Could the cost of coffee rise due to tariffs?
Congresswoman Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii.) launched the first-ever 'Congressional Coffee Caucus' Tuesday morning.
'I am very caffeinated,' Tokuda said at the caucus launch, where Kona coffee was served.
She's not alone.
'Did you know that over 70% of us drink coffee every single day?' National Coffee Association President William Murray asked.
Murray joined lawmakers for the launch of the new caucus, aimed at being a voice for the coffee industry in Congress.
'In Hawaii, we're the only coffee-growing state, really, that has been able to brand it for over 200 years in the country,' Tokuda said.
Most of the coffee in America is imported from countries like Brazil and Colombia. Lawmakers say new tariffs on those countries could make your coffee more costly.
'For many consumers, that's going to hit their pocketbook quite significantly,' Tokuda said.
Congressman Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.) says it's all the more reason to buy American.
'This is an American grown product right from our 50th state, Hawaii that doesn't have to be subject to any of that stuff, and it's really good,' LaMalfa said.
Tokuda says the tariffs will also hit Hawaii's coffee industry through other production costs.
'Fertilizer, equipment, supplies, much of it has to be, if not all of it, has to be literally cargo shipped in,' Tokuda said.
Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) says she expects prices to go up on lots of products.
'Whether it's coffee, whether it's bananas, whether it's automobiles. This is going to be an enormous burden on our working families,' Dexter said.
Congressman LaMalfa has a different perspective on tariffs.
'Nobody really wants to have to deal with them, but if it shakes things up a little bit, or a lot, then maybe it's a good tool,' LaMalfa said.
Some lawmakers have proposed legislation to re-assert Congress's authority in imposing tariffs, but it's not moving forward.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Airlines say AI won't set fares by passenger. Experts aren't so sure.
Cruising Altitude is a weekly column about air travel. Have a suggestion for a future topic? Fill out the form or email me at the address at the bottom of this page. It's no secret that airline pricing can be opaque and confusing to many travelers – even to experts. When I spoke to William J. McGee, senior fellow for aviation and travel at the American Economic Liberties Project, we joked that one of the worst questions an aviation expert can get asked at a party is, 'how do I find a good deal on airfare?' The answer is usually best represented by the shrugging emoji: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ However, flight pricing is getting a renewed round of attention after Glen Hauenstein, president of Delta Air Lines, acknowledged on the company's earnings call last month that the airline is testing a new AI tool to help set its fares. Panic from consumers, advocates and even lawmakers naturally ensued as the specter of a new way for corporations to squeeze every penny out of us appeared on the horizon. For now, Delta (and other airlines) insist that they're not using AI to make prices truly individualized, but as technology gets more sophisticated, the already-dynamic pricing model used in the aviation industry is likely to get more granular. How do airlines price tickets today? Again, I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 'This is such an opaque process, there is so much that we don't know about what they know about us,' McGee said. Airlines acknowledge using some of our personal data in setting prices even now but say that such information is used only in the aggregate, not to tailor fares to individual travelers. In a letter to senators after last month's earnings call, Delta Air Lines' Executive Vice President of External Affairs, Peter Carter, explained how the carrier does and doesn't use passenger data for setting prices. 'There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data. ... Our AI-powered pricing functionality is designed to enhance our existing fare pricing processes using aggregated data,' the letter said. 'Given the tens of millions of fares and hundreds of thousands of routes for sale at any given time, the use of new technology like AI promises to streamline the process by which we analyze existing data and the speed and scale at which we can respond to changing market dynamics.' Still, McGee said airlines have a history of testing the limits of price differentiation. 'It's really a much longer story going back 20 or 25 years at least. The technology has improved for them, and that has increased the airline industry's ability to tailor surveillance pricing, individualized pricing,' he said. For now, Delta says it's just using AI technology to streamline the work of its human analysts, who ultimately set and file its fares. Kyle Potter, editor of Thrifty Traveler, a travel and flight deal website, said it makes sense that airlines don't have the technical capability right now to target prices at specific passengers, because the system airlines use to file their fares relies on outdated technology. 'The technology in how airlines set fares and distribute them to their own website and other third-party sites, is really a roadblock to offering truly individualized airfare,' he said. 'There's no way to weave in the massive amount of data that airlines have or could have into offering a truly dynamic set of prices that varies from person to person. That's just not possible today at any kind of scale that I'm aware of.' How could AI be used for airline pricing in the future? For a third time I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ There are just too many variables to be sure about how all this will develop. 'Where we're at right now is that we're going to come to look at Delta's comments last month to investors as a trial balloon for just how far Americans would be willing to go to accept some level of personalized pricing,' Potter said. 'The answer, at least for the last month, has pretty clearly been not at all.' Delta, which is the poster child for pricing developments in the airline world right now, insists it has no intention to ever set truly individualized prices. 'There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data,' Carter's letter said. But McGee, who works as a consumer advocate, said it's important for both passengers and regulators to not get complacent as predictive pricing technology gets more powerful. 'It's going to be very hard, but it's necessary, for regulators and legislators to get their hands around this and understand it,' he said. 'It's not unimaginable that if this goes unchecked and there's not action by Congress or (the Department of Transportation), we may all be paying a different fare for the same flight within a few years. That's going to be a tough thing to undo.' Potter agreed with McGee's assessment. 'I think what we saw this year, what we've seen again and again and again over the last several decades is that airlines will do whatever it takes to charge people the highest fares possible within the constraints of the technology that they currently have,' he said. 'The global airline industry has been trying to push towards a future of personalized airfare. Just because there's a backlash now doesn't mean this isn't going to happen eventually.' Last week's Cruising Altitude: Travel tips every senior should know for stress-free flights How do I find the best airfares? For one final time, I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Airfares are subject to change at any time, and the prices are set by people working in a black box behind a curtain. In general, the advice experts have always given me is to trust your gut. If you feel like you're getting a good deal on airfare when you look for flights, you probably are. Also: it's a good idea to leverage consumer-facing price prediction tools, like those available on Google Flights, Expedia and other airfare aggregators. Zach Wichter is a travel reporter and writes the Cruising Altitude column for USA TODAY. He is based in New York and you can reach him at zwichter@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Could AI make your plane ticket more expensive than your neighbor's?
USA Today
3 minutes ago
- USA Today
Kim Jong Un's sister calls South Korea 'faithful dog' of Washington
SEOUL/WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - North Korea is stepping up criticism of South Korea's new President Lee Jae Myung as he prepares for his first summit with President Donald Trump, calling Lee's efforts to engage with Pyongyang a "pipedream". Since taking office in a snap election in June, the liberal Lee has taken steps to lower tensions with the nuclear-armed North, and the issue is one where he is expected to find common ground with Trump, who still boasts of his historic summits with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. But North Korea's envoys have yet to accept any of Trump's latest letters, and Kim's powerful sister, Kim Yo Jong, has issued a steady stream of dismissive statements rejecting and ridiculing Lee's overtures. "Lee Jae Myung is not the sort of man who will change the course of history," she told a gathering of North Korean diplomats, state news agency KCNA reported on Wednesday. She called South Korea a "faithful dog" of Washington, accused Lee of speaking gibberish, and said his government maintains a "stinky confrontational nature…swathed in a wrapper of peace". More: Meet Kim Yo Jong, the sister of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un Kim said the Lee administration is pursuing a two-faced policy of engagement as well as threatening joint military drills with the United States, which bases around 28,500 troops in South Korea as a legacy of the 1950-1953 Korean War. Leader Kim Jong Un has ordered his diplomats to take "preemptive counteraction" against enemy states, the KCNA report said, without providing details. In response to her statement, South Korea's presidential office said the administration would open a new era for joint growth with North Korea, and its recent measures were meant for the stability and prosperity of both Koreas. South Korea and its ally the United States kicked off joint military drills this week, including testing an upgraded response to heightened North Korean nuclear threats. More: North Korea's Kim Jong Un vows to win anti-US battle as country marks Korean War anniversary Earlier this week, Kim Jong Un said that the joint U.S.- South Korea drills were an "obvious expression of their will to provoke war" and that his country needed to rapidly expand its nuclear armament. North Korea has surged ahead with more and bigger ballistic missiles, expanded its nuclear weapons facilities, and gained new support from its neighbours. "The North Korean leader sees little need to engage with Washington since he is receiving far more substantial benefits from Russia with fewer conditions than he could attain from the United States," said Bruce Klingner, a former U.S. intelligence analyst now with the Mansfield Foundation. Still, Kim could eventually respond to Trump in the hopes of providing the American president the "illusion of success though it would do nothing to actually reduce the North Korean threat to the U.S. and its allies," he said. North Korea in recent years has also changed its policy toward the South, dismissing the idea of peaceful unification and called Seoul a main enemy. Lee this week ordered his cabinet to prepare a partial step-by-step implementation of existing agreements with North Korea, and South Korea has begun removing loudspeakers that had been blaring anti-North Korea broadcasts along the border. "There's nothing new here and it's not going to get them anywhere," said Jenny Town, managing director Washington-based North Korea project 38 North. More: North Korea wired an agent $2M to smuggle weapons, tech and disguises out of California If anything of substance is discussed at the summit it will likely be the joint drills, which Trump scaled back during his first term, Town said. (Reporting by Joyce Lee in Seoul and David Brunnstrom in Washington; additional reporting by Ju-min Park; Writing by Josh Smith; Editing by Stephen Coates and Michael Perry)
Los Angeles Times
3 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
California Republicans push Democrats on transparency, timeline for redistricting
SACRAMENTO — California's push to redraw the state's congressional districts to favor Democrats faced early opposition Tuesday during legislative hearings, a preview of the obstacles ahead for Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies as they try to convince voters to back the effort. California Democrats entered the redistricting fray after Republicans in Texas moved to reconfigure their political districts to increase by five the number of GOP members of Congress after the 2026 midterm elections, a move that could sway the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections. The proposed map of new districts in California that could go before voters in November could cost as many as five Golden State Republicans their seats in Congress. In Sacramento, Republicans criticized Democrats for trying to scrap the independent redistricting process approved by voters in 2010, a change designed to remove self-serving politics and partisan game-playing. GOP lawmakers argued that the public and legislators had little time to review the maps of the proposed congressional districts and questioned who crafted the new districts and bankrolled the effort. In an attempt to slow down the push by Democrats, California Republicans filed an emergency petition at the California Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats violated the state Constitution by rushing the bills through the legislature. The state Constitution requires lawmakers to introduce non-budget bills 30 days before they are voted on, unless the Legislature waives that rule by a three-fourths majority vote. The bills were introduced Monday through a common process known as 'gut and amend,' where lawmakers strip out the language from an older pending bill and replace it with a new proposal. The lawsuit said that without the Supreme Court's intervention, the state could enact 'significant new legislation that the public has only seen for, at most, a few days,' according to the lawsuit filed by GOP state Sens. Tony Strickland of Huntington Beach and Suzette Martinez Valladares of Acton and Assemblymembers Tri Ta of Westminster and Kathryn Sanchez of Trabuco Canyon. Democrats bristled at the questions about their actions, including grilling by reporters and Republicans about who had drawn the proposed congressional districts that the party wants to put before voters. 'When I go to a restaurant, I don't need to meet the chef,' said Assembly Elections Committee chair Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz). Democrats unveiled their campaign to suspend the independent redistricting commission's work Thursday, proposed maps of the redrawn districts were submitted to state legislative leaders Friday, and the three bills were introduced in the legislature Monday. If passed by a two-thirds vote in both bodies of the legislature and signed by Newsom this week, as expected, the measure will be on the ballot on Nov. 4. On Tuesday, lawmakers listened to hours of testimony and debate, frequently engaging in testy exchanges. After heated arguing and interrupting during an Assembly Elections Committee hearing, Pellerin admonished Assemblymembers Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) and David Tangipa (R-Clovis). 'I would like you both to give me a little time and respect,' Pellerin said near the end of a hearing that lasted about five hours. Tangipa and the committee's vice chair, Assemblywoman Alexandra Macedo (R-Tulare), repeatedly questioned witnesses about issues that the GOP is likely to continue to raise: the speed with which the legislation is being pushed through, the cost of the special election, the limited opportunity for public comment on the maps, who drew the proposed new districts and who is funding the effort. Tangipa voiced concerns that legislators had too little time to review the legislation. 'That's insanity, and that's heartbreaking to the rest of Californians,' Tangipa said. 'How can you say you actually care about the people of California? Berman dismissed the criticism, saying the bill was five pages long. In a Senate elections committee hearing, State Sen. Steve Choi (R-Irvine), the only Republican on the panel, repeatedly pressed Democrats about how the maps had been drawn before they were presented. Tom Willis, Newsom's campaign counsel who appeared as a witness to support the redistricting bills, said the map was 'publicly submitted, and then the legislature reviewed it carefully and made sure that it was legally compliant.' But, Choi asked, who drew the maps in the first place? Willis said he couldn't answer, because he 'wasn't a part of that process.' In response to questions about why California should change their independent redistricting ethos to respond to potential moves by Texas, state Sen. Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) was blunt. 'This is a partisan gerrymander,' she said, to counter the impacts of Trump administration policy decisions, from healthcare cuts to immigration raids, that are disproportionately impacting Californians. 'That's what we're talking about here.' Her comments prompted a GOP operative who is aiding the opposition campaign to the ballot measure to say, 'It made me salivate.' California Common Cause, an ardent supporter of independent redistricting, initially signaled openness to revisiting the state's independent redistricting rules because they would not 'call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarianism.' But on Tuesday, the group announced its opposition to a state Senate bill. 'it would create significant rollbacks in voter protections,' the group said in a statement, arguing that the legislation would result in reduced in-person voting, less opportunities for underrepresented communities to cast ballots and dampens opportunities for public input. 'These changes to the Elections Code ... would hinder full voter participation, with likely disproportionate harm falling to already underrepresented Californians.'
