Transcripts For CSPAN2 Free Trade 20180209

We trade with other countries, and so leading us through this very important global conversation is adam ferris, our moderator, legislative assessment for senator James Langford who covers International Trade, policy and homeland security. Adam will graduate from the u. S. Army war college with a mavsers of Strategic Study in july. So congratulations, adam. The light at the end of the tunnel. Some students graduating in may in the room. Dale moore, executive director for Public Policy at the American Farm bureau federation, joined afbf in 2011 as deputy direct oroff Public Policy and manager of the greg and trade policy team. Brings 30 years of experience in Public Policy and communications to afbf. Lisa schroeder the global director of trade for the dow chemical company. As part she has direct responsibilities for defining and making the companys global trade agenda and developing a strategy on International Aspects of corporate issues. Based in washington, dc, her responsibilities include trade policy and legislation, trade negotiation, and investment issues that foster growth and dows global businesses through identification of policies facilitating Market Access and reducing Global Distribution costs. Ken backus is director of International Trade and Market Access and is based in washington, dc. Ken is the National Lead advocate on trade issues, including nafta, restoring access to china, expanding access to japan and other pacific rim markets and this position kent works with congress, the white house, and foreign governments to advance the u. S. Beef industrys trade priorities. He was the associate director or legislative affairs and represented ncpa on texas, trade and transportation issues. Ken joined ncba in 2010 after serving on several political campaigns in texas and working at the agriculture and appropriateses assistant to u. S. Senator elizabeth dole. Give me a big georgetown welcome to our panelists. [applause] thank you very much for introduction, im adam ferris and we have three distinguished pammests today that are eager to share their insights and thoughts with you guys about the importance of free trade and agriculture. I note that you just got to hear a little bit about us and i thought it might be a good idea if the panel knew more about our audience. So, can we gate show of hands how many georgetown students in the audience today . Awesome. Very good. Any congressional hill staff . A couple rows. Thank you. Any executive branch folks that might be in the audience . One. Nice. Thanks for being here. So if its okay, open is up for introductions and then go off into a q a section which i will start off. Kent, if you want to start off. Thanks so much for havingmer here. Let me tell you about who the National Cattlemens Beef Association is, as an industry we represent the the largest and oldest trade association representing the cattle industry. Been around since the 1890s, and have been had a presence here in washington, dc for quite some time. We cover production from the cowcalf side to retail, and thats really the important thing for us is to make sure that we can speak on behalf of those men and women who are producing our food, who cant have a daily presence here in washington. As far as trade goes, when you look at beef production in the United States, most of what we consume what we produce is consumed here in domestically. Only about 10 to 15 is actually exported. The United States is still one of the greatest marketness the world for beef consumption and beef sales in the United States, beef industry, we dominate here. So, weve got a saturated market here. Very developed Consumer Base, and so in order to increase our sales, we have to look beyond our borders. You hear the statistic commonly used that 9596 of the worlds consumers live outside of our borders. And so its important for us to try to target those different markets. For beef in particular, north america has been a great place for us. Nafta created two 1 billion markets on either side of the bored, mexico consumes a lot of cuts that american consumes find less desirable and were able to sell things there at a premium. Well talk more about that. The main focus has been asia, where we have seen a tremendous growth and really over the last five years, weve seen a shift in our expert focus export focus from north america to asia. The biggest market is japan. In 2017 we came close to selling almost 2 billion worth of u. S. Beef products to japanese consumers and thats with a 381 2 take tariff applied to the beef. Its been a great market for us, cuts like tongues, rounds, chuck shoulders, Everything Else like that, we were able to sell there at a premium, and really we would not be able to sell at a premium here domestically so thats why we target those areas. Korea is our second largest export market. We sold roughly 1. 2 billion worth of beef there, and under the korea Free Trade Agreement we have seen our experts double. So we exports double. So we have lot of opportunities in asia. Going to be a big focus for us and thats where a lot of our trade barriers still lie. Thats why we have really requested so much attention from congress, from the administration to focus efforts on opening those asian markets. Thats really where we see a lot of potential and thats where our focus is going to be. The reason why that is so important to us is that experts account for 300 per head. So its important to our producers because with market with market volatility, the different swings in cattle prices its important to develop sturdy export markets to help offset the volatility. So, were, again, happy to be here today and look forward to the questions. I can tell already i have to hold the microphone and i talk with my hand. So if i fade in and out thank you, and thank you for the opportunity to be here. I work for American Farm bureau federation, we are the nations largest general farm organization, roughly 6 million member families across the country. We have presence, footprint, if in every state puerto rico. So we have a 51 affiliates. We also are in the Car Insurance business, banking business, number of other branches of the family that are, again, part of farm bureau. One of the things in trade being one of those, when we look at trade, because we represent all commodities, we represent all the different size us of farmers and rank ranchers. We represent the organic growers to nose using the latest hightech, biotech kind of approaches to managing their farms. When we look at trade, our basic macro level is roughly a third of what is produced in the United States by americas farms and ranch is destined for export. It veries much accommodate commodities. In the pacific northwest, wheat degree america that area and the type of wheat they, raise anywhere from 80 to 85 of that wheat is destined for exhort. You then crops, the grains and cotton, Dairy Products but theres also the specialty crop crop crops, future and vehicle damages, farmers in hawaii and puerto rico, very active in the coffee market. Maybe a small niche marketing kind of approach. When it comes to trait its fundamentally and linked to where the farm economy is. Without trade, were in deep economic strife. Were looking at going into the fifth year of downturn in terms of the economic platform that agriculture stands on. We have lost roughly have the net farm income over the last five years. Most of our producers are in the commodity business which means the prices they get nor their commodities, their crops, livestock, are not things they get to set. Theyre price takers, not pricemakers, so when you have a commodity that is particularly dependent on exports, you run into a on trade, you run into situations where a little ripple right now were wrestling with china who is upset about tariffs announcements on washing machines, on solar panels and other things so they in effect are dropping the hammer on grains. A their little form of retaliation getting our attention. Not a whole lot we can do about what is going on we solar panels but at the same time knew wore working to fight to get that work out. Working on the nafta renegotiation, working on a lot of different fronts, including the fact that when we pulled out of the Transpacific Partnership, the tariff kent mentioned on beef, we had a really good deal with japan on that. Thats not in the offing now. When you talk about a Bilateral Agreement with these countries, theyre pretty straightforward in telling you, were not really interested in going back to that particular drawing board. Yall are going to have to start over. When we look at trade, there is out in the countryside i guarantee if you brought to and filled this auditorium with farmers and ranchers, a good number of them would say i dont understand the trade thing. I dont sell to japan or mexico. Sell to the local Grain Elevator or the local meat packer or the local farm stand, and now im dealing with an issue when id much rather have you focusing on the farm bill 0 other issues. So trade is one where we spend as much time encouraging congress, encouraging the executive branch to Pay Attention to agriculture trade as we do spending time out in the countryside, letting our members know why this issue is so important. So appreciate the opportunity to be here. Look forward to answering questions, as always, been in town 30 years ceasefire the questions are easy youll get a short answer. Thank you. Lisa schroeder with dow chemical. Dow chemical is a historic and american iconic company, operating not only here in the u. S. But around the world. We also as of last year permanented wherever i dupont, so one thing i really want to highlight out of that merger and gives us a great opportunity in terms of looking at the Agriculture Sector, as my colleagues talk about, ag is a sector, its an entire value chain, not just the end product in your supermarket. So, when we look at agriculture, were looking at everything from seeds and Crop Protection technology, innovation and farm and heavy machinery, equipment, to data and packaging and the Logistics Network that actually gets that product into your supermarket or farm stand. Its really important to look at that think that ag across the chain because then you get a sense of the impact we have on the economy. That is a lot of jobs, even from the guy just helping to pack the truck thats on the way to your super market. Thats why the u. S. Has real advantages. We are an enormous Agricultural Producer and one of to the most innovative territories in tick. In particular we you think Crop Production, seed technology, thats a great example of where signs is driving health, environment, yield innovation to help get the farmer more out of his crop that ends up getting more out into the food value chain. Great example is dow back in 2005, we created a new canola oil. Its taken a billion pounds of fat out of the american diet. Theres a lot of innovation and signs that americans bring to agriculture that is a benefit not only for our health and nutrition here in the out but around the world at a time. When the Food Security challenge is only getting more difficult. We drive innovation in things like precision agriculture that partnership width Great Companies like john deere to look at how data can help us ensure take the volatility out of american Agricultural Production. Resource efficiency. How to grow more with less water or other resources that are becoming increasingly scarce. As we look at all the Great Innovation and the development of these products in america, we also need to look at the export market. This is very much about as were growing all of this, eventually people want to get paid for what theyre contributing and that means accessing a lot of markets reasons the world. Tariffs have been mixed mentioned quite a lot and that tends to be the first place most people go to. Tariffs are a big part of grandmas because theyre very quantifiable. If you knock down the 141 2 japan charges on ag chemicals thats very much about Market Access. The trade goes way beyond. I. For agriculture there are critical areas like regular larry to use. Regulatoriy barriers are deeper barrier because theyre stopping our product from leaving the country or in some case preventing products from being introduced, innovative Crop Production materials because you dont have import licenses to key customer countries like china for those biotechnology products. And if you look at nafta, its one of the why we are such big supporters of the agreement, theres actually a regulatoriy cooperation chapter specific to chemical, and the reason thats in there and the reason thats so supported by not only the u. S. Chemical industry but also mexico and canada is because its about raising the standard trade really gives us an opportunity to imbed sound science, transparent, efficient approaches to regulatoriy that get to the heart of what regulations are supposed to do ensure high levels of health and safety while also promoting economic competitiveness. Of course, to do that, we fundamentally need an underlying nafta agreement so were very hopeful progress that was made in montreal we can continue to capture the good and eventually get to a modernized nafta. There are other areas in trade agreements these days, too. Reasons why modernization is a good idea. Dat. Nafta was signed in 1994. There was not a lot of effort to think about ecommerce or digital signatures on documentation, crossborder data flows, believe it or not there was a time when the internet was not so prevalent. We werent writing it into agreements yet. We need think about things like crossborder data flows, custom fa facilitation. A computer might be able to wait at the port. Mose gruesomal products cannot most Agricultural Products cannot and we have to be efficient great Great American innovation straight to our customer. One reason why its an interesting opportunity to have this conversation with all of you because there really have been a lot of changes in the way agriculture is produced in this country and the opportunities in the relevant of the world. Ill stuff there because im much more interested in your discussion than hearing myself rattlen on. Ill ask the first few questions but i want to leave a lot of im for the audience to ask questions as well. I think its just as important for the panel to hear from the audience as it is for the audience to hear from the panel today. So, if i could id like to start with kind of a general question about trade and agriculture that a lot of you had in your opening remarks but just wanted to leave an opportunity to mention anything else on this. So, ag has been an important part of american trade policy for many years, American Farmers are extremely efficient, which is witness bed the fact we have had a surplus in agriculturear products and many years. Can you talk a little bit about why ag has been such a success in the context of trade compared to other industries. Im going to start off because i can give a really general answer and then let the smart folks answer after me. Fundamentally because when you look around the world good,s and services we have and you look at the marketplace out across the world, there are a number of good, solid market are for agricultural food, fiber, feed, where the economies dont have them clamoring for the latest iphone or computer or whenever else. And secondly, Everybody Needs to eat. For a lot of country is have the opportunity to participate with fort mcnair and the Industrial College of the armed forces and one thing they look it is a most of the time when we have men and women in harms way there in countries where Food Security is a real deal. Is food available period . I think thats one advantage we have when we help through different programs, get the opportunity to develop a market. We also cotton is a great example where our textile industry has duped but the u. S. Exports 70plus percent of our raw cotton going to countries that have developed a milling industry and a textile industry, and we help feed that Economic Development in those countries. So, thats not really food but its Agricultural Production that helps feed the economy, not just the people around the world. I would just add to that, the point about innovation. Think in particular when you look at american agricultures, whether its getting the food out that solves these food sustainability, Food Security issues, or looking at the broader opportunity of integrating things like packaging so we can get more product out to markets safely. When you look at cotton production, the science and the opportunity to develop not only just selling cotton but cotton is actually customized. Creating solution products so that customer in other parts of the world have products that are really going fit their marketplace, where its a cotton thats more specific to highend clothing versus lowend. Theres a great amount of American Science and Technology Going into these production so is it makes our product more valuable. Theres a desire to buy from america when you know youre getting the quality that you need and the solution that is going to help you be more successful and that is a real advance we have in the world, providing we can get access to those markets. I think just piggy backing off what she said there you talk about quality. I think you can dive a little further into that and really look at safety. The products we produce here are produced at some of the highest standards in the world. We have not only a very intelligent and educated producer group, most of our people, they have fouryear degrees and higher. These are scientist producing our food. When you really look at it. So, not only that but the strict standards that are applied to us in production, we dont have to worry about a lot of the same problems they do in other countries. We also have very strong Environmental Standards here, too. So when you look at the quality that is there, a lot of that comes from safety, and you also have to look at where our growth is. Its in asia. In asia you have a rising middle class that wants to incorporate more protein into their diet. For us specifically, we produce some of the safest, highest quality beef in the world but not only just beef but pork, poultry, down the line on any agricultural good, were at the top, and people pay for that. They pay for peace of mind, because in many cases theyve had incidents where people have gotten sick or died. There have been stories, we have all read them. Thats wee why were concerned about standards from these marks. In those countries we have been able to develop a trust with the consumer, and with their Economic Growth and the demand for our goods that many of them quite frankly cant produce. Thats been a real winwin for us. Not only for us as producers but for consumers in those markets. So lisa you mentioned something i want to hit on, the importance of innovation in trade. I know that a lot of you in our organizations are also involved in talking about Regulatory Reform efforts. Is there a nexus between domestic regulation and exports and innovation . Lisa . As i mentioned we use that nafta example. One of the reasons why why aindustries we are were promoting regulatory cooperation is when you look at the Chemical Industry, the u. S. And canada have already and relatively recently upgraded their chemical regulatory systems in the in u. S. Its the update of the people cal security act which Congress Passed last year. Theres also a very Strong Canadian science based Risk Assessment based regulatory model. Mexico in the process of upgrading theirs, and doing it in alignment means theres going to be much greater efficiency, understanding the transparency and efficiency of the system allows to us bring products that much more quickly to market. Where theyre his transparent, less efficient or models not based on science or Risk Assessment you can awe run into real challenges. We have had issues in china, for example, biotechnology approvals. You need an import license to bring in Biotech Products cultivated here in the u. S. As dow and dupont we have a number of Innovative Products that fortunateliers are looking for because they solve real challenges. Hard hards, herbicides or pesticides and earn more for literal the blood, sweat and tears going into agriculture production. We want to provide to the products to them so they can grow more and sell to their winds customer but without the Regulatory Approval thats blocked and stopped innovation getting into the market. Chinas has made Great Strides in improving that system and looking to move more approvals but wed like to see more transparent, efficient and regular system will help all of us plan with more certainty. As any business would you want to know youre going to be the crop youre growing now you can sell once you have grown it. Looking at regulatory barriers they can be an impediment or a great opportunity, like were seeing in nafta. I was going add but all i can say now is amen. Were talking about have when you have certainty and a sciencebased system, you have an ability not only here but the country, the other side is using the same standards, but as a usda we had process process and often would ask the when we would get upset and get calls from capitol hill, why are you letting in oranges from this particular country, or even beef from a different country. Its like, well, because part of what we were trying to do and part of what we need to do is set an example, too. So if were going to demand that china follow certain protocols and procedures procedures proced approached. Certificating that example give us a leg up as we the collective we is trying to get them to use nontariff trade barrier friday and pseudo science to hold things out. You mexes the foreignbased regulatory efforts. There is also a link to what the u. S. Does . Are there bigger factors at play with trade policy other than just your traditional trade barriers, tariffs, its . You touch on that, lisa, and kent as well. What hanes what happens here at home, there is an impact on trade . I think so. You can look at done unfortunately a lotve regulations where ag gets forced in. No matter who is in offers, trying to apply a onesizefitsall approach. In our situation we handle live animals and transportation regulations hat have the been put forward, while its important to have safe trucks and things on the road, they dont always apply to us. They could actually put those animals at risk. So we have some livestock concerns there one of the other big thing is is theres a lot of growth overseas and demand on our industries and in order to meet that demand, we need access to credit. Not just through the farm Credit System and through the private Financial Sector in order to expand and to be able to hire more people to develop our operations operations. We need that access, unfortunately, doddfrank, while it was well intended, it was supposed to go after the bad actors and unfortunately its led to closure of many rural banks that finances a lot of operations. So now you have banks in more urban areas who dont understand the rural needs, and then those are pretty much the only people we have to go with. So, while theres always good intentions for regulations or policy, but unfortunately, agriculture has been on we have been Collateral Damage in a lot of ways and thats prevented us from capitalizing on this demand for our products. I think adding to that point, the point about Regulatory Reform going on here and i think the more we really demonstrate that this is a working model, if things like chemical regulatoriy approaches or others, demonstrates that high level of safety, security, while encouraging innovation and economic competitiveness. Its affected every country, as they shark need to develop their own regulation. Thats a National Sovereignty issue. But most countries, especially emerge countries, look at what models are out there and the more we service that model, demonstrate that science and risk approaches work, and meet the needs, the more we can actually work with countries to ensure theres alignment based on fundamental principles to matter what type of system they put in place. Does europe come to mind when you talk about this stuff . That is always a longstabbed degree baste if the the europeans and that is one of the examples of progress we were make in the to tati negotiations. The idea has been around for a long time but that becomes parted of the conversation. The more we can being regulators together, as the Chemical Industry we have an Umbrella International association called icca and have created a global regulatory Cooperation Task force, and designed to do that, really elevate the conversation at a local level, but get regulators talking to one another, and you dont see that enough in the world. Very often theyre working on the same things. When you do things like nat the a sew lie without consultation you can end up with diverging results. So an opportunity to bring that conversation more together is a good thing and that includes wife, the european partners. I would just add that kent and i probably shouldnt comment on europe because our cowboy words tend to come out in trying to deal with those folks so just stop there. Well, thank you. I think a lot of you have mentioned maybe all three the growing demand for u. S. Agricultural goods abroad. So, im curious if you could talk about the balance between providing a stable food source here at home with our agriculture industry, with the demands abroad for our goods. This is one in this is a longstanding talking point among i think aggies all over capital hill and around tunnel. I wifer producing for a robust export market, were producing more than enough to meet domestic demand and i think thats fundamentally where we look at it. Its when an export markets start trying up and the Economic Impact on the producers and all the way up from the beginning of the value dine the Grocery Stores, then you start having issues, domestically and we have seen that in other countries as well. Thats part of what drives innovation and drives the investment and research and development with the companies that provide the input to all our members from the seed and Crop Protection and so forth. But at the same time if im going to put a lot of time, energy and resource into a foreign market, typically im looking also, if im in a particular commodity sector looking for a home for the excess were producing in this country to keep the market price up and thats writ comes from. Kent, anything from your end . Sure. When we look at the role that imports play in our industry, theres only so many parted of the animal you can actually eat. A lot of other stuff goes into the rendered product, which is a big industry but its also the not the most valueadded part of the industry. We want to sell those hides, sell the meat and Everything Else, but theres only so many cuts and so many Different Things americans want to buy. So we export quite a bit as well. But one of the probably one of the brightest things we have in our industry is our ability to capitalize on imports. What we export is not the same as what we import. Everyone always tries to look at the differences there, and try to think its a oneforone thing. The high value export we get from the cuts americans dont want, its not offset through imports of the same product. Were importing primarily trimming or things that go into make ground beef. Most of our cattle are theyre fed here in the United States which benefits not only our producers but in grain producers as well. But marbling adds high value and heaven outsider companies have a higher fat content. In order to meet the demand nor ground beef domestically, we import lean trimmings from other countries. We also do that because the same cuts that we were using for ground beef, the primarily the chuck, we have developed into other cuts, things like the flat iron steak. That used to go into making ground beef. Now we can sell that as a lean muscle cut that is much more affordable and hit an entirely new demographic domestically. When you look at that without those imports would would not be able to make the ground beef necessary to meet demand here. But i would say more generally, one of the value of imports we have seen is specifically through nafta. The fact you going do a Grocery Store anytime of the year and get fresh fruits and vegetables and its safe, has to they have to meet the safe standards in the United States. Encourage you to find that in many other countries through the world. Were spoiled. We gate very affordable food fly and get it yearround and pretty much get whatever we want. Thats because of thats not only the high value products we produce here but also those valuable imports that come in. So, for our consumers, thats a very good thing. Trade has developed a lot of those opportunities. Also, one other port thing to remember is while we dont raise cat until the cities, we have a lot of consumers there. Obviously we have an issue with food deserts and things like that. He imports help lower the price of food and make it more affordable, and so thats why these trade agreements are so important. We want all those imports to be safe. We want them to be the same caliber product or at least safe like our products here, but we also want to make those available to consumers. So, trade is a twoway street. We cant necessarily demand access to foreign markets if were not willing to give access as well. The important thing is that we need to tear down those export barriers. Our market is already open and thats northwest our Grocery Stores, our restaurants and Everything Else. The problem is that its not a twoway street because we dont have that reciprocal access in many of these other markets. I was just going add to that from our perspective, were all about helping the Farming Community do more. Do more do better. So, when they have opportunities to grow, they can store theres great opportunities to source domestically and for export when we meet all the need ken is talking about. I was just going to say, im officially hungry after hearing you talk about beef and steak. I just have one more question and then id like to open up questions period for the audience. This is a very simple question. But i just think its kind of a fascinating concept here on the hill. Why is japan so important to trade . Especially agriculture . It was perceived as the real benefit of the tpp. I know that this administration has said theyre going to continue pressing for negotiations. Why is it so important . Ill start. For us, in the beef industry, japan was the brass ring of tpp. The main reason why we really wanted that. Its because its our biggest export market. We sell in volume and in value. We sell more beef to japan than any other mark in the world. More than mexico, more than canada. We sell it to japanese. They are willing to pay a premium for a lot of these cuts. For us, japan means 75 per head of cattle. Thats a lot of money. And so we unfortunately we still have a high tariff we face there, and our competitors dont. Our main competitors their australians and they have an 11 advantage over us, and while our experts have significantly increased over the last couple of years, were afraid that those gains willing we shortlived and we could lose that advantage once the Australian Market starts to recover. So, trade agreements, they dont guarantee success. What they do is give us the opportunity to capitalize on Market Conditions and maximize our sales when theyre advantageous, and right now were still leaving a lot of money on the table with the 381 2 tariff in place women also see japan as not only important on the value side but also just strategically. When japan considers a product safe, japan is very high standards. Then other countries look to that as well as an example. And were still trying to make major inroads into china, we have made major inroad into korea. A lot of that that do with the fact we have such positive image in the japan market and that sends a strong message throughout the pacific rim. I think the other thing you have to keep in mind, too with japan, it is in terms of its economic, i guess, value, its an affluent country. It is a first world country. Its got a large pop population and a minimal land mass so feeding that population means theyre looking for food. Their own Food Security, and theres a demand for the higher value products that can come in, and thats frankly comparative advantage we have over most countries around the world. Put that in context, its 127 million consume, high income consumers looking for the diversity, look for Specialty Products and japan particularly is still one of those economies that is fairly high tariff. On average 14 on a wide range of agricultural product. Its a real area of opportunity. Taking that down so we are competitive especially as they negotiate deals with other countries, that creates a real steady market for american agriculture. Kent already mentioned the high standard. You look at the rule of law, the commitment to science, and intellectual property protection, all areas areas aree theyre operating in a market where american ag can do really well provide we can access it. If you wouldnt mind saying your name and what offers you work for or what organization youre with. So, id like to cheat a bit because conference organizers shouldnt ask questions but i couldnt help but notice kent mentioned nafta and standards and sort of fruit. Idber accuse curious what you say about country offeror inlabelling and it was like partly a regulatory thing and emotive thing. People want to notify they wering into u. S. Beaver but canada felt it was unfair. Good question on the country of origin labeling. Its not a food safety mechanism. Its a Government Marketing mechanism. It compete width our private labels that already do that. So when you have the government picking winners and losers that discourage innovation and competition, defer courages quality. So it wasnt just canada and mexico didnt want it. U. S. Beaver industry didnt want it. We didnt ask for it. One of great ideas from from congress and its not necessarily something that we really wanted. So we had to did everything we could to try to work around that. Any beef that is going to come from the u. S. Has to meet equivalent standards of what we have here. So quality may not necessarily be the same, the safety has to meet that certain threshold. So at the end of the day, its also something that if Consumers Want that marketing, theyre going to pay for it. The market will reflect that. So far the market hasnt indicate that at all. When consumer goes to the meat case they look at price, first, and quality, look at tenderness, appearance. When you slap a government label on it, theyre not going to see any of that. It also when you look at the sidebyside comparisons, theres still a lot of grocery stowses put product of the u. S. Beef, made in america, put that sticker on there, but what country of origin labeling was that small little black lettering that was on the nutrition labels, and nobody paid attention to it. Did nothing to develop a new Consumer Base for us or to drive sales. If anything it cost the industry millions and millions of dollars in compliance, and it led to the potential retaliation of almost 1 billion from canada and mexico. So it wasnt really a winwin situation for anybody. And didnt deliver on any promise us. So with and a half dark thats one over nafta, we asked the administration not do, to go back down the path that was litigated, showing this was a failed policy and let the market determine what goes on those kind our marketing labels. As far as food safety goes, has nothing to do with that. I dont want to touch that. Good afternoon. Im anchor at georgetown, third year navy veteran and have been overseas a lot so whenever i went to the exteriors was very very comforted by american beef and other american products. Thank you. Definite lay quality difference. So, i have two questions. One, how much is a head of catting, and two, when you are trying to break down trade barriers with our competitors, do you find that going to the wto is a last ditch resort or is it or effort . What are the things that you have worked on over the decades especially to enter marks in asia. First of all, thank you for your service. And thank you for your support for u. S. Agriculture. I think when you look at the value of cattle overall, it fluctuates. The average fed steer this last year, i think that brought anywhere between like, 1400 and 1800. Depends on ball and also dependses because we have a wide range. You have what is called commercial beef production, which i primarily people who they have some innovation but not church and then very high end cattle so theres a wide spectrum in the value. That average that i mentioned is really just an average of the whole value. So, that is an important part of that. Exports build a significant part of that value. When you look at the wto ill touch on this briefly wto takes a long time. It is youre hopeful your goes settling these issues before they get into that wto process. Quite frankly it ties up a lot of resources. We would much rather focus on negotiating more mark access than having to either take other countries to court for abusing us or defending u. S. Policies, but we police in a we live in a world with a lot of lawyers and im sure some of you are lawyers or will become them and the wto has been a Good Business for them. Once a case gets run in the wto it can take years, and for us in particular, even when you have a wto ruling in your favor, sometimes its very hard to enforce that. Then grew through the appeals process, and thats makes kind of gums up the works. Thats why the trade agreements are important women need different provisions in there that kind of help us resolve those disputes much faster than in the wto. I think exactly what kent said. When youre looking at a tick country, a lot of how effective you going using something look the big hammer with the wto, a. , its resourceintensive and if the other country largely ignores through the process, used the cotton case from brasle, suing the United States over the con cotton program. And took over a decade to get that resolved. If youre a farmer or rancher and have to wade a decade for something to be sorted out, you could be out of business by the time its sorted. The wto as a hammer can help drive more effort to use the dispute settlement mechanisms in these trade agreements. It certainly gives, for example, the department offing a gull tour working with the u. S. Trade representative, work with the department of commerce, certainly work with the state department, brings a lot of different resources to bear on the government kind our, a, kind of, and one of those things that resolve these things internationally could also find when you have another pressure point, that i may be using a nontariff trade barrier to keep your products out of my country, and then i have a hiccup on a sanitary issue other and all of a sudden im willing to sit down, lets talk about your suspect please dont shut the gate on mine. So like any negotiation. Ick ask and kent you touched on this as well. Theres really generally speaking three ways settling a dispute. Unilateral action, you view it a grievance, decide to implement a tariff, and its a oneway deal. Typically retaliation is involved there, and theres bilateral action, and then theres the multilateral going through the wto. It sounds to me like both of you are typically generally supportive of the bilateral action when comes to settling disputes in the agricultural trade. Is that generally fair to say or times when it is help of to go to the wto or unilaterally do something . I he absolutely believe that it works so much better when you can get things sorted out bilaterally. I think this is again, look at nafta being an example. We have had issues with canada, if mexico and you look the gates on the border, and im saying this carefully but its a little bit like last night at midnight. When things shut down, okay, this is real so lets get this sorted out and come up with an agreement so before everybody wakes up we have if sorted out. When you have a workable Bilateral Agreement or multilateral like we have with nafta, kind of gives everybody a chance to get in the room and go around the hard way on this or we can work it out. We went through this on country offeror inlabelling where we werent able to sort it out in the u. S. In a way that california and mexico liked and they took to us wt expo we understand we dont need retaliation from either direction. Ill just mention one other really quick area, too, all of the dispute mechanisms youre talking about, to give you credit to the usdr and usda colleagues, the wto and the spf committees at the pbt and those can be areas where theres conversations that can take place before the barrier is in place. The idea of notifying draft regulations and creating some conversation amongst the governments and in many ways it can be sort of u. S. Driven but the more there are other countries raising concerns, the more we can help, again back to the point we raid before, look at different models to make help that government do what they want to do but in a way that doesnt create a trade restriction. So, the effort to modify and engage early, before we have to before we consider our dispute options, can be a real opportunity, too. Next question. Hi. Im from kenya, studying economics last semester. Just want to go back to innovation policy and i do have a comment and then one question that follows up. Many countries are actively pursuing ambition Innovation Technology to push their competitor, both private and public, and transitional in nature so basically my question is, how do you build innovation capable to effectively address sustainability challenges which includes environment, food securities and public health, you kind of talked about it but would that be possible . That is a great question. You have reminded me that one of the favorite things that i get to do is we work a lot with state department and u. S. Usd and private sector groups in farmertofarmer exchanges or agriculture food industry, both commercial and government officials that come from other countries. Well get contacted, say, group from kenya is coming in, can you talk about it. Theres lot of innovation that is developed and in place in the United States that likes, well, lets just share that innovation but it doesnt really not real applicable because of the cost or technology and systems. The trackers needed for the harvest systems or designs for large acreages and then what is it we have that we can share with other countries because its not just about helping farmers, for example, get from subsistence farming to basically farming and growing food, fiber, feed, et cetera, for customers. Building an economic base. So when we look at innovation thats part of what sometimes have to remind yourselves we have reames and reames or buildings full of innovation, not all of it may be the latest technology here in the United States, but theres some very worthwhile technologies for small farmers, for very small farmers. Sometimes its not about an actual commodity being raised but the services, where again, the usda, a lot of what we need certain countries was effectively export our Extension Service ideas to put the experts out there that can help, and bring that sustainability because he sustainability, most folks think about the environment first. How do we have environmental sustainability . I always like to remind folks that for farmers and rancher it was touched on to be good a farmer and rancher and be in business, being an economics major, its good if you make money. So that you can continue being in business. And thats kind of the number one sustainability issue for the men and women that it work for and however we can help bring that around the world, because that economic sustainable gross in another country, that provides the resources and also the desire to inincorporate other technologies such as Environmental Quality or innovations. Ill be fast on this because i want to get another question. I think its also important that the United States continue to engage in International Standard setting bodies. Specifically theres one that is called the were very fortunate that in the u. S. We have the Scientific Community and we have the regulators who can work well together to give proper guidance on the use of technologies in food production. Not every country can afford that. Many countries cant. Dale touched on the extension. Thats one part. The other part is standards in in place are actually available for their producers one major problems that it is supposed to be a board made primarily of scientists, and each country sends representatives. Name represents from south america, europe, africa, he but europe does not embrace technology. Europe prohibits the use of technology the their food production, and even though the Scientific Community internationally supports this and the science supports the use of these technologies, whether its gmos or here morneau nye growing hormones those all Safety Products going through rig produce testing. If we are not leading, the europeans will show up with their votes in block and they will restrict technology everywhere. And as our population grows, we need to use technology and we have fewer people producing more food for growing population. We have to be efficient and safe in doing that and the policies of the European Union as spouses, especially through kodaks and preaching their doctrine, they take punitive action on countries who will back the use of these technologies and something we have to step up as leaders inthis world to push back against because the last thing we need is more famine. We dont need people facing hunger. We need to be able to use the Agricultural Production of each of these countries, use it efficientlyand safely so that theres less instability overall. If i can ask you about something you brought up, you mentioned the importance of for the United States, being able to set standards internationally toward trade policies. Part of the reason that the Previous Administration really pushed on the Transpacific Partnership was because of its ability potentially to an act standards broadly across the asianpacific region of the us standards. The Current Administration has taken the approach that wants to pursue bilateral trade deals as opposed to multilateral trade deals. Do you think that same pursuit of setting standards globally can be achieved bilaterally . I think first of all, we are hopeful that President Trump is going to really entertain returning to the Transpacific Partnership. Weve heard that repeated by secretary perdue as early as yesterday, pipe Vice President pence. We hope the Administration Takes steps to do that because tpp would not only have basically applied us standards to a lot of other countries, it would have given us dramatic leverage over a lot of other countries , not just the Lower Terrace but apply better labor and Environmental Standards and also production standards. The fps sanitary chapter within tpp is one of the strongest and we were hopeful theres not going to be significant changes in this new modified version of it but the tpp was a good example of the us really expanding our presence in a fastgrowing market. We are hopeful we can return there. The bilateral process means we have to take them one at a time. The only problem is it takes two to tango. If the other countryis not necessarily willing to sit down and agree to these terms , it will be tough. So with tpp, youve got it all in one fell swoop. Its going to take more time and instead of having this in play, now its going to take a few more years to see action and thats why its so important that we continue to support the efforts of the tpp because even if the nsa doesnt return, we still left our mark andespecially in the sbs chapter, we need to see that apply across the pacific rim. Bilaterals can work, multilaterals, we need whole different approaches. But you know this, it takes as much work to get a bilateral 218 votes as it does to get a multilateral. So theres that political components here in town to get back. Remember the world is not waiting. Weve already seen obviously the tpp 11 are down known as the two tpp. Australia hosted several partners and the pacific alliance, five countries out of latin america talk about building a new trade relationship and use upgrading their agreement with mexico. And the rest of the world isnt waiting. And its the longer that this takes us to continue to drive thosestandards , the more difficult it becomes. Other questions . We will move quickly, i think we can get two more questions. Thank you for being here, my name is aaron from senator langfords office. I want to ride the wave with the discussion here. You know, what do you guys see as the future of tpp now with the us withdrawal. The second question, for us in congress, looking forward with other freetrade agreements, what kind of messaging you think and what lessons can we learn from that withdrawal looking forward . Thats a great question. And i would say that what immediately popped to mind. At this point when we look at this, these are negotiations. Which means were not dictating, were negotiating and were very much aware of that. But what it means fundamentally, when for example when tpp started out, it was actually i think 10 of us. And then canada and mexico or excuse me canada and japan want to join the party. And we the United States were adamant that if you are going to return the dvd, you join the game inprogress. Were not going to go and start all over so all the things weve agreed to , you got to suck it up and get on board with those provisions because thats where going. We pull out, and then we come back in and like hey, guess what. We want to get back in. Its like you join the game in progress. The point, we dont know what all they changed but im sure we will find out the details as they go along but now were looking at that same list and having what we use to kind of force canada and japan into a certain size box. Theyre saying you guys can join us but guess what you got to put up with . Thats going to be the tough part. I think theres real value, the fact that these high standards and high principles will get implemented in the region and there is a real benefit that its something that we can bring back to washington as american multinationals, many of us operating in certain cases as well the more that we can demonstrate the benefit and the standards and how it aligns with american interests, potentially that gets us to that point where we can wait to get back in. One quick point here, as he already mentioned, the clock is ticking. And while its easy to point fingers obviously at the administration, i think we also need to be respectful of the fact that we are asking the administration to do a lot with nobody in there to actually negotiate. We need, im glad the senate is probably deciding to move forward and confirm the rest of the nominees, not just ustr, theres a lot of other Unfilled Positions and we really need to have those positions filled because when it comes to these negotiations, where going to accomplish a lot of technical level, no question. We have some of the best trained lawyers who are there those possibilities kicked up to the next level before they go all the way to ambassadors. Next level, we dont have people who are confirmed. To actually expect results whether multilateral or bilateral if we dont have people in place to actually call the balls and strikes on all these other negotiations and really the intimate those recommendations to the top. So thats probably one of the biggest concerns that we have as an industry is just the fact that it has taken such a long time. It took a long time to get people nominated in the first place and in the confirmation process has taken a long time to. I understand that. I was a senate staff, and i understand how things can drag out but if we dont move quickly to put these people in place, then its going to be tough for us to see the real change that we are asking for. We have the nafta round coming up soon and we still have achieved agriculture share and its important that we dont go seven rounds without having someone there is achieved agriculture negotiator. This is very important. So a point well taken, we are working on it. Let you do that as potentially a call to action to because theres such an enthusiastic and positive view to this. You came to this discussion and learn more about this and it seemed really interested. We talked a lot about the process of specific agreements and the challenges we see in the environment these days. And broader issues, there is real concern about trade policy and the impact it has four people. So the more that you get educated in the space, the more we can actually bring out that rational conversation in the world, what does trade mean. And its not just the validity or ability to buy strawberries in december as great as that is. Need to focus on some of the underlying concerns and how were addressing people who are worried about it so that we are initiating trade policy as the benefit that really can be for our economy but mostly importantly for our workforces and consumers in the United States. A question from the back area do we have time for one more . My name is tom dunn, a consultant. It seems as though every 10 or 15 years theres a proposal to merge the ustr and commerce and occasionally to include the Foreign Agricultural service. Can you some people say theres the fas is among the most successful of the trade agencies. Can you the importance of keeping the agriculture negotiating separate from the manufacturing goods and the second, youve alluded to the importance of gm owes and not successful or not as accepted in europe but how successful are the agriculturalbased Research Projects or our projects, how are they breaking into other markets and im thinking specifically of monsanto, the projects that are soon to be monsanto, can you those points . I want to take the easy question. As far as working, ustr and commerce and fas, it would be a great idea so long as there reporting to secretary perdue. Thats when youre talking about agriculture, you know, you need to understand agriculture. Thats why we need it agriculture negotiator. One of the things and its when you look at how the structure works. Again, when i was in usda. Ustr has a small. But they rely heavily on in the Agriculture Sector for holds in the service , usda as well as economists from the Economic Research Service National agricultural statistics, folks from the food Safety Inspection service, folks from, you go bang down the list, all those folks working together to bring a tremendous amount of resource in terms of both expertise and time and energy to focus on the details, the small details and feedback back into the agriculture negotiating. Thing commerce and any other sector, theyre not going to find too many experts on automobiles or intellectual property from the trait perspective. Working at the department of agriculture anymore than you got a beef expert or weed expert or cotton at commerce. And just to add to that. One of the most exciting things we have seen is that first of all, thank you to congress for authorizing the undersecretary for trade. Thats been a big victory for agriculture. Were glad that secretary perdue has implemented that. We think hes going to do a fantastic job. Hes traveling around the world and really the problem was with the way the system was designed, pretty much we have these silos where people have different tasks but there really wasnt any way to organize. And so its dependent on the issue that would pop up, who was going to take the lead and be responsible for that. With ted kennedy, we now have someone who can organize that and who people are accountable to. And thats one of the good things is we have someone who can help troubleshoot a lot of the issues that not only that we run into but that other countries run into in doing business with the us. We can solve these issues before they become leveraged trading issues. And speaking of the Technology Issue broadly, when you look at that innovative agriculture space, theres obviously a great deal of opportunity and demand, whether thats leveraging innovation to solve securitychallenges , in deprived parts of the world or dealing with environmental challenges farmers face at home, in latin america and biotechnology has become an opportunity for a lot of the regions can was talking about before. The wide range of science and recognizing the value in hoping to address, things like Sustainable Development goals. The morewe continue to use scienceand innovation to address those challenges , the better a planet. How are we doing on time . I think its a good note to end it on. I dont want to force you guys to stay, if youre willing to do more questionsi think theres interest in doing so. The gentleman in the back has raised his hand. We will let him ask his question and decide whether or not we want to add answer it. You have to ask a really good questionbecause if not, they are going to just walk out. Im the only one here from wg to so perfect. My question he backs off, when you consider the fact that from the crossborder data flows, prospective innovation perspective, fundamental economics perspective, why is the Manufacturing Sector kind of winning this battle over agriculture and tech when it comes to tpp . When it comes to tpp . Or i guess more Free Trade Agreements in general. Let me put it in this context and let me explain i got a degree in Animal Science so if i sound like i understand economics, im just making that up. But when you look at agriculture in general, and this is one of the issues on nafta that generally speaking is the same in tpp. Agriculture generally is a winner in these trade negotiations. Theres a lot of particularly countries where there are bilaterals like with south korea, colombia and so forth but when it comes together to your point, agriculture has consistently been a surplus in terms of net trade in the macro sense. But certainly some countries where we import more than we export but in total, we export more in value and in quantity then we bring in. So typically, our experience with trade deals is that any country we have a trade agreement with, we are generally doing about 65 percent better in trade with that country than we were before. When you step back from that point and say or other sectors, honestly one of it is the Technology Change that occurred. Intellectual property and those things, that dynamichas changed a lot but agriculture , despite the innovation, despite all thedifferent Technology Used , its still fundamentally a pound of beef. Its a bale of cotton. Its a bushel ofwheat, its a basket of apples. And folks are looking for food, if theyre safe and the quality is there, were going to make a deal. I think thats also from kind of politics of it frankly. Virtually, every senator has got farmers and ranchers in their district or in their state, excuse me. I grew up on how side so on the outside, it varies. About 70 congressional districts in which you would consider rule districts. But when you do that comparison and you bring this forward, agriculture typically is usually the period when you get a negotiation done and agriculture is the last thing to get sorted out. But agriculture is also critical to getting these trade deals to 218 votes to 60 votes. Thats fundamentally where it is. When you gauge what we talked about, when you gauge a trade agreement success or not, based simply on whether or not we had a trade surplus or trade deficit with the country, youre missing a whole bunch of backandforth of the economic value that importing copy for example, just think about the Economic Activity that drives. Just out in the hall, everybody had a coffee pot. Hows that for dancing all the way around the barn and not answering the question . Add onto that, im also a gw grad and you do not want to see what my ecommerce looks like. But i think that evolution and were seeing in trade here, i thinkthats why theres so much , we are what generates a lot of concerns and challenges is not that easy. To separate and say this is agriculture, thats manufacturing. Farm equipment, in manufacturing when goes with with and vice versa. So it really is about getting the best and most conference of deals that wecan so that everybodys got the opportunity to compete. And i see that theres also just the misconception that agriculture stops at the farm. We are manufacturing, we are definitely part manufacturing. Just on the beach side, i mentioned the rendering factor. Like it or not, that stuff goes into pharmaceuticals. It goes into cosmetics. Theres a lot of other valueadded products come from one animal. Weve been able to innovate into maximize that. That is created a lot of opportunities in manufacturing services. That start at the farm but its in there. And its notjust that, when you look at equipment. When you look at all the Farm Equipment thats produced, thats one of the biggest exports out there. No one produces that as good as we do and that the quality and quantity. So its, the manufacturing doesnt exclude agriculture. We are part of it. So were part of that balance, were also that discussion. But i also think you cant go into the fact that you know, not everybody farms, everybody eats. And as dale mentioned, that resonate with a lot of folks. I dont think we are necessarily losing as much i just think that the conversation has changed. People are looking. Theyre looking at factors that quite frankly had been part of the discussion in the past. But you know, its not necessarily the direction we want things to go. I think thats another way to say it. We would much rather see our government focus not on renegotiating the entire trade agreements, focus on areas that need tobe improved. Lets get back to doing what we do best, thats tearing down trade barriers and letting Us Agriculture really maximize some of those outcomes. I think were out of time so thank you for being a great audience and asking such great questions. Im glad i was not the one having to answer those. If we can get lisa and can round of applause. [applause] you, lisa, dale and can. I appreciate how candid and informational that last panel was. What a great note in the conference on. From the entire 18, policy conference and team, thank you for joining us today. It was a great to finish with. I think that this panel and every panel that we seen exemplifies the mission of our 2018 conference and we met and chose the topic of free trade in american prosperity, we decided we wanted this congress to be something more than an academic exercise. We wanted this conference to be seen through the eyes of the practitioner. We wanted it to be seen through the eyes of the American Farmer, through the eyes of the auto manufacturer, the investment banker, even the european and i think we achieved that with the fantastic panel that we had today and the one we had last night. You could have had this amazing conference without the support of our generous sponsors, ford motor company, the baker, center for leadership and governance and as well as bury gold. We didnt get to see this morning the energy, but we sure would like to have back to georgetown at a later time and on a more personal about the conference, last night very brief Government Shutdown was a minor reminder that our democracy doesnt always go according to plan for how we want. But shutdown notwithstanding we were still here today in the peoples house where the most influential buildings in the world. Posting this very great conversation so now its up to us to continue the conversation beyond today when you call to action and not end with that and thank you for coming. [inaudible conversation] taking a look at prime time programming here on cspan2 at 8 pm, a forum on Us Immigration policy and the human toll of border crossings. Its hosted by the university of michigan ford school of Public Policy andthat eight over on cspan, several africanamerican women journalists including april ryan , demetrios center, Malika Anderson and darlene sue prevailed on their experiences covering the trump administration. Sunday on afterwards, classified matter cofounder patrice with her book when they tell you it terrorist, white black lines matter memoir. Hes interviewed by author and journalist torre. We created black lines matter and we knew we had to get people on board. And we have to also interrupt what people try to do and the coop black lines matter so we ensured that it wasnt coopted. Challenging people in our movement sometimes so that what we love and artists to not say our lives matter, to save other communities matter but to really focus on black people and to be okay. And to be allies and be in solidaritywith black people and then we took it out to the world. Watch after words sunday at night you turn on book tv. Saturday, American History tv on cspan3 is live at 9 am eastern with excerpts from the new museum of the bible inwashington dc with a symposium of historians exploring the bible and the founding of america. People include Baylor University history professor donna skid, opera benjamin franklin, the religious life of the founding father. American University Public Affairs Professor Daniel Dreisbach , author of reading the bible with the founding fathers. Vanderbilt university divinity Professor James byrd, author of sacred scripture, sacred war the bible from the american revolution. Watch live on saturday morning at 9 am eastern on American History tv on cspan3. I hearing now on the impact of environmental regulations on farmers and ranchers. Officials from the American Farm bureau, thenational Farmers Union , the National Pork Producers Council testified