More-civil discourse: Pence and Harris debate

Scaling requires infrastructure, talent, and policy certainty. The UK's Modern Industrial Strategy delivers all three and more through a 10-year plan. With £10 trillion in capital, world-class universities, and unrivalled market access, the UK is engineered for growth. Start your investment journey at business.gov.uk. growth.

Hello and welcome to The Intelligence on Economist Radio. I'm your host, Jason Palmer. Every weekday, we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world. For many, the empty shelves sparked by the pandemic were an unusual experience—not for Cubans. But shopping there now is all but impossible. A crippling food crisis could at last put an end to Cuba's confusing, market-distorting dual currency system. And tens of millions of birds stop off in Asia's wetlands on their annual migrations. Those ecosystems are slowly disappearing, Birdwatchers are trying to coordinate helpful policies across national borders, but geopolitics is sticking its beak in. First up, though—

In Kingsbury Hall tonight, we have a small and socially distant audience.

For days, there had been debate about the vice presidential debate in the wake of President Donald Trump's COVID diagnosis and the cascade of positive test results from those in his inner circle.

And we've taken extra precautions during this pandemic. Among other things, everyone in the audience is required to wear a face mask, and the candidates will be seated 12 feet apart.

Last night at the University of Utah, current Vice President Mike Pence and California Senator Kamala Harris took the stage for their only debate of the 2020 campaign. It was a calmer affair than the first presidential debate, with less frequent pleas for rule following from the moderator Susan Page of USA Today.

This is very important, Susan.

Yes, but we need to give Vice President Biden— I'd just like to—

he interrupted me, and I'd like to just finish, please.

The tone was so comparatively cordial, it bordered on boring. If anything, the run-up to the debate itself made for most of the tension.

The backdrop to this debate was the COVID cluster spreading through the White House.

John Fassmann is our Washington correspondent and a mainstay of our sister show on American politics, Checks and Balance.

At least 34 White House staffers and others have been sickened with the virus. There were some Democrats who felt that it was too risky for Senator Harris to even be in the same room with Vice President Pence. They obviously were, but at her insistence, there were plexiglass panels that separated the candidates from each other and from the moderator, Susan Page of USA Today. And as for the audience, the crowd was pretty sparse, as it was at last week's presidential debate, but everyone wore masks and were told they'd be thrown out of the hall if they took them off. Overall, it was a far more visibly COVID-conscious debate than last week's presidential contest.

And a noticeably less shouty one.

Yeah, it was a far more subdued affair than last week's. Both Senator Harris and Vice President Pence parried and dodged questions and trotted out pre-planned attack lines. You know, they acted like normal politicians, and this debate proceeded like a normal vice presidential debate, meaning it was overall pretty predictable. Maybe even a little dull, but that strikes me as a welcome respite. Neither was as rude or combative as President Trump was last week. Senator Harris dealt capably with Vice President Pence's efforts to interrupt and talk over her.

"Mr. Vice President, I'm speaking.

I'm speaking." He was clearly leery of appearing too aggressive. And both of them played a lot of defense, though I suspect Senator Harris would have attacked the president far more aggressively had he not been ill.

So what were the lines of attack then?

Well, the biggest theme was clearly COVID. Senator Harris hammered the Trump administration for its failures.

The American people have witnessed what is the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country. And here are the facts: 210,000 dead people in our country in just the last several months.

Vice President Pence responded by praising the American people for their resilience and willingness to sacrifice. And you know, flattery is always a safe strategy, especially when you're trying to defend something that's very hard to defend. He also attacked Vice President Biden for his handling of swine flu, which was a far less virulent virus, and praised the president for suspending travel from China.

Before there were more than 5 cases in the United States, all people who had returned from China, President Donald Trump did what no other American president had ever done, and that was he suspended all travel from China. The second—

Which isn't entirely accurate. The president suspended access for some travelers from some parts of China. Vice President Pence went on offense when he tried to get Senator Harris to say she wanted to increase the size of the Supreme Court. And President Trump did the same thing last week with Vice President Biden. That would let Republicans paint Democrats as radicals bent on reshaping the structure of the court. Senator Harris wouldn't be drawn. Neither was Vice President Biden. But it's a potent line of attack, and they're clearly going to trot it out again. Vice President Pence was, I thought, an exceptionally effective debater. He speaks calmly.

Let me just say, I think we're going to win this election.

And he's a sort of furrowed brow, more in sorrow than anger effect that makes whatever he says at least sound reasonable. It's a very good tactic.

And what about Senator Harris? What did you take away from her performance?

I thought that Senator Harris really hit her stride near the end of the debate.

People around our country of every race, of every age, of every gender, perfect strangers to each other, marched Shoulder to shoulder.

When she was talking about her past as a prosecutor. I know what I'm talking about.

Bad cops are bad for good cops. We need—

And about the multiracial protests that followed the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. Vice President Pence did not go nearly as hard at her or at law and order as President Trump did last week. I think he knew that this was not favorable ground for him to fight on. Overall, though, there really weren't many fireworks, but, you know, there never are at these debates. I think the most memorable moment at a vice presidential debate was probably Lloyd Benson telling Dan Quayle, "You're no Jack Kennedy," in 1988. But of course Benson and Dukakis went on to lose to Dan Quayle and George H.W. Bush.

And was there anything really potent in there, any soundbites that'll be talking points in the aftermath?

I can't really see any viral moments coming out of this debate. There was a fly that landed on Vice President Pence's head and stayed there for an unusually long time. And I mean, partisans will have their favorite clips. Democrats will like Senator Harris effectively quieting Vice President Pence, and they'll like her discussion of the protests. I think Republicans will no doubt like the vice president defending Judge Barrett's faith.

We hope she gets a fair hearing, and we particularly hope that we don't see the kind of attacks on her Christian faith that we saw before.

Vice President Pence, like President Trump, alarmingly refused to commit to accepting the election's results if they lose. I think we're at a moment when that no longer no longer counts as viral or surprising, unfortunately. You know, they both dodged questions very capably, and they had their lines, they trotted out, and they were overall perfectly fine and capable.

I mean, normally there isn't this degree of focus anyway on a vice presidential debate, but as the moderator put it, whoever's elected will be the oldest president in American history. How did, how did that play out in the debate?

Yeah, you're right. Susan Page asked them whether they had had conversations with their running mates about what they'd do in the event of presidential disability, and neither of them really answered that question.

Well, Susan, uh, thank you, although I would like to go back I think we need to move on to the issue, but I would like—

and it's an important one. On Inauguration Day next year, Donald Trump will be 74 and Vice President Biden will be 78. So I don't think it's a macabre or unjustified or unfair question.

So let me tell you, first of all, um, the day I got the call from Joe Biden, it was actually a Zoom call.

Um, we really didn't learn anything, which is unfortunate but not surprising. You know, as a voter, I'd like to know how the campaigns are thinking about it, but I can see why a a vice presidential candidate would find speculating about the death of the top of the ticket uncomfortable.

Given all of that, though, I mean, do you think this debate actually changed anybody's mind? No. That's the short answer.

No. I'm struggling to think of the voter whose mind this may have changed, which is good news for Vice President Biden, whose lead seems to be widening, and bad for President Trump, who really needs to do something to change the race's dynamics. I assume that one way or another, both candidates on that stage have their eyes on 2024. You know, it's hard to imagine Mike Pence's subdued style carrying him through what will undoubtedly be a raucous primary in 4 years. And Senator Harris may have an easier path on her side. But of course, a lot can happen in 4 years.

And you no doubt have many more thoughts about the run-up to the election, which we're going to hear about later this week, right?

Yes, there'll be more from me on our American politics podcast, Checks and Balances, tomorrow. The past couple of weeks, I've been in Georgia, Florida, and Maine. And this week's show is going to feature Florida, which is a must-win state especially for President Trump. Thanks very much for talking to us, John. Thanks, Jason. Great to be here.

Scaling requires infrastructure, talent, and policy certainty. The UK's Modern Industrial Strategy delivers all three and more. Through a 10-year plan. With £10 trillion in capital, world-class universities, and unrivaled market access, the UK is engineered for growth. Start your investment journey at business.gov.uk/growth.

If you live in Cuba, chances are you're accustomed to long queues and empty shelves. But right now, the island is experiencing one of its worst food shortages since the fall of the Soviet Union. That's not the only thing that's got people waiting in line. There's ever more serious talk of ending Cuba's complicated dual currency system, and that's got Cubans queuing up outside banks and exchange houses too.

The experience of shopping in Cuba right now is a bit like an endurance sport.

Rosanne Lake is our Cuba correspondent. It's always been rather tedious.

Very long queues are common in Cuba, but now shoppers need to queue twice. Once for a number that corresponds with a time slot that is often the next day, during which they must queue a second time just to gain access to a store.

And when you're inside, what's it look like then?

It's difficult to find what you need, so all of that queuing may not necessarily pay off. There are rations on basic goods, and this is to discourage stockpiling. And the Cuban government was very crafty in rolling out a new app called Portero, which is used to scan the IDs of every shopper, and they ensure that you don't shop too often. Sources that I've spoken to said, well, I was just headed over to the shop to buy some shampoo and hot dogs, neither of which were available. My app was scanned, and as I was leaving the store, I was told that I wouldn't be allowed to return to that same store for a week. And Cubans have done what they usually do very well. They've found ways to sort of improvise. So some of my sources say, well, we don't like sardines, but we buy them anyway because we know that we can trade them with our neighbors later on.

So what exactly is going on here? Is this a pandemic effect?

COVID-19 is definitely an important part of it because it has decimated the tourism industry, which is an important source of hard currency for Cuba. But even before the pandemic, the economy was in a very difficult spot. Venezuela hasn't been able to provide Cuba with the same volume of crude oil, which Cuba then refines and sells around the world in exchange for hard currency. Also, Cuban doctors, they've become less popular around the world, and they were also another critical source of foreign tender. So it's really a very unfortunate and rather perfect storm that was magnified by the pandemic that has left the Cuban government with far fewer sources of revenue to buy the products that it sells in state-run stores. And this, of course, has led to shortages of basic goods and queues and apps to control what you can buy.

Doesn't that also drive a bunch of gray market, black market stuff?

It absolutely does. But the black market in Cuba has been thriving for quite some time because prior to the pandemic, these shortages already existed. But the saving grace of the black market at the time were Cubans referred to as mulas or mules. Cubans who would sort of make a living of traveling to places like Mexico or Miami to buy things. They would bring it back into the country and resell it on the black market. But of course, as a result of the pandemic, there's no travel in or out of Cuba. And so these mulas have sold off their supply and what's being traded on the black market instead are US dollars.

So why the strong association between the black market and dollars then?

Well, dollars have suddenly become a lot more popular because Cuba has started to open more and more MLC stores, moneda libremente convertible, which basically means stores where you can purchase things in dollars. This was of course a temporary scheme that Cuba cooked up to increase its access to foreign currency, right? If suddenly you open up stores that are better stocked than your average stores where people can only pay in foreign currency, you can collect that. And of course, people are keen to have dollars so that they can shop in them. This has prompted a bit of a re-dollarization of the economy. You can no longer get dollars at exchange houses or banks, and the black market price for dollars is very high.

But this is in a country where there are already two currencies in circulation, right? There are.

So there are two official currencies in Cuba, the Cuban peso and the CUC, which is a convertible currency pegged to the US dollar. It was introduced in 1994 to help curb a flight from dollars into Cuban pesos, whose worth plunged as prices rose after the fall of the Soviet Union. But what makes things even more wonky is that these currencies operate with two different exchange rates. So for everyday citizens, the rate is 24 Cuban pesos for 1 CUC. But for state-owned enterprises, that exchange rate is 1 to 1. This creates distortions in the economy because, of course, importers of essential goods, which are all state-owned enterprises, companies use the overvalued CUC to buy goods cheaply from abroad, but they pay their employees in Cuban pesos. This, of course, keeps wages low and discourages domestic production of goods that would otherwise be competing with imports. It's a big old mess that has long been a spur to productivity. But starting in late July, state media began to hint that the dual currency system might finally, after nearly 2 decades of trying to do this, be eliminated by the end of the year. And of course, this has prompted Cubans to join yet more kilometric queues, but this time outside of banks and exchange houses in an attempt to convert their CUC into Cuban pesos because they're concerned that the value of the Cuban peso will change after the CUC disappears.

So if for no other reason, it'll at least be less confusing if this change goes through.

It will certainly be less confusing, but it won't be easy. Currency unification is expected to lead to inflation, and right now it's unclear how the government plans to address that. And Cubans are likely to see the value of their savings decrease by as much as 40%. But ultimately, it really is the only way to purge Cuba's economy of these distortions that have created trouble for it for many decades. This system is actually the reason that so many parts of the economy are unproductive, not least of which is the agricultural industry.

And why is that industry so affected by this?

Cuban farmers are paid in Cuban pesos and the government determines how much they have to sell to the ACOPIO, which is the government entity responsible for buying food. And they also set the price. In exchange for this, farmers are given seeds and fertilizer and some farming tools, but rarely enough to be able to scale their production and earn real income from selling their surplus, which ultimately just means that they have little incentive or means to produce more than required. But many times, because there are inefficiencies in other parts of the economy, for example, the acopio, sometimes their trucks break down. And so the 1,500 pounds of pineapples that you were supposed to sell to the acopio never get picked up and are instead left to rot in the sun. And you're not compensated in many cases for that lost produce. There are also other authorities that clamp down on farmers who attempt to sell a little bit of their surplus. There's been a lot of drama around bananas in Cuba lately. There was a case of a farmer in Holguín whose son took off to another province in a horse-drawn cart, and he was trying to sell bananas at 5 pesos a bunch. And those bananas were seized because it was determined that he was not able to sell them privately. So really, it's this lack of basic commercial freedoms that's come at an incalculable cost to the economy. And it all begins to explain why we've had a pandemic and most other countries around the world rich and poor, have managed to get through it without major disruptions to the food supply. But in Cuba, we still have interminable queues and empty shelves.

And faced with those, Cubans just have to survive the best they can, I guess.

They do. And there's a Spanish word that summarizes that spirit pretty well. It's resolver. Resolver really just means to resolve, but in Cuba, it takes on a new meaning. It really represents the resilience of Cubans. Who just have this incredible knack to resolver, right? To resolve what's thrown at them despite what's missing, what's broken, what's impossible to find. Te lo resuelvo, right? I'll resolve it. This is what they do, and that's how they keep going.

Thanks very much for your time, Rosanne.

Thank you, Jason.

The East Asian-Australasian Flyway isn't a road, it's a flight path for more than 150 species of birds making long migrations each autumn. Along the way, they stop amid Asia's wetlands to fuel up—you know, worms and the like. Yet those wetlands are being developed, estuaries enclosed, those crucial pit stops are drying up. It's the sort of cross-border problem addressed by organizations such as BirdLife International, a British umbrella group for friends of the feathered the world over. Except earlier this month, BirdLife expelled the Chinese Wild Bird Federation, a member organization, from Taiwan. It seems that politics is at play, and some of those 50 million or so migrating birds may pay the price.

Well, it's a fantastic spectacle. It's the autumn migration, and these waders, shorebirds as they're sometimes called, and other waterfowl that breed way up north are barreling down the East Asian-Australasian Flyway, which is one of the world's great flyways.

Dominic Ziegler writes Banyan, our column on Asian affairs, and does a little birdwatching on the side.

And they basically stop to refuel at wetlands along the way. Now, in Hong Kong, where I live, One of its least well-known secrets are the wetlands at Maipo, which are of international significance. Very large numbers of waders will make pit stops here, and at the moment, the mudflats, the shrimp ponds are filling up with these fantastic, extraordinary, and brave but tiny birds.

And so what kinds of birds are you seeing at the moment?

Well, there's about 155 species of waders altogether on this Flyway. Some of them are pretty common, like the Eurasian Curlew, the Dunlin. Some very, very rare ones include the tiny little Spoon-billed Sandpiper. A real success story is the Black-faced Spoonbill, which breeds in the demilitarized zone between South and North Korea. Now, that bird was nearly extinct 25 years ago, but thanks to conservation efforts mainly by protecting its wintering grounds, the numbers are up to over 4,000, and about a quarter of the whole global population is in Maipo over the winter.

And so the birds return to the same place each year to fuel up?

They tend to do that, yes. Now some birds have very specific sites to which they go. A few years ago, the South Korean authorities filled in 400 square kilometers of mudflats, incredibly rich nutrient life for birds. As a consequence of that, the population of the so-called spoonie has plummeted.

So development and the like is essentially making it harder for these birds to make those pit stops. Are environmentalists, activists doing anything to help with that?

Well, they're doing as much as they can, and one of the great things about environmentalists is that just like the birds, But unlike governments in East Asia, they're not concerned with borders. They want to work across them and cooperate to preserve the habitats that are so crucial to these species. That's why Asian conservationists were appalled when the main global body involved with bird conservation, BirdLife International, expelled the longtime member from Taiwan, which was called the Chinese Wild Bird Federation. Now, the Chinese Wild Bird Federation has done a lot of good in Taiwan, and in cooperation with conservationists in neighboring countries. The revival of the black-faced spoonbill is one example of their good work.

So why was it that the Chinese Wild Bird Federation was kicked out of BirdLife International?

Well, BirdLife International swears there was no pressure from China, but as you know, China does its utmost to freeze Taiwan out of any international organizations. I would say that at a minimum, BirdLife International felt that it had to be in China's good books in order to be able to do good work there. And it may even have thought that it might get some of the money that the Taiwan Federation gave to BirdLife International.

And is it fair to say then that these geopolitical tensions actually put the birds at greater risk?

Well, they do if there isn't cooperation. But thankfully, there are some hopeful signs and scientific cooperation has helped Well, you know, some of the geopolitical freeze. For instance, 4 years ago, New Zealand and China signed a treaty to protect the habitat of the bar-tailed godwit. That's because in Maori tradition, the arrival and departure of the bar-tailed godwits is in fact the souls of arriving and departing ancestors going off to the Maori homeland. That myth is a powerful one. And when it's tied to ideas of bird conservation, well, then that provides ballast to a relationship. And surely at a time when China's relations with New Zealand are growing rocky, as China's are with several countries, then the conservationists' involvement is a useful ballast to have.

Dominic, thank you very much for your time.

Thanks, Jason.

That's all for this episode of The Intelligence. If you like us, give us a rating on Apple Podcasts, and you can subscribe to The Economist at economist.com/intelligenceoffer. See you back here tomorrow.