“I am really, totally committed to bringing back manufacturing.” –– Hillary Clinton, campaigning in Ohio

Most every candidate running for president has pledged to support U.S. manufacturing. Apparently one thing we agree on is that too much has been lost by outsourcing so much manufacturing in so little time. Ask consumers, businesses, you name it: We want to make more things here.

We don’t agree on how, though. Leaders of both political parties blame agreements like NAFTA and the pending TPP for emptying the cupboard of U.S. jobs, presumably because voters do. But America’s most influential manufacturing organization, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), sees it the other way.

Jay Timmons, CEO of NAM, believes free trade agreements work for manufacturers and the U.S. I’ve heard him acknowlegde the difficulty of the issue, but suggest that the positive trade balance we enjoy with most treaty-bound partners makes them worthwhile. Nevertheless, NAM disagrees with much of its rank and file. Free trade is a non-starter for candidates running in Ohio, or Michigan, or Pennsylvania, states where national elections now pivot.

Politics aside, there’s a growth formula we can agree on, one shaped not in the political sphere but of course by industry, by the companies already leading a manufacturing revival and by lessons being learned. It’s not to say that elements of a campaign framework aren’t helpful or relevant. Some are. Hillary Clinton suggests we ‘Expand access to capital, especially for smaller manufacturers,’ a goal we agree with. We’ll host the second annual manufacturing growth and investor conference in Denver this summer — with a Utah version to follow. Growth manufacturers need money.

In addition to capital, our simple blueprint would:

1. Acknowledge that in most of America, manufacturing looks different that it did generations ago — and respond accordingly.

Federal Reserve data we published last week provides a roadmap as to where manufacturing is growing fastest. It’s an important guidepost as we consider a growth strategy:

A half-dozen or so sectors have reached their all-time peak production levels in the past year, including manufacturing sectors critical to the economies of Colorado, Utah, and much of the West: semiconductors, food, medical equipment, electronics and aerospace equipment.

If you were skeptical this region wasn’t at the center of the new manufacturing economy, think again.

2. Connect manufacturers with qualified business partners.

As we reshore jobs and develop new opportunities, the challenge for manufacturers is finding qualified, compatible business partners. Manufacturers need a robust supply chain. In many ways ‘business development’ means making it easier for manufacturers to find qualified business partners.

I read an analyst last week bemoan the amount of time and energy U.S. industry has invested in studying, building, analyzing, and awarding global supply chains as its domestic counterpart languishes. It’s a powerful observation. But the time is right to redouble efforts: U.S. manufacturing is suddenly competitive. A push to develop a world-class domestic supply chain should pay off.

3. Support manufacturers with modern, innovative economic development and marketing.

We’re investing millions in training, retraining, and education. In Colorado and Utah, taxpayer dollars are funding infrastructure programs, including high-tech ‘advancement’ centers. What’s also needed is economic development that’s well-aligned with manufacturing, including public/private partnerships to incubate and accelerate manufacturing companies in food and beverage, lifestyle and consumer goods, and other high-growth industries.

They dot the lancscape in the tech space. But technology’s most glorious manifestations are brought to life by manufacturers. Think Apple.

Capital. Connectivity. Training and business development. A simple plan that even the most ideologically opposed observers can agree on.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Reach him at btaylor@companyweek.com.

It’s tempting to say they never had a chance, really, this upstart bunch that somehow was selected a finalist for Walmart’s U.S. Manufacturing Innovation Fund.

The idea for Rural Colorado Apparel Manufacturing, or RCAM, was strong, so the submission was eye-catching and in keeping with Walmart’s push to support domestic manufacturing. But last month, Walmart informed CSU’s Dr. Nancy Miller and Carol Engel-Enright, along with the RCAM team including its visionary, Julie Worley, that they didn’t win. Walmart’s selections read instead like a laundry list of academic exercises with tertiary ties to manufacturing.

Think it’s deterred the group from pushing forward? Think again.

“It’s a blessing we weren’t selected for funding,” Engel-Enright says, with perhaps a hint of disappointment. How far would $300,000 have gone in rural Colorado? A country mile. But Engel-Enright insists a clean break will force RCAM to act like a real business. To develop realistic budgets, to generate revenue, control costs, and be accountable to investors.

As with any startup, it won’t be easy. But RCAM is one of a number of grassroots efforts aligned with the region’s incredibly active apparel and lifestyle business ecosystem, in this case intent on reconstituting a U.S. cut-and-sew workforce decimated by decades of offshoring and neglect, to keep jobs here instead of shipping more overseas.

Born from the 2014 Colorado Apparel Manufacturing Summit, Worley, a Phillips County economic developer, boldly envisioned that underutilized labor in the small towns of eastern Colorado could comprise a new workforce of sewers, assemblers, and finishers.

Enter RCAM. Today it’s more than an idea. RCAM-Wray center, in northeast Colorado, is up and running “in its third production run!” Engel-Enright states proudly, sewing long-sleeve T-shirts and hoodies with ‘kangaroo’ pockets. Today the Wray center employs six operators, led by Leslie Starks, who happens to have a fashion degree and acumen, it turns out, for the business side. “She’s caught on quick to industrial matters,” Engel-Enright says.

That RCAM-Wray is online — with centers in Julesburg and Ordway, Colorado, to follow — is testament in part to Engel-Enright’s unique skill-set, a combination of industry experience in fashion design and production, of owning and operating businesses of different stripes, of finding jobs for her fashion students in private industry and recently of a hard earned doctorate from CSU in education with an emphasis on design entrepreneurship. I tracked her down at CSU in early 2014 with the idea for a Colorado apparel manufacturing summit. It wouldn’t have happened without her.

Still, she’s realistic about the daunting challenge of developing apparel manufacturing infrastructure to compete with the Asian powers, in particular. “When it comes down to it, there’s no model out there, no blueprint to follow, to train a new generation of sewers and production specialists. We’re developing the plan and the process as we go,” she says.

That’s not to say the end results are also obscure. “We know the standard. We have to produce quality garments that measure up to the best in the world,” she asserts, but adds, “When do we know our efforts will translate into quality apparel? No matter how big the order, can we produce a quality piece?” More questions.

Early returns from the initial production runs and training sessions promise answers. “There’s no surprise about the quality of people we’re finding from these communities. They’re incredibly hardworking — we can’t get them to stop and take breaks!” she laughs. “But Julie and Darlene Carpio and others knew this would be the case. Rural America has so much to offer; there’s no doubt we can train a workforce to compete on an international stage if we’re smart about this.”

There are other needs — like equipment. “The Wray center’s working on knits, on flatlock machines [a sewing machine that creates a flat seam with the same appearance inside and out],” says Engel-Enright. “All three centers will have all the basics — straight stitch, overlock, and coverstitch. Julesburg is organized and investors are in place with deposits on equipment. We’re ready to go there when training and jobs are lined up.” But advanced cutting equipment and specialized sewing and finishing machines are much needed.

Without Walmart dollars, funding is the challenge. An Advanced Industry grant from Colorado’s Office of Economic Development and International Trade seems to fit the bill, but OEDIT views apparel-related business as a ‘Creative Industry’, not ‘Advanced Industry.’ The AI grant program is today under review; perhaps a revision will accommodate a wider cross-section of manufacturing industries.

All of which leaves Engel-Enright entirely unfazed. “These centers won’t replace Asian factories,” she says matter-of-factly, “but they will reduce barriers to entry for small business. A former student and budding entrepreneur told me, ‘What seemed insurmountable now seems possible.'”

Supporting a business-savvy academic would have been yet another benefit for Walmart, along with goosing domestic manufacturing and helping rural America ‘Live Better’.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Reach him at btaylor@companyweek.com with questions or information about the 2016 Colorado Apparel Manufacturing Summit, September 28 in Denver, Colorado.

Here are seven manufacturing stories we’ll be following closely in 2016:

1. Craft beer’s pivotal year. Two key ingredients of Colorado craft’s successful formula — its specialty sales channel and local ownership — may be tipped over in 2016. How will the sector respond? In November voters will likely decide whether grocery stores and other retail outlets can sell craft beer and wine, a move opposed by much of the craft ecosystem including the state’s network of thriving small liquor stores. The craft sector may have lost an important ally in the debate with the sale of Breckenridge Brewery to Anheuser-Busch, and may lose more. With rumors of a billion-dollar sale of New Belgium swirling, 2016 may be the year that Colorado craft’s united front against ‘big beer’ finally cracks. To what end?

2. Welcome to the (food) revolution. Food brands and manufacturers here are leading a sea change in what we eat and how we grow, make, and distribute our food. Brands flock here to be part of the scene and local companies are targets for takeovers. It’s a poster-child for the new manufacturing economy – entrepreneurial, innovative, ‘Made in America’ — and a model other states emulate. It’s also the fastest-growing manufacturing sector in Colorado. Storylines should be plentiful in 2016.

3. Will McCain’s antics derail one of Colorado’s signature aerospace manufacturers? In a pique over Ukraine, Arizona Senator John McCain led a congressional effort to ban the use of Russian RD-180 rocket engines used by Colorado aerospace manufacturer United Launch Alliance. As the company maneuvered around the politics McCain made it his personal mission to vilify ULA, one of Colorado’s signature companies. Alabama senator Richard Shelby fought back (ULA assembles its launch platforms in Alabama), securing more RD-180s as part of the 2016 federal budget. But is damage done? With dozens of government-funded launches planned in the near future, and ULA competitor SpaceX seemingly more viable than ever, it’s a good bet McCain will do everything he can to undermine ULA. Will Colorado senators, silent to this point, join the battle on behalf of a Colorado manufacturer?

4. Local sourcing: a new supply chain may light a fire under lifestyle manufacturing. Quiet but important grassroots efforts are underway to develop new supply-chain options for lifestyle and consumer brands — like a rural network of cut-and-sew centers. And why not? The region is a magnet for outdoor gear and apparel companies, for smart, visionary entrepreneurs with ambitions to launch and develop lifestyle companies. We seem far away, though, from a world-class supply chain that might actually begin attracting gear, apparel, or other consumer OEMs to Colorado. But small steps are important. And people are starting to get it.

5. What return on taxpayer investments in manufacturing? In addition to the space program, federal taxpayer dollars are flowing into the state to fund other programs designed to benefit manufacturers. Millions have already been spent on workforce development. CAMA’s FourFront initiative will spend $6.6 million in support of defense diversification and innovation. The City of Loveland, Colorado School of Mines, Manufacturer’s Edge and others will be investing taxpayer dollars in support of manufacturing. The initiatives hold promise but more government spending means higher taxes and with business over-regulated as it is, manufacturers reasonably expect to see tangible benefits in 2016 from the spend. (John Tamney’s brilliant Forbes column provides the backdrop.)

6. Pot’s impact on manufacturing. It almost goes without saying, but Denver’s future as a modern urban manufacturing center may hinge on the availability of affordable commercial real estate. Pot grows have radically changed the market. It’s bad form to root for the real estate bubble to burst, so instead, let’s hope the price of marijuana goes the way of oil and crashes, leaving pot businesses less well-heeled and the market less inflationary. It’s actually a good bet. If it happens we’ll remind you we told you so.

7. The rehabilitation of manufacturing’s brand — or not. Last year we chronicled the national debate regarding a U.S. manufacturing ‘renaissance’. By year’s end, the dialogue was less a lively back and forth and more a rout: Most business writers, like Jon Talton of the Seattle Times, had effectively buried the idea of a manufacturing ‘comeback’ in the bottom of a $40 barrel of oil, alongside a strong dollar hammering U.S. exports, or relative to manufacturing employment numbers from circa 2007, before a recession bludgeoned a sector already reeling from a wholesale offshoring of jobs.

To be fair, the reimagining of manufacturing is lost on local media as well; Colorado scribes often can’t identify a manufacturing company when they see one. It’s also hard to be critical of critics when manufacturing’s own advocates lose sight of the issue. ‘Re-branding’ was once a stated objective of manufacturing trade efforts. Today, not so much.

Our story is that manufacturing employment has returned to pre-recession levels in places like Colorado and Utah and that jobs are being created in a sector reinventing itself with technology and driven by consumer and business trends that today favor more locally produced goods. High-tech fabricators in aerospace and biomedical and food and beverage manufacturers will blaze a way forward. The future’s bright.

We’ll stick to it in 2016.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Reach him at btaylor@companyweek.com.