‘Remember Mount McKinley?’ Trump’s 1890s USA claim debunked

Donald Trump recently claimed that President McKinley’s policies made 1890s the wealthiest period in American history.


Pop Culture & Art September 28, 2024
-Reuters/White House Historical Association

Donald Trump claimed that the 1890s were America’s most prosperous period, attributing the success to high tariffs imposed by President William McKinley. 

During Friday's town hall event in Michigan, Trump emphasized the use of tariffs to protect American businesses, suggesting they played a key role in strengthening industries like steel. "We’re gonna use tariffs very, very wisely," Trump stated, pointing to the 1890s as a time of significant economic growth.

However, historian T. J. Stiles, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author, has disputed this claim. Stiles explained that the 1890s were not the wealthiest period in U.S. history and pointed out that McKinley was not a businessman.

Stiles referenced the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, which raised duties on imported goods by about 50%. Stiles noted that the tariff contributed to significant political losses for the Republican Party in the 1890 midterm elections, as well as President Benjamin Harrison’s defeat by Grover Cleveland in 1892.

Stiles also emphasized that economic prosperity during McKinley’s presidency wasn’t solely driven by tariffs. He argued that McKinley’s commitment to the gold standard contributed to economic challenges and that tariffs often benefited special interest groups.

Research supports the idea that tariffs can lead to higher consumer costs. Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell has described tariffs as a "tax" on consumers, as businesses often pass on the increased costs of imported goods. The Peterson Institute for International Economics estimated that a 20% tariff could raise annual costs for the average American family by $2,600 due to higher prices.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ