Last time we heard from Illinoisans John Westberg and Steve Rauschenberger, two knowledgeable voices when it comes to the topic of manufacturing in the United States.

An article earlier this year by American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson titled, “Free Trade, Fair Trade, and Reality,” lays out his perspective on the free v. fair debate: President Donald Trump “has repeatedly stated that he wants ‘free trade’ that is also ‘fair trade,’” Lifson writes, “I am all for free trade, but it’s got to be fair.”

Academic and political critics are quick to point out the oxymoronic nature of this statement. Free trade means no government interference with private entities making the deals they see as beneficial. “Fair” trade means that someone else’s idea of fairness is imposed on deals that the parties find satisfactory to themselves.

Lifson cites examples of how corporations and governments engage in a “give and take” all the time. Governments force companies “to offer concessions for the privilege of doing business unhindered by limitations and harassment.”

President Trump is the first postwar president to acknowledge this reality, and to promise to play the game as well as it is being played against the US. When he blasts the negotiators who have inked trade deals, he is really criticizing the policy of the US playing by the rules while others play hardball, with pressures both formal and informal being used to extort value from American companies and ultimately from the American economy. Those [research & development] jobs overseas won’t generate nearly as many American jobs as they would if located in a US facility.

President Trump is really writing the obituary for the era in which the US kept everyone else happy by conceding to others the ability to play economic blackmail while self-righteously refusing to play that game to protect our own interests. He is a realist, and it is refreshing.

In another article at American Thinker, Steve Feinstein, in a piece titled “Manufacturing a Crisis,” writes:

If there is one thing that Democrats and Republicans always seem to agree on, it’s this: Manufacturing jobs are the key to economic success in this country. We’ve got to “revitalize” the manufacturing sector if the economy is to generate strong job growth and economic expansion.

That’s just such total hogwash, because it’s not true and it’s not reflective of reality.

Cheaper foreign goods, Feinstein writes, enables “American consumers to spread their money around in more areas and it frees up American workers to pursue other — better-paying and more sophisticated — things.”

Have those “better-paying and more sophisticated” “‘things”(!) been keeping pace with the number of jobs lost in the manufacturing sector? A lot of the people in Rust Belt states, whose standard of living has stagnated or fallen over the past 20 years, said “no they haven’t kept pace” when they voted for Trump.

According to some “economic troglodytes,” Feinstein writes, “we’re only in the economic sweet spot if we’re manufacturing cheap Bic pens and Keds.”

Actually, the value of our manufacturing sector’s output is at record levels, even if the absolute number of workers employed in manufacturing is less than the peak. It’s directly analogous to our agricultural output being the highest ever, even though none of you farm.

Take that you economic troglodytes!

Next time you hear an ill-informed politician talk about how we need to “bring our manufacturing jobs back,” you’ll know better. We manufacture exactly what we should in this country. There’s always a plus/minus to how much we make here depending on the specific conditions of the moment, but you should hope you never see a U.S.-made Bic pen again.

There is also an interesting bunch of articles at American Thinker written by Howard, Raymond, and Jesse Richman (here is their personal website). They are big on the topic of “balanced trade,” and they regularly promote their idea of using a “scaled tariff.”

They also remind everyone that the word “trade” is used in the U.S. Constitution. I’ve linked to a few of their articles below.

And if you think economists are mild mannered group, note this opening from one of their articles last year:

In one of National Review’s hit pieces against Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump (“What Trump Doesn’t Understand — It’s a lot about our Trade with China”), correspondent Kevin D. Williamson called Trump a “dangerous buffoon” because he would threaten tariffs upon China’s products and thus risk a trade war with China. But it’s not Trump who is the buffoon on trade; it is National Review!

Trump plans to take on the huge U.S. trade deficit with the world, and especially with China. He threatens to place upon Chinese products a tariff like the 45% tariff that China recently placed upon some U.S. cars. Such a threat could lead to negotiations between the U.S. and China about balancing trade, and Trump wrote the book on negotiations.

When an article tears into a candidate for having his facts wrong, the magazine that prints it probably should check to make sure that the candidate is actually wrong. But, National Review failed to fact-check this piece.

They go on in the article to compare the NR’s “facts” with their own.

Next up, more on the debate about manufacturing jobs and trade.

Three articles by Raymond Richman, Howard Richman and Jesse Richman:

Free Trade vs. Balanced Trade

The People are Right: It’s Time to Balance Trade

How to Restore America’s Manufacturing Innovation

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for serious Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

In the last article, we outlined John Horvat’s argument that America’s economy cannot be solved merely by bringing back jobs from overseas, but rather, “America faces a grave moral crisis that needs to be addressed.”

Then we introduced former manufacturing company owner John Westberg, who not only understands our county’s moral challenge, but also has some ideas on how we can bolster American manufacturing and improve our country’s trade position to benefit American workers.

On the website of his foundation New Hope for America, Westberg provides both summary and details of what he is proposing:

The Problem

During the last 40 years, living the American dream became almost impossible for the working people of America because of the “outsourcing” of U.S. manufacturing. Observing this loss of good paying “middle class” jobs, Mr. Westberg established the NHFA foundation to find a solution to this problem.

The Solution

Through research he rediscovered the solution that Japan had used to rebuild their manufacturing base after the devastation of WW 2. Using this concept, they went on to become the No. 2 Economic Power in the world. NHFA suggests utilizing this same proven concept to restore U.S. Manufacturing. This, in turn, would create millions of new jobs, raise the wages of American workers, and restore a robust economy to the U.S.

Okay, how, exactly?

NHFA’s website is loaded with detailed policy papers outlining how policy makers can stop companies from importing from low-cost suppliers in China rather than purchasing from high-cost suppliers in America.

If our nation’s trade policy required that U.S. businesses could only import the type of products that they [manufacture], then your customers would no longer be able to import the type of products that you produce.

The Solution:

U.S. businesses can only import the types of products that they actually do manufacture . . .and . . .each manufacturer’s import percentage of their own sales would be limited to the current import penetration of that particular product market.

Got it? Don’t worry if your answer is “not yet.” Economics is called the dismal science for a reason. There is a lot more to Westberg’s pitch — you can find more of his argument on this page of NHFA’s website.

Another Illinois voice on the topic is Steve Rauschenberger, president of the Technology & Manufacturing Association (which is “a Schaumburg-based agency that acts as a comprehensive resource for Midwest manufacturers.”)

Celebrating “National Manufacturing Day,” Rauschenberger wants “to dispel misperceptions of American manufacturing.”

The folks who are involved daily in the industry know that there are three big manufacturing myths — that the U.S. manufacturing industry is in decline; that it is backbreaking work in a dark, dirty building; and that there is little future in a career in manufacturing.

In an article that recently ran in the Daily Herald, Rauschenberger writes that “Manufacturing in Illinois is strong and growing stronger.”

Manufacturing here has experienced a resurgence. As manufacturers have become leaner and more competitive globally, they have experienced tremendous growth.

“Free trade” has been a solid plank in the Republican National Committee’s Party Platform for decades, but candidate and now President Donald Trump has caused that plank to show some signs of weakening.

Without much of an effort over two years, I collected more than a hundred links to op eds, policy articles, and studies focusing on various aspects of the manufacturing/trade issue.

It isn’t as simple as just a debate between free traders and protectionists. Tax rates, regulations, tariffs, globalization, advancing technology, currency manipulation, poorly negotiated trade treaties, countries cheating on trade treaties, trade balance, and theft of intellectual property are all matters of controversy. As we saw last time, cultural issues and skilled labor are also in the mix.

In the next articles, I will only present an overview, linking and excerpting from only a handful of articles. At the conclusion, for anyone interested in drowning themselves in the subject, I’ll provide all the headlines and links I gathered.

To give you a flavor of what I collected, here are just a few that I won’t be quoting from:

Unfair Trade Hurts Ordinary Workers in Both China and the U.S.
By getting tough with Beijing, President Trump can make life better for American and Chinese citizens alike.

Free Trade As a General Rule
When in doubt, free trade is a safe bet.

Despite the Rhetoric, US Trade Deficit With China Is Not a Big Problem. Here’s Why.
In our capital account, the U.S. has a huge surplus with China. That means money is flowing into our country from China.

If anything, globalization increased the cost of meat in America
The two most fundamental needs are food and shelter, and globalization has certainly not reduced the real costs of these.

Dear China: Thank You for Manipulating Your Currency
China’s currency manipulation is a form of foreign aid, and to the direct advantage of millions of U.S. consumers.

Trump Can Succeed On Trade By Ending Global Currency Manipulation
World trade in goods and services has morphed into a gigantic manipulative carnival of currency trading. This needs to change.

PLEASE consider a financial gift to IFI to sustain our work.
We’ve stood firm for 25 years, work diligently to accomplish our mission to
“boldly bring a biblical perspective to public policy” in Illinois.

A couple of weeks ago I had the opportunity to talk with former state Senator Steve Rauschenberger, an old friend and former boss. When I first met him during his first campaign back in 1992, the political operative I was with made a prediction to me after the meeting: Steve is not going to play along — he’s going to be a problem for the GOP establishment. And he was.

Along with four other senators elected the same year, Steve became part of what was called the “Fab Five”: Peter Fitzgerald, Chris Lauzen, Pat O’Malley, and Dave Syverson. Only Syverson remains in the Illinois Senate today. The group was outspoken and critical of both parties when it came to important policies.

Then Senate President James “Pate” Philip made Steve chairman of the senate’s Appropriation Committee, and Rauschenberger became a respected expert on the budget. In addition, Steve excelled in an understanding of electric deregulation, telecom legislation, and the state’s health care industry. You don’t get that deep into technical issues such as those without ability and commitment.

In the senate Rauschenberger was a critic of both Governors Jim Edgar and George Ryan, but once Rod Blagojevich took office, Edgar and Ryan looked a whole lot better by comparison. Under Blagojevich, Steve explained, any commitments to restraints were tossed out and mismanagement took hold and both spending and debt skyrocketed.

Curious to hear what Steve had to say about the state budget drama today, I called him. Sure enough, he summed up the state of the state nicely.

When it comes to spending money, he explained, the state is like a raging drug addict that is incapable of dealing with his addiction. Increasing the supply of drugs is as foolhardy as giving the state more money. That addict needs to be committed to a clinic where he can get treatment and break his addiction.

When it comes to state spending, there are three places you’re going to have to look: Medicaid, education, and pensions. On the phone, Steve said there were four areas — he divided up K-12 and higher ed.

When I told him I figured Medicaid was going to be tough to get money from as we transition out of Obamacare, he disagreed. Medicaid payments to hospitals are too high in Illinois, Steve explained, and then he confirmed another one of my recent comments to friends regarding hospital construction. The Rush-Copley near me recently put on a new lobby and facade. Not long ago I learned that some of the floors of a hospital in DuPage County were being laid with marble from Asia. I was correct that the hospital business was thriving, but wrong about Medicaid — it indeed can be cut according to Rauchenbeger.

Eventually the pensions are going to have to be cut off from the state budget, Steve said, as there is no legal requirement for taxpayers to keep funding the system. The proliferation of six-figure pensions for retired state employees is (and these are my words) legalized theft.

As for the K-12 and the state colleges and universities, there has been little discipline when it comes to spending for many decades. It’s for the kids, don’t you know, and uh, the young adults attending college.

On the topic of the budgetary standoff between Governor Bruce Rauner and House Speaker Mike Madigan, Steve then compared the state’s budget to a machine. Government programs operate like an engine, and when there is something wrong with the engine, just adding more fuel (through tax increases) solves nothing.

You have to fix the engine to balance the budget. In some policy areas the only adjustment needed will be the turning of a few dials. In other areas, a tune-up. Still others, a complete overall is absolutely required. Unfortunately, he said, right now there seems to be little interest in addressing the fundamentals.

When Illinois Senators Kyle McCarter (R-Vandalia) and Dan McConchie (R-Lake Zurich) introduced their “Taxpayer Bargain” budget proposal a few weeks ago they described it as strong medicine for a very sick state.

After talking with Steve Rauschenberger, it looks like major surgery will be required along with that strong medicine.

For up-to-the minute news, action alerts, coming events and more you can now sign up for IFI Text Alerts!

Stay in the loop by texting “IFI” to 555888 or click HERE to enroll right away.

Click HERE to donate to IFI