This is all organized to keep competition down and prices high for U.S. producers.

The U.S. oil companies have a lot of clout but they are up against a formidable set of farm senators. A pretty strong lobby in the farm sector says we should hold off (lifting the duties).

It's very easy to talk about limiting imports of bedding or shoes or whatever, but once you do it and prices shoot up, then you will get a backlash.

It's not an innovation problem; it's more a matter of production.

A comprehensive trade agreement would take the downward pressure off not only for American producers but for other countries as well,

The rhetoric will be stepped up on trade.

We think it would have been difficult with Portman. Now it's close to impossible.

There are groups in Mexico who want limits. I can see a bargain along those lines.

The problem is that she does not have the profile that Portman does, and I am afraid that will be read abroad as a downgrading of the trade portfolio.

With $4 billion at stake, you would fight to the last, ... has been a poison for U.S.-Canada relations?. That is what the Byrd amendment has generated.