BISMARCK, N.D. - On President Trump’s “Liberation Day” last month, he argued non-tariff trade barriers are often more damaging to America’s competitiveness than actual tariffs imposed by foreign governments. He rightly called out unfair practices like currency manipulation, export subsidies, and intellectual property theft. But one often-overlooked offense stands out: lax environmental standards, enforcement, and compliance.

In his remarks, the President blasted other countries for accusing America of committing environmental crimes and demanding that our producers pay for damages for which they were not responsible. U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, penned an op-ed in RealClearEnergy, arguing for an America First approach to foreign pollution, and that the rules we impose on ourselves reflect our stewardship values. If countries want access to our markets they should abide by our standards, and we shouldn’t devolve to theirs. 

Foreign Pollution & PROVE IT

If Countries Want Access to Our Markets, They Must Abide By Our Standards

RealClearEnergy – May 19, 2024

On President Trump’s “Liberation Day,” he argued non-tariff trade barriers are often more damaging to America’s competitiveness than actual tariffs imposed by foreign governments.  

The President called out several unfair practices used to create an artificial advantage in trade – currency manipulation, export subsidies, intellectual property theft, exorbitant value-added taxes, and unfair rules. But one often-overlooked offense stands out: lax environmental standards, enforcement, and compliance. He is right to pinpoint this disparity as it undermines U.S. competitiveness and directly harms the wellbeing of Americans.

Emissions from industrial activities across the Pacific, particularly in China, contribute up to 30% of surface ozone and 20% of fine particulate matter in the western U.S., making it more difficult for states to meet their air quality targets under the Clean Air Act. In addition, mercury pollution from coal-fired plants in Asia accounts for 20 to 40% of mercury deposition in the West.

If American facilities fail to comply with our environmental statutes, a state’s federal highway funds can be withheld, or strict regulatory constraints impacting the permitting and investment of new industrial facilities could be imposed. This is why U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin recently announced the removal of red tape that placed excessive burden on states’ ability to prove their pollution problem was linked to foreign sources. He understands Americans should not be punished for another country’s’ pollution.

U.S. companies work hard to meet EPA requirements. They spend hundreds of billions on environmental compliance, with our manufacturing and energy-intensive sectors bearing the highest burden. A National Association of Manufacturers’ report found the average U.S. producer pays over $10,000 per employee annually on meeting environmental standards.

When a regulation’s costs outweigh its public benefits, it should be eliminated. But Americans live by the old Boy Scout adage to “leave this world a little better than you found it.” We want safe environments for our workers, clean air and water, and for our innovators to create more efficient ways to produce more in America. The rules we impose on ourselves reflect our stewardship values. If countries want access to our markets they should abide by our standards, and we shouldn’t devolve to theirs. 

“Free-trade-at-any-cost” idealogues portend all commodities are created equal, as if there isn’t intrinsic value in where a product is made. In their mind, a barrel of Russian or Iranian oil is the same as one out of North Dakota or Alaska, or a rod of Chinese steel is no different than one out of Cleveland or Pittsburgh. Never mind these foreign producers are dirtier, use their profits to promulgate foreign wars, and exploit abhorrent labor standards.

In his remarks, the President blasted other countries for accusing America of committing environmental crimes and demanding that our producers pay for damages for which they were not responsible.   

He’s right to decry this hypocrisy and I’m committed to working with him to hold overseas polluters accountable.

Last Congress, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) and I introduced the PROVE IT Act, which would require the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop a dataset to compare the relative carbon efficiency of U.S. production to our foreign competitors. Existing data compiled by the Climate Leadership Council already shows the United States has a clear carbon advantage over its competitors. While the idea of using carbon as a metric might confuse those who seek to punish overseas producers for traditional pollutants, it serves as an excellent proxy for actual emissions. 

On paper, China’s environmental regulatory regime appears reasonable, but enforcement and compliance suffer from corruption that results in cheating. Chinese companies, especially coal-fired power plants and heavy industries, have been documented turning off or bypassing pollution scrubbers to cut costs. Our bill requires DOE to strictly review foreign data to make sure this type of cheating isn’t tolerated.

The President is right to focus on the effects of unfair trade practices to level the playing field. An America First approach on foreign pollution, however, can do much more – it can rewrite the script on how conservatives view U.S. environmental progress.

Paired with effective trade measures that hold overseas polluters accountable, we can monetize the superior environmental performance of our workers and industry and protect public health. At the same time, we can create a durable and transparent trade agenda that not only encourages domestic investment in manufacturing but also cleans up the global environment. 

Global demand for virtually everything is growing. If we want cleaner, more secure supply chains, we won’t get there by punishing ourselves. The solution is recognizing our excellence and making more in America!

President Trump gets this. But first, we need the comparative emissions data authorized by the PROVE IT Act to determine the scope of this unfair trade practice and to help understand the impact of foreign pollution on America.