Because nobody is going to steal our businesses, nobody will close our factories and nobody will close our plants anymore. They are all coming back. [applause] susan President Trump has popularized the debate over tariffs in our country once again. How long throughout our history have tariffs been a subject of political debate . Peter tariffs have been the topic of discussion from the beginning. Tariffs make great rhetoric. Really power people up. One could argue that the United States was founded on a tariff thatll. Not american tariffs, but opposition to english tariffs. Susan we will spend some time we started asking questions about the tariff debate and we thought we would bring the audience along to learn more about the role of tariffs and American History. Before we get into the meat of this, what is a tariff . Peter it is a tax. There are many different kinds of tariffs. You will hear about protectionist tariffs, punitive tariffs. But at the end of the day, the difference between those tariffs is minimal. It depends on if you are paying the tariff, or paying for the tariffs. The most basic level is there are two ways that tariffs are adjudicated. One is that it is the percentage of the cost of the item being imported. The other is a fixed cost. When the United States was first founded, most of the tariffs were 5 of the value of an object coming in. There were some things that were specific. I think . 10 on a gallon of wine. They did not make a difference if it was good wine or bad wine, it was . 10 a gallon. Susan overall, with regard to tariffs, are there winners and losers when they are imposed . Peter tariffs are fascinating in that they are very mysterious. I like analogies. Thinking about tariffs is thinking about a big plate of spaghetti. Everybody loves spaghetti. Tariffs are very complicated and difficult to understand. Its almost impossible to pull a strand of spaghetti out of the plate without touching the others. Depending on your perspective, different people have remarkably different ideas about whether they are effective or not effective. People argue about that forever. They are taxes. It is very unclear. One thing that is absolutely clear about tariffs is the rhetoric about tariffs is extremely successful. This is something that politicians, throughout the history of this country, have used very effectively to get elected. Being in favor of or being opposed to tariffs. Susan before we get into the founding of the nation and the tariffs at the earliest days, i want to learn more about you. You spent much of your career at the American History museum, what is your job there . Peter i am a curator. I take care of a variety of collections. I am the project director for the American Enterprise exhibition. Which is the exhibit that looks at the history of the nation, of the people through the story of business and working people. Susan at this network we talk to academic historians, you are a public historian. What is your mission . Peter my job as a public historian is to get people excited about history, get people excited about thinking and learning. The mission is not so much to tell people what is right or wrong, or specific dates, but to make them understand that any topic is complicated and involved. The perfect example is tariffs. No one understands tariffs. Even the people involved will occasionally own up to the fact that they are very hard to decipher. For the public, whats really important is to know that tariffs have huge effects, and its very unclear what those effects will be. Unintended consequences are associated with tariffs quite often. Susan since the Trump Administration has brought tariffs back to the forefront, have you changed the way you talk about them in your exhibition . Peter no. The smithsonian is apolitical. Its important for us to represent all sides of the argument. We are excited that people are interested in tariffs, because it is a business story, and it makes people lean in more. We are not influenced by any one groups interest for or against something. Susan people are generally more interested in the topic. You make it easier to find . Peter as topics change, different portions of exhibition become more engaging. If you listen to peoples conversations, sometimes they are more heated than they were in the past. Susan we have a few of the items and you can explain how they tell the story of tariffs. How did you get started in all this . Peter in terms of Business History . Susan and your interest in doing this for a profession. Peter if you are interested in technology, i am a historian of technology, the aspect of it that touches people, how their lives are changed by technological innovation is important. The role of business in that story is complicated. For me, as a historian, that complication is really delightful. Understanding history is very gray. Maybe a conspiracy is actually true. That people have alternative motives, they will do one thing and Say Something else. It is a great learning experience that you can apply to the future. Susan what sparked your initial interest in taking this direction in your history studies . Peter i have always done Industrial History. I am a big fan of big, heavy greasy things. Being able to do Industrial History requires you to look at business, to think about it, who the people are and how labor is being formed. Economists are great people. They write wonderful books that are filled with great numbers that are often correct. Historian understands the anecdotal part. Why at the wto, why the protesters were marching in turtle suits was a fascinating time. Susan you made the point that the nation was born over tariffs. What is your point . Peter trade is what is important. Tariffs are a huge element of trade because they have become a bar to importing, and occasionally exporting more. The United States, as a set of british colonies, was interested in trade. It existed in a mercantile system. The british said you must send all this back to the mother country, we will turn it into finished goods and then you can buy it back at a higher price. People wanted to do the value added. They wanted to trade not only with england, but be able to trade with germany, with australia, with china. We have a big section and our exhibition that looks at the china trade in the 1840s. There were a series of tariffs that were put on to citizens of the u. S. , the stamp act would be one example. You had to pay a tax for any type of document. Had a huge founding that was put on it. Susan which led to the Boston Tea Party . Peter correct. Americans were unhappy about having to pay for that extra tax that was put on their tea. Sometimes they sent it back to england. Sometimes they locked it up in warehouses. In a violent act they destroyed the tea and true some of it into the harbor. Susan in the colonial period was the u. S. A producer of anything other than Agricultural Products . It was not the United States yet, were the colonies . Peter the british colonies were exporting a lot of food goods. Wood was very important. Trade itself was very important. Shipbuilding because of the , amount of wood of skilled craftsmen, you could build ships. Being part of that trade. We always talk about merchants. Part of our exhibition is the merchant era, which is 1770s to the 1850s. What we are saying is not merchants in the notion of somebody behind a store counter, but a merchant in terms of a trader. Somebody who is buying cargo and moving it around. The colonists were very involved, somewhere very involved in merchant trade. Most of them were in agriculture. The time of jefferson, which is much later after the country was founded. Probably 80 of americans were involved in agriculture in one form or another. Susan if people were to understand the roots of the american revolution, would you say they were in equal parts political and economic about trade . Peter there are many different causations for the revolution. The United States, the culture of the u. S. Had a very fine look at business, at making money, at creating opportunities throughout its history. One of the things that our exhibition does is argues big ideas. For thinking about the mentality and what drives people. That is the notions of opportunity, innovation, competition and common good. These are the heartfelt bases of the people of the United States. It separates them from many other countries. That notion of opportunity is really, at a part, american capitalism. The notion of common good is really american democracy. It really pushes for independence, for liberty, leave me alone, those great things are felt in that notion of democracy. But also opportunity. The chance to make money and do things. Susan one of the items that we want to show people from that period is the teapot. How would this have been used in society at that time . Peter this is just a wonderful piece on so many different levels. This is the english actually selling the fact that they are in trouble. The stamp act was much vilified in the u. S. People had an option of what types of pots they would have for their tea. Tea was a very important thing in the u. S. This was a piece that represented that political thought. That tea drinking is often associated with politics. With interchange about concepts. What makes this delightful is that it is made in england and was made for export. At the time, the Industrial Revolution is taking place, mechanization is taking off, and the potteries in england are becoming bigger and bigger and they need to expand their market. They are very interested in appealing to Anyone Around the world. The American Market is substantial. They make things that are lampooning themselves. There are many levels of interest involved. Susan another piece from that period is a dress that is for Martha Washington . Peter this is a great dress. Her gown. This is chinese silk. Silk at this time is imported. It really talks about the international kind of trade. If you look at the early period in the United States, there is a lot of conversation about the cult of weaving fabric, and this is a very american ideology. By the 1850s, americans are looking back, somewhat nostalgically and romantically, and at an earlier period they are talking about the age of homespun. The yankee woman spinning cotton, spinning silk and making fabric. That dress goes to speak to the fact that International Trade, even in the time of george washington, is very important. Susan if you were a politician of the era, your choice of clothing fabric might be a political statement . Peter absolutely. If you look at Benjamin Harrisons wife, her gown that she wears to the inaugural of harrison is silk, but it is woven in the United States, and it is emblazoned with icons of the nation. The burr oak and things like that. Keeley is a congressman, very big protectionist, he was very careful to always Wear Clothing that was american made. Only by america. America first, and made, made in the usa is something that has been around for a long time. Susan what are we to make of the fact that the first piece of legislation passed by the congress when we signed the constitution to become a nation on july 4, 1789, sign into place by president washington, placed a 5 tariff on most imported goods. Peter any government needs money to operate. There is no income tax at this point. There has to be some source of revenue. Tariffs in this early period, really up until 1913,s revenuegenerating. If you are going to have a federal government, this is the argument between hamilton and jefferson, is how strong should the federal government be. If you will have a federal government, you need to be able to build things and do things. That means funds. Some money is coming from land sales, but revenue from tariffs is one of the big drivers of government. Susan Alexander Hamiltons secretary of treasury. He is a leading voice for tariffs. Can you talk about how he promoted the idea, and what the political debates were between his group, the federalists, and jeffersons party. They had a very different point of view. Peter jefferson was a states right and he had a different vision for the nation. Really seeing the yeoman farmer as the quintessential american. Sandwiched between the notion of what jefferson probably would talk about the savagery of native americans, and the evil aristocrats of england, which would be factory workers. What he saw was the yeoman farmer with connection to the earth as a great thing. He saw local control as important. On the other part they sought manufacturing and cities as the future. As such, creating an economic platform where you have tariffs to protect those infant industries, was really critical. At this time they are really critical. Protecting those industries is a reasonable thing. Later on, people use the same rhetoric, but its tougher to say whether it is measured in later years as fairly used as a justification for taxes. Susan this period of time, the jeffersonian democrats and then ultimately the whigs. The jeffersonian democrats were low tariff people and the whigs were high tariff people. Peter the farmers, throughout much of American History, the farmers of the south are not keen on tariffs because they rarely help them. They increase the cost of goods. Jefferson was not for tariffs. Jefferson was not for creating a big government. He was keen on he eventually has to eat his words and become a person who puts tariffs into place. Not initially. Hamilton is looking at supporting the urban northeast with factories that are located in the tariffs are protecting them. The efficiency in the United States in the late 1700s is not very great. Cost of labor in the u. S. Is always extremely high. This is one of the two things you can say about the u. S. Throughout the entire history, there is a lot of land and not many people. Because of that, labor is consistently very high. In the u. S. , people keep turning to new techniques, greater efficiency machines in order to compete with other countries, like england, that had labor costs. Susan as we move into the 19th century, a major figure is henry clay. He also had this concept called the american system. What should we know about that period of time. Henry clays philosophies. Peter he is an interesting character that comes out of kentucky. You think he would be respecting the southern notion of being opposed to tariffs. But he is a protectionist and is promoting tariffs. In order to get people on board with the idea of tariffs, he argues the american system. Which has three elements. One, that you charge these high tariffs that will protect industries. That you create a central bank in order to create an Economic System that is easier to have monetary exchange. This appeals to both manufacturers, and to a degree, it appeals to the plantation owners because they are selling their cotton abroad. He also promotes infrastructure. He says that if we charge these tariffs, if we are taxing americans on these goods, raising the price on the goods, that we will take that money and turn around and improve canals. We will build roads. We will make navigation better. This will help everybody. So you put together this threepart alliance and tries to get people on board. He is a really interesting person. Really persuasive. Very effect. His campaign medallion from 1844 is one of my favorite things in our exhibition. Susan lets show it, because henry clay always had president ial ambitions, was never successful at it. Peter it is a wonderful piece. The side with his face on it, you can see he is not very telegenic. He doesnt really have the physique that people warm up to. The backside is the part that i love. This am a struck in 1844 and it was a campaign token. He would hand them out. In the back you can see henry clay, the champion of a protective tariff, then there is an image. Visual analysis is something that curators love to do. Looking at this tells you so much about what is going on. You can see this sailing ship is flying the american flag. You can see what line it is. In the foreground, you can see that there is industry. And agriculture. That you have a plow with a sheaf of wheat hung over it. The argument being that the protective tariff will help the manufacturers who are shipping their goods, but it will also help the farmer. This is really a sectional view. There is something not in the image. What is missing is a bale of cotton. In 1844, the biggest u. S. Export is cotton. Henry clay gave up on the south. Instead he is appealing to the west. In thinking about american politics, you always have to remember north and south is not the case. Its really north, south and west. The argument is that, if the more it does well, more people war have more money and they will buy more food and the food is coming from the west. He is building an alliance between the farmers to the west and the manufacturers of the north and largely gives up on the people of the south who are not going to vote for him anyway. Susan you told us the average tariffs were about 5 , maybe 10 . How high have the tariffs gotten by this time in general . Funding the whole government, right . Peter one of the major sources of income is tariffs. It changes at any given time. It is interesting to see how as tariffs goes up, the revenues go up and then they have to figure out how to reduce some tariffs to bring it down. It would be an argument that would be enjoyed because the notion of having too much money for government makes it do things that you dont want. The period that starts to make tariffs take off is the war of 1812. The u. S. Is pulled into a war wars are going on, the u. S. Tries to stay neutral, but even with its declared neutrality, american ships are being pulled in by the english and sailors are being oppressed. They are being taken into duty. Jefferson really wants to stop this, creates an embargo that is a total failure. Eventually the war of 1812 breaks out. For several years the u. S. Is at war with england. After that, the u. S. Continues to it needs money at the time so it has tariffs to generate money to fight a war. The tariffs are in place and they are starting to protect the textile industries, which are suddenly in trouble. This mason factory system that was born during the war of 1812. Once the war is over and the british cap have their more sophisticated operations, they can bring textiles back. You asked that the cotton produced in the northeast are looking for protection and help. Susan so as the decade progresses, taxes increasing the sectionalism that is happening . Peter absolutely. It is important that in the United States all politics are local. While people talk about general trends and aspects of it, at the end of the day, tariffs are very local and very idiosyncratic. Thats why the notion of it makes sense. Sometimes people that you think would be opposed to tariffs that you thought would be for them is because it has a very reasonable kind of sensibility. The creating of tariffs starts not with the president , but in the ways and Means Committee in the house. You have representatives who are voted in every two years. Representatives with a small district and then responding to not just the nation, but to what the district needs. The notion of porkbarrel is something that was true in the past as it continues to be. People do favors for each other. Log rolling is what any tariff politician old time you. Log rolling is the key word, people are cutting deals. Sometimes the tariffs are for broad, national and philosophical reasons. Sometimes they are supporting a single operation. Susan as the sectionalism leaves us to the civil war, we bring lincoln into office. Lincoln was a student and great admirer of henry clay. He became the republican when the party was founded. Where was Abraham Lincoln on tariffs . Peter lincoln wanted to keep the union together. The election of lincoln set a very strong signal to the south, to the founders. That was that their vote was not going to count. There had been a series of battles that were so severe that south carolina, even before lincoln ran for the presidency, nullified the tariff and said we will not pay for it. The government, the union stepped in to say that you had to. When lincoln gets elected it is a sign that the powers for probusiness are very strong, and that antitariffs are probably not going to be pushed as much. With the civil war, lincoln has to create revenue for the war. It also means that the states were antitariffs are no longer at the table. They are no longer able to vote. The people that were against tariffs go away. The political balance changes considerably. Susan after lincoln, if you look at the line of president s from lincoln all the way up until herbert hoover, there were a string of republican president s. We are in a very much protariff protectionist era. How does that contribute to the change in the American Economy . Peter how much you attribute to the tariff and how much you attribute to other factors is always complex. Nobody will ever know. Tariffs are gigantic. You have really high tariffs. It is really a question of large tariffs or even larger terrors. There is never a time of particularly low tariffs. By the 1850s the role is really recognizing the United States as an industrial power. There is a great desire to protect and service those manufacturing firms. The tariffs are one element to it. There is also tremendous improvements. There is technological change. Theres Huge Investment in industry. Some of the push forward is coming from those sources as well. It is certainly risky, but it is fair to say that in terms of industry getting its way its golden. Susan did they contribute to the gilded age millionaires . Peter they were very pleased to have tariffs protect them. An early example would be the building of the Transcontinental Railroad. The Transcontinental Railroad is heavily subsidized by the United States government. Link in an office, with the southern votes away from the table, is able to push through a Pacific Railroad. The Pacific Railroad act of 1862. The government will give a lot of land, will really encourage things, but by the way, you also have to use only americanmade iron and steel in the production of it. Even from great Infrastructure Projects like that, the american manufacturers are being looked at by the government. Susan you talked about the fact that people should know about tariffs. Then it was the president. It was a house of representatives, ways and Means Committee and the big name was William Mckinley. What should we know . Peter he never saw a tariff he did not like. He was a huge proponent of them. Certainly pushed the mckinley tariff is one of the most aggressive tariffs. Interestingly, sometimes tariffs have an amazing effect. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that a tomato is a vegetable and not a fruit because of a tariff. Sort of an odd story. Any botanists will tell you a tomato is a fruit. But the 1883 tariff put a tariff on vegetables and not fruits. So an importer of vegetables pointed out that the tomatoes he was bringing in from the caribbean were fruits and he did not have to pay has tariffs. The battle went on for quite some time. Eventually the Supreme Court ruled that tomatoes are actually vegetables. It is an interesting ruling that had repercussions beyond just tomatoes themselves. Susan William Mckinley also had president ial aspirations. It is another motif. In the 1888 election. Is that right . Peter right. Here you can see the notion of being a proponent of a high tariffs is something that is really great. Susan this is Grover Cleveland versus benjamin harrison. With mckinley in the background as the chairman of the ways and Means Committee. What are the politics we are looking at . Peter it is really about the west, the interest of the south versus the northeast. The story always remains the same of who benefits by the tariffs. Along with the tariff argument, there is this notion about how open the country should be to people of other countries. It starts to become the ideology of tariff tax on specific goods, but related to that is the control of people coming in as well. Susan if we can go back so people can see the screen. Old grover, mayor of buffalo and governor of new york favored this. Benjamin harrison backbone been from kernel to Brigadier General in the civil war. United states senator. When William Mckinley president , was he still happy about tariffs . Peter he was very happy about tariffs as president. That little break in the republicans domination, only because of very deep depressions. This sort of push for tariffs to remain, you often see on things like this the full lunch pail. When you look at when mckinley once won the presidency, his Campaign Poster has mckinley standing in front of a bank talking about how he wants to open up the mills of labor. Speaking out to labor saying we will have more employment, you will have higher and better paying jobs if we have tariffs. It will be great to you. Very little appeal to consumers. The tariffs will aid manufacturers, which should mean more employment and possibly higher wages. Tariffs always end up in greater costs for goods. Relatively little rhetoric about the consumer perspective. You will pay more for your chocolate. Susan the Republican Party in the early 20th century seems like they had a split over economic interests. We will turn to the voice of jeffrey rosen. He wrote a biography of William Howard taft. He tells us about the big debate in the Republican Party during the 1910s1920 era. [video clip] jeffrey so the tariffs are bubbling as a political issue and it splits the Republican Party. The party was traditionally devoted to protected tariffs for income but not protection. In other words, moderate tariffs in order to fund the government but not protect certain industries. Tariffs naturally favored some people over others. Eastern manufacturers, glove manufacturers. Within the Republican Party there are three camps. The stand pat republican who wants to pander to their constituencies. Independents want to lower the tariffs, though not eliminated like the freetrade democrats. And then taft is caught in the middle. [end of video clip] susan ultimately we get to the point of the time when the country moves away from tariffs and finds another way to fund the government, which is the income tax. What led to that . Peter the government needs to have a source of income. There were times when some of it was pulling in to much money he was creating a bigger government that people wanted and have surpluses. It was a system that was out of control. It was really a lot of conversation. It is interesting that we still have some of that same notion today in terms of tax revenue about government programs. Its related to income. It is hidden much more because of borrowing and we dont run so close to our revenue streams. Creating impact changed the notion. The argument was long past. The notion of income taxes is created in a time where its possible to raise money in a different kind of matter, and will really push the government in a different kind of direction. It was required to have a constitutional amendment to make it pass. Susan if we moved to the era of the 1930s, the government is now having an income tax. We have gone through world wars. Fdr comes into office. How does the policy of the United States change from fdr through most of the 20th century regarding trade and tariffs . Peter even before fdr comes and you have to talk about holly. Susan everyone learns that in high school, dont they . Peter there was an article recently about one of the family discovering what their genealogy was. The politicians all love to argue about the holly tariff. It is a very draconian one it ups the ante. It partially passed before the depression. Before it is put into place in the market crashes. It really depends on your definition of depression. If you think of the depression, the Great Depression as the fall of the stock market and financial collapse, that is one thing. Agriculture in the United States had been in a batch straight for almost the entire decade. The 1920s is a bad time. There is a desire to improve things for farmers. Smoothawley is generating protection for not manufacturers, but for farmers to raise their situation. Unfortunately, once you start taking a bill, like the tariff bill in congress, people jump on board and the logrolling takes place and the protection for the farmers, people sign onto, but they ask for protection for different kinds of manufacturers. By the time smoothawley was put into play, the Great Depression had hit. The high bar tariffs were very destructive and created retaliation. It stopped International Trade and was very destructive. Fairly quickly, fdr comes into play and starts looking at a different kind of approach of reciprocal trade. Students having tariffs that are true for everybody. Instead of having tariffs that are true for everybody, you have different relationships with different countries. Its really a different sensibility that becomes kind of defining for us, even to today. Susan the Congress Also seated power to negotiate. Why would Congress Give up that power . Peter Congress Hangs onto it. The executive branch get stronger and stronger. The tariffs are being charged today by donald trump are coming strict we from the white house. He is using an interesting approach. Its the economic expansion act of 1962. The Congress Still has the right to generate tariffs. Any tax bill or money bill comes out of congress. This economic expansion act says the president , in times of the of national defense, can impose tariffs. It is kind of a loophole that is used. Its part of this trend of congress having less power in the executive branch maintaining more power. Susan coming out of the roosevelt administration, we hear about the agreements on tariff and trade in 1947. The next and last clip i want to show you, fastforward from the 1940s into the 1990s. This is president bill clinton on the signing of the nafta agreement. Lets watch. [video clip] fmr. Pres. Clinton its an honor to be here today with this north American Freetrade agreement. President jimmy carter gives great energy to our efforts and has been a consistent theme of his for many, many years now. President ford, who has argued this fiercely for expanded trade and for this agreement as any american citizen, and whose counsel i continue to value. These men differing in party and outlook, join me today because we all recognize the important stakes are our nation in this issue. Today we turn to face the challenge of our own country, our own economic fortunes. In a few moments i will sign three agreements i will complete our negotiations with mexico and canada, to create in north American Free trade agreement. In the coming months i will submit this to congress for approval. It will be a hard fight, and i expect to be there with all of you every step of the way. [end of video clip] susan the year after nafta was signed, the wto was created in 1994, you mentioned the protests that were created when they meet. What was interesting was the lineup of democratic and republican president s. Ronald reagan was an antitariff freetrade person. We continue on this motif through now. Here and between the 2018s, we are questioning whether or not nafta was a good idea and a president talking about tariffs again. Is this all cyclical . Peter things definitely come and go. There is no question about that. Everybody always argues about what the cycles are like, people always try to pick the stock market based on cycles. If they exist, its hard to say. The philosophical change, while wto, imf, is about creating a different world order. Really following world war ii recognition that it is no longer just about nations. That we are in a truly Global Economy and we really have to operate in a different kind of way. I think across these party lines you see the leaders recognizing that new world order and trying to create a degree, from different perspectives, of stability. Business always likes stability. Today we are seeing a fascinating return to nationalism. It was very strong in the late 1900s. In the early 1900s in late 1800s. I would point to three big acts that give us a sense of the rising nationalism. First, we saw the rise of putin in russia doing things selfdestructive to the country. It has made its power ever stronger. A really nationalistic push. Then we had brexit. Which seems, from a business perspective, odd. The british folks would choose to pull themselves out of the eu. Again, based on nationalism. Finally, the election of donald trump as president. On this populist nationalist kind of push. We really see the rhetoric of nationalism starting to trump globalism. That people are making decisions that are very emotional, and not necessarily always a Good Business sense. Susan we are also talking about tariffs with regards to china. You mentioned china as an important trading partner since the beginning of the country. How does the china american tensions play into this . Peter it has been ongoing with china that when the United States started trading with china in the 1820s1830s, china did not want much from the u. S. And the u. S. Wanted a lot from china. That kind of sensibility continues into today. That the nation is not that interested in pulling in this kind of notion. So creating a truly free trade with china is something that has challenge people for quite some time. It has never been a moment of tremendous free trade with china. Susan in our last four to five minutes as we sum up, what are the things that people should know about the history of tariffs in this country, and the role they have played . Peter i think tariffs are so intimidating. There are so difficult and so complex. If you go to a party and Start Talking about tariffs, guarantee peoples eyes will rollback and they will walk away to do something else. Its really a mistake because tariffs are so fascinating. From my perspective, not doing the economic history, but looking at the anecdotes are so revealing. Thinking back on the protests of the wto, the wto, in 1999 in seattle, what was that all about . One of the problems as we moved away from politicians that we know and we voted for, and we could complain to that was true in the 1800s, now in 1999 we have nameless bureaucrats making decisions who have no input. Everybody thought it was hilarious and interesting with the marching turtles. The reason for the turtle outfits is about tariffs. That the United States decided that from an environmental perspective, it was important to not buy shrimp from countries that did not put turtle excluders on their nets. Without those you would be killing sea turtles. So, the u. S. Passed this tariff that forbade the import of shrimp from those countries. The wto said it was unfair trade practice, and said we had to buy shrimp from those countries. The marching turtles were activists, heartfelt people saying that we hold the environment first, and we want to do this over national trade. You start to see the complications, the difficulty for these different things. The banana wars would be another great example of how a mcdonalds in france is destroyed by farmers or making cheese over the u. S. Practice with bananas in guatemala. They are very complicated. People really should dive into tariffs. Certainly at this wonderful anecdotal level to have a better sense of how complex it really is. Susan we had a chance to see a couple of items from your exhibition at the American History museum in washington. We encourage people to come and see it. If you were to choose an iconic object from todays debate over terrorists, do you know what that would be . Peter there are so many. The exhibition is chalked full of it. At the end of the exhibition there is a bottle of mexican cocacola, which was hard to collect. It was from 2002. It is all about trade battles. That mexico has a big sugar industry, cane industry, and the u. S. Is a very efficient grower of corn, from which you can make High Fructose Corn Syrup. The u. S. Started to export it to mexico, mexico said it was a bad idea, and they put a tariff on to High Fructose Corn Syrup. The u. S. Files a protest with the wto. The wto rules in favor of the u. S. Mexico puts a tax on High Fructose Corn Syrup. They then file in favor of the United States and High Fructose Corn Syrup is allowed to be exported to mexico. That simple bottle of coke that looks refreshing but innocent, embodies a battle between forces around the world. So much of that is true. By diving into some of these artifacts and our exhibition, i think our business will have a better chance of the complexities of the world they live in. Susan Peter Liebhold thank you for helping us understand how important tariffs have been. Peter i hope everyone has a chance to come and visit our exhibit, and help us think about when new artifacts we should collect to represent the everchanging story. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] all q a programs are available on our website or as a podcast at cspan. Org. Henry ford and Thomas Edison took highly publicized camping trips together at the height of their fame. President warren g. Harding even joined them on one trip. Next on q a. Sunday the historian discusses his book about the summer road trips taken between 1914 and 1925. Thats q a next sunday 8 00 p. M. Eastern and pacific time on cspan. Washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up monday morning, we will discuss the trump then ament inquiry, and discussion of the Supreme Court and Progressive Court reform. Asll talk about ohios role a campaign 2020 battleground state. Be sure to watch washington journal live at 7 00 eastern monday morning. Join the discussion. Here is a look at what is on monday on the cspan networks. Cspan at 10 30 a. M. Eastern, a discussion on the impact of the National Popular vote election on a president ial campaign hosted by the hill and making every vote count. At noon, the Congressional Internet Caucus Academy host the discussion on the d. C. Circuit court of appeals decision to uphold the fccs repeal of the obama administrations Net Neutrality rules. Cia p. M. , summer former cia director David Petraeus speaks at the Johns Hopkins school of international threats,bout cyber military strategy, nato, and other topics. Acting Homeland Security secretary Kevin Mcaleenan kicks in all day and all day kicks off in all day an all migration. N. Ampaign 2020 watch live coverage of the president ial candidates on the campaign trail. Make up your own mind. Cspan 2020, your unfiltered view of politics. Dominic raab stood in for Prime MinisterBoris Johnson during question time. Was attendingster a conference in manchester, england. Brexit, north korea, and russian interference in the u. S. Elections. This is just over 45 minutes. Order. Questions to the Prime Minister. Question number one, mr. Speaker. Thank you, mr. Speaker. Of thet honorable friend conservative Party Conference is making, as we speak, the keynote speech setting