¶ Overview
Nunn has described Trump’s tariffs as “winning” even though an Iowa economist warned “we’re all going to be poorer.”
He voted four times to protect the tariffs, including in April 2025 when he was the deciding vote to protect tariffs from being repealed by Congress, dooming Iowans who relied on her to a trade war and rising prices. Tariffs are contributing to higher food prices, higher costs for researchers, and hurting Iowa farmers.
¶ Nunn Was The Deciding Vote To Protect Trump’s Tariffs, Which An Iowa State University Economics Professor Said Would Make Everyone Poorer
¶ Nunn Repeatedly Voted to Protect Trump’s Tariffs
¶ September 2025: Nunn Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Nunn Effectively Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through March 2026. In September 2025, Nunn voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the resolution [that] would allow for the tolling (the pausing of counting) of days for resolutions of inquiry from Sept. 30, 2025 through March 31, 2026. It also would provide that each day during the period from April 9, 2025, through March 31, 2026. would not constitute a calendar day for the purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution to terminate President Donald Trump's April 2, 2025 executive order declaring a national emergency regarding tariffs on imported goods. The resolution also would provide that during the period for March 11, 2025 through March 31, 2026, would not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency executive order declared by President Trump on Feb. 1, 2025. Such an executive order concerned tariffs on many Canadian and Mexican imports and Chinese goods. The resolution also would provide that the provisions of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act would not apply through March 31, 2026 to a joint resolution terminating the national emergency.” The vote was on the rule. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 213 to 211. [House Vote 268, 9/16/25; Congressional Quarterly, 9/16/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 707;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
- Support Was Won From GOP Holdouts Through A Promise Of A Vote Later In The Week To Shorten The Block To End In January Rather Than March. According to Politico, “GOP leaders flipped several of the Republican holdouts with a promise to add language shortening the block on tariff disapproval votes to a forthcoming measure set for approval later in the week, per two Republicans with direct knowledge of the agreement. The expiration date on the block will be reset from March 31 to the end of January, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Tuesday. It’s likely the Supreme Court will have ruled on a challenge to Trump’s tariff-declaring powers by then.” [Politico, 9/16/25]
¶ April 2025: Nunn Cast The Deciding Vote To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Nunn Cast The Deciding Vote For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through September 2025. In April 2025, Nunn voted for, “adoption of the rule (H Res 313) that would provide for floor consideration of the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). The rule would provide up to one hour of debate on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the measure. It also would block the expedited consideration of joint resolutions terminating President Donald Trump’s tariff actions under the April 2 executive order by providing that each day during the period from April 9, 2025 through Sept. 30, 2025, will not constitute a calendar day under the federal law pertaining to terminating national emergencies.” The vote was on the rule. The underlying legislation was the FY 2025 budget resolution. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 216 to 215. [House Vote 94, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
- Speaker Johnson Backed The Move, Claiming Trump Has “Executive Authority” And That The Tariffs Are “In The Interest Of The American People.” According to ABC News, “House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., defended the move, telling reporters, ‘I've made it very clear I think the president has executive authority. It's an appropriate level of authority to deal with the unfair trade practices. That's part of the role of the president is to negotiate with other countries.’ Johnson said Trump told him Tuesday night that ‘there are almost 70 countries that are [in] some stage in negotiation of more fair-trade agreement agreements with the United States. I think that is in the interest of the American people. I think that is an ‘America First’ policy that will be effective, and so we have to give them the space to do it.’” [ABC News, 4/9/25]
- The Vote Was The Second Use Of The Procedural Tactic To Block Votes On The Tariffs, The First Use Of It Being In March. According to ABC News, “House Democrats, led by Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., moved to force a vote on Tuesday on terminating the national emergency authority and blocking Trump's sweeping tariffs. Now, that vote is unlikely to occur. This is the second time Johnson has moved to stop the legislative calendar to prevent votes on Trump's authority on tariffs. Under House rules, these votes would typically come up within 15 calendar days but now will not if the ‘rule’ passes during the vote series Wednesday afternoon.” [ABC News, 4/9/25]
¶ If One “Aye” Vote Had Switched To A “No” On House Vote 94 The Measure Would Have Failed Instead Of Passing
The Measure Considered In House Vote 94 Passed By A Vote Of 216 “Ayes” To 215 “Nos,” Which Meant If One Aye Vote Had Switched To A No Vote The Measure Would Have Failed.
[House Vote 94, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
¶ April 2025: Nunn Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Nunn Effectively Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through September 2025. In April 2025, Nunn voted for, “motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 313) that would providing for floor consideration of the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). The rule would provide up to one hour of debate on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the measure. It also would block the expedited consideration of joint resolutions terminating President Donald Trump’s tariff actions under the April 2 executive order by providing that each day during the period from April 9, 2025 through Sept. 30, 2025, will not constitute a calendar day under the federal law pertaining to terminating national emergencies.” The vote was on the previous question. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 217 to 212. [House Vote 93, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313]
¶ March 2025: Nunn Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Nunn Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs. In March 2025, Nunn voted for, “the bill that would provide for Congressional disapproval of, and nullify, a December 2024 IRS rule related to gross proceeds reporting by brokers involved in digital asset sales. The rule imposed reporting requirements, beginning in 2027, on non-custodial barkers who participate in the decentralized digital asset market. It also required brokers to file information returns and provide payee statements reporting gross proceeds from certain digital asset sales and transactions.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 292 to 132. [House Vote 71, 3/11/25; Congressional Quarterly, 3/11/25; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 25]
- The Bill Effectively Blocked The House From Voting To Reverse Trump’s Tariffs On Mexico, Canada, And China For The Next Year. According to the New York Times, “Republican leaders on Tuesday slipped language into a procedural measure that would prevent any resolution to end the tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China from receiving a vote this year. It passed on party lines as part of a resolution that cleared the way for a vote later Tuesday on a government spending bill needed to prevent a shutdown at the end of the week.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
- The Bill Nullified A Law That Would Allow The House And Senate To End A Disaster Declared By The President. According to the New York Times, “In this case, Republican leaders did so using a particularly unusual contortion: They essentially declared the rest of the year one long day, nullifying a law that allows the House and Senate to jointly put an end to a disaster declared by the president.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
- The National Emergencies Act Required Consideration Of Resolutions Ending A Presidentially Declared Emergency Within Fifteen Calendar Days But Republican Leadership Included A Measure In The Bill Declaring The Rest Of The Year Did Not Constitute A Calendar Day. According to the New York Times, “The national emergency law lays out a fast-track process for Congress to consider a resolution ending a presidential emergency, requiring committee consideration within 15 calendar days after one is introduced and a floor vote within three days after that. But the language House Republicans inserted in their measure on Tuesday declared that, ‘Each day for the remainder of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day’ for the purposes of the emergency that Mr. Trump declared on Feb. 1.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
¶ Nunn: “This Is The Trade War That We Have To Have Now”
Nunn: “Trump Has Gotten It Right From Day One. This Is The Trade War That We Have To Have Now So We Don't Have Capitulation War Ten Years From Now.” According to a panel Zach Nunn spoke on, "QUESTION: Okay, with the remaining time, I want to get to China. We talked a little bit earlier about China's latest antics with restricting rare earths, restricting material. The president's efforts to mine rare earths here in America. But overall, what is your assessment with our position with China right now and maybe some of the hotspots we should be looking for? NUNN: So I wish we would have the opportunity to start with this, because in my opinion, this is the singular most pressing national security threat and it's one that's going to echo long beyond the next three years of the Trump administration. But I will say Trump has gotten it right from day one. This is the trade war that we have to have now so we don't have capitulation war ten years from now. We have an opportunity here to fundamentally reshape how we hold China accountable." [Richard Nixon Foundation Grand Strategy Summit, 10/22/25] (video)
¶ More Than Once, Nunn Claimed Trump’s Tariffs Were “Winning”
Nunn In April 2025: “I've Said Since The Beginning, Trump's Tariffs Are Winning.” According to the Des Moines Register, "Nunn said Trump's global trade war will ultimately help reduce the U.S. trade deficit and open up new markets for Iowa farmers. ‘I've said since the beginning, Trump's tariffs are winning,’ Nunn said." [Des Moines Register, 4/25/25]
- Nunn In February 2025: “Let's First Of All Recognize That Trump's Trade Tariffs Are Winning.” According to the Des Moines Register, "Republican U.S. Rep. Zach Nunn told reporters Monday that President Donald Trump’s tariff threats are ‘winning’ by forcing concessions from other countries. ‘Let's first of all recognize that Trump's trade tariffs are winning,’ Nunn said. ‘It has forced Colombia to take back prisoners. It has negotiated with Mexico, who, just within the last hours, has agreed to become a good partner in fighting fentanyl. There's a conversation going on with Canada this afternoon.’" [Des Moines Register, 2/3/25]
HEADLINE: “Congressman Nunn Supports Tariffs On Canada, Mexico, China” [Radio Iowa, 2/4/25]
¶ Iowans Expressed Concern About Trump’s Tariffs
Iowa State University Economics Professor Peter Orazem On Trump’s Tariffs: “We're All Going To Be Poorer.” According to the Gazette, "Q: How would the tariffs affect America's long term economic alliances, and what would that mean for market access to Iowa farmers to sell their products overseas? A: Well, we're all going to be poorer. The whole definition of trade is both parties benefit. But there seems to be a sense that trade is a zero-sum game. So if the other person loses, you must be winning. But in fact, a reduction in trade means both parties lose. So unless we have a quick resumption of trade, you're going to see a protracted loss of wealth in the United States." [The Gazette, 4/14/25]
- HEADLINE: "Grocery Inflation Highest Since 2022 As Trump Tariffs Pile Up" [Axios, 9/16/25]
HEADLINE: "Vulnerable Iowa Farmers Now Face Perils Of Trump’s Trade War" [New York Times, 5/5/25]
The President Of The Iowa Corn Growers Association Said Tariffs Would Impact Farms And Rural Communities At A Time When Farm Income Was Already Falling And The Industry Was Experiencing Layoffs. According to Iowa Public Radio, "The American Soybean Association, National Pork Producers Council and Iowa Corn Growers Association issued similar calls for trade negotiations and support for new markets. ‘We see tariffs impact us as farmers … but it also relates heavily to rural Iowa and the communities we live in,’ said Stu Swanson, president of the Iowa Corn Growers Association and a farmer in Wright County. Swanson said the trade conflict comes on top of low commodity prices and high input costs. Net farm income has fallen since 2023 after a record high in 2022. The farm economy downturn has contributed to layoffs at John Deere, Bridgestone-Firestone, Cargill and Corteva over the last year. Commodity groups and farmer organizations are also concerned that China will turn more to Brazil and Argentina for its supply of corn and soybeans in an ongoing trade war. Swanson said it’s difficult for American farmers to regain their market share once it’s lost." [Iowa Public Radio, 4/8/25]
An Agricultural Economist From Iowa State University Said Tariffs Would Hurt Iowa Producers Because Chinese Buyers Would Buy Less American Product And Put Downward Pressure On Prices Of Goods Like Corn And Soybeans. According to CBS 2 Iowa, "But economists who studied the last trade war say the damage to farmers was significant, even with billions in federal aid. Dr. Chad Hart, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University, explained how the latest Chinese tariffs work and why they could hurt U.S. farmers. ‘China putting a 10% tariff on soybeans, a 15% tariff on corn— that’s forcing those products to cost 10-15% more than they used to. That means Chinese buyers will buy less from us,’ Hart said. ‘Since they’re buying less from us, that’s going to put downward pressure on prices here in the U.S. for corn and soybeans. And that’s how it hurts producers.’" [CBS 2 Iowa, 3/6/25]
Iowa Farmers Union Board President: "A Trade War Will Put Iowa Farmers Directly In The Crossfire Without Getting Any Closer To The Long-Term Goal Of Fair Trade That Values Iowa Farmers And Workers." According to the Des Moines Register, "Among the most worried are rural residents who are heavily reliant on farming and manufacturing. Aaron Lehman, the Iowa Farmers Union board president, said farmers and rural communities pay ‘the price when the administration chooses a chaotic trade policy.’ ‘A trade war will put Iowa farmers directly in the crossfire without getting any closer to the long-term goal of fair trade that values Iowa farmers and workers,’ Lehman, a central Iowa farmer, said in a statement." [Des Moines Register, 4/4/25]
University Of Iowa Engineering Students Said The Tariff Charge For What They Needed To Make A Chip That Could Help Provide UV Protection Cost More Than The Product Itself. According to KRCG, "The University of Iowa’s ‘Modern Marvel’ event comprises upper-level students who designed their technology. Still, in the process, some learned the impacts these tariffs can have in the real world. Tyler Steffen and his group have developed a tiny chip that can help provide UV protection. ‘Something you’d want to wear to try and keep an eye on your own health,’ said Steffen. Most of the students at the event graduate in just days, but not before the ‘Modern Marvel’s event that offers real-world experience. A real world that will require greater American ingenuity in a time of competition from China and other countries. ‘Somebody’s got a real-world problem that they want to solve, and then they can take everything they learned in the last three years and apply it to the project,’ said Chair of the Engineering Department Gary Christensen. But this year’s ‘Modern Marvel’s event faced another obstacle that put these engineering students to the test. ‘We were met with a tariff charge that was larger than the cost of the board itself,’ said Steffen. Overcoming that is becoming a valuable lesson in itself. Their creations can change lives but will be influenced by actions that are out of their hands and can prove costly. ‘To have it completely done and ready to order and then basically be told no, the politics of this say no you aren’t able to do it anymore,’ said Steffen. ‘I was distraught that day honestly. It upset me quite a bit.’" [KCRG, 5/9/25]
¶ Trump’s Tariffs Had Caused Problems For Iowa Soybean Producers
PRESS RELEASE: "U.S. Soybean Farmers Sound Alarm As China Turns To Brazil Amid Trade Standoff" [Press Release – Iowa Soybean Association, 8/21/25]
- HEADLINE: "China’s Snub Of U.S. Soybeans Is A Crisis For American Farmers" [New York Times, 9/15/25]
- As Of September 2025, China Had Not Bought Any American Soybeans And Was Instead Placing Orders From Brazil. According to Reuters, "U.S. farmers are missing out on billions of dollars of soybean sales to China halfway through their prime marketing season, as stalled trade talks halt exports and rival South American suppliers step in to fill the gap, traders and analysts said. Chinese importers have booked around 7.4 million metric tons of mainly South American soybeans for October shipment, covering 95% of China's projected demand for the month and 1 million tons for November, or about 15% of expected imports, according to two Asia-based traders. By this time last year, Chinese buyers had booked around 12 million to 13 million tons of U.S. soybeans for September-November shipment, said one of the traders, who is based in Singapore at an international trading company. The U.S. normally ships most of its soybeans to China between September and January, before Brazil's harvest hits the market, but Chinese buyers have yet to book any U.S. cargoes for the new crop year, according to traders tracking shipments." [Reuters, 9/10/25]