Former President Donald Trump has unveiled several ambitious proposals aimed at addressing affordability for American families as he campaigns for the 2024 presidential election. A $2,000 subsidy for all Americans—richer or poorer—is at the heart of his plan. He proposes that we use the revenues from our tariffs to pay for this new endeavor. Notably, Trump included in his 2024 budget proposal turning government health insurance subsidies into cash transfers. He’s doing all this to promote the idea of 50-year mortgages as a new long-term home financing option.
Yet it’s hard to remember that overall economic backdrop considering Trump’s proposals arrive at a moment when most Americans are struggling with affordability. Even with these alarming realities, he has continued to minimize the extent of the crisis, even asserting that the economic outlook has gotten better under his watch. President Trump is certainly right to prioritize affordability, as evidenced by his call for a federal investigation into soaring beef prices. In recent news, he has successfully negotiated with pharmaceutical manufacturers to lower the cost of obesity drugs for uninsured consumers.
The former president’s approach seems to be what draws some voters. His electoral achievement underscores his keen political acumen. He does an excellent job engaging the chasm between Democratic elites in D.C. and the mood of the American electorate. According to recent exit polls, public support for Trump’s economic management appears to be fading.
In perhaps the most attention-getting infrastructure proposal of all time, Trump called for using tariff revenue to fund his $2,000 rebate plan. That’s why economists are so wary of this approach. For one, they contend that the anticipated tariff revenue will not come close to covering the proposed payments. Further compounding these failures, reports have suggested that Trump first floated all of these proposals with limited or no consultation from top White House advisers.
In addition to promoting land use deregulation, Trump has promoted 50-year mortgages as a policy to increase homeownership. He thinks this floated 40 year payment schedule could help reduce the cost of living for American families. As we’ve previously discussed, critics of these long-term loans have expressed concern about what they may mean in practice.
“I don’t like 50-year mortgages as the solution to the housing affordability crisis,” – Marjorie Taylor Greene
Greene’s worries, though, are shared by some analysts. They cautioned that while longer mortgage terms may seem beneficial, they would be detrimental to consumers by leading to greater interest payments over time.
Trump remains resolute in his belief that affordability has been mischaracterized by Democrats, whom he accuses of using it as a political tool. He stated, “affordability is a new word and a con job by Democrats,” implying that the term has been weaponized in political discourse rather than being a genuine concern.
In addition to the suggested mortgage reforms, Trump has proposed allowing Americans to “go out and negotiate their own insurance.” As with so much else, this push mirrors his long-standing desire to deregulate and increase consumer choice in the world of healthcare.
Despite the challenges ahead, Trump’s proposals are indicative of his effort to connect with voters who feel left behind by current economic policies. As he navigates a complex political landscape, he continues to articulate a vision that aligns with his supporters’ aspirations for greater financial relief.
“It feels right now they’re just throwing all sorts of ideas out there to test them to see if they sound good,” – Ms. York
This skepticism is highly representative of the skepticism surrounding many of Trump’s proposals. Many Americans eagerly advocate for direct cash payments and longer mortgage terms. Others express skepticism on their practicality and lasting impact.
Despite this, Trump and his campaign continue to thrum along with their campaign. We’ll see over the next year how these affordability efforts will evolve and whether they reach a broader audience. The next few months will surely show us more about his plan, as well as how voters are responding to his approach.