Eric Ham is based in Washington, D.C. and is a political analyst for CTV News. He’s a bestselling author and former congressional staffer and writes for CTVNews.ca.
From tariff powers to trade leverage, Ham breaks down what Canadians need to know ahead of next week’s crucial U.S. midterm elections.
What impact, if any, will the U.S. midterms have on talks between Ottawa and Washington?
It is unclear how earnest actual negotiations are as voters gear up to head to the polls. Still, Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump are attempting to drive a narrative in the closing days of tightly contested races that will shape the balance of power in Washington and ultimately relations between the two neighbours.
Talks failed back in August as the prime minister ended negotiations. The White House imposed tariffs on a bevy of goods in response, with Ottawa retaliating. Since that time each country has implemented import duties on billions of goods.
President Trump announced Liberation Day tariffs more than a year ago, so why is the White House moving on tariffs now?
According to a poll conducted by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C., 75% of all registered voters surveyed said that tariffs will be “important” for their vote in this year’s midterms. Moreover, a Fox News poll conducted in September found that 64% of respondents said tariffs hurt the U.S. economy. A Marquette Poll found that 70% of those surveyed disapprove of Trump’s handling of tariffs.
Nevertheless, the White House has continued to double down on this ruinous economic policy even as the American people reject the import taxes. Now as the president finds his administration universally loathed as a result, it appears to be costing his party in an off-year election. Even traditional red states Trump won in just 2024 by double-digits are now in play for Democrats. Historically conservative Kansas, home to 1,500 jobs directly tied to Canadian defence contractor Bombardier, was being targeted by the White House in its ongoing trade war with Canada.
Yet, as polls showed races in the state tightening and Democrats with a real shot at winning a statewide office for the first time since 1931, the administration has abruptly changed course recently, rescinding tariffs.
Who holds leverage in current trade talks?
President Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House just last week, stated it was the United States that “holds all the cards.” However, just this week, the prime minister said the Trump administration is “coming closer to our position.
Carney made the comments during a question-and-answer period with reporters after a meeting between First Nation leaders and First Ministers in Ottawa on Monday. Yet, as voters head to the polls—seemingly ready to oust Trump’s party from power—it is clear that all leverage, at least for now, rests with Ottawa.
If Democrats succeed in winning back control of Congress, what does that mean for the ongoing trade war and the president’s tariffs?
Democrats have vowed to rescind all of the Trump tariffs as well as trade authorities within the first 100 hours of taking office. A tall order indeed that will require a veto-proof majority of Congress to pass the legislation necessary to undo the tariffs enacted by the White House.
As for the actual trade authorities themselves exercised by the Trump administration, that, too, could be undone by Congress, provided the votes exist. The Constitution gives primary commercial and tariff authority to Congress, the executive branch’s current influence over trade does not come directly from the text of the Constitution. Instead, it comes from statutes passed by Congress over decades (especially since the Second World War and the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934) that delegate specific authorities to the president.
Those authorities include:
- Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act;
- Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974;
- International Emergency Economic Powers Act; and the
- Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) All of these have been used by this White House to increase prices on goods coming across the border.
A new Congress can author legislation to override existing laws that will dramatically curtail the Executive Branch’s trade powers. Success, of course, depends on enough Democrats winning next week to outright pass bills to withstand a White House veto.
How many votes are needed to override a presidential veto?
Congress needs a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers. The specific number is based on the total number of members present for an actual vote. Should Democrats succeed in winning back both chambers, there is still no guarantee they will succeed in rescinding Trump’s tariffs on Canada. Congressman Hakeem Jeffries would likely make history as the first person of colour to ascend to the position of Speaker of the House.
In such a powerful role he is untested and it is unclear if he has the political influence to rally his caucus to take very difficult votes that would directly usurp the muscular authority of perhaps the most powerful chief executive since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Moreover, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has largely underwhelmed and nothing in his tenure suggests a willingness to engage in political pugilism with a Trump-led White House.
What happens if Democrats do not secure victory in both chambers of Congress? Will they still be able to rescind presidential trade authorities and tariffs?
Even with the votes to challenge the president, it is going to be a monumental challenge. Yet, without control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats simply do not have the votes to override a presidential veto as they would need Republican support.
President Trump, as a lame-duck president, still controls congressional Republicans with an iron fist. Democrats might be able to stifle, delay, and thwart the White House legislative agenda, but undoing presidential trade authority is practically impossible without the votes to override a veto. Moreover, because the president has largely bypassed Congress, relying on executive orders to swiftly enact his agenda, delay tactics, too, would prove fruitless without absolute control of both chambers.
