Senator Cortez Masto’s Tariff Tantrum

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and her noble band of enlightened colleagues have set pen to paper, demanding the Trump Administration reconsider its audacious decision to levy tariffs on Canadian goods. Judging by the tone of their letter, one would think that our friendly neighbors to the north have long been the selfless benefactors of American commerce, piously refraining from imposing undue burdens on our humble exports.

Alas, reality tells a different tale—one of tariffs so steep they might make a man dizzy just from reading the numbers. For years, Canada has treated American goods as if they carried some dreadful contagion, slapping tariffs on our dairy products that would make a highway robber blush.

Milk, for instance, is met with a staggering 270 percent tariff, while cheese and butter face penalties of 245 percent and 298 percent, respectively. Even the innocent egg is taxed at an astonishing 163 percent as if it were a rare jewel rather than a staple of breakfast tables. Meanwhile, American-made cars, televisions, and consumer goods bear a 45 percent tariff, ensuring that the good people of Canada do not fall victim to the temptation of affordable American craftsmanship.

And yet, when the Trump Administration had the temerity to introduce a 25 percent tariff on Canadian imports, a fraction of what Canada has been imposing for years, Cortez Masto and her companions took up their quills in righteous indignation. With the solemnity of a preacher at a revival, they declare that such measures threaten America’s national security, undermine trade with an “essential partner,” and—most egregiously—might even cause inconvenience to industries that rely on Canadian minerals.

One must wonder where this concern was when American farmers, steelworkers, and manufacturers spent years laboring under the yoke of Canadian protectionism. Were the costs imposed upon the American people not a matter of economic security? Did the good Senators fail to notice that their beloved Canadian trade partner had been exacting a king’s ransom on American exports for decades? Or, perhaps, is it only a crisis when the tariffs flow in the other direction?

Ever eager to burnish her credentials as championing national security and supply chain resilience, Cortez Masto has previously fought against mining taxes and introduced legislation to reduce dependence on China. These are noble endeavors, to be sure.

But one cannot help but chuckle at the irony—that while she rails against tariffs that inconvenience some industries, she appears entirely indifferent to the decades-long tariff burdens hefted by her constituents. If free trade is the banner under which she rides, it would seem more convincing if she had raised her voice before Canadian tariffs on American goods had accumulated into a veritable mountain of economic obstruction.

There is an old saying that a man’s principles are best measured when they come at a cost to himself. By that measure, the good Senator’s devotion to fair trade appears as sturdy as a reed in the wind—firm only when it suits the direction of her political interests.

Comments

Leave a comment