2 stories credited to Alliance for American Manufacturing
Latest story Apr 15, 2026 · on ChamberLight since Apr 2026
A story can appear as several articles (copies of the same piece), so counts of stories and of articles differ.
Scores for Alliance for American Manufacturing
Writing quality not enough rated stories yet: 2 of 10. How it is measured
Scores last checked Sep 24, 2026.
Stories ChamberLight collected, by month
Stories credited to Alliance for American Manufacturing, by publication date. ChamberLight collects articles that mention the officials it tracks, so this shows its own coverage of this source, not how much the source publishes.
- Stories from Alliance for American Manufacturing
- Shaded: ChamberLight collected no stories, or almost none, from any outlet (a gap in its collection, not in the outlet’s publishing)
Show as a table
| Month | Stories | All outlets |
|---|---|---|
| March 2026 | 1 | 148 |
| April 2026 | 1 | 4,537 |
| May 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| June 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| July 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| August 2026 | 0 | 1 (collection gap) |
| September 2026 | 0 | 598 |
Top topics
Share of this source’s stories tagged with each topic. A story can carry several topics, so the shares do not add up to 100%.
- Foreign Policy2
100% of 2 stories · 30% across all outlets
- Economy1
50% of 2 stories · 26% across all outlets
- Infrastructure1
50% of 2 stories · 8% across all outlets
- Labor/Unions1
50% of 2 stories · 4% across all outlets
- Technology/Privacy1
50% of 2 stories · 10% across all outlets
The thin mark on each bar is the topic’s share across all outlets.
Who they cover
Party of the officials these stories are mainly about, across all 4 officials named. A story counts once for each official it is mainly about, so the split is over 4 story–official pairs, from 2 stories.
- Republican50% · 2 pairs
- Democrat25% · 1 pair
- Party not recorded25% · 1 pair
Most covered
Stories mainly about each official, and their share of the source’s 2 stories.
Article tone
ChamberLight’s article analysis assigns each story a tone toward the official it covers. It describes the coverage of that official, not Alliance for American Manufacturing’s stance, and reader votes do not change it. 2 stories.
- Good Look
- 2 (100%)
- Mixed
- 0 (0%)
- Informational
- 0 (0%)
- Bad Look
- 0 (0%)
Challenges to these scores
No one has challenged a score on this page yet. Anyone can; editors publish every outcome here.
Articles served from americanmanufacturing.org
4
Senators Propose a Section 232 Investigation into Heavy Equipment Manufacturing
Caterpillar equipment in a lot in San Leandro, Calif. | Getty Images In a letter to the Trump administration, Tammy Baldwin and Bernie Moreno cite CNH, Caterpillar and John Deere after jobs are offshored. When you think of a classic American company, one that probably springs to mind is John Deere. The company’s been around since 1837, when John Deere himself revolutionized farming technology. Today, his namesake continues to sell tractors, mowers and more to both farmers and the average consumer. But even though John Deere feels very American and started out as such, the products themselves are less so. The same is true for other heavy equipment manufacturing companies such as Case New Holland (CNH) Industrial and Caterpillar. That’s because these companies have significantly offshored their operations. Although they continue to produce some parts of their products domestically, offshoring has become a major part of their strategy. The people who suffer because of this offshoring are American workers. In 2024, CNH Industrial sparked controversy when they announced plans to lay off over 200 workers in Wisconsin and move those jobs to Mexico. In 2025, John Deere announced it would also be moving some of its manufacturing operations to Mexico and laid off thousands of workers in Iowa. Caterpillar has extensive facilities in Mexico, including some that have come under fire for reported labor abuses. These companies have cited cost-cutting measures as the reason why they continue to offshore. But when it comes to spending money on executives and investors, it’s a different story. Over the past few years, John Deere, CNH and Caterpillar have paid billions of dollars to shareholders through stock buybacks and shareholder dividends. This state of affairs hurts hard-working Americans, especially in the Midwest, which has been hit hard by factory reductions and closures. That’s why, in a moment of bipartisan collaboration, Sens Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) wrote a letter late last month calling on the Trump administration to open a Section 232 investigation into the offshoring of heavy equipment manufacturing, citing John Deere, CNH and Caterpillar as the prime offenders. The letter came ahead of the White House hosting John Deere and CNH’s CEOs for National Agriculture Day. A Section 232 investigation would determine whether the offshoring of heavy equipment manufacturing threatens national security. If it’s determined that imports do pose a threat, the president can then impose tariffs on these products. The senators wrote: “We are outraged that John Deere, Case New Holland (CNH), Caterpillar, and other major manufacturers have turned their backs on the American workers, families, and towns that built them by sending production of heavy construction and agricultural equipment to Mexico… These companies should not be allowed to eliminate American jobs, pay Mexican workers poverty wages, and then ship products back to the U.S. for additional profit on the backs of our communities.” Although the senators focus on Section 232 tariffs on these manufacturers, that’s not their only concern. They also point out how the current US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (USMCA) has allowed this massive offshoring to happen. Currently, due to USMCA, heavy equipment made in Mexico can enter the United States duty-free with no rules of origin. Even if the administration does impose Section 232 tariffs, the issue can’t fully be addressed until the issues with USMCA are dealt with. The Alliance for American Manufacturing applauds Sens. Baldwin and Moreno for speaking out against the scourge of offshoring. We hope the Trump administration will seriously consider their proposal – and improve the USMCA, as we’ve written about here.
Senators Propose a Section 232 Investigation into Heavy Equipment Manufacturing
Caterpillar equipment in a lot in San Leandro, Calif. | Getty Images In a letter to the Trump administration, Tammy Baldwin and Bernie Moreno cite CNH, Caterpillar and John Deere after jobs are offshored. When you think of a classic American company, one that probably springs to mind is John Deere. The company’s been around since 1837, when John Deere himself revolutionized farming technology. Today, his namesake continues to sell tractors, mowers and more to both farmers and the average consumer. But even though John Deere feels very American and started out as such, the products themselves are less so. The same is true for other heavy equipment manufacturing companies such as Case New Holland (CNH) Industrial and Caterpillar. That’s because these companies have significantly offshored their operations. Although they continue to produce some parts of their products domestically, offshoring has become a major part of their strategy. The people who suffer because of this offshoring are American workers. In 2024, CNH Industrial sparked controversy when they announced plans to lay off over 200 workers in Wisconsin and move those jobs to Mexico. In 2025, John Deere announced it would also be moving some of its manufacturing operations to Mexico and laid off thousands of workers in Iowa. Caterpillar has extensive facilities in Mexico, including some that have come under fire for reported labor abuses. These companies have cited cost-cutting measures as the reason why they continue to offshore. But when it comes to spending money on executives and investors, it’s a different story. Over the past few years, John Deere, CNH and Caterpillar have paid billions of dollars to shareholders through stock buybacks and shareholder dividends. This state of affairs hurts hard-working Americans, especially in the Midwest, which has been hit hard by factory reductions and closures. That’s why, in a moment of bipartisan collaboration, Sens Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) wrote a letter late last month calling on the Trump administration to open a Section 232 investigation into the offshoring of heavy equipment manufacturing, citing John Deere, CNH and Caterpillar as the prime offenders. The letter came ahead of the White House hosting John Deere and CNH’s CEOs for National Agriculture Day. A Section 232 investigation would determine whether the offshoring of heavy equipment manufacturing threatens national security. If it’s determined that imports do pose a threat, the president can then impose tariffs on these products. The senators wrote: “We are outraged that John Deere, Case New Holland (CNH), Caterpillar, and other major manufacturers have turned their backs on the American workers, families, and towns that built them by sending production of heavy construction and agricultural equipment to Mexico… These companies should not be allowed to eliminate American jobs, pay Mexican workers poverty wages, and then ship products back to the U.S. for additional profit on the backs of our communities.” Although the senators focus on Section 232 tariffs on these manufacturers, that’s not their only concern. They also point out how the current US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (USMCA) has allowed this massive offshoring to happen. Currently, due to USMCA, heavy equipment made in Mexico can enter the United States duty-free with no rules of origin. Even if the administration does impose Section 232 tariffs, the issue can’t fully be addressed until the issues with USMCA are dealt with. The Alliance for American Manufacturing applauds Sens. Baldwin and Moreno for speaking out against the scourge of offshoring. We hope the Trump administration will seriously consider their proposal – and improve the USMCA, as we’ve written about here.
Buy America Mitigates Cybersecurity Threats to America’s Water Infrastructure
Photo screenshot from House Energy & Commerce YouTube Buy America Build America creates valuable U.S. jobs and strengthens domestic manufacturing, but the policy also has knock-on benefits well beyond economic stimulus. “Accessible and reliable water and wastewater services are essential to protect public health and provide fundamental services to our constituents. These services can also be a foundational basis for a strong economy and a strong America.” That’s what Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W. Va) said in her opening statement during the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing she chaired last month. And she’s not wrong: Reliable water and wastewater services are as close to a definitive public necessity as you’re likely to get. And their importance explains why they’re persistently the target of foreign cyberattacks; it was, in fact, the subject of the hearing. Capito and others on the committee, including ranking member Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), made note of that persistence, and witnesses urged lawmakers to fund any mandates for cybersecurity improvements. One witness, Scott Dewhirst of Fairfax Water in Virginia, pointed out that while Congress has authorized programs that extend grants for cybersecurity enhancements, they aren’t well-funded. And it’s all optional, he said. “While guidance and tools provided by [the Environmental Protection Agency] and [the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency] are valuable, there are currently no statutory federal cybersecurity requirements for water systems, making these best practices optional and leaving less resourced utilities wholly unprepared for a cyber incident,” Dewhirst said. So what works in its place? Improved cybersecurity may be a knock-on effect of domestic procurement preferences – better known as Buy America rules. That was the observation made in another hearing a few weeks later in a House Energy & Commerce subcommittee hearing that examined challenges facing public water utilities. It’s not easy to run such a service with limited funds, (important) regulatory requirements, and the real threat of cyberattacks. About halfway through the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) raised the question directly to Eric Hill, the general manager of the Russellville Water & Sewer Board in Russellville, Ala. Hill was appearing before the committee on behalf of the National Rural Water Association. “On the issue of cybersecurity risk, do you think the Build America Buy America (BABA) requirements are an appropriate mechanism to ensure the critical components are sourced from American companies, not from adversaries like China? That’s part of my concern is: them embedding the ability to interfere with their water systems,” asked Palmer. “Is that a concern for the rural systems?” Hill responded: “It was a big concern for us. We had a telemetry system, which could be intercepted, and it was a proprietary system. So we reached out with our [technical assistance] providers from Alabama World Water Association, and we got on the same page with them. And we bid the project out with SRF funds, and we switched over with those SRF funds and installed a [supervisory control and data acquisition system]. It has the VPN. It is encrypted. It is BABA compliant. And that was our biggest concerns with something like that.” The idea that Palmer was getting at – and that Hill confirmed in his answer – is that procuring electronic equipment from domestic sources limits cybersecurity threats. It’s the same reason there’s a rule banning Chinese software in connected automobiles: The software itself is the vector for an attack, and imported software is less secure than that developed outside of the purview of U.S. law and regulation. Buy America has many more obvious and direct benefits to it. By giving American manufacturers the first shot at federally backed infrastructure projects, U.S. workers benefit from public spending. However, improved cybersecurity in our public water systems is an unquestionably positive and important knock-on effect. Watch the full House Energy & Commerce hearing below.
Buy America Mitigates Cybersecurity Threats to America’s Water Infrastructure
Photo screenshot from House Energy & Commerce YouTube Buy America Build America creates valuable U.S. jobs and strengthens domestic manufacturing, but the policy also has knock-on benefits well beyond economic stimulus. “Accessible and reliable water and wastewater services are essential to protect public health and provide fundamental services to our constituents. These services can also be a foundational basis for a strong economy and a strong America.” That’s what Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W. Va) said in her opening statement during the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing she chaired last month. And she’s not wrong: Reliable water and wastewater services are as close to a definitive public necessity as you’re likely to get. And their importance explains why they’re persistently the target of foreign cyberattacks; it was, in fact, the subject of the hearing. Capito and others on the committee, including ranking member Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), made note of that persistence, and witnesses urged lawmakers to fund any mandates for cybersecurity improvements. One witness, Scott Dewhirst of Fairfax Water in Virginia, pointed out that while Congress has authorized programs that extend grants for cybersecurity enhancements, they aren’t well-funded. And it’s all optional, he said. “While guidance and tools provided by [the Environmental Protection Agency] and [the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency] are valuable, there are currently no statutory federal cybersecurity requirements for water systems, making these best practices optional and leaving less resourced utilities wholly unprepared for a cyber incident,” Dewhirst said. So what works in its place? Improved cybersecurity may be a knock-on effect of domestic procurement preferences – better known as Buy America rules. That was the observation made in another hearing a few weeks later in a House Energy & Commerce subcommittee hearing that examined challenges facing public water utilities. It’s not easy to run such a service with limited funds, (important) regulatory requirements, and the real threat of cyberattacks. About halfway through the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) raised the question directly to Eric Hill, the general manager of the Russellville Water & Sewer Board in Russellville, Ala. Hill was appearing before the committee on behalf of the National Rural Water Association. “On the issue of cybersecurity risk, do you think the Build America Buy America (BABA) requirements are an appropriate mechanism to ensure the critical components are sourced from American companies, not from adversaries like China? That’s part of my concern is: them embedding the ability to interfere with their water systems,” asked Palmer. “Is that a concern for the rural systems?” Hill responded: “It was a big concern for us. We had a telemetry system, which could be intercepted, and it was a proprietary system. So we reached out with our [technical assistance] providers from Alabama World Water Association, and we got on the same page with them. And we bid the project out with SRF funds, and we switched over with those SRF funds and installed a [supervisory control and data acquisition system]. It has the VPN. It is encrypted. It is BABA compliant. And that was our biggest concerns with something like that.” The idea that Palmer was getting at – and that Hill confirmed in his answer – is that procuring electronic equipment from domestic sources limits cybersecurity threats. It’s the same reason there’s a rule banning Chinese software in connected automobiles: The software itself is the vector for an attack, and imported software is less secure than that developed outside of the purview of U.S. law and regulation. Buy America has many more obvious and direct benefits to it. By giving American manufacturers the first shot at federally backed infrastructure projects, U.S. workers benefit from public spending. However, improved cybersecurity in our public water systems is an unquestionably positive and important knock-on effect. Watch the full House Energy & Commerce hearing below.