The Alternate Path to American Industrialism

Guest Opinion by Jason Keeley

Liberation Day was quite the upheaval for the economic status quo. The President called it the revitalization of America; businessmen called it destructive. Many cheered, many booed, and some sued.

That lawsuit, brought by more than 1,000 businesses, seems very well likely to succeed.

The Daily Wire reported that “The court’s liberal justices appeared to side with the plaintiffs in the case … [and] Conservative Justices John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett also expressed skepticism about some of the Trump administration’s arguments.”

If the Supreme Court does indeed strike down the tariffs, the only solution would be for Congress to reenact them, though that would be quite difficult to get through a free trade Senate. Tariffs also have not proven to be effective in their purpose of revitalizing manufacturing.

Another Daily Wire report says that, in December of 2025, “The retail industry shed 25,000 jobs, while manufacturing lost another 8,000 positions. Economists have attributed factory job losses to the Trump administration’s tariff increases.”

Indeed, the Foundation for Economic Education reported that the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book says that Cleveland manufacturers are passing along 100% of tariff costs onto consumers, that Chicago manufacturers passed on higher raw material prices onto consumers, and that a Richmond glass manufacturer had its supplier driven out of business by the tariffs, which again drove prices higher.

I recommend reading that full report, as that is not the limit to the damage caused by the tariffs.

That all said, the motivation for the tariffs was absolutely sound. Manufacturing must come home. It is a national security issue that this happen. Our WWII wartime economy relied on us being an industrial nation. We needed civilian factories that could be converted into the Arsenal of Democracy. A service economy is an economy that cannot withstand wartime. Tariffs are simply the wrong tool to fix the very real problem of industrial incapacity.

What I propose instead is an expansion of what we already do in other sectors. The Post Office is a state corporation that handles the transportation of goods. Amtrak is a state corporation that handles passenger rail. The Tennessee Valley Authority is a state corporation that handles nuclear energy development. A new National Industrial Authority could handle growing the manufacturing base.

The path to onshoring is, simply put, “if you want something done right, do it yourself.” Congress commissions the NIA with its structure based on the successful (and profitable) TVA, and the NIA is given the job of creating not simply factories but dual-use factories that are equipped to produce both cars and tanks, freighters and fighters.

According to BreakingDefense, such a proposal has already been made by legislators in D.C. under a proposed “Civil Reserve Manufacturing Network” (Though, as usual, D.C. names are awful, and I prefer “National Industrial Authority.”).

Dual-use factories under an NIA would not only revitalize the manufacturing base without raising prices but would make the Pentagon its own supplier. The military is infamous for being overcharged on everything it buys. If it were its own manufacturer, it would buy at cost. It would be a massive relief for the federal budget. Instead of buying the arms, we’d buy the blueprints.

The Tennessee Valley Authority succeeded in its goals and turns a profit doing it. Tariffs, meanwhile, are hurting the manufacturing base rather than growing it. Let’s learn from what works and Make America Industrial Again with the National Industrial Authority.

Jason Keeley is a political science student at Auburn University at Montgomery. He is the Eagle Forum River Region Action Group leader and is currently an intern for the Barry Moore for Senate campaign. The views expressed here are his own. To contact, email JasonKeeley6@gmail.com.