Readers Write: New tariffs, wrongful deportation

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Just throwing tariffs at imports to raise money is not a very smart economic policy. Systems are too complex to accurately predict the outcome. The stated goal is to raise revenue and bring manufacturing back to this country, but no one is looking at the unintended consequences.

During his first term, President Donald Trump put tariffs on imported appliances. Manufacturers didn’t create more jobs in America, they simply raised their prices to match the price of imported products, resulting in increased profits. The price of a refrigerator still hasn’t come down.

In 1976, President Gerald Ford tripled the import tax on sugar to win votes in the state of Louisiana (he lost). Within two years, the sugar market in the U.S. was in chaos. Sugar consumers looked for cheaper alternatives and discovered high-fructose corn syrup. Fifty years later, scientists have stated that we have an obesity epidemic in the U.S. and blame it, in part, on high-fructose corn syrup.

I was going to replace my 21-year-old car this year, but I think I’ll just get a tuneup and fix the brakes. Manufacturers will make one less car. I won’t be paying interest on a loan — the banks make less money. I won’t be paying higher insurance premiums — the insurance industry will suffer and the rest of you will pay higher premiums. It puts about 400 grams of carbon into the atmosphere for every mile I drive — what is that going to do to our planet 50 years from now?

Tariffs may be a good policy when foreign governments subsidize products then flood our markets with cheap goods. But to raise money, as Trump is using them, tariffs will ultimately fail as consumers find alternatives — with sometimes disastrous consequences.

Richard Crose, Bloomington

•••

Once again, this paper just shows one-sidedness of its coverage, the topic being tariffs. Will this paper ever become balanced and show all sides, or only show the side that it feels is politically correct? Strib Voices keeps publishing opinion pieces showing how bad tariffs are and how they’re going to hurt everybody and anybody. If you read this paper, it’s like no other country puts tariffs on any of our materials or products.

And I’m curious — why aren’t the beef farmers complaining about the tariffs that Thailand puts on us: 50% on American beef and 0% on Australian beef? Why is that, and why is that fair? How about American cars being sold in Germany, the tariff that’s placed on those versus what we put on German vehicles? And let’s talk about Canada, our so-called friend to the north — why are there restrictions on our dairy and farm products? If we go over the restrictions we’re hit with a major tariff.

So explain to me why it’s OK for our American companies to be penalized by other countries, but when we do it it’s the end of the world? I challenge this paper: Show what tariffs are in place in 2024 on American products going into other countries versus what tariffs the president is proposing.

Dave Zimmerman, Coon Rapids

•••

By declaring an emergency under the National Emergencies Act and raising tariffs to all-time highs, the president just delivered a massive gut punch to our economy and in particular, my retirement savings. Congress has the power to block these tariffs. Thanks to at least some Republicans in the Senate along with Senate Democrats (such as Sen. Amy Klobuchar), that is getting consideration (“GOP helps Klobuchar’s Canada resolution pass,” front page, April 3). In order for that effort to succeed, though, more Republicans in the Senate as well as the House need to support it. Clearly, doing so is in the interest of the American people. For many Republicans, however, that leaves them with a difficult choice. Either they act in the interest of the people who elected them, or they act in the interest of this president. November 2026 is coming.

Greg P. Olson, Eden Prairie

•••

Free trade? Gone. Alliances? Not anymore. Student visas? Tick off Trump and you’ll likely find yourself deported. Also, U.S. aid to overseas programs has been mostly eliminated. People now routinely boo our national anthem at hockey games played between U.S. and Canadian teams. In less than 100 days of Trump’s second term, he has effectively raised America’s drawbridge and given the rest of the world the proverbial middle finger. For Trump, the concept of “ally” is the same to him as “chump,” “loser” and “cheater.” Trump and his acolytes like to claim “America First.” In reality, it should be “Only America.”

The damage to America’s prestige is incalculable. As a nation we will likely be less well-off and more at risk in a dangerous world. How tragic it is that the gravest risk to America right now is the president himself, who has fully embraced xenophobia and isolationism.

Phillip Trobaugh, St. Paul

•••

Does it surprise anyone that POTUS didn’t place a tariff on Russian imports?

Robert Boyat, Minneapolis

The Trump administration admitted April 1 that they wrongfully sent a Maryland man to an El Salvador prison due to an “administrative error” (“ ‘Error’ sends migrant to notorious prison,” front page, April 3). But they now say they are unable to return the man, who was in the U.S. legally, because he is beyond the reach of U.S. jurisdiction, and no longer subject to U.S. court orders.

I am 75 years old, was born in the U.S., so I am by almost any definition a citizen. But I have criticized Trump. So I wonder what is to prevent ICE from making another “administrative error” that would result in me being sent to the prison in El Salvador, where ICE then says they are unable to retrieve me. If you aren’t frightened by the cruelty of this administration, you should be frightened by their sheer incompetence.

Leon Webster, St. Paul

•••

A Strib headline on April 2 was“ ‘Error ’ sends migrant to notorious prison.” The error is bad enough, but the administration’s response to it is outrageously immoral and irresponsible. The migrant was here legally and not guilty of anything that justifies deportation. The Justice Department claims it cannot use pressure to get him back because the victim is no longer in U.S. custody. Of course not. You sent him there. And being out of custody has not stopped this country before from negotiating with Russia or elsewhere to get back our innocent civilians. The administration’s response to the subsequent suit against it was that “Plaintiffs have not clearly shown a likelihood that Abrego Garcia will be tortured or killed.” Have they not seen with their own eyes how the prisoners in Venezuela have been treated so far? Undear officials, don’t wordsmith us. Act like you actually care about an innocent person to whom you owe maximum effort. Yeah, I’m angry, and we should all be.

Jim Bartos, Maple Grove

•••

I am horrified by the “administrative error” that allowed Kilmar Abrego Garcia to be deported to El Salvador’s notorious prison. How many other “errors” have there been or will there be? Also disturbing is that he is currently surrounded in the prison by gang members when his coming to the U.S. was to avoid recruitment into a gang. But most disturbing of all is the Justice Department’s lack of effort in ensuring his return, including saying they cannot use diplomacy or financial pressure to free him because it would threaten U.S. foreign policy and its relationship with an ally.

Where is the concern from the Trump administration regarding our relationship with our allies like Canada, Ukraine, NATO members and more who have been on the receiving end of threats, name calling, bullying and extortion? Where is the effort to right this terrible wrong? The hypocrisy and lack of compassion for humanity of this administration is truly concerning.

Colleen Eggerichs, Brooklyn Park