Who Decides? The Constitutional Question of Trade Policy

In the United States, power is supposed to be shared — divided deliberately between branches of government to ensure accountability, transparency, and respect for the will of the people. Trade, one of the most consequential areas of economic policy, is no exception. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution clearly assigns to Congress the authority “to regulate commerce with foreign nations.” This is no accident. The Founders understood that trade decisions have far-reaching consequences for the economy, national sovereignty, and the livelihoods of everyday citizens. That power, they believed, should rest with the elected representatives of the people — not with a single individual.

And yet, in practice, that principle has eroded.

Over the past decades — and especially in the 21st century — Congress has gradually ceded its trade authority to the Executive Branch. Through legislation like the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974, the President has been granted broad powers to impose tariffs under the guise of “national security” or in response to perceived “unfair trade practices.” While these tools may have made sense in a Cold War context, their modern use has blurred constitutional lines. Section 232 and Section 301 have become loopholes through which the White House can unilaterally reshape America’s economic relationships — often without Congressional approval, public debate, or long-term strategy.

We saw this dynamic play out dramatically during the Trump administration, when tariffs on steel, aluminum, Chinese goods, and more were imposed without serious consultation or oversight. But the trend didn’t begin with Trump, and it likely won’t end with him unless the constitutional balance is reasserted. Trade policy has become an executive weapon instead of a legislative process, and the costs are borne not by politicians — but by workers, consumers, and businesses who are left with little recourse.

This is not just a legal question. It is a democratic one.

In a functioning republic, power over national direction must be subject to deliberation, debate, and public scrutiny. When trade decisions are made behind closed doors and enforced via presidential decree, we erode the very spirit of representative government. Reclaiming the Republic means reclaiming this conversation — and restoring Congress to its rightful role as the voice of the American people in matters of trade.

The People Are Investors: Tariffs Hurt Main Street Too

When we talk about Wall Street, the image that often comes to mind is one of suits, skyscrapers, and hedge funds. But that vision is misleading — and politically dangerous. Because today, Wall Street is also Main Street.

More than 55% of Americans own stocks, directly or indirectly. Many do so not because they’re day traders or speculators, but because their retirement depends on it. Whether it’s through a 401(k), an IRA, a union pension fund, or a state employee retirement system, tens of millions of working Americans have a personal stake in the health of the stock market. When markets tumble, it’s not just billionaires who feel the shock — it’s teachers, factory workers, nurses, and small business owners watching their future security evaporate.

And tariffs? They rattle markets.

Each time a new round of tariffs is announced — especially on major trading partners like China, the European Union, or Canada — investors react. Uncertainty rises. Supply chains are disrupted. Costs go up for manufacturers, which means lower profits and, eventually, falling share prices. This isn’t a theory. We saw it clearly in 2018 and 2019, when the Trump administration launched its aggressive tariff campaigns. Markets lurched, farmers needed bailouts, and iconic American companies like Harley-Davidson and GM scrambled to adjust production strategies. Some laid off workers. Some offshored. None benefited from the chaos.

It’s easy for populists to mock “the market” as if it’s a separate elite entity. But in reality, crashing the stock market is crashing the savings of millions of citizens. It’s attacking the hopes of a secure retirement, the ability to help a child through college, or the dream of buying a first home. Tariffs aren’t a punch to the rich — they’re a blow to the middle class.

If we are serious about protecting the economic dignity of ordinary Americans, we need to stop pretending that trade wars are harmless tools. They carry real, measurable costs — and those costs fall on the very people populists claim to defend.

No Map, No Compass: The Missing Industrial Strategy

Tariffs are often sold to the public as a tool for “bringing jobs back home” — a noble-sounding goal that resonates across political lines. But a tool is only as good as the plan behind it. And right now, the United States is wielding tariffs like a blunt instrument without a blueprint. There is no cohesive industrial strategy guiding this approach — just reactive policy and political posturing.

True industrial renewal requires more than punishing foreign imports. It demands long-term vision: targeted investments, workforce development, infrastructure upgrades, incentives for innovation, and a clear roadmap for how America intends to compete in the industries of the future. Yet what we’ve seen instead is a chaotic mix of slogans and short-term fixes, disconnected from any broader economic transformation.

Take manufacturing, for instance. Slapping tariffs on steel or semiconductors doesn’t automatically lead to new factories opening in Michigan or Ohio. In many cases, it simply raises input costs for American producers, making them less competitive globally. Without parallel investments in automation, clean energy, research, and training, we’re not reshoring production — we’re just shifting pain onto domestic firms who depend on global supply chains to survive.

Compare this with the strategic approaches taken by countries like Germany, South Korea, or even China. Their industrial policies are deliberate, multi-decade plans rooted in national priorities. They invest in education and research, nurture key sectors, and align government, business, and labor behind common goals. The U.S., by contrast, seems content to substitute tariffs for strategy — as if raising costs on imports is a plan in itself.

In reality, it’s not a plan. It’s a message — and a dangerously misleading one. Without a compass to guide these trade policies, we risk alienating allies, stoking inflation, and undermining our own competitiveness, all while failing to achieve the promised industrial revival.

If we want real renewal, we need more than economic nationalism. We need a strategy that sees beyond the next election cycle — one rooted in reality, not rhetoric.

Scapegoats and Slogans: The Populist Escape Hatch

When economic policies falter — when jobs are not “brought back,” prices rise, and markets tumble — populist leaders rarely take responsibility. Instead, they reach for a familiar playbook: blame someone else. Whether it’s China, immigrants, multinational corporations, or their political opponents, the goal is the same — to deflect, distract, and divide.

Donald Trump’s use of tariffs is a prime example of this dynamic. Presented as a bold act of economic nationalism, the tariffs have lacked clear objectives, measurable success, or coordination with broader economic policy. But when they inevitably fail to reverse decades-long industrial trends, Trump and his allies will not revisit the wisdom of the policy — they will double down on the narrative that it was sabotaged by others.

This strategy is not new. It’s the essence of performative populism: promise easy answers, vilify dissent, and shift the blame when outcomes disappoint. The danger is not just economic mismanagement — it’s the erosion of civic trust. When leaders tell their base that every failure is the result of “traitors,” “elites,” or “foreigners,” they cultivate a worldview where compromise is weakness and enemies are everywhere.

These slogans — “America First,” “Make America Great Again,” “They’re laughing at us” — are not economic plans. They are emotional triggers, designed to spark loyalty and outrage, not solutions. They substitute spectacle for substance, noise for nuance, grievance for governance.

But slogans don’t build factories. Scapegoats don’t create jobs. And pointing fingers won’t secure America’s future. It’s not enough to name a problem; leaders must be brave enough to offer real answers — and honest enough to admit when they don’t have them.

As the economic consequences of trade wars mount, we must prepare for the political fallout. The public will be told that the pain was worth it, or that it would have worked “if only” the deep state, the left, or foreign powers hadn’t interfered. But we should see this tactic for what it is: a smokescreen for failure.

America deserves better than scapegoats and slogans. It deserves leadership that faces reality — and takes responsibility.

Reclaiming Reality: A Better Way Forward

Tariffs, when used indiscriminately, are not a show of strength — they are a sign of strategic emptiness. They may make for good headlines or rally chants, but they do not solve the complex challenges of global competition, technological disruption, or industrial renewal.

What America needs is not a war on trade — but a plan for progress.

We must return to constitutional principles that place economic decision-making where it belongs: in the hands of the people’s representatives. We must protect investors not because Wall Street deserves sympathy, but because working Americans are the investors. And we must craft an industrial strategy not from fear and nostalgia, but from ambition, cooperation, and foresight.

The challenges ahead are real — but so is the opportunity. The United States has unmatched potential to lead in clean energy, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and advanced manufacturing. But that potential will only be realized if we stop chasing enemies and start building coalitions — across parties, industries, and borders.

In the end, the real test of leadership is not who you can blame, but what you can build. A great republic does not retreat behind walls of tariffs and slogans. It steps forward — clear-eyed, united, and prepared for the future.

Let us choose that future