United states. A quick followup on africa. Ways and means has pointed out that there could be a problem between the u. S. And africa u. S. And the event e. U. If the u. S. Begins to get preferences in the african market. You chose a different path. Two quick questions. One, will you have some flexibility so you dont harm u. S. Exports and, two, have you given any thought to a common origin rule perhaps being part of epa where excuse me being part of ttip where the u. S. Recking nices african inputs the recognizes african inputs the same as export to the u. S. And vice versa so this wouldnt promote african participation in the Global Supply chain. And the third very quick is on g. I. S some are concerned youre use r using the lisbon agreement to make some progress. Perhaps that should be better left for the negotiation of the ttip in terms of this very controversial issue of geographical indications. Thank you very much. Thank you. That was a lot of questions. On tpa we are, of course, following that process very closely, and i know its an intense debate here. We have looked at what has been proposed, different amendments, but thats one of the reasons i wanted to be here in may as well to discuss with the team to get his sense of this and what will actually become the end vote. So its very difficult for us to have a position on individual paragraphs or amendments in tpa. We need to get clarity what it means in practice. For instance, the ones you mentioned on africa. What we have been doing in africa for a long time, i think is a good thing opening up our market for them and giving them access. That is to support their economy and their growth, and we dont think that is being done, you know sort of to harm u. S. Interests, its to promote our interests and theirs, but ill be happy to discuss in this morning with mike froman as well. And we hope that the tpa and tpp can be concluded quite soon because, as i said earlier, even if tpp ttip has a parallel negotiation track, of course it cannot be concluded before congress and the senate has agreed on the tpa. So thats why its very important for us as well. On the wipo, this is a e. U. Is not a member of wipo. There are nine e. U. Countries who are members. There is a congress coming up. We are, of course, following that very closely. The u. S. Is not part of it, so whats happening there is for the members to discuss. And our discussions on geographical indications needs to have a parallel track. We need to find a solution, a way forward that everybodys happy with. As i said, this is a difficult issue, but we are willing to look at this and im sure it can be done. It has been done with others. Fantastic. Okay. We have a question right here in the front. Good morning. Im greg with the American Cancer Society cancer action network. The e. U. Has a rather robust Tobacco Products directive and we are seeing trade disputes around world involving government regulation of tobacco to protect people from disease and death. Can you say a little bit about how protection of Public Health particularly on issues like tobacco are factoring into your consideration of positions on isds . Thank you for that question. I think that is an illustration of why isds has become conflictual as well, because people in europe have seen Tobacco Companies suing governments because of their willingness to protect the citizens from damages of smoking with plain packages and so on. And thats why we put already in the canadian agreement a provision that states have the right to regulate to protect the health or the safety of the citizens. And this cannot be put into question by a company. And we are strengthening that language in the proposed reform of the system as well. So the case that is ongoing right now would probably not be successful or would not be successful with the new terms that we have put up with isds. States have the right to regulate to protect their citizens in tobacco and in other areas. Fantastic. Question over there please. Microphone is coming your way. Hi, commissioner. Business newspaper. Really glad to see you here because i was based in brussels last two years i follow you. [laughter] yes i follow ttip from the u. S. european joint announcement. My question is in Washington White House and congress use china as a subject to get through all the blocks like tpa and tpp saying if u. S. Doesnt set the High Standards china will. I want to ask you commissioner also use china as [inaudible] european difficulties from Member States of parliament, and do you think ttip is really about setting a High Standard between transatlantic and exclude other nations other emerging countries . Thank you. Well, its not for me to comment on what politicians here in the u. S. Have said about one thing or another. We think that ttip is a great possibility to create the largest free trade area between the two biggest economies of the world for the moment, europe and the u. S. And we are convinced that setting standards there is a good thing. If we can set standards in a new generation of standards in different technologies, we have good people who put standards in regulators in europe, we have in the u. S. As well. If we can set some standards they have a good possibility to become global standards. But we are doing this for us and for our people because we are convinced it would be good for how economy. But were not doing it, you know position to anybody else. Of course, as i said in my introductory remarks theres a spaghetti bowl of different Bilateral Agreements and, of course, they can be seen as all hostile towards each other, but thats the world we live in. Everybodys making agreements. Chinas making a lot of agreements as well. We are engaged in a trade Investment Agreement with china from the european point of view, and we hope we can finish that quite soon and we also cooperate in other foras. So it is not directed toward someone else, but its a good thing to do in itself. Fantastic. Why dont we take one more question. Sir, youll have the last question. Thank you maam. Sam gillston with washington tariff and trade letter. One of the key elements of the talks is in regulatory convergence. You didnt get into that very much. Can you give us an idea of the status of how well those are going, what are the big problems, and which areas do you see most likely to have something in this agreement actually come out . Yes. This is an area where we have made good technical progress but, of course, it takes time. We have identified, like, eight, nine different sectors where we think there is scope to recognize each others standards, in the car sector cosmetic engineering, medical devices, what else . Well, theres a variety of sectors where we think that we could recognize each others standards because, for instance, we do inspection of factories. They have to be done where you do pharmaceuticals. We do it in one way in the European Union you do it in a very similar way in the u. S. And theyre both as safe and as good, and they produce the same results. But for a company that wants to export to one side or the another, you have to do it twice. That costs a lot of money. Medical devices have to go through a formal operation system twice. Car crash tests. If i want to sell a dress, i have to put it in [inaudible] in europe our way and i have had it in the i have to do et in the american way as well. So very, very similar to protect the goals of consumers but we have to do it twice and that costs a lot of money. So we can recognize each other standards in these sectors i think that could be a very good thing especially for Small Companies who dont have the room to maneuver to pay for these extra fees. And if we can do it for future regulations because we have very good regulators on both sides to set future standards in electronic [inaudible] or nanotechnology or whatever, we could, we could perform one global standard that would have an effect for the rest of the world. And then that could, of course, be a very good thing for business and it could also facilitate for the rest of the world who want to export [inaudible] one standard instead of two. So this we have made good technical progress, but its not done yet. So we have to go through sector by sector case by case, and to to convince each other that our standard is as good as yours but we are making progress here. Our Technical Team is even between the different negotiation rounds, so i hope we can announce some result there later this fall. Well, commissioner malmstrom thank you so much. You addressed a very broad range of issues with good humor great common sense. I have a feeling were going to be seeing quite a bit of you in washington and i think ambassador fro matchs going to get some fromans going to get some frequent flyer miles over the next several months. [laughter] we hope the next time youre in washington youll return and help us understand the process. This is extremely helpful, and i for one would like to sit through your isds 101 class that you gave. Maybe that should be something you do the next time. Were grateful that you spent your time with us. We wish you the best with your meetings with the commerce secretary, ambassador fro match and others. With your applause, please join me in thanking commissioner malmstrom. Thank you so much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] a quick reminder on this monday morning that if you missed any of this program that we just showed you, you can watch it anytime in the cspan video library. Go to cspan. Org. And live coverage still to come here on cspan2. At noon the Cato Institute will host a forum looking at the future of south africa. Panelists will also talk about the political and Economic Development in the country since it transitioned from apartheid to majority rule government system. Thats live at noon eastern right here on cspan2. The u. S. Senate will return at 3 p. M. Eastern today and theyll consider overriding a president ial veto of a measure dealing with regulations on Union Election rules. Senators also expected this week to continue work on the iran Nuclear Oversight bill and start consideration of the 2016 budget resolution that was negotiated by house and senate conferees. The house, by the way is out all this week for a district work period. Members will be back for legislative business on may 12th. As always, you can see live coverage of the house over on cspan and the senate live right here on cspan2. In Campaign News today ben car soften is announcing this morning carson is announcing this morning that he is going to run for president in 2016. Dr. Carson, whos a retired neurosurgeon, is set to make that announcement in about 15 minutes from now in detroit, 10 30 eastern today. Politico has a story about it. Dr. Carson began to draw interest from the Republican Party after speaking at the National Prayer breakfast in 2013 where he assailed president obama over the Affordable Care act while the president sat in attendance. You can watch ben carsons candidacy announcement on cspan this morning starting at 10 30 eastern followed by your phone calls and comments. And politico also writes about carly fiorina. She announced today she will also seek the republican nomination for 2016. Quote yes i am running for president , she said on abcs Good Morning America today. She also launched her campaign web seat today with this web site today with this oneminute video. Im getting ready to do something too, im running for president. Our founders never intended us to have a professional Political Class. They believed that citizens and leaders needed to step forward. We know the only way to reimagine our government is to reimagine who is leading it. Im carrie my carly fiorina, and im running for president. If youre tired of the sound bites, the vitriol the pettiness, the egos the corruption, if you believe that its time to declare the end of identity politics, if you believe that its time to declare the end of lowered expectations, if you believe that its time for citizens to stand up to the Political Class and say enough, then join us. Its time for us to empower our citizens, to give them a voice in our government, to come together to fix what has been broken about our politics and our government for too long. Because we can do this. Together. President ial candidates often release books to introduce themselves to voters. Heres a look at some recent books written by declared and potential candidates for president. Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton looks back on her time serving in the Obama Administration in hard choices. In american dreams, florida senator marco rubio outlines his plan to restore economic opportunity. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee gives his take on politics and culture in god, guns, grits and gravy. And in blue collar conservatives, potential president ial candidate Rick Santorum argues the Republican Party must focus on the working class in order to retake the white house. In a fighting chance, massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren recounts the events in her life that shaped her career as an educator and politician. Wisconsin Governor Scott walker argues republicans must offer Bold Solutions to fix the country and have the courage to implement them in unintimidated. And kentucky senator rand paul who recently declared his candidacy, calls for Smaller Government and more bipartisanship in taking a stand. More potential president ial candidates with recent books include former governor jeb bush in immigration wars, he argues for new immigration policies. In stand for something, Ohio Governor john kasich calls for a return to traditional american values. Former virginia senator james webb looks back on his time serving in the military and in the senate in i heard my country calling. Independent vermont senator Bernie Sanders recently announced his intention to seek the democratic nomination for president. His book the speech, is a printing of his eighthourlong filibuster against tax cuts. And in promises to keep, Vice President joe biden looks back on his career in politics and explains his guiding principles. Neurosurgeon ben carson calls for greater individual responsibility to preserve americas future in one nation. T in fed up, former Texas Governor rick perry explains government has become too intrusive and must get out of the way. Another politician who has expressed interest in running for president is former rhode island governor lincoln chafee. In against the tide, he recounts his time serving as a republican in the senate. Carly fiorina former ceo of hewlettpackard, shares lessons shes learned from her difficulties and triumphs in rising to the challenge. Louisiana governor bobby jindal criticizes the Obama Administration and explains why conservative solutions are needed in washington in leadership and crisis. And finally, in a time for truth, another declared president ial candidate texas senator ted cruz recounts his journey from a cuban immigrants son to the u. S. Senate. Look for his book in june. A Senate Appropriations subcommittee held a hearing last week on the 2016 funding requests for the National Institutes of health. The groups director, dr. Francis collins was joined by a few of the 27 directors of the institutes and centers to talk about some of their initiatives in Precision Medicine and the progress being made in their respective areas of Biomedical Research. This hearing is led by subcommittee chair senator roy blunt. The appropriations southbound committee on labor health and Human Services and education and related agencies will come to order. Certainly, were pleased this morning to see dr. Francis collins and the Institute Directors from nih with us. Glad to have you here to talk about the budget. We look forward to the the testimony and the opportunity to talk with each perp on the panel person on panel about these issues as they come up. Throughout history the practice of medicines been largelya xd reactive. Even today we have to wait until the ons of most diseases before were able to treat them or begin the process of curing them. Science doesnt fully understand the genetic and environmental factors that cause major diseases such as cancer, diabetes alzheimers disease. Because of that, treatments are often inprecise often unpredictable and unfortunately, up not effective. This budget that you all have proposed really proposes a revolutionary concept of addressing each individual in a precise and off different way often different way. The Precision Medicine initiative would allow physicians to really individualize the treatments on patients based on their unique genetic makeup. By having access to each individuals genetic makeup now a physician has the potential we hope, to decide not to use or to use specific and targeted drugs. As the chairman of the subcommittee i certainly will support this project. I hope we can prioritize and intend to prioritize funding for nih as one of the things the committee does even in a year where our funding challenges are greater than they sometimes are. We always have funding challenges at home at work, in the government, have those funding challenges. But p