Former Labor Secretary: Here's How Trump Should Rebuild American Manufacturing
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The House of Representatives recently held a hearing that explored strengthening American manufacturing, specifically in the medical space. The congressional inquiry echoed President Donald Trump's "Made in America" agenda, which intends to ramp up domestic production of everything from cars and trucks to iPhones and computer chips.
But as this new landscape takes shape, returning to "peak" American manufacturing should not necessarily be the goal. The world looks very different today than it did in the 1970s, and so does our labor force. Policymakers should focus on making targeted investments—driven by smart tax incentives and reduced regulatory barriers—in key sectors that will help the country meet the strategic demands of the 21st century.
President Trump has made it clear he will provide incentives to American companies willing to reshore operations closer to home. But two sectors in particular—national defense and health care—require the most attention. That's because both are foundational to the country's long-term stability and resilience, yet remain concerningly reliant on foreign supply chains that are vulnerable to disruption and manipulation.
Take semiconductors. These chips power everything from smartphones to fighter jets, yet the vast majority of production occurs overseas in places like Taiwan. With COVID-19's supply chain disruptions fresh in our memory and China's growing hostility toward Taiwan, America should not be dependent on troubled areas for the technologies that underpin our defense systems.
The same applies to shipbuilding and aerospace. In April, President Trump signed an executive order to restore American maritime dominance by boosting domestic vessel production. The initiative not only reinforces our national defense infrastructure; it also presents a major opportunity to revitalize America's skilled labor force by bringing thousands of high-quality manufacturing and engineering jobs back to coastal and heartland communities alike.
US President Donald Trump (L) gestures as US Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta looks on as they speak to the media on July 12, 2019 at the White House in Washington, DC.
US President Donald Trump (L) gestures as US Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta looks on as they speak to the media on July 12, 2019 at the White House in Washington, DC.
Alastair Pike / AFP/Getty Images
Such a large-scale effort would rely on smaller manufacturers to supply key components and materials. Large manufacturers currently take up that spotlight. (The recent deal brokered between U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel is a prime example.) But for every large manufacturer willing to take part in the "Made in America" campaign, ten smaller manufacturers are lining up at the door.
Connecting small manufacturers to procurement pipelines—and reducing the regulatory burdens they face—would unleash a new level of innovation and coordination across the country.
Just as national defense requires a robust industrial foundation, so too does our health care system. In fact, a strong health care system is itself essential to protecting and defending the nation. The inevitable vulnerabilities of diversified global supply chains, coupled with China's focused efforts to invest in its own biomedical industries, leaves Americans exposed when diplomatic relationships sour or global crises strike.
Fortunately, the U.S. already has the infrastructure to bring pharmaceutical manufacturing home. States like Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are established industry hubs. Meanwhile, the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico—which currently boasts the second-largest pharmaceutical manufacturing output in the country—has long supported large-scale medicine production and is poised to continue to do so.
Incentivizing further investment in these areas must remain a top priority for the Trump administration. The White House's recent executive action to reduce regulatory barriers for pharmaceutical companies reshoring their operations is a strong start—but it shouldn't stand alone. The budget reconciliation package, now advancing in Congress, presents a key opportunity to pair these efforts with targeted, pro-growth tax incentives.
Cutting government red tape and lowering taxes can lay the foundation for a new golden age of American manufacturing.
Rebuilding American manufacturing, an idea with strong national support, is rightly a focus of President Trump and his allies in Congress. But rather than spreading resources thin to cast a wide net that lightly lifts production across the board, policymakers should focus their energy on restoring the production capacity of sectors critical to national security and Americans' health.
Alexander Acosta served as the 27th United States Secretary of Labor from 2017 to 2019.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
7 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Ford CEO Jim Farley Has a Clever Defense for Auto Tariffs
At a June 27 appearance at the Aspen Ideas Festival moderated by author and biographer Walter Isaacson, Ford CEO Jim Farley defended that some limited, targeted import tariffs could help the Blue Oval and other Detroit automakers survive and create more industrial jobs. Still, Farley said there needs to be a balance between a "fair playing field" to promote U.S. manufacturing while keeping cars affordable, which unfortunately will require importing components from other countries like Mexico. "What I like to say is, let's create a fair playing field for the finished vehicle. For parts, let us import parts from around the world," Farley said. "Let us keep Mexico stable, and other countries. That's what we're working with the administration on." The Ford figurehead's remarks at Aspen comes four months after he criticized President Trump's tariff policies at the same time Ford announced its Q4 and FY 2024 financial results in February, where he noted that they would create "a lot of cost and a lot of chaos," as duties on Mexican and Canadian imports "would blow a hole in the U.S. industry that we have never seen." However, he has slightly softened his position, noting that some protectionist measures could help promote American blue-collar industries, such as construction, manufacturing, agriculture, and skilled trades, to the next generation of skilled workforce instead of white-collar office work. He noted that the American workforce needs "to go back to the basics to trade schools" and that "we need to have a society that doesn't look down on people like that," adding that its factory in Germany participates in an apprenticeship program where students are exposed to an industrial environment "starting in junior high school." "What happens if you [the United States] have to defend yourself?" Farley told Issacson and the crowd at Aspen. "What, is Google going to make the tanks? We've talked a lot about energy independence, but we need to start talking about industrial independence. People do not realize how dependent we are as a country on making things in other countries." Farley pointed to the rare earth mineral crisis as an example. Over the last three weeks, Ford temporarily idled factories in the U.S. due to a shortage of magnets containing rare earth minerals, which are used in many different components. "We cannot get any high-powered magnets without China," Farley said. "We shut down plants for the last three weeks because we cannot get high-powered magnets. We can't make that stuff." As someone who graduated from a vocational high school, I see an inherent value in what Farley is saying. That's especially true as the topic of his conversation with the Steve Jobs and Elon Musk biographer turned to the Chinese EV market, where he mentioned that realizing the strength of the Chinese automotive industry was "the most humbling thing I have ever seen," adding that "seventy percent of all EVs in the world, electric vehicles, are made in China." However, I don't think that getting more people into the trades and into industrial environments is an end-all, be-all solution. As time evolves, technologies such as robotics and AI may have a larger role in industrial might; at least that is what Chinese companies like Xiaomi have been doing to scale up their car factories. Farley isn't wrong for wanting to try at least; however, there is more than what meets the eye on a topic where there is no straight solution. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Miami Herald
7 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Who is Senate parliamentarian? What to know about staffer Trump seeks to overrule
At the heart of the debate over the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' stands one little-known official: the Senate parliamentarian. The low-profile congressional official has been thrust into the spotlight after issuing a procedural decision on the GOP-backed spending bill, drawing sharp responses from some Republicans. President Donald Trump himself has even weighed in, calling for the 'unelected senate staffer' to be ignored. Who is the Senate parliamentarian? What powers do they have? And why are Republicans up in arms? Here is what to know. Who is the parliamentarian? The Senate parliamentarian is a nonpartisan advisor who makes recommendations to lawmakers regarding the interpretation of rules and precedents in the upper chamber. The role was established in 1935 amid the passage of a slew of New Deal-era laws, which 'expanded opportunities for procedural confusion and mischief,' according to Senate records. The parliamentarian is appointed by the Senate majority leader and serves at their pleasure, according to the National Constitution Center. The official's rulings are not necessarily final. The presiding officer of the Senate — typically the vice president or the president pro tempore — can simply ignore their advice, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. This has happened a few times in recent history, including in 2017, when GOP lawmakers changed Senate rules to allow Supreme Court nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority. That said, the Senate typically adheres to the parliamentarian's guidance, according to Time. This included in 2021, when the staffer rejected Democrats' attempt to include a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the 'Build Back Better' bill. Currently, the office of the parliamentarian is held by Elizabeth MacDonough, who has served in the position since 2012. She was appointed by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat. MacDonough formerly worked at the Senate library and as a trial attorney, according to the Wall Street Journal. She also advised former Vice President Al Gore during a recount dispute following the 2000 election. Why are Republicans upset? Some Republicans expressed outrage at the parliamentarian after she issued rulings on the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' which is currently being considered by the Senate, following its passage in the House in May. In late June, MacDonough ruled that a series of provisions in the bill violate the Senate's Byrd Rule, which prohibits 'extraneous' provisions from being included in budget reconciliation bills. One such provision would have charged immigrants a $1,000 fee to apply for asylum in the U.S., according to The Hill. MacDonough also ruled against several provisions that affect Medicaid. One was a proposed cap on provider taxes, which states use to fund Medicaid, according to CNBC. Another would block noncitizens from accessing Medicaid in addition to other health programs, according to USA Today. In response to these proposed changes, multiple GOP lawmakers telegraphed their frustration with MacDonough. 'The WOKE Senate Parliamentarian, who was appointed by Harry Reid and advised Al Gore, just STRUCK DOWN a provision BANNING illegals from stealing Medicaid from American citizens,' Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a Republican from Alabama, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on June 26. 'THE SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN SHOULD BE FIRED ASAP.' Rep. Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, also singled out MacDonough for criticism. 'How is it that an unelected swamp bureaucrat, who was appointed by Harry Reid over a decade ago, gets to decide what can and cannot go in President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill?' he wrote on X. He then called on Vice President JD Vance — using his power as the presiding officer in the Senate — to ignore the proposed changes. Trump appeared to concur with this view. 'Great Congressman Greg Steube is 100% correct,' he wrote on Truth Social on June 29. 'An unelected Senate Staffer (Parliamentarian), should not be allowed to hurt the Republicans Bill. Wants many fantastic things out. NO!' However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, poured cold water on the push to sideline MacDonough. When asked by Politico about overruling her on June 26, Thune said, 'No, that would not be a good option for getting a bill done.' Meanwhile, other Republicans have defended MacDonough. North Carolina Sen. Thom Thillis, who recently announced he will not seek reelection, called her a 'straight shooter,' according to Reuters. And Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy told reporters, 'Nah, never overrule the parliamentarian.'
Miami Herald
7 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Minnesota agriculture institute joins lawsuit against USDA to save grant funding
WASHINGTON - A Minnesota agriculture group says the Trump administration's canceling of so-called DEI grants in farm country broke the law and imperiled a food network initiative's future, in a federal lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia. The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in Minneapolis joined other farm sector non-profits who said last week in a lawsuit that the U.S. Department of Agriculture slashed grants for DEI - diversity, equity and inclusion - haphazardly and without individual review, violating federal law. The grants are intended to promote DEI efforts, from a San Francisco Bay Area initiative to boost LGBTQ and multiracial farmers to a New York soil health program. In Minnesota the IATP's grant for $111,695 to finance the MinnieAg Network, including tools for bridging farmers with food and ag industry officials, was terminated just six months from the finish line. That forced the organization to spend $30,000 from its own pocket to finish the grant's goals. "The abrupt and unexpected cancelation of our grant comes at a critical juncture just before we were planning to finalize our 'Farm and Food Systems 101′ resources to make this information available to all," said Erin McKee VanSlooten, Community Food Systems program director at IATP. VanSlooten said the cuts amount to "negating" 18 months of work, and she worries about the program's future. Upon taking office in January, President Trump signed a flurry of executive orders aiming to root out government funding for equity, sustainability and diversity programs under the charges that such programs were discriminatory or wasteful. According to the ag groups' lawsuit, when USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins posted to X that she'd cancelled a grant in the Bay Area to "educate queer, trans and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about food justice," she said her agency would refocus around "American farming, ranching and forestry." The lawsuit alleges staff at USDA did not properly review programs and the agency could not revoke funding previously granted. The plaintiffs cover a wide swath of agriculture groups working to build pathways for non-traditional farmers to enter the industry, improve soil health and build climate and food resilience. One nonprofit's grant work aimed to build more trees in cities to provide buffers from the heat. Another sought to teach producers about no-till farming. The lawsuit names USDA, Rollins and other Trump administration officials, including the acting director of the Department of Government Efficiency. In a statement, a USDA spokesperson said they would not comment on pending litigation. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
