Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
PartialTrade & Tariffs

There's no going back to business as usual on trade. We need new rules, and a new process that has the voices of all stakeholders at the table.

Sources (click to view full provenance)

Propose an edit to this promise's details

Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.

Sign in to suggest a correction

Free — it takes a minute. New here? Create an account and complete the Contributor Agreement once.

Assessments

evidence-backed verdicts

These are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.

PartialFact-checker reviewConfidence: 70%

Biden did not return to a pre-2017 trade posture; instead his administration kept Trump-era Section 301 China tariffs and layered new ones on after a formal four-year statutory review finalized September 13, 2024. On the 'new process with all stakeholders' front, USTR pursued the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (launched May 2022) with 13 partner nations, concluding a Supply Chain Agreement that entered into force February 2024, though the trade-pillar negotiations were shelved in November 2023 after union and congressional Democrat objections. The administration built some new multilateral consultative structures but did not deliver a comprehensive new trade rulebook.

Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)

Sign in to vote.

Discussion

community opinions

Comments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.

Sign in to join the discussion.

Propose a correction

community accountability

See an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.

Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.

Debate

sourced community arguments

These are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.

No arguments yet

Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.

Add a sourced argument

Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.

Sign in or create an account to add an argument.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →