The High-Stakes Fight for the Senate
As the 1916 election approaches, a local editorial attacks Senator Miles Poindexter for his stance on free trade and the Underwood tariff.
The most important fight before protectionists today, outside of the election of the president, is to so change the political complexion of the next United States senate as to repeal the Underwood law and save the industries of the nation. An unusual situation exists in the state of Washington. Congressman William E. Humphrey and United States Senator Miles Poindexter are candidates. We know these men by their records in congress. Judging by these records, Mr. Humphrey has always been a protectionist, and Mr. Poindexter a free-trader. Mr. Poindexter voted for the Underwood law that placed lumber and shingles on the free list. In view of the injury that the Underwood law has brought to the industries of the state of Washington, particularly to the lumber and shingle industries, we cannot understand how a man of Senator Poindexter's standing can consistently run as a protectionist.
“It would be a strange position for the republican party in the state of Washington to have a candidate for United States senator that would agree with his free-trade opponent.”
Political debates over international trade and the protection of local industry remain central to Washington's economy today. This editorial captures the fierce partisan intensity of the 1916 election cycle, mirroring the long-standing tension between global trade policy and regional industrial security.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.