Democrats demand Senate GOP chairman hold hearing on Trump tariff ‘chaos'
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and other Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee are demanding that the panel's chairman, Republican Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), hold a hearing on President Trump's authority to impose tariffs on more than 180 countries, citing the 'economic chaos' caused by Trump's 'lack of a coherent strategy.'
'Tariffs can be critical to grow American industry and promote good manufacturing jobs. But many of the president's tariffs lack a coherent strategy, generating economic chaos and giving giant corporations an excuse to raise prices on Americans,' the Democratic senators wrote in an April 6 letter to Scott.
The Democrats noted that the Republican-controlled Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs has jurisdiction over key aspects of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump has cited as his authority to impose sweeping tariffs.
Warren and her colleagues also warned that Trump may grant tariff exemptions to allied business leaders and industry.
'The president's tariffs also raise concerns about whether he will repeat mistakes from his first term in handing out exceptions to well-connected friends or companies at the expense of everyone else,' they wrote.
A study by researchers from the SUNY Buffalo, Fordham University, University of Oklahoma and Lehigh University published in The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis found that companies that made political contributions and investments to help Republicans before and during Trump's first term were more likely to win tariff exemptions.
Meanwhile, companies that supported Democrats were less likely to secure tariff exemptions.
Senate Democrats said a hearing in the Banking Committee would help shed more light on Trump's tariff policies.
'We urge you to hold a hearing so the American people can understand the president's plan and how it will affect their economic futures,' they wrote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Can you pass this quiz on Social Security, savings and debt? Most Americans could not.
If you think you are financially literate, then try to answer this question: How much of your healthcare expenses do Medicare and other government programs cover in retirement? Over 90%? About two-thirds? Or about half? If you chose 'about two-thirds,' you're correct, and you're in the minority. Only about one in four Americans answered that question right on a financial literacy quiz, completed online in January by 3,371 consumers. Overall, Americans got correct answers on just under half of the quiz questions. The findings come from the 2025 Personal Finance Index, published in late May by the TIAA Institute and the Global Financial Literacy Excellence Center. Each of the 28 questions covers a basic concept of financial literacy: Saving and investing, borrowing and managing debt, spending money and comprehending financial risk. In a financially literate society, the quizmasters say, most of us would know most of the answers. Yet, only 16% of quiz-takers got 22 or more of the 28 questions right. The average test-taker knew about half of the answers. 'In a capitalist economy, when human beings are responsible for managing their own finances, including their own lifestyle in retirement, a certain amount of financial knowledge is assumed,' said Michael Finke, professor of wealth management at the American College of Financial Services. 'And people who don't have financial knowledge are vulnerable.' The Personal Finance Index and attendant quiz have been offered annually since 2017. The results suggest that Americans aren't making much progress in financial literacy. In the best year, 2020, quiz-takers answered 52% of the questions correctly. The results matter 'because the lack of financial awareness is what holds people back from either building wealth or getting out of a cycle of debt,' said Caleb Silver, editor in chief of Investopedia, the financial journalism site. Financial literacy runs low, according to Silver and others, because most Americans don't learn much in school about saving, investing or managing debt. The next generation may do better. More than two-thirds of states now require personal finance classes for high school graduation, compared with fewer than half of states in 2022, according to the Council for Economic Education. The Personal Finance Index quiz measures literacy in eight subjects. The share of correct answers in 2025 ranged from a high of 59%, on the subject of borrowing, to a low of 36%, in the area of comprehending risk. Test-takers showed greater knowledge on the basics of saving, and less literacy on insurance and investing. If you don't understand the basics of managing debt, then you might not know that a credit card balance with a 20% interest rate costs the borrower more over time than a balance with a 10% rate. If you aren't financially literate on investing, then you might not appreciate the power of compound interest in building retirement savings over multiple decades. 'How much of your paycheck to save for retirement: This is an incredibly important decision that can have a huge impact on the standard of living that you have in retirement,' Finke said. Nothing flummoxed the quiz-takers more than risk, a set of questions that covered uncertain financial outcomes. Here is a sample question about risk: There's a 50/50 chance that Malik's car will need engine repairs within the next six months, which would cost $600. At the same time, there is a 10% chance that he will need to replace the air conditioning unit in his house, which would cost $4,000. Which poses the greater financial risk for Malik? The air conditioning replacement? The car repair? Or is there no way to tell? To get the correct answer, you multiply the cost of each scenario by its probability. As it turns out, the A/C replacement poses the greater risk. One-third of quiz-takers figured that out. 'It's a very simple scenario, but there's a lot going on there,' said Surya Kolluri, head of the nonprofit TIAA Institute. Here are some other questions from the Personal Finance Index quiz. Test your financial literacy! Latisha plans to start saving for retirement by setting aside $2,000 this year. Her employer offers a 401(k) plan and fully matches a worker's contributions up to $5,000 each year. Under which scenario does Latisha have the largest amount in retirement savings at year-end? A) She contributes $2,000 to the 401(k) plan and invests the money in a mutual fund that earns a 5% return during the year. B) She contributes $2,000 to an IRA, or Individual Retirement Account, and invests the money in a mutual fund that earns a 5% return. C) It doesn't matter: She will have the same amount of year-end savings either way. Answer: A. Anna saves $500 each year for 10 years and then stops saving additional money. At the same time, Charlie saves nothing for 10 years but then receives a $5,000 gift, which he decides to save. If both Anna and Charlie earn a 5% return each year, who will have more savings after 20 years? A) Anna B) Charlie C) Anna and Charlie will have the same amount Answer: A. Which statement about Social Security is false? A) The amount someone receives in Social Security benefits depends upon his/her earnings during the last two years of full-time employment. B) A worker receives Social Security benefit payments if he/she becomes disabled before retiring. C) Social Security benefit payments will continue as long as an individual is alive, no matter how long he/she lives. Answer: A. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Can you pass this financial literacy quiz? Most Americans could not. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
LA's Only Elected Republican Reacts to National Guard Troops, ICE Raids
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The only elected Republican in Los Angeles, Kathryn Barger, warned that there must be close coordination between federal, state, and local agencies if President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to quell the city's riots is to work. Her warning, in an email to Newsweek, comes as Trump clashes with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats, over his deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines. Newsom and Bass oppose the moves, accusing the Republican president of fueling the disorder. Barger, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, is the sole Republican elected to office at the local government level in the LA area. There are no other Republicans on the LA County Board of Supervisors, and none at all elected to the LA City Council. She also called for "transparency, accountability, and respect" from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as it conducts raids across LA, operations that sparked the unrest. Protests in the city against raids by ICE over the weekend have descended into riots and looting. The raids are part of the Trump Administration's effort to deport all illegal immigrants from the U.S., with an emphasis on violent criminals. Newsom and Bass said state and local authorities can handle the situation without National Guard troops. But Trump says he is reestablishing law and order after failures by local and state leadership. "The deployment of National Guard troops is a significant action that must be approached with great care and coordination," Barger told Newsweek. "While I understand the urgency that may prompt federal involvement, I believe any such deployment must be done in close partnership with state and local agencies to ensure the safety and well-being of our communities. "Effective use of this powerful resource depends on clear communication, mutual goals, and a unified command structure. "My focus remains on making sure that all efforts—federal, state, and local—are aligned to deliver real support where it's needed most." This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration... This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration operations in Los Angeles. More BLAKE FAGAN/AFP via Getty Image Barger also urged ICE to minimize "fear and disruption among law-abiding residents." "Immigration enforcement is a deeply complex and sensitive issue, especially in a diverse region like Los Angeles County," Barger told Newsweek. "Federal agencies like ICE are tasked with upholding the law and I believe it's critical that their operations are conducted with transparency, accountability, and respect for the communities they affect. "My priority is ensuring that all enforcement actions are carried out in a way that upholds public safety while minimizing fear and disruption among law-abiding residents. "Local and federal agencies must work together thoughtfully to maintain trust, protect civil liberties, and ensure due process is respected at every level." This is a developing article. Updates to follow.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The S&P 500 Is Nearly at an All-Time High After Falling 19%. Here's What History Says the Stock Market Could Do Next.
Rebounds after past S&P 500 sell-offs of 19% or more have sometimes led to strong bull markets -- but not always. The big wild card today for the stock market is the outcome of President Trump's trade policy. However, history is on the side of long-term investors. 10 stocks we like better than S&P 500 Index › Imagine you're a modern-day version of Rip Van Winkle, but instead of sleeping for 20 years, you fell asleep in early January 2025 and woke up in early June. The S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) would be a little higher than when you dozed off. You probably would think you didn't miss much, at least where the stock market is concerned. The reality, of course, is that a lot happened with stocks during the first five months of the year. The S&P 500 plunged roughly 19% below its high before rebounding strongly. The widely followed index is now near its all-time high. What does history say might be next for the stock market? The S&P 500 was introduced in its current form with 500 companies in March 1957. By my count, there have been a dozen times in the past when the index fell roughly as much as it did earlier this year. In three of those cases, the S&P 500 bounced back much more slowly than it has in recent months. For example, in late 1973 and early 1974, the index entered into a prolonged bear market, and the S&P didn't regain its previous high until 1980. Other extended downturns occurred in the early 2000s after the dot-com bubble burst, and the financial crisis of 2007 through 2009. The S&P 500 also fell sharply in 2022 and didn't fully recover until early 2024. The S&P 500 didn't immediately rebound several other times. The index's first steep sell-off in its current form provides a great case in point. The S&P briefly entered a bear market in 1957 and didn't fully claw its way back until September 1958. Similar trajectories occurred in 1962-1963 and 1966-1967. However, the S&P 500's resurgence was faster in other cases. For example, stocks plunged close to 25% in mid-1970, but by early 1971, the S&P regained its previous high. The index continued its momentum for a few months before becoming range-bound. The S&P 500 declined significantly in 1981 and 1982. Its rebound was especially strong, though, and led to a multiyear bull market. Likewise, the sell-off in 1990 set the stage for a quick comeback and roaring market throughout much of the next nine years. I think two historical precedents are especially noteworthy, and one occurred during the first Trump administration. The S&P 500 sank nearly 20% in 2018. President Trump's trade war with China was one of the key factors behind the decline. However, stocks soon rebounded and went on a tear in 2019 as trade worries subsided and the Federal Reserve cut interest rates. The stock market plunge resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 also looks similar in some ways to the S&P 500's performance this year. Stocks quickly sank but also quickly bounced back as investors saw opportunities to buy at a discount. There isn't a clear historical pattern for how the S&P 500 will perform after falling 19% or more. However, previous quick rebounds in the past, like the one we've seen in recent months, have often led to sustained momentum. The big wild card today is what will happen with President Trump's tariffs. If favorable trade deals are made with major trading partners, the S&P 500 should soar. I think a similar outcome is likely if the federal courts overturn the Trump administration's tariffs. On the other hand, should the president ultimately levy steep tariffs against China, the European Union, and other countries, the chances of another S&P 500 sell-off will be higher. The good news for investors, though, is that history looks very encouraging over the long term. The S&P 500 (and its predecessors) have delivered positive average annual returns in every rolling 20-year period since 1928. If you're a long-term investor, history is on your side. Before you buy stock in S&P 500 Index, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and S&P 500 Index wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 173% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Keith Speights has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The S&P 500 Is Nearly at an All-Time High After Falling 19%. Here's What History Says the Stock Market Could Do Next. was originally published by The Motley Fool
