The criticism of Elon Musk to the main commercial advisor of the Republican Administration and architect of the Tariff Revolution, as well as the opposition of more than a dozen republican legislators to the taxes, tarnish the satisfaction of President Donald Trump for having declared. Musk, who theoretically is not a member of the Government, especially hurts the 18,000 million dollars lost in shares of Tesla in two days due to the fall of the bags. This Saturday he pointed out that the ideal would be an area of zero tariffs between the United States and the European Union. For their part, the legislators, including senators Ted Cruz or Mitch McConnell, are aware that the economic deceleration that can follow the barrage, will especially hit their voters and that they will be they who pay the bill at the polls.
Either by the hole in the pocket or by political calculation, the shy opposition front is made its way. Musk responded in the early hours of Saturday to several users of his social network X (formerly Twitter) who had extolled Peter Navarro as an expert in the field. “A doctorate in economics by Harvard is a bad thing, not good,” wrote the tycoon about the titration of Trump’s main commercial advisor. In response to another Internet user, who pondered the expert’s achievements, he replied: “[Navarro] He has not built shit. ”On Saturday afternoon, in a video intervention in an act of, he went beyond betting on the fall of commercial barriers.” Both Europe and the United States should pass, ideally, in my opinion, to a situation of zero tariff, effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America, “Musk said.
Musk says US should move to “zero tariffs situation situation”
“I hope it is agreed that both Europe and the United States should move, ideally, in my view, to a zero tariff situation…creating a free trade zone
“That has certainly been my advice to the President.”
— Will Steakin (@wsteaks)
Navarro has been omnipresent on television throughout last week, defending the Trump Tariff program and proclaiming possible 600,000 million dollars in new annual revenues. The advisor has minimized Musk’s criticism on Sunday by stating that the tycoon “does not understand” the mechanics of other countries that deceive US commercially, with high barriers and, and that, as is logical, “it is simply protecting their interests, as any businessman would do,” he said in statements to the Fox chain. “[Musk] He has X, has a great microphone, we don’t care to say what he wants, ”added Navarro.
The calculation of political risks also supports the incipient debate on (the announced tax decrease, probably in summer). After Wednesday the Senate approved a resolution that would frustrate the president’s ability to impose new tariffs on Canada, Trump lashed out at the four Republicans who joined the Democrats in the initiative. In a post in Truth Social, he wrote: “To the people of the great states of Kentucky, Alaska and Maine: please contact these senators and make them finally adhere to republican values and ideals. They have been extremely difficult to treat and, incredibly unfair with the leader of the majority of the majority of [republicana en el Senado] John Thune, and with the Republican Party itself. ”
The bill, promoted by the Democrats to end the national emergency declared by Trump on January 22 by the entrance of Fentanil from Mexico, Canada and China ——, probably ends its journey in the House of Representatives, but the rebellion is indicated by the fear of the real consequences of the tariff storm. To those four rebels, ”Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul – joined a day later in statements to Fox Business Ted Cruz, Senator by Texas, a state whose GDP depends a lot on foreign trade. “Tariffs are a consumer tax, and I am not in favor of increasing taxes to US consumers,” he said Thursday. “So my hope is that these tariffs are of short duration and serve as a lever to reduce tariffs worldwide.”
The veteran McConnell – who has publicly faced Robert Kennedy, secretary of Health, in defense of vaccines – has been the most eloquent in criticism of Trump’s commercial war. “At a time when Americans are squeezing the belt, we would do well to avoid policies that increase pain. We should strengthen as pillars of US prosperity and security,” said the one who for years was leader of the Republican bench in the Senate.
Chuck Grassley, senator for Iowa, has even come to co -cross a bipartisan law promoted by Democrat Maria Cantwell who would limit the president’s power to impose and promulgate tariffs and give Congress more control in this regard. The draft establishes that, within 48 hours after imposing or increasing a tariff, the president must explain to Congress the reasons to do so and present “an evaluation of the potential impact on the companies and consumers of the United States.” Grassley also watches over their voters, dependent on a large part of manufacturing and agriculture.
“To a bankruptcy harvest”
Other senators such as Thom Tillis, from North Carolina, have supported the bipartisan initiative signed by Grassley for the good of their voters. “Anyone who says there may be some pain before we do things well needs to talk to my farmers, who are at a bankruptcy harvest,” Tillis told the CNN. “They don’t have time to lose, so we must be especially clear in the application [de los aranceles] or we could cause irreparable damage. ”
Interestingly, all critical voices come from the Upper House, while almost no Republican of the House of Representatives, which are much more aligned with the president than their somage counterparts, has spoken against tariffs. Until Friday night, when Don Bacon broke the ice, Nebraska, announcing that he will present a complementary bill to the Senate Bipartisan bill to stop Trump’s tariff powers and return that authority to Congress. As will probably happen with the latter, the Bacon project will ship in the camera.
To finish heating the environment, economists from the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative studies center, have revealed that the formula used by the Republican administration to impose reciprocal tariffs contains in approximately one in four cases. According to experts, the error has caused much higher tariff rates to achieve the objectives intended by the administration.
