Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Harris And Trump Hold Dueling Rallies In Pennsylvania; Polls Tighten With Weeks Left Before Election; Trio Awarded For Showing Democracy Leads To Stronger Growth; NASA Sends Spacecraft To One Of Jupiter's Moons; E.U. Threatens 50 Percent Tariff On U.S. Whiskey If Trade Talks Fail. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired October 14, 2024 - 16:00:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:23]

JULIA CHATTERLEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Smiles and cheers at the New York Stock Exchange. And it is a magical Monday. Fresh record highs for the S&P

500 as earnings season gets underway. Those are the markets and these are the main events.

With three weeks left until the US election, both candidates headed to the key state of Pennsylvania.

Exploring an outer space ocean world. NASA launches a new mission to Europa, one of Jupiter's moons.

And up for auction, unreleased tracks from Jimi Hendrix will go on sale next month in London.

Live from New York. It's Monday, October 14th. I'm Julia Chatterley, in for Richard Quest, and this is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

And a good evening once again.

Tonight, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris holding dueling events in Pennsylvania as they look to gain an edge in that key swing state.

Pennsylvania's 19 electoral votes helped secure the 2020 election for Democrat, Joe Biden, and they are up for grabs in this year's race.

Kamala Harris is in Erie, Pennsylvania. It's a swing county, too, favoring Biden in 2020 after backing Trump in 2016. The former president is in Oaks,

Pennsylvania. He's trying to cut into Harris' lead in the Philadelphia suburbs.

Stephen Caruso is a reporter at "Spotlight PA," and he joins us now.

Stephen, fantastic to have you on the show.

I read today that out of a total of, wait for it, $1.5 billion that's been spent on advertising in this presidential campaign, more than a fifth of

it, so we're talking over $300 million has been spent in Pennsylvania. What does it feel like for somebody living there and experiencing all of this?

STEPHEN CARUSO, REPORTER, SPOTLIGHT PA: I think you asked the right question. I can tell you from -- I like to spend times out talking to

voters as much as possible with candidates and campaigns. They're not actually very happy about it.

You know, their inboxes get filled with fundraising requests. Their mailboxes get filled with mailers from all sorts of groups, and you can't

put on TV without somebody trying to get your vote.

And I've talked to multiple people who said, you know, I'm just sick of it. My mind is made up, whatever way it is, then I'm just ready to vote have

this over with.

CHATTERLEY: That's interesting. It's coherent.

What proportion of people are saying, look, my mind's made up, and none of the cacophony of requests and demands and begging actually will sway me

versus the proportion of people that say, maybe I'm listening to some of the policy ideas and actually, it may help me change my mind or actually go

to vote, perhaps more importantly.

CARUSO: I think that is like the million dollar question that campaigns are asking themselves right now. I think, you know, it's hard for me as a

reporter, because sometimes I just sit down by myself as a reporter and people kind of shut down.

But look, a lot of people's minds are made up. I talked to a ton of people who are, you know, very much just like a very anti-Trump. Remember, Trump

has been in the news cycles since 2016. People are kind of sick of hearing about him if you don't like him.

Now, if you're a fan of him, this is delightful and you're excited that he has another chance at it. So I think those two groups probably make up, you

know, I would say 60 or 70 percent, and that middle group, which could include people who are registered to a party, but they don't really

identify with it, or register Independents, or the biggest group that's growing in Pennsylvania, they're being real quiet.

And I think, you know, that's a lot of what "Spotlight PA" and myself are spending time on in these last couple of weeks, just trying to get a look

inside their minds, because it's just -- it's hard to say. But, you know, I think a lot of people's minds are made up, and they just want this to be

over.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. Yes. I think a lot of people would agree with that point.

What we have seen, I think, and it's been accelerated, certainly, at least it feels over the past month or so and you can give your view on this too,

and what you're hearing from people, but the sort of politics of embellishment, lies, hatred, I think, perhaps on one side more than the

other, and then sort of the politics of joy, which I'm not sure resonates in the same way.

How do people feel about some of the rhetoric that they hear, whether it's about abortion, whether it's, I think about immigration, perhaps, and

racism in particular.

CARUSO: You know, I think there is a lot of -- there's been some good reporting, you know, from the "Philadelphia Inquirer" who went to a Western

Pennsylvania old mill town that Trump had focused on just much as he focused on Springfield, Ohio, with fears of immigration -- migrants,

Haitians, in particular, coming to there.

And the fact is, as locals, were just happy to have folks coming to their town where folks aren't used to going. Western Pennsylvania is a place that

got hurt by the industrialization. So yes, I think that does turn people off.

[16:05:01]

I think, you know -- I think that, though, also, there's a lot to be scared of, and what a lot of the abortion messaging that Democrats use is also,

you know, it's predicated on a fear, and I think, you know, justified or unjustified, depending on where you are ideologically, of women losing

access to one of their -- what they see as a fundamental right.

So fear is always kind of going to be played in politics as an easy motivator. And I think that's kind of why you're seeing people turned off.

And you know, just looking at where people are going, Trump is going to the Philadelphia suburbs, because that's a place that's turned away from his

rhetoric on migrants, on abortion, on what have you.

And Harris is up in Erie, a Western Pennsylvania place, because this is an area Democrats where people feel Democrats are often left behind. So, you

know, I think everyone's very aware of their weaknesses, it is just a matter of how you close out the pitch.

CHATTERLEY: I asked a voter this recently, and they said, never mind the politics of fear nor the politics of joy. I want to talk about the policies

that are putting food on the table and affordability. And we know that at least the economy in a casual term, but I think affordability, given the

sort of high prices and the inflation crisis that the country has been through, is a hot button issue.

Stephen, do you think that's what it comes down to for the majority of people in Pennsylvania? And clearly, there's many issues, but is the

economy something that matters most and perhaps the policies, be it energy policy, particularly perhaps in Pennsylvania, or how you manage the

economy, and trust in managing the economy. What matters most?

CARUSO: Yes, you know, I believe James Carville's famous quote, "It's the economy, stupid." He coined that in a 1990 special election in

Pennsylvania. I think that's always the case. People want to know, can I pay rent? Can I afford food? Can my kids go to college, et cetera? All of

those things that are expensive, particularly living in a city.

And I think, you know, there is definitely a looking at the two candidates who will do this better. Harris is pitching, you know, I have a plan, which

usually involves a lot of tax credits, a lot of sort of sort of wonky solutions that I think are focused on trying to, you know, she's -- I think

she puts it as an opportunity economy.

Trump has been trying to pitch his idea of tariffs to cut down on unfair imports that he say harm local industrialization. Obviously, that's a

compelling pitch to Pennsylvania, because this was an industrial heartland of the state.

I can't tell you which one is working best, because those last twenty, thirty percent of voters who not made up their mind are occasionally hard

to get to, but overall, I always am going to go back to the economy's people's number one issue and I think most people who do this get that.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, and we know that the majority of people still trust Trump on that versus Harris.

Stephen Caruso, great to have your wisdom, sir. Thank you so much for joining us.

Now, already, tight polls are getting even tighter. The latest CNN Poll of Polls showing no clear leader. Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump at the

national level by just three percentage points. The race remains even closer in most critical swing states, where polling averages show the race

is within one or two points.

Harry Enten joins me now.

Harry, can you decipher anything from this? Because it's so close and it's so tight and it remains so.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: I mean, somehow a race that was tight has become even tighter. And we can talk about this from these Great

Lake battleground states, right?

So take a look here. This is the Harris versus Trump margin. You look three weeks ago, look we got Harris up by two points in all of these states --

Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan. You look today, look at that. It's Harris by a single point in all of them.

I've never seen a race as close as this one, and I can tell you, it is considerably closer than it was either four or eight years ago at this

point. So let's take a look again across all three of these key Great Lake battleground states. This is Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

You look at the average right now across all three, it's plus one Harris. You go four years ago, Joe Biden was up by eight. You go four years before

that, in 2016 Hillary Clinton was up by eight. I think this is part of what gives Democrats adjutant in these states is because Joe Biden and Hillary

Clinton were way out ahead in these key battleground states four and eight years ago respectively, at this point. But yet, Harris only up by a point,

and she's expected to win there?

But here's the thing, here's the thing to keep in mind, is if at this particular hour, the polling averages are, what the final result is, which,

of course, we don't know if that's going to be the case, but if it is, Harris would still win up in these Great Lake battleground states, right?

She'd win in Wisconsin, win in Michigan, win in Pennsylvania. That would be enough to get her to exactly 270 electoral votes.

The question is, though, are the polls going to be right or are the polls going to underestimate Donald Trump? Because if, let's say, Donald Trump

outperforms his polls by just a point. Just a point. Look at this, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, all go red, and instead of Kamala Harris

winning by unpoint, in fact, it's Donald Trump who wins with 312 electoral votes, which would be a relative blowout. It would be his largest ever

performance, his best ever performance in the Electoral College.

So now, with a little bit more than three weeks to go, there is so much still that hangs in the balance. I will say I've been covering campaigns

professionally since 2012, I've been following them long before that.

[16:10:14]

I have never seen a race as close as this one. Ask me again, in a week where I think the polls are, they'll probably be pretty close to the same,

but it wouldn't be surprising to me if Trump even close it a little bit more, or maybe Harris expands her lead a little bit more, but that's the

beauty of campaigns, we'll just have to wait and see.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, and we'll come back to you to find out. It's exciting, even if it is sort of bewildering.

ENTEN: It is. It is. For me, it's extremely -- for me, it's extremely exciting. I think for fans of either of the two major party candidates,

they wish their candidate was up by a little bit more than these polls suggest that they are.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. Yes. it keeps us excited, at least anyway.

Harry, great to have you. Thank you for that.

ENTEN: Thanks.

CHATTERLEY: All right, three economists winning a Nobel Prize for their work showing inclusive institutions lead to better growth in the longer

term -- James Robinson, Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson focused their work on the colonial era. They found that in places where colonizers exploited

indigenous populations, long-term growth suffered, while those that set up property rights and maintained things like the rule of law became more

prosperous over time.

A Nobel Prize winner, author and professor, James Robinson joins us now.

Professor, fantastic to have you on the show, and huge congratulations on your winning work.

I'm very excited to talk to you individually, because I read your book "Why Nations Fail" back in 2012, I believe, and I thought it was a very engaging

way of describing exactly what you've now won the award for, as I mentioned, it's sort of controversial, but the premise is a colonizing

power, if it focused on positive, impactful, inclusive, institutional structures in a nation overall, can have positive effects. And of course,

the reverse is true, too.

JAMES ROBINSON, NOBEL PRIZE WINNER, AUTHOR AND PROFESSOR: That's right, but that -- you know, the fact that you know, what our work shows is that, you

know, colonialism has shaped the modern income distribution of the world in profound ways, you know, I'm not sure I would emphasize anything good.

You know, it's true, of course, that colonialism created very prosperous societies in -- you know, eventually in North America, for example, but you

know, it did so at the expense of the expropriation of indigenous people and a long, deep history of slavery.

So it is a complicated picture and we emphasize, you know, really the difference in the United States was the initial circumstances at the time

of colonization meant that the type of colonization that you saw in Latin America, for example, couldn't really work in North America, and that's why

a different type of society appeared.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, and I think your point is a very valid one. And actually, I was sort of going to follow up with that, with the reverse, that if it

can be very extractive, and if you go there and you squeeze resources, that the sort of the strongest takeaway from this should be, we need to build

strong institutions. You need property rights, you need the rules of law, and then you lay the path work to be able to build better at least

inclusive growth, and perhaps otherwise might have been created, whatever the situation was that created it in the first place.

ROBINSON: Yes, I think that's right. I think, you know, in any modern, prosperous society with inclusive institutions, that's the outcome of a

long struggle to change the way things work in society. You know, my own country, Britain, same thing.

You know, Britain benefited, after all, from the slave trade. You know, women were disenfranchised until 1928, so there was a long history of

struggling to make the society more inclusion. It doesn't come about overnight or because of some magic wand.

CHATTERLEY: What are you going to do with the prize money, Professor Robinson?

ROBINSON: I don't know. I haven't really thought about it, actually. I don't think -- I don't think that's the important bit. I think, you know,

what's rewarding is, we've been working together for close to 30 years now, the three of us on the project and the research. And, we're getting a bit

older in the tooth, but we're still very excited about doing research, and we have a lot of ideas and projects.

And so I'm just -- I just hope that I can carry on, you know, doing the same thing, and I can just -- we can inspire other people to kind of work

on these topics and there are so many things we don't understand. And, you know -- so I think that for me, that's the big plus, is just the

recognition of the research and hope that it'll encourage other people to build on what we've done.

CHATTERLEY: I was about to ask that, because it's beyond the research, and what you're showing is how that then is mapped into the real world and

perhaps how governments and it's difficult, perhaps in democracies, because they have elections every four or five years, but how they can look at

their own institutions and the workings of their own institutions and say, actually, perhaps fine, we're getting some things right. we're getting some

things wrong.

And actually, there are frameworks that we can apply, utilizing this knowledge to actually strengthen and see better, more inclusive growth in

nations.

Can you see that? And do you see great examples or better examples, perhaps, in others around the world?

[16:1 5:28]

I remember very --

ROBINSON: Well --

CHATTERLEY: Go on.

ROBINSON: No, please.

CHATTERLEY: I was just going to ask you about China because you had very strong views on why nations fail and what the outlook for China was, what

sort of 13 years ago, and it's a -- you know, China's still there.

ROBINSON: Well, that's true, you know, but the Soviet Union was still there after 50 years, an economist writing books celebrating what an economic

miracle it was, you know.

So, I think, like what we argue in the book, is that, you know, China succeeded economically since the late 1970s because it created more

inclusive economic institutions and it dismantled this sort of socialist economy. But you can't have an inclusive economy at the whim of a

totalitarian dictatorship.

So that's the train wreck waiting to happen. China does not have the political institutions necessary to really create a modern, prosperous

society, so, you know, I still believe that will be, fundamentally a transitory situation. That's what the theory implies.

You know, everyone comes up with sort of specific reasons for why China might be different. But everyone came up with specific reasons for every

other society that looked like that and then collapsed, like Argentina around the First World War.

So I think, in terms of changing the world, our view is that, the creation of economic success is a very deeply political process, and it's not about

economists having better ideas or it's not about people not knowing what to do. You know, I work a lot in the Global South, in Nigeria and the

Democratic Republic of Congo, and I can tell you, people in Nigeria know what needs to be done, they just can't do it, you know.

So I think, for me, the role of ideas, you know, and theories and evidence like this is trying to help people kind of get an interpretation, a better

interpretation of what the problem in their country is, and maybe find common axes to cooperate and organize to change things ultimately, you

know, that's -- you know, think about the Civil Rights movement in the United States, you know, how did a lot of barriers to inclusion be -- how

were they dismantled in the 1950s and the 1960s in the south of the United States? That was collective action by the people who suffered under those

institutions. And that's for me, is the bigger picture of how change happens.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, society pushes forward, and change then inevitably follows, but it can take some time. A very well-known policymaker in the

European debt crisis once said to me, Julia, we all know how to reform, we just don't know how to reform and get re-elected and I walked away

thinking, yep, that's a fair point. A fair point.

Professor, great to chat with you. Professor James Robinson. Sir, congratulations once again. Thank you so much for your time.

ROBINSON: My pleasure.

CHATTERLEY: Thank you.

Okay, coming up, a Hezbollah drone attack kills four Israeli soldiers on a base deep in Israeli territory. It's one of the bloodiest attacks on Israel

since the war began. The details, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:21:07]

CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, where we're following several stories from the Middle East.

The Lebanese Red Cross says nearly 20 people were killed in an Israeli airstrike on a village in Northern Lebanon, about 100 kilometers north of

Beirut. It comes after a Hezbollah drone attack killed four Israeli soldiers on a base deep in Israeli territory. More than 60 people were

hurt. Sunday's attack is one of the bloodiest on Israel since the war began.

The United States, meanwhile, is sending an advanced anti-missile system to Israel to bolster its defenses. It's also supplying around 100 US troops to

operate that system.

Nic Robertson is in Jerusalem for us.

Nic, I want to talk about the fact that we know Israel has several types of missile defense systems for various ranges of missiles that they're trying

to tackle.

What do we know about what happened with these specific drone attacks and why some form of defense system wasn't triggered in order to protect it,

particularly over Israeli territory?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes, what we've heard from the Israelis is that the system was triggered in part. They had picked

up that a couple of drones had come across the northern border, and they managed to shoot one of them down, but the other one managed to evade and

it's not quite clear if this is Hezbollah upgrading their technology, using new software, using new skills. They claim to have used diversionary

tactics.

But I think what it has done here is triggered principally three things. One is, clearly head scratching, trying to figure out what went wrong, and

how it got through; two, anger, and that's going to come back in the terms of a response from Israel. And thirdly, you know, frankly, not only

shocking the troops there that this could happen, but a shock for people in the country as well.

It unfolded early evening yesterday --

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON (voice over): Moments after impact, elite Golani Brigade trainees struggle to save lives. The worst of the wounded whisked away to nearby

hospitals by helicopter, others taken by ambulance, medics swarming to the IDF base, 40 miles from the frontline in Lebanon.

Within hours, the toll becoming clear, four dead, eight others seriously injured, making it the deadliest for troops outside of combat zones since

October 7th last year.

REAR ADM. DANIEL HAGARI, ISRAEL'S CHIEF MILITARY SPOKESPERSON (through translator): We need an improvement to our defense.

ROBERTSON (voice over): Israel's prime minister on site inspecting the damage inside the canteen, which appears to have been the target, time

close to 7:00 PM when troops would have been having dinner, uncompromising in his response.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): I want to clarify. We will continue to strike Hezbollah without mercy everywhere in

Lebanon, including Beirut.

ROBERTSON (voice over): After the strike, Hezbollah claiming it was a complex attack involving rockets to decoy Israel's air defenses and a swarm

of drones.

Regardless of this claim, in recent days, they've been threatening strikes on gatherings of troops away from the war at Lebanon's border, and in

recent months, have released what they claim is drone surveillance video of sensitive sites deep inside Israel.

But Hezbollah may have had unwitting help from the IDF in their intelligence gathering. An IDF promotional video of the base, 30 miles

north of Tel Aviv reveals its layout in detail, including the location of the canteen.

[16:25:10]

As the IDF expands its cross border raids, it says are targeting Hezbollah in an increasingly protracted campaign there, a new reality is emerging.

After heavy blows, Hezbollah is finding its feet and its wings becoming a lethal threat far from the frontlines.

The four trainee troops who died all 19 years old.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBINSON (on camera): You know, and I think this -- when the response comes as it appears that Israel will give it is an indication, and we heard it

there from the prime minister, that any sense that Israel is in the sort of mood for making a bargain with the United States receiving this sort of

top-end missile defense system in exchange for not striking Beirut, which seemed to be something that was getting a lot of discussion over the past

24 hours. any sense of that, I think, is clearly scotched by this. The prime minister being very, very clear, there is no place for Hezbollah to

hide in all of this.

CHATTERLEY: And I think Israel also digging their heels in over the United Nations as well. We know there's been a war of words and criticism fought

now for many months between Israel and the UN. They are continuing to see peacekeepers -- UN peacekeepers remain in place in Lebanon, despite the

risk of what the spokesperson for the UN Secretary General called the risk of "potential war crimes" -- Nic.

ROBERTSON: Yes, and I think you know, whatever piece of the UN touches Israel at the moment, it is -- the relationship is toxic. Take Gaza, where

UN Human Rights organizations are saying that the humanitarian, rather, the UN's humanitarian organizations are saying the humanitarian situation on

the ground in Northern Gaza is absolutely dire.

The UN's director of the relief efforts inside of Gaza, you know, is saying that the situation there is getting worse, and that the polio vaccine

campaign there that they're trying to roll out that is going to be impacted by the current military operations the IDF has undergoing there right now.

And then, as you rightly say, along the northern border, I mean, with Lebanon, where UNIFIL, the sort of UN force that's supposed to enforce the

last UN agreement in 2006, you know, the prime minister here, coming up very pointedly and saying, look, we are not out to target UNIFIL, we have

told them that they need to move away, that it's not going to be safe for them there.

And I think we're up to sort of at least five or six different incidents over the past three days, four days now, where UNIFIL soldiers have been

injured or got caught up in the conflict, and one of those was where 15 of them were in a base and it appears that the IDF, this is what the IDF say.

They were targeted by Hezbollah from close to that base. They were they caught in an ambush, and they had to pump out a lot of smoke, get their

troops out, their tank reversed it, they say, into the gates of that UN base.

So the war is happening right around the UNIFIL troops and the question is, how long can they stay? And what the Israeli prime minister is saying, they

should get out, and what the UN nations are saying, no, this is our job. We're supposed to be here, and we're not moving at the moment. So this is

contested territory, even at that level.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. I think you defined it perfectly. It's a toxic relationship now with human consequences, at least in the interim.

Nic Robertson, great to have you with us. Sir, thank you.

All right, NASA is on its way to one of Jupiter's moons --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Five, four, three, two, one. Ignition.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHATTERLEY: The Europa Clipper orbiter took off from Florida aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket. It was the company's second major launch in as

many days.

SpaceX made engineering history on Sunday with its latest Starship test flight. The super heavy booster returned to the launch pad and was caught

by the tower. The Europa mission is due to reach its destination in 2030.

Michael Holmes has more on that mission.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A vast ocean in a moon hundreds of millions of miles away. That's what NASA's new and largest planetary

spacecraft is set to explore.

Scientists believe that Europa, one of Jupiter's many moons, is one of the most promising places to look for life beyond Earth.

The moon, about the same size as our own, is thought to have beneath its icy surface, an ocean of water perhaps encompassing the entire moon.

LAURIE LESHIN, NASA DIRECTOR OF THE JET PROPULSION LABORATORY: We, scientists have been dreaming about a mission like Europa Clipper for more

than 20 years. We've been working to build it for 10 years. It's going to be another 10 years because Jupiter is so far away, until we have all the

science in the bag.

[16:00:13]

HOLMES: The mission is not looking for life on the moon, but, rather, an environment in which life could survive.

The Europa Clipper will gather information on the thickness of that icy shell, investigate the possible ocean beneath it, and study the geology of

the surface. So, how does an icy moon far away from the sun have the energy to sustain life? Well, Jupiter's strong gravity creates tides that stretch

and tug the moon, producing heat.

GINA DIBRACCIO, NASA ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANETARY SCIENCE DIVISION: Clipper is going to tell us if Europa has all of these ingredients for life. So

what we learned with Clipper and the habitability of Europa, this is going to pave the way for the future for future missions to Europa and elsewhere

in our solar system where we can search more directly for life.

HOLMES: This big venture from NASA requires very big equipment. The Europa Clipper is about 16 feet or nearly five meters tall and more than 100 feet

or about 30 meters wide. That's about the length of a basketball court. The scale of the Clipper is primarily due to its massive solar arrays. Another

big feat for this spacecraft is a poem.

ADA LIMON, U.S. POET LAUREATE: Still, there are mysteries below our sky.

HOLMES: U.S. poet laureate Ada Limon wrote an original poem dedicated to NASA's Europa Clipper mission. The poem will be engraved on the spacecraft

as a way to connect the two worlds. Earth and Europa.

LIMON: We point to the planets we know. We pin quick wishes on stars. From Earth we read the sky as if it is an unerring book of the universe. Expert

and evident.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHATTERLEY: All right. Coming up for us, Donald Trump is proposing huge tariffs if he wins back the White House. U.S. distillers might be the first

to face retaliation. We'll speak to the head of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. That's next. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:35:21]

CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are campaigning in the swing state of Pennsylvania. Trump's push for

higher tariffs could put some U.S. Industries at risk and distillers might be the first to face retaliation. The E.U. slapped a 25 percent retaliatory

tariff on U.S. whiskey back in 2018. Exports to Europe, plunged as a result, only rebounding once the tariffs were suspended in 2022.

Alcohol tends to be an easy target in trade wars. China just slapped anti- dumping measures on European brandy, by the way, raising the cost for importers at least 34 percent. That decision followed an E.U. vote for

tariffs on Chinese-made cars.

Chris Swonger is the President and CEO of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. Chris, welcome to the show. Great to have you with us.

The problem is people like to drink and therefore you're easily weaponized. It's been a rollercoaster few years. Just explain where the industry is

today and what you fear should we see more tariffs and potential retaliation.

CHRIS SWONGER, PRESIDENT AND CEO, DISTILLED SPIRITS COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES: You bet. And thank you for having me. No doubt our industry was

embroiled in two different trade disputes since 2018. And right now, those tariffs are suspended on U.S.-based distilled spirits and E.U.-based

distilled spirits. But in March 2025, the tariff on American whiskey is scheduled to go up by 50 percent in less.

Either the Biden administration or the incoming Harris and/or Trump administration tries to get a resolution, we want those tariffs permanently

suspended. And the big impact is it would have a direct impact on American whiskey exports. And certainly, imports come in from Europe. Many of our

member companies have cognac, scotch, Irish whiskey, rum, American whiskey. So, we want to make sure that we're going to work with either administration coming into power to make sure those tariffs remain

suspended or permanently removed all together.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. And just because our audiences, these are sort of retaliation for steel and our aluminum concerns. You've also got coming up

in, I believe, July 2026. If there aren't Boeing Airbus dispute resolutions, the potential for more backlash as well. So fast forward to

the presidential election. And what we've seen is the former president, Former President Trump threatening a whole host of additional tariffs,

enormous ones up to 60 percent on China but even between 10 and 20 percent on other importers into the United States.

Chris, is that your worst fear for the industry at that moment? And I'm sure you're explaining this to both the White House and contacts around

him.

SWONGER: Absolutely. Well, we're committed to working with either administration that comes into power, and we recognize. President Trump is

very invested in reducing the trade deficit. What's unique about U.S. distilled spirits and distilled spirits products in general is we're not a

commodity. American whiskey can only come from the United States. Cognac can only come from France. Scotch whiskey from Scotland.

So, our products are very, very unique and not a commodity. And the -- when the E.U. imposed tariffs on American whiskey back in June 2018. We saw a

dramatic decrease in American whiskey exports and had an impact on jobs and economic vitality in the United States. So that is counter of anything

President Trump would want to do on. We certainly appreciate the Biden administration's leadership on having those tariffs suspended.

So, we're going to work with either administration, whether it's a Kamala Harris administration or Donald Trump administration to make sure that we

can continue to work closely with our European partners and make sure that this industry remains tariff free because trade barriers do nothing to help

foster the economic development and most importantly, consumers enjoying the product.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. I mean, in the end, that's the -- that's the key, isn't it? But as you said, it has a job impact too. We'll see, Chris, as you

said, you're willing to work with both, but they're both -- the former administration and the current one have had their issues with tariffs and

imposing tariffs. So, it's a challenge, I think, for you either way.

(CROSSTALK)

CHATTERLEY: Yes, Chris. Great to have you with us, sir. Thank you so much. Chris Swonger there.

SWONGER: Thank you. Thank you.

CHATTERLEY: Thank you. All right, exciting news for Music Flans with plenty of money to burn, a number of unreleased Jimi Hendrix master tapes are up

for grabs.

[16:40:02]

The rare recordings, along with some of his personal items will be auctioned next month. Anna Stewart has been exploring.

ANNA STEWART, CNN REPORTER: Well, Julia, given Jimi Hendrix's career was cut tragically short, he was a known artist for just four years, to hear

something new from him is generating a lot of excitement. There are 50 rare tapes in this collection, which includes some unheard tracks. Now, the

titles fans will be familiar with. For instance, this master tape has Up From The Skies, Ain't No Telling, and Little Miss Lover.

But they're different, the versions that appear on the Axis: Bold as Love album. The auction house expects it to sell for up to $260,000. It's not

just the music going on sale. All sorts of personal items, from a dry- cleaning bill for a gold suit to pay slips and a note from Hendrix's record company informing the artist he was being evicted from Ringo Starr's London

flat on account of complaints from the neighbors. Possibly a bit unsurprising.

This auction will take place in London on November 15th, and if you're not a Hendrix fan, there will also be pieces associated with Michael Jackson,

Oasis, Queen, John Lennon, amongst others. Julia?

CHATTERLEY: Our thanks to Anna Stewart there. And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Julia Chatterley. Up next, Connecting Africa. Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END