Editor's note: this story was translated from the original VOA Mandarin article.
With two weeks until the November 3 midterm elections, the U.S., and China’s relationship is on the ballot in some closely contested races nationwide — from soybean exports and factory jobs to the cost of powering data centers.
Candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate are debating how to counter Beijing while addressing a question closer to home: Who is benefiting from those policies, and who is paying a price.
Soybeans: can trade promises deliver?
In North Carolina’s competitive 1st Congressional District, Democratic Representative Don Davis as recently as September called on President Donald Trump to secure what he called a “a verifiable, structured timeline" for promised Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans. Davis faces Republican challenger Laurie Buckhout.
There have been signs of progress. Last week, Chinese state-owned buyers had ordered a combined 1.2 million to 1.5 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans. But sustained purchases and actual deliveries will be key tests of any trade commitments.
In Iowa’s Senate race, agricultural trade is also a flashpoint. During an October 7 debate, Democratic candidate Josh Turek said tariffs on trading partners, including China, were hurting agricultural export markets. Republican Ashley Hinson defended efforts to hold Beijing accountable for its trade practices, while pledging to support manufacturing and reduce fertilizer costs.
Data centers: who pays for the SI race?
The push to compete with China in super intelligence, commonly referred to as artificial intelligence, is colliding with concerns about electricity costs and local control.
In Pennsylvania’s 8th Congressional District, Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti, a Democrat challenging Republican incumbent Rob Bresnahan, has made data center development a campaign issue.
Cognetti’s campaign has criticized tax breaks for such centers and a lack of transparency, warning that residents could be left with higher costs.
Bresnahan has proposed legislation to protect communities that reject data center projects, limit developers’ ability to sue over those decisions, and require some federally subsidized projects to deliver tangible local benefits.
President Trump has made expanding U.S. AI infrastructure a national priority. At an October 3 rally in Ohio for Republican Senator Jon Husted, Trump defended data center development with a warning: “They’ll go to China.”
Husted’s Democratic challenger, Sherrod Brown, has criticized his Republican opponent's support for data centers and tax incentives, arguing that the facilities should pay the full cost of their electricity use.
Husted sponsored the Ratepayer Protection Act, which would require states to consider standards making data centers cover grid upgrades needed to meet their additional power demand. The House passed the measure, but it failed to advance in a Senate procedural vote in September. Democrats argued that it did not provide adequate protections.
The dispute is not simply whether to build data centers, but how to ensure the costs do not fall on households and small businesses. The issue is also featuring in Senate races in Georgia, Texas and Maine.
Tariffs: protection or higher costs?
Tariffs present another tradeoff. Measures intended to protect U.S. producers can also raise costs for businesses that rely on imported components.
The Associated Press reported on factory layoffs that employers say have attributed to higher import costs, while also noting that tariffs are not the only cause of manufacturing job losses. The White House responded by saying a factory boom is underway.
Michigan’s Senate race highlights another distinction: opposing broad tariffs does not necessarily mean rejecting targeted trade restrictions on China.
Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed has criticized the Trump administration’s sweeping tariffs while leaving room for targeted measures tied to industrial policy. Republican Mike Rogers has defended some tariffs but called for an end to tariff disputes with Canada.
The debate underscores how trade policy toward China can also affect U.S. businesses and economic ties with other trading partners.