Heidi Heitkamp on Free Trade
Kevin Cramer (R): "I would prefer a more measured approach." But they are "the one tool [Trump] has," so support them & present a united front for negotiations.
Heidi Heitkamp (D): No. They "severely limit our ability to build the international support need to keep China in check." Retaliatory actions will hurt North Dakota.
The 30-second ad centers on Cramer's support for Trump's trade war with China, which will hurt North Dakota's large agricultural economy because China has enacted retaliatory tariffs.
A farmer calls out Cramer while standing in a soybean field. "China is canceling their contracts to buy soybean. North Dakota is losing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of business. But when you ask Kevin Cramer why he supports the trade war, he criticizes farmers," the farmer says.
The ad then plays several Cramer soundbites that are ripped from their context in which Cramer seemingly downplays the trade war's impact. "Mr. Cramer, that trade war is costing my family a lot of money and you don't seem to care," the farmer says in response.
Heitkamp drew a clear line between her and Cramer on tariffs, explaining how they negatively impact her constituents. "I think the first thing when you look at trade, you haven't seen the full impact. Fundamentally everyone had hoped by this time there would have been an agreement that we would have returned to shipping soybeans to China," she said. "That hasn't happened. As time goes on and you scratch the surface, people are getting more angry."
"Farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and the energy industry--the lifeblood of economic activity in our state--know that a trade war is bad for jobs, bad for business, and bad for North Dakota. A trade war has dangerous ripple effects across our economy, costing consumers in expensive and unpredictable ways. If the administration wants to strengthen rural America, it should focus on protecting markets for the goods we produce and expanding opportunities for industries in our state. Instead, they're shooting our economy in the foot, stoking fear in our farming communities, and casting a shadow on manufacturers who rely on exports to survive."
Background: Heitkamp has been fighting to protect and expand markets for North Dakota goods, pushing the administration to back off damaging threats to withdrawal from NAFTA and speaking out against tariffs.
Heritage Action summary of vote# S206: The Senate voted to table (kill) an amendment by Sen. Kirk to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. Sen. Kirk recommends voting NO. Heritage Foundation recommends voting YES because the "Ex-Im Bank is little more than a $140 billion slush fund for corporate welfare."
OnTheIssues explanation: Voting NO would allow a vote on reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank. Voting YES would kill the bill for reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank.
Cato Institute reason for voting YES to kill the bill:The Ex-Im Bank's reauthorization buffs contend that Ex-Im fills a void left by private sector lenders unwilling to provide financing for certain transactions. Ex-Im's critics [say that] by effectively superseding risk-based decision-making with the choices of a handful of bureaucrats pursuing political objectives, Ex-Im risks taxpayer dollars. It turns out that for nearly every Ex-Im financing authorization that might advance the fortunes of a single US company, there is at least one US industry whose firms are put at a competitive disadvantage. These are the unseen consequences of Ex-Im's mission.
|Other candidates on Free Trade:||Heidi Heitkamp on other issues:|
Senate races 2019-20:
AK: Sullivan(R,incumbent) vs.Gross(I)
AL: Jones(D,incumbent) vs.Sessions(R) vs.Moore(R) vs.Mooney(R) vs.
AR: Cotton(R,incumbent) vs.
AZ: McSally(R,incumbent) vs.Kelly(D)
CO: Gardner(R,incumbent) vs.Hickenlooper(D) vs.
DE: Coons(D,incumbent) vs.Scarane(D)
GA-2: Isakson(R,resigned) Loeffler(R,appointed) vs.Lieberman(D) vs.Collins(R) vs.Carter(D)
GA-6: Perdue(R,incumbent) vs.Tomlinson(D) vs.Ossoff(D) vs.Terry(D)
IA: Ernst(R,incumbent) vs.Graham(D) vs.Mauro(D) vs.Greenfield(D)
ID: Risch(R,incumbent) vs.Harris(D) vs.Jordan(D)
IL: Durbin(D,incumbent) vs.Curran(R) vs.
KS: Roberts(R,retiring) vs.
KY: McConnell(R,incumbent) vs.McGrath(D) vs.Morgan(R) vs.Cox(D) vs.Tobin(D)
LA: Cassidy(R,incumbent) vs.Pierce(D)
MA: Markey(D,incumbent) vs.
ME: Collins(R,incumbent) vs.Sweet(D) vs.Gideon(D) vs.
MI: Peters(D,incumbent) vs.James(R)
MN: Smith(D,incumbent) vs.
MS: Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent) vs.Espy(D) vs.Bohren(D)
MT: Daines(R,incumbent) vs.Collins(D) vs.Bullock(D)
NC: Tillis(R,incumbent) vs.E.Smith(D) vs.S.Smith(R) vs.Cunningham(D) vs.Tucker(R) vs.
NE: Sasse(R,incumbent) vs.Janicek(R)
NH: Shaheen(D,incumbent) vs.Martin(D) vs.Bolduc(R) vs.O'Brien(f)
NJ: Booker(D,incumbent) vs.Singh(R) vs.Meissner(R)
NM: Udall(D,retiring) vs.Clarkson(R) vs.
OK: Inhofe(R,incumbent) vs.Workman(D)
OR: Merkley(D,incumbent) vs.Romero(R)
RI: Reed(D,incumbent) vs.Waters(R)
SC: Graham(R,incumbent) vs.Tinubu(D) vs.Harrison(D)
SD: Rounds(R,incumbent) vs.Borglum(R) vs.Ahlers(D)
TN: Alexander(R,incumbent) vs.Sethi(R) vs.Mackler(D) vs.Hagerty(R)
TX: Cornyn(R,incumbent) vs.Hegar(D) vs.Hernandez(D) vs.Bell(D) vs.Ramirez(D) vs.West(D)
VA: Warner(D,incumbent) vs.
WV: Capito(R,incumbent) vs.Swearengin(D) vs.Ojeda(D)
WY: Enzi(R,incumbent) vs.Ludwig(D) vs.Lummis(R)
Senate Votes (analysis)