On Friday, I received an email from Pennsylvania's jr Senator, Dave McCormick:
From the context, he's responding to this blog post from April 7 - a couple of questions about this administration's tariffs.
Let's note that he has yet to respond to a previous blog/letter to him - a blog post about Donald Trump's interest in an end run around the Constitution's 2-term Presidential limit.
Interesting.
Anyway, back to Dave's response.
(Note: The name at the bottom of the letter is, in fact, "Dave." I'm just following Dave's lead here - no disrespect should be seen in my use of "Dave" at all.)
Anyway, anyway...
After pointing out the WSJ's description that the tariffs wiped out trillions of dollars in wealth and triggered fears of a recession and CNN's reporting that markets were plunging and how conservatives used to define tariffs as taxes - taxes in the American family, in fact, I asked:
Given all the short term damage (so far) to the economy, do you stand with this administration's tariffs?
Also, given all that damage, any comment on Donald Trump playing golf all weekend as the economy tanked?
And this is how Senator McCormick answered:
President Trump has used tariffs as a mechanism to advocate for reciprocal treatment with international trading partners. On April 2, 2025, the President imposed a minimum global tariff of 10 percent and elevated reciprocal tariffs on specific countries. The global 10 percent tariff went into effect on April 5, 2025. The elevated reciprocal tariffs were scheduled to go into effect on April 9, 2025, but the same day, President Trump announced they would be paused for 90 days as international negotiations continue. He also raised tariffs on the People’s Republic of China to 145 percent.
American businesses do not compete on a level playing field. They must contend with heavily subsidized competitors and distortive trade practices that are designed to disadvantage the United States. American exporters have also been deprived of fair access to foreign markets.
I support President Trump’s goal of restoring fairness and reciprocity to our trade relationships and bringing countries to the table to negotiate a better deal for American businesses and workers. To accomplish that goal, I believe we must be very specific about the bad behavior from other countries that is unfair and that we would like to see changed.
I have also encouraged the President to use the leverage he has established to show the path to better trade agreements and economic certainty; lets seize this opportunity to get some early trade wins for American workers, businesses, and the economy. Finally, I think there should be a thoughtful exclusions process for certain imports that cannot be purchased in the United States in sufficient quantities or of adequate quality.
I'll let the Tax Foundation define Trump's "reciprocal tariff" in order to foil what Dave is trying to assert in his letter:
However, despite the characterization of the tariffs as “reciprocal,” and despite the accompanying graphics referring to foreign “tariffs charged to the USA including currency manipulation and trade barriers,” the White House did not actually measure tariffs, currency manipulation, or trade barrier policies employed by other countries. Instead, it drew its estimates from something else entirely: bilateral trade deficits in goods.
Specifically, the White House documents appear to allege the “tariffs charged to the USA” are the greater of two different quantities: (a) 10 percent, and (b) the 2024 US trade deficit in goods with a given country, divided by the total quantity of US imports from that country.
And:
The method for calculating other countries’ so-called “tariffs” for reciprocal purposes is nonsense. Bilateral deficits are not tariffs, nor are they meaningful anyway; trade in services is relevant; and tariffs cannot be used to target overall trade deficits. The overall result is an extraordinary policy error that will severely damage the economy while failing to reduce the US trade deficit. [Emphasis added.]
And now go back and look at Dave's response.
He supports the idea of fairness and reciprocity in trade deals and does not expressly criticize Trump's use of tariffs to achieve that end. He just wants it done, it seems, in a more thoughtful manner.
There is no mention in his letter of how the tariffs are a tax on the American People. No mention of how we would be paying the tariffs in this attempt to achieve any sort of "fairness and reciprocity" in international trade.
There's also no mention of Trump's golf playing while the economy burned.
Senator McCormick Responded.
