Wisconsin Economic Development Corp.'s Hughes discusses tariff shock, European trading partners
Gov. Tony Evers and Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO Missy Hughes at the Hannover Messe trade show in Germany last week. (Photo courtesy of WEDC)
The sweeping tariffs President Donald Trump put in place last week have left key Wisconsin business leaders as well as the state's important trading partners confused and uncertain, the state's top economic development official said Monday.
Missy Hughes, CEO of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., spoke to the Wisconsin Examiner from Germany, where she and Gov. Tony Evers are in the midst of a trade mission. Hughes left March 29 and returns to Wisconsin this week.
'The government officials, economic development officials, the businesses that we've been talking to are very confused about how we got here after over 75 years worth of partnering and working together,' Hughes said. 'The folks here are really wondering what has happened and where this is going.'
Hughes said she's hearing regularly from Wisconsin businesses that have integrated themselves into the global economy.
'I've been in touch with companies that are directly importing things like coffee [for which] there's really no way to work around the tariffs,' she said. 'And so they're very concerned about just increased costs on their bottom line.'
Other businesses have connected with the supply chains that run between Canada and Mexico through the United States. They are 'sending products back and forth across those borders, and are now very confused and concerned about how to make their supply chains work,' Hughes said.
For businesses that have had a good run for the last several years, '[there] is real frustration around instability and unpredictability,' she said. 'They were experiencing growth, they were doing well, and now they're concerned that that might be endangered.'
Hughes contrasted the crisis brought on by the tariffs and the responses to them with the COVID-19 pandemic's disruption to the economy five years ago.
'This is a man-made crisis,' whereas the pandemic was 'a crisis that was not man-made,' she said.
'For the average Wisconsinite the concern I have is the increased cost in their pocketbook,' Hughes said. 'There's going to be increased grocery prices, there might be inflation. It's going to cost more to replace your dishwasher or your automobile.'
Those present 'an impact [that] is difficult to predict,' she said. 'This is really going to be an unfolding crisis as we see immediate impacts and then impacts that will evolve, due to changes that are being made on a daily basis.'
In addition to the volatility from the tariffs, Hughes said, there's also uncertainty from unexpected and sweeping cuts across federal agencies, resulting in disruptions that range from university research programs cut short to social services delayed or ended.
Markets worldwide take another dive as Trump threatens higher tariffs on China
Farmers are losing grants they have been relying on, she said, but also are faced with losing the counsel they've relied on at the U.S. Department of Agriculture to help them manage regulations.
Leaders of a biohealth company have expressed 'their concern that the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] is no longer going to be the premier global agency that people rely on,' Hughes said.
'There's things that are going to be immediately apparent and things that are going to be apparent as we see real expertise and institutional knowledge from our agencies disappear,' she added.
The trade mission took the Wisconsin delegation to France as well as Germany. It is aimed at encouraging businesses in Europe to buy Wisconsin exports and talking up the Badger State for companies interested in establishing or expanding their operations here.
A highlight of the visit was kicking off the 50th anniversary of Wisconsin's sister-state relationship with the German state of Hesse (Hessen). The group also attended the Hannover Messe, a major worldwide advanced manufacturing trade show.
In the face of the startling reversal from longstanding relationships between the U.S. and the world, Hughes said, leaders the state delegation met with welcomed Wisconsin's continued overtures.
'Obviously, things are still very volatile,' Hughes said. Despite that, she added, 'people have been so happy that we are here extending a handshake and reminding everyone that there are opportunities for relationships beyond what's happening in Washington, D.C.'
Joining the trip were four Wisconsin companies and representatives of New North, a Wisconsin regional economic development and business organization. The Wisconsin participants were looking at opportunities such as distribution deals in Europe for their products, Hughes said.
'They were by and large very happy with their visits and the opportunities to create relationships,' Hughes said.
The other principal aim of the trip was to connect with companies in Europe that have Wisconsin operations or are interested in establishing a presence in the state.
'While those conversations were positive, there was certainly also concern expressed about, what if there's a slowdown, what if there's a recession,' Hughes said. A recurring theme in those conversations, she added, was the 'need to understand what the economy is doing, and we need things to not be as volatile as they are right now.'
The Wisconsin team is working 'to remind folks that Wisconsin's is a strong economy,' she said. 'We have strong businesses that are interested in being and already participating in the global market and want that to continue. So I think, you know, we are a steady hand during this volatile time and I think that's really beneficial.'
In the face of the current economic turmoil, Hughes said she worries about the toll on business confidence.
'When you lose confidence you start to become risk averse, you hold off on making investments,' she said. That's important in Wisconsin because of the state's role making large, expensive machinery.
'We make CAT scans and MRIs and tractors and big industrial machinery,' Hughes said. 'People need confidence before they make those purchases. And so if we lose confidence, it's going to be harder to recover even if the tariffs were taken away next week, or next month.'
Confidence is hard to measure and not always easily predicted, she acknowledged. 'My fear is that people will really start to become risk-averse, and that hinders the whole growth of the economy.'
Despite that fear, however, she said she's found reasons to buoy her spirits in the conversations she's had over the last two weeks.
'The desire for a relationship, the desire for connections, the long-term historic partnerships that we've had are still here,' Hughes said. She professed optimism that those connections can still be nurtured and survive the current gyrations of the stock market or the economy itself.
'I'm very confident that we have such strong ties that those will stand strong during these times,' she said. 'But it is difficult.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Who are the eight new vaccine advisers appointed by Robert F Kennedy?
Robert F Kennedy Jr, the US health secretary, named eight new vaccine advisers this week to a critical Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) panel after firing all 17 experts who had held the roles. New members of the panel include experts who complained about being sidelined, a high-profile figure who has spread misinformation and medical professionals who appear to have little vaccine expertise. Kennedy made the announcement on social media. 'All of these individuals are committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense,' Kennedy said in his announcement. 'They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations.' Formally called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the panel advises the CDC on how vaccines should be distributed. Those recommendations in effect determine the vaccines Americans can access. This week, Kennedy also removed the career officials typically tasked with vetting ACIP members and overseeing the advisory group, according to CBS News. Related: RFK Jr announces new panel of vaccine advisers after firing entire previous team Kennedy is a widely known vaccine skeptic who profited from suing vaccine manufacturers, has taken increasingly dramatic steps to upend US vaccine policy. 'ACIP is widely regarded as the international gold standard for vaccine decision-making,' said Helen Chu, one of the fired advisers, at a press conference with Patty Murray, a Democratic US senator. 'We cannot replace it with a process driven by one person's beliefs. In the absence of an independent, unbiased ACIP, we can no longer trust that safe and effective vaccines will be available to us and the people around us.' Arguably the most high-profile new member, Robert W Malone catapulted to stardom during the Covid-19 pandemic, appearing across rightwing media to criticize the Biden administration while describing himself as the inventor of mRNA technology. Messenger RNA technology powers the most widely used Covid-19 vaccines. While Malone was involved in very early experiments on the technology, researchers have said his role was limited. Malone's star rose quickly after appearing on the Joe Rogan podcast in 2022, where he and Rogan were criticized for spreading misinformation. On the show, Malone promoted the idea that both ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine could be possible treatments for Covid-19, but said research on the drugs was being suppressed. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine have not been shown to improve outcomes from Covid-19. 'Malone has a well-documented history of promoting conspiracy theories,' said Dr Jeffrey D Klausner, an epidemiologist and infectious disease expert at the University of Southern California, who recently told the New York Times he was in touch with Kennedy about his appointments. Kulldorff is a former Harvard professor of biostatistics and an infectious disease epidemiologist originally from Sweden. He said in an essay for the rightwing publication City Journal that he was fired because he refused to be vaccinated in line with the school policy. Like Malone, he rose to prominence during the pandemic as a 'Covid contrarian' who criticized the scientific consensus – views he said alienated him from his peers in the scientific community. He voiced his opposition to Covid-19 vaccine mandates and, in his essay, complained of being ignored by media and shadow-banned from Twitter. Kulldorff co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which called for limited closures instead of pandemic lockdowns before vaccines were available. The document became a touchstone for the American political right. Before the pandemic, Kulldorff studied vaccine safety and infectious disease, including co-authoring papers with members of CDC staff, such as on the Vaccine Safety Datalink. He was a member of the CDC's Covid Vaccine Safety Working Group in 2020, but said later he was fired because he disagreed with the agency's decision to pause Johnson & Johnson's Covid-19 vaccine and with Covid-19 vaccine mandates. He served on the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) drug safety and risk management advisory committee around the same time. He has since enjoyed support from people already within the administration, including the Great Barrington Declaration co-author Dr Jay Bhattacharya, current head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Dr Vinay Prasad, head of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which handles vaccines. Meissner is a professor of pediatrics at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth. He previously held advisory roles at the FDA and CDC, including ACIP from 2008-2012. In 2021, Meissner co-wrote an editorial with Dr Marty Makary, now the head of the FDA, which criticized mask mandates for children. In April, he was listed as an external adviser to ACIP on the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) committee. Notably, Meissner is listed in a new conflicts of interest tool launched by the health department in March. Kennedy had criticized the fired ACIP members as 'plagued with persistent conflicts of interest'. 'He's a card-carrying infectious disease person who knows the burden of these diseases, and he knows the risk and the benefit,' Dr Kathryn Edwards told CBS News. Edwards previously served as chair of the FDA's vaccine advisory panel. Pebsworth is a nurse and the former consumer representative on the FDA's vaccine advisory committee. She is also the Pacific regional director for the National Association of Catholic Nurses, according to Kennedy's announcement. In 2020, Pebsworth spoke at the public comment portion of an FDA advisory panel meeting on Covid-19 vaccines. There, she identified herself as the volunteer research director for the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), 'and the mother of a child injured by his 15-month well-baby shots in 1998'. The NVIC is widely viewed as an anti-vaccine advocacy organization 'whose founder Barbara Lou Fisher must be considered a key figure of the anti-vaccine movement', according to an article from 2023 on how to counter anti-vaccine misinformation. Levi is a professor of operations management at the MIT Sloan School of Management who Kennedy described as an 'expert in healthcare analytics, risk management and vaccine safety'. In 2021, he opposed Covid-19 booster shot approval during the public comment portion of an FDA advisory committee hearing. In 2022, he wrote an article calling for EMS calls to be incorporated into vaccine safety data, arguing that cardiovascular side-effects could be undercounted – an article that later required correction. The potential effects of Covid-19 vaccines on heart health have been a focal point of right-leaning criticism. Last month, Levi was criticized for publishing a pre-print paper – a paper without peer review – that he co-authored with Dr Joseph Ladapo, the Florida surgeon general, a vaccine skeptic. The paper alleged that people who took the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine were more likely to die than those who received the Moderna vaccine. Kennedy described Ross as 'a Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at George Washington University and Virginia Commonwealth University, with a career spanning clinical medicine, research, and public health policy'. However, as first reported by CBS News, Ross's name does not appear in faculty directories for either school. A spokesperson for George Washington University told the outlet that Ross did work as a clinical professor, but 'has not held a faculty appointment … since 2017'. A spokesperson for Virginia Commonwealth University described Ross as 'an affiliate faculty member' at a regional hospital system in the Capitol region. He is also listed as a partner at Havencrest Capital Management, as a board member of 'multiple private healthcare companies'. Hibbeln is a California-based psychiatrist who previously served as acting chief for the section of nutritional neurosciences at the NIH. He describes himself as an expert on omega-3, a fatty acid found in seafood. He also serves on the advisory council of a non-profit that advocates for Americans to eat more seafood. He practices at Barton Health, a hospital system in Lake Tahoe, California. His work influenced US public health guidelines on fish consumption during pregnancy. Pagano is an emergency medicine physician from Los Angeles 'with over 40 years of clinical experience', and a 'strong advocate for evidence-based medicine', according to Kennedy.
Forbes
8 hours ago
- Forbes
The MeidasTouch Podcast Now Has 5 Million Subscribers
The MeidasTouch podcast just hit 5 million subscribers, cementing its status as a breakout force in ... More progressive media. Launched during the isolation of the pandemic lockdown era, a group chat between three brothers has transformed into one of the most influential voices in progressive media. The MeidasTouch Podcast — the flagship show of the MeidasTouch Network — has just crossed 5 million subscribers, a milestone that cements its place as not only a media juggernaut but a dominant force in independent political commentary. Founded in 2020 by Ben, Brett, and Jordy Meiselas, MeidasTouch first made waves as an anti-Trump political action committee during the height of the COVID pandemic. At the time, all three brothers were generally frustrated by the state of the world and looking for a productive outlet for their time and talents. 'It felt like screaming into the void,' Brett recently told Vanity Fair. 'So we committed to doing what we could — writing articles, making videos, just getting our thoughts out.' The rise of the MeidasTouch podcast They've been doing that same work, just more of it, ever since. What began with viral videos evolved into a full-fledged media network, now home to a multiple shows including Leigh McGowan's PoliticsGirl, and the legal commentary series Legal AF. But it's the core MeidasTouch Podcast, hosted by the three brothers, that's leading the way and drawing major guests like President Biden and Senators Elizabeth Warren – and racking up viewership numbers that rival cable news. A celebratory tweet posted by the network's senior digital editor Acyn Torabi (@Acyn on X) marked the subscriber milestone, reading in part: 'As we hit 5 million subscribers, I want to say this: this is one small step for the MeidasTouch Network, but I think one giant leap for independent journalism and democracy generally.' As far as who the brothers are: Ben is a lawyer and Colin Kaepernick's business partner, Brett is a two-time Emmy-winning video editor, and Jordy is a top advertising executive in New York. Their network has seen explosive growth so far this year, with Podscribe data showing that the podcast jumped from 57.7 million downloads and views per month in mid-February to 115 million the following month. And even after that surge, the numbers remained strong, with April 2025 data showing 107.3 million downloads. The brothers' YouTube channel alone averages 33 million views every 48 hours, according to Acyn, while the podcast's momentum has been enough to briefly dethrone even The Joe Rogan Experience. In February 2025, MeidasTouch pulled in 57.5 million downloads, outpacing Rogan's 51.5 million for the month. While comparisons to right-wing media stars are inevitable, however, the Meiselas brothers push back on the idea that the left needs its own Rogan. 'Right-wing podcasters weren't cooked up in a lab,' Ben continued in the Vanity Fair interview. 'They developed audiences organically over time.' Brett added that the key isn't finding someone who mimics Rogan's tone or beliefs — it's the authenticity that matters. That's a major part of MeidasTouch's appeal. Brett Meiselas has said in the past that the goal is to make listeners feel like they're part of the same experience the brothers share in private. The vibe, in other words, is supposed to feel like a conversation among friends. As for what's next, Acyn made it clear in his message on X, adding: 'We use our platform for good: to always shine a light on the truth, to expose the injustices taking place, and to confront the authoritarian Trump regime head-on, where corporate news has utterly failed and betrayed us all.' Five million subscribers in, the MeidasTouch Network clearly isn't slowing down. Based on the trends this year alone, there's every reason to believe that this is just the beginning.
The Hill
8 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump hits Iran: 5 questions on what comes next
President Trump's decision to authorize a military strike on Iran is a seismic moment that could reshape the future of the Middle East and his presidency. The administration on Sunday signaled it wants to contain the conflict, underscoring that it does not want an all-out war with Iran but will not accept a world where Tehran has a nuclear weapon. Whether it can contain the fallout is a different proposition and one that may depend largely on Iran. Politically, the vast majority of Republicans are sticking with Trump, while many Democrats are expressing outrage over what they see as a lack of strategy, as well as a lack of notification to Congress ahead of the strikes. The move by Trump is, in some ways, a surprise, as he came to office promising to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Now, less than six months into his second term, he is on the brink of a larger battle. Here are five big questions. This is the most important question. Administration officials on Sunday signaled that they are hopeful Iran will return to the negotiating table, but signs quickly emerged of a more aggressive response from Tehran. Iranian television reported that Iran's parliament had approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route between Iran and Oman. State-run Press-TV said a final decision on doing so rested with Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Shutting off the waterway could have major implications for global trade, leading to increased oil and gas prices in the U.S. That would bite at Trump, who vowed to bring down prices after years of high inflation under former President Biden in the post-COVID era. It also risks turning the conflict into a broader war. Iran could also launch strikes against U.S. military targets, though its abilities to do so have been hampered by more than a week of strikes by Israel, which has allowed U.S. and Israeli planes more security to fly over Iranian skies. Another widely-discussed possibility is that Iran could back terror attacks around the world on U.S. targets. Of course, there would be serious risks to such actions by Iran. Just taking steps to move forward with its nuclear program, let alone striking out at the U.S., would lead to negative consequences, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Sunday. 'Look, at the end of the day, if Iran is committed to becoming a nuclear weapons power, I do think it puts the regime at risk,' he said during an appearance on Fox Sunday Futures. 'I really do. I think it would be the end of the regime if they tried to do that.' Before this week, Trump's Make America Great Again movement looked divided on a strike on Iran. Trump has long criticized past U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a big part of his draw to many voters was his promise to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. MAGA voices from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to political pundit Tucker Carlson to former Trump strategic adviser Steve Bannon have all cast doubt on getting the U.S. more directly involved in the Iran-Israeli conflict. In the immediate aftermath of the strikes, Republicans were notably united, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) being a notable exception. And administration officials with non-interventionist records were taking rhetorical steps to keep the doubters in line. A chief example was Vice President Vance, who said the U.S. was at war with Iran's nuclear program, not Iran as a country. Iran may not see things that way, and if Tehran takes steps to hurt the U.S., GOP voices who doubted the wisdom of a strike may get louder. That will be something the administration watches closely going forward. Trump, in a Sunday Truth Social post, also touted 'great unity' among Republicans following the U.S. strikes and called on the party to focus on getting his tax and spending legislation to his desk. On the left, Democrats have hit Trump hard over the strike on Iran. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), speaking at a rally on Saturday night, reacted to unfolding events live, arguing Trump's action was unconstitutional as a crowd changed 'no more wars.' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Trump's action was an impeachable offense. That was a bold statement in that Democrats largely have avoided impeachment talk with Trump after twice voting to impeach him during his first term. Both of those efforts ultimately ended with Senate acquittals and, finally, with Trump's reelection last year. Presidents in both parties have taken limited military strikes without first seeking permission from Congress, but Democrats have also brought up the War Powers Act, saying Trump went too far with the strikes. At the same time, many Democrats are concerned about Iran's potential to go nuclear, and the party does not want to be cast as soft on Tehran. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a vociferous opponent of Iran, called for his GOP counterpart, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), to put the War Powers Act on the floor so senators could vote to authorize Trump's actions. Going a step further, Schumer said he would vote for it. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said in the statement. 'Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased.' 'We must enforce the War Powers Act, and I'm urging Leader Thune to put it on the Senate floor immediately. I am voting for it and implore all Senators on both sides of the aisle to vote for it,' he said. Another Democrat further to the center, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, retweeted Trump's Truth Social post on the attack and said he fully agreed with it. In general, the strikes on Iran may further divide Democrats on liberal-centrist and generational lines. Yet much, again, depends on events. A successful Gulf War by former President George H.W. Bush did not save his presidency in 1992. And the second Gulf War ended disastrously for the Republican Party led by Bush's son, former President George W. Bush. Trump justly had a reputation as a president who is averse to foreign conflicts, given his criticism of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and his repeated calls that he would keep the U.S. out of such wars. So how did this Trump end up bombing Iran, becoming the first president to authorize the dropping of some of America's most lethal non-nuclear bombs? It's more likely Trump's shift is a bit of a one-off based on current world events than a complete change in philosophy. After Israel's initial strike on Iran on June 13, the administration distanced itself from the decision. Trump previously has been seeking to get Iran to agree to a nuclear deal, and many reports suggested he was not keen on an aggressive Israel attack. But that attack happened, and it went well. Israel had control of Iranian airspace, potentially clearing the way for U.S. B-2 bombers. Action by Russia was unlikely given its own war with Ukraine — something that was not part of the political fabric in Trump's first term. Iran's backers in Hamas and Hezbollah also have been devastated by Israel since Hamas launched its attack on Oct. 7, 2023, an event that has had a number of serious repercussions. Some U.S. officials on Sunday called for peace, a sign that Trump is not seeking a prolonged conflict. That could also be a message to his supporters who did not think they were voting for a leader who risked getting the country into a Middle East War. At least some of those voters may be asking questions in the days and weeks to come, and what comes next will make a big difference in shaping their views. Trump's decision to attack Iran and enter the Israeli-Iran war is a big win for hawkish supporters and allies of the president, most notably Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). It is also, oddly, something that will be cheered by certain Republicans who are more often critics of Trump, such as former National Security Adviser John Bolton and former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). It seems clear Trump is listening to the voices of Graham, Rubio and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the sometimes-tense relationship between the U.S. and Israeli leaders. Vance is clearly a part of the president's inner circle, and it was notable that he, Rubio and Hegseth were at Trump's side when he announced the strikes on Saturday night. Trump 2.0 has been notable for having few voices that offer pushback to Trump's decisions. It is difficult to see Hegseth pressing Trump to move in a different direction on a national security issue, for example. And Trump twice this week described assessments by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon as wrong. So, who has Trump's ear? Most of these key people surround Trump and others, like White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. But Trump is his own decider-in-chief, and the Iran strikes are a reflection of his own unpredictability.
