The 2024 election and what it could mean for natural products industry

The federal election next month is a toss-up, and its outcome could have substantial impacts for natural products consumers and businesses.

This summer, America witnessed perhaps the most impactful two months in national politics in 50 years, since the Watergate scandal forced then-President Richard Nixon to resign from office. It started with the majority of Americans frustrated with where the country was headed and the choices they faced for president in November.

Polls showed former President Donald Trump with a slight lead over President Joe Biden, largely tied to concerns over Biden’s age and fitness to serve another four-year term. Then a disastrous performance by Biden in the June 27th presidential debate led to a growing lead for Trump. This spurred intensifying calls within the Democratic Party for Biden to consider dropping his bid for a second term.  

Days before the Republican National Convention, Trump was nearly killed in an attempted assassination. Republicans and Democrats alike predicted a Trump landslide. Just days later, Biden shocked many by dropping out of the race and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris.

Democrats quickly coalesced behind Harris and their relief and excitement translated to renewed hope that Democrats could beat Trump. A successful Democratic National Convention and a strong performance by Harris in her debate with Trump has resulted in polls showing the race is now too close to call.

Most observers agree that the outcome of the presidential race hinges on voters in just seven states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona and Nevada). Consider this: It was recently reported that 81% of Trump’s advertising in the last two months of the race has been dedicated to just two states: Pennsylvania and Georgia. 

The two candidates are spending the majority of their time campaigning in these seven states. And in recognition of widespread voter dissatisfaction with the direction of the country, both candidates are jockeying to be seen as the true change agent. History says the winner will be the one who wins the change agent battle.

In a recent presentation to the United Natural Products Alliance (UNPA), I reviewed what I see as other key factors in the race. First is abortion. A recent survey of suburban women voters in the seven swing states found that by far the most important voting issue for them is abortion.   Democrats see this as a major advantage and key to driving turnout.

At the same time, Harris must do better among male voters than Hillary Clinton did in 2016. Trump beat Clinton among men by 11%, while Biden was able to cut that advantage to 1%. The youth vote could also prove decisive. A 52% turnout by young voters helped propel Biden’s win over Trump in 2020. Trump won in 2016, when just 42% of youth voted. Turnout of black voters could determine the winner in several of the key swing states. Black voter turnout was 61% when Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, but fell to 56% in 2016 when Trump was elected.

The makeup and leadership of Congress is also at stake this November. This will have a major impact on what either a President Trump or Harris could get done if elected. And control of the Congress could well shift in ways that will create divided government next January. Republicans can regain control of the U.S. by picking up just one seat. And Democrats could win the majority in the U.S. House with a pickup of just four seats out of 435.  

As of this writing, I predict that even if former President Trump is reelected, Democrats will retake control of the House. Renewed energy and enthusiasm among Democrats could well translate to more than enough “pickups” in heavily Democratic states like California and New York. And with Democrats defending three Senate seats in states that are likely to go big for Trump, I predict that even if Harris wins, Republicans will take back control of the Senate.

Impact on dietary supplements, consumers

So, what does this all mean, particularly for natural products consumers and businesses?

First, regardless of who wins the White House, we are likely to be facing divided government — with one party controlling the presidency and one side of the Capitol. The other party will use its control over the other side of the Capitol to block major changes they disagree with. That will mean continued gridlock in Congress and lots of executive actions by the president to try to move their agendas. However, the impact on the natural products sector will likely still be significant.

If Trump wins along with a divided Congress, he will likely move to substantially increase tariffs on goods imported from China and other countries. This would clearly increase input costs for dietary supplements. It could also trigger a larger trade war with China that could have even more meaningful impacts, including possible restrictions in the supply of key dietary ingredients like vitamin C, the supplies of which are largely controlled by China. In fact, UNPA is already working with policy leaders to stave off such supply chain disruptions.

Another substantial impact of a second Trump term could be on the powers and resources of federal agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Federal Trade Commission. Trump has promised to make big cuts to federal agency staffs as well as to federal regulations. This could mean reduced inspection staff at FDA and reduced enforcement efforts. Promises by Trump to give Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a substantial role in his administration could also impact natural products. Kennedy is an outspoken critic of FDA and the food industry. He has called for significant changes to public health and nutrition policy that could have major implications for natural product consumers and industry.

If Harris is elected and faces a split Congress, she too would likely lean heavily into executive actions to advance her agenda. She would likely bring less dramatic changes to FDA and FTC budgets and general direction. Harris would also be less likely to call for major increases in tariffs. She will likely bring in new leadership to federal agencies and has promised to rein in bad actors in industry and target price gouging in the food industry. The impact on potential changes to DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994) is less clear, and will likely rest on the ability of industry to unite behind changes and convince champions in Congress as well as leaders in the new administration.

Another major factor influencing natural health policy in the coming years will persist regardless of who wins the White House: major precedent-breaking decisions by a conservative Supreme Court. The impact of the court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturning so-called Chevron deference will continue to shift power away from federal agencies and to the courts and the states.

For dietary supplements, that could mean future court challenges that result in major alterations in how key issues like the drug preclusion section of DSHEA are interpreted. Increased reluctance or inability of FDA to enforce DSHEA could lead to more state laws and state executive actions regulating supplements. And additional major court decisions that move power away from the federal government can be expected in the coming years. This continued dispersion of regulation to the states and courts could lead to greater support for federal actions in order to create greater certainty and consistency for both natural products consumers and businesses.

Along with the rest of the nation and world, we’ll be watching the election results with great interest.