Rebuilding American Manufacturing Through Executive Orders

December 17th, 2024

President Trump has the authority to take significant action to rebuild American manufacturing through executive orders. By utilizing his executive powers, President Trump can implement various strategies to support and enhance the manufacturing sector in the United States.  In my article, “What do Manufacturers Need to Succeed and Grow?, I highlighted several policies that would help rebuild American manufacturing.  This article points out some actions that President Trump could take to rebuild American manufacturing through executive orders:

Protect Manufacturers from Unfair Trade Practices:  In his first term, President Trump used executive orders to implement tariffs on imports from certain countries. Trump has said he would fulfill a campaign promise to levy tariffs on imports from America’s biggest trading partners immediately. 

During his presidential campaign, Trump promised to impose between a 10 and 20 percent blanket tariff on all $3 trillion worth of U.S. goods imports and at least a 60 percent tariff on all Chinese goods.

In a Truth Social post  on November 25, 2014, Trump promised to implement 25 percent tariffs on Day One on all goods from Canada and Mexico until they clamp down on drugs and migrants crossing the border. He also promises an additional 10 percent tariff on all Chinese goods unless China implements the death penalty for all drug dealers linked to fentanyl.

By continuing to use tariffs strategically, President Trump could protect American industries from unfair competition and create a level playing field for domestic manufacturers.

Reduce Regulatory Burdens: President Trump could issue executive orders aimed at streamlining regulations that hinder the growth of American manufacturing. By cutting red tape and eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens, businesses would be able to operate more efficiently and invest in expanding their manufacturing capabilities.

President Trump could end the Biden administration’s “electric vehicle mandate.” Biden’s EPA implemented limits on climate pollution from passenger cars, pushing for electric vehicles to make up two-thirds of new car sales by 2032.

Provide Access to Affordable Energy:  President Trump could keep a campaign promise he made during a speech in Michigan to “declare a national emergency to allow us to dramatically increase energy production” in an effort to reduce energy costs.  On Day One, he could issue an Executive Order to  “approve new drilling, new pipelines, new refineries, new power plants, new reactors and  slash the red tape.”  His oft-stated campaign vow to “drill, baby, drill” and “frack, frack, frack” would open up all American sites for oil drilling and fracking.

In a campaign speech on May 11, 2024, Trump swore he would end offshore wind projects on Day One,  “They ruin the environment, they kill the birds, they kill the whales.”

Promote Buy American Policies: President Trump could issue an executive order prioritizing the use of American-made products in federal procurement and infrastructure projects. By mandating the use of domestically produced goods, the demand for American manufacturing would increase, leading to the growth of the sector.

In addition to these important actions, President Trump could use executive orders to do the following:

Invest in Workforce Development: Establish programs that promote workforce development in the manufacturing industry. By providing funding for training programs and apprenticeships, the administration could ensure that the American workforce has the skills needed to drive innovation and growth in manufacturing.

Support Research and Development: Increase funding for research and development in key manufacturing sectors, such as advanced manufacturing, robotics, and clean energy. By investing in innovation, the administration could help American manufacturers stay competitive in the global market.

Establish Manufacturing Task Forces: President Trump could create executive orders to establish task forces or councils dedicated to addressing the challenges facing the American manufacturing sector. These task forces could bring together industry leaders, policymakers, and experts to develop strategies and initiatives to support the growth of manufacturing in the United States.

By taking decisive action through executive orders, President Trump has the opportunity to revitalize American manufacturing and strengthen the country’s economic resilience. Through a combination of policies that promote domestic production, support workforce development, and encourage innovation, the administration can help rebuild American manufacturing and create a more prosperous future for the industry.

Posted in General | No Comments »

Reclaiming American Manufacturing: Take Back the Middle Class from Globalism

December 4th, 2024

Several years ago, I met Bill Waddell at a Lean Frontiers conference where we were both guest speakers. We kept in touch via LinkedIn and he recently sent me a message about his new book, titled Reclaiming American Manufacturing.  His topic was so closely related to the topic of my last book, Rebuild Manufacturing – the key to American Prosperity that I was anxious to read it to see how he proposed to accomplish our common goal.

After reading his book, we had a short conversation via Zoom about how U.S. manufacturing has been devastated in the past 30 years, along with the devastation of the middle class.  His book explains how we got here, and what it will take to set things right again. He draws from his experiences in a long career at the management level of several manufacturers, both domestic and foreign, as well as his experience as a manufacturing transformation consultant in the U.S. and Germany. He started his career in manufacturing in 1978 when he went to “work for a window and cabinet hardware manufacturer, Amerock, in Rockford, IL – which had recently been acquired by Anchor Hocking.” He said he loves everything about manufacturing, and I told him, “I do, too,” and I started as an engineering secretary at age 18 for a company that made electronic and electrical components and assemblies.

I asked why he wrote the book at this time in his life, and he said, “I had some health problems in the last year so I had the time to do it. For the first time, I wasn’t spending all my time in airports.  Also, rebuilding manufacturing is what both candidates were saying.  I thought it would be timely to put my two cents in from the standpoint of someone who was a manufacturing guy. I don’t know a lot about philosophy or economics, but I thought I could contribute to the discussion from the standpoint of someone who knows a lot about how manufacturing really works and how the decisions are really made about why we are going to build a plant in China rather than the U.S. and why we were not going to move it back.  I thought I had a unique perspective.  It hurts me personally to remember the glory days of manufacturing. I live in the Midwest, and every town around me has empty factories. I know what it could be and what it used to be. I think it is an important issue economically and not only hurts me, but my children and grandchildren. If we are not going to be a manufacturing nation, they will not have the quality of life that I have had.

We shared our experiences with the effects of NAFTA.  Because I read, write, and speak Spanish, I used to sell to the maquiladoras in Baja California prior to NAFTA, but it became too complex and time consuming to continue after NAFTA went fully in effect.  He said he learned the implications of NAFTA when he worked for McCulloch Corporation’s chain saw factory in Tucson, AZ that had a plant in Sonora, Mexico.  He was “troubled by the openly abusive labor practices” he encountered and “by the poverty of the employees.”

He said that when he worked as a consultant at plants owned by American companies in China, “working conditions were often wretched, and worker safety was often non-existent.”  I said that while I had never been to China, I had described the horrible working conditions in a chapter titled, “What Are the Effects of Industrialization on China and India,” in my first book, Saving U.S. Manufacturing, based on the research I had done.

Bill said that he was “very well acquainted with the people in manufacturing, from American middle managers to Chinese machinists to German engineers to Mexican electrical harness assemblers.”

In his chapter, “Hollowing Out the Middle Class,” he points out that “According to the U.S. Census Bureau, manufacturing jobs pay an average of a little over $61,000 a year.  If we look at a weighted average of the Health, Education, Hospitality and Transportation jobs that replaced them, it is only $43,000 and change.  For all practical purposes, 11 million people took an $18,000 a year pay cut – 30% – and went from the solid middle class to the high end of the lower class.”

I agreed with what he wrote in that same chapter about the “big financial winners in the NAFTA and Ch8ina trade deals have been the big multi-national manufacturers and the banks supporting them [whereas] 95% of American manufacturers are small or medium sized, most with one location, and privately owned – usually a single owner or a family business.”

I resonated with the points he made about NAFTA and the World Trade Organization in his chapter titled “Bill Clinton: Globalist in Chief.” He mentions that Clinton had his work cut out to get NAFTA passed by Congress.  While the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate, more Republicans than Democrats supported it.    He “garnered enough Democrat support to get it passed” with “a pledge to enter into side agreements with Mexico to assure their protection of the environment and human rights to get it done.  They continued to promise that NAFTA” would create as many as a quarter of a million American manufacturing jobs.”

Bill wrote that this proved to be a lie because “By the time Clinton left office in 2001, 6 million American manufacturing jobs were gone, and the US trade balance was in a steep dive.”

He then describes how President Clinton “set about putting US policy and leadership in line with the World Trade Organization – WTO – in 1995” and then in the year 2000, “Clinton attained membership for China in the WTO (essentially giving them what used to be known as ‘most favored nation’ status).”

After defining globalism vs. nationalism in his chapter of the same name, he made a very astute observation: “The old Democrat Part no longer exists. It would be more accurately called the ‘Globalist Party. And the old Republican Party no longer exists. It would be more accurately called the ‘Nationalist Party.’” He states that the globalist ideology that “people, goods, and information ought to be able to cross national borders unfettered” to create a new economic order in the world explains everything from free trade agreements to climate change.

He then dissects David Ricardo’s Theory of comparative Advantage in his chapter titled “Giving Ivy League Degrees to the Illiterate.” He asserts that “they all seem to have missed Recardo’s fundamental principle and explains that “the Theory of Comparative Advantage is not about cheap labor or cheap production – it is about productivity, as it must be.” He concludes, “If global trade is based on sending work to the places where workers are the worse paid, the collapse of the economies in the developed national is inevitable.”

In his chapter “The Economists New Clothes,” he writes, “The intellect behind globalism comes from a fairly tightknit group. The Ivy League, Stanford, MIT, Oxford and a handful of other ‘elite’ schools make up the core of it.” He writes, “The problem isn’t a lack of intellect. It is lack of any real-world exposure or experience.”  As a result, “the elite schools have not been in touch with or contributed anything meaningful to manufacturing since the 1980s…”  He asserts, “The very notion that the Industrial Revolution has ended, or ever will end, is absurd…Manufacturing in this day and age is a very high-tech endeavor not just in a few select highly automated factories – all of it.”  I told him that this is what I have been asserting in every article I’ve written in the past 20 years.

In his chapter, “It’s a Matter of Principle as Much as Economics, he describes the oppressive working conditions, human rights abuses, and air and water pollution of the low-cost labor countries like China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and India.  He comments, “No one should be surprised that the same countries that have a wretched track record of abusing human rights have atrocious air and water quality, and have their people living in dire poverty, struggling just to eat.”  He concludes that “Every transaction requires a willing seller and a willing buyer. In globalizing manufacturing, unaccountable leaders were the willing sellers of their countries’ human and natural resources to the willing buyers at the multi-national companies.”

His last two chapters provide his solutions for reclaiming American manufacturing, two of which are so unique that I couldn’t do justice to summarizing his explanation of them.  I want to make learning about them an incentive to buy and read his whole book.  It will be well worth you time and money.  You can buy his book from Amazon.

Posted in General | No Comments »

What do Manufacturers Need to Succeed and Grow?

November 12th, 2024

Now that we have re-elected President Trump for a second term to work on achieving his goal of Making America Great Again, it’s time to focus on how to rebuild America’s manufacturing industry because we can’t be great again without a strong domestic manufacturing industry.

My book, Rebuild Manufacturing – the Key to American Prosperity, provides detailed ways to rebuild American manufacturing based on my over 40 years in the manufacturing industry.  As a start on the path to rebuilding American manufacturing, here are a few suggestions on what manufacturers need to succeed and grow:

 Restoration of Patent Rights

 Manufacturers mainly fall into one of three groups:

 Original Equipment Manufacturers – selling a finished product such as a motor vehicle, ship, airplane, satellite, etc.

Suppliers – manufacturing a component, subsystem, or assembly for a finished product, such as a motor, power supply, semiconductor, etc.

Fabricators – perform a manufacturing process to make a particular part or assembly for a finished product such as an enclosure, bracket, panel, gasket, seal, etc. 

During my career, I have worked for OEMs and suppliers, but currently represent fabricators as a sales rep.  Each of these manufacturers requires a unique selling point (USP) or unique value proposition (UVP) that is part of a company’s marketing strategy to inform customers about how their brand, product, or service is superior to its competitors.

One or more patents are often an important component of the USP/UVP for products, components, and subsystems incorporating new technologies. While fabricators rarely have patents, many have trade secrets covering their manufacturing processes.

 My previous blog articles have shown how patent rights have been eroded by the America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011 and why patent rights must be restored to help technology-based companies have the strong patent protection they need to be successful. The threat of having their patent invalidated by the Patent Review and Trial Board (PTAB) established by the AIA is discouraging inventors from applying for a patent, and they are going to other countries to get their patents.  In addition, the lack of secure patent rights is also hindering the willingness of angel investors to invest in new technologies for startup companies. We must also continue to protect trade secrets because China uses espionage to steal both patented technologies and trade secrets.

 Protection from Unfair Trade Practices

In an increasingly interconnected global economy, American manufacturers face significant challenges, particularly from China’s trade practices. As concerns over unfair trade continue to rise, it’s crucial to understand the implications these practices have on U.S. businesses and the broader economy. Common examples of mercantilist trade practices by China are:  currency manipulation, rampant intellectual property theft, product dumping (selling products at below-market prices), and government subsidies for Chinese companies.  These unfair trade practices have created an uneven playing field. According to the U.S. Trade Representative, these practices have contributed to a substantial trade deficit with China, severely impacting American manufacturing sectors.

 Several industries have borne the brunt of these practices. For instance, the U.S. steel industry has faced aggressive pricing from Chinese manufacturers, which has led to factory closures and job losses across the country. In the textile sector, similar patterns have emerged, where Chinese imports flood the market at prices that domestic producers cannot match, resulting in significant downturns in American jobs.

The U.S. government has implemented various measures to counteract these unfair practices, such as tariffs and trade negotiations to foster fair competition. Addressing unfair trade practices is essential for the survival and growth of American manufacturing. We need fewer imports and more domestic production. Now is the time to take a stand and implement strategies that ensure a fair playing field for American manufacturers. The following strategies should be considered:

  • Establish Tariffs on all Chinese Products – read my previous article on “Why we Need Tariffs on Chinese Products”
  • Strengthening Enforcement of Trade Laws: Increasing the capacity of trade enforcement agencies to investigate and combat unfair practices can deter such actions.
  • Promoting Domestic Production: Incentives for manufacturers to produce locally can help rebuild industries affected by unfair competition.

 Access to Affordable Energy

In the modern manufacturing landscape, access to affordable energy is not just a necessity; it is a fundamental pillar of success. As industries strive to remain competitive in a global market, the cost of energy can significantly impact operational efficiency, profitability, and innovation. Energy costs represent a substantial portion of manufacturing expenses. From powering machinery to heating facilities, energy consumption is intrinsic to production processes. When energy prices rise, manufacturers face difficult choices: pass costs onto consumers, reduce labor, or cut back on investment in technology and innovation. These decisions can hinder growth and competitiveness.

Lower energy costs can lead to reduced overall production expenses, enabling companies to offer more competitive pricing and improve profit margins. For example, industries such as steel and chemicals, which are energy-intensive, benefit tremendously from stable, low-cost energy sources. This advantage can be a deciding factor for companies considering where to locate new facilities or expand existing operations.

Affordable energy is also crucial for fostering innovation. Manufacturers need access to reliable energy sources to invest in new technologies and processes that enhance efficiency and reduce waste. By keeping energy costs low, regions can attract and retain manufacturing businesses, leading to job creation and economic development.

Access to affordable energy is vital for the health and growth of the manufacturing industry. It influences operational efficiency, competitive advantage, innovation, and job creation. Policymakers, industry leaders, and communities must work together to foster an environment where affordable energy is a reality for all manufacturers.

 Reasonable Corporate Tax Rates

Tax policies that govern businesses can significantly influence manufacturers’ operational success and growth potential. Reasonable corporate tax rates are essential not only for maintaining profitability but also for fostering innovation and job creation.  Manufacturers often operate on thin margins, making it crucial to manage costs effectively. Lower tax liabilities provide manufacturers with the capital needed to expand operations, upgrade equipment, and develop new products.

High corporate tax rates can place an additional financial burden on these businesses, reducing their ability to reinvest profits into operations, technology, and workforce development. When manufacturers are forced to allocate a significant portion of their earnings to taxes, they may struggle to remain competitive, especially against international rivals with lower tax obligations. In a global marketplace, manufacturers often compete not only with domestic companies but also with foreign firms that may benefit from more favorable tax regimes.

By implementing reasonable corporate tax rates, governments can level the playing field, allowing American manufacturers to compete effectively against their international counterparts. This is particularly important in industries where price competitiveness is key to success.

Reasonable corporate tax rates can stimulate investment in the manufacturing sector. For example, when businesses have more disposable income, they are more likely to invest in research and development, which is essential for driving innovation and maintaining a competitive edge in the market.

To support the manufacturing sector, policymakers must consider tax reforms that prioritize reasonable corporate tax rates. This can include reducing rates, closing loopholes that disproportionately benefit large corporations, and creating incentives for small and medium-sized manufacturers. A balanced approach to taxation can foster a more equitable environment that encourages growth and investment across the sector.

Reasonable corporate tax rates are crucial for the health and vitality of the manufacturing industry. They enable manufacturers to invest in growth, create jobs, and compete effectively on a global scale. As policymakers consider tax reforms, it is essential to recognize the significant role that reasonable taxation plays in supporting American manufacturers and, by extension, the broader economy. A commitment to fair corporate tax rates will help ensure a robust and thriving manufacturing sector for years to come.

Regulatory Relief in Manufacturing

The burden of overregulation can stifle the potential of manufacturers, hindering productivity and competitiveness. Overregulation refers to the imposition of excessive or unnecessarily complex rules and standards that can burden businesses. For manufacturers, compliance with these regulations often requires significant time, resources, and financial investment. This can divert attention away from core operations, stifling creativity and limiting growth opportunities.

Excessive regulations can make it difficult for U.S. manufacturers to keep pace with competitors who operate in more business-friendly environments. Lowering the regulatory burden can enhance competitiveness, allowing manufacturers to focus on innovation and efficiency.

The costs associated with compliance can be substantial. From hiring specialized staff to implementing new technologies for regulatory adherence, manufacturers often find their budgets stretched thin. This financial strain can lead to higher product prices, which may result in lost sales and reduced market share. A more streamlined regulatory environment can foster a culture of innovation, allowing companies to focus on creating cutting-edge solutions that meet market demands.

While regulations are essential for ensuring safety, environmental protection, and fair labor practices, it is crucial to strike a balance. Policymakers should engage with industry leaders to understand the unique challenges manufacturers face and develop regulations that protect public interests without imposing undue burdens. Streamlining regulatory processes, simplifying compliance requirements, and providing clarity in regulations can significantly benefit manufacturers. A collaborative approach to regulation that prioritizes both public welfare and the needs of manufacturers will pave the way for a robust and resilient manufacturing sector.

Manufacturing is not only vital for the U.S. economy but also plays a crucial role in driving innovation, job creation, and economic prosperity. Manufacturing provides millions of Americans with jobs, both directly in manufacturing plants and indirectly through supporting industries such as logistics, finance, and technology. Manufacturing has a vast supply chain that includes raw materials, components, and finished goods, supporting a wide range of businesses and services across the country. The manufacturing sector is a hub of innovation and research and development (R&D), driving technological advancements and creating new products and processes that can benefit various industries.

Manufacturing exports contribute significantly to the U.S. trade balance, helping to generate revenue and create a favorable balance of trade. The manufacturing sector often leads to economic growth by attracting investment, generating tax revenue, and increasing productivity. Most importantly, a robust manufacturing sector is essential for national security, as it ensures domestic production of critical goods and reduces reliance on foreign sources during times of crisis.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Economy, General, Manufacturing, Patent Reform, Taxes/Regulations, Trade Policy | No Comments »

Why We Need Tariffs on Chinese Imports

October 22nd, 2024

On Friday, October 18th, Sean Hannity interviewed Kevin O’Leary, one of the investors on Shark Tank, regarding his opinion of tariffs.  O’Leary has been such a strong proponent of free trade in the past.  In fact, even though I enjoy hearing about new inventions and products presented by the inventors and entrepreneurs on the program, I stopped watching the program because I was disgusted by how often they recommended that the product be manufactured in China. 

Therefore, I was astonished when Mr. O’Leary expressed his support for the tariffs President Trump has proposed, saying that tariffs are a good negotiating tool.  I didn’t have the ability to record his interview on Hannity’s show, so could only take notes. Thus, I can only paraphrase what he said instead of quoting him word for word.  Mr. O’Leary said that right now we don’t have a level playing field for trade with China. so, tariffs would be a way to level the playing field.  He shared that one of the companies in which he had invested went to China to manufacture their product. They spent about $400,000 on tooling, and everything was fine until the product volume got up to about five million. Then, a knock-off of the product made with their tooling appeared on the market under another company’s name and sold for 2/3 of their price. 

He said that nearly every company is wholly or partially owned by the Chinese government and they subsidize some of the costs of these companies to capture foreign markets.  He again said that tariffs would be a good way to fight against China’s unfair trade practices and level the playing field.

It was gratifying to see that someone of his stature in the industry has finally experienced what we in the marketing and sales trenches for American-made products and manufacturing services have been experiencing for over 20 years. I am just surprised that it took so long for him to come to this conclusion.

It only took a couple of years after China was granted Most Favored Nation status in the year 2000 to start seeing an unprecedented pruning of companies in the San Diego region because of the unlevel playing field we experienced in competing against Chinese companies. Buyers that weren’t willing to use vendors in the Midwest or East Coast were willing to go to China on the other side of the world to save money. Sourcing in China became the “in thing” to do.

It became more difficult for the American manufacturers we represented to compete against China, especially for the higher volume work to make plastic injection molded parts or die cast parts for commercial markets.  Our success became more and more limited to Original Equipment manufacturers making products for the military and defense industries that mandated “Buy America” as well as the lower volume work for niche commercial markets.  Sometimes, the quoted Chinese price was equal or a little more than what our American manufacturer had to pay for just the material to make the part. 

I started to keep a record of the companies that moved out of state or had gone out of business starting in January 2001 from my own database of customers and prospective customers. By 2003, I had documented 85 companies that had gone out of business, moved out of California, or sourced their manufacturing out of the country, mostly in China. I contacted the Chambers of Commerce of the other 17 cities in San Diego County and found out that none of them were tracking this data.

However, the loss of companies didn’t make the headlines in San Diego news because they were nearly all smaller companies with fewer than 50 employees.

In the spring of 2003, several legislators with whom I had campaigned for state assembly in the year 2000 asked me to provide them with the list of companies that were moving out of California. I turned the list into a report in an effort to make these legislators and other key policy makers aware of the seriousness of what was happening. I emailed this first report in March 2003 to legislators, local elected officials, industry leaders, and the local news media. The report got attention from a local radio talk show host, Roger Hedgecock, who immediately invited me to be a guest on his show. I prepared two more reports later that year and was invited on his show after each report was released.

I electronically published (e published) two to three reports a year from 2003 – 2010 and became a regular guest on the Roger Hedgecock show and a featured guest on several other regional radio shows. I also started writing opinion blog articles once or twice a month that were published by a local online news line and emailed to my own Constant Contact database.

My list had grown to nearly 200 companies by 2007, and I realized that this phenomenon was not just happening in San Diego or California, but was affecting the manufacturing industry in all of the United States. It became my passion to do what I could to save manufacturing in America because I firmly believe that if we don’t save manufacturing, we will lose our middle class as manufacturing jobs are the foundation of the middle class. That’s when I started to write my book, Can American Manufactur8ing be Saved? Why we should and how we can, which was published in 2009.

In addition to chapters that covered a brief history of manufacturing for 1790 to the present day and the role unions played in shaping American’s industrialization, I covered what was happening to manufacturing, what had been the effects of outsourcing offshore, why we should save American manufacturing, and my opinion of how we could save American manufacturing.

I wrote that I had learned that tariffs on foreign imports was one of the main sources of revenue for the Federal government until the initiation of the income tax in 1913. For more than the first 150 years of its history, the United States was a protectionist country in order to protect and grow its fledgling manufacturing, allowing the United States to become a major industrial power by the early 20th Century. 

After World War II, the U.S. switched from protectionism to free trade in order to rebuild the economies of Europe and Japan through the Marshall Plan and bind the economies of the non-Communist world to the United States for geopolitical reasons.

To accomplish these objectives, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was negotiated during the UN Conference on Trade and Employment and signed by 23 countries at Geneva in 1947. GATT became the most effective instrument in the massive expansion of world trade in the second half of the 20th century.

GATT’s most important principle was trade without discrimination, in which member nations opened their markets equally to one another. A major benefit for GATT members was the reduction or elimination of tariffs. Once a country and one of its trading partners agreed to reduce a tariff, that tariff cut was automatically extended to all GATT members. GATT also established uniform customs regulations and sought to eliminate import quotas. By 1995, when the World Trade Organization replaced GATT, 125 nations had signed its agreements, governing 90 percent of world trade.

Our elected officials should have realized that they needed to change the trade policy when we started to lose market share to Japanese products, especially cars and consumer electronic products.

As a result of these free trade policies, the United States developed a trade deficit with the majority of its trading partners starting in 1980. Of course, some deficits were small, but they increased over time until they became enormous like our current deficit with China.

According to USA Facts, “Over 50% of U.S. trade in 2023 involved one of five partners: Mexico, Canada, China, Germany, and Japan.  In 2023, the US imported $1 trillion more in goods than it exported, marking the sixth straight year of a trade deficit in the trillions (adjusting for inflation) …The highest trade deficits were with China ($279 billion), Mexico ($152 billion), and Vietnam ($105 billion).”

The work of The Reshoring Initiative to educate manufacturers on how to use Total Cost of Ownership Analysis to determine the true cost of sourcing offshore vs. domestically has helped a great deal, and by 2023, the U.S. had recouped over a million of the 5.8 million manufacturing jobs that it lost between the year 2000 – 2010. 

In addition, increased interest by consumers in buying “Made in USA” products and more stringent “Buy America” regulations for military and defense procurement has helped save the American manufacturing industry.

It is an acknowledged fact that the tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration on steel and aluminum saved the U.S. steel industry.  Thus, it is now my opinion that if we want to significantly reduce our trade deficit with China, we must impose tariffs on all Chinese products imported into our country.  There is considerable debate about how high these tariffs should be.  I can tell you that for plastic injection molded parts or rubber molded parts, the tariff would need to be 200% to 300% to be competitive on piece pricing with China.  

I realize that this high a percentage of tariffs would never be approved, but the tariff percentage needs to be higher than a token 10% if we really want to achieve the goal of reducing our trade deficit significantly.

We can either continue down the path of increasing trade deficits and increasing national debt by allowing products to be imported by countries practicing predatory trade policies. Or, we can forge a new path by developing and implementing a national strategy that includes tariffs to win the international competition for good jobs, sustained economic growth, and strong domestic supply chains.

Tags: ,
Posted in General, Manufacturing, Trade Policy | No Comments »

Inventors Need Your Help to Protect Their Patent Rights

October 8th, 2024

US Inventor was founded in 2015 after the passage of the America Invents Act of 2011  and the establishment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to “restore a solid patent system that ensures small businesses and individual inventors can protect their inventions from theft, regardless of the power and influence of large corporations. Every initiative and action undertaken by US Inventor aims to restore and reinforce the integrity of the American patent system.” US Inventor is the only organization representing small inventors, businesses, and startups to enact change that supports these groups, and it has grown to about 87,000 members over the past couple of years.  If you haven’t already signed the Inventor’s Rights Resolution, you may sign here.

In the past several weeks, US Inventor has been active in opposing two Senate bills that were scheduled for “mark up” by the Judiciary Committee during one of the three committee meetings scheduled in September. The bills are:

S. 2140: Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 (PERA)

S.2220 – PREVAIL Act

Both bills were introduced during the current Congress in 2023, and I wrote about these bills in a previous blog article, summarizing the reasons why US Inventor is opposed to each bill.  Briefly, US Inventor stated: “PERA must not become law without complete removal of Section 3(b)(1)(B)(i) and (ii) and its support at Section 2(5)(D)(v) and Section 2(5)(E)(i) and (ii).” The full analysis of PERA by US Inventor can be reviewed here.

US Inventor’s position on PREVAIL is that it “could be saved if it had an amendment that “offers inventors the “choice” of not being forced into the unjust PTAB administrative court, but rather being able to choose to face your infringer in a real court with a jury and Due Process.” The full analysis of PREVAIL by US Inventor can be reviewed here.

During the month of September, thousands of USI members called and wrote their Senator expressing their opposition to both bills.  US Inventor also arranged Zoom meetings with staff of the Senators who are members of the Judiciary Committee.  I participated with other California constituents who are inventors in Zoom meetings with the staff of California Senators Butler and Padilla.

When it was my turn to speak, I said that I was a board member of the San Diego Inventors Forum, which is one of the oldest and largest inventor groups in the country with a database of over 600 inventors, entrepreneurs, and service providers. We have noticed that the threat of having the Patent Review and Trial Board (PTAB) invalidate a patent is discouraging inventors from applying for a patent, and they are going to other countries to get their patents. Even China has a more secure patent system, so inventors are giving their technologies to China when they get a patent there. 

It is also causing more inventors to focus on getting licensing agreements instead of starting companies.  The danger is that the some of the large corporations they approach for a licensing agreement steal the technology and dare the inventor to sue them for infringement because they know the case will be handled by PTAB where the inventor’s patent will be invalidated. In addition, the lack of secure patent rights is also hindering the willingness of angel investors to invest in new technologies for startup companies. 

US Inventor held their second annual conference, From Dreamers to Decision-Makers, on September 26th-28th in Washington, D.C. where several inventors shared their stories of having their patents infringed and then invalidated by the PTAB.  The bills mentioned above were discussed in detail during the conference as well as the two new bills introduced last spring:

HR 8134, the Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act (RALIA), introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

HR 8132, the Balancing Incentives Act (BIA) introduced by rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY)

Attendees had been encouraged to come a day early to visit the offices of their Senators to express their opinions on patent legislation.  Many were able to make arrangements to meet with the staff of their Senators and express their opinions about the bills.  That same day, Dirk Tomsin of US Inventor hand delivered 7,350 letters to their Senator’s offices, along with petitions signed by over 4,500 signatories.

It appears that as a result of these efforts, the bills were not considered by the Judiciary committee for “mark up” during any of their September meetings. Congress is now in recess until after the election. However, the danger is that Congress will be in session for five weeks before the end of this session of Congress, so these bills could still be scheduled for “mark up” during that brief session.   

 The Senators comprising the Judiciary Committee are:

Chairman, Dick Durbin (D-IL)

Ranking member, Lindsey Graham (R-SC)

Majority Members

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

Chris Coons (D-DE)

Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)

Mazie Hirono (D-HI)

Cory Booker (D-NJ)

Jon Ossoff (D-GA)

Alex Padilla (D-CA)

Peter Welch (D-VT)

Laphonza Butler (D-CA)

Minority Members

Chuck Grassley (R-IA)

John Cornyn (R-TX)

Mike Lee (R-UT)

Ted Cruz (R-TX)

Josh Hawley (R-MO)

Tom Cotton (R-AR)

John Kennedy (R-LA)

Thom Tillis (R-NC)

Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

Suppose any of the above Senators are your Senators. In that case, I urge you to contact their offices and express your opposition to PERA and PREVAIL unless PREVAIL is amended as suggested above. You can call the U.S. House switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to connect to your Senator’s office.

Tags:
Posted in Inellectual Property, Legislation | No Comments »

What Can Individuals Do to Rebuild American Manufacturing?

September 24th, 2024

You may feel that there is not much you can do as an individual to rebuild American manufacturing to create jobs and protect our national security.  This isn’t true?  Remember that our country was founded by a small group of people that did indeed change the world by forming the United States of America. American activist and author, Sonia Johnson said, “We must remember that one determined person can make a significant difference, and that a small group of determined people can change the course of history.” Eleanor Roosevelt echoed this sentiment saying, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Here are suggestions of what each one of us can do:

As a Consumer:  It matters if we buy American-made products.  Our addiction to imports has played a major role in creating our high trade deficit, especially with China, where most of the consumer goods we import are manufactured.

We lost 5.8 million manufacturing jobs from 2000 – 2010 because of importing so many goods from China and other Asian countries.  In contrast, American-made products create American jobs, reduce our trade deficit, and reduce our budget deficit from increased tax revenue. Each time you choose to buy an American-made product, you help save or create an American job.

When you shop in person, look for the country-of-origin labels of goods. Most imported goods are required to have these labels.  Don’t throw things into your shopping cart without checking labels. The most important step is to make a commitment to buy American made products. Commit to make a fair effort to find made in the USA products. Make a promise to yourself to buy the “Made in USA” product even if it costs more than the imported product. It is a small sacrifice to ensure the well-being of your fellow Americans. The price difference you pay for “Made in USA” products keeps other Americans working.

If the product you are looking for is no longer made in America, then buy the product from another country besides China, which has nuclear warheads aimed at American cities. By buying Chinese imports, American consumers have provided the funds for the bulk of China’s military buildup. American service men and women could one day face weapons mostly paid for by American consumers. Instead, you could patronize impoverished countries such as Bangladesh or Nicaragua, which have no military ambitions against the United States.

In addition, by buying a product “Made in USA, you would reduce the “carbon footprint” caused by shipping the product thousands of miles by container ship, using a greater amount of fossil fuel than shipping within the United States.

If you are willing to step out of your comfort zone, you could ask to speak to the department or store manager of your favorite store and tell them that they need to start carrying more “Made in USA” products if they want to keep you as a customer. If you buy products on line or from catalogs, you could contact these companies via email with a similar message. Your communicating with a company does have an effect because the rule of thumb in sales and marketing is that one reported customer complaint equals 100 unreported complaints.

If you think that Americans no longer care about where goods are made or have concerns about the safety of foreign products, you may be surprised to learn that poll after poll shows that the majority of Americans prefer to buy American.

A survey of 1,000 U.S. adults by Morning Consul  in  May 2023 with regard to their views of  products made by American companies vs. Chinese companies revealed the following:

  • 65% of U.S. adult consumers claimed to sometimes or always buy “Made in America” products intentionally
  • 43% prioritize purchasing American-made products rather than prioritizing other options like quality, sustainability, or affordability
  • 48% are willing to pay higher amounts for U.S.-based products. 39% responded they would pay between 6%-10% more for said products

If you are having trouble finding “Made in USA” products, you can search “buy American” on the internet.  A few of the sites you will find are:

www.madeinusa.com

www.ionlybuyamerican.com
https://www.themadeinamericamovement.com/made-in-usa-companies/
https://www.madeinamerica.co/pages/thelist
https://madeinamericastore.com/home/

www.buyamericanmart.com

www.americansworking.com

www.shopunionmade.org

www.MadeInUSAForever.com

www.stillmadeinUSA.com

There are also brick and mortar stores springing up around the country that are either stocking only “made in America” products, such as the Buy American Store  and the Urban Outfitters stores. Even stores like Wal-Mart and Target are carrying more “Made in USA brands due to customer demand.

As American consumers, you have many choices to live safely and enjoy more peace of mind with American products. It’s high time to stop sending our American dollars to China while they send us all of their tainted, hazardous, and disposable products. If 200 million Americans refuse to buy just $20 each of Chinese goods, that’s a four-billion-dollar trade imbalance resolved in our favor – fast!

As a Voter:  Voter apathy is partially responsible for the state of our affairs as a country. Too many people have decided that there is nothing they can do on an individual basis and have stopped voting.

Americans have been “sold down the river” by politicians on both sides of the aisle – Democrats and Republicans. Democrats profess to support “blue collar workers” and unions, yet NAFTA and the WTO treaties were approved and went into effect under the presidency of Democrat Bill Clinton. Republicans have professed to support business, yet they have voted to approve harmful trade agreements like NAFTA and have primarily supported policies that benefit large, multinational corporations rather than the small businesses that are the engine of economic growth in the U.S. and the foundation of the middle class.

Remember that the U.S. President isn’t a king or dictator; there are only a limited number of actions a president can do by Executive Order.  It’s the job of the President’s administration to set policies, but Congress turns the policies into laws. This makes it just as important to choose to vote for the right person for your Congressional Representative and Senator as it to vote for the President because very few of the policies proposed by the President will be turned into law if Congress is controlled by the opposition party.

In order to help manufacturers succeed and grow to rebuild our domestic manufacturing industry, manufacturers need affordable corporate tax and interest rates because manufacturing is a capital-intensive industry. They need affordable and reliable energy sources because it takes energy to manufacture every product.  They need protection from the unfair trade practices of China, such as:

  • Currency Manipulation – undervaluing the yuan against the U.S. dollar to capture market share with lower prices
  • Product Dumping – selling at or below cost to destroy their American competitors. 
  • Trans-shipping – shipping to an intermediary country before shipping to the U.S. from that country in order to hide that the product was made in China.

When you choose who to vote for President or Congress, examine both their campaign promises and their track record. It’s important to support candidates that would support and protect American manufacturers.  Here are a few questions you can ask:

  • Do they support more harmful trade agreements?
  • Will they increase enforcement of current Agreements to reduce trade cheating?
  • Will they enforce penalties on trans-shipping of steel and aluminum?
  • Will they continue the tariffs on Chinese steel, aluminum, solar panels and add tariffs on other goods imported from China?
  • Will they support “Buy America” for all government agencies and not just the military?
  • Will they keep tax rates at an affordable level?
  • Will they institute policies to provide affordable and reliable energy produced in the U.S.?

We cannot afford to export our wealth and be able to remain a first-world country. We cannot lose our manufacturing base and be able to remain a “superpower.” In fact, we may not be able to maintain our freedom as a country because it takes considerable wealth to protect our freedom.

You can play a role as an individual in saving our country ? the company you save or the job you save by your actions may be your own in the future. It’s time to shed apathy, become involved, and vote for the candidate that will best protect American manufacturers and help rebuild American manufacturing.

Tags: ,
Posted in Economy, Made in America, Manufacturing | No Comments »

Excitement Builds as Manufacturers Prepare to Open Doors to the Public

September 3rd, 2024

This year Manufacturing Day will be Friday, October 4th, 2024. This is the day when manufacturers nationwide open their doors to the public for plant tours or participate in manufacturing expos to display their innovations.

It’s interesting to look at how this special day started.  The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) blog describes how it happened.  In 2011, Dileep Thatte of NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) met with Ed Youdell, the new President & CEO of the Fabricators and Manufacturers’ Association at their office in Rockford, Illinois “to share how NIST MEP is focused on helping U.S. manufacturers incorporate innovation, new technologies, productivity and quality improvement techniques and develop their workforce.” 

In the course of the meeting, they developed the idea of having a special day to have FMA members get involved with NIST MEP. Then, they decided it should have a broader scale and created Manufacturing Day. They decided to conduct a pilot event in the Midwest and planned the first Manufacturing Day for the first Friday of October 2012 to allow enough time for outreach and planning.  The first year featured about 240 events and generated a great deal of enthusiasm among the people who participated. 

“The idea was to allow the manufacturers to open their doors in any way they see fit to invite the community, their schools, their educators, the legislators, and others, so that they see what is modern manufacturing and the value of manufacturing for the community.”

The goal was to dispel the myth that manufacturing is “dumb, dangerous, and dirty” so parents, educators, and students “could see that modern manufacturing is different than the traditional image of manufacturing.”  Modern manufacturing is “high tech,” involving computers, Computer Numerical Controlled (CNC) machines, robotics, automation, 3D printing, and other “cool” tools. “It’s about creativity, innovation, teamwork and technical skills.”

This reason this is important is that there is a significant shortage of skilled workers in the U.S. and the gap is expected to widen even more unless more youth start entering the manufacturing workforce. According to a 2021 study “by Deloitte and The Manufacturing Institute, the manufacturing skills gap in the U.S. could result in 2.1 million unfilled jobs by 2030.” We must address this workforce gap by changing the perception of manufacturing jobs, and Manufacturing Day is one of the best ways to change this perception.

By 2014, other national organizations such as the Association for Manufacturing Excellence (AME), the Association for Manufacturing Technology (AMT) and SME had jumped on the bandwagon to promote Manufacturing Day.  In San Diego where I lived, the four major chambers, the Greater San Diego Regional Chamber, the East County Chamber, North County Chamber, and South County Chamber, all had events that day ranging from a breakfast with speakers from the manufacturing industry to expos where manufacturers exhibited their products.  Manufacturers all over the county opened their doors to visitors and gave tours. Attended the breakfast put on by the Greater San Diego Regional Chamber and then went on three of the 25 tours scheduled in San Diego County. The producers of Manufacturing Day 2014 bragged that “This year’s Manufacturing Day set another record with almost twice as many events as last year. The final count was over 1,650 events in all 50 U.S. states, three Canadian provinces, and Puerto Rico.”

The NIST blog article, states “In 2016, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), an organization with membership in excess of 14,000 manufacturers, began leading the Manufacturing Day initiative. NAM, through their workforce development and education partner, The Manufacturing Institute, has done a magnificent job of supporting this initiative.

We moved to Riverside County in the fall of 2018, and on Manufacturing Day, I began my day by attending the special event in Menifee at Mt. San Jacinto College to introduce their new Makerspace to students.  The auditorium was nearly filled with students form Santa Rosa Academy where a panel of business professionals and professors shared the value of their education to their careers.  The event was sponsored by the City of Menifee, the Menifee Valley Chamber of Commerce, and CMTC. The audience was welcomed by Major Bill Zimmerman and Tony LoPiccolo, Executive Director of the Chamber. Fortunately, I was able to get a private tour of the MakerSpace by Hal Edghill, the MakerSpace specialist, before the students had finished listening to the panelists. I only had time to visit two companies because they were located so far apart and held in the same time period between 10 AM and 2 PM.

In 2019, I attended the first Made in America trade show that was held October 3-6th in Indianapolis, IN. The event began during Manufacturing Week declared by President Trump and the show opened to the public on the national Manufacturing Day. The NIST blog states, “In 2019, more than 325,000 students, teachers, and parents participated in MFG Day which consisted of more than 3,000 events held across all 50 states and Puerto Rico.”

Unfortunately, the COVID Pandemic lockdowns of 2020 curtailed the in-person special events and plant visits, but MFG Day 2020 because a virtual day, celebrated online instead of in person. “Even amid the pandemic, there was a widespread outpouring of support for manufacturing, including from many policymakers.”

The NAM website states, “The White House issued a proclamation on Thursday night designating Oct. 2 as National Manufacturing Day, while at least 28 governors and leading members of Congress marked the occasion by proclamation or on social media.” 

MFG Day 2021 was October 1st, and “manufacturers throughout the nation hosted open houses, factory tours and job fairs—both on site and online—to introduce young people and others to the promise of modern manufacturing. And many companies and leaders took to social media to show their support and love for the industry.

Besides the proclamation of President Biden, at least 15 states issued their own Manufacturing Day proclamations, and more than 40 congressional representatives publicly marked the occasion.

MFG Day 2022 and 2023 resumed having more emphasis on in-person events, plant tours, and expos.  Over 14,000 manufacturers across America now participate in country-wide celebrations

In June 2023, the Manufacturing Institute of NAM hosted a webinar, “Making the Most of Your Event,” featuring “seasoned MFG Day hosts sharing about their own events, best planning tips, lessons learned, ideas for school and community events.  The purpose of the webinar was to “share tips, insights and resources for companies interested in putting on their own MFG Day events.”  The webinar is available to watch here on YouTube for companies and organizations interested in hosting an event or plant tour for 2024.

In the article about the webinar, MI Director of Student Engagement Jen White, said, “Being involved with MFG Day, hosting events, using the branding that’s available on the website, registering your events on MFGday.com and all of our resources and toolkits are 100% free to you,” said White. “You do not have to be an MFG Day sponsor. You do not have to be an NAM member. It is 100% free for you to use. We want as many companies and partners of manufacturers involved in MFG Day as possible.”

I highly encourage you to sign up to be involved in Manufacturing by sponsoring an event, opening up your company for a plant tour, or attending an event or plant tours in your area at this website.  I certainly plan to attend as many plant tours as are logistically possible in my region of Riverside County, California.

Tags: ,
Posted in General, Made in America, Manufacturing | No Comments »

Fall Trade Shows Highlight New Technologies of American Manufacturers

August 20th, 2024

The trade show schedule for Fall 2024 will be very busy around the country.  If you want to keep abreast of new technologies, look for American manufacturers to return manufacturing from offshore, or look for new vendors to make your supply chain more secure, be sure to attend the trade show nearest to you.  The fall starts off with the biggest trade show of them all in Chicago.

September 9-14, 2024 at McCormick Place in Chicago, IL

The International Manufacturing Technology Show (IMTS) is the largest trade show in the Western Hemisphere and draws the innovators, sellers, and drivers of manufacturing technology together to connect, be inspired, and find new solutions.

Location:  McCormick Place, 2301 S Lake Shore Dr, Chicago, IL 60616

Registration:  8:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Show Hours:  9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Register Now

I’ve been attending this show for over 30 years.  It used to be called the Job Shop Show because it featured companies that performed custom fabrication services such as castings, forgings, extrusions, plastic and rubber molding, metal stamping.  What is unique about this show is that only American companies are allowed to exhibit, The shows in Southern California is where me met many of the companies my manufacturers’ sales agency, ElectroFab Sales, represents.  I will be attending the Long Beach show on September 26th to help out at the booth of the rubber molding company we represent, Century Rubber Company.

Southeast Region

When:September 10 & 11, 2024
Hours:Tuesday 9:30am – 3:00pm Wednesday 9:30am – 3:00pm
Where:Greenville Convention Center
1 Exposition Dr.
Greenville, SC 29607
Cost:Free Admission & Free Parking
  

Southern California

When:September 25 & 26, 2024
Hours:Wednesday 9:30am – 3:00pm Thursday 9:30am – 3:00pm
Where:Long Beach Convention Center
300 E Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
Cost:Free Admission Register for Free  

New England

When:October 16 & 17, 2024
Hours:Wednesday 9:00am – 4:00pm Thursday 9:00am – 3:30pm
Where:Royal Plaza Trade Center
181 Royal Plaza Dr West
Marlborough, MA 01752
Cost:Free Admission & Free Parking

This show is put on by the Del Mar Trade Shows company that puts on the Del Mar Electronics & Manufacturing show in the spring at which my company has exhibited for 27 years.  As an authorized speaker for the Reshoring Initiative, I will be giving a presentation on “How to Reshore Using Total Cost of Ownership Analysis” on October 2nd at 1:00 PM in Room D.

Free parking! Free Attendance! Free Reception!

Register Now

October 7 – 9, 2025

Anaheim, CA

The Manufacturing Technology Series of five regional shows produced by SME & AMT connects decision makers from diverse industries with leading suppliers of advanced manufacturing technology, equipment and tooling. The next Eastec and Southtec shows will be held in the spring of 2025.

Find the Schedule, Floor Plan & Exhibits, Event Information, Your Personalized Planner, Unlock an Exclusive Gift, Connect with People, and More!

Download the SME Events +App now

Meet the Innovators Shaping the Future at The Battery Show 2024!

Over 1,150 exhibitors representing the full advanced battery and EV supply chain.

Register here

This show is the Midwest version of the show that takes place at the Anaheim Convention Center in February at which I have been a panelist or speaker five times.

Register with the special code JOINME24 and grab a free expo pass or receive 15% off all conference passes.

Your FREE expo pass includes access to:

  • 530+ exhibits for the Midwest’s largest collection of end-to-end design and manufacturing suppliers on one show floor, spanning medtech, automation, packaging, plastics, and design
  • Daily keynote presentations including Pat Baird of Philips, Amy Alexander of Mayo Clinic, and Jonathan Arenberg of Northrop Grumman Space
  • Access to hours of free content  at 3 theaters in the expo hall—MedTech Central, Engineering Theater, and Tech Theater
  • Complimentary networking & experiences including a Welcome Reception, Career Connections with professional advancement experts, and booth bar crawls

This list of shows is by no means comprehensive.  There are many more trade shows related to a variety of industries, such as the toy industry, hardware industry, consumer electronics, etc.  Trade shows are still the best way to see products, new technologies, and meet suppliers in person. Many of the trade shows have a concurrent conference or free seminars. 

Tags: ,
Posted in General, Manufacturing, Technology | No Comments »

What is the Progress on Rebuilding American Manufacturing to Create Prosperity

August 6th, 2024

People have forgotten that there are only three ways to create tangible wealth — mine it, grow it, or make it. Manufacturing is the term now used to describe “making it.” The problem with the current economy of the United States is that we have been outsourcing all three ways to create wealth to other countries for the past 25-30 years, primarily to China after the country was granted Most Favored Nation status in the year 2000.  

As a result, we are now dependent on other countries for the energy, food, and manufactured good we need to sustain the modern way of life, protect the health and welfare of American citizens, and provide the goods needed to protect the national security of our country.

This outsourcing caused a dramatic loss of jobs in the manufacturing industry, namely, 5.8 million high paying jobs from 2000 – 2010.

Let’s consider what progress has been made on a few of the simpler and faster to implement strategies and policies to accelerate the rebuilding process.  In my 2017 book Rebuild American Manufacturing – the key to American Prosperity, I quote recommendations made by the Information Technology& Innovation Foundation (ITIF) and the Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) and make many my own recommendations of what needs to be done to rebuild American manufacturing.

Two of the ITIF recommendations were: “Create a network of 25 Engineering and Manufacturing Institutes performing applied R&D across a range of advanced technologies and support the designation of at least 20 U.S. manufacturing universities.”

While the Manufacturing USA Network was formally established in 2014 when “Congress passed the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act (RAMI Act) into law, it took three years of planning and competition to form the 16 institutes. Each of these institutes has a unique technological concentration, but is also designed to accelerate U.S. advanced manufacturing as a whole.  The April 2024 edition of Design2Part magazine provides good description of the technological advances facilitated by several of the institutes.

Another ITIF recommendation was:  Lower the effective U. S. corporate tax rate” because at that time, the United States had the highest statutory corporate tax rate at almost 39 percent (when state and federal rates are combined) of any OECD nation.”

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 “reduced the federal top corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, bringing the combined US federal and state rates to about the average for most other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, and eliminated the graduated corporate rate schedule (table 1). TCJA also repealed the corporate alternative minimum tax.”  However, the TCJA expires in 2026, so Congress will need to address this issue in 2025.

The ITIF also recommended” “Better promotion of reshoring.”

Thanks to changing economic factors and supply chain disruptions caused by the COVID pandemic, the work of Harry Moser of The Reshoring Initiative to help manufacturing companies do a Total Cost of Ownership Analysis to return manufacturing to America, reshoring has dramatically accelerated in the past three years.  As the chart below shows, we have been able to reshore nearly two million manufacturing jobs (1,898,404) as shown on the chart below:

However, at this rate, it would take another 20 years to recoup the 5.8 million we lost from 2000 – 2010.  To rebuild American manufacturing in a faster way, we must focus on other policies besides reshoring.

The Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) released a white paper, titled, “A Competitiveness Strategy for the United States – America at a Crossroads,” in November 2015 that included an even longer list of recommendations.  As a member of CPA since 2011, I quoted all of their recommendations in my 2017 book and have written blog articles in the past several years about many of the specific strategies and policies the report included.

  • Impose offsetting tariffs to neutralize foreign government subsidies to industries and supply chains that compete with ours.
  • Counter foreign government policies that force offshoring by conditioning access to their markets on transfers of technology, research facilities and/or production to their countries, as well as compliance with export performance and domestic content.
  • Develop a national trade strategy and increase funding for U.S. trade policymaking and enforcement agencies. (blog article)
  • Combat foreign currency manipulation through a Market Access Charge (blog article)
  • Congress should strengthen and tighten procurement regulations to enforce “Buy America” for all government agencies, not just the Department of Defense. (blog article)
  • Prevent sale of strategic U.S.-owned companies to foreign-owned companies (blog article)
  • Ensure that domestic manufacturing and agriculture benefit fully from an expanded supply of low-cost US produced energy” (blog article)

President Trump took action on the tariff recommendation in January 2018 by imposing tariffs on solar panels and washing machines of 30 to 50 percent. In March 2018, he imposed tariffs on steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) from most countries. In June 2018, this was extended to the European Union, Canada, and Mexico. However, with the ratification of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), the North American trade deal set to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the tariffs on Canada and Mexico were rescinded on steel and aluminum.  Since then, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and South Korea have successfully negotiated a permanent exemption from the steel tariffs. In addition, the Trump Administration Enforced penalties on trans-shipping of steel & aluminum.  Thankfully, the Biden administration has kept these tariffs in effect, essentially saving the U.S. steel and aluminum industries.

The Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) asserts that further tariffs are needed to balance trade, and on July 24, 2024, CPA “released a new economic analysis showing that a global 10% tariff on all U.S. imports would generate U.S. economic growth, increase real wages, increase employment, and raise additional revenue to lower taxes for lower- and middle-class Americans. 

Our analysis finds that a 10% tariff would stimulate domestic production and raise economic growth to produce a 5.7% increase in real income for the average American household,” said CPA Chief Economist Jeff Ferry. “Further, the $263 billion raised in tariff revenue could be used to provide tax refunds to all households with income below $1 million a year, creating a progressive tax refund.”

We have a long way to go on implementing some of the other recommended policies to rebuild American manufacturing..  How these issues should be addressed should be one of the main criteria of who to vote for in November, both for President and Congressional candidates.

Since I started writing the first edition of my previous book, Can American Manufacturing be Saved?  Why we should and how we can in 2007, I have made it my mission for the rest of my life to do as much as possible as I can to rebuild American manufacturing to create jobs and prosperity. The future of the American middle class and, more importantly, our national security depends on the choices we make and the actions we take now.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Economy, Manufacturing, Reshoring | No Comments »

Access Trax Expands Opportunities for Outdoor Fun for the Disabled

July 23rd, 2024

Many disabled people that have to use walkers or wheelchairs are deprived of experiencing outdoor activities they used to enjoy, such as going to the beach, going fishing at lakes, or other outdoor activities.  A new American-made product produced by Access Trax is restoring their ability to enjoy outdoor activities. Access Trax specializes in outdoor portable pathway solutions for wheelchair and handicap access for sand, gravel, grass, and more. Their premier product is the Trax modular pathway.

I learned about this product when I had lunch recently with a long-time friend, Kathy Roberts.  Access Trax was co-founded by her niece, Kelly Twichel.  Kathy said that Kelly wanted to help disabled people because her mother (Kathy’s sister) had a stroke when Kelly was only 12 and then spent the rest of her life being disabled before she died in 2020. Kathy connected me with Kelly, and I had the pleasure of interviewing her virtually last Friday.

Kelly said “While I was a student at the University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences in San Marcos in 2016, Eric Packard and I were tasked to create an assistive technology device as part of our course work to become occupational therapists. Our inspiration came from a desire to assist local adaptive surfers in crossing the sand to the water’s edge while maintaining dignity and independence.

We tested numerous prototypes in cooperation with the local adaptive surfing community before I graduated with a degree in Occupational Therapy in 2017. After we had achieved a successful design, we launched the company in early 2018. Our mission is for everyone to access the outdoors.”

She said that they got some good news coverage in 2019 and 2020 from local news outlets that helped increase their sales (see featured news coverage here). 

She added. “We were on the verge of having to shut our doors in early 2020 and were saved by winning the highly competitive Federal Express Small Business Grant Contest and receiving a grant of $50,000. I was interviewed by Shawn Styles of CBS 8 San Diego News after winning the grant.  This grant helped us to be able to nearly triple our sales in 2021 over 2020. All together, we have won over $100,000 in different grants since 2017, and we have been able to increase our sales every year.”

Kelly explained, “Besides selling our Access Trax mobile panels to individuals and families for personal use, we are also selling them to the National Park Service, City and County Park and Recreation Departments, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Our latest customers are movie crews using the panels for outdoor film productions.”

Some of the benefits for these entities are:

  • Stable walkway for ADA compliance
  • Durable and reliable for years
  • Quick and easy set up and maintenance
  • Stake down panels for permanence  
  • Ability to customize the pathway

I asked Kelly if she had any patents, and she replied, “Eric and I were granted a design patent in 2021 and we have three trademarks.  I recently applied for a design trademark on our logo. Our portable wheelchair access mats are durable, lightweight, foldable for use on terrain like sand, gravel, dirt, mulch, grass, and snow.  They work with mobility devices and heavy equipment of up 1,000s of pounds.”

In answer to my question about manufacturing, she said, “No, we buy the raw material from a company in Florida and have a company in San Diego size the panels and add our logo. Then, my employees and I assemble the panels into our standard kits and ship them to customers using Federal Express.”

I asked if Eric is still involved in the day-to-day operations, and she said, “No, he is a silent partner now.”

Kelly said, “We give back to the community in three main ways. First, we sponsor outdoor adaptive sports events so participants can get the access routes they need over sand and grass.  We have been an in-kind sponsor of events for the U.S. Open Adaptive Surfing Championships since 2017.

Second, I travel around the country to speak on subjects such as the value of adaptive sports and recreation, assistive technology, universal design, and how to become a social impact problem-solver. I share information based on my background as an occupational therapist and what I’ve learned with Access Trax.

Third, I joined a small group of San Diego-based nonprofits and businesses focused on empowering people in the community who use wheelchairs for mobility. The group coined their name the “Mobility Community Access Partners” or MCAP for short. Our first goal was to host an event in San Diego to bring people together. In June 2022 we hosted the first ever Adaptive Sports, Recreation and Resource Fair in San Diego. The event included adaptive sports such as wheelchair basketball, adaptive fitness, kayaking, boccia ball, and adaptive over-the-line.”

Kelly added, “Access Trax was a co-host of the June 3rd 2023 event “San Diego Adaptive Sports, Recreation & Resource Fair”. We also co-hosted it again last month on June 29th, 2024 at the same place (recap video).”

I told her that I have being doing what I could to first save and then rebuild American manufacturing since my first book, Can American Manufacturing be Saved? Why we should and how we can” was published in 2009.  I’ve been using my God-given talents to write two more books since then, the latest being Rebuild Manufacturing – the Key to American Prosperity

I told her that besides writing hundreds of blog articles, I have been giving back by helping and mentoring inventors since 2014 as a board member for the San Diego Inventors Forum (SDIF)and was also a mentor for the CONNECT Springboard program for startup companies in San Diego from 2015 – 2018.   

Kelly, said, “I went through CONNECT ALL at the Jacobs Center in 2019, which used to be partly supported by CONNECT. It was a business accelerator that supported local San Diego small businesses with an emphasis on minority and low-to-moderate income founders. When I went through the accelerator, it was a free, six-month program with mentorship, learning modules, and access to a beautiful brand-new coworking space. The program ran from 2019 until 2024 and each cohort was about 4 months long with about 10-15 founders each. Unfortunately, this program recently lost funding and the building was purchased by San Ysidro Healthcare so we lost our co-working space. But I will forever be grateful for that accelerator and the folks who managed it.”

Kelly later emailed me that the former CONNECT ALL is now The Jacobs Center’s Business Accelerator program  The website says it “is the region’s first low to moderate-income and diversity-focused business accelerator program, guiding startups that want to grow rapidly with all the support they need to be successful. A partnership between the City of San Diego, CONNECT w/ San Diego Venture Group, and the Jacobs Center, the Business Accelerator was founded to provide participants with mentors, free co-working space, and guidance on how to scale their businesses.”

I told her that It’s very important to support companies like hers to restore our domestic manufacturing base. SDIF didn’t get to have any in-person meetings for three years because we lost our meeting location at AMN Healthcare’s conference center during the COVID pandemic lock downs, and Zoom meetings didn’t work out.  Finally, we found a new location to resume meeting in person last September, so we just had our 11th meeting on July 11th. I told her that our group supports the national organization, US Inventors, that is working to restore our broken patent system. Our group currently meets the second Thursday of the month at the law offices of Knobbe Martens in the Carmel Valley area of San Diego.  and invited her to our next meeting on August 8th. I thanked her for her time and wished her continued success for her much-needed product for disabled people.

Tags: ,
Posted in General, Innovation, Made in America | No Comments »

« Older Entries