate at Yale University, where he studies languages, history, and literature. He writes regularly for the Yale Daily News.\u00a0Zachary\u2019s poetry has been published by numerous publications, including\u00a0CNN.com<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Urbanitus.com<\/a>. He was the 2022-2023 Austin Youth Poet Laureate and a recipient of the Scholastic Art & Writing Awards Silver Key and AISD Trustees\u2019 Scholar Award. You can hear him discuss his poetry on\u00a0public radio<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n","post_title":"Zachary Suri","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"zachary-suri","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-09-09 12:12:36","post_modified_gmt":"2025-09-09 17:12:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/?post_type=speaker&p=820","menu_order":0,"post_type":"speaker","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"guests":[{"ID":3751,"post_author":"10","post_date":"2024-12-05 14:33:37","post_date_gmt":"2024-12-05 20:33:37","post_content":"\n

Dr. Meg Reiss received her Ph.D. from the LBJ School of Public Affairs. She was the national security advisor to Senator Mitt Romney from 2019 to 2023. Dr. Reiss is the founder and CEO of SolidIntel, a company using artificial intelligence to help manage global supply chains.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Dr. Meg Reiss","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"dr-meg-reiss","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-12-05 15:43:02","post_modified_gmt":"2024-12-05 21:43:02","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/?post_type=speaker&p=3751","menu_order":0,"post_type":"speaker","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"transcript":"

00;00;05;29 – 00;00;07;19
\nIntro
\nThis is democracy.<\/p>\n

00;00;07;21 – 00;00;16;13
\nIntro
\nA podcast about the people of the United States. A podcast about citizenship. About engaging with politics and the world around you.<\/p>\n

00;00;16;15 – 00;00;20;15
\nIntro
\nA podcast about educating yourself on today’s important issues.<\/p>\n

00;00;20;17 – 00;00;22;07
\nIntro
\nAnd how to have a voice and what. Happens next.<\/p>\n

00;00;25;01 – 00;00;59;07
\nJeremi Suri
\nWelcome to our new episode of This Is Democracy. This week we are going to discuss free trade and tariffs and the contemporary debate, the current debate about, what kinds of protections, if any, the United States should be initiating through tariffs and other forms of supply chain security. in a world of relatively, open trade, but a world where many Americans seem to think and particularly the president elect, that open trade is a danger to the United States.<\/p>\n

00;00;59;10 – 00;01;21;04
\nJeremi Suri
\nwhat what are tariff measures and how do they work? And what should we expect if they’re put into place? we are really fortunate to be joined by, a longtime friend, a former student and colleague who has been at the center of these debates for a long time as a scholar or as a policymaker and now as an entrepreneur.<\/p>\n

00;01;21;06 – 00;01;48;00
\nJeremi Suri
\nthis is Meg Reese. She is, among other things, a PhD in international history, policy and national security from the LBJ school. I had the good fortune of working with her. She then went on to really extraordinary work as the national security adviser to Senator Mitt Romney from 2019 to 2023, and she is now the founder and CEO of a super exciting new company that I hope everyone will look at.<\/p>\n

00;01;48;00 – 00;01;58;17
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd soon everyone will hear about. It will be the next Amazon, I’m sure. this is SolidIntel. One word. SolidIntel is her company. Meg, thank you so much for joining us.<\/p>\n

00;01;58;24 – 00;02;00;25
\nMeg Reese
\nThank you for having me.<\/p>\n

00;02;00;28 – 00;02;09;21
\nJeremi Suri
\nIt’s really, a pleasure to have you on, Zachary. Of course you have your scene setting poem for us this week. What is the title of your poem.<\/p>\n

00;02;09;23 – 00;02;11;13
\nZachary Suri
\nOn the border.<\/p>\n

00;02;11;15 – 00;02;14;28
\nJeremi Suri
\nOn the border? Let’s hear it.<\/p>\n

00;02;15;00 – 00;02;38;15
\nZachary Suri
\nDown in the canyons where the river flows. One could mistake the silence for a peace. We’re on the banks of dirt. The tall grass grows. The softly whispering winds never cease. And stepping from the raft to solid rock. The other side is still in the same way. The difference seems to be on taking stock in an old wives tale.<\/p>\n

00;02;38;17 – 00;03;02;02
\nZachary Suri
\nA line that gestures say. For down inside the canyons it is still the shadows falling, rising with the day. The stars who blink the same on both the hills. The whistling winds who beg you still to stay. But stay you cannot. This is not the time. You must forget how much the border rhymes.<\/p>\n

00;03;02;04 – 00;03;07;25
\nJeremi Suri
\nI love it, Zachary. It really makes me feel the border in some ways. what is your poem about?<\/p>\n

00;03;07;27 – 00;03;40;21
\nZachary Suri
\nMy poem is about how incongruous. the reality of the border of the United States. At least the part of the border in Texas that I’m familiar with, is with the kind of political rhetoric that we’re seeing around the border, in particular, president elect Trump’s proposed tariffs against Mexico and Canada. And how strange it is to, to to erect these legislative, barriers between our neighboring countries, which are not just economically tied so closely, but ecologically, socially, culturally.<\/p>\n

00;03;40;24 – 00;04;05;04
\nJeremi Suri
\nYes. Yeah. It does seem as if the rhetoric, assumes a world of distinct, separate societies, which is not the reality. Meg, you’ve been involved from the very start, of at least the last, few administrations, you’ve been involved with, trade policy. And, Senator Romney has long been an advocate of of increased trade, a free trade in many ways.<\/p>\n

00;04;05;09 – 00;04;13;22
\nJeremi Suri
\nWhat? Let’s start there. What is the argument for free trade? The argument, I think, is implied by Zachary’s poem of the intersections and the connections between societies.<\/p>\n

00;04;13;29 – 00;04;59;14
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah, free trade is really a a tool to be able to integrate countries and their goods to facilitate the free flow of goods, with the assumption that as there is minimized, taxes and burdens on producers, manufacturers, consumers, that you’re going to better integrate these trade routes and supply chains so that you can more easily facilitate the flow of goods and the broader goal is generally that as you do so, you’re actually going to strengthen the ties between these countries because they become very economically intertwined.<\/p>\n

00;04;59;16 – 00;05;11;16
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd it really adds to a lot of other ties between the countries, culturally, etc., and a movement of peoples as well. all tied up in these, these flow of goods.<\/p>\n

00;05;11;18 – 00;05;20;01
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd, and, Meg, do you think the United States has benefited from the dividends of free trade, particularly in the last 20 to 30 years?<\/p>\n

00;05;20;04 – 00;05;55;02
\nMeg Reese
\nI don’t think there’s any question that free trade has had a positive impact on many aspects of the economy and society writ large. That being said, where where problems happen, where there’s manufacturing that moves out of the US into countries where it’s cheaper to produce goods, we also have the downside. So you have reductions in our automotive sector and manufacturing sectors that get blamed on free trade.<\/p>\n

00;05;55;04 – 00;06;13;05
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd honestly, a lot of that would have happened regardless. So it’s figuring out how do we balance the positive and negative sides of it. And then where I get interested is, how do you understand the national security implications of these these movements as well?<\/p>\n

00;06;13;07 – 00;06;30;22
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd what are some of the national security implications of, for instance, the free trade regime that we have had in place with China? I mean, I know you you have been concerned about the ways the Chinese have been using trade access to, steal secrets and technology. Is that is that correct?<\/p>\n

00;06;30;29 – 00;07;01;04
\nMeg Reese
\nIts secrets and technology? it’s also, you know, kind of getting around the trade rules often times are using things in a way that they weren’t intended. I think that generally free trade has been a really, really net positive for the US. And I am very, very concerned about the potential of tariffs on our friends and allies where we want to actually increase these flows of goods.<\/p>\n

00;07;01;07 – 00;07;53;18
\nMeg Reese
\nBut when it comes to China, what we’ve seen is, kind of kind of the manipulation and a lot of the WTO rules in, in really, really problematic ways that undercut the flow of goods and, you know, have really taken on certain industries, things like solar, actually a number of different industries have the potential, China also will do things like massively subsidize their certain key industries, kind of sell goods into other countries at really reduce rates in a way that they actually take on the the domestic industries, undercut them, kill those domestic industries, and then raise their rates when they stop subsidizing in such a profound way.<\/p>\n

00;07;53;20 – 00;08;16;25
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd so you’ve seen the weaponization of trade, by, by the Chinese in a really profound way, over the last 15 or so years. And it really came to the forefront, actually probably starting at the Trump administration, you had a couple key industries that got hit really hard before then, but he did bring it to the forefront.<\/p>\n

00;08;16;27 – 00;08;41;20
\nMeg Reese
\nThat being said, he did it at the same time as attacking European trade. And what we’re seeing now is we’re seeing Canada, Mexico and a whole bunch of other friendly or allied countries being threatened with massive tariffs that could really undercut our ability to continue or could actually lead us to violate our own free trade laws.<\/p>\n

00;08;41;23 – 00;08;43;04
\nJeremi Suri
\nZachary.<\/p>\n

00;08;43;07 – 00;08;58;21
\nZachary Suri
\nWhy do you think people, and particularly politicians are on both sides of the aisle, has grown increasingly skeptical in recent years of free trade. It’s it’s hardly a term one hears, from national politicians regularly these days.<\/p>\n

00;08;58;23 – 00;09;42;05
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. So they’re every every, state pretty much has seen some version of backlash against free trade, but you get it really heavily in the Midwest and against, industries that were previously really controlled by unions. And so you’ll see a drop off, both from the Democrat side and the Republican side. and it it seems to flow alongside of other really problematic things we’ve seen in rural populations, for instance, or, smaller cities as they start to, to flow outwards.<\/p>\n

00;09;42;07 – 00;10;14;10
\nMeg Reese
\nor the jobs flow outwards. And so you’ll see that uptick of fentanyl and other methamphetamine abuses, etc.. And it seems to really integrate in people’s minds that the that free trade was the cause or the root cause of a lot of these problems. and so you’re, you’re seeing backlash, you’re not seeing the positive aspects of it, which were really, really big in the 90s, of people openly calling for free trade.<\/p>\n

00;10;14;12 – 00;10;27;21
\nMeg Reese
\nand so you’ve just seen backlashes. And as the populist movements on both the right and the left, grow even stronger, this ends up being the boogeyman.<\/p>\n

00;10;27;23 – 00;10;47;17
\nJeremi Suri
\nand why does, president elect Trump and some of his trade advisors, why do they think tariffs will work? What is the logic of placing 25% tariffs or 50% tariffs, as he sometimes says on Chinese goods, on Canadian goods, on Mexican goods?<\/p>\n

00;10;47;19 – 00;11;20;09
\nMeg Reese
\nso I can tell you the national security justification for the China side, because I think that there’s a lot more general support that’s popped up, at least for certain key industries and Chinese imports. So when you do have tariffs, tariffs are essentially a tax on American consumption. as much as we like to, as much as he Trump used to say he’ll make Mexico pay for it or whichever country would pay for the tariffs.<\/p>\n

00;11;20;11 – 00;12;09;13
\nMeg Reese
\nThat’s not how it works. It ends up being a tax that we pay, which makes a certain countries goods more expensive relative to the other potential imports of goods. And so it tends to be a tool of punishment when it comes to the Chinese. goods. There are certain industries where I think there is general agreement that we need to have more domestic or allied production out of concern that the Chinese would be willing to leverage our reliance on their goods in a conflict scenario, so that we would know longer be willing to support an ally or a friend like Taiwan, because they are able to hold these supply chains over our heads.<\/p>\n

00;12;09;16 – 00;12;50;24
\nMeg Reese
\nNow, that doesn’t really make sense for Mexico or Canada, where we have both long standing friend friendships with these two countries. And we have, you know, free trade rules in place that we don’t want to violate. what Trump seems to be doing is using anger at these two countries and holding the threat of tariffs on them in order to get them to change laws, regulations, etc. especially related to immigration and potential of drug, drug supply.<\/p>\n

00;12;50;27 – 00;13;04;27
\nMeg Reese
\nand so we’ll see if that leads to actual changes before he gets into office, where he’d be willing to say it. Well, you guys kind of follow through with x, y, z. Therefore I don’t need to punish you. We’ll see what happens.<\/p>\n

00;13;04;29 – 00;13;12;01
\nJeremi Suri
\nSo so you think this is a negotiation tactic more than it is a fully thought out policy?<\/p>\n

00;13;12;03 – 00;13;59;19
\nMeg Reese
\nI think that is probably the most likely thing. That’s a so Trump has been very pro tariffs throughout for very very long time. So this seems to be a tool or at least a threat of first resort for him. but he does seem willing to change or negotiate a bit. And you’ll see. I mean, he’s, different leaders will come to him and try to both, personally or otherwise try it and try to appeal to him and things that those countries could be doing in Canada, for instance, that could get them back in the good graces to take off these threats.<\/p>\n

00;13;59;19 – 00;14;12;08
\nMeg Reese
\nSo I think there’s, there’s, negotiation starting point, there’s a threat. But what the actual repercussions will be, I don’t think we know quite yet.<\/p>\n

00;14;12;08 – 00;14;36;28
\nJeremi Suri
\nRight, right. We do know, as historians, of course, that, we have a long history with tariffs in the United States. In fact, throughout the 19th century and the early 20th century, the United States had very high tariffs on trade, particularly after World War One, the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariff and various others, made it very expensive to import products into the United States.<\/p>\n

00;14;37;01 – 00;15;01;07
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd just as you said, mag, we know that those tariffs raise the costs in the US. They protected certain domestic industry, but that was a time when many of the domestic industries that were being protected, when when they didn’t really rely upon goods from overseas, they weren’t bringing in, elements of the production process from overseas. and it still had very harmful effects.<\/p>\n

00;15;01;15 – 00;15;20;28
\nJeremi Suri
\none of the causes of the Great Depression is the, tariff regime that the United States has and other countries have that limit international trade and the movement of capital. All of that said, it does seem we’re in a very different situation today where any American manufacturing relies upon foreign parts and products in the production process. Right?<\/p>\n

00;15;21;01 – 00;16;11;11
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. yeah, it’s actually to the so our supply chains are so internationally integrated at the moment that I, so I have a, an I supply chain companies. So we use generative AI to try to understand where foreign companies etc., potentially foreign adversaries end up in supply chains. And it is nearly impossible. So very few companies even know who are in their supply chains, pass the secondary to tertiary tiers of their supply chains, which means that you could be incredibly integrated with a Chinese with Chinese supply chains as a huge corporation.<\/p>\n

00;16;11;13 – 00;16;59;12
\nMeg Reese
\nBut you have the potential of not even knowing that those exist because they don’t do or require reporting past a couple of supply chain staff or a couple, links down. And so even understanding the full implications of some of these things gets really, really hard. You saw you saw a move by China. just a couple of days ago now, where the Biden administration put sanctions on another 100 companies or Chinese companies and China retaliated by putting four, the they had export controls on some critical minerals like gallium and germanium, antimony, some types of graphite.<\/p>\n

00;16;59;15 – 00;17;27;19
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd now they’re putting full on bans against selling these to the US. And we don’t we really don’t like truly know how much we’re integrated and how impactful some of these moves are going to be by China or the US, as we’re thinking through what the implications are for the supply chain, what that’s going to mean for transferring to find alternative suppliers, or what it’s going to mean for the consumers.<\/p>\n

00;17;27;19 – 00;17;50;14
\nMeg Reese
\nWe already have had really significant inflation for our generation, and this is considered very significant. And they really trying to understand what the implications of big tariffs are going to be on our friends as well as on China. It could really hit, the pocketbooks of a lot of Americans.<\/p>\n

00;17;50;17 – 00;17;52;07
\nJeremi Suri
\nZachary.<\/p>\n

00;17;52;10 – 00;18;21;13
\nZachary Suri
\nI want to ask, how likely do you think, the Trump tariffs, are to be implemented? But more broadly, do you think the general trend in the last few years towards more protectionist trade policy on both sides of the aisle will continue? And in particular, why do you think the Republican Party, which, as I’m sure you you are, you are well experienced in had long embraced free trade, has come to see protectionism as one of its key key political platforms.<\/p>\n

00;18;21;16 – 00;18;32;02
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. I mean, I will just say I still think longingly about TPP. For instance, if you want to understand where I am, that’s the.<\/p>\n

00;18;32;04 – 00;18;34;22
\nJeremi Suri
\nPacific part trading partnership, right? Yeah.<\/p>\n

00;18;34;23 – 00;19;05;10
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. and that ended up being opposed by both Trump and Clinton in 2016, if I remember properly. Yeah. So the so I will say that I anticipate that there will be pretty broad support. for tariffs on certain types of Chinese goods going forward, at least for the next few years. We’re using tariffs as a national security tool at this point.<\/p>\n

00;19;05;10 – 00;19;38;29
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd really we’re using a lot of other tools at our disposal, export controls and sanctions and general pressure points on DoD, to really try to move certain supply chains out of the Chinese market as much as humanly possible, because there’s a lot of concern that there will be a kick off of some, conflict scenario with Taiwan, whether it’s a blockade or a military or whatever.<\/p>\n

00;19;38;29 – 00;20;09;11
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd I, I don’t I’m not super convinced how the US would respond, but I do think I would lead to a lot of disintegration between the US and Chinese economies. And so if you have a lot of really key supply chains integrated in with China, you could have the Chinese really impacting whether or not the US is able to continue supporting or supplying key allies in the region.<\/p>\n

00;20;09;14 – 00;20;58;08
\nMeg Reese
\nIf there was a physical conflict or even if there was pressure on Taiwan. And so you’re seeing a lot of folks in the national security community really supporting a lot of different levers against China. when it comes to kind of moving out these supply chains. That being said, I don’t see there being a lot of long standing or growing support to apply tariffs to our friends, especially as we’re building up the recognition that we need our friends very close to us in this China scenario, which means that we aren’t going to be wanting to apply 1025 50% tariffs on South Korea or Mexico as we’re trying to move our supply chains into those countries.<\/p>\n

00;20;58;08 – 00;21;00;20
\nMeg Reese
\nI just it doesn’t seem logical to me.<\/p>\n

00;21;00;20 – 00;21;11;28
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd do you think that those countries will retaliate if, if, tariffs are put in place? That was, of course, the reality of the early 20th century that we just discussed a few minutes ago. Do you see a trade war emerging?<\/p>\n

00;21;12;04 – 00;21;40;11
\nMeg Reese
\nI would be very concerned about the potential of that. I have one one example, which wasn’t trade, but it was part of this tit for tat thing. So during the last Trump administration, Trump was trying to get South Korea and Japan to pay. I want to say it was either 4 or 5 times what they were paying for, basing US soldiers.<\/p>\n

00;21;40;14 – 00;22;14;11
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd we were at the same time negotiating with the Philippines for some longstanding basing agreements. And I want to say it was due today and then up threatening the Trump administration with needing to pay five times what we had been paying on the exact terms to continue allowing America, an American military in the Philippines. So I see other folks just following this model.<\/p>\n

00;22;14;13 – 00;22;34;23
\nMeg Reese
\nEveryone ended up having to back down in certain ways to to go forward. But I, I see the potential of threats being a thing. That being said, we have a lot of trade agreements in place where these are already defined, and so we could end up actually violating treaties as well as some of these threats happen, which is not good.<\/p>\n

00;22;34;23 – 00;22;41;18
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd there hasn’t been much discussion of those treaties. do they matter?<\/p>\n

00;22;41;21 – 00;23;18;03
\nMeg Reese
\nThey do they I mean, they continue to kind of set all of these various standards, we did pass a lot of legislation out of a mark on the congressional roll in abrogating or getting rid of treaties. And so there’s there’s a role of Congress in this because you have to actually pass these treaties. Right. And so there’s not a unilateral authority of presidents to just stop following these, change all the rules and have there be no consequences.<\/p>\n

00;23;18;03 – 00;23;43;17
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd so it just it you will see, or I would expect you’d see that there is going to be pushback whether or not it happens publicly or if that happens behind closed doors that closed doors is usually the better, better option. You can reduce friction between countries as well as, various parties within the US. If you if you have these negotiations behind closed doors.<\/p>\n

00;23;43;19 – 00;24;15;18
\nMeg Reese
\nSo there’s it’s going to happen. treaties still actually force things in certain ways. I’m a big fan of treaties. There was kind of this assumption during the first Trump administration that we had moved away from multilateral treaties into bilateral treaties, and that’s what we kept being told as the administration didn’t want multilateral, they wanted bilateral. And we’ll we’ll just see if that what this looks like in this next term.<\/p>\n

00;24;15;21 – 00;24;40;11
\nJeremi Suri
\nI was trying to figure this out. Meghan, I don’t understand this. I should, the president has authority to, raise tariffs in certain circumstances, especially for national security reasons. But if there’s an operable treaty, such as the World Trade Organization, that we’re a part of, that we’re a treaty member of, does that not place restrictions on executive power?<\/p>\n

00;24;40;13 – 00;25;08;07
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. Because you it should be law at that point. so there are restrictions in place and there has been pushback against because again, you you’re completely right. There’s national security essentially exceptions that allow some unilateral things to happen, which is why the steel tariffs and others ended up being a huge debate. And I don’t know, a 2017 or so.<\/p>\n

00;25;08;10 – 00;25;38;19
\nMeg Reese
\nbecause there was a question, is there an actual national security imperative to putting these, these restrictions in place, or are these tariffs in place? And so I you’ll probably get that again, but I see that happening a lot more. Where are our friendly countries WTO. it’s really funny. The WTO when there have been challenges the US has come out ahead almost every time.<\/p>\n

00;25;38;21 – 00;26;03;28
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd so it’s strange to me that we don’t go to it more often because usually when we bring a case, we win. But that stop being a thing that we cared about doing a lot a few years ago, and I don’t really see it being being the the place of first resort and China, you know, there are a lot of problems with China and the WTO, and being treated as a developing country.<\/p>\n

00;26;04;00 – 00;26;34;12
\nMeg Reese
\nIt’s they have some special protections that I think there’s general consensus. And on both the left on the right that they shouldn’t have exceptions. As you know, for this second most powerful economy in the world. And so there’s a lot of concern about the ongoing role of China in that organization and whether or not it can actually be in the correct position in order to protect free trade.<\/p>\n

00;26;34;14 – 00;26;56;28
\nJeremi Suri
\nI see it’s an important point to underline that you made, that that many people lose sight of, that these international treaties and organizations such as the World Trade Organization, that, of course, we helped to create, they have repeatedly protected our interests. for example, when the Chinese or other countries try to dump their products on our market, they actually have provided protection for us.<\/p>\n

00;26;56;28 – 00;27;00;16
\nJeremi Suri
\nSo so we should we shouldn’t trash these organizations, correct?<\/p>\n

00;27;00;18 – 00;27;25;26
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah, yeah. When we I mean, this is a longstanding soapbox of mine is something like NATO. And, you know, there are a lot of international organizations that need reform in certain ways. But we did get to be one of the authors of a lot of different international bodies. And so we should be really good at using them because we got to help create them.<\/p>\n

00;27;25;26 – 00;27;34;09
\nMeg Reese
\nAnd I hope that we spend a decent amount of time trying to figure out how to participate for our best interests.<\/p>\n

00;27;34;11 – 00;28;05;26
\nJeremi Suri
\nYeah, yeah. So so mag, we always like to close by asking our distinguished guests like you to connect this history and political analysis with, a forward looking, hopeful perspective. If we can find that today. Where do you see this debate going? And more importantly, how can citizens who care about some of the benefits of free trade, or at least concerned about some of the costs and harms of tariffs and closed borders?<\/p>\n

00;28;05;28 – 00;28;12;06
\nJeremi Suri
\nHow can we contribute to the debate? How can we make sure that these other voices are heard?<\/p>\n

00;28;12;09 – 00;28;55;10
\nMeg Reese
\nI would say that there’s actually a true role for very smart citizens to get involved in some of these issues, because often when you’re in a Senate office or even members of an administration, they only hear the negatives. They don’t hear the positives. And so if there are examples of ways that you want to protect certain types of trade, or that the tariffs would be detrimental and XYZ way, actually making sure that your voice is heard, writing, calling, talking to people about it so that these things are done and the smartest way possible.<\/p>\n

00;28;55;10 – 00;29;31;19
\nMeg Reese
\nI, I really do think there are going to be tariffs on China in particular. But as, as this administration may end up learning that tariffs on a Mexico or a Canada would actually kill businesses, they will end up being responsive. So I think there’s there’s actually more room for folks to get involved and create positive change, and prevent kind of more deleterious things from happening early on because I think they will be at least somewhat responsive.<\/p>\n

00;29;31;22 – 00;29;42;25
\nJeremi Suri
\nIt’s it’s such an important point. And, you know, so well, having been in, an important Senate office for so many years, the, the influence that that ordinary constituents can have. Right, Meg.<\/p>\n

00;29;42;27 – 00;30;18;17
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah. Yeah, absolutely. And you know, yelling never, you know, works. But talking and being thoughtful really, really does. And highlighting especially business owners what the good in the bad is. So that folks who are making and writing the laws understand where the pain points are. It’s so important. I part of the reason I started my company is because I had companies coming to us when I worked in the Senate and telling us about their supply chain issues.<\/p>\n

00;30;18;24 – 00;30;40;27
\nMeg Reese
\nSo I started understanding and our legislation got better and more in-depth and more thoughtful, because I started understanding their pain points and even recognizing ways that government would not serve. And there were private sector opportunities. And so those those folks who come in and talk to staff and a really thoughtful way can really produce real change.<\/p>\n

00;30;41;00 – 00;31;08;21
\nJeremi Suri
\nthat’s that’s very uplifting to to hear that and provides us with some hope, Zachary, for, you know, younger people who, benefit so much from, free trade, from the, you know, movement of, products, consumer goods that were able to get Ahold of, but also, people, being at a university where we have students, of course, from all around the world, and that those students enrich our universities, they bring knowledge, they bring perspectives.<\/p>\n

00;31;08;23 – 00;31;20;29
\nJeremi Suri
\nSo we’re obviously tied to this, how does this debate resonate in that context? And and what role do you see young people like yourself playing in this debate about free trade?<\/p>\n

00;31;21;02 – 00;31;44;23
\nZachary Suri
\nWell, I think young people are probably more hopeful than their parents generation about the possibilities of free trade. I think if anything, the internet has made the boundaries, the borders that we began this discussion with seem less and less meaningful, even as the economic the economic pressures on politicians to move towards more protectionist trade policy seem to have increased.<\/p>\n

00;31;44;26 – 00;32;22;28
\nZachary Suri
\nI so I do think young people have a uniquely international perspective, not just on this issue, but on so many issues. And in that regard, I do think, that this debate still has real meaning, for young people. And I think with the growth of, these technologies and the increasing ability of young people to travel, and the more and more young people growing up alongside immigrants from different countries and really sort of experiencing so many different cultures, I do think that the potential for a new young people’s movement, for free trade, for connections across the globe is very much possible.<\/p>\n

00;32;22;28 – 00;32;27;08
\nZachary Suri
\nAnd I would say that’s probably one of the more hopeful elements of our moment.<\/p>\n

00;32;27;10 – 00;32;31;08
\nJeremi Suri
\nAnd do you see young people getting involved politically around these issues?<\/p>\n

00;32;31;10 – 00;32;51;28
\nZachary Suri
\nAgree that I’m not so sure of. I think that young people’s politics is still very much focused on the local and, the things that affect their lives, which I think makes sense and is probably a good thing in of itself. But I do think there’s there’s room for a greater recognition of the impact of these trade policies on our lives.<\/p>\n

00;32;51;28 – 00;33;03;13
\nZachary Suri
\nAnd I’m sure if we do see these tariffs implemented, that the young people, whom they will probably end up hurting the most, right, will, will be very loud, in in voicing their opinion.<\/p>\n

00;33;03;15 – 00;33;30;22
\nJeremi Suri
\nYeah. I think and your poem certainly gestures in this direction. I think there’s a knowledge young people have on the ground of, how valuable open trade is, even though there must be, as Meg says, also certain restrictions, particularly upon a national security stealing and, threats. Nonetheless, how important open trade is and I think this is only going to become a more and more important issue for young people as as we go forward.<\/p>\n

00;33;30;24 – 00;33;32;08
\nMeg Reese
\nCan I ask a question?<\/p>\n

00;33;32;08 – 00;33;33;09
\nJeremi Suri
\nSure. Meg, please.<\/p>\n

00;33;33;12 – 00;34;01;29
\nMeg Reese
\nSo, Zachary, one of one of the really important parts of free trade agreements is actually the human rights side. So we’ll we’ll come to negotiations with countries where they have to or where we end up doing mutual reforms, or one country has to do reforms to reach certain human rights standards. is this something that you could see younger, younger, people getting behind?<\/p>\n

00;34;02;02 – 00;34;28;00
\nZachary Suri
\nYeah, I think so. I mean, I personally was not very aware of that until you mentioned it. So I think there’s there’s probably very little knowledge among young people of, of that impact. And I would say there’s probably increasing skepticism of the ability of economic and trade connections to enforce democratic institutions and human rights protections, that certainly present among young people.<\/p>\n

00;34;28;03 – 00;34;40;16
\nZachary Suri
\nBut I do think young people still, care very deeply about human rights. And I think there’s certainly space politically to make an appeal to young people about free trade along those lines.<\/p>\n

00;34;40;19 – 00;34;56;01
\nJeremi Suri
\nRight. And the ways in which free trade often brings a freer press as well, and the role that the press can play, for transparency in countries such as China. is that is that a fair assessment? Make that that free trade generally brings freer press access to.<\/p>\n

00;34;56;03 – 00;35;31;25
\nMeg Reese
\nIts it can, depending on the way it’s negotiated. I think you have a little more you have more options when it’s a smaller group, I’d say, than one of these massive international organizations and some trade deals there. But when you have one on one or just a couple small groups, they really can, you know, push for some of these bigger reforms that are in the best interest and tend to be in the best interest of the trade and economic situations of all parties involved.<\/p>\n

00;35;31;27 – 00;35;58;05
\nJeremi Suri
\nThis is certainly one of the lessons from the Cold War. We’re in a different, geopolitical context now. But during the Cold War, the Soviet desire for Western goods and western capital in the 1970s was definitely one of the motivations for the Soviet Union, agreeing to sign what became known as the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, that that allowed for much more transparency around human rights issues in the Soviet bloc.<\/p>\n

00;35;58;08 – 00;36;11;00
\nJeremi Suri
\nso so there is some precedent for that. But I think your point, Meg, is this has to be negotiated in a strategic way. which is all the more reason why, blanket tariffs are dangerous.<\/p>\n

00;36;11;03 – 00;36;11;16
\nMeg Reese
\nYeah.<\/p>\n

00;36;11;19 – 00;36;34;05
\nJeremi Suri
\nSo I think we’ve covered so much here. I want to thank you, Meg Reese, for joining us for sharing your insights on free trade, on tariffs, on the nature of international trade negotiations. And I want to remind our listeners to, take a look at the important work your your company is doing around AI and international issues.<\/p>\n

00;36;34;08 – 00;37;07;17
\nJeremi Suri
\nMeg’s company is called SolidIntel. And, I imagine that, you’ll all hear more about her company in the coming years. Zachary, thank you so much for joining us. and sharing your poem, as always, with our podcast listeners and your wonderful questions. And thank you most of all, to our loyal listeners and loyal subscribers to our Substack newsletter for joining us for this episode of This Is Democracy.<\/p>\n

00;37;07;19 – 00;37;11;00
\nOutro
\nThis podcast is produced by the liberal arts it’s development studio.<\/p>\n

00;37;11;06 – 00;37;15;09
\nOutro
\nAnd the College of Liberal Arts at the University of Texas at Austin.<\/p>\n

00;37;15;11 – 00;37;19;09
\nOutro
\nThe music in this episode was written and recorded by Harris Codini.<\/p>\n

00;37;19;12 – 00;37;27;08
\nOutro
\nStay tuned for a new episode every week you can find This Is Democracy on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and Stitcher.<\/p>\n

00;37;27;10 – 00;37;28;12
\nOutro
\nSee you next time.<\/p>\n"},"episode_featured_image":false,"episode_player_image":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/17\/2021\/03\/This-Is-Democracy-Logo-TPN-Update-2021.png","download_link":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/podcast-download\/3749\/this-is-democracy-episode-285-tariffs-trade-and-supply-chains.mp3","player_link":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/podcast-player\/3749\/this-is-democracy-episode-285-tariffs-trade-and-supply-chains.mp3","audio_player":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/podcast-player\/3749\/this-is-democracy-episode-285-tariffs-trade-and-supply-chains.mp3<\/a><\/audio>","episode_data":{"playerMode":"dark","subscribeUrls":[],"rssFeedUrl":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/this-is-democracy\/feed\/podcast\/this-is-democracy","embedCode":"

This is Democracy – Episode 285: Tariffs, Trade, and Supply Chains<\/a><\/blockquote>