Latest news with #Neiman
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
What happens when the Freedom Caucus takes control?
CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Up until five years ago, Wyoming House Speaker Chip Neiman was focused on cows and hay — not RINOs. That changed when neighbors asked the rancher to consider getting involved in Republican precinct politics. He remembers a contentious early meeting with Republicans complaining about 'RINOS.' 'Why are we talking about African animals?' he whispered to someone next to him. Neiman was a quick study on 'Republicans in name only,' growing irked by GOP legislators whose votes deviated on the party's core issues. That led him to run for the Wyoming House and join the hard right Freedom Caucus, which he sees as following true conservative Republican ideals. There are plenty of voters in his state who agree: Wyoming now has the only state legislative chamber in the country controlled by the Freedom Caucus. 'This isn't a flash in the pan,' Neiman said during an interview in his office here in the state Capitol. Five years ago, the legislature had eight Freedom Caucus members. That grew over the past two election cycles to 42 out of 62 House members today. Meanwhile, Democrats are an endangered species in Cheyenne, holding just six seats in the chamber. With a supermajority, the Freedom Caucus in its first legislative session was able to adopt bills that will reshape daily life in Wyoming, from launching a universal school voucher program that directs taxpayer dollars to pay for private, home, and religious education options to eliminating most gun-free zones and approving a substantial property tax reduction. The Freedom Caucus also passed legislation aimed at limiting illegal immigration and transgender rights. It wasn't all smooth sailing, acknowledges Neiman, pointing to a Senate that doesn't have the same Freedom Caucus power behind it and a sometimes reticent Republican Gov. Mark Gordon, who allowed some bills to become law without his signature. And Wyoming's conservative lawmakers know it's the next legislative session that will put them to the test. That's when they'll have to wrangle a state budget at the same time the Trump administration is slashing federal funds and roiling the economy with on-again-off-again tariffs. Neiman says he's not concerned about the challenges, and expects other states will see more Freedom Caucus members joining the legislative ranks. 'I pray for their success, because obviously there are people in those districts that voted those people in and that want to have their voice heard,' said Neiman. 'They have a responsibility.' This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. Has it been difficult operating within the system after the Freedom Caucus here and across the country has for so long worked on the sidelines? There's just a bunch more people in here that have a much more conservative mindset — a more Republican platform mindset — than there have been for a lot of years. A big part of the success of the Freedom Caucus is that a lot more people are becoming involved in the process. There's a lot of folks who are very frustrated with the direction of their legislatures. States are bracing for how the Trump tariffs and federal cuts will trickle down to them. How is it affecting Wyoming and are there areas in the state that might be disproportionately impacted? Tariffs have identified a situation where we're relying on other countries to provide resources that we can produce here cheaper. Fuel is one. So the American consumer — me as a farmer, buying my diesel — if I'm going to continue to buy out of that plant in Montana that has a pipeline to Canada, I'm going to be paying for those tariffs. It creates additional costs to all of our operating expenses in that part of the country, which increases the cost of food. The frustrating part to me is that we have now identified our dependence on outside countries for things that we should be and should have been taken care of here at home. … Why in the world are we allowing another country like China to say, 'I'll send you something?' Until more products are produced in the U.S., how does Wyoming anticipate dealing with tariffs? We really haven't seen the effects of the tariffs here so far. Yet we are seeing an exponential increase in mining and exploration. We are seeing a reinvigoration of companies coming in to invest in Wyoming, because we do have coal, we do have oil. We have natural gas, uranium mining up in my part of the country [near Devil's Tower National Monument], it's just exploding. You can't find a drilling rig to drill a water well because they're all out there drilling holes for uranium mining. As cuts are made at the federal level, what do you say to a family struggling to make ends meet? Just hang in there. And just know that as things get high, they're going to hit a point where prices will come back down. … I'll tell people that are on lower income abilities that right now there's a massive regrowth of the cow numbers in the United States, which means people are retaining heifers. … We are going to successfully over produce for the market, and we're going to see a drop. And that's just how it works. So patience is a virtue, and it's hard to do when things are tight. We're already seeing the price of oil decline. And what that translates into is the costs of goods and services, and the input costs are going down. So people are going to actually be able to have more money in their pocket. What about Medicaid cuts? I don't see there being cutbacks on children, the elderly and infirm. What they are cutting back on is basically able-bodied adults. But Wyoming didn't take federal money (for Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act) so it won't be affected. Has it been difficult to work with GOP lawmakers who aren't in the Freedom Caucus? Not really. The big push is, how do you work with people that disagree with you — whether they're Republican or Democrat? As the speaker of the House, my job is to try to be able to listen, to try to work through differences that we can and to find common ground. Now, there's other things that I can't find common ground with. There's this real pushback and almost a resentment for holding Republicans (not just the Freedom Caucus) accountable for their votes, holding people accountable for their Republican stance. … You say you're a Republican. But when you go down to the Legislature and you vote a completely different way, to me, that's a lack of integrity. You're just using the R as a vehicle to get where you want into a position of power. You started your legislative session hoping to pass a handful of bills related to elections, immigration and education and you succeeded. Did you have to adjust to get them through? All those passed. One of them, [to restrict] voter identification, just got challenged. Wyoming was the first state in the union to pass U.S. citizenship to vote, and got a shout out from President Trump. I think it was only logical that you should be a Wyoming resident, be a U.S. citizen before you can vote. It was not difficult to get them passed in the House. They were very, very solid on that. The Senate took a little longer, but they got it passed and got it through. The big thing was waiting for our governor to sign it, which he ultimately did not — so it went into law without his signature. We overrode five vetoes, which was almost unheard of. … Our governor's, I mean, I work with people that are wrong all the time. I get along with him. We try to meet with him at least once a week, he or his people. State Freedom Caucuses are often criticized for taking their marching orders from the national Freedom Caucus. Did you do that to get bills passed? Absolutely not. But I don't go out of my way to try to reinvent the wheel. If I see a piece of legislation in another state that makes sense, we'll bring the bones of that here and try to shape it to fit Wyoming statutes. What do you say to Freedom Caucus members in the 49 other states? I pray for their success, because obviously there are people in those districts that voted those people in and that want to have their voice heard. They have a responsibility. I don't know if I would call them necessarily the conscience of the Republican Party, but if you're standing on the Republican Party platform of your state, voted on by the grassroots people, then I don't know what better place to stand other than the word of God. … I would encourage them to stay the course and make sure that integrity is the hallmark of your work, and that you listen to the people that elected you, and that you protect our Constitution and our Bill of Rights and know that that's what it's about.
Politico
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Politico
What happens when the Freedom Caucus takes control?
CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Up until five years ago, Wyoming House Speaker Chip Neiman was focused on cows and hay — not RINOs. That changed when neighbors asked the rancher to consider getting involved in Republican precinct politics. He remembers a contentious early meeting with Republicans complaining about 'RINOS.' 'Why are we talking about African animals?' he whispered to someone next to him. Neiman was a quick study on 'Republicans in name only,' growing irked by GOP legislators whose votes deviated on the party's core issues. That led him to run for the Wyoming House and join the hard right Freedom Caucus, which he sees as following true conservative Republican ideals. There are plenty of voters in his state who agree: Wyoming now has the only state legislative chamber in the country controlled by the Freedom Caucus. 'This isn't a flash in the pan,' Neiman said during an interview in his office here in the state Capitol. Five years ago, the legislature had eight Freedom Caucus members. That grew over the past two election cycles to 42 out of 62 House members today. Meanwhile, Democrats are an endangered species in Cheyenne, holding just six seats in the chamber. With a supermajority, the Freedom Caucus in its first legislative session was able to adopt bills that will reshape daily life in Wyoming, from launching a universal school voucher program that directs taxpayer dollars to pay for private, home, and religious education options to eliminating most gun-free zones and approving a substantial property tax reduction. The Freedom Caucus also passed legislation aimed at limiting illegal immigration and transgender rights. It wasn't all smooth sailing, acknowledges Neiman, pointing to a Senate that doesn't have the same Freedom Caucus power behind it and a sometimes reticent Republican Gov. Mark Gordon, who allowed some bills to become law without his signature. And Wyoming's conservative lawmakers know it's the next legislative session that will put them to the test. That's when they'll have to wrangle a state budget at the same time the Trump administration is slashing federal funds and roiling the economy with on-again-off-again tariffs. Neiman says he's not concerned about the challenges, and expects other states will see more Freedom Caucus members joining the legislative ranks. 'I pray for their success, because obviously there are people in those districts that voted those people in and that want to have their voice heard,' said Neiman. 'They have a responsibility.' This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. Has it been difficult operating within the system after the Freedom Caucus here and across the country has for so long worked on the sidelines? There's just a bunch more people in here that have a much more conservative mindset — a more Republican platform mindset — than there have been for a lot of years. A big part of the success of the Freedom Caucus is that a lot more people are becoming involved in the process. There's a lot of folks who are very frustrated with the direction of their legislatures. States are bracing for how the Trump tariffs and federal cuts will trickle down to them. How is it affecting Wyoming and are there areas in the state that might be disproportionately impacted? Tariffs have identified a situation where we're relying on other countries to provide resources that we can produce here cheaper. Fuel is one. So the American consumer — me as a farmer, buying my diesel — if I'm going to continue to buy out of that plant in Montana that has a pipeline to Canada, I'm going to be paying for those tariffs. It creates additional costs to all of our operating expenses in that part of the country, which increases the cost of food. The frustrating part to me is that we have now identified our dependence on outside countries for things that we should be and should have been taken care of here at home. … Why in the world are we allowing another country like China to say, 'I'll send you something?' Until more products are produced in the U.S., how does Wyoming anticipate dealing with tariffs? We really haven't seen the effects of the tariffs here so far. Yet we are seeing an exponential increase in mining and exploration. We are seeing a reinvigoration of companies coming in to invest in Wyoming, because we do have coal, we do have oil. We have natural gas, uranium mining up in my part of the country [near Devil's Tower National Monument], it's just exploding. You can't find a drilling rig to drill a water well because they're all out there drilling holes for uranium mining. As cuts are made at the federal level, what do you say to a family struggling to make ends meet? Just hang in there. And just know that as things get high, they're going to hit a point where prices will come back down. … I'll tell people that are on lower income abilities that right now there's a massive regrowth of the cow numbers in the United States, which means people are retaining heifers. … We are going to successfully over produce for the market, and we're going to see a drop. And that's just how it works. So patience is a virtue, and it's hard to do when things are tight. We're already seeing the price of oil decline. And what that translates into is the costs of goods and services, and the input costs are going down. So people are going to actually be able to have more money in their pocket. What about Medicaid cuts? I don't see there being cutbacks on children, the elderly and infirm. What they are cutting back on is basically able-bodied adults. But Wyoming didn't take federal money (for Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act) so it won't be affected. Has it been difficult to work with GOP lawmakers who aren't in the Freedom Caucus? Not really. The big push is, how do you work with people that disagree with you — whether they're Republican or Democrat? As the speaker of the House, my job is to try to be able to listen, to try to work through differences that we can and to find common ground. Now, there's other things that I can't find common ground with. There's this real pushback and almost a resentment for holding Republicans (not just the Freedom Caucus) accountable for their votes, holding people accountable for their Republican stance. … You say you're a Republican. But when you go down to the Legislature and you vote a completely different way, to me, that's a lack of integrity. You're just using the R as a vehicle to get where you want into a position of power. You started your legislative session hoping to pass a handful of bills related to elections, immigration and education and you succeeded. Did you have to adjust to get them through? All those passed. One of them, [to restrict] voter identification, just got challenged. Wyoming was the first state in the union to pass U.S. citizenship to vote, and got a shout out from President Trump. I think it was only logical that you should be a Wyoming resident, be a U.S. citizen before you can vote. It was not difficult to get them passed in the House. They were very, very solid on that. The Senate took a little longer, but they got it passed and got it through. The big thing was waiting for our governor to sign it, which he ultimately did not — so it went into law without his signature. We overrode five vetoes, which was almost unheard of. … Our governor's, I mean, I work with people that are wrong all the time. I get along with him. We try to meet with him at least once a week, he or his people. State Freedom Caucuses are often criticized for taking their marching orders from the national Freedom Caucus. Did you do that to get bills passed? Absolutely not. But I don't go out of my way to try to reinvent the wheel. If I see a piece of legislation in another state that makes sense, we'll bring the bones of that here and try to shape it to fit Wyoming statutes. What do you say to Freedom Caucus members in the 49 other states? I pray for their success, because obviously there are people in those districts that voted those people in and that want to have their voice heard. They have a responsibility. I don't know if I would call them necessarily the conscience of the Republican Party, but if you're standing on the Republican Party platform of your state, voted on by the grassroots people, then I don't know what better place to stand other than the word of God. … I would encourage them to stay the course and make sure that integrity is the hallmark of your work, and that you listen to the people that elected you, and that you protect our Constitution and our Bill of Rights and know that that's what it's about.
The Independent
09-04-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Trump ‘got it very wrong' over tariffs, says economist used by US president
A renowned economist who co-wrote research used by Donald Trump to justify his aggressive tariff hikes says the White House got it 'very wrong'. University of Chicago Economics Professor Brett Neiman, who was also a Biden administration Treasury official, said the Trump administration wildly overcalculated tariff rates placed on nearly all countries that export to the U.S. The U.S. Trade Representative released its workings and cited a paper produced by four economists, including Prof Neiman, supposedly supporting its approach. 'But it got it wrong. Very wrong. I disagree fundamentally with the government's trade policy and approach,' the professor wrote in a guest essay for The New York Times. 'Even taking it at face value, our findings suggest the calculated tariffs should be dramatically smaller — perhaps one-fourth as large.' Neiman said there are numerous mistakes with the new tariff regime, which has placed tariffs of at least 10 per cent of nearly all exporters to the U.S., and up to 50 per cent on some countries with large trade surpluses. The sweeping tariffs caused stock market chaos on Monday and led to calls from billionaire allies including Bill Ackman to call for a rethink, but Trump dismissed the turmoil, saying 'sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something'. Neiman said the biggest mistake with the tariffs is the fact that the Office of the Trade Representative said they were calculated at levels that would eliminate trade deficits, because that was not a reasonable goal. 'Trade imbalances between two countries can emerge for many reasons that have nothing to do with protectionism,' he said. He highlighted the trading relationship with Sri Lanka as an example: Americans spend more on Sri Lankan-made clothing than the South Asian country spends on American drugs and gas turbines, and that reflects differences in development and resources. 'The deficit numbers don't suggest, let alone prove, unfair competition,' Prof Neiman said. While there are some arguments for reducing the overall trade deficit - which is when the value of a country's imports exceeds the value of its exports - Neiman said it made little sense to apply this on a country-by-country basis. The economist also pointed out that the reciprocal tariffs would not even achieve this goal, particularly given the broad nature of the changes. 'A large tariff on Japanese auto parts could cause an increase in demand for imports from Mexico and vice versa. And the tariffs clearly invite retaliation and may over time increase the dollar's value, both factors that would most likely depress US exports,' he said. Ignoring both of those problems, Neiman said even the calculation used to formulate the tariffs, including the part using the research he co-authored, was incorrect. Based on the research he conducted with Alberto Cavallo, Gita Gopinath, Jenny Tang, Neiman said they estimated that domestic importers would bear a 95 per cent increase (pass through) in prices: 'In simple terms, that implies that the price paid for U.S. imports would rise almost as much as the tariff rate.' But he said the Trump administration used a different figure to calculate the rate of pass through, using a rate of 25 per cent. 'Where does 25 percent come from? Is it related to our work? I don't know. The reciprocal tariffs have enormous implications for workers, firms, consumers and stock markets around the globe. But the methodology note offers shockingly few details,' Prof Neiman said. He said the tariffs should be scrapped entirely, but barring that: 'the administration should divide its results by four'.
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
CNN Rolls Out Schoolroom Prop to Prove Trump's ‘Cascade of Mistakes' on Tariffs
On CNN's OutFront Tuesday, anchor Erin Burnett turned to a white board to help illustrate an economist's point that the Trump administration erroneously cited a paper he co-authored when it tried to justify sweeping tariffs. Burnett spoke with University of Chicago professor Brent Neimen, who was perplexed by the president's move when he first learned about it last week. Neimen would later pen a New York Times op-ed saying that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 'got it wrong.' On Tuesday, Neimen, a former Treasury Department official in the Biden administration, shared his theory of how the administration butchered his research. 'They they billed it as a reciprocal tariff, so, you know, what I was expecting is that they would look at what other countries charge as tariffs to the United States, and if there are two, three, four percentage points higher, we might try to bridge that gap with a reciprocal tariff of our own, and maybe they would look also at non-tariff barriers, et cetera,' Neiman said. 'But they did nothing of the sort. The main issue with these tariffs is that they define them such that they would eliminate bilateral trade deficits between the United States and every trade partner that we have in the world, one by one, where we run deficits.' Neiman added later that under the current method, 'you're instead going to come up with something that can do real harm to Americans, and I think to the whole world.' Experts quickly figured out that Trump's tariffs were calculated by dividing the trade deficit the U.S. has with a country by the value of that country's imports. As Neimen described it, 'It's a mistaken philosophy to even try to calculate reciprocal tariffs the way that they did.' The professor added that the more he read into the administration's reasoning—or lack thereof—'there was what I would characterize as a cascade of of mistakes making these tariffs even broader and even bigger.' When Burnett presented Neiman the administration's formula, which resulted in Japan being slapped with a 46 percent tariff, for instance, Neiman took issue with one value that the administration plugged into it. His change resulted in a different dividend: only 12 percent. 'I don't even know' how the administration came up with the value which led to the 46 percent tariff, Neiman said.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump Team Made a Critical Math Error When Calculating Extreme Tariff
The Trump administration's calculations justifying the most consequential tariff scheme of the last century are all wrong. In an op-ed for The New York Times published Monday, economist Brent Neiman, whose research was used to justify the White House's implementation of reciprocal tariffs, wrote that the White House fundamentally misunderstood his work. 'My first question, when the White House unveiled its tariff regime, was: How on earth did it calculate such huge rates?' Neiman wrote in the op-ed. 'The next day it got personal.' Shortly after the Trump administration announced its plan to implement tariffs of 10 percent or more on 90 countries—which it claims will eliminate the trade deficit but has only spurred global economic chaos—the Office of the United States Trade Representative published its methodology for the tariff calculations, citing a paper by Neiman and four other economists. 'But it got it wrong. Very wrong. I disagree fundamentally with the government's trade policy and approach,' Neiman wrote. 'But even taking it at face value, our findings suggest the calculated tariffs should be dramatically smaller—perhaps one-fourth as large.' So if the White House had done the math right, and wanted its absurd trade plan to actually work, 20 percent tariffs should have been … 5 percent. That wasn't the only mistake, Neiman pointed out. The Trade Office claimed its reciprocal tariff calculations would eliminate trade deficits with each American trading partner. Neiman concluded that is not a 'reasonable goal.' 'Trade imbalances between two countries can emerge for many reasons that have nothing to do with protectionism.… There are some reasonable arguments in favor of reducing the overall trade deficit, such as to reduce risks from our debt. But these arguments don't apply country by country,' Neiman wrote, further exposing the White House's lack of reasoning. Even if all trade deficits are eliminated (which Neiman points out is basically impossible), reciprocal tariffs still won't work. 'The administration's tariff formula assumes that a tariff placed on one country won't affect imports from any others and ignores any implications for exports,' Neiman said. 'These assumptions may work for an action against one small trade partner, but not for the broad salvo announced last week.' Neiman went on to decimate pretty much every justification the Trump administration has provided for tariff implementation, including its selective picking and choosing of his research results to support its claims. 'As a result of these and other methodological choices, Wednesday's reciprocal tariffs will bring average tariff rates to their highest level in over 100 years. I would strongly prefer that the policy and methodology be scrapped entirely. But barring that, the administration should divide its results by four.' Neiman concluded, a grim reminder of the economic chaos yet to come.
