This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. President, Claims · 208 wordsthe President of the United States--acting, in my view, without any legal authority--is imposing unilateral tariffs on Canada.1 Those tariffs are now being reciprocated by Canada on us.2 They are doing enormous damage today to Vermonters and to Americans. They are doing enormous damage to our Canadian neighbors and their businesses. They are doing nothing beneficial for our long-term relationship with our major trading partner. Canada is Vermont’s major trading partner, 3but we are not unique. Thirty-four States, 4and, I think, including Idaho--I may be wrong-- count Canada as their major trading partner. Canada and the United States have been operating very well under a trade agreement, the USMCA.5 That was a trade agreement that President Trump bragged about--and, by the way, rightly bragged about--as the best trade deal ever.6 And that is being ripped up by the President, without any committee hearings in the Finance Committee, without any discussion with Republicans or Democrats, 7but with undeniable harm to everyday people in this country.Unearned certainty Senator Gillibrand and I have introduced the BAD DEAL Act, 8and it is to repeal these extraordinarily damaging, unjustified tariffs, give relief to commerce on both sides of the United States-Canadian border, and begin the process of healing our relationship with our closest ally. Procedure · 16 wordsI am going to just give a couple of examples of what has happened in Vermont.Procedure Claims · 150 wordsWe have an extraordinary cheese-making company called Jasper Hill in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont. It was started by two college graduates a number of years ago. They are now worldwide renowned and win cheese-making awards internationally. They have been a source of sustaining agriculture in Vermont, which is very tough. They have created hundreds of jobs.9 They have a piece of equipment that costs a million dollars.10 It is on the Canadian side of the border. They will have to pay an extra $500,000 if they need this piece of equipment.11 They can’t do that. We have a manufacturing company with a facility in Wisconsin and also, again, in the Northeast Kingdom. They make snow-moving equipment on tracks. They have a number of pending sales to Canada. This is a $500,000 piece of equipment. They are losing the sales because the buyer will have to pay an extra $250,000.12Logical leap Positioning · 11 wordsFor what? This is just bone crushing, business crushing, job crushing, PositioningClaims · 70 wordsand there is no rationale for it. And then, when you add onto that the rhetoric--the 51st State, the Governor of Canada--our tourism industry, very close with Canada, is down with Canadian visitors by about 47 percent.13 We have Jay Peak, which is an extraordinarily wonderful ski area for families. Canadians generally come down and have close relationships with the Vermonters up there in Burke, VT. They are not coming. Anecdote · 11 wordsAnd, by the way, it is an emotional blow, as well, AnecdoteClaims · 33 wordsbecause our business is like the Presiding Officer’s. The folks really care about who their customers are. And some of these are bed and breakfasts with families that come back every single year. Positioning · 3 wordsAnd for what?Positioning Claims · 119 wordsNothing--nothing good is coming of this.No reason given The other point that I think is absolutely essential for every single one of us in the U.S. Senate to acknowledge is that the taxing power of this country is vested in the U.S. Congress, not in the President of the United States.14 And when the President is claiming emergency authority to justify these tariffs, when there is no emergency, and where even the grant of emergency authority, in a bipartisan way in years past, was based on the premise that there would be restraint on the part of the Executive and would only use it in the moment of a real emergency, that authority is just rampantly being abused by the Executive. Reasoning · 32 wordsAnd we, with our responsibility, under the Constitution, Republican or Democrat, must insist that it is this body that decides yes or no on taxes that are imposed on the American people. Claims · 127 wordsAnd make no mistake, a tariff is a tax. Our bill--Senator Gillibrand and I--on these tariffs that are invoked under section 338, a never-before applied section of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, that notorious act that was an accelerant of driving this country into the Great Depression, would repeal that authority.1516 It is called the Banning Antiquated Duties and Delivering Equitable American Levies, 17or BAD DEAL, Act. It would also repeal President Trump’s import ban on various Canadian products.18 In Vermont, the average household is going to be paying $4,500 more for goods and services due to rising costs, due in large part to the President’s trade war.19No reason given In Vermont, these section 338 tariffs, according to our agency of commerce, will cost Vermont businesses an additional $193 million.20 Positioning · 2 wordsFor what?Positioning Claims · 41 wordsWe are not going to build a road. We are not going to repair a bridge. We are not going to help farmers through a tough season. We are not going to be able to put that money into our schools. Positioning · 3 wordsIt really hurts.Positioning Claims · 26 wordsOne in four businesses in Vermont relies on trade with Canada, 21and Vermont buys more goods from Canada than the next nine largest foreign markets combined.22 Reasoning · 28 wordsSo it is time for us to accept our responsibility for taxing authority and not capitulate to an Executive who is reaching into the powers of this Congress. Promise · 32 wordsAnd we have the opportunity now, by acting, to end these punitive tariffs, these punitive taxes, that are leading to higher costs everywhere, including fertilizer costs in my State and in Idaho. Procedure · 51 wordsI ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S.23 5397 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.Procedure
Analyzed on