By Mónica Cordero
Just as he did in 2016 and 2020, Iowa farmer and rancher Lance Lillibridge plans to vote for Donald Trump this November.
However, this self-described conservative said his vote for the former president will come with concerns.
“His policies didn’t do us any good; his tariffs didn’t do us any good,” said Lillibridge, referring to Trump’s first term as president.
At the start of his second year in office, Trump, responding to what he said were unfair trade practices, enacted the most significant increase in U.S. tariffs since the Great Depression. Trump imposed higher taxes on imports from several countries, including China, Canada, the European Union, Mexico, India and Turkey.
In response, many of the affected countries imposed retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports of agriculture and food products, leading to an estimated $27 billion decline in foreign sales between mid-2018 and the end of 2019, according to the USDA’s Economic Research Service. The losses were most pronounced in the Midwest, with Iowa, Illinois and Kansas — states that collectively account for more than 50% of the region’s total agricultural exports agriculture — hardest hit. Soybeans were the most affected, but the corn and pork industries also suffered significant damage.
The impact of the trade war was felt primarily in transactions with China, one of the top three destinations for U.S. agricultural products.
Lillibridge worries another Trump term would mean a return to high tariffs and another financial squeeze for American farmers. However, his opposition to tariffs isn’t enough to make him vote for Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate.
“Trump will get my vote, but it comes with reservations,” said Lillibridge, who once served as president of the Iowa Corn Growers Association. “It would come without reservation (if) we could address these ag policies.”
Lillibridge’s concerns and future vote highlight the dichotomy in feelings many Midwestern farmers have this election season. Trump’s support is strong in much of America’s agriculture center, but this year’s presidential election could determine whether farmers see a return to a costly trade war that reduced profits and weakened the nation’s status as a major exporter of crops and meat.
Harris has called Trump’s tariff strategy a “sales tax on American people” due to its potential to increase prices for U.S. consumers. During last month’s presidential debate, Harris cited economists who estimate Trump’s proposed tariffs could result in middle-class families paying an additional $4,000 annually.
The Biden-Harris administration has maintained some of Trump’s tariffs on China while implementing new ones on specific products. Harris has not detailed her specific tariff strategy, but her campaign spokesman, Charles Lutvak, told the New York Times that she would “employ targeted and strategic tariffs to support American workers, strengthen our economy, and hold our adversaries accountable.”
In response to a presidential candidate questionnaire from the American Farm Bureau Federation, Harris did not specify her stance on tariffs but emphasized that “she will not tolerate unfair trade practices from China or any competitor that undermines American farmers and ranchers.”
The Harris campaign did not respond to Investigate Midwest’s questions.
Trump has promised to be even more aggressive if he returns to the White House, proposing tariffs up to 10% on most imports, more than 60% on Chinese goods, and a “100% tariff” on nations that stop using the U.S. dollar.
He promised that consumers would not bear the cost, insisting higher costs would be passed on to other countries. With the revenue generated from imposing import taxes, Trump said he could fund child care, combat inflation, and finance a U.S. sovereign wealth fund.
The Trump campaign also did not respond to questions from Investigate Midwest.
Trump told the Farm Bureau that tariffs — along with tax cuts and other incentives — would be part of his toolbox to relocate critical supply chains back to the United States, safeguard national security and economic stability, and expand international markets for U.S. agricultural products.
However, many have warned that Trump’s aggressive tariff policy could hurt farmers, especially those in the Midwest who rely on critical regional commodities, such as soybeans.
“The issue is not just the short-run (monetary) losses, but what’s really the problem is that you lose long-run market access,” said Sandro Steinbach, director of the Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies at North Dakota State University.
Click here to see more...