Last updated on 2018-07-16
While our current members of Congress wring their hands over Donald Trump’s destructive trade war, Democratic candidate Tim Bjorkman yields the floor to South Dakota farmers who offer real evidence of real damage to South Dakota agriculture. Todd Epp reports these farmers’ testimony from Bjorkman’s Thursday press conference in Sioux Falls.
Soybean prices are down:
[SD Farmer’s Union president Doug] Sombke, [who] farms near Conde, said soybeans have dropped $3 per bushel since April, For him, with 1,000 acres in soybeans and production at 40 bushels per acre, that’s a $120,000 loss [Todd Epp, “Bjorkman, Aggies Want Actions Not Words on Tariffs,” KELO Radio, 2018.07.12].
Milk prices are down:
Mark Rogin, a dairy farmer from the Garretson area, said milk prices had just started to move to the break-even point before all the tariff talk. He says milk prices now have dropped $2-$2.50 per 100 weight, which means a $450,000 loss per month for his operation [Epp, 2018.07.12].
Corn prices are down:
Bo DeKramer, who farms near Canistota, says June should be the best month of the year to market corn. But because of the talk of tariffs and tariffs, corn dropped from $3.75 per bushel to $3. He said he fears severe consequences–such as the loss of farms and farmers–if things get worse [Epp, 2018.07.12].
Sombke and Rogin both identify trickle-down effects that are cutting into their operating capital and driving cutbacks in farm spending that hurt the overall South Dakota economy:
…Sombke said he went to an implement dealer to get a new bucket loader for his tractor. The dealer told him that simply because of the threat of tariffs, Sombke would have to pay seven percent more than the noted price. The dealer said that was because he was going to have to pay seven percent more to restock the item from his distributor.
…[Rogin] said he was going to put up a new $250,000 steel building, but now he can’t afford to. Rogin said that then cost the contractor profits and work for the employees [Epp, 2018.07.12].
Hear Sombke, Rogin, and DeKramer explain these problems themselves in Epp’s video:
https://youtu.be/JmZpzD5O4gU?t=15m20s
Bjorkman says writing letters to Trump begging for mercy isn’t enough. This real economic harm to South Dakota farmers and the broader economy justifies the concrete response that Bjorkman has advocated all summer: reasserting Congress’s Article 1 Section 8 power to regulate trade with foreign nations and ending Trump’s destructive trade war.
This was all unnecessary ha America not elected a spoiled 2 year old for bogus potus.
Listen Dem and all others- get off yer duffs and vote. Your future depends on your participation.
Bjorkman won’t be afraid to take on the President and to oppose the President. Our current delegation is paralyzed with fear and indecision. They like trade, but they are not tough enough to stand up to Trump. Thune in particular has proven himself to be completely worthless as anything more than a cardboard cutout to prop up behind McConnell at press conferences. The other two aren’t any better, but they don’t claim to be in GOP Party leadership either. (Being in leadership means that you have to stand behind McConnell at press conferences and remain totally and completely silent).
Mr. Sombke … Any implement dealer that tries to pull that B.S. logic with you should never, ever get another dollar of your business. He wants to make more on an item he’s got on the books because the next one will cost him more? What a Trump inspired con job he’s trying to pull on you. He’ll make more on the lower cost of one he has in stock already and make the same on the next one, with the same markup. So, he’ll make more for doing nothing but trying to raise prices with no justification. It’s his right to charge what he wants but it’s your right to shop around for a friendly implement dealer.
Has anybody seen what Dusty Johnson has said about this?
Expanding on my last comment, why would Thune even want to be the #3 person in the Senate GOP Party leadership when that position requires him to be completely subservient to both McConnell and Trump? Someone outside of leadership has the freedom to do and say as they wish, but Thune is required to be a top lackey and to encourage his fellow GOP Party senators to fall in line as well.
The only plausible reason anyone would want to be #3 in Senate GOP Party leadership is the prospect of replacing McConnell as the GOP Party leader. But after years as a #3 lackey Thune really has no chance whatsoever of ever rising to #1. Thune has cemented his image as a perpetual handmaid rather than a leader. When the time comes to replace McConnell the GOP Party senate caucus will fight over whether to elevate #2 John Cornyn or to go a new direction with someone dynamic outside of the current leadership. Whatever promise Thune once exhibited as a person on the rise within the party has now been replaced by the image of him as a cardboard cutout placed behind McConnell at press conferences who has traded his voice for a lame and meaningless “leadership” title.
You are correct Porter, that item has already been pre tariff paid for and moreover, my bet is that there are still some that are already pre tariff paid for, in the pipeline. The guy is a rip off, like trump. This is one of the many problems of the easy to win trade wars, there are con men who see they can look you in the face and tack on the extras. The only thing missing with this yahoo is to blame Obama for it…believe me, that is coming.
One to two months ago soybeans/corn were at a 2-3 year high cash wise (corn still holding in there). Everyone that is blaming Trump needs only to look in the mirror. There were plenty of marketing opportunities so far this year to sell old and new crop grains at profitable levels. All the price decline is not solely due to tariffs, the USDA still predicts monster crops this fall.
That being said the year is far from over, regarding markets conditions can change quickly. I personally have more than I should on hand in old crop inventory and only have myself and greed to blame.
Regarding the tariffs, I am all for Trump seeing this thing through. China has had some sort of tariff on our soybeans since the bush/clinton years, meanwhile charges SA nothing and invests all our stolen tech and trade surplus into our biggest competitor building up their infrastructure. As we are finding out in the world “fair trade” is not what it seems to be.
McConnell & his wife will quit’n run, just like Ryan, when opposition forces out Trump, who knows it in chaotic desperation. Thune wants to be like Leader Dashle just once before the GOP crashes & burns. I wonder if Thune undoubtedly hates Obama like Trump and all Congressional, likely racist, Republicans. Imo
For the Russian comrade trump, seeing it through is exactly in the best interests of his boss Putin. Russia is selling soybeans like hotcakes while these guys here loose thousands upon thousands. See it through? These Russians, with full republican/trump support, were not only after emails, they stole the elections. This is from Illinois:
“Based on information in the indictment, Illinois State Board of Elections spokesman Matt Dietrich said Friday afternoon that officials believed the Illinois agency is the one identified in the indictment only as SBOE 1.
“We think it’s very likely that we are SBOE No. 1,” Dietrich said at a Springfield news conference. “We have not received any confirmation from the Department of Justice on that, but based on the circumstances described in the indictment, we think it’s pretty likely that that’s us.” https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/illinois-election-officials-very-likely-state-was-target-of-russian-hackers/
Atta boy comrade dude, keep clapping for the Russians…to see it through.
Greg Deplorable, Trump has put your bottom line on the front line of a trade war. Time will tell how your patience holds up and whether the effort was worth it. Maybe down the road you will come back to us with an estimate of how much the trade war has cost you personally, and whether the (future) resolution of the trade war has benefited you personally.
When it’s all said and done will you give us your own numbers of how the trade war has affected you, and your own assessment of whether the Republican Party should go back to its long-held free trade positions or retain Trump’s protectionist stance?
Markets go up and down always have. The prices of today are much better than that of the 80’s, 90’s and early 2000’s. We’ve had a really good run in the commodity cycle. Some of the producers crying the most have a cost of production problem not a price problem, which again points back to themselves.
Rorschach I’ve been through tough times. These are not tough. I’m more than willing to give up a year of depressed prices to fix our trade issues. Fixing the fundamentals is key to your own operation and world trade.
It remains to be seen whether any trade issues will be fixed. Maybe they will be. Or maybe a bull in a China shop is only built for destruction. We will both find out.
Thanks, Greg, you’ve provided an excellent perspective with pure honesty. That’s hard to find these days.
Drumpf had plenty of chances to fix the tariffs but he blew his chances because he knows everything, Just ask him. He negotiated a tariff deal where none of his or his family’s junk made over seas is tariffed. Good for him. NOT! How does that help farmers and ranchers? It doesn’t.
If Drumpf is good at anything it is torking off allies for Putin’s benefit and our allies won’t necessarily be forgiving any time soon. Drumpf cannot be trusted and the entire world, except wingnuts, know this.
seekingalpha.com/article/4049544-grains-move-lower-recent-highs-another-buying-opportunity
It seems like only yesterday that wheat rose to an all-time high in 2008 at $13.345 per bushel, and soybeans and corn rose to their record levels at $17.9475 and $8.4375, respectively in 2012. If we learned anything about agricultural commodities over the past four years where bumper crops provided ample supplies around the globe, it is that exponential population growth has increased demand to a point where the world not only expects but requires a record crop each year. If that were not the case, we would have seen a return to prices seen in 2000 when CBOT wheat (NYSEARCA:WEAT) was at $2.50, corn (NYSEARCA:CORN) was around $2.05, and soybeans (NYSEARCA:SOYB) were at the $4.60 per bushel levels.
The fact that the massive crops and bear market of recent years has not driven prices near to the levels seen at the turn of the millennium should tell us something important. Grains are in demand, and the next time we see a weather event or crops are not up to bumper levels, watch out prices are heading higher in a big way. From Feb 2017
Each year, traders approach the beginning of a new crop year in the United States with trepidation. While the most recent World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report from the USDA was not all that bullish, the prices of all three of the primary grain markets ra
There must be some reason for crop price decline if not overproduction. Maybe market instability due to tariffs and threats of more tariffs and retaliation for tariffs and threats of more tariffs. Nah, couldn’t be it. Trust the stable genius………at yer own peril.
High prices cure high prices. 2012 was an exceptionally dry year, substantially below trend-line yields. In subsequent years what did the American farmers do? What we do best. Break up every farmable acre and plant row crops, exactly what market forces told us to do. It sure hasn’t helped that we have had 3 going on 4 record setting crops far above trend-line yields and no worldwide production problems.
Corn out by the badlands, row crops from Pierre to North Dakota? We planted around 77-78 million acres of corn/soybeans in 2006, now a little over 90 million each today.
The math isn’t hard to figure out, it just doesn’t fit around your narrative.
Determined trumpelstilskins won’t change their minds until the pain is very acute. A few never will due to an extreme form of Stockholm Syndrome, a sort of deranged masochism.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/north-dakota-farmers-lash-gop-trumps-crippling-trade-war-china-scared-ive-ever/
The math isn’t hard to figure out, it just doesn’t fit around your narrative. Nice try, but I didn’t write the article. The guy who did is supposed to be an expert. What are your qualifications for knowing it all?
Greg, something I have never quite understood about commodities is the actual scale of “there market.” Your posts here has raised some questions – honest informative questions I have about these markets. 1) US (and worldwide?) production is up; but all that production is being sold/used – is that correct? 2) If China is making US goods more expensive (through tariffs), then they are buying other countries’/suppliers commodities – then why isn’t the US getting into the markets that are now open from the vacuum created by this Chinese shift? For example, if China is now buying all the Brazilian beans, then doesn’t whoever WAS buying the Brazilian beans need to turn to the US to supply their needs now?
Am I oversimplifying the trade picture?
Greg,
In re. Tariffs and your experience:
As a “producer” it really doesn’t hurt your end. I can’t really say with certainty what your situation is, but I am fairly certain that USA age policy still has price floors established for crops, right? So the worst that can happen is total wash. Not total LOSS. Now, add that in with the passing of what essentially amounts Tobago consumption tax to the consumer, and you don’t really see the effects for years. My question would be why close the biggest market off to yourself? Or, I should say, to the country? If you held on to excess crop yields,yeah, totally your prob. Why one would do that beats me. As a nation though, we are a net consumer of almost all of our goods. That is why trade is so important. There is no such thing as free trade; or fair trade. Its a ridiculous semantic game. But why intentionally pass ones own pants, which honestly, is what a tariff amounts to?
Looks like the only farmers who are gonna be okay on this are the ones who inherited their farms with working capital. Pretty easy to weather the storm when you don’t have to deal with the bankers for your operating expenses.
It’s the decisions you make in good times that determine your fate in the down times.
High corn prices; buy a second home, rent the countryside, take on all kinds of new paint,
Or pay the tax get debt free and build up some capital.
Everyone makes the choice.
All who voted for fat Nixon should get what they voted for, hard and often.
And Donald Trump is making reckless choices that are causing farmers needless grief. Why? Why should we accept that? We should we shrug fatalistically as if the tariffs were a hailstorm or tornado or some other act of God?
Wow, so that is the answer. You’re on your own and if you make the wrong decision, then tough nuggies for you, bankers are cool with that as well. That is some way to run a business, no wonder farmers kill themselves.
How many farmers held off buying new paint until they enjoyed a few boom years? How many bought 20k an acre farm ground because the farm economy was gonna stay bullish?
I noticed when I was actively engaged in farming that seed corn and beans and fertilizer didn’t drop when crop prices did. Farmers were being squeezed flat since the 80’s farm crisis.
Who could blame them for splurging when they had some money?
It comes as no surprise that a board full of avowed socialists don’t understand the business cycle.
Sure there is grief, but this differs from the Carter years because there is a clear objective that most in business understand.
Most of you could give a rats ass about Farmers. Your party with endless regulations, taxes and health insurance forced down our throats have led to some of the biggest increases in our COP of my lifetime. So forgive me, but your beef with Trump comes off as politically convienient at best.
Mr. Deplorable,
You know me no better than I know you. Stand on the strength of your arguments, which make sense, then ad hominim attacks. I simply dislike tariffs because its an added tax on consumer goods. I am not a producer. I can’t hike the cost of me per hour, as opposed to, Apple, and their hiking of a Mac, or whatever. We are a country of consumers. Why hinder them?
“Give up a year to fix the issues?” Nice, Greg, except there is no end game in sight, just the open ended “things will be much better.” Well, this administration tried to end Obamacare and had no plan after that. They took children away from their parents at the border without any idea what to do after they took them. Tariffs on our best/closest trading partners thinking there would be no reprisal. Wonderful tax cuts that left a gaping $1.5 trillion dollar hole that they are going to fix with fairy dust and big hopes. When will it sink in that THERE IS NO PLAN?
So before Trump no one cared that there was roughly an 8-13% tariff on our soybeans by China and none on the SA soybeans they imported?
We just let it slide. “Can’t upset our biggest customer they said.”
Or the Canadian tariffs on our dairy? Nope, Canada rejected the idea of no tariffs.
How about the 10% tariff on our cars to the EU while ours was only 2%?
Trade was far from free or fair.
Deplorable explodes like Drumpf. Hope it isn’t catchy.
This headline indicates that self-interest may soon create a reason to end the trade war http://thehill.com/policy/finance/397048-some-maga-hats-made-in-china-may-increase-in-price-because-of-tariffs
The biggest problem with dairy income is an enormous over supply of milk. https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/u-s-canada-dairy-dispute/
I owned my first business at age ten and have owned eight over my lifetime before I sold them and retired at age 50. I went to business school in Vermillion. I believe I have as good an understanding of business as you, Greg Deplorable. If we had more European socialism you wouldn’t be crying and having to defend a policy specifically designed to use you as a tool to make the super rich even richer.
Wonder if these hats are being sold in Drumpf’s gift shop in the WH?
Greg, it seems it’s you that doesn’t understand business beyond your farm. The system was working. China and Canada got hosed as much as we did. We came out fine and they came out fine. Trump is greedy and wants us to win and China and Canada to lose. Well, lets just see how that works out. Last time it was tried led to the Great Depression.
Greg has about an acre under till, mostly in sweet corn and zucchini that he likes to put in people’s cars when they leave them unlocked.
So then, tell us how that Farm Bill works and why do you support it…with your vote.
Interesting read. My take is farmers made business decisions based upon the markets before/during/after planting season. Decisions on what crops, number of acres and the variable costs which affect cost of production. So planting is done, spraying season begins, weather events adversely affect the crop, replant, lack of rain too much rain, hail damage and the President begins an escalating argument about tariffs and theft of intellectual property, my point isn’t whether or not we should raise or lower tariffs, but don’t be chaotic about it creating uncertainty and huge negative market volatility.
“Farm Service Agency policy requires that producers participating in several programs submit an annual report regarding all cropland use on their farms. These programs include Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC). Reporting also applies to those who receive marketing assistance loans or loan deficiency payments. Failure to file an accurate and timely acreage report for all crops and land uses can result in loss of program benefits. Producers are required to self report all cropland on each farm to FSA annually. FSA uses these data to determine payment eligibility (land must be in an eligible agricultural use to qualify for payments) and to calculate losses for various disaster programs. Data are reported in the following categories: planted; prevented planted; and failed. In addition, the National Agricultural Statistics Service uses FSA planted acreage data to complement their survey data. For more information, visit the NASS website at http://www.nass.usda.gov.” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/efoia/electronic-reading-room/frequently-requested-information/crop-acreage-data/
So ya got that going for ya. But what about the capital Greg was speaking of, how does that all work?
“A major problem is that some farmers have used up their working capital. When that happens, there is no money to operate on. For the past two crop seasons, better yields have kept many farmers’ working capital above water, but there wasn’t any improvement on that working capital.” https://www.agriculture.com/farm-management/business-planning/how-farmers-can-cope-with-less-cash
Pretty marginal, as we have seen. Add in the fact that the crop was already in the ground when the tariffs hit and you can see why and how real farmers are in trouble. Yeah, we do give a rat’s ass about farmers and ranchers as most of us have some of that in our background. Even if there are those who do not know a thing about agriculture, they know what happens when ag is sick and how it dries up other business.
What I found astonishing was Dusty Johnson’s statement that he opposed Congress taking any action “at this time.” Really? How far do prices need to drop before the time is right?
Drey,
You honestly believe Dusty came up with that response on his own?
Mr. Deplorable, would you please tell us if you participate in any of those “socialist” farm programs?
Here’s a great, very brief FB post by an econ instructor about why Tangerine Wankmaggot is such a pathetic deal maker on international trade:
The best, most cogent and elegantly simple explanation into the inexplicably destructive negotiating processes of the president,by Prof. David Honig of Indiana University.
Everybody I know should read this accurate and enlightening piece…
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University – Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.
Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”
Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.
The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.
The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.
One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.
There isn’t another Canada.
So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.
Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM – HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.
Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.
For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.
Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.
From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
— David Honig
David Honig never built a business. David teaches negotiation theory and therein is the problem: You don’t buy insurance from a teacher. You don’t take medical advice from a widget builder. You don’t follow skydive directions from a ladder maker. David’s advice means nothing as he has no actual success other than to convince someone to pay him for teaching a class on negotiations.
Trump has a proven record of winning when it comes to negotiations. Even the European news are talking about the fact that Trump has won at every meeting he has had whether it was NATO, the courts, immigration, standing for the National anthem, kneeling during a game, Trade or even calling out the media for fake news. I understand you do not “like” that fact but it is what it is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=52&v=IUN36UG8JaQ
Great and informative reading, Ms Debbo.
OldSferbrains yer ideas about Drumps imaginary victories totally matches Drumpf’s ideas of inaginary victory. You must be conjoined at the MAGAT (made in China) hats.
Please explain what Drumpf won from Canada, North Korea, NATO, Great Britain, the courts, immigration, etc.
How come American corporations are moving out of the country because of Drumpf’s imbecility?
Mr. Deplorable. “So before Trump no one cared that there was roughly an 8-13% tariff on our soybeans by China and none on the SA soybeans they imported?”
Actually – YES – someone DID care. They worked together with other Asian nations and the South Americans and Canadians to come up with something called the Trans Pacific Trade Partnership – which was dealt specifically with the trade practices around China and SA – and Trump dumped it.
Pay attention.
The NOem, Thune, Rounds, trump and little Opie’s idea of the theory of tariff trade wars also come into play when you go to buy something like a washing machine. Ag folks are taking a huge hit on their current crop and future crops as well as using what little, if any capital they have left just to keep the homestead running.
It seems that the Old Soviet points out, regarding that the professor in Indiana, teaches how to negotiate, that our inadequate Russian could have used some educating before China schooled us. We are just getting started, so just wait for the rest of it all to kick in. Hard to say this, but America can no longer be trusted in any kind of partnership deals…to include NATO, as we gear up to go fight another unnecessary war in the Mid East, with Iran. When all else fails, start a war.
Putin’s Russia is winning big time on this blunder, Russian farmers are the ones that will buy new washing machines for their homes with the windfalls of the Republican trade wars.
This current Ag crisis is just further proof of how too many South Dakotans vote against their true interests every chance they can get. And why do they do this? The duality between the world they want to live in versus the world they actually live in makes a mockery of their true political judgment; and makes one wonder if their values are but an attempt at a desert mirage, while their compass – which should be a moral one – hints that they should go an other way….
JKC, Sr: perfectly written. Fat Nixon campaigned since 2016 on raising tariffs, regressive economics, etc., et al. The fools who voted and continue to vote against their interests receive what they sowed.
Dusty Johnson did say in April, “Tariffs are not good for South Dakota agriculture.” However, last week he told that Sioux Falls paper that (reporters’ words) “the president should maintain the authority over trade negotiations” and that (Dusty’s words) “Injecting more Congressional involvement, at least at this time, is going to inject more politics into it.”
Funny that Dusty would dismiss an exercise of proper Constitutional authority as “politics.” It seems that he’s injecting more politics into the discussion by reaching for a political excuse instead of doing what the Constitution plainly dictates.
Cory, exactly right! You will notice this campaign year that Dusty will say very little re: what congress SHOULD do as he wants to ride into that body solely on the basis of the R in front of his name on the ballot–not on his qualifications for the job….
e