New reports spell trouble for North Dakota industries and pro-tariff pols like Cramer

(BISMARCK, ND) — Another day, another example of how unpopular and dangerous Kevin Cramer’s support of the Trump administration’s trade war is — and how it spells trouble for opportunistic pro-tariff politicians like him.

In a U.S. Chamber of Commerce memo obtained by the Wall Street Journal, experts estimate that as many as 2.6 million jobs could disappear if the Administration continues down this path. We have already seen retaliations promised by China, Mexico, Canada and the European Union, and in a state that depends heavily on exports, North Dakota’s industries are extremely vulnerable.

But it’s not just the economists and business experts who are sounding alarm bells. Increasingly, the American people are speaking out against the threat that these misguided policies pose to their bottom line through loss of jobs, increased taxes, and higher prices. In a new poll published by Politico, 70 percent of voters would like to see the administration focus on negotiating trade deals that open up new markets for American goods.

So, tariffs are bad for the economy, may cost millions of jobs, will hit North Dakota hard, and are extremely unpopular. Why is Kevin Cramer still supporting them?

WSJ: Trump’s Trade Policies Threaten Millions of Jobs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Says

• The Trump administration’s trade policies will hamstring the U.S.’s robust economic growth and threaten as many as 2.6 million jobs, according to a memo from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s top official on Thursday.

• The memo—from Tom Donohue, the chamber’s chief executive, to his board of directors—followed news Thursday morning that President Donald Trump’s administration would make good on threats to apply tariffs to steel and aluminum imports from neighbors and allies, including Canada, Mexico and the European Union.

• In the memo, Mr. Donohue cited a number of the administration’s trade initiatives that he wrote would hurt growth and employment. Should the president, for example, pull out of the North American Free Trade Agreement, as Mr. Trump has threatened to do many times, it would cause a net loss of 1.8 million jobs, he wrote. Efforts to reach a deal and enact a new version of Nafta this year have stalled.

• Meanwhile, the administration has threatened tariffs on autos and auto parts, on steel and aluminum, and on intermediary goods from China that are used in U.S. supply chains, all of which would contribute to job loss and an economic slowdown, Mr. Donohue wrote in the memo, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

• Canada, Mexico and the European Union all threatened retaliation against the U.S. after Mr. Trump’s administration declined Thursday to renew a tariff exemption that prevented Canada, Mexico and the EU from facing broad duties on steel and aluminum shipments to the U.S. Those products will face tariffs as of Friday.

• “The current approach—and the obvious retaliation that will occur in response—poses a serious risk of raising barriers and reducing Americans’ access to vital global markets,” Mr. Donohue wrote in the memo. “Our businesses will lose customers, workers will lose jobs, and American consumers will lose family income through higher taxes and higher prices.”

Politico: Poll: Voters want trade deals, not tariffs

• A huge majority of U.S. voters would prefer that President Donald Trump focus more on negotiating new trade agreements rather than imposing tariffs on foreign imports, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released Thursday.

• The poll of nearly 2,000 registered voters found that 70 percent of them would prefer the Trump administration focus more on “negotiating trade agreements to open new markets to sell American-made products and goods.” Only 14 percent, in contrast, answered that they would prefer the administration focus on “imposing tariffs or taxes on foreign products to slow down their sales in the United States.”

• When voters were asked which they would prefer Congress focused on, the numbers were similar: 67 percent wanted lawmakers to focus on negotiating new deals, while 16 percent said they would prefer they focus on imposing tariffs.

Administration announces tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and the European Union, threatening North Dakota’s economy

(BISMARCK, ND) — With more news of an expanding trade war, more bad news comes for North Dakota’s economy. The Trump administration already announced tariffs on $50 billion on Chinese goods, which were quickly met with threats against American agriculture. Now the administration is going after our allies in Canada, Mexico, and the European Union with its next round of misguided and harmful changes to trade policy, which have also met with promises of retaliation.

And where is Kelly Armstrong in all of this? Siding with the administration, not North Dakota. He has had the chance to denounce these tariffs, but time and time again he’s spoken in favor of the administration’s trade policies.

“Kelly Armstrong wants to be the voice of North Dakota in Washington, but he has shown he won’t stand up to the administration even when North Dakota farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers need him to,” said Scott McNeil, Executive Director of the North Dakota Democratic-NPL. “It’s plain and simple: retaliatory tariffs would hurt North Dakota’s economy. But rather than stand up for North Dakotans, Kelly has been quickly agreeingwith the tariff policy when asked about it. North Dakota needs a strong, independent voice in the House of Representatives, and Kelly Armstrong will not be it.”

After unsuccessfully pleading for Trump’s praise, Cramer endorses a convicted Peeping Tom, then blames White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short for GOP legislative failures

(BISMARCK, ND) — Still jilted from getting snubbed by President Trump – or perhaps just jealous of his opponent’s legislative prowess – Kevin Cramer came a little…unhinged.

After pleading with the White House to campaign more for him just last week, the president’s gratitude for Senator Heitkamp’s leadership during the signing of the Banking bill caused Cramer to – well, snap. Asked about reports that he was upset that the White House wasn’t campaigning for him enough and being too friendly to Heitkamp, Cramer lashed out at White House Legislative Director Marc Short, saying yesterday, “If Marc Short was very good at his job, you know, we’d have a repeal and replacement of Obamacare, we’d have a replacement of the venting and flaring rule.”

This comes one week after Cramer rushed to the defense of the political career of a convicted Peeping Tom who preyed on freshman female students at North Dakota State University where he was employed as a 29-year-old married father. Cramer called the predator, Will Gardner, a “very good man” who handled the exposure of the criminal record he tried to hide in a “gentlemanly way,” saying Gardner “absolutely” has a bright political future ahead of him.

Politico: GOP Senate candidate lashes out at Trump’s legislative director

• Rep. Kevin Cramer, one of the GOP’s top Senate recruits, launched an unusual attack on the White House’s legislative director Wednesday, blaming him explicitly for the party’s legislative failures in the Senate.

• The comments from Cramer (R-N.D.) come amid rising GOP angst over President Donald Trump’s close relationship with his opponent in the North Dakota Senate race, Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp.

• After POLITICO published a story on Wednesday outlining the awkward dynamic between Heitkamp, Cramer and the White House, Cramer told North Dakota radio host Rob Port that he had done some digging and believes that there “are some people in the White House that think, you know, the president’s too friendly too her.”

• Then Cramer laid into White House legislative affairs director Marc Short for two prominent failed GOP efforts in the Senate: Repeal of Obamacare and the rollback of an Obama-era regulation that would limit flaring and venting from oil and gas wells. Heitkamp voted against both and Cramer has criticized her in particular over the flaring vote.

• “If Marc Short was very good at his job, you know, we’d have a repeal and replacement of Obamacare, we’d have a replacement of the venting and flaring rule,” Cramer said.

Daily Kos: ND Congressman leaps to the defense of Republican candidate caught peeping with his pants unzipped

• The party of questionable “family values” is at it once again. This time Congressman Kevin Cramer (R-At-large) of North Dakota appeared on the conservative “Jarrod Thomas Show” to discuss his feelings about Republican Secretary of State candidate Will Gardner dropping out of the race after revelations he was arrested in 2006.

• Although currently serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, Cramer is challenging Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), hoping to make the leap to the United States Senate this fall. At the time, Gardner was a 29-year-old married father of two who was caught peeping on women undressing in a North Dakota State dorm.

• To this day, Gardner’s account does not match those of the three officers who witnessed his prowling. You’d think that would be enough for North Dakota Republicans to distance themselves, but not United States Congressman Kevin Cramer. No sir! on the “Jarrod Thomas Show” Cramer thought Gardner’s withdrawal from the race for secretary of state was premature and he wishes he would’ve weathered the storm.

• Furthermore, he called Gardner a “good man” and hopes he runs again.Does a good man, a married 29-year-old with two kids at home go creeping outside the women’s dorm with his pants unzipped? Is this someone who should be representing North Dakota?

• On whether he would’ve won the primary if voters had known in advance?

  • I’m not so sure Will wouldn’t have still won the Republican endorsement had he done, had he revealed this much, much earlier and explained it to people, and in which case, I think he wouldn’t have much of an issue.

• Should Gardner have exited the race as quickly as he did once the arrest became public? Cramer thinks he should’ve chilled out for a bit, let the peeping brouhaha die down.

  • I think that a little time, you know, is always valuable when you are faced with something like this. […] So but you’re right, there was, in my view, there was no urgency for the party to have had to have this settled immediately.

• Should Gardner run again some day? Why, of course! Everyone loves to see creepy guys get another chance at public office.

  • [Could Gardner] one day run for a state office again? I absolutely think there is. I absolutely think there is. And I think that maybe that was part of this calculation of how he handled it because I do think, again, North Dakotans, like other Americans, like the redemption story. Will is that. He is by all measure, by anybody who knows him and knows him well, including his wife, a very good man.

Washington Republicans derailed the vital bill over unrelated immigration squabble

Cramer refuses to stand up to hardliners in his party, says it’s “not inappropriate” to jeopardize legislation that many hardworking North Dakotans depend on

(BISMARCK, ND) – At one time, collaborating on the Farm Bill served as a rare example of cooperation in Washington, according to a recent editorial reprinted in the Bismarck Tribune. Apparently, those days are long gone, as far-right conservatives in the House of Representatives have steered this year’s Farm Bill way off of the bipartisan course over a wholly unrelated political vote.

North Dakota’s lone representative in the House would normally be expected to serve as an advocate for the legislation, which is widely supported by farmers and ranchers in rural states. But not Kevin Cramer. Cramer, a proud member of an ideological caucus that backs anti-farming legislation, has refused to stand up to the right flank of his party, describing their actions to sink the bill as “not inappropriate.” Opposing bipartisanship is nothing new for Cramer, who has been criticized in the past for politicizing farm bills and is currently feeling the heat for his complaints over the president’s close relationship with Senator Heitkamp.

Meanwhile, Heitkamp is working diligently across the aisle to help craft a strong, bipartisan Farm Bill in the Senate, and has repeatedly expressed her support for cooperation on this critical legislation.

Highlights from the editorial below:

Bismarck Tribune via Lincoln Journal Star: Farm bill’s failure shows partisanship

• Recently, the House’s proposal to replace the current farm bill that expires later this year failed in spectacular fashion.

• What once inspired thoughtful policy debate on the agriculture industry, conservation, food assistance and more has increasingly become a proxy war for unrelated topics. Given the importance of the farm bill, that’s a crying shame. Americans deserve better of their Congress.

• At one time, hashing out the farm bill was among the most bipartisan exercises on Capitol Hill. Why? Because representatives and senators all sought to please key constituencies in their states, with all regions benefiting from ag policy, food stamps, environmental rules and more.

• Instead, this year’s version — which was admittedly flawed — died not on its own merits but largely because a small cadre of immigration hard-liners wanted to trip up an unrelated bill regarding “Dreamers.”

• Some might call that playing politics. But therein lies the problem.

• Politics don’t have to be a zero-sum game. No compelling reason exists as to why Americans can’t enjoy both updated farm policy and much-needed immigration reform, beyond the people elected to the office deciding that scoring political points in an election year was more important than passing laws for those same constituents.

Cramer says Gardner “absolutely” can run again for office, handled the exposure of his Peeping-Tom criminal history in a “gentlemanly way”

(BISMARCK, ND) — Kevin Cramer sounds ready to endorse convicted-Peeping Tom Will Gardner for his next run for office after he withdrew from the Secretary of State’s race this week.

This morning, Cramer praised Gardner as “a very good man,” who handled exposure of the criminal history “in a gentlemanly way.” When Gardner was a 29-year-old married father of two, he caught prowling outside freshman women’s dorms in the middle of January at the North Dakota State University – where he served as an employee – with his pants unzipped, shirt undone and belt left on the front see of his car. Gardner described his behavior as “immature.”

Cramer said Gardner’s convicted prowler history, if made public earlier, “wouldn’t have been much of an issue,” and wouldn’t “have been a compelling case” not to vote for him. Cramer even suggested that Gardner may have orchestrated the exposure of his crimes to help his future political career because “Americans like a redemption story.”

“Does Kevin Cramer think that preying on young women makes someone a good man?”said Scott McNeil, Executive Director of the North Dakota Democratic-NPL. “Not pausing to even think of the victims, Kevin Cramer would rather defend a predator just to make sure Gardner’s actions don’t reflect badly on his own Senate run. How about condemning this absolutely disgusting behavior or speaking up on behalf of women across North Dakota? Kevin Cramer should be setting an example, not acting as a window-peeping apologist.”

Cramer’s quotes show his nonchalant attitude towards Gardner’s acts:

• If, after the fact, as it turns out, it comes out while he’s already while he’s already on the ballot and he’s the endorsed candidate, I suppose I would have told them to handle it just like he did because I thought, I think Will handled it as well as anybody could in a gentlemanly way, did the right thing. But it’s very unfortunate for the party to have been, to be in this situation, to have been put into this situation, and it could have been avoided.

• I’m not so sure Will wouldn’t have still won the Republican endorsement had he done, had he revealed this much, much earlier and explained it to people, and in which case, I think he wouldn’t have much of an issue.

• Sure, the Democrats would make an issue of it, as they should. That’s what the opposition is supposed to do. But I don’t think it would have been a compelling case.

• I think that a little time, you know, is always valuable when you are faced with something like this. […] So but you’re right, there was, in my view, there was no urgency for the party to have had to have this settled immediately.

• [Could Gardner] one day run for a state office again? I absolutely think there is. I absolutely think there is. And I think that maybe that was part of this calculation of how he handled it because I do think, again, North Dakotans, like other Americans, like the redemption story. Will is that. He is by all measure, by anybody who knows him and knows him well, including his wife, a very good man.

Kevin Cramer Only Cares About His Audience of One 

(BISMARCK, ND) – Forget North Dakota farmers, ranchers and manufacturers – Kevin Cramer only cares about his audience of one, and that’s the president. He still can’t muster up support for North Dakota agricultural producers who are concerned about the trade war – he even condescendingly calls their concerns “hysteria.”

But it looks like Cramer is becoming even more isolated in his support for a trade war, as key Trump allies in the Congress voice their concerns. Highlights from two important articles below:

The Hill: Republicans think Trump is losing trade war

• President Trump is facing a significant backlash from Senate Republicans over his trade talks with China, which they see as delivering far less than he promised. Several GOP senators say Trump has wound up on the losing side of the discussions, and his talk of lifting rules barring U.S. companies from selling to the Chinese telecommunications firm ZTE has prompted a revolt.

• “Sadly #China is out-negotiating the administration & winning the trade talks right now,” [Senator Marco Rubio] wrote on Twitter. “They have avoided tariffs & got a #ZTE deal without giving up anything meaningful in return by using N. Korea talks & agriculture issues as leverage.”

• Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said farmers and ranchers he met with on Tuesday are not reassured by Trump’s claim over the weekend via Twitter that “China has agreed to buy massive amounts of additional farm/agricultural products.” “I’ve been meeting with farmers and ranchers all morning. I have not yet heard one who thinks the U.S. has won anything from the Chinese leadership,” he said. “They’re scared to death.”

• Sasse, who ripped Trump’s trade policies earlier this year as the “dumbest possible way” to take on China, said Trump doesn’t appear to have made significant progress addressing two major economic threats facing the United States: China’s ambitions to dominate high-tech industries and its rampant theft of U.S. intellectual property.

• Even Trump’s most loyal allies are expressing frustration. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said he agreed with Rubio’s critique.

• “Is there a plan somewhere?” asked Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Politico: Who’s winning the trade war? Everyone but Trump.

• There may be new winners as President Donald Trump ramps up trade pressures on China: America’s top competitors.

• Brazil could bring millions of new acres of land into production faster with the help of Chinese investments in its roads and railways, a boom for soybean farmers seeking an edge over U.S. farmers. In Europe, Airbus is poised to ramp up production to fill Chinese orders that were originally meant to go to U.S.-based Boeing. Australia, Canada and other countries may be able to export the scrap aluminum and other recyclables the U.S. used to send to China en masse.

• Beijing will continue to pour resources into other countries to diversify its sources for everything from food to consumer goods to meet growing demand. And that worries American manufacturers and growers who stand to lose market share to competitors whose governments are friendlier to global trade.

• Brazil’s push on soybeans is a prime example of the unintended — and irreversible — consequences of a U.S.-China trade war. The U.S. once was the major grower and exporter of soybeans, with China as the major consumer and importer. Now, the South American nation has supplanted the U.S. as the biggest global supplier. Protracted discussions between the U.S. and China are just expected to exacerbate the widening gap.

• Any further losses in market share could have devastating effects on U.S. farmers, who saw 61 percent of their total exports go to China last year, amounting to $14 billion worth of shipments. Farm incomes are already at their lowest point since 2009 and are expected to stay stagnant for the remainder of 2018.

• Economists say that situation could worsen if the threat of tariffs continues through the summer and, as the U.S. harvest nears, Chinese buyers grow even more reluctant to import the commodity only to have a duty imposed while the shipment is out to sea.