Sep 8, 2017

By Stephen Gray, Area Development The volume of rules and policies with which manufacturers need to comply is onerous — cutting into their competitiveness and growth opportunities. The U.S. manufacturing industry is a force to be reckoned with. From its emergence during the Industrial Revolution in 1820, the sector has experienced repeated blows from the Great Depression to the Great Recession more recently. Despite these setbacks coupled with a highly evolving global industry, U.S. manufacturing has shown its resilience. Modern manufacturing is thriving across America. The fact remains that manufacturing has much more potential, if certain hurdles weren’t in the way. Among the top challenges manufacturers face are regulatory concerns, an inequitable tax system when compared with certain other countries, and, in some cases, unfair subsidies provided to certain industries by foreign governments. Manufacturers recognize that a safe working atmosphere and healthy environment are ensured through regulation. But, the complexity of regulations often results in duplicative, poorly designed and thus ineffective rules adding an unnecessary burden to manufacturing operations. Since 1981, the federal government has issued at least one manufacturing-related regulation each week. The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has found that the industrial sector faces a staggering 297,696 restrictions on their operations from federal regulations. Is the federal government overstepping its intended power? Rules and policy within reason are valuable, but will the U.S. economy begin to falter if the rate of regulation continues to rise? Notably, no regulations have been eliminated. With the sheer volume of new rules and policies to keep up with, manufacturers are not able to focus on competitiveness and growth opportunities, factors that feed into a prosperous economy. The Burden Manufacturing Faces The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued the majority of rules that impact industrial productions across the United States. While environmental issues are vital to the future of humanity, some flaws exist that counter the real benefits. American companies and associations, including U.S. Steel Corporation and the American Petroleum Institute, have openly voiced how regulatory burdens prevent building and expansion opportunities. Valero Energy Corporation, which is a member of the American Fuels and Petrochemicals Manufacturers Association, has pointed out that its manufacturing operations are “significantly impacted by the inefficiencies of...

By: National Association of Manufacturers Manufacturers recognize 296 members of congress for their support of pro-manufacturing policies On October 2, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) announced that 248 members of the House of Representatives and 48 senators received the NAM Award for Manufacturing Legislative Excellence. This is a record year for the number of members who voted in support of pro-manufacturing policies and demonstrates the understanding from our policymakers how important manufacturing is to our economy. Unfortunately, gridlock prevented Congress from acting on the major reforms manufacturers need to turn around our economic slowdown. “Manufacturing is front and center, and with more members of Congress than ever before supporting the manufacturing agenda, we have an opportunity to drive economic growth,” said NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons. “The choice we face now is whether we continue down a path of uncertainty and risk falling in the fiscal abyss or pursue a thriving manufacturing economy that encourages investment and jobs here in the United States.” These awards are based on members of Congress’s votes on key manufacturing legislation identified by the NAM in the 112th Congress. These included key votes on issues such as energy policy, taxes and regulations, among others. Each key vote was selected by the NAM’s Key Vote Advisory Committee, which is comprised of NAM member companies and associations. Members of Congress are notified in advance when key votes are pending and why the key vote designation has been made. The NAM is nonpartisan and does not endorse candidates. Voting records for all members of Congress and further details about NAM Key Manufacturing Votes are available...

By: Malia Spencer, Pittsburgh Business Times In a dispute filed with the World Trade Organization the Obama administration is taking on China and that country’s trade practices regarding parts for the auto industry. On Monday, the U.S. filed a “request for consultations” which is the first step in the WTO dispute process. This starts a 60-day clock where officials from the U.S. and China can talk and try to find a solution without further litigation, according to the WTO website. If these consultations fail, the dispute can be decided by a WTO panel. The U.S. contends China is offering illegal subsidies to export products in China’s auto parts industry. Groups such as the Alliance for American Manufacturing, which is a partnership formed between manufacturers and the United Steelworkers, and the AFL-CIO have issued statements in support of the move. “The facts in the case are indisputable. China is subsidizing its auto parts sector, blocking our exports, and causing significant harm to workers and businesses in our nation. Our auto assembly sector, now back on its feet, could be undercut by China’s cheating, causing irreparable damage to the heart of America’s productive economy,” said Scott Paul, executive director of Alliance for American Manufacturing, in a written statement. “Auto parts makers in America have already seen the effects of 25 percent surges in Chinese imports over each of the past two years.” Local companies, both large and small, have been pushing lawmakers to crack down on China’s trade policies and its currency...

By: Michele Nash-Hoff, Can American Manufacturing Be Saved On August 23rd, the Economic Policy Institute released a briefing paper, “The China Toll ─ Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost more than 2.7 million jobs between 2001 and 2011, with job losses in every state, written by Robert Scott. “Between 2001 and 2011, the trade deficit with China eliminated or displaced more than 2.7 million U.S. jobs, over 2.1 million of which (76.9 percent) were in manufacturing. These lost manufacturing jobs account for more than half of all U.S. manufacturing jobs lost or displaced between 2001 and 2011.” The growing trade deficit with China has been a prime contributor to the crisis in U.S. manufacturing employment. When you take into account the multiplier effect of manufacturing jobs creating 3-4 other jobs, this explains why we have had a virtually jobless recovery since the end of the recession and why the unemployment rate has stayed so high for so long. The growing trade deficit between China and the United States since China entered the World Trade Organization in 2001 has had a disastrous effect on U.S. workers and the domestic economy. It has cost jobs in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. “A major cause of the rapidly growing U.S. trade deficit with China is currency manipulation. Unlike other currencies, the Chinese yuan does not fluctuate freely against the dollar.Instead, China has tightly pegged its currency to the U.S. dollar at a rate that encourages a large bilateral trade surplus with the United States.” China’s currency should have increased in value as its productivity increased, which would have created balanced trade. But, the yuan has remained artificially low as China acquired dollars and other foreign exchange reserves to further depress the value of its own currency. The paper explains “To depress the value of its own currency, a government can sell its own currency and buy government securities such as U.S. Treasury bills, which increases its foreign reserves.” As a result of pressure for action on China’s currency manipulation, the Ryan-Murphy Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act (H.R. 2378) was approved by the House of Representatives on September...

By: Mark Shortt, Design-2-Part Many issues are at stake as the 2012 U.S. Presidential election approaches. Both candidates for President–the incumbent Pres. Barack Obama and the presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney–know that a healthy and growing U.S. manufacturing sector is vital to the success of the U.S. economy. But only time will tell whose leadership will better enable American manufacturers to thrive. No matter whom you’re supporting, the election will help set the stage for a good deal of political confrontation and, perhaps, compromise on many important policy issues over the next four years. For manufacturers, the question is not so much “Who will win the election?” as it is “Will manufacturing win?” The answer will depend not just on who’s elected President, but on the composition of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Most important, it will hinge on how well the two houses can work together to craft policies that will support manufacturers by lightening corporate tax burdens (especially for companies that are bringing manufacturing operations back to the U.S.), increasing the available pool of qualified workers, strengthening our nation’s resources for research, development, and innovation, and eliminating unfair international trade practices. But in order for manufacturing to win, both houses of Congress will need to work together more effectively to enact legislation that has been shown to have wide public support. An example is H.R. 639, the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, a bipartisan bill that would “crack down on Chinese currency manipulation by giving the United States the power to respond appropriately to unfairly subsidized exports from countries,” such as China, according to a statement released last September by the office of Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), who co-authored the Senate version of the bill with Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME). The bill seeks to “amend title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify that countervailing duties may be imposed to address subsidies relating to a fundamentally undervalued currency of any foreign country.” The bad news is that the bill, which has languished in the House since being introduced in February 2011, has only a “2% chance of being enacte,” according to GovTrack.us, an online tool for following legislation...