Here & Now

Johnson Weighs in on Where the Wall Stands

Frederica Freyberg:

A first look tonight from Washington. On Tuesday, President Donald Trump delivered his second State of the Union address. President Trump spoke to health care, job growth, trade, war in the Middle East and immigration. To prevent an impending, second federal government shutdown next week, he called for Congressional bipartisanship to fund a border wall between the United States and Mexico.

Donald Trump:

My administration has sent to Congress a common sense proposal to end the crisis on the southern border. It includes humanitarian assistance, more law enforcement, drug detection at our ports, closing loopholes that enable child smuggling and plans for a new physical barrier, or wall, to secure the vast areas between our ports of entry. In the past, most of the people in this room voted for a wall, but the proper wall never got built. I will get it built.

[cheers and applause]

Frederica Freyberg:

Wisconsin’s Congressional delegation was at Tuesday night’s State of the Union address. Among them, Republican U.S. Senator Ron Johnson. He joins us now from Milwaukee and senator, thanks very much for being here.

Ron Johnson:

Hello, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:

What are you being told about what is in the deal being hatched by Congressional negotiators over border wall funding with this clock ticking down to another government shutdown?

Ron Johnson:

Well, I’m not in the conference committee, but they’re basically trying to figure out appropriations for seven different appropriation accounts. As relates to border security, my guess is it’ll have a combination of some better barrier funding, probably some technology for monitoring the border and then probably more additional personnel at targeted points of entry where all the drugs are coming in. So again, I’m not part of those discussions but as I was talking to the appropriators yesterday before we headed back to our states, they seemed pretty optimistic.

Frederica Freyberg:

That’s good news because President Trump had called the conference committee’s negotiations a, “waste of time” and apparently could still declare a national emergency to get his wall funding. What’s your position on going that route?

Ron Johnson:

Well, again, I’m a Constitutionist, so I am concerned about an erosion of Congressional authority that’s been occurring over the number of decades prior to this. I have no doubt that there are probably laws on the books that will give any president the authority to secure our border and keep this nation safe. I’m not sure which one the president may choose, but he may try and do that.

Frederica Freyberg:

Do you support the full $5.7 billion for the wall as President Trump has been requesting?

Ron Johnson:

No. I think that’s a very reasonable amount. We do need better barriers. Better barriers work in the four sections where we do have better barriers, we’ve decreased illegal immigration by somewhere between 90% to 95%. It’s part of what we need to do to secure our border. We have laws that incentivize people, particularly unaccompanied children and people coming in as family units to enter our country illegally. We need to fix those laws. But we do need better technology. We need more personnel. Particularly technology and personnel at the ports of entry where all the drugs come through.

Frederica Freyberg:

So what would be your position on a final deal that doesn’t deliver that 5.7?

Ron Johnson:

Again, the simplest way out of this would be to provide the president the $5.7 billion, which is a very reasonable amount. Democrats in the past have supported $8 billion in better barrier funding as part of the 2013 Senate Immigration Bill, over $40 billion for other border security. Again, we need to fix our broken laws. I’m certainly going to continue to work on that beyond whatever happens here with this particular appropriation impasse.

Frederica Freyberg:

Moving to a different matter: trade. You’ve joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers supporting a group called Tariffs Hurt the Heartland. How are President Trump’s tariffs hurting the heartland, like Wisconsin?

Ron Johnson:

Well, the tariffs are certainly making Wisconsin businesses uncompetitive with their international competition, both internationally as well as domestically. Tariffs are a tax on consumers. I think we need to understand that. Tariffs are not being paid by the countries that are abusing our generosity in our trading relationships and they’re certainly not right now doing anything in terms of stopping China’s theft of our intellectual property. So I completely agree with this administration’s goal of stopping China’s theft, of resetting our trade relationship. Because of our generosity, we have been taken advantaged of [by] our trading partners. He’s completely correct in demanding on reciprocal treatment in our trading relationships. I just — I feel it’s my responsibility to make sure that the president and his administration understands the harm that’s being done to Wisconsin and other businesses throughout the U.S. because of these high tariffs making them uncompetitive.

Frederica Freyberg:

Experts have said that Foxconn’s decision to build its first plant outside of Asia in Racine County, USA is viewed as a hedge against a trade war with China. Let me just read you this tweet that President Trump made last year about Foxconn’s biggest client. He said, “Apple prices may increase because of the massive tariffs we may be imposing on China, but there is an easy solution, where there would be zero tax and indeed a tax incentive. Make your products in the United States instead of China. Start building new plants now.” So having read that tweet, given the changeable plans on Foxconn’s part for the Racine operation, do you think that that was the company’s overriding motivation for coming into Wisconsin?

Ron Johnson:

Well, having been in manufacturing myself for 30 years and exporting to 20 different countries, I know there’s always pressure when you are supplying an international customer to manufacture close to those customers. That’s just going to be natural, whether you’re an international business doing business in the U.S. or a U.S. business trying to do business internationally. Customers want the manufacturing facilities close to where the demand is. I have no access to Foxconn’s marketing, er, business plans or exactly what’s happening with the demand for their products by Apple as well. So in the end, what makes more sense and what is going to bring more manufacturing back to the U.S. is U.S. has to be an attractive place for business investment and risk-taking. And you do that by reducing the regulatory burden, which this administration has done by having a more competitive tax system. The tariffs from my standpoint and the administration talked about those is basically a leverage point to bring people to the negotiating table, which I guess is fine. But, for example, in the case of the USMCA deal, once that was signed by both Canada and Mexico, those tariffs were supposed to go away. They haven’t gone away yet so we’re trying to talk to the administration about when they’re going to lift those tariffs on Canada and Mexico.

Frederica Freyberg:

On Foxconn in Wisconsin, how closely are you monitoring the company’s role out here on behalf of taxpayers?

Ron Johnson:

Well, we’re obviously watching that. But, you know, any kind of tax benefits granted by the state of Wisconsin are going to be prospective. They’re going to have to provide the employment. They’re going to have to actually construct the facilities. I hope it proceeds. It would be a great thing for not only Wisconsin, but to have that manufacturing capability for America would be a very good thing. But again, it’s going to be based on business conditions and demand for their product.

Frederica Freyberg:

Senator Ron Johnson, thanks very much for joining us.

Ron Johnson:

Have a good day.