Donald Trump ties U.S. success to 2nd term: ‘You have to vote for me’
President Donald Trump sought to reassure his supporters about the state of the U.S. economy despite the stock market volatility and told rallygoers in New Hampshire, a state that he hopes to capture in 2020, that their financial security depends on his reelection. “Whether you love me or hate me you have to vote for me,” Trump said. Speaking to a boisterous crowd at Southern New Hampshire University Arena, Trump dismissed the heightened fears about the U.S. economy and a 3 percent drop Wednesday in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which was fueled by a slowing global economy and a development in the bond market that has predicted previous recessions. Avoiding an economic slump is critical to Trump’s reelection hopes. “The United States right now has the hottest economy anywhere in the world,” Trump said. Trump, who reached the White House by promising to bring about a historic economic boom, claimed, as he often does, that the markets would have crashed if he had lost his 2016 bid for the presidency. And he warned that if he is defeated in 2020, Americans’ 401(k) retirement accounts will go “down the tubes.” The Republican president also defended his tactics on trade with China. He has imposed 25 percent tariffs on $250 billion of imports from China and has threatened to hit the remaining $300 billion worth of Chinese imports with 10 percent tariffs. He has delayed that increase on about half of those items to avoid raising prices for U.S. holiday shoppers. He said China wants to make a trade deal with the U.S. because it’s costing the country millions of jobs, but he claimed that the U.S. doesn’t need to be in a hurry. “I don’t think we’re ready to make a deal,” Trump said. Trump’s rally was the first since mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, killed 31 people and wounded dozens more. The shootings have reignited calls for Congress to take immediate action to reduce gun violence. Trump said the U.S. can’t make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, but he advocated for expanding the number of facilities to house the mentally ill without saying how he would pay for it. “We will be taking mentally deranged and dangerous people off of the streets so we won’t have to worry so much about them,” Trump said. “We don’t have those institutions anymore, and people can’t get proper care. There are seriously ill people and they’re on the streets.” Along with discussion of the economy and guns, Trump hit a number of other topics, accusing the European Union of being “worse than China, just smaller”; bragging about his 2016 electoral victories in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania; and calling it a “disgrace” that people were throwing water on police officers in New York. The rally was interrupted about a half an hour in by a handful of protesters near the rafters of the arena. As the protesters were being led out, a Trump supporter wearing a “Trump 2020” shirt near them began enthusiastically shaking his fist in a sign of support for the president. But Trump mistook him for one of the protesters and said to the crowd: “That guy’s got a serious weight problem. Go home. Start exercising. Get him out of here, please.”After a pause, he added, “Got a bigger problem than I do.” New Hampshire, which gave Trump his first GOP primary victory but favored Hillary Clinton in the 2016 general election, is doing well economically, at least when using broad measures. But beneath the top-line data are clear signs that the prosperity is being unevenly shared, and when the tumult of the Trump presidency is added to the mix, the state’s flinty voters may not be receptive to his appeals. An August University of New Hampshire Survey Center poll found that 42 percent of New Hampshire adults approve of Trump while 53 percent disapprove. The poll also showed that 49 percent approve of Trump’s handling of the economy and 44 percent disapprove. Some Democratic presidential campaigns are holding events to capitalize on Trump’s trip. Joe Biden’s campaign set up down the street from the arena to talk to voters and enlist volunteers. A group for Pete Buttigieg’s campaign gathered in nearby Concord to call voters about his support for new gun safety laws. And Cory Booker urged Trump to cancel the speech and instead order Congress to take immediate action to prevent gun violence. At 2.4 percent, New Hampshire’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for May was among the lowest in the nation. But wage growth is significantly below national gains. Average hourly earnings rose a scant 1 percent in New Hampshire in 2018, lagging the 3 percent gain nationwide, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In other ways, like the home ownership rate — first in the nation — and median household income — seventh in the U.S. — the state is thriving, according to census data. New Hampshire’s four Electoral College votes are far below that of key swing states like Florida, Wisconsin and Michigan, but its influence can prove powerful in close election years like 2000, when George W. Bush’s victory in the state gave him the edge needed to win the White House. By Kevin Freking Associated Press AP Economics Writer Josh Boak and AP Polling Editor Emily Swanson in Washington and Associated Press writer Hunter Woodall in Manchester, N.H., contributed to this report. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
AP fact check: Donald Trump’s made-up claims on shootings, tariffs
Playing defense, President Donald Trump made up facts in the aftermath of two mass shootings and as U.S. businesses braced for a potentially devastating trade war with China. Trump distorted science in seeking to assign blame on video games for the deadly shootings in Texas and Ohio, rather than on his own words that critics say contributed to a combustible racial climate spawning violence. He also pointed to an imminent magic solution in the form of legislation on background checks that was far from certain and misrepresented his record on gun control. On trade, Trump repeatedly exaggerated the benefits of tariffs and sought unfairly to fault the Federal Reserve — not his own policies — for any weakness in the U.S. economy. Trump says he will impose new taxes on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese imports on Sept. 1 that are almost certain to inflict pain on American consumers. Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden claimed Trump did nothing on gun control, but in fact Trump banned bump stocks, a gun attachment deemed legal during the Obama-Biden administration. A look at recent claims and reality: TRADE TRUMP: “China wants to make a deal so badly. Thousands of companies are leaving because of the Tariffs, they must stem the flow.” — tweet Saturday. TRUMP: “China is losing so many — they’re losing — thousands and thousands of companies are leaving China now because of the tariffs.” — remarks to reporters Wednesday. THE FACTS: Not so fast. It’s true that many companies are rethinking their supply chains in an effort to dodge Trump’s tariffs on goods from China. Some are moving production to other countries such as Vietnam and Mexico. But there’s no evidence of a mass exodus. For one thing, relocating factories takes time — often 12 to 18 months. For another, it will be hard for multinationals to duplicate what they have in China — long-standing relationships with Chinese contractors and access to a vast array of specialized suppliers who can quickly deliver niche components. Trump is seeking to intensify pressure on China to reach a trade deal by saying he will impose 10% tariffs on the remaining $300 billion in Chinese imports he hasn’t already taxed. TRUMP: “China dropped the price of their currency to an almost a historic low. It’s called ‘currency manipulation.’ Are you listening Federal Reserve? This is a major violation which will greatly weaken China over time!” — tweet on Aug. 5. TRUMP: “China is intent on continuing to receive the hundreds of Billions of Dollars they have been taking from the U.S. with unfair trade practices and currency manipulation. So one-sided, it should have been stopped many years ago!” — tweet on Aug. 5. THE FACTS: He’s misrepresenting the facts. Trump is correct to be worried that China may decide to use its currency as a weapon in its ongoing trade war with the United States. But it is Trump’s own Treasury Department that had failed to cite China as a currency manipulator in five reports it had issued since Trump took office in January 2017, even though Trump promised in the 2016 campaign to do so right away. Treasury’s surprise move to formally label China a currency manipulator last Monday came after China allowed its currency, the yuan, to fall below the seven yuan-to-$1 level for the first time in 11 years. In the following days, China continued to lower the trading range for the yuan, showing the potential to use its currency as a weapon in the trade war with the United States. A weaker yuan would make Chinese goods less expensive in the United States, potentially offsetting some of the impact of the tariffs Trump has already imposed on $250 billion in Chinese goods and is threatening to widen to an additional $300 billion in goods next month. Those U.S. tariffs drive up the cost of Chinese imports to American consumers. Trump appeared to blame the Federal Reserve for not taking action against China in the currency area. In reality, the Treasury’s previous reports had repeatedly said that China did not meet the requirements established in U.S. law to be branded a currency manipulator. Under U.S. law, the Federal Reserve plays no role in deciding whether countries are unfairly manipulating their currencies. In its announcement, the Treasury Department contended that the real purpose of “China’s currency devaluation is to gain unfair competitive advantage in international trade.” It was the first time Treasury put China on the currency blacklist since 1994. The administration’s surprise announcement raised questions about what exactly had changed from the Treasury’s last report issued in May that said China did not meet the criteria to be labeled a currency manipulator. FEDERAL RESERVE TRUMP: “As your President, one would think that I would be thrilled with our very strong dollar. I am not!” — tweet Thursday. TRUMP: “The Fed’s high interest rate level, in comparison to other countries, is keeping the dollar high, making it more difficult for our great manufacturers like Caterpillar, Boeing …. John Deere, our car companies, & others, to compete on a level playing field. With substantial Fed Cuts (there is no inflation) and no quantitative tightening, the dollar will make it possible for our companies to win against competition.” — tweet Thursday. THE FACTS: The president is oversimplifying the Fed’s role in determining the dollar’s value and failing to take into account possible threats to the country from a weaker dollar. Trump is correct that U.S. interest rates play a role in determining the value of the dollar against other currencies. Higher U.S. rates tend to attract foreign investors who want to earn higher rates of return on dollar-denominated investments and this does push the dollar’s value higher. The Fed cut its key short-term rate by a quarter-point last week, its first reduction in more than a decade. But the Fed’s action in setting its short-term rate is only one factor influencing the dollar’s value. U.S. economic growth also plays a
No sign of Donald Trump-Mexico deal on farm goods
President Donald Trump is bragging about a new deal with Mexico that provides for “large” sales of U.S. farm goods, but it doesn’t appear to exist. In weekend tweets, he announced in all capital letters that he had won the agreement to benefit America’s “great patriot farmers,” and that U.S. sales would begin “immediately.” There isn’t any sign of that happening, however. Mexican officials denied that anything on agriculture was included in the deal on border security reached Friday to avert Trump’s threatened tariffs. Trump also unfairly placed responsibility on Mexico for the entire U.S. drug problem, even though many of the known drug deaths have nothing to do with the country. The statements came in a week where the apportioning of credit and blame often went awry in Trump’s remarks. He hailed pristine air quality that isn’t, wrongly insisted that the U.S. was paying “close to 100%” of NATO and told Puerto Ricans they should love him because he got them hurricane aid that he’s actually been complaining about for months. In the Democratic presidential campaign, meantime, Trump was accused of breaking a gun-control promise that in reality he kept. A look at recent claims and reality: MEXICO DEAL TRUMP: “MEXICO HAS AGREED TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN BUYING LARGE QUANTITIES OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT FROM OUR GREAT PATRIOT FARMERS!” — tweet Saturday, retweeted Sunday. THE FACTS: There’s no evidence that Mexico agreed to “large” purchases of agricultural products from the U.S. as part of the deal to avoid tariffs. Nor did the White House provide any details to show such a deal exists. The joint declaration between the U.S. and Mexico released by the State Department late Friday makes no mention of agriculture. Officials from Mexico deny an agreement was reached on farm goods as part of the talks. “Everything that was negotiated was in the joint statement,” said a Mexican official familiar with the discussions who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. When Mexico’s ambassador to the United States, Martha Barcena, was asked repeatedly Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation” whether there was a new agricultural deal, she demurred, saying such trade between both countries should increase over time. She referenced instead the potential impact of the separate United States-Mexico-Canada trade deal, which has yet to be approved by Congress. “Is trade on agricultural products going to grow? Yes, it is going to grow, and it is going to grow without tariffs and with USMCA ratification,” Barcena said. According to the office of the United States Trade Representative, Mexico bought $20 billion in U.S. agricultural goods last year, making it the United States’ second-largest ag export market. TRUMP: “Look, I’m dealing with Mexico right now. They send in $500 billion worth of drugs, they kill 100,000 people, they ruin a million families every year if you look at that. That’s really an invasion without the guns. … 100,000 people are killed, dead every year, from what comes through our southern border. They shouldn’t be allowing people to come through their country from Central, from Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador.” — Fox News interview Thursday. THE FACTS: Trump is inflating the death toll from drug overdoses — more than 70,200 in 2017 — and wrongly blaming all the known deaths on Mexico. Tens of thousands of those deaths have nothing to do with Mexico or Central America. They are from legally made prescription opioids, fentanyl laboratories in China or other sources of international drug smuggling and illicit manufacturing in the U.S. More than 17,000 of the deaths in 2017, for example, were from prescription opioids alone. Mexico is indeed a significant conduit in the drug trade — it’s a leading source of heroin, for example — but it is hardly the only one. DISASTER AID TRUMP, on signing a relief bill for multiple U.S. disasters: “Puerto Rico should love President Trump. Without me, they would have been shut out!” — tweet Thursday. THE FACTS: That’s not likely. The $19.1 billion disaster aid bill, passed by the House on Monday and signed into law by Trump on Thursday, ordinarily would have been approved by Congress months ago. But Trump injected himself into the debate, demanding that money for hurricane-rebuilding efforts that was sought by Puerto Rico’s elected officials, Republicans and Democrats both, be kept out. Trump frequently inflated the amount of aid that Puerto Rico had obtained in previous bills and feuded with the island’s Democratic officials. Congressional Democrats held firm in demanding that Puerto Rico, a territory whose 3 million people are U.S. citizens, be helped by the measure. The legislation ultimately included more money for Puerto Rico, about $1.4 billion, than Democrats originally sought. The relief measure delivers money to states in the South suffering from last fall’s hurricanes, Midwestern states deluged with springtime floods and fire-ravaged rural California, among others. NATO TRUMP: “We were paying so much. I think we were really paying close to 100% of NATO. So we were paying to protect all of these European nations. And it’s just not fair.” — interview Thursday with Fox News. THE FACTS: It’s not true that the U.S. was paying “close to 100%” of the price of protecting Europe. NATO does have a shared budget to which each member makes contributions based on the size of its economy. The United States, with the biggest economy, pays the biggest share, about 22%. Four European members — Germany, France, Britain and Italy — combined pay nearly 44% of the total. The money, about $3 billion, runs NATO’s headquarters and covers certain other civilian and military costs. Defending Europe involves far more than that fund. The primary cost of doing so would come from each member country’s military budget, as the alliance operates under a mutual defense treaty. The U.S. is the largest military spender but others in the alliance obviously have armed forces, too. The notion that almost all costs would fall to the U.S. is false. In fact, NATO’s Article 5,
US Steel cites Donald Trump in resuming Fairfield Works construction project
U.S. Steel Corp. will restart construction on an idled manufacturing facility in Alabama, and it gave some of the credit to President Donald Trump’s trade policies in an announcement Monday. Trump’s “strong trade actions” are partly responsible for the resumption of work on an advanced plant near Birmingham, the Pittsburgh-based company said in a statement. The administration’s tariffs have raised prices on imported steel and aluminum. The manufacturer also cited improving market conditions, union support and government incentives for the decision. Work will resume immediately, the company said, and the facility will have an annual capacity of 1.6 million tons (1.5 million metric tons). U.S. Steel said it also will update other equipment and plans to spend about $215 million, adding about 150 full-time workers. The furnace is expected to begin producing steel in late 2020. The 16,000-member United Steelworkers praised the decision to resume work, which followed an agreement with the union reached last fall. “This decision paves the way for a solid future in continuing to make steel in Alabama and the Birmingham region,” Leo W. Gerard, the president of the international union, said in a statement. U.S. Steel shut down its decades-old blast furnace at Fairfield Works in 2015, idling about 1,100 employees, and said it would replace the operation with an electric furnace. The company then blamed conditions in the steel, oil and gas industries as it suspended work in December 2015 on an electric arc furnace at its mill in Fairfield, located just west of Birmingham. The project stalled until the announcement Monday. Trump imposed tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on imported aluminum on June 1, 2018. The move was to protect U.S. national security interests, he said, but other countries said the taxes break global trade rules, and some have imposed tariffs of their own. Republished with permission from the Associated Press
Doug Jones says farmers scared by Donald Trump’s tariffs
Democratic Sen. Doug Jones says President Donald Trump’s talk of tariffs is sparking questions and anxiety back home in Alabama, including from soybean farmers who are “scared to death.” Jones said Wednesday in an Associated Press interview that even in deep-red Alabama people are starting to question whether Trump’s “nationalistic approach” on tariffs is a threat to their financial well-being. He said: “My soybean farmers are scared to death because they’re losing markets left and right. They’ve spent so much time building up markets in China and abroad” that are now uncertain because of Trump’s approach. Jones said Alabama’s auto exporters are also concerned. Trump calls himself the “tariff man” and wants to hike more such taxes on foreign entities that do business in the U.S. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Donald Trump’s push for tariffs squeezes a weakening global economy
The global economy was already showing signs of a slowdown when President Donald Trump reminded the world of his love of tariffs and sent a chill through financial markets. “I am a Tariff Man,” Trump announced Tuesday to signal his devotion to import taxes — a remark that served to downplay the likelihood of ending his trade war with China. Stocks sank across the world, in part over fear that an escalation in tariffs would choke off economic growth and possibly send a global slowdown into a recession. By Wednesday, Tariff Man had tweaked his message to suggest more optimism on the odds of forging a deal with President Xi Jinping. Their meeting last weekend at an economic conference in Argentina produced a 90-day truce, a suspension of further increases in U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods and a pledge by Beijing to buy more U.S. goods. “Not to sound naive or anything, but I believe President Xi meant every word of what he said at our long and hopefully historic meeting,” Trump tweeted. “ALL subjects discussed!” Still, Trump’s rattling of the global economy came at a precarious moment, with the economic outlook for 2019 dimming and concerns about a potential recession — if not next year then soon thereafter — rising. The economic stimulus from U.S. tax cuts is beginning to fade. Britain is struggling to leave the European Union. Italy’s debt is widening. China is trying to navigate a slowdown after decades of unsustainably fast growth. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, shrank in its most recent quarter. Global growth was already slated to slip to 3.5% next year from 3.7% even without accounting for the risks of escalating U.S. tariffs and China’s counter-tariffs, according to estimates by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an intergovernmental think tank of 36 nations. Now, businesses, consumers and nations must account for the chaotic confusion injected by Trump’s evolving and conflicting messages about his administration’s trade relationship with Beijing, said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. Shepherdson worries that the president’s fondness for tariffs might itself be enough to further suppress growth. “The uncertainty caused by the whipsawing of his trade stance means that business investment will be delayed or canceled, marginal hiring decisions will be postponed and potential overseas business partners will look elsewhere,” Shepherdson said. Trump imposed tariffs of 10% on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods in September. Those tariffs were set to rise to 25% on Jan. 1. The president had also threatened to impose tariffs on essentially all the remaining goods from China that aren’t already subject to his higher tariffs. The Trump-Xi dinner negotiations, though, led the two sides to hit pause and agree to 90 days of negotiations. Trump says he wants to shrink a gaping $336 billion U.S. trade deficit with Beijing — the gap between how much America buys from China and how much it sells — and stop the Chinese from stealing or forcing the handover of U.S. technology and intellectual property. Complicating the problem is that all this is happening against the backdrop of weakening growth around the world. The economy of the 19 countries that use the euro currency, for example, stumbled in the July-September period. Its quarterly growth halved to 0.2%. Worries escalated after data showed that the economies of Italy and Germany, which relies on global exports, shrank during the quarter. “The global picture is getting murkier, and that’ll impact the eurozone via trade and sentiment,” Erik Nielsen, chief economist at UniCredit bank, said in a note to clients. Italy is suffering from uncertainty over its economic outlook under a new populist government. The government wants to raise public spending, thereby adding to its huge debt load of over 130% — and even rekindling concerns of a return of Europe’s debt crisis. Brexit, meanwhile, is an unknown, with Britain in the midst of political turmoil. It’s possible that it could leave the EU without any deal on future relations involving trade. That’s a worst-case scenario that would immediately establish tariffs and customs checks on hundreds of billions of dollars in exports between Britain and the 27 other EU nations. White House aides have suggested that Trump is promoting tariffs merely as a tool to forge agreements that would actually eliminate all import taxes. And at the opening of this week, the administration was already claiming progress with China on the purchase of $1.2 trillion worth of U.S. goods — even though White House officials couldn’t supply any meaningful details. “President Trump regards himself as a trade reformer,” Larry Kudlow, director of the White House National Economic Council, told reporters Monday. “He wants a world of zero tariffs and zero non-tariff barriers and zero subsidies.” Then, on Tuesday, Trump seemed to thumb his nose at that White House talking point by dubbing himself “Tariff Man.” “When people or countries come in to raid the great wealth of our Nation,” he tweeted, “I want them to pay for the privilege of doing so.” Those words helped trigger a dizzying sell-off Tuesday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average shed about 800 points — 3.1%. U.S. financial markets were closed Wednesday for the funeral of former President George H.W. Bush. But stock indexes in Britain, Germany, France, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Japan, Australia, South Korea and India tumbled. The problem for the global economy is that tariffs tend to inflate prices, depress trade and reduce the incomes of everyday workers. That’s because companies must either absorb the higher costs created by tariffs or pass them on to their customers. The Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank, studied the $42 billion of tariffs already imposed by Trump, which include taxes on steel, aluminum, washing machines and the duties being charged on Chinese imports. Its analysis, released Wednesday, concluded that these tariffs had reduced incomes by an average of $146 for taxpayers who earn between $27,740 and $43,800. The tariffs also cut U.S. hiring by the equivalent of 94,300 full-time jobs. If Trump proceeds with
Doug Jones makes bipartisan request of GAO to investigate exclusions for Trump’s tariffs
As part of bipartisan trio of senators on Monday, Alabama U.S. Sen. Doug Jones called on the Government Accountability Office to formally investigate the Trump administration’s tariff exemption process in relation to the blanket import tariffs on steel and aluminum that went into effect this spring. According to the Senators, the Commerce Department exclusion process for the Trump Administration’s tariffs on steel and aluminum has generated a large backlog of petitions and has placed significant burdens on American businesses. The 25-percent tariffs on steel and 10-percent tariffs on aluminum were the result of a section 232 investigation that examined whether these imports were a threat to U.S. national security. “As a result of the section 232 actions, U.S. trading partners have levied retaliatory tariffs on billions of dollars of American exports. In addition, several countries, including U.S. allies like Canada, Mexico, and the European Union (EU), have filed disputes against the United States using the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute mechanism,” the senators wrote. They continued, “Members of Congress and U.S. businesses have repeatedly raised concerns about the pace, transparency, and fairness of the section 232 steel and aluminum exclusion process. For example, the Senate Finance Committee and industry groups have called on Commerce to clarify the criteria it uses to determine whether to grant an exclusion from the tariffs. In July 2018, at a House Ways and Means subcommittee hearing, businesses vocalized concerns about the backlog of exclusion applications and the challenges small businesses have faced in accessing adequate resources to navigate the exclusion process.” By the end of October, Commerce had received 49,301 exclusion petitions (including resubmissions) and had issued decisions for just 16,567 (34 percent) of them. In their letter, the senators call for GAO to investigate key questions about the current process, including how to improve the pace of review, the cost to taxpayers, the amount of technical support provided to petitioners, and how exclusion approvals are determined. Read the full text of the letter below: November 26, 2018 The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro Comptroller General of the United States United States Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW Washington, DC 20548 Dear Mr. Dodaro: We write today to request a review of the process by which the Department of Commerce (Commerce) has been granting tariff exclusion requests for steel and aluminum imports that would otherwise be subject to additional duties under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. In April 2017, the Secretary of Commerce initiated a section 232 investigation to examine whether steel and aluminum imports impair U.S. national security. On the basis of a positive determination from this investigation, President Trump invoked his authority under section 232 to proclaim 25% tariffs on steel imports and 10% tariffs on aluminum imports. These tariffs went into effect for most countries on March 23, 2018. Although Mexico and Canada were initially excluded from the tariffs, President Trump announced on May 31, 2018 that both countries would be included. In 2017, the U.S. imported approximately $29 billion in foreign steel and $17 billion in foreign aluminum. As a result of the section 232 actions, U.S. trading partners have levied retaliatory tariffs on billions of dollars of American exports. In addition, several countries, including U.S. allies like Canada, Mexico, and the European Union (EU), have filed disputes against the United States using the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute mechanism. Since the tariffs went into effect, Commerce has been processing on a rolling basis thousands of petitions from U.S. importers of foreign steel and aluminum products seeking tariff relief. As of October 29, 2018, Commerce had received 49,301 exclusion petitions (including resubmissions), and had issued decisions in 16,567 cases (34%). Of these, 12,044 requests were approved and 4,523 were denied. In Congressional testimony on September 9, 2018, Commerce officials reported that the agency had redeployed staff from other Commerce offices and was in the process of hiring 55 contractors to handle the backlog of exclusion petitions. Members of Congress and U.S. businesses have repeatedly raised concerns about the pace, transparency, and fairness of the section 232 steel and aluminum exclusion process. For example, the Senate Finance Committee and industry groups have called on Commerce to clarify the criteria it uses to determine whether to grant an exclusion from the tariffs. In July 2018, at a House Ways and Means subcommittee hearing, businesses vocalized concerns about the backlog of exclusion applications and the challenges small businesses have faced in accessing adequate resources to navigate the exclusion process. To ensure that Congress has a better understanding of this issue and possible actions that the federal government can take to address it, we request that the Comptroller General initiate a review that evaluates the following questions: How has Commerce incorporated feedback from petitioners, members of Congress, and other stakeholders to develop and improve upon its exclusion process? What criteria does Commerce use to make a determination to approve or deny an exclusion petition? How does Commerce adjudicate rebuttals? What steps has Commerce taken to ensure the timely processing of exclusion petitions, including additional staffing and resources? What steps could Commerce take to improve the pace of its exclusion process? How has Commerce trained staff to properly evaluate petitions? What is the average amount of time Commerce takes to issue a decision on a petition? How does the rebuttal and surrebuttal process for opposition comments increase this timeline? What has been the cost to date of the 232 exclusion process, including the costs of increased staffing to evaluate petitions? How does Commerce ensure transparency and adequate communication with petitioners? How frequently does Commerce contact petitioners for additional information, if needed? How quickly does Commerce correct any mistakes in the administration of the exclusion petition process? What degree of technical support has Commerce provided to assist petitioners, particularly small businesses, in filing exclusion petitions? Please consider including recommendations for agency or congressional action in your evaluation. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Mark Libell (Jones) at 202-224-4124, Halie Craig (Toomey)
Donald Trump’s tariffs could sow trouble for GOP in farm districts
In the aptly named Harvester Restaurant, wheat farmer Roy Dube makes clear he’s no fan of President Donald Trump‘s trade policy. “We get him elected into office and he pulls us out of trade agreements,” Dube said last week as local farmers gathered to hear Democratic House candidate Lisa Brown. Dube says China is buying less wheat from eastern Washington farmers and Trump’s policies have opened the door for Australia and Canada to wrestle away business. His frustration extends to his congressional representative, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who is the highest-ranking Republican woman in the House and running for an eighth term. “I’m concerned that Cathy McMorris Rodgers didn’t put up more resistance,” Dube said. The U.S. tariffs on agriculture products, sown by Trump, have grown into an election-year threat to Republicans in rural districts that are heavily reliant on exports for their economy. With the livelihoods of farmers at risk, opposition to the tariffs could make a difference in some races and help determine which party takes control of Congress. McMorris Rodgers has made it clear she opposes the president’s actions on tariffs, but so far, the Republican-controlled House has not taken up legislation to block them. Democrats characterize GOP lawmakers as unable or unwilling to check Trump, who has declared that “tariffs are the greatest.” “My opponent, though she would say she’s concerned and talking to the administration about these issues, she’s still mostly a cheerleader for the president,” said Brown, a former state legislator. Facing what appears to be the tightest re-election race of her career, McMorris Rodgers is emphasizing that she has encouraged the president to “move from tariffs to agreement.” “I have made it very clear that I don’t support the across-the-board tariffs, that we should take a more targeted approach,” McMorris Rodgers told The Associated Press. Clues that the president’s trade policies will play a role in the November midterm elections can be seen in Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue‘s travel schedule. Over the past few months, he’s been to Eastern Washington to join McMorris Rodgers in meeting with farmers. He’s also been to California’s Central Valley to meet with farmers in the districts of Republican Reps. Jeff Denham and David Valadao. He also went to Iowa, where Republican Reps. David Young and Rod Blum are both in close races. The battle for the Senate could also be affected by the tariff issue, particularly in North Dakota, Indiana and Missouri, where Republicans hope to knock off three Democratic incumbents. The president has tried to allay farmers’ concerns with an aid package of up to $12 billion to help them weather the trade war. J. Read Smith, a rancher near St. John, Washington, said he shares Trump’s goal of seeking a level playing field in trade. “But antagonizing our trading partners is not the way to do it,” said Smith, who emphasized that he is not a Democrat. “I’m an American.” Aaron Flansburg, who runs a diversified farm near Pullman, Washington, said he’s skeptical the tariffs will change the way most farmers vote, though. “Farmers often vote for Republicans,” Flansburg said. “Whether that will change, I have my doubts.” McMorris Rodgers said it’s her sense that voters are willing to give the president time to negotiate better agreements. “Yes, there’s a lot of uncertainty. There’s a sense that we need to get these trade agreements into place as soon as possible, but there’s also a recognition that for too long America has not taken action, especially against China,” she said. In July, the United States began imposing a tax on $34 billion in Chinese imports. Last month, it added tariffs to $16 billion in Chinese goods and is readying taxes on an additional $200 billion worth. China retaliated with its own tariffs on U.S. products. The world’s two biggest economies are clashing over allegations that China steals technology from American companies. The Trump administration also announced that it will begin taxing $200 billion in Chinese goods starting Monday. The tariffs will start at 10 percent and rise to 25 percent in 2019. The Trump administration also imposed a 25 percent tariff on imported steel and a 10 percent tariff on imported aluminum that included imports from the European Union, Canada and Mexico — and just about everyone else — in the name of national security. Those tariffs also drew retaliation. For example, the EU targeted bourbon, a key industry in Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell‘s home state of Kentucky, where Republican Rep. Andy Barr and Democratic challenger Amy McGrath are battling in a close election. Overall, about 6 in 10 Americans disapprove of how the president is handling trade negotiations with other countries. Farm groups have testified in congressional hearings that retaliatory tariffs increase the cost of their products for customers abroad, giving foreign competitors an edge. “The current tariffs, continuing back-and-forth retaliatory actions and trade uncertainties are hitting American agriculture from all sides and are causing us to lose our markets. Once you lose a market, it is really tough to get it back,” said Kevin Paap, president of the Minnesota Farm Bureau. Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, who is overseeing Democratic efforts in House races, pointed to Iowa as a state where he believes the administration’s tariffs could backfire. He said primary turnout was up, in part because small family farmers and the businesses they buy from are worried. “I really believe that in those districts, you’ll see people come forward and hold everyone accountable not standing up for them,” Lujan said. GOP lawmakers from Iowa, including Young and Blum, signed onto a letter calling on the president to act quickly to save rural economies. Blum also wrote Trump separately urging him to “consider the consequences tariffs have on American manufacturers.” When the president visited Blum’s district a few days later, he thanked him for his “political courage” on trade. “You’ve taken some heat for it in the short term, but in the long run, the farmers, the manufacturers, the employers are all going
Doug Jones introduces bipartisan bill to reform process for national security tariffs, increase oversight
Alabama’s newly elected U.S. Senator, Democrat Doug Jones is hoping to put an end to President Donald Trump‘s ability to impose steep import tariffs. On Wednesday, Jones, along with his Republican colleagues Ohio-Republican U.S. Sen. Rob Portman and Iowa-Republican U.S. Sen. and Joni Ernst introduced the Trade Security Act, legislation that will reform Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which Trump is using to impose tariffs on imports. The legislation addresses the Trump Administration’s justification of implementing tariffs on certain imports by citing a national security concern. In order to prevent this scenario moving forward, the bill makes common-sense reforms that require the Department of Defense to justify the national security basis for new tariffs under Section 232 and increase congressional oversight of this process. “We cannot resolve perceived trade imbalances by accusing our allies of being a threat to our national security. If a trading partner is suspected of undermining our national security, that claim needs to be thoroughly investigated by those with relevant expertise in the Department of Defense,” said Jones. He continued, “Unfortunately, the current process led by the Department of Commerce has been misused to target important job-creating industries in Alabama like auto manufacturing. I’m proud to introduce this bipartisan legislation with Senator Portman that will reform the Section 232 process and help to refocus our efforts on punishing bad actors, rather than hurting American manufacturers, workers, and consumers.” Portman says misusing America’s trade tools not only hurts exports, but also consumer. “We must hold countries like China who violate our trade laws accountable, but we must do so in a way that protects American jobs and strengthens the U.S. economy,” said Portman. “As a former USTR, I know that misusing our trade tools not only hurts our exports and our manufacturers, but also our consumers, so I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.” Ernst agrees in holding bad actors accountable. “When it comes to national security, we must hold bad actors accountable,” said Ernst. “I support the president’s ability to make trade deals and keep our nation secure, but the Department of Defense must justify the national security basis for new tariffs under Section 232, and we must increase congressional oversight of this process.” The Trade Security Act will reform the Section 232 statute and ensure that (1) any Section 232 actions are based on a national security determination by the Department of Defense; and (2) Congress has a larger role to play in 232 actions. Specifically, this bill will: Bifurcate the existing Section 232 process into an investigation phase, led by the Department of Defense, and a remedy phase, led by the Department of Commerce. Splitting these responsibilities, while guaranteeing consultation between the two departments at all stages of the process, plays to each department’s strengths to ensure that the statute is used for genuine national security purposes. Require the Department of Defense – instead of the Department of Commerce – to justify the national security basis for new tariffs under Section 232 and make the determination about the national security threat posed by imports of certain products. If a threat is found, the Department of Defense would send its report to the president. In the event that the president desires to take action based on the finding of a national security threat, the president would then direct the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the U.S. Trade Representative, to develop recommendations for how to respond to the threat. After receiving the recommendations of the Secretary of Commerce, the president would decide whether to take action. Increase the role of Congress in the Section 232 process by expanding the process whereby Congress can disapprove of a Section 232 action by passing a joint resolution of disapproval. Currently, Section 232 contains a disapproval resolution process limited only to the disapproval of actions on oil imports, which was a reaction to the only two uses of Section 232 over the past 55 years. This bill would expand the use of that disapproval resolution process to all types of products. The reformed disapproval process will only apply to future Section 232 actions. Require consultation with Congress throughout the Section 232 process.
Doug Jones introduces bipartisan legislation to delay Trump’s auto tariffs
Alabama’s junior U.S. Senator, Democrat Doug Jones is doubling-down on his disapproval of the Trump administration’s new tariffs on foreign-made cars and auto parts by introducing legislation to delay them. A critic of the tariffs from the beginning, Jones joined his Republican colleague, Tennessee-Republican U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander on Wednesday and introduced the Automotive Jobs Act of 2018, a bipartisan bill to delay President Trump’s recently proposed 25-percent tariff on imported cars, trucks, and auto parts. At the President’s direction, the U.S. Commerce Department initiated a Section 232 investigation in May to determine whether imported automobiles, trucks, and parts are a threat to U.S. national security and to subsequently levy tariffs. The senators’ legislation requires the International Trade Commission (ITC) to conduct a comprehensive study of the well-being, health, and vitality of the United States automotive industry before tariffs could be applied. “These tariffs are a tax on American consumers and they’re going to cost Alabama jobs,” said Jones. “I share the President’s goal to reinvigorate manufacturing and secure trade deals that benefit our country, but not at the expense of one of Alabama’s biggest job creators. This bipartisan legislation will hold the Administration accountable by ensuring it has all of the facts about the positive impact American automakers have on their communities, regardless of where they’re headquartered. With that information in hand, the Administration could no longer make the ridiculous claim that this industry is somehow a national security threat.” “This bill would delay the administration’s proposed 25 percent tariff on automobiles and automotive parts imported into the United States until the President has a second opinion from the International Trade Commission about the effect those tariffs would have on the more than 7 million jobs in the American automotive industry,” added Alexander. He continued, “About 136,000 of those auto jobs are in Tennessee, one third of our state’s manufacturing jobs. The president has gotten the world’s attention with his tariffs, but what deserves more attention is his long term solution – zero tariffs, zero barriers, which is, as the president said at the G7 summit in June, ‘the way it should be.’ Taking steps in the direction of reciprocity—insisting that other countries do for us what we do for them—rather than a trade war, will be much better for the American worker.” Last month, the senators wrote a letter to U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross urging him to reconsider the tariffs. This legislation addresses the key concerns the senators raised in their letter to Secretary Ross. As part of the mandated study, the ITC will be required to assess, among other things: The number of automobiles assembled in the United States that are exported each year and to which countries; The percentage of component parts of automobiles assembled in the United States that are imported; The number of component parts for automobiles that are not produced in the United States and would thus not be available to United States automotive producers if prohibitively high duties were imposed on imports of those parts; and, The effect an increase in automotive manufacturing costs would have on jobs in the United States. The ITC will be required to deliver the report to Congress and is to include policy recommendations based on the study. Under this legislation, these tariffs cannot be applied until the report is delivered. Last week, Jones also stood up against the tariffs by join the “Here For America’s Washington D.C. “Drive-In” during which over one hundred international auto employees pulled up to the U.S. Capitol in a caravan of American made vehicles. Watch Jones’ floor speech on the legislation below: Jones is not alone One very important Alabama official happens to agree with Jones: Governor Kay Ivey. Ivey, who released a statement and wrote a letter to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross and several members of the Alabama congressional delegation in June expressed her concerns saying that “estimates show that a ten percent decrease in Alabama-made vehicle exports could result in the loss of approximately 4,000 jobs in Alabama.” “Such a loss would be devastating to thousands of families across our state,” Ivey continued. “These are Alabama families who are dependent on the income from working in these facilities.”
Donald Trump’s $12 billion bailout for farmers draws mixed reactions in Alabama
On Tuesday the Trump administration announced it would extend $12 billion in emergency aid to American farmers impacted by tariffs imposed by China on American farm goods. In Alabama, the announcement drew a mix of reactions. The decision for aid came after China imposed a 25 percent retaliatory tariff last week on several crops Alabama farmers export like soybeans and cotton. The aid programs will assist agricultural producers to meet the costs of disrupted markets through market facilitation, food purchase and distribution, and trade promotion. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced the aid in a call to reporters, saying the programs “are a firm statement that other nations cannot bully our agricultural producers to force the United States to cave in.” Here’s what Alabamians are saying: Alabama 4th District U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt: President Trump and Secretary Perdue took action to stand by farmers who are suffering from illegal trade retaliation. Secretary Perdue called me earlier Tuesday to discuss these measures. The actions and funding announced, demonstrate that the President has not forgotten the American farmer and that agricultural producers will not bear the brunt of unjustified retaliation by foreign governments. As Chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, I have worked to ensure that protective measures and funding would be available should our nation’s agriculture producers be confronted with such abusive policies enacted by foreign leaders. Any funds spent will be temporary. This will ensure that our farmers are able to make ends meet while the Trump Administration works out more fair deals for farmers, ranchers, and producers who want to sell their products overseas. I applaud President Trump for standing-up to China and other foreign government’s unfair trade practices. If our markets here are open to their goods then their markets should be open for American agriculture and manufacturing. Mallory Hagan | Democratic Candidate for Alabama’s 3rd U.S. Congressional District Nearly every farm in Alabama is a family farm. Farm families need confidence to know they can get their products to market so they can put food on the table. Thanks to the whiplash of Donald Trump’s rollercoaster trade war, they don’t have confidence they can make ends meet right now. This $12 billion ‘band-aide’ addresses a problem we can fix for free – unnecessary tariffs blocking American farmers and manufacturers out of markets around the world. Taxpayers should never foot the bill for unsustainable policies. In their silence and failure to act, Congress and Rep. Mike Rogers are supporting bad trade policy and government bailouts along the way. That’s irresponsible and unacceptable. Rogers’ complicity in this insane trade war is hurting Alabama families and killing jobs. It’s time to put the brakes on this administration’s trade disaster. Getting out Uncle Sam’s credit card is not the solution. Alabama Farmer’s Federation: We appreciate President Trump’s administration recognizing the impact intense trade negotiations are having on U.S. farmers and providing assistance to weather tough economic times,’ said Walker, the Federation’s director of national programs. ‘Alabama farmers remain hopeful the ultimate solution will be a healthy trade environment where U.S. agriculture can compete on a level playing field with the rest of the world. Doug Jones | U.S. Senator (via Twitter) Many of your tariffs are not the greatest—they’re the worst. Your auto tariff/tax threatens 57k AL jobs & $11B in exports. Retaliatory tariffs/taxes threaten $170M in AL soybean exports 2 China annually. Your tariffs/taxes are great for 1 thing: killing US jobs. John McMillan | Alabama Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries These three programs will allow the administration to continue to work on long-term trade deals. The end goal is to have an even playing field for our country’s producers.
Donald Trump plans emergency aid to farmers affected by his tariffs
The U.S. readied a plan Tuesday to send billions in emergency aid to farmers who have been hurt by President Donald Trump’s trade disputes with China and other American trading partners. The Agriculture Department was expected to announce the proposal that would include direct assistance and other temporary relief for farmers, according to two people briefed on the plan, who were not authorized to speak on the record. The plan comes as Trump speaks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention in Kansas City in the heart of the nation’s farm country. Trump declared earlier Tuesday that “Tariffs are the greatest!” and threatened to impose additional penalties on U.S. trading partners as he prepared for negotiations with European officials at the White House. Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said the funding may need to be approved by Congress and the aid would be temporary. “The administration is trying to negotiate better trade deals,” he said. “In the near term is there some relief we can look at? Well, we’ll see.” But the plan magnified objections among many Republicans that the tariffs amount to taxes on American consumers. House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin said lawmakers are making the case to Trump that tariffs are “not the way to go.” Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said the plan would spend billions on “gold crutches.” “America’s farmers don’t want to be paid to lose — they want to win by feeding the world,” he said. “This administration’s tariffs and bailouts aren’t going to make America great again, they’re just going to make it 1929 again.” The Trump administration has slapped tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods in a dispute over Beijing’s high-tech industrial policies. China has retaliated with duties on soybeans and pork, affecting Midwest farmers in a region of the country that supported the president in his 2016 campaign. Trump has threatened to place penalty taxes on up to $500 billion in products imported from China, a move that would dramatically ratchet up the stakes in the trade dispute involving the globe’s biggest economies. Before departing for Kansas City, Trump tweeted that U.S. trade partners need to either negotiate a “fair deal, or it gets hit with Tariffs. It’s as simple as that.” The president has engaged in hard-line trading negotiations with China, Canada and European nations, seeking to renegotiate agreements he says have undermined the nation’s manufacturing base and led to a wave of job losses in recent decades. The imposition of punishing tariffs on imported goods has been a favored tactic by Trump, but it has prompted U.S. partners to retaliate, creating risks for the economy. Trump has placed tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, saying they pose a threat to U.S. national security, an argument that allies such as the European Union and Canada reject. He has also threatened to slap tariffs on imported cars, trucks and auto parts, potentially targeting imports that last year totaled $335 billion. During a Monday event at the White House featuring American-made goods, Trump displayed a green hat that read, “Make Our Farmers Great Again.” The president is meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker on Wednesday. The U.S. and European allies have been at odds over the president’s tariffs on steel imports and are meeting as the trade dispute threatens to spread to automobile production. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
