One of the most consequential Senate races in this year’s midterm election cycle is Roy Cooper (D), the former governor, vs. Michael Whatley (R), former RNC and North Carolina GOP chair. With an American financial center in Charlotte, cargo in Wilmington and Morehead City, forest products across rural counties, and manufacturing spread across the state, North Carolina represents an important chokepoint in global trade.

Cooper and Whatley will argue about prices, borders, jobs, energy, crime, and Washington. They should also answer a question built for North Carolina: when dirty goods move through clean paperwork, should banks help stop them?

If Cooper argues for clean energy, jobs, and corporate accountability, he should explain how banks, customs agencies, and importers will verify the supply chains behind those promises.

Federal Reserve research on U.S. bank trade finance found that the five largest trade-finance providers accounted for more than 75% of trade-finance loans. The five largest banks also accounted for more than 87% of reported trade-finance claims. Around 90% of U.S. banks reported no commercial letters of credit at all. This high concentration of trade finance makes banking legislation a potentially game-changing avenue for protecting indigenous people, forests like the Amazon, domestic manufacturers, and much more.

If Whatley argues for tariffs, border control, and American manufacturing, he should explain how enforcement will distinguish real domestic protection from another paperwork game.

Both candidates should answer the same question: will you support federal rules requiring large trade-finance banks to perform enhanced due diligence on high-risk goods before financing or processing transactions?

Tariffs Are Not Enough

This is where the race should move beyond tariff theater.

Tariffs punish declared origin. Traceability tests whether the declared origin is true. A tariff may push goods through Mexico, Southeast Asia, the Caribbean, or another waypoint. A banking rule can ask whether the source, owner, route, and end user match the paperwork.

North Carolina manufacturers should care because a domestic producer competes against importers that may use weak documentation, hidden ownership, forced-labor inputs, illegal timber, origin laundering, or third-country rerouting to make a product look cleaner than it is.

The same point applies to forest products. A North Carolina mill should not have to compete with a forged permit. A furniture maker should not compete against wood whose harvest origin cannot survive scrutiny. A paper or packaging company should not lose market share to goods that carry a clean label but a dirty chain.

Clean markets need clean checkpoints.