Here are our debate questions for Harris and Trump
Tuesday night’s presidential debate offers voters their first-ever opportunity to watch Kamala Harris and Donald Trump take questions on the same stage about the ins and outs of their policy pronouncements — from the GOP nominee’s vows of mass deportations and newfound embrace of legalized pot to the Democratic hopeful’s calls to crack down on high housing costs and price-gouging.
But it’s far from a sure thing that the showdown in Philadelphia will cast much light on any of the hard questions confronting the country, including an addled post-pandemic economy, security challenges from around the globe, and looming risks such as climate change and the rise of artificial intelligence. After all, June’s debate between Trump and President Joe Biden wound up making history for much different reasons.
So here is POLITICO’s primer on some of the policy questions that ABC News’ David Muir and Linsey Davis may want to ask Harris and Trump — and how they might push the candidates beyond their easy talking points:
Taxes
Question for both candidates: Both of you have proposed tax cuts that would cost trillions of dollars in federal revenue. With the nation’s debt already at a level that many economists consider unsustainable, how do you justify calling for even more tax cuts?
Reasons for asking: A big chunk of the tax cuts Trump signed into law in 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025, and he wants to make them permanent. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that would cost $4.6 trillion over 10 years.
But Trump has also proposed tacking on new tax cuts, including ending federal taxes on tips and Social Security income and lowering the corporate income tax rate to 15 percent from 21 percent for companies that make their products exclusively in the United States.
Harris, too, has proposed numerous tax cuts, including eliminating the federal income tax on tips, expanding family tax credits, creating a new credit for first-time home buyers and offering a major boost in a tax deduction for small businesses that are just getting off the ground.
To make up for the lost revenue, Harris has proposed boosting taxes on people making more than $400,000, raising the corporate income tax to 28 percent and increasing the capital gains tax rate to 33 percent from 23.8 percent for people making more than $1 million.
Trump, meanwhile, has vowed to balance his tax cuts by slashing spending and dramatically increasing tariffs on imported goods, among other things. He has also argued that tax cuts reduce the federal debt by juicing the economy.
No one knows, at this stage, whether the math will work on either plan. But promises to pay for tax cuts have proven much easier said than done in the past.
— Toby Eckert
Energy
Question for Trump: Under Biden, the U.S. set an all-time world record for oil production last year. The U.S. is also the world’s biggest exporter of natural gas, and is spending many billions of dollars to get companies to build battery and clean energy factories in the United States. Why do you claim that Biden and Harris are waging a war on American energy?
Question for Harris: You’ve said you wouldn’t ban fracking, but your administration has taken a big step that could threaten the future growth of the natural gas industry in states like Pennsylvania — pausing the approval of new natural gas exports while regulators study their impact on climate change and the economy. Environmental groups want the pause made permanent. Some U.S. allies worry it could interrupt their supplies of American fuel. Would you lift the pause when it expires next year?
Reasons for asking: The United States’ emergence as an energy superpower during the past decade and a half has scrambled a lot of old assumptions left over from the scarcity-wracked ’70s, even if the country remains yoked to a troublesome global petroleum market. But much of the political rhetoric surrounding the issue has yet to catch up.
For example, U.S. oil and gas production has climbed during Biden’s administration — defying both Republican accusations to the contrary and the president’s pledges to steer the country away from fossil fuels.
Trump, meanwhile, has portrayed himself as the fossil fuel industry’s biggest booster. But oil and gas executives have expressed ambivalence about his energy policies, which would grant them access to vast amounts of federal land but could cause them difficulties in the global markets. His promises to impose broad tariffs raise fears that worsening trade tensions — and the likely retribution from other countries — would drive up their cost of doing business, and thus raise energy prices.
Harris has long challenged the oil and gas industry’s practices, first as California’s attorney general and later as a senator who co-sponsored the Green New Deal resolution. She has moderated her positions since joining Biden’s ticket in 2020, and since becoming the Democratic standard-bearer this summer, but voters scarred by the record-high gasoline prices of 2022 may be looking for reassurance that she won’t make their daily commutes more expensive.
— Matt Daily and Bob King
Ukraine
Question for both: What is the first action you'll take regarding the war in Ukraine?
Reasons for asking: Some mystery exists about how either candidate would handle Russia's war with Ukraine, now in its third year.
Trump has said he has a plan to end the war in 24 hours, but has refused to divulge details. He has blamed Biden for Russia's invasion, saying it never would have happened under his own watch, and has encouraged lawmakers to vote against sending weapons and other aid to Kyiv. Yet as president, Trump would also be eager for a win on the global stage and may still decide that supporting Ukraine can benefit him.
Harris, meanwhile, has shown no signs of straying from Biden's policy of arming Ukraine. But the Biden team has moved cautiously on deciding which weapons to send — critics say too cautiously — and Harris may decide to loosen restrictions on where Ukraine can strike inside Russia.
— David Brown
Israel and Gaza
Question for both: How do you plan to deal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both when it comes to the treatment of Palestinians in the short term and when planning for a post-war Gaza in the longer term?
Reasons for asking: Harris has said she stands by Israel but believes Netanyahu's government has gone too far in its treatment of civilians in Gaza. She has also said she plans to follow Biden's policy with respect to weapons transfers. But Biden has in limited cases paused the delivery of weapons over humanitarian concerns, so she has wiggle room when it comes to leverage over Netanyahu.
Trump was proud of his warm relationship with Netanyahu while he was president, but since then has criticized the Israeli leader for not finishing the war quickly. His answer to this question would show how much pressure he plans to apply to Netanyahu if the war continues to drag on.
— David Brown
Education
Question for Trump: Four people are dead, nine wounded, and countless others scarred after last week’s school shooting in Georgia. Polls suggest parents are more concerned for their children’s safety at school than ever before. You and your running mate have suggested that schools need to harden their security and arm teachers. But many schools already have imposed multiple layers of physical security — including the one in Georgia, where a school resource officer confronted the gunman and a new panic alarm system played a key role in the response. Don’t we need to do more than lock down the schools?
Reasons for asking: Trump has routinely called for schools to strengthen physical security measures and arm educators with firearms to defend against shootings. But unlike Democrats such as Harris, Trump has refused to endorse a ban against civilians’ use of military-style weapons. After a January school shooting in Iowa, Trump described such fatal attacks as "horrible" and expressed sympathy for the victims but added: "We have to get over it — we have to move forward."
— Juan Perez
Question for Harris: The Biden administration vowed to tackle the student debt crisis. But the courts have paused or halted its biggest student debt relief programs. Student loans now make up one of the largest forms of consumer borrowing, saddling millions with hefty payments and disproportionately affecting people of color. What policies would you push that would make a difference?
Reasons for asking: Only 22 percent of adults say it's worth getting a four-year degree if they have to take out a loan to do it, according to a Pew Research Center poll conducted this year. Biden made reducing student loan debt a key part of his education agenda, although has had limited success. The Supreme Court last year struck down his student loan forgiveness plan. Courts this year paused his income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE, and preemptively paused another debt relief program that was supposed to launch in the fall.
Republicans scoff at most of Biden’s student debt relief efforts, saying it unfairly burdens taxpayers. Trump has called Biden’s student debt plans “vile.” His running mate JD Vance, in a post on X, labeled student loan forgiveness a “massive windfall to the rich, to the college educated” and “corrupt university administrators of America.”
— Rebecca Carballo
Trade
Question for Trump: You’ve said you want to impose a universal tariff of 10 percent to 20 percent, plus even stiffer trade penalties on China, but it will be difficult to win approval for that from Congress. Would you declare the trade deficit is a national emergency in order to impose those new tariffs through executive action, or would you seek new legislation?
Reasons for asking: Trump dusted off rarely used laws as president to impose tariffs on steel and a broad array of Chinese goods. If elected to a second term, trade experts and former officials say, he could easily use another obscure but long-standing statute to enact his latest trade proposal: slapping a universal tariff of 10 or 20 percent on all goods imported into the U.S., which total more than $3 trillion annually, as well as imposing a 60 percent tariff on all Chinese goods.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act gives the president sweeping authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. Some trade experts believe it is supple enough to also implement Trump’s pledge to phase out imports of essential goods from China over four years. Trump, during his first term, proposed legislation that would give the president more power to raise U.S. tariffs to match the level of duties in other countries, although that could be a challenge getting through Congress.
Such moves would trigger major shifts in the U.S. and global economies. Free market-oriented economists warn that an across-the-board tariff would fuel inflation and drive up the costs of everyday goods for Americans. Harris has slammed Trump’s tariff proposal as a “national sales tax” on American families.
Question for Harris: Would you continue Biden’s de facto ban on new tariff-easing free trade agreements with foreign countries? What do you say to farmers and other industries who want the U.S. to open more export markets for their goods via traditional free trade agreements?
Reasons for asking: The Biden administration swore off pursuing conventional free trade deals out of fear of electoral backlash and a belief from his team — particularly his trade chief — that lowering tariffs won’t help the U.S. economy. That’s drawn cheers from organized labor, some domestic industries and more protectionist groups, but it’s also increasingly frustrated sectors of the U.S. economy that rely on exports — such as agriculture — as well as foreign allies and other trading partners in key parts of the world, including the Asia-Pacific.
— Doug Palmer, Ari Hawkins
Food and agriculture
Question for Trump: The agriculture and food industries rely on foreign-born labor, and many people who work on farms and meatpacking plants are undocumented. If you crack down on legal and illegal immigration, as promised, who will grow and pick and prepare the food Americans eat every day? And what will happen to food costs?
Reasons for asking: The Trump campaign is looking to weaponize a forecasted drop in farmer income in 2024, the second year of falling incomes after a record high in 2022, as part of its effort to keep rural voters solidly in his corner.
But the many reasons for those falling incomes include rising labor costs, something the ag industry has struggled with for years. Trump’s immigration policies could worsen the problem by cracking down on a major source of labor — immigrants, and specifically, undocumented immigrants, who make up roughly 40 percent of crop farmworkers in the United States, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Meatpacking plants also rely on a significant number of foreign-born workers, both undocumented and authorized, including refugees.
The former president, however, has promised to round up and deport millions of undocumented immigrants who reside in the United States. While it would be hard to pull off deportations on that scale, Trump’s policies could certainly make it harder for undocumented laborers to cross in and out of the country. He’s also likely to tighten restrictions on legal immigration, as he did in his first term.
Question for Harris: Your campaign has softened the language it is using to explain your grocery price-gouging proposal. Can you clarify how you would employ a price-gouging ban and whether you think you can get the proposed legislation through Congress?
Reasons for asking: The rising cost of living remains top-of-mind for a majority of voters, and the Harris campaign has responded by promising to bring down grocery prices, among other things. She has been vague about how exactly she would combat price-gouging, though one part of her proposal focuses on passing legislation that largely mirrors a bill by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). But Democrats on the Hill say such a bill has virtually no chance of passing in the near future.
Harris' advisers have toned down their rhetoric on how aggressive the measures would be by downplaying their overall impact on the market. Brian Nelson, a top Harris economic adviser, told reporters at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago that the plan simply aimed to match up federal standards with so-called price gouging guardrails that already exist in 37 states — many of them Republican-led.
— Meredith Lee Hill, Emily Cadei
Housing
Question for Trump: The Black-white homeownership gap is roughly as wide today as in 1968, when housing discrimination was legal. You’ve warned that Democrats trying to implement a fair housing rule are declaring “war on the suburbs.” What do you mean by that?
Reasons for asking: The Biden administration in 2023 proposed the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, which would implement a provision of the landmark 1968 Fair Housing Act by requiring local governments to address patterns of segregation in their communities to receive federal funding.
Trump had scrapped an earlier, Obama-era version of the rule in 2020 in an attempt to woo suburban voters, accusing Democrats of trying to “abolish the suburbs.”
Under the Biden administration's version, states and localities would be required to submit “equity plans” to the Department of Housing and Urban Development every five years detailing their strategies to combat housing discrimination. They would then be required to submit annual progress evaluations. The proposal would allow the public to file complaints with HUD about local governments that fail to comply.
During a campaign stop last month in Michigan, Trump pledged to “keep the suburbs safe,” adding: “I stopped low-income towers from rising right along the side of [suburban women’s] house[s]. I keep illegal aliens away from the suburbs.”
Question for Harris: You released a plan last month that you said would lead to the construction of 3 million new housing units. It encourages states and localities to remove barriers to construction by competing for grants. But isn’t the problem the places that have no interest in removing those barriers? Would you consider sticks such as tying federal transportation dollars to zoning changes alongside the carrots in your plan?
Reasons for asking: Much of the cost of constructing additional housing is determined at the local level: Zoning rules, land-use restrictions and permitting fees often make it prohibitively expensive to build affordable units. Regulations from all levels of government typically account for about 25 to 30 percent of the cost of building a new single-family home or apartment building.
The Biden administration has championed a competitive grant program to induce local governments to ease barriers to construction, and Harris proposed a $40 billion fund to remove barriers such as exclusionary zoning in the housing plan she unveiled last month.
But economists and housing advocates are skeptical that a carrots-only approach will work: Many localities have traditionally resisted efforts to build new affordable housing, and mayors are often keen to keep the federal government off their backs.
— Katy O’Donnell
Health care
Question for Harris: Medicare for All is no longer on your agenda. What changed?
Reasons for asking: During her short-lived 2020 presidential bid, Harris offered a modified Medicare for All plan, which would have made a significant overhaul of the health care system by moving it toward government-backed insurance but not eliminating private health insurance. Her campaign has not explained what changed her thinking since then.
Harris spokesperson Seth Schuster previously declined to comment on the Medicare for All shift but told POLITICO that Harris would take the “same pragmatic approach” that the Biden administration has on policy, “focusing on common-sense solutions for the sake of progress." Harris has spoken broadly about protecting Obamacare and Medicare.
Question for Trump: Medicaid is the largest payer for low-income Americans and covers about 1 in 5 Americans. You’ve pledged to protect Medicare from cuts, but your administration took steps that could allow states to cut Medicaid. Would cuts to Medicaid also be off the table?
Reasons for asking: Trump has been largely silent on what he’d do about Medicaid. His Republican National Convention platform doesn’t mention Medicaid, the safety-net insurance program, but Harris’ Democratic platform mentions Medicaid 26 times.
During the failed attempt during Trump’s reign to repeal Obamacare, the GOP attempted to overhaul Medicaid financing. His administration approved 13 states’ requests for controversial work requirements tying Medicaid to employment, though due to litigation only Arkansas’ launched. His administration also called on states to seek waivers that would allow them more flexibility over Medicaid coverage — including cutting it.
Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt previously told POLITICO that his call for large-scale deportations would “end the financial drain” on the U.S. health care system and ensure Medicaid can care for qualified citizens. But most states do not cover undocumented immigrant adults, and those that do use state money.
— Ben Leonard
Artificial intelligence
Question for Harris: Artificial intelligence could deliver huge economic growth — and could also hurt American citizens if it’s misused. How will you use Biden’s 2023 White House executive order on AI to rein in the technology’s potential harms without losing the competitive race with China? And if that’s a false choice, which is the bigger concern about AI for you — the risk it will discriminate against marginalized Americans, or the risk an authoritarian country could beat us on the next great tech wave?
Reasons for asking: With AI growing vastly more powerful and attracting billions of dollars in investment, the 2023 executive order from the Biden White House — as well as an earlier AI Bill of Rights — pushed the government to enforce laws to prevent algorithmic systems from acting with bias and worsening societal inequalities. Harris has been out front in the administration’s push to address these real-world harms from AI.
But the tech industry, and many national-security hawks, worry that slowing down AI development with more rules and tighter oversight will cede important ground to China — which could threaten both American economic power and global democratic values.
— Mohar Chatterjee
TikTok
Question for Trump: In 2020, you said TikTok should be banned. Now you’ve flipped completely and said you’d “never ban TikTok.” Why did you change your mind? And if its Chinese ties are still a threat, what would you do about it as president?
Reasons for asking: The Trump administration tried and failed to ban TikTok in 2020. Then this year, after Congress passed legislation that forces the app to divest from its Chinese owners or face a nationwide ban, Trump told one conservative influencer that he would “never ban TikTok.” He has faced questions about whether his change of heart was driven by current or prospective Trump donors who have invested in TikTok.
If he wants to save the app, he’d need a plan to unwind the TikTok law, which passed earlier this year with huge majorities in both chambers of Congress. He’d also need to align the GOP on this issue: An overwhelming majority of Republican lawmakers voted to ban TikTok.
— Brendan Bordelon
Antitrust and corporate power
Question for both: A pushback against corporate power, particularly the Big Tech giants, was a common theme of both the Trump and Biden administrations. Will your administration continue an effort to curb the power of the world's largest tech companies? Will you keep Lina Khan as the head of the Federal Trade Commission?
Reasons for asking: Both parties have seen a split between a populist wing that wants to see the biggest and most powerful companies reined in — even broken up — and a more traditional corporate wing that wants to see a return to the looser antitrust enforcement of the past 30 years. The populists have had reason for optimism since 2020, as federal regulators have filed antitrust suits against Google, Meta, Amazon and Apple.
In donor-rich Silicon Valley, many leaders have soured on the Biden-Harris economic agenda, with venture capitalists and tech executives suggesting the president is hostile to innovation, and they see the White House sending the wrong signal by attacking hyper-successful American companies in court. They have joined several top GOP lawmakers in attacking Khan’s record at the FTC, which has clamped down on allegedly monopolistic behavior in a range of industries.
But much of the current anti-monopoly fervor actually began under Trump, whose appointees at the FTC and the Justice Department filed the first antitrust suits against Google and Meta. Vance has been a strong advocate of tighter antitrust enforcement as well.
The next president will have to balance populist enthusiasm for the pushback campaign with the growing discontent about it in corporate America — and an argument that these cases undercut American soft power by handcuffing the most economically important companies in the world.
— Josh Sisco and Brendan Bordelon
Industrial policy
Question for both: The U.S. has pivoted toward industrial policy, with more use of tariffs and new laws passed under Biden that aim to increase domestic manufacturing of semiconductors and green energy technology. Is that an approach that you want to apply to other sectors?
Reasons for asking: Trump has suggested he would put across-the-board tariffs on imported goods, but it’s unclear whether he thinks any particular sectors should be protected and subsidized. He has criticized Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which has facilitated massive private investment in clean energy projects, as a waste of money. At the same time, the IRA’s provisions restricting incentives for foreign-made products have rankled U.S. allies in Europe and Asia.
Harris has been a key spokesperson for the Biden administration in highlighting the benefits of the industrial policies they’ve pursued thus far, but it’s an open question whether that’s a strategy she’d like to expand.
— Victoria Guida
Labor policies
Question for Trump: You've claimed to be a pro-worker candidate, yet your administration rolled back many labor protections enacted during the Obama administration, such as making it more difficult for unions to organize, narrowing overtime pay requirements and making it easier for employers to classify workers as independent contractors, who have fewer workplace protections. Why should workers trust you to fight on their behalf, as you’ve promised?
Question for Harris: The Biden administration implemented work rules that heavily favored organized labor — for instance, making it easier to form unions and extending overtime pay to more people. Republicans complained the administration was putting a thumb on the scale for unions. As president, would you continue to pursue such policies and, if so, how would you overcome courts that are hostile to that agenda?
Reasons for asking: During the Trump administration, labor-related agencies proposed or implemented rules considered favorable to business and at odds with unions. And Trump has expressed anti-union sentiments, recently indicating his approval of firing striking workers. Nonetheless, Trump has courted the votes of union members by arguing his policies on trade have benefited them. Most major unions have endorsed Harris, saying Trump’s policies are clearly anti-worker, but he drew a large share of votes from union households.
The Biden administration repealed many of the Trump-era labor regulations. But those moves were met by a flood of lawsuits from business groups, which argue that the administration overreached its legal bounds, and increasingly conservative federal courts have blocked them.
At the same time, recent Supreme Court rulings have made it more difficult for agencies to defend regulations that are contested.
— Lawrence Ukenye and Toby Eckert
Africa and Latin America
Question for Harris: The Biden-Harris administration vowed to help strengthen democracy in Africa and Latin America, yet it has struggled to respond to an epidemic of coups across Africa and democratic backsliding in Latin America. What would a Harris administration do to restore U.S. standing in Latin America and Africa and rival China and Russia’s growing influences in both regions?
For Trump: When you were president, you referred to nations in Africa and elsewhere as “shithole” countries. Yet many Republican lawmakers and former members of your administration say the U.S. needs to work with these countries to compete with Russia and China. Do you still view them as shithole countries, and if not how would you make amends with them to advance U.S. interests against its adversaries?
Reasons for asking: The Biden administration came into office pledging to strengthen U.S. ties with Africa and Latin America and has, on several occasions, worked to step up its cooperation with governments in both regions on security, technology and trade. But the U.S. has struggled over the last four years to match China's investments in Africa and Latin America. And China, not the U.S., is increasingly seen as the economic and geostrategic partner of choice in many of these countries.
Moscow, meanwhile, has become a security guarantor for many former U.S. African allies, especially in the Sahel. The Russian mercenary Wagner Group has fomented and aided coups in countries, most recently Niger, that previously helped the U.S. in its military efforts against ISIS and other jihadist groups in Africa. And African countries have been muted in their criticism of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and have kept warm ties with the Kremlin.
It’s also worth noting that African countries were disappointed that Biden postponed a promised trip to the continent. However, the White House will point to trips there by Harris, first lady Jill Biden and Cabinet-level officials such as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
Meanwhile, Trump’s caustic rhetoric alienated some key countries on the continent during his presidency and stunted some U.S. initiatives there to address public health challenges and security. But the Trump administration did support the Africa Continental Free Trade Agreement and launched trade negotiations with Kenya.
— Robbie Gramer and Eric Bazail-Eimil
