GOPers Discuss Changing Definition Of National Security To Stop Trump Tariffs

United States President Donald J. Trump participates in a meeting with the Prime Minster of The Netherlands, Mark Rutte, at The White House in Washington, DC, July 2, 2018. Credit: Chris Kleponis / Abaca
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Several Republican senators are mulling whether they should change the definition of national security to cramp President Donald Trump’s habit of imposing trade tariffs on U.S. allies, Politico reported.

Those senators reportedly think Trump has abused his authority on steel and aluminum tariffs and are discussing whether they should combat Trump’s justification of the new tariffs as a matter of national security.

Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, including Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), fear Trump is sabotaging his own economic gains and are pushing for legislation that would abate Trump’s ability to take action on trade. According to people familiar with the matter who spoke to Politico, those Republicans are looking at at least five different modifications that could be made to the law that controls national security tariffs.

“I’d like to kill ‘em,” Hatch reportedly said, referencing Trump’s tariffs.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Now that he’s retiring, Orrin has discovered a vestigial spine.

  2. Or they could actually do their jobs, too. My understanding is Trade and Commerce is the Congress’ purview, not Cheetolini.

    My two cents.

  3. If they finally find the courage to go against Trump on one issue and the sky does not fall perhaps they will muster enough strength to go against him on other issues thereby causing Humpty Dumpty to fall off the Wall.

  4. Any change will have to be veto-proof, although Trump has yet to veto any legislation. This one might get his attention.

    The “national security” exception is simple. Define it so that it applies only if we are at war. You remember “war,” don’t you? You know, when Congress “declares war” on another country, rather than just letting the President send tens of thousands of troops out to deal with one of his irritations?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

33 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for 1gg Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for sickneffintired Avatar for denisj Avatar for paulitical Avatar for zlohcuc Avatar for tsp Avatar for matthew_tanner Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for milt69 Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for corncaucus2008 Avatar for maximus Avatar for seamus42 Avatar for the_loan_arranger Avatar for justruss Avatar for cathill Avatar for greatlake Avatar for yellowbeard Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for captain_america Avatar for desertdweller Avatar for angrychickadee

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: