So, Donald Trump thinks playing the farm card is his ace in the hole in Iowa.
He might want to rethink that hand.
At the Adler Theatre in Davenport this week, Trump targeted Ron DeSantis for opposing ethanol and claimed to be the savior of the American farm.
“How could a farmer vote against me,” Trump asked?
It’s true farmers backed Trump in 2016 and 2020 – against Democrats. But that may not be the case against a Republican.
They, like other Republicans, want to win in 2024. And while Trump may portray his record as an unadulterated success for American agriculture, the real record is quite different.
How many farmers really want to go back to the days when agriculture was at the tip of the spear in the ex-president’s trade war with China?
Yet, a second Trump term is headed that way.
Last month, Trump unveiled a new trade policy that is much the same as the old trade policy.
Tariffs. Revoking China’s most favored nation trade status. Restricting its imports. More conflict.
Republicans, farmers included, don’t care for China. But Politico reported this month the Trump plan isn’t rating raves from farm state lawmakers. Quite the opposite.
The plan, is “raising hackles,” according to the article, as lawmakers worry it would “inflict new harm on the U.S. agricultural economy, which relies on exports to its biggest market: China.”
“There are serious trade disparities that should rightfully be raised, but we should be honest about the potential economic impact to rural America,” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.).
Another farm state Republican lawmaker was more blunt when asked about how Trump’s new trade proposal could impact the U.S. agriculture economy, calling it “fucking suicide” for rural communities.
It’s unlikely DeSantis will urge a softer approach to China and risk looking weak. He’s already doing that when it comes to Russia and Ukraine. Still, when a fellow Republican says your trade plan is “fucking suicide” for rural America, it’s usually not a recipe for political success in Iowa.
But then, Trump’s old record in rural America isn’t necessarily anything to brag about – although that’s exactly what Trump did in Davenport.
The ex-president claimed he’d rained money down on America’s farmers.
“We handed checks to the farmers for $28 billion,” Trump boasted. “Did anybody get a check in this room?”
What Trump didn’t mention was that he was paying farmers for the exports they’d lost after he launched first-strike tariffs against China (and even some of our allies) which China then responded to with retaliatory tariffs on farm products.
We saw what happened.
Exports plummeted, especially soybeans. And that $28 billion – contrary to what Trump claims – didn’t come from China. It came from the US treasury. And the tariff revenues – again, contrary to Trump’s claims – didn’t come from China. That false claim has been debunked repeatedly. Tariff revenues flowing into the US treasury came from duties paid by American importers, some of it passed on to consumers in this country.
Trump should have asked people in the Adler: “Did anybody in this room get the bill for my tariffs?”
Trump may think Iowa farmers won’t mind going back to 2020, when almost 40% of their net income came from US government checks. But I don’t think that’s what they want. And I don’t think Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, who was sitting up front for Trump’s speech, wants that, either. In 2018, she said “nobody wins in a trade war.”
Iowa Agriculture Secretary Mike Naig said in 2019 that Iowa farmers want “trade, not aid.” Those words were echoed by the Iowa Farm Bureau president.
I think that’s still the sentiment.
So, Ron DeSantis has some ammunition of his own. And not just on trade, but ethanol policy. It was Trump’s EPA that repeatedly and generously handed out “small refinery” exemptions to the federal Renewable Fuel Standard.
Farmers remember that.
DeSantis could have some exposure on ethanol. He co-sponsored a bill when he was in Congress to eliminate the RFS, but Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said that candidates can start campaigning in Iowa with a “blank slate” when it comes to ethanol, according to Radio Iowa. “We’re not going to hold too much to what they might have done six or seven years ago when they had a different role, a different perspective,” he said.
What is important, Shaw said, is candidates should have a national energy policy, and it should include ethanol.
It would be good to remember, too, that Ted Cruz opposed ethanol subsidies, and despite Trump hammering him for it, Cruz won the Iowa caucuses in 2016.
As for Trump’s trade war, was it worth it?
An economist at the Tax Foundation wrote last year, “the economic literature shows that the U.S. import tariffs and subsequent retaliatory tariffs imposed by China and other countries on U.S. agricultural exports have hurt the U.S. agricultural industry and could impact future production, further raising food prices.”
Even Trump’s “Phase One” deal with China that called for China to buy $200 billion in additional goods and services in 2020 and 2021 didn’t work out like he planned. Trump blames Biden, but in February 2021, just after Biden took office, the Petersen Institute for International Economics was already calling Phase One a “flop.”
Based on 2020 results, it said, “China was never on pace to meet that commitment,” with the pandemic “only partly to blame.”
Trade tends not to be a big topic in presidential elections. But I hope 2024 is an exception. Iowa’s economy depends a lot on foreign trade. And Biden, who has kept Trump’s tariffs on China in place, is in the midst of his own get-tough-on-China approach that some analysts say is even harsher than Trump’s.
We haven’t yet heard DeSantis talk about his own trade ideas. But, as far as the Iowa caucuses are concerned, if Trump is banking on his record with farmers to lift him up here, his story isn’t as rosy as he claims. And even though polls say rural Iowa tends to still like Trump, I suspect they aren’t eager to go back to the turmoil of his trade wars.
Not when they can choose another Republican.
At the least, the idea will probably get a lot more skeptical look in rural America than it got Monday at the Adler Theatre.
Along the Mississippi is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Along the Mississippi is a proud member of the Iowa Writers Collaborative. Please check out the work of my colleagues and consider subscribing to their work.
Laura Belin, Iowa Politics with Laura Belin, Windsor Heights
Doug Burns: The Iowa Mercury, Carroll
Dave Busiek: Dave Busiek on Media, Des Moines
Art Cullen, Art Cullen’s Notebook, Storm Lake
Suzanna de Baca: Dispatches from the Heartland, Huxley
Debra Engle: A Whole New World, Madison County
Julie Gammack: Julie Gammack’s Iowa Potluck, Des Moines and Okoboji
Jody Gifford: Benign Inspiration, West Des Moines
Beth Hoffman: In the Dirt, Lovilla
Dana James: New Black Iowa, Des Moines
Fern Kupfer and Joe Geha: Fern and Joe, Ames
Robert Leonard: Deep Midwest: Politics and Culture, Bussey
Tar Macias, Hola Iowa, Iowa
Kurt Meyer, Showing Up
Pat Kinney, View from Cedar Valley, Waterloo
Kyle Munson: Kyle’s Main Street, Iowa
Jane Nguyen, The Asian Iowan, West Des Moines
John Naughton, My Life, in Color, Des Moines
Chuck Offenburger: Iowa Boy Chuck Offenburger, Jefferson and Des Moines
Barry Piatt: Behind the Curtain, Washington, D.C.
Macey Spensley: The Midwest Creative
Mary Swander: Mary Swander’s Buggy Land, Kalona
Mary Swander: Mary Swander’s Emerging Voices
Cheryl Tevis, Unfinished Business, Boone County
Ed Tibbetts: Along the Mississippi, Davenport
Teresa Zilk: Talking Good, Des Moines
Also, please check out our alliance partner, Iowa Capital Dispatch. It provides hard-hitting news along with selected commentary by members of the Iowa Writers Collaborative.
Strike up the band Ed.
We agree! This is a day that will go down in infamy.
I'll take it a step further, I wish Trump would just go into political retirement.
Your essay reminded me how one could argue that compared to R administrations, Democratic policies since the New Deal have provided more financial support to Iowa's corn and bean producers.