NORTH DAKOTA (KXNET) — Incumbent U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R) joined Nicholas Quallich for episode 27 of The Voice of the People. Senator Cramer, who's running for re-election, spoke about his time in office, why he's running for re-election, his top priorities if North Dakotans vote for him again, and more. Here is a transcription of the podcast:Nicholas Quallich: Thanks for watching the Voice of the People podcast here on KXNET.com. I'm Nicholas Quallich and joining me today is the current incumbent senator for the state of North Dakota; that's Senator Kevin Cramer. Senator, thanks for joining me. Sen. Kevin Cramer: Oh, it's a pleasure, Nicholas. Thanks for the opportunity. I love the fact that, you know, it's video that's available forever. Quallich: Yes. I want to again. I told this to the senator before we started, but I thank him for his patience. I've been under the weather literally for the last couple of days. So, hopefully my voice holds out but thanks anyway for joining me. As we're taping this, this will air the following Monday, we are five weeks away now from the election. How do you feel? Cramer: Well, I feel pretty good. I mean, it's probably the longest five weeks of my life, just like a week from today, it'll be the longest four weeks of my life. That's just the way it is when you're a candidate. And I've done this several times. I've been a challenger many times against incumbents. I've been the incumbent a few times against challengers. You never rest when you're in a campaign and that's the way it's supposed to be. That's what's so great about our system of self-governance is that it doesn't matter how important you think you are. It doesn't matter how big a job you have. Every few years, the people you work for get to do a performance evaluation and determine your fate. At the same time, when you're a challenger, you have all the excitement of going up, trying to get somebody fired and you replacing them. And you have a little more leeway, a little more liberty and in that sense, a little more idealism. And I think that's what's sort of wonderful about our whole system. So yeah, it'll be, I sleep well, Nicholas, so far, but definitely the campaign's always on your mind. Quallich: So why did you decide to run for re-election? Cramer: Yeah, that's a really good question because, you know, I was in the House of Representatives for three terms, that's six years, and then now one term as a senator, that's six years. But one thing about Congress in general, and specifically and especially the United States Senate, it really does honor longevity. In other words, seniority really does matter. It's not that you have any more, you know, you don't have any more votes, you still only have one vote, but you do have gavels. You end up being a chairman. I'd be chairman of two subcommittees this year if, this next year, if I win and Republicans take the majority. And that's because of seniority. It's literally just time put in. And in the Senate, seniority compiles very quickly because there's a lot of turnover every, you know, over the six-year time when you're a senator. And so it's just, I just think for North Dakota, for the people of North Dakota to benefit the most from what I've done, what I've learned in my previous six years in the House and six years in the Senate, it just gets value added. In fact, I often say a second Senate term is almost worth a third or fourth because you've just gained so much in terms of, not just seniority, but wisdom and experience and Rolodex. It really is a value-added proposition. So I think at least one more time, we'll add on to the times served and make it, you know, dynamically more valuable. Quallich: Now, as our viewers know, I spoke to your opponent, Katrina Christiansen, and the big issue that I had spoken to her about as far as candidate-wise, she was the first candidate I spoke to her since the second assassination attempt of former President Trump. I wanted to pose that question to you because obviously being a current officeholder, you know, this is something that I think you and I never thought would happen, you know, ever since the last time we saw a presidential assassination, so tell me about that and you know how does that reflect on our current state of politics? Cramer: Yeah, no, it's a really important question because I think that the two assassination attempts on President Trump Certainly are the most extreme examples of what has become a very raucous and unsettling political climate in our country You know we know we have deep philosophical divides. We know that the lines between the parties are brighter than probably ever, at least in my lifetime. Now, don't get me wrong. We fought a civil war once, and that led to an assassination of a president. But not in modern history. This is really a different time for us. So I think the assassination attempts are very sobering. Not only that they were both aimed at, at least up to this point, that the two that we've had are aimed at a former president who wants to be president. The fact that we now know that the country of Iran has a bounty out on President Trump, said that they in fact as a nation, as a government, are trying to find the opportunity to assassinate President Trump. They clearly don't want him to be president. So we know we live in a more dangerous time. We know we live in a more divided time just among our electorate. And you look at our politics, and I think it would surprise a lot of people to know that in the United States Senate, we all get along quite well. We pray together, we do Bible study together, we legislate together. I mean, just about everything I've ever legislated, I've had multiple bills and amendments that I've introduced become law. Pretty much all of them have had a Democratic co-sponsor. And we do these things together. We have dinner together. It's just a very, you know, quite a really cordial environment, at least in the United States Senate. But if you believed what you saw on TV, you would think we were always at each other's throat. And part of the problem with that is that this is a reflection, not of just the leadership of the country, but of the country in general, that the population is very divided. And I think to the degree we can in our positions of influence and where we have a big platform and, you know, the bully pulpit, if you will, we need to demonstrate a better way. And I think that does happen. It just doesn't get a lot of attention because, of course, you know, the news does better if there's conflict than if there's peace in the family, so to speak. So I just think the two assassination attempts are sort of the exclamation point on just how bad things have gotten in this country politically. But I also hope that they serve as a reminder of how bad it can get and that maybe we should all tap it down just a little bit, step back a little bit, be passionate for sure, but no place for violence whatsoever in our political discourse. Quallich: Now, that raises a good question because, of course, when something like this happens, the issue of gun control be implemented to the extent of which, you know, I think sometimes there might be an expectation that well, we can just legislate our problems away when at the same time, you know, there are just going to be those people who will do whatever it takes to get their hands on a gun and just cause chaos and violence. Cramer: You know, it's really an interesting point because when you put it in the context of these two assassination attempts, remembering that the most recent one, he had a gun that the, he had a rifle, I believe it was, that the serial numbers had been filed off of. In the other one, the young man had purchased guns legally, or between he and his father, they had purchased guns legally. And so there you have two different scenarios, but the common denominator being a person whose mind was so greatly disturbed that they thought that they ought to try to kill a former president. And so it's really not, in my mind, it's really not about the guns. In fact, the guns in many respect in this country save a lot of lives. They help us defend our own property, defend ourselves against our own violence, whether it's in a neighborhood in Chicago or on the great plains of North Dakota, we have that right and it's a constitutional right and it needs to be preserved, it needs to be protected. But it's really more about the heart and the mind in my view. And I think that when it comes to whether it's faith leaders, social workers, government leaders, educators, families themselves. We all just need to be, again, a lot more responsible, but we also just need to share and promote a different culture, not a culture of death or a culture of violence, where death is all too common anymore, even sanctioned by the government in some cases. We need to get back to a culture of community, where people love each other, where even when they disagree, they do it in an agreeable way. I'm so blessed to every Tuesday night have dinner with a group of Republicans and Democrats, House members and senators, people, all men, men that I consider friends and brothers. We pray together, we dine together, we share together, we're vulnerable with one another and we have each other's backs. We just need to do more of that as a nation. We need to do more of that in our communities, at our schools, and certainly in our churches and other institutions. We need to learn to love each other a lot more and take away the desire to ever use a gun against somebody else. Quallich: I want to focus more now on you on your re-election campaign. Now, of course, this is not the way it would work and I would hope it would never work this way, but if you wanted me to write a internet article about your term in office as senator so far, and it said, Senator Cramer's term in office can be described as blank, how would you go about it? Cramer: That's a great way to frame that point and that question. One of the things I want is that Kevin Cramer shows up. If he can, he gets there, wherever it is. I show up here at home in North Dakota, and I show up in Washington, D.C., especially when North Dakotans are visiting. I think it's important. It's a major part of serving the public in a self-governed country, show up. Quallich: Tell me about one of the things that I know a lot of people here in North Dakota have been anxiously awaiting is a farm bill. Of course, that was back in 2018 and expired on the 3rd. So what can you tell us about that? Cramer: Sure. So you're right. We are, as of this day that we're recording this, we are now starting what will be the second year of an extension of the previous farm bill. So, a year ago, we extended the five-year farm bill into the sixth year. That sixth year wrapped up on September 30th, and now we are going to the second year. And a year ago, it was tolerable. And when I say tolerable, it's never ideal. But prices were high enough and input costs were at least within some reason and a farmer could make it and a banker could bank the farmer. Now with inflation being aggregated to well over 20% in most cases, and in fact it's over 30 or 40% in the area of energy, which is a major input obviously for agriculture, and interest rates high and in other inflation high, it's harder to bank when prices are so low. So what, you know, the question being, what are we going to do or what's next? I personally believe we will get a farm bill done between the election and the new year. We are now in an extension with government funding until December 20th, at which time we'll have to have an appropriations bill. And my sense is that we'd have an omnibus spending bill, or at least some smaller minibuses, and then a farm bill to go along with that, along with the National Defense Authorization Act. All of those things expired on September 30th, and are now in an extension. And I just think that in a lame duck, what's called lame duck session, with so much at stake, the election behind us, most people will want to have a fresh start on January 1st. I think it's a perfect time to pass a new farm bill. The new farm bill will have to, no doubt, recognize the more modern cost of doing business on the farm. Seven years ago or six years ago when the current farm bill was passed, input costs were much lower and so reference prices, for example, will need to be raised whether you're a farmer that's using the the ARC the agricultural risk coverage a formula or the PLC which is price loss calculation then you'll you know you should be able to have an input cost there that match the reference price. Same is true of the other safety net the most important safety net probably of all of them, and that being crop insurance. Crop insurance, you have to be able to insure a crop at a cost, or at least at a price that gets back your costs, your input costs for growing that crop. Cramer: So those are the three main things. There are a few other things that we're dealing with. The biggest problem we have with the Farm Bill, quite honestly, is that Debbie Stabenow, the chairwoman of the Agriculture Committee, is insisting on keeping the baselines of all the other programs at all time highs. And the reason they're so high is because they added to them in the middle of the Farm Bill, which you were never supposed to do. So for example, right now, 80% of the Farm Bill is the SNAP program, has nothing to do with farmers. And then another big chunk of it, which is actually equal to the crop insurance, is the conservation title, which is what they call the climate title. And those are way too high and it dilutes then the opportunity or the dollars that can go to the actual farmer as a safety net to ensure that they can continue to grow the safest, most reliable, and low-cost food in the world. So we've got some work to do. We are at an impasse, but I do think some progress is being made in the last, just in the last couple of weeks actually. Quallich: But I presume you can appreciate how frustrating some farmers might be wondering why it's taken so long and why there have been a couple of extensions, correct? Cramer: Without a question. We, of all of the groups, of all the stakeholder groups that I represent, farmers are the one that show up the most. They, there's almost every week some farm group, some coalition of some sort in agriculture, whether it's cattlemen or grain growers or soybeans, corn growers, Farm Bureau, Farmers Union, there's always a farm group in. So we hear their frustration a lot. We have this very same conversation you and I are having. They're generally encouraged because the most optimistic people in the world are farmers or you wouldn't get up every day and go out and plant another crop every spring. And so, yeah, not only do I understand the frustration, I sense it and feel it along with them. And that's not even to include the bankers. I mean, all the banking groups that come out, whether it's North Dakota Bankers Association, credit unions, the independent community bankers, farm credit services, they all have the same problems, same concerns, even the rural electric because they can't really lend money if the safety net isn't adequate to cover the loan. So there are a lot of stakeholders, not to mention just all of us that eat, and some of us eat more than others. Quallich: And a lot of us here eat product that is from here. But, I see there's concern, mainly with the whole country of origin. Will we see anything regarding that in this farm bill, do you suspect? Cramer: Yeah, so it's interesting, there is a bill that attempts, it's introduced by John Thune of South Dakota, that attempts to force a country of origin labeling on beef products exclusively, and one that meets the requirements of trade deals, right, of the WTO in particular. Because country of origin labeling is prohibited by our enrollment, our involvement with the WTO and same with Canada's and Mexico's. I firmly believe one of the ways to do this is, so as a voluntary program, which there is. And so you can do that for sure, but a mandatory one is gonna be very tricky unless we really mess up one of our trade deals. We need to be very careful to make sure we're in compliance with that. Of course, the other, you know, the other big issue that I wanted to talk to you about was the whole idea of here we are again coming up on the end of the year, and you did pass the bill to avert that government shutdown. As Speaker Johnson said, he said shutting the government down less than 40 days from a fateful election would be an act of political malpractice. He acknowledged not everything was in there that he wanted in there. I suspect you probably feel the same way. Quallich: So what do you think has to happen to avoid another extension come the end of the year? Cramer: Yeah, so a really important point. It's all up to Chuck Schumer every time. I mean, all of the appropriations bills that should have been voted on the floor have already passed the committee long ago. The House has passed their appropriations bills. The only entity that hasn't had an appropriations bill on the floor is the United States Senate, and one person makes that decision, and that's Chuck Schumer. He likes these omnibus spending bills because then he gets to put all of the appropriations bills, all 12 of the appropriations bills, into one giant appropriations bill, add all kinds of things he may want that others don't want, add some things other people want that he may not love but but he wants to get the votes and then you force an up-or-down vote on a whole Christmas tree of things that offends people as well as you know funds necessary things and it's not the way to do business. The number one thing we can do and is when we get back after the election is force him to bring some things to the floor. If he won't do it we're going to be looking at another straight up or down vote late in December before the holidays, before Christmas, when he knows he has extra leverage. Now, hopefully, we will, Republicans will win the majority in the Senate. We'll have a brand new leader because Mitch McConnell's not seeking re-election as leader. And my insistence with everybody that's running for leader is that they show me their calendar for next year. I want to know all 12 appropriations bills, what weeks they're going to be on the Senate floor, put it in the calendar before we start the new session. And then we'll know we're going to have what's called regular order. And that's important for lots of reasons. First of all, it's just important that all 100 senators have an opportunity to amend bills on the floor. That's what regular order provides. The other thing is, is it provides transparency to everybody, anybody that's interested in the process. And transparency, with transparency becomes accountability. And with accountability, it becomes more responsibility. And one of the reasons we've been, sort of had the green light to just overspend is because there's nobody holding everybody accountable because there's no transparency because Chuck Schumer won't allow it. So we have got to bring back that process of debate and amending bills, up or down votes on amendments and move on if we want to get back to some regular order where you eliminate this frustration of omnibus spending bills at the end of the year. Quallich: So, Senator, if you get re-elected this time, what is one priority that you feel that you have to get done for North Dakota? Cramer: Yeah, well, let's, first of all, let's, I'm gonna presume for a moment that we're gonna get a farm bill done before the New Congress starts if we don't that's got to be number one starting in January Beyond that what I where I'm planned to really hone in and focus first of all as a member of the Armed Services Committee That's a massive responsibility. You know about 30 of my friends, and I are on the committee We'll no doubt have a briefing here in the next couple of days as we record this, because of course on this day, Iran has responded with missile attacks, ballistic missile attacks on Israel. We have got to start projecting strength as a nation. We're going to have to have a lot of discussions about the cost of deterrence. Ronald Reagan could teach us a thing or two about that. Modernizing the nuclear triad, including both wings of the nuclear triad that are housed at the Minot Air Force Base, modernizing our ISR and space assets, which we also have the Grand Forks Air Force Base and the National Guard and of course up at the Cavalier Space Force Station. So a lot of my focus will be on keeping America safe. The other thing though, where I really want to drill down and my history, my experiences. Since the three Supreme Court cases, which restored rights back to states and things like North Dakota versus the EPA, where they used the major questions doctrine to say, hey, listen, if Congress didn't give you this authority, you don't have it. Or the absence of a prohibition is not a license to make up new rules. With Waters v. The United States, which is also a North Dakota case, where they found in favor of the landowner instead of the bureaucracy and changed the definition of an navigable water or a federal jurisdiction water to reduce jurisdiction by about 90% in this country. Or with the Chevron doctrine, overturning the Chevron doctrine, which says no, it's not up to the Unelected bureaucracy to make laws where where they're not there aren't laws or where there's ambiguity that's up to the legislature the Congress if you will and the and the courts and all of that says okay Here's our moment. Here's our opportunity to greatly reduce the burden and the You know overbearingness and of course just the cost of a super bloated bureaucracy. I think we can take down large, large parts of our state or federal agencies where there's no longer anything for them to do because of the Supreme Court's rulings, which really restore rights back to states and individuals where they belong constitutionally all along. Quallich: So as we kind of wind this up here, you know, we elect people like yourself. We elect one to represent many, and of course, representing many people, you are in touch with your constituents, you hear a lot. Of course, there is some criticism of, you know, how someone does their job right or wrongly. So what are some of the criticisms that you hear about yourself and how would you address them with our viewers? Cramer: Sure, so I get, a lot of times I get a lot of my Republican friends that think I'm too bipartisan. They don't, they don't, for example, they don't like that I helped shepherd the bipartisan transportation bill or the infrastructure bill. But that's my responsibility as a ranking member of the transportation and infrastructure subcommittee. I try to find solutions to problems. You know, the Export-Import Bank extension, for example, was my bill. A lot of a lot of my conservative friends don't like the Export-Import Bank, but it's really important to North Dakota's farmers and to many, many of our small manufacturers. So that's one of the more common criticisms I get, frankly, from people in my own party. On the other side, there's some people that are upset that I'm a Republican at all, or that they get upset about the abortion issue. They don't like that I'm so pro-life. Well, I know that. I am pro-life. I don't apologize for that. It's a major reason that I won the election six years ago. And so what I try to do, though, regardless of what the criticism is, is I always listen. I try not to get too defensive. But then I explain myself. And I think that that's where the showing up part comes in. You know, I do not let the talent screen the calls, I take whatever's coming and try to explain it. And that's why I love a format like what you provide. I think that's what we haven't always had, but because of technology, because of new ways to communicate, new ways to distribute information, you can do it responsibly or irresponsibly, but the ability to actually drill down and talk about issues, unfiltered, non-edited, really helps. But also being able to go on talk radio and listen is also as helpful as talking. So some criticism is warranted. Sometimes somebody might have an objection to a particular way I vote. Generally speaking, though, in North Dakota, even our critics are nice. I mean, we're just so blessed to have good people. And I often say I do as many town halls at Menards or, or the Ace Hardware Store or the supermarket, you know, as I do, as I do anywhere else, because people are so nice, and they might have a concern, they might have a criticism, they might a lot of times you'll have a problem. And I've had many people that have approached me in a grocery store and they end up getting a land of doing some casework for them whether it's getting a social security check that they're missing or a veteran's benefit or Some you know visa for for their farm workers I mean, it's amazing how it's just a blessing to be from North Dakota and to work for North Dakotans, where even the mean people are nice to each other? And there are no mean people. Quallich: Finally, Senator Kramer, with about a minute left, why should North Dakotans re-elect you? Cramer: You should re-elect me because you know me. You know me, you know that I show up, you know that I listen, you know that I always have North Dakota's interests in my heart and my mind, and that it's reflected in the hearings and in the legislation and how I vote. You've invested six years in me, and the next six years will be two, three, four times better than the first six years just because of how much better I know you and how much better I know the United States Senate, and because I'll now have that much more seniority and wisdom. Quallich: Okay. Well, Senator Kevin Cramer, thank you so much again for your patience with me, and thanks again for joining us here on The Voice of the People. And thank you for watching The Voice of the People podcast here on kxnet.com. We'll be back soon with more on the questions and answers affecting you. Because, remember, it's your voice that matters: The Voice of the People. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Today's Top Stories SIGN UP NOW