Why this Republican is challenging Trump on tariffs
23:11 Share

High Five Casino is the top sweepstakes casino that's free to play. Sign up today to receive a free welcome bonus and exclusive first purchase offers. Choose the premium jackpot package for $29.99 and claim up to 700 game coins, 55 sweeps coins, one sweeps coin daily bonus for five days, and 400 diamonds. Your high five moment awaits at highfivecasino.com. No purchase necessary. Boardware prohibited by law. Must be 21 years or older. Terms and conditions apply.

What is it like to be a Republican in Congress and stand up to President Donald Trump? Our guest is helping lead an effort to rein Trump in on tariffs. Trump announced tariffs on April 2nd on pretty much all imports. This was on dozens of countries. Markets around the world tanked. This week, Trump announced a pause on those tariffs, except for those on China. But the market volatility continues.

But the story isn't just about the economy. To some members of Congress, this is also about constitutional powers. From the newsroom of The Washington Post, this is Post Reports. I'm Colby Ickowitz. It's Friday, April 11th. Today, we're welcoming Congressman Jeff Hurd to the show. He's a Republican from Colorado. Hurd's bill would restore Congress's power to enact tariffs. Congressman, thank you so much for being with us. Happy to be with you, Colby.

So Congressman, working across the aisle is so rare these days. And yet on this bill, you've got three Republicans and three Democrats sponsoring it. So I'm curious how the six of you came together and decided to take this on.

Well, certainly we've had tariffs in the news and I've certainly been hearing it from a lot of my constituents in concern. And it occurred to me just as a new member of Congress, one of the things I did was make sure I reread the Constitution before I took my oath of office. And I remember that Article 1, Section 8 specifically says that Congress has authority with respect to tariffs. And

For me, this isn't a political issue. I would be taking this position regardless of who the president was or who's occupying the White House. And I think fundamentally, Congress needs to do a better job of asserting its authority under Article 1 of the Constitution. And so it was just a natural fit for me when I was running for office. Colby, I told my constituents that my two priorities were the Constitution and the best interests of the third congressional district. And I think this legislation encapsulates both of those priorities.

Congressman, you said you've been hearing from a lot of constituents. What are they saying?

Well, I've been hearing from producers, the people that grow our food, farmers and ranchers, concern about the tariffs and the uncertainty. Also from some of our manufacturers, large manufacturers, everyone from steel manufacturers to local bike part manufacturers in the western part of my district in Grand Junction. There's concern about the depth and breadth and scope of these tariffs. And that's something that has been consistent for the past couple weeks.

By introducing this bill, you and your colleagues seem to be suggesting that President Trump has overextended his authority on this issue with his recent announcement of his major new tariffs. I mean, is that...

the message here that the president is trying to expand his presidential powers too much? Well, certainly I think the overall picture and the overall message is Congress has delegated too many of its authorities out and has not lived up to its constitutional responsibilities in Article 1. And that's happened. This isn't something that's new. It's been going on for decades. And part of the reason I ran was because I thought Congress needs to do its job. And part of its job is making sure that we're recognizing

representing our constituents and that when we're doing things that affect the economy broadly, that they make sense and that they're in the best interest of the people that we represent.

So I just want to step back and understand the law. So as I understand it, Congress passed a law in 1974 that allowed the president to enact temporary tariffs. And so your bill would take that power back. Is that the idea? That's right. The bill would do two things fundamentally, Colby. It would require the president when implementing tariffs to give Congress notice within 48 hours. And the second thing it would do is it would give Congress 60 days within which to either allow the tariff and approve it or disallow it.

I see. So it allows some flexibility. And if the president needs to step in and take emergency powers and impose tariffs to address serious situations, he or she has that ability. But Congress does have a review function as well. It does have some exemptions for anti-dumping and sorts of things like that if there are some absolute clear trade abuses. But as a general matter, it restores that authority back to Congress. And so the idea would be the president could enact a tariff, it would go into effect, but

After 60 days, Congress could reverse that? That's right. Congress could do it sooner if it wanted to through a joint resolution. But if Congress doesn't approve it within 60 days, then the tariff would expire. Yeah. So, Congressman, you said you ran for Congress because you wanted to, you know, support the Constitution. You wanted Congress to take back some of its powers.

I wonder how you feel about some of the president's other kind of overreaching actions, like shuttering federal agencies, kind of canceling federal funding. Has that raised constitutional oversight questions for you? Well, look, fundamentally, I'm in support of what the president's trying to do when it comes to government efficiency. I do believe that we overspend in our federal government. That's something that my constituents, the same ones that are concerned about tariffs, will also tell you that they believe we're spending too much money.

from the federal government and that we're bankrupting our children. You know, the fundamental reason that I ran was, yes, to support the Constitution, but the more basic reason, the more practical reason, the more, the reason that's closest to my heart is because we are being left behind in rural America and rural Colorado and my district. Our greatest export has become our kids.

And they grow up and they leave, they don't come back. And fundamentally, I want to create economic opportunities so that families in rural America can thrive. And we need to do that through good public policy. And we need to make sure that when the federal government is doing something right, we're behind it. When the federal government is not, when it's spending too much, we're fighting it. But fundamentally, we got to do that within the constitutional constraints. Yeah. I mean, so it's one thing. Should Congress be making those calls about where and when to rein in spending as opposed to the president and Congress?

Elon Musk and Doge kind of doing it unilaterally? Well, there's a process for budgeting. I mean, the president will submit a budget to Congress, and that's how the budgeting process starts. And look, the president is, practically speaking, going to have to enact the legislation. So it would be foolish for one branch of government to simply think that it could call all of the shots. So coordinating those is important.

And look, I am in support of the Doge effort to make government more efficient. And certainly it hasn't been perfect in the way that it's being laid out. I know we've seen some issues in my district as well with some of the places that those cuts have been happening. But as an overall matter, if you talk to people in my district and the federal that even work for the federal government, they know that there's inefficiencies as we can do a better job. We just need to make sure the cuts are in the right spot.

Have federal workers lost jobs in your district? There have been some cuts in my district. Yes, we have. It's a large district. Colby, it covers half of the state of Colorado. It's actually geographically bigger than the state of Pennsylvania. Wow. So it's very large. And we have six national forests in Colorado's third congressional district. And so some of the cuts that we've seen have been in the Forest Service and the boots on the ground, the people that are actually maintaining our forests, helping to prevent wildfires, vegetation management, wild...

watershed management, those sorts of things. So we have seen some cuts in my district. I mean, the thing that surprised me most is, you know, I covered Congress for a number of years in the start of my career. And the most important job on Capitol Hill was being an appropriator. People waited years and years to get a position on the Appropriations Committee. They wanted to run the Appropriations Committee. You were a kingmaker if you did that.

But there seems to be a willingness among the Republicans to kind of give up some of that power to President Trump. I mean, he's, you know, he canceled USAID. He's canceled other programs that are congressionally funded and authorized and appropriated programs. So I just wonder...

How Republicans defend that? Well, certainly the role of Congress is to pass the laws, including the appropriations and the job of the executive branch is to enforce them. One of the things, though, that we've seen, Colby, is that Congress wasn't exactly clear when it delegated those spending authorities exactly where those dollars would go. And so there's a lot of discretion that's given to the administrative agencies that I think should be scrutinized and should be looked at when the executive branch is looking at how to enforce them. So that's something that, you know, I think is, again, it gets that fundamental issue of Congress.

not living up to its responsibilities. But overall, I think we do need to take a careful look at how we're spending our federal dollars and working with the administration to do that. And that's something that I want to do certainly in Congress as well. So,

Is it constitutional overreach to, I'll just use USAID as an example, for the president to eliminate that agency? Well, I think the president is within the maximum scope of his authority when it comes to issues that relate to foreign affairs and foreign issues. So that's one area where certainly I think we'll have to see exactly how the courts let these things play out. But I would also say that

Part of my frustration also with the spending is some of this seems so calcified. And in some ways, we do need to shake up and we do need to relook at things. And government over time has become calcified. There's been like layers and layers and layers of just bureaucracy and spending that's sort of layered in. And there is a lot of good that can be done by looking at these programs one by one.

rooting out some of the inefficient and wasteful spending. And that's an exercise that I think not only we should be doing, I think we have to be doing given the spending crisis that we have. Yeah. I mean, Congressman, I used USAID a few times, but for a lot of people here in the country, that seems far away and it doesn't directly affect them. So something like

clinical trials for people with cancer and other diseases that affects all Americans. I mean, I guess to ask a more specific question, are any of these cuts problematic to you? Are there any that you would want to see reinstated? Well, I can speak specifically to my district. It would be a good idea if

For example, when it comes to land management agencies, if we are not making cuts on the ground, the boots on the ground, not as many of the probationary employees, but we look at some of the folks that are maybe in the bureaucracy here in Washington, D.C., I think there's a lot of layers of that bureaucracy where we can more efficiently make those cuts. But

Yes, there have been some cuts that I think were maybe a little overaggressive in the district, and we're working to fix those. And to its credit, the administration is working with us behind the scenes, trying to get these employees back in place, recognizing that whenever you're making large systemic changes like this, sometimes you're going to make mistakes and you need to fix things. And we're working with the administration, and it's important that we have a good relationship with the administration when it comes to making sure that we have the right people in the right places.

I think, Congressman, to the public view, it feels or looks like Republicans are reluctant to stand up to President Trump. Is there stuff that goes on behind the scenes that we don't see? I mean, are Republicans standing up to him on some of these issues? Well, there's always going to be discussions behind the scenes with any presidential administration. And, you know, the other thing I would say, too, is

This issue of, you know, is the president not spending money that Congress has delegated? I mean, people can ask the same question about President Biden and construction of the border wall. Those were dollars that were appropriated and and the president there used the, you know,

federal law to impound those dollars and not to spend them. And then also the president forgave federal student loans, notwithstanding the fact that the Supreme Court said that that was not permissible under the Constitution. So I think we need to make sure that when we're looking at these things, yes, we stand up for the Constitution, absolutely. But we take it in a sort of historical perspective where we make sure that we stand up

but that we're consistent also. And we recognize that a lot of these issues aren't brand new. They've been happening before. But again, fundamentally, it's up to Congress to do its job. We haven't been doing that. We need to do that. And that's something that I'm happy to champion. After the break, Congressman Heard's message to Trump. We'll be right back.

High Five Casino is the top choice for social casino gaming that's free to play. With chances to win and redeem for real cash prizes, free spin rewards, and tons of exclusive games, you can experience more High Five moments than ever before. You're going to want to High Five everyone. The neighbors, the mailman, all your co-workers, of course your friends. Well, you get the point. Your High Five moment awaits at HighFiveCasino.com. No purchase necessary. Voidware prohibited by law. Must be 21 years or older. Terms and conditions apply.

Did you know 39% of teen drivers admit to texting while driving? Even scarier, those who text are more likely to speed and run red lights. Shockingly, 94% know it's dangerous, but do it anyway. As a parent, you can't always be in the car, but you can stay connected to their safety with Greenlight Infinity's driving reports. Monitor their driving habits, see if they're using their phone, speeding, and more. These reports provide real data for meaningful conversations about safety. Plus, with weekly updates, you can track their progress over time. Help keep your teens safe.

Sign up for Greenlight Infinity at greenlight.com slash podcast.

Back to the tariff issue. Have you yourself spoken to President Trump or anyone in the administration about your concerns that this should be a congressional power and not an executive power? There have been some discussions, certainly. Not with me and the president directly, but our teams. It's really important for me as a member of Congress and legislative branch to be working with the administration. There are so many priorities that we share in common. And fundamentally, what I tell the president's team is,

I am in complete support of the effort to onshore critical manufacturing, to grow American jobs, to make it easier for American products to be sold in foreign markets. We just need to make sure that we're doing it in the right way. And from my perspective, in the interest of the Third Congressional District of Colorado. So, yes, those discussions are they happen and.

You know, overall, directionally, we are in close alignment on the agenda that we campaigned on and that the president campaigned on. But where we have those issues and those differences, like any normal two branches of government, you have those discussions and you certainly keep those lines of communication open.

It seems like the message seems to have gotten across in some way. President Trump rolled back or at least paused the tariffs for the next 90 days. Do you think the pressure from Capitol Hill had something to do with that?

I think it's possible. It's a lot of different things. You know, there's, you know, I'm not privy to all that's coming before the administration and all the dynamics that the president and his team are dealing with. But in part, it's certainly possible. But obviously, we look at some of the dislocation in the markets and seeing how our partners overseas are looking at this. Certainly, I am very happy to isolate China, I will tell you. I think it's a good thing to

And then I applaud the president in wanting to get manufacturing and disconnecting us from China. Now, that's one of those areas, again, I think if you had Congress,

doing its job and looking at these under its terror power under Article 1, Section 8, the Congress would be, there'd be little daylight between us and the president on these things. So directionally, absolutely on national security issues, economic security issues, making sure that China as a strategic adversary is not empowered and that we weaken them. I think that's really important.

And that's something that, you know, we just need to make sure we do it in the right way and that we're strategic in how we employ those tariffs. Yeah, I guess that's a good question, Congressman, because you talk about this from the perspective of constitutional powers. But let's say Congress did have the power. Would you then support these kinds of sweeping global tariffs? I think we'd want to look at it on a more individualized basis. Certainly, I would want to take into account the...

In the interests of my congressional district, that's certainly what the Constitution contemplates is I think the Congress having some authority and perspective on what makes the most sense given its relationship in the constitutional order to the people that are represented there. One interesting fact I learned is if you're a member of the House of Representatives, it's the only –

position in government, I think that you cannot be appointed to, you have to be elected to. In other positions, there can be an arrangement for an appointment, but it's in the House of Representatives, they need to be elected by the people. And I think there's a real interesting constitutional significance to that and being responsive and being connected to the people.

And so it should be Congress, not the president, because they represent the people deciding where and how these tariffs be. Yes. But remember, we need to work with the with the president. It's not just one branch of government that enacts laws. Well, I guess you could have a veto proof majority. So, but the

ordinarily, in most cases, the legislative branch and the executive branch are going to be working together. And so it's in that balance of power, in that separation of powers, that I think maybe not perfect public policy, but constitutionally appropriate public policy is developed. And that's one of the things that has been the hallmark of our constitutional order since 1789.

There's also a lot, you said you support the efforts of the administration of Elon Musk's DOJ, the Department of Government Efficiency, to root out waste and fraud and excess spending in our government. But there's a lot of concern about the way it's being done, not just that they're overstepping Congress, but that it's done by someone who's not elected, not appointed, didn't go through the Senate. Does it concern you that all of these decisions are being made by an unelected bureaucrat?

Well, again, you know, I don't think this is the first time that we've ever had this situation where someone in the administration or an administration is making decisions that are in tension with what Congress has decided or allocated or appropriated. And I mentioned the two examples, but there are many more that go back beyond President Biden. And I think you can look back to President Obama as well and even perhaps some of the Republican presidents. But probably nothing to this scale, though, right? I don't think there's been anything to this scale where someone like Elon Musk would have a team of people

going into every agency and government and just firing people and eliminating programs. Well, and I think that's where the constitutional order takes place. And we've been seeing some of the constitutional challenges and legal challenges to some of the things. And some of them have been paused. Some of them have not been. This report has upheld certain other actions. So I think that's part of the way that this works. But one thing I will tell you, Kobe, is I do feel

Like it's tough sometimes to have this sort of broad systemic change. But it feels like to me as an outsider that's come to Washington, D.C., that there's a heck of a lot of change that needs to be made. And sometimes it takes a little bit of disruption in order to make the change that needs to be made. Yeah, there's certainly a sense across the country that Washington's not working for the American people. That's one of the reasons why President Trump was reelected in November and reelected.

the question will be, I guess, come 2026, whether the American people feel that this is the right way to go about making those changes. Are you hearing from constituents who are concerned about, you know, how these changes are happening? Maybe not the what, but the how. Yes, certainly. But I'm also, last night I had a

with some of the cattlemen from our district. And I talked to a gentleman that was very happy with the way things are going. He said, we need to have the shakeup. So, yes, I hear concerns. I hear, you know, folks that reach out that are unhappy with the way things are working. But like in any republic, you have people that think it's a good thing as well. And so trying to balance those and do what's best for the people

for the district in representing 735,000 people. Those are 735,000 different opinions that folks have. And so there's certainly a diversity of opinion. But yes, there are some that express concern. But there are also that there are others that understand that we do need to make serious changes here. And sometimes that causes disruption. But I would say fundamentally, I am somebody that believes in institutions and the power of institutions.

And in the constitutional order, in whatever we're doing, if we overstep those boundaries, we need to pull back and follow the Constitution. That's what's kept our country where we are today. And again, that's why I introduced the legislation that I introduced with respect to the tariff issue. Yeah. On the other side of that, you know, there's a certain understanding of like an orthodoxy or a purity when you're part of, you know, Trump's Republican Party these days. Have you heard people...

pushback from Republicans on the right that you have introduced legislation that, you know, pushes back on something that President Trump wants to do? You know, for my colleagues in Congress, I think people understand that you need to do what you campaigned on and what's in the best interest of your district. And there's a lot of respect for that. So I would say if there's been any pushback, it might have been from some of the folks. It might be from some of the people that I represent in my district that that that

understand what President Trump is trying to accomplish, and they would prefer to see their representative completely in unison with the president on those things. And what I tell them is look at the other issues that we're focusing on, energy, reducing the cost of groceries, gas, the cost of your utility bills.

You know, passing, helping to secure the border, all those things that we're doing, working with the president and his administration. There's a heck of a lot that we are working very closely on. But fundamentally, I'm doing what's in the best interest of my district and what I think is required under the Constitution. And so some of those folks will understand that and they say, yeah, OK, I get it. You know, we may disagree, but I understand Congressman Hurd. That's OK.

Others aren't as happy, but that's, I knew that going into this, to this process and, and it's still an honor to serve them and represent them. Do you consider yourself a MAGA Republican? I always describe myself as a constitutional conservative. I tend to,

I'm not really get too excited about tags and I think one of the things that I want to do is be an effective, thoughtful, pragmatic conservative. So that's a lot of adjectives that I just gave myself there.

But I would say the label that I feel most comfortable with is constitutional conservative. And again, going back to this tariffs issue, that's something that I feel fundamentally that we need to stand up for in Congress and reclaim that constitutional obligation. So I know you said you didn't speak to President Trump directly about this issue. But if you could, what would you say to him? I would say, Mr. President, I am behind you 100 percent on the

overall goal of on-shoring critical manufacturing, growing our domestic economy, keeping more jobs here in America, growing more jobs here in America, selling more American goods outside of our country. And I applaud that and I'm 100% behind you. Let's work together to make sure that we're doing it in the best strategic way for rural America and particularly the people of the Third Congressional District and

many, many, many, the majority of whom voted for President Trump in this last election. I mean, he won my district. He won a number of other districts in Colorado. Well, let's see, he won at least one other district, maybe two other districts in Colorado. In rural Colorado, he's very popular. And what I would tell him is, Mr. President, let's work together to make great policies that help

rural America and deliver on the promises that people voted on us for. Great. Well, Congressman, thank you so much for taking the time. It was great to chat with you. Happy to join you, Colby. Thanks. Thanks. Congressman Jeff Hurd represents Colorado's 3rd District.

That's it for Post Reports. Thanks for listening. Today's show was produced and mixed by Sam Baer, with help from Ariel Plotnick and Peter Bresnan. It was edited by Maggie Penman, Rina Flores, and Ronita Jablonski. Thank you to Emily Anderson and Meryl Cornfield.

Our team also includes Ted Muldoon, Lucy Perkins, Alana Gordon, Renny Siernovski, Sabi Robinson, Emma Talkoff, Sean Carter, Peter Bresnan, Elahi Azadi, Martine Powers, and Laura Benshoff. I'm Colby Ickowitz. We'll be back tomorrow with more stories from The Washington Post.

High Five Casino is the top social casino that's free to play. Sign up today to receive a free welcome bonus and exclusive first purchase offers. Choose the premium jackpot package for $29.99 and claim up to 700 game coins, 55 sweeps coins, one sweeps coin daily bonus for five days, and 400 diamonds. Your high five moment awaits at highfivecasino.com. No purchase necessary. Boardware prohibited by law. Must be 21 years or older. Terms and conditions apply.