NextFin news, On November 7, 2025, during a campaign stop at a Wilson County farm in North Carolina, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Roy Cooper sharply criticized President Donald Trump’s tariff policies, calling them “erratic” and economically damaging. Cooper emphasized how these tariffs have exacerbated price increases for both farmers and consumers, stressing that continued trade restrictions are undermining North Carolina’s agricultural sector and broader local economy. The Senate hopeful urged Congress to act decisively to end what he frames as harmful trade barriers that disproportionately hurt working families and rural communities.
Cooper’s remarks come amid sustained inflationary pressures in key sectors influenced by trade policy disruptions, building on long-standing debates around tariffs implemented during the prior Trump administration and maintained into his current presidency. The campaign stop in a farm setting highlighted the lived realities for many constituents who face heightened input costs for fertilizers, equipment, and export tariffs reducing market access for North Carolina crops, including tobacco, soybeans, and sweet potatoes.
According to WRAL.com, Cooper highlighted rising prices, noting that tariffs are inflating production costs and raising food prices at grocery stores. He positioned himself as a defender of North Carolina’s farmers against what he called the economic fallout of these policies, framing tariff repeal as a pathway to restoring price stability and competitiveness in regional agriculture markets.
This explicit opposition to Trump’s tariff strategy is significant given President Trump’s current administration tenure beginning January 2025 and the centrality of trade policy in national economic discourse. As North Carolina remains an agriculturally intensive state, Cooper’s stance appeals to rural voters wary of protectionist trade measures that have historically sparked retaliatory tariffs and disrupted global supply chains.
The root causes of this tariff controversy can be traced to earlier trade confrontations aimed at protecting domestic industries but resulted in higher input costs and reduced export opportunities. Tariffs on steel, aluminum, and certain agricultural imports have fed through supply chains raising prices on manufacturing and farm inputs. This has pressured profit margins for producers and led to higher consumer prices, contributing to inflationary dynamics seen nationwide.
Empirical data supports Cooper’s narrative: USDA reports indicate North Carolina’s agricultural exports have declined by approximately 7% since the resurgence of tariffs in 2024, while input costs for farmers have increased by nearly 12% year-over-year, squeezing operational viability. Consumer Price Index (CPI) data further corroborates steady food price inflation averaging a 5% annual increase in the state, above the national average.
Beyond immediate economic effects, ongoing tariff-induced uncertainty hampers long-term investment decisions by farmers and manufacturers. Supply chain disruptions deter capital expenditures and can shift production offshores, adversely impacting local employment and economic growth prospects.
Politically, Cooper’s public challenge to the presidential tariff agenda amplifies partisan divides over trade policy, underlining ideological contrasts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. His positioning aims to consolidate support among moderate and rural voters concerned with cost-of-living pressures and trade impacts on agriculture-dependent communities.
Looking forward, if Congress heeds calls like Cooper’s to dismantle or recalibrate tariffs, the prospects for economic stabilization in North Carolina's agricultural sector may improve, accompanied by easing inflation pressures. However, resurgence of geopolitical tensions or strategic protectionism could sustain tariff regimes, perpetuating uncertainties and economic headwinds.
Ultimately, Cooper’s campaign critique signals a broader national debate on balancing trade policy objectives with economic realities faced by vulnerable sectors. The trajectory of this debate will significantly shape regional economic resilience and political alignments in the coming electoral cycles.
