Transcripts For CSPAN2 U.S. Trade Representative Robert Ligh

He is discussing the trade agenda. Thank you for joining us. We look forward to your testimony. As a former deputy under president reagan, the trade negotiator, you understand the u. S. Leadership and participation in a rules based trading system is essential to our nations prosperity. America has led the world in Global Commerce for the better part of the past 100 years. Through our network of strong trade agreements to expand the Economic Freedom store businesses and their consumers. Through our leadership we held our competitors accountable. Through our steadfast commitment to the principles of free enterprise, open market and rules based international commerce, our nation has set itself apart. The world looks to us to lead in setting the standards of Global Commerce. When we set an example, the world follows. Today American Leadership on trade is more important than ever, especially in the asiapacific region work chinas influence is growing every day. Its important that we dont lose ground in china. We preserve and strengthen leadership in Global Commerce and its not enough to simply buy American Products and services but we have to sell american. We need strong trade agreements to do so in asia markets throughout the world. Our trade agreements, including nafta, have been tremendously successful to create american jobs and help their businesses compete and win in all three crucial segments of our economy. That said, we have to take action to strengthen our existing agreements and ensure they continue to benefit the american people. Im pleased that President Trump is taking this approach with nafta. They were negotiated nearly 25 years ago. It should be updated to reflect the modern trade on digital commerce, electric property, enterprises and custom barriers among others. Following the negotiation objectives congress set forth in tpa. As youve committed to us, this modernization must be accomplished in a manner that retains current benefits in a seamless way that doesnt disrupt the current agreement, ongoing trade or the millions of american jobs at stake. The administrations commitment to a strong negotiating objectives and the timetable established, i am confident we can Work Together to deliver a highquality deal for the american people. One that can serve as a model as you move forward with other Bilateral Agreements. Given the administration does not support a multilateral approach, we must move quickly together on an ambitious network of deals that break down barriers and allow us to sell american all over the world. Im particularly interested in t tip once the European Union concludes an ambitious and comprehensive deal. Im also in interested in trade agreements with japan and the United Kingdom when it can come to the table and the trade in services agreements. We plan to renew and move quickly on our miscellaneous tariff bill to help exports. Im encouraged to see the president s dedication, the strict enforcement of trade roles. He has already taken important steps by putting into action many new enforcement tools passed by Congress Last year. If countries fail to uphold their trade obligations, these powerful tools and our participation allow us to challenge them and push back strongly on behalf of our businesses and our workers. When it comes to americas trade deficit, we welcome the president s efforts to examine the issue. There are many factors behind our trade deficit. Some are related to trade but many are not. The dollar status of the World Reserve currency is a significant factor. Examining the trade balance conceals whats really going on. Many exports from mexico reflect tremendous u. S. Value add to research, development, design, intellectual Property Service support in manufacturing. To the extent that the trade deficit is caused by unfair trading practices, we must break down those barriers. Another solution is to push for strong trade agreements that push for american markets worldwide. Through trade agreements that are strictly enforced, weve reduced and eliminated trade deficits in manufacturing, agriculture and service. In many cases weve even turn deficits into surplus. While the first instinct may be to reverse import, the most successful method is breaking up a new markets to americanmade goods and services. We have some of the best businesses and products in the world. If we can reach these customers on a level Playing Field, america will usually come out on top. Thats the recommendation i offer as the administration considers whether it was tricks steel and aluminum imports. We must address market extortions from china. Authority must be used with careful consideration of consequences to our economy and trade rules that we wrote and fully expect our trading partners to abide by. If its done improperly we cut off supply that we need to stay competitive. If its done hastily we raise cost and proved to our partners that we arent reliable. Done indiscriminately, we harm countries that trade fairly and send a protection signal to those looking for an excuse to do the same. It will encourage others to restrict our exports, even in unrelated sectors. It only hurts the growth of jobs and paychecks your home. I will work with the administration to identify a remedy thats balanced, effective, and protects our National Security and economic interest. America must continue to set the standards of Global Commerce. 96 of the worlds customers are located outside the United States. We cannot afford to sit on the sideline, or worse, lead the world in abandoning the rules that have served us so well. We want to work with you on an agenda that creates jobs, grows paychecks improves the lives of all americans. Thank you for being here. We look forward to your testimony. I now yield to mr. Neil for the purposes of an Opening Statement. Thank you. Welcome on behalf of the committee democrats. This hearing is an opportunity for us to hear from you about the administrations vision for u. S. Trade. The administration has certainly been busy on trade. The headlines passed months have been filled with stories about modernizing nafta, withdrawing from nafta, executive orders and memos. Section 232 reveal ou review on steel and aluminum imports, mexican sugar, u. S. China and a 100 day plan and certainly the issue of currency manipulation. What weve been missing in the overall vision, as well as the specifics behind it is activity. What are the administrations policy goals . What priorities are you trying to serve, how are you going to do it, and i hope this morning you can provide us with some answers. There have been a lack of clarity, consistency and consultation. For example, by statute, the administration was required to submit a report on trade policy and its agenda by march 1. On that day, the administration instead submitted a statement that promised to submit a full report after ustr was confirmed and had the full opportunity to participate in developing the report. The report has still not been submitted to this congress. I hope youll clarify the ministrations position on a range of trade issues today. Specific objectives of an after rewrite, the administrators of objective and how the administration will address currency manipulation and their current thinking in steel and aluminum National Security investigations as well. As you know, House Democrats have the most open mind when it comes to revisiting and taking new directions in u. S. Trade policy. We look forward to working with you to prioritize the needs of American Workers and their families through trade policy and we await your testimony. Thank you. Thank you. Without objection, Opening Statements will be made a part of the record. Todays sole witness is the United States trade representative, the committee has received a written statement. It will be made part of the formal hearing record in five minutes to deliver your oral remarks. Again, welcome and you may begin when you are ready. Thank you. Chairman brady, Ranking Member neil, members of the ways and Means Committee, its an honor to appear before you today. In recent weeks, it has been a pleasure getting to know the chairman, the Ranking Member and several members of the committee. I look forward to developing these relationships and to working with each of you. The u. S. Has a special relationship with this committe committee, and i intend to continue that tradition. I met some of you for the first time on may 16 when i appeared before the House Advisory Group on negotiations and the ways and Means Committee bipartisan meeting. Those consultations are critical to helping the administration establish its negotiating objectives for nafta, and more generally, they are helpful for developing trade priorities going forward. To implement this agenda, the president has requested increased funding in the coming fiscal year. Our budget calls for 57. 6 million in increase of nearly 6 over the 2016 level. These Additional Resources will be used to implement the Interagency Center on trade implementation, monitoring and enforcement and will allow ustr to hire eight additional staff to support our trade enforcement activities. The president s budget request is consistent with his desire to control federal spending as well as his insistence on a strong and aggressive trade policy. After being sworn in last month, i have been working with our team to advance the trade policy. We have been active on the International Front with trips to the aipac ministers meeting, a meeting in paris and the wto. At all of these meetings, as well as the numerous bilateral meetings here in washington, i have conferred with my counterparts from almost every major world economy. In many cases, they have indicated a willingness to work with the United States on efforts to reform the Global Trading system in ways that will lead to market outcomes that are fair and more efficient. lowering the nations trade deficit. We briefly discuss each of these topics. First, on may 18 i notified congress that the president will conduct negotiations with canada and mexico in an effort to renegotiate and modernize nafta. The congressional notification is followed by a 90 day period of consultations with congress. This means that the nafta negotiating rounds can begin as soon as august 16. We intend to move very quickly. In the meantime ustr was talking to members, stakeholders or staff and the public to help us develop policy outcomes and negotiations. We put out a request for comments and received more than 12,000 responses. Scheduled hearing for june 27, 20th and 29th. During the 90 day period we will work closely with congress to develop and define our negotiating objectives. In the interest of transparent process and as required by tpa, we will be publishing a detailed summary of negotiating a objectives july 17. Second, we have an aggressive enforcement agenda. We are both defending our rights and holding other counties accountable for their trade violations. For too long the United States, one of the freest and most open markets in the world has been achieved target of litigation at the wto. This makes no sense. At the same time we are proceeding with several wto cases and this is only the beginning. We will aggressively pursue countries that violate trade deals with the United States. We have a number of potential cases under review as i speak. Third, we intend to improve Market Access for us producers. Let me be clear on this point, was that ustr wants to help every American Business that takes its product or provides a service to increase exports to the world. Sometimes this requires enforcement action, other times negotiations are sufficient. The administration is currently engaged with conversations with all our Major Trading partners to have a lower barrier that harm us companies, workers and ranchers. Finally, we hope that these and other efforts by the trumpet administration will help to lower the nations chronic trade deficit. We understand many observers believe that we should not concern ourselves with the trade deficit. This figure is merely a number, that reflects macroeconomic factors, not related to trade policy. The president s view and by is that the trade deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars that persists for years and years regardless of changes in the broader economy are indicative of structural problems in global trade argument or ambassador, i got five minutes though i will pass. We will thank you for your testimony and proceed to question and answer sessions, the lead off and i want to ask very basic questions about freedom. And leadership. My view is that free trade is Economic Freedom, is the freedom to buy and sell around the world , and government interferenceas possible. The freedom that if you and i build a brighter process , developed throughout the world, someone else will build a better project and will buy for a family and for our businesses. It really is one of the greatest economic rights of every american. So given the choice between more Economic Freedom and less, we should always use more. But the question is , will be trumpet Administration Work to expand americans Economic Freedom to trade or ultimately restrict it. The trumpet administration wants to expand Economic Freedom, wants to expand trade. Believes that we can reduce our trade deficits through sales. That certainly is our objective. Philosophically, i would say that the president believes in free trade. He doesnt think it exists right now and the question becomes what you will do to get there. So there are a variety of approaches, i think his approach is to aggressively go after people that are engaging in unfair trade and hope that leads to more Economic Freedom and globally more wealth. Thank you ambassador. That steps into leadership, i think the view of many of us is that if america doesnt lead in free trade, we will grow weaker and our foreign competitors will grow stronger. Factories and farmers or technology as mrs. Will be priced out and shut down around the world. My state of texas is made of trade. America is made for trade. And thats nowhere more important than in the Asian Pacific region. Its imperative we continue to communicate to our trading partners and the rest of the world that we are not a region even though were no longer part of the gdp for the reasons that i along with Ranking Member neil, chairman riker and our Senate Colleagues introduced a resolution last month expressing our strong support or continuing us leader engagement with other countries. So in the area of leadership, especially in that region, at the end of the day, do you see americas trade values and standards prevailing in that region . Or do you see chinas trade values and standards prevailing in that region . I certainly believe that americas trade values will prevail. I would say in this issue of engagement, i was on the job for days when the president sent me off to hanoi to go to the opec meeting and blearyeyed, Walking Around trying to read briefing papers so i can tell one country from another, but he did that because he wanted to make the point that youre making, that we have to be engaged, these people have to know were coming, we are going to do business, that we are going to sell American Products, going to do Bilateral Agreements that out of tpp was known by no means pulling out of the asianpacific, the president s view is that we can get better deals on a bilateral basis that engage in terms of overall whose model works, hours or chinas, thats a very big, very serious question. My belief is that ours is the path that will prevail and i think a lot of people in that part of the world are concerned about this question but the question i ask is how do we prove that . We have to take on china when they do things that are inconsistent with our values but the way we think the economy should develop and work. If you look at it objectively you would say for example in an area likesteel, they have now hugeSteel Industry , motivates based on economics. And somebody in a country in asia looking at that i think their system is succeeding and ours is failing. 1. 1, at least 1 billion times still capacity and we cant produce hundreds of millions of dollars. So what we look at is a, i think were going to prevail, be, i think we have to prevail, not for our own good but for the good of the world. The question i always have and i believe the president has is what do we do it to ensure that and that to me is taking on china whenever they do something that is inconsistent with not only our model but their obligations. I apologize for that being too long. Thanks for your thoughtful answers and mister neil you are recognized. Mister ambassador, ive requested in negotiations that we discussed in my office, you paid a visit and as we look at negotiations between the Global Commerce<\/a> for the better part of the past 100 years. Through our network of strong trade agreements to expand the Economic Freedom<\/a> store businesses and their consumers. Through our leadership we held our competitors accountable. Through our steadfast commitment to the principles of free enterprise, open market and rules based international commerce, our nation has set itself apart. The world looks to us to lead in setting the standards of Global Commerce<\/a>. When we set an example, the world follows. Today American Leadership<\/a> on trade is more important than ever, especially in the asiapacific region work chinas influence is growing every day. Its important that we dont lose ground in china. We preserve and strengthen leadership in Global Commerce<\/a> and its not enough to simply buy American Products<\/a> and services but we have to sell american. We need strong trade agreements to do so in asia markets throughout the world. Our trade agreements, including nafta, have been tremendously successful to create american jobs and help their businesses compete and win in all three crucial segments of our economy. That said, we have to take action to strengthen our existing agreements and ensure they continue to benefit the american people. Im pleased that President Trump<\/a> is taking this approach with nafta. They were negotiated nearly 25 years ago. It should be updated to reflect the modern trade on digital commerce, electric property, enterprises and custom barriers among others. Following the negotiation objectives congress set forth in tpa. As youve committed to us, this modernization must be accomplished in a manner that retains current benefits in a seamless way that doesnt disrupt the current agreement, ongoing trade or the millions of american jobs at stake. The administrations commitment to a strong negotiating objectives and the timetable established, i am confident we can Work Together<\/a> to deliver a highquality deal for the american people. One that can serve as a model as you move forward with other Bilateral Agreements<\/a>. Given the administration does not support a multilateral approach, we must move quickly together on an ambitious network of deals that break down barriers and allow us to sell american all over the world. Im particularly interested in t tip once the European Union<\/a> concludes an ambitious and comprehensive deal. Im also in interested in trade agreements with japan and the United Kingdom<\/a> when it can come to the table and the trade in services agreements. We plan to renew and move quickly on our miscellaneous tariff bill to help exports. Im encouraged to see the president s dedication, the strict enforcement of trade roles. He has already taken important steps by putting into action many new enforcement tools passed by Congress Last<\/a> year. If countries fail to uphold their trade obligations, these powerful tools and our participation allow us to challenge them and push back strongly on behalf of our businesses and our workers. When it comes to americas trade deficit, we welcome the president s efforts to examine the issue. There are many factors behind our trade deficit. Some are related to trade but many are not. The dollar status of the World Reserve<\/a> currency is a significant factor. Examining the trade balance conceals whats really going on. Many exports from mexico reflect tremendous u. S. Value add to research, development, design, intellectual Property Service<\/a> support in manufacturing. To the extent that the trade deficit is caused by unfair trading practices, we must break down those barriers. Another solution is to push for strong trade agreements that push for american markets worldwide. Through trade agreements that are strictly enforced, weve reduced and eliminated trade deficits in manufacturing, agriculture and service. In many cases weve even turn deficits into surplus. While the first instinct may be to reverse import, the most successful method is breaking up a new markets to americanmade goods and services. We have some of the best businesses and products in the world. If we can reach these customers on a level Playing Field<\/a>, america will usually come out on top. Thats the recommendation i offer as the administration considers whether it was tricks steel and aluminum imports. We must address market extortions from china. Authority must be used with careful consideration of consequences to our economy and trade rules that we wrote and fully expect our trading partners to abide by. If its done improperly we cut off supply that we need to stay competitive. If its done hastily we raise cost and proved to our partners that we arent reliable. Done indiscriminately, we harm countries that trade fairly and send a protection signal to those looking for an excuse to do the same. It will encourage others to restrict our exports, even in unrelated sectors. It only hurts the growth of jobs and paychecks your home. I will work with the administration to identify a remedy thats balanced, effective, and protects our National Security<\/a> and economic interest. America must continue to set the standards of Global Commerce<\/a>. 96 of the worlds customers are located outside the United States<\/a>. We cannot afford to sit on the sideline, or worse, lead the world in abandoning the rules that have served us so well. We want to work with you on an agenda that creates jobs, grows paychecks improves the lives of all americans. Thank you for being here. We look forward to your testimony. I now yield to mr. Neil for the purposes of an Opening Statement<\/a>. Thank you. Welcome on behalf of the committee democrats. This hearing is an opportunity for us to hear from you about the administrations vision for u. S. Trade. The administration has certainly been busy on trade. The headlines passed months have been filled with stories about modernizing nafta, withdrawing from nafta, executive orders and memos. Section 232 reveal ou review on steel and aluminum imports, mexican sugar, u. S. China and a 100 day plan and certainly the issue of currency manipulation. What weve been missing in the overall vision, as well as the specifics behind it is activity. What are the administrations policy goals . What priorities are you trying to serve, how are you going to do it, and i hope this morning you can provide us with some answers. There have been a lack of clarity, consistency and consultation. For example, by statute, the administration was required to submit a report on trade policy and its agenda by march 1. On that day, the administration instead submitted a statement that promised to submit a full report after ustr was confirmed and had the full opportunity to participate in developing the report. The report has still not been submitted to this congress. I hope youll clarify the ministrations position on a range of trade issues today. Specific objectives of an after rewrite, the administrators of objective and how the administration will address currency manipulation and their current thinking in steel and aluminum National Security<\/a> investigations as well. As you know, House Democrats<\/a> have the most open mind when it comes to revisiting and taking new directions in u. S. Trade policy. We look forward to working with you to prioritize the needs of American Workers<\/a> and their families through trade policy and we await your testimony. Thank you. Thank you. Without objection, Opening Statements<\/a> will be made a part of the record. Todays sole witness is the United States<\/a> trade representative, the committee has received a written statement. It will be made part of the formal hearing record in five minutes to deliver your oral remarks. Again, welcome and you may begin when you are ready. Thank you. Chairman brady, Ranking Member<\/a> neil, members of the ways and Means Committee<\/a>, its an honor to appear before you today. In recent weeks, it has been a pleasure getting to know the chairman, the Ranking Member<\/a> and several members of the committee. I look forward to developing these relationships and to working with each of you. The u. S. Has a special relationship with this committe committee, and i intend to continue that tradition. I met some of you for the first time on may 16 when i appeared before the House Advisory Group<\/a> on negotiations and the ways and Means Committee<\/a> bipartisan meeting. Those consultations are critical to helping the administration establish its negotiating objectives for nafta, and more generally, they are helpful for developing trade priorities going forward. To implement this agenda, the president has requested increased funding in the coming fiscal year. Our budget calls for 57. 6 million in increase of nearly 6 over the 2016 level. These Additional Resources<\/a> will be used to implement the Interagency Center<\/a> on trade implementation, monitoring and enforcement and will allow ustr to hire eight additional staff to support our trade enforcement activities. The president s budget request is consistent with his desire to control federal spending as well as his insistence on a strong and aggressive trade policy. After being sworn in last month, i have been working with our team to advance the trade policy. We have been active on the International Front<\/a> with trips to the aipac ministers meeting, a meeting in paris and the wto. At all of these meetings, as well as the numerous bilateral meetings here in washington, i have conferred with my counterparts from almost every major world economy. In many cases, they have indicated a willingness to work with the United States<\/a> on efforts to reform the Global Trading<\/a> system in ways that will lead to market outcomes that are fair and more efficient. lowering the nations trade deficit. We briefly discuss each of these topics. First, on may 18 i notified congress that the president will conduct negotiations with canada and mexico in an effort to renegotiate and modernize nafta. The congressional notification is followed by a 90 day period of consultations with congress. This means that the nafta negotiating rounds can begin as soon as august 16. We intend to move very quickly. In the meantime ustr was talking to members, stakeholders or staff and the public to help us develop policy outcomes and negotiations. We put out a request for comments and received more than 12,000 responses. Scheduled hearing for june 27, 20th and 29th. During the 90 day period we will work closely with congress to develop and define our negotiating objectives. In the interest of transparent process and as required by tpa, we will be publishing a detailed summary of negotiating a objectives july 17. Second, we have an aggressive enforcement agenda. We are both defending our rights and holding other counties accountable for their trade violations. For too long the United States<\/a>, one of the freest and most open markets in the world has been achieved target of litigation at the wto. This makes no sense. At the same time we are proceeding with several wto cases and this is only the beginning. We will aggressively pursue countries that violate trade deals with the United States<\/a>. We have a number of potential cases under review as i speak. Third, we intend to improve Market Access<\/a> for us producers. Let me be clear on this point, was that ustr wants to help every American Business<\/a> that takes its product or provides a service to increase exports to the world. Sometimes this requires enforcement action, other times negotiations are sufficient. The administration is currently engaged with conversations with all our Major Trading<\/a> partners to have a lower barrier that harm us companies, workers and ranchers. Finally, we hope that these and other efforts by the trumpet administration will help to lower the nations chronic trade deficit. We understand many observers believe that we should not concern ourselves with the trade deficit. This figure is merely a number, that reflects macroeconomic factors, not related to trade policy. The president s view and by is that the trade deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars that persists for years and years regardless of changes in the broader economy are indicative of structural problems in global trade argument or ambassador, i got five minutes though i will pass. We will thank you for your testimony and proceed to question and answer sessions, the lead off and i want to ask very basic questions about freedom. And leadership. My view is that free trade is Economic Freedom<\/a>, is the freedom to buy and sell around the world , and government interferenceas possible. The freedom that if you and i build a brighter process , developed throughout the world, someone else will build a better project and will buy for a family and for our businesses. It really is one of the greatest economic rights of every american. So given the choice between more Economic Freedom<\/a> and less, we should always use more. But the question is , will be trumpet Administration Work<\/a> to expand americans Economic Freedom<\/a> to trade or ultimately restrict it. The trumpet administration wants to expand Economic Freedom<\/a>, wants to expand trade. Believes that we can reduce our trade deficits through sales. That certainly is our objective. Philosophically, i would say that the president believes in free trade. He doesnt think it exists right now and the question becomes what you will do to get there. So there are a variety of approaches, i think his approach is to aggressively go after people that are engaging in unfair trade and hope that leads to more Economic Freedom<\/a> and globally more wealth. Thank you ambassador. That steps into leadership, i think the view of many of us is that if america doesnt lead in free trade, we will grow weaker and our foreign competitors will grow stronger. Factories and farmers or technology as mrs. Will be priced out and shut down around the world. My state of texas is made of trade. America is made for trade. And thats nowhere more important than in the Asian Pacific<\/a> region. Its imperative we continue to communicate to our trading partners and the rest of the world that we are not a region even though were no longer part of the gdp for the reasons that i along with Ranking Member<\/a> neil, chairman riker and our Senate Colleagues<\/a> introduced a resolution last month expressing our strong support or continuing us leader engagement with other countries. So in the area of leadership, especially in that region, at the end of the day, do you see americas trade values and standards prevailing in that region . Or do you see chinas trade values and standards prevailing in that region . I certainly believe that americas trade values will prevail. I would say in this issue of engagement, i was on the job for days when the president sent me off to hanoi to go to the opec meeting and blearyeyed, Walking Around<\/a> trying to read briefing papers so i can tell one country from another, but he did that because he wanted to make the point that youre making, that we have to be engaged, these people have to know were coming, we are going to do business, that we are going to sell American Products<\/a>, going to do Bilateral Agreements<\/a> that out of tpp was known by no means pulling out of the asianpacific, the president s view is that we can get better deals on a bilateral basis that engage in terms of overall whose model works, hours or chinas, thats a very big, very serious question. My belief is that ours is the path that will prevail and i think a lot of people in that part of the world are concerned about this question but the question i ask is how do we prove that . We have to take on china when they do things that are inconsistent with our values but the way we think the economy should develop and work. If you look at it objectively you would say for example in an area likesteel, they have now hugeSteel Industry<\/a> , motivates based on economics. And somebody in a country in asia looking at that i think their system is succeeding and ours is failing. 1. 1, at least 1 billion times still capacity and we cant produce hundreds of millions of dollars. So what we look at is a, i think were going to prevail, be, i think we have to prevail, not for our own good but for the good of the world. The question i always have and i believe the president has is what do we do it to ensure that and that to me is taking on china whenever they do something that is inconsistent with not only our model but their obligations. I apologize for that being too long. Thanks for your thoughtful answers and mister neil you are recognized. Mister ambassador, ive requested in negotiations that we discussed in my office, you paid a visit and as we look at negotiations between the United States<\/a> and eu, im hoping you can give us an update on the plan. There are 500 billion consumers in europe and different lifestyles. One of the things that we also found very interesting was that we actually suggested to president obama earlier on that juxtaposed the two trade agreements, europe and asia, we would have considered your first. The cause it was much easier to accomplish given the fact that there were many prospects of actually doing that. Now to find that the administration i think needs to update us on what their plans are for asia, i think its gotten an awful lot of potential for americans in the east coast if done correctly. The second question, perhaps you answered both, we already this week about or Motor Company<\/a> deciding to build more cars not in mexico but in china. And importing those cars to the United States<\/a>. It seems to be inconsistent with the president s promise to get jobs here in america. And with fords decision, also seems to indicate that now china beside the president s comments during the course of the campaign is hastening a relationship with automobiles in china. What were trying to discover to the president s comments today if this suggests that for some reason were focusing more on china than we are on nafta. Mister deal, first of all on judith, we certainly agree that thats an important negotiation, for a variety of reasons, installed when it did and this was not a good year to get started because of internal european reasons. They had a series of elections which made compromises difficult. But the final one of those elections is september and its in germany and after that, i think we will talk to them. I certainly hope to with the trade commissioner and ive talked to her about bilateral issues and cooperating issues and im not here to make any announcement about it but it is something that we realize the importance of. On the issue of four moving the plant which i saw in the paper also from mexico to china, i agree, i think that is troubling. We dont have an administrations position on that and we talked about at this point but as the us i found that very troubling. I want to see what incentives there are. It doesnt necessarily make sense to me, obviously it makes sense to board or they wouldnt be doing it but i think its incumbent on us to sit back and look at all the incentives and figure out exactly why that happened. And if it happened for reasons that are not economic reasons, i think the administration should take action. In terms of the president s relationship with affordable, i guess im reminded of a quote in the back of profiles in courage. Where there taking little. And he says that congressman once wrote in the 30s that one of the problems with being elected to congress was this is a response to a constituent letter, is that i get letters from people like you who ask and say that i ran for congress on reforesting this Sierra Nevada<\/a> mountains, ive been in all office six weeks and i havent gotit done, can help. So i guess thats a long way of saying i think its early to say that the president s fault, these are responsible for doing whatever it is that hes doing but i think its something we have to look at. We have to have incentives and it was as troubling to me as it was to you. Mister ambassador, i hope you might inform the committee of the administrations position is probably as you can on that issue. I hope that you can inform the committee promptly on your position and the administrations position on the issue, those cars being manufactured in china i appreciate that question, i will use that as a mandate to develop a report to you. Thank you mister ambassador in german. Mister nunez, you are recognized. I have three topics i want to cover with you and get through all pretty quickly here. The first is nafta, we are all for looking at ways to improve nafta. However, as you know with all negotiated trade, whatever actionbecomes a reaction so there could be a reaction from our allies or partners. Agriculture specifically, as you know the United States<\/a> produces more food than we can consume and i am worried about any type of contribution that either mexico or canada could take. Canada could take on our us farmers so i know youre aware of this but i wanted to get your thoughts on ensuring that we protect agriculture in these upcoming negotiations on nafta. Congressman, thats very important. We realize there have been winners and there have been losers in the nafta process as its developed over the 23 years, 25 years as negotiation of sales began, agriculture has been a winner. I would say even with that, i would say that although we have a 4. 7 billion deficit in agriculture, is not for the kind of products you were thinking about. And it is very important that we do no harm. So our very high priority would be making sure that we do not disrupt our sales in agriculture products, to either canada or mexico but mostly youre thinking about mexico and that is a problem, its a legitimate worry, something were worried about and very concerned about. Theres no question canada could do a lot more to open up their trading practices for our Agricultural Products<\/a>. If i could, id like to move to india. You and i share the goal of enhancing our partnership with india. The Worlds Largest<\/a> democracy. Theyve made a lot of growth over the years but they continue to have trading practices that make it hard for us to get to the table with each other. And one of those issues that i want to make sure you can just bring to your attention in case youre not aware and you can come back to us for the record but specifically with all and other types of walnuts and distasios, there continues to be problems with moving those products to india and im not going to ask you to be an expert on a specific product but if you could come back to us with a report on ideas, different potential problems that they are creating with these trade practices, i appreciate it. I will certainly do that and with the director going to washington this is an opportune time to do that. I have raised the only issue with him so its clearly something were concerned about and as part of my response were looking at the size of the trade surplus you have with the United States<\/a>, you want to be looking for things to buy to get the deficit down. As one of the ways we are trying to help america. Thank you ambassador, i appreciate that comment. Finally, i know that theres been a lot of debate whether or not our taxes need to have a border adjustment. I do know 150 countries around the world have order adjustments and i just find it hard to believe in the long run how were going to be competitive if everything that we export to most of our trading partners as anywhere from a 15 to 25 percent on top of those products and that of course anything that we import doesnt pay them back in their country. And im not asking you to wait into the whether or not you support or oppose border adjustments but id be interesting in your thoughts as to how we can fix these discrepancies with these countries that border it. Thank you congressman, i have from time to time written off as in the light on the subject, it is troubling to me. I first of all and not the treasury secretary, so i dont have to worry about negotiating a tax deal. And i dont envy any members of the committee who have that as we go forward but i agree that tax created an unfair advantage and theres the migration around the world from income taxes to value and taxes. Precisely for that reason. So i dont agree with people who say it doesnt make any difference, i think it does make a difference. So that is to say im approaching any particular solution but i am sympathetic to the problem and i think it has an impact on exports. I think it has an important impact on manufacturing, competitiveness in america so i think its a major issue thank you mister ambassador, my time is expired. Chairman 11, you are recognized. High. Nafta seems very much involved in controversy, mainly because of the lack of enforceable labor and environmental pollutions. The auto sector is a major source of the trade deficit. Let me just review a few facts and ask you some questions. In the last decade or two, the employment in the mexican auto sector has gone up over 200,000 people. While in the us its dropped 90,000 , really more than that if you go back over a decade. In terms of competition, Mexican Water<\/a> workers in the Auto Industry<\/a> are paid 19 percent of what are paid in the big three. And the president called mexican factories sweatshops. That further evidence that auto workers in mexico went down 20 percent for productivity, went up 80 percent. And sweatshops, thats correct because workers in the Auto Industry<\/a> and in mexico cannot form unions. There are outfits so let me ask you three questions if i might relating to that. First, do you agree with depressed wages in mexico leading to negative wage pressure in job loss in the United States<\/a> . If so, can any renegotiation of nafta truly promote jobs here in the us without addressing labor rights in mexico . Two, with that in mind, can you tell us what specific proposals, civic proposals the administration is considering to require mexico to change its laws and practices relating to labor rights as a way to create and safeguard jobs in the us . Number three, i take it on this you are the lead person in the administration although that isnt always clear. I hope you will be. Will the administration insists that mexico bring its labor laws and practices into compliance with basic labor standards before congress is asked to vote on a renegotiated nafta agreement . Fire away. Thank you. Thank you counselor. First of all, i believe that mexican labor laws are having a effect on the us, yes, i believe that. I believe were going to get the deficit down and have the appropriate agreement and one that will pass, it will have to have an effect on that. I do believe that the Mexican Government<\/a> itself understands that theres a problem. I think theyre taking steps which is a good sign but im not suggesting that. You need to talk further. With respect to what our specific proposals are, were still in the process of talking to stakeholders and congress and are interested in peoples views. We do believe you have to have basic core standards and we believe they have to be enforceable just like we believe every position in the agreement has to be enforceable. Do i believe there should be a commitment in the group before a vote . Number were going to put together an agreement and come forward, its going to be an agreement we can have it in the final analysis, the United States<\/a> congress will rule on whether its a sufficiently good agreement and i dont think there will be preconditions like this. Okay, i think unless practices show that changes are made before the breaking laws and practices, that essentially you will be difficult and it shouldnt be difficult to pass nafta. We insisted with peru that they change their laws and practices before we voted on it. May 10 was a major breakthrough. And unless it was made real before we voted, it was impossible to vote for it and time has shown with columbia and other countries that if you dont have that standard, chasing your chasing enforcement everywhere so were going to be very emphatic about that. Thank you mister levin. You are recognized. Thank you for being here, i know that you know the volume and complexity and challenges of trade ive only grown over the years. I want to associate myself with what ms. Nunez said with respect to agriculture in ohio, my own state is the number one trading partner in agriculture is our number one issue. And the number one economic driver. I want to focus on our trade agreement with korea. We have seen an influx of imports of oil and tubular goods. Oh ctg for the republican of korea. In 2015 congress treated the department of commerce to address distortions in the production of foreign merchandise. The margins that more accurately account for their unfair pricing practices of foreign exports. You commit to this committee that you will make it a priority of this administration to engage with our trading partners particularly in this case korea and the republic of korea to continue to dump these products into our country . Yes thank you. I certainly appreciate that. The other issue the german mentioned and i want to comment on is our ongoing section c 32, investigation on National Security<\/a> implications of steel and aluminum imports and i want to applaud and i appreciate the administrations commitment to americas security ensuring a level Playing Field<\/a> with our workers. However, ive heard from a number of employers inmy district , manufacturers about the potential that some of our trading partners good misuse National Security<\/a> justifications to have retaliatory and protection actions taken against them. Are you at all concerned about potential retaliation by some of our trading partners and the effect it would have on domestic manufacturers . Yes. We are concerned, although we start with the proposition that we have a global, extraordinary excess in our capacity that is basically created by china and we can talk about other potential problems but we have this one point one or more billion times which i mentioned before and the question becomes how do you deal with that . You cant deal with it at the border with china because its not that kind of problem, its extending everywhere in the world and as you said in your first question, theyre sending it to korea and to us in the form of ocd with a huge problem. Given that problem is reasonable to sit back and say what are all of the possible tools we have in one of the tools we have is 232 because it does have a National Security<\/a> effect is quite significant. There is the response one of retaliation, were always worried about retaliation but if we dont defend ourselves the cause of a fear of retaliation, then we are just going to be the residual of what nobody else wants so we cant let unfair trade go forward just for that reason but it certainly is reasonable to think about it and try to control so i dont disagree with that at all. The argument that while other people will use their National Security<\/a> exemption for a way that is really hidden, protectionism, thats also a concern, something we have to think about what im inclined to believe personally that with respect to a lot of these countries, they will use every two or tool they have now to defend their interests and take advantage of our market so im less persuaded by that argument although i think its a legitimate argument, something we have to be concerned about but we do have an obligation to all americans when you see something thats very bad going on , we had a kind of a contract with all our workers, all the farmers, we are going to defend america and free trade doesnt mean anything, every member of this committee agrees with that and this is one of the tools that is legitimate to look at and use in this context. I appreciate your work, your execution on this issue. I would hope that you and your team would clearly review the chairmans Opening Statement<\/a> here. I think it reflects on the side of the aisle a concern about the balance in this area, thank you so much. Mister donohue, you are recognized. Thank you ambassador, youve been a personal longtime critic of wto dispute panels overreaching and effectively declaring new obligations and undermining our democratic processes. Under nafta, the investor state settlement procedures which you are familiar, the ist asked for three or five attorneys whose decisions are not subject to appeal to create new obligations and commit unlimited amounts of taxpayer funds to Foreign Corporations<\/a> for paying violations. Yesterday at the finance committee you testified concerning your concerns about ist s. You are aware that the National Association<\/a> of attorney general, the National Conference<\/a> of state legislators have objected to ist asked, that recently the American Automotive<\/a> policy council and are major manufacturers said that quote, i sds provisions in nafta are unnecessary. Do you agree with that . , do you agree without reading it, do you agree that isds is unnecessary then nafta. Isds is something we have to discuss and be informed by my more by the members. I will take a final decision right now. I would say this, it clearly is a balance. There is a legitimate interest in people who go overseas and invest in the United States<\/a> to make some of those people treatedfairly. On the other hand as he suggests , i am troubled iv sovereign issue, im troubled by the fact that anyone, anyone can overrule the United States<\/a> congress and president of the unitedstates. That is troubling to me so those two things are something that i want to work throughs what we do want to see our investors protected wherever they are. And canada as a mature court system, there are more challenges in mexico but i hope you will be looking closely at a system that i think has failed us area and in the second area, you say in your testimony and i was pleased to hear it that you expect significant action far beyond Previous Administration<\/a>s including for example self initiated litigation in defense of us workers. While thats good, its a fairly low bar and ustr under all Previous Administration<\/a>s i think has never successfully challenged a labor or environmental provision with any trading partner and as you know, yesterday the United States<\/a> lost in its drug out, lengthy, nineyear action with reference to guatemalan labor with a finding apparently that was not a matter affecting trade. I believe that the failure to effectively enforce our environmental and working condition provisions is one of the reasons many of us did not have confidence in the tpp or other recent agreements that the comments about labor and environment were meaningless, given the short time i would ask you to respond in writing as to whether you consider artificially suppressed wages to be a subsidy and whether the subsidies impact trade between countries, to tell us how this decision may affect the need for changes in the nafta agreement with reference to workers. Similarly with peru, they are both labor complaints on which there are provisions thathave not been enforced. And i would ask you to respond concerning the complaint filed in 2015 on peru labor concerning the fact that there were effectively denying improved wages and conditions in peru and also on the environmental provision that about 90 percent of all timber leaving peru was harvested illegally. When we set up the agreement and it still is, and if you believe that peru is in compliance with its environmental obligations, under the forest and ask and wives there have been no audits of producers and exporters. As ill submit, others concerning all the ending Enforcement Actions<\/a> on which we see really no effective enforcement. Finally youve got 500 advisors on trade agreements, cooperative advisors. Will the members of congress be able to see the specific language that ustr proposes to mexico and canada on nafta changes . In the first place, we will submit an answer in writing as you requested congressman. In terms of the language, we have an agreement with the chairman. We expect to be very transparent. Going to follow the tpa to the letter. I realize that there are issues about whether or not congress has adequate access to tax and i think im in agreement with the chairman. We have a plan, i expect to follow that plan and make that check available and i expect the german to instantly tell me when i have the plan which will only be by accident. Could you disclose what the plan is . We are with the Ranking Member<\/a> on this important issue. So thank you ambassador, mister reichert, chairman of the committee, you are recognized. You mister chairman, welcome mister ambassador. Where are you on this panel, they will tell you that trade is critical to their home state and im going to tell you thats true of washington state. Brothers export one third of their crops each year, state Services Exports<\/a> over 26 billion a year and the jobs in washington is supported by exports, over 90 percent depend on manufacturers selling their worldclass products across the globe. But washington workers, farmers and businesses cannot directly find as other countries raise to establish drawing bilateral and regional agreements that carved us out. While we work to update nafta we must put other negotiations in the pipeline so im an old career Law Enforcement<\/a> retire, i get the enforcement needs but theres always Community Outreach<\/a> and in my view, tpp companies have been left hanging and i was disappointed but encouraged that the president wants to goBilateral Agreements<\/a> , im on board with that. Weve had a chance to visit but i think there has to be an aggressive energetic outreach to these countries and in my question is, beyond canada and mexico, which countries regions and or sectors are priorities for the Trump Administration<\/a> . Whats the next step after nafta . We are still in the process of developing those priorities and that test. First, i would say that the president is very protrade. Secondly, we as you say our objective as to Bilateral Agreements<\/a> and a series of them and i think we can do that using model agreements and do it effectively and have agreements with which are better for American Workers<\/a> and apple growers and others. In terms of what specific countries we would go to, there are a lot there on the table, obviously theres cpap which has been mentioned. Theres a lot of people who believe we have to go up to the tpp countries and start negotiating those in the course foremost among those in some peoples opinion is japan, so thats something we have to think about now what youre in communication with those countries. We are, ive met with several of them and there are a variety of issues in various places and the japanese my guess right now are not ready to do a Bilateral Agreement<\/a> but these things are all developing, were in discussion. So after nafta youre considering japan or uk. Uk is another option so these are things, i do think theres a lot of pressure to move in the direction with the tpp would fill the gap. By instinct, numbers of Congress Also<\/a> would feel comfortable if we started doing that so were a lot of reasons they facilitate in that direction but it does take two to tango so we have to develop this. I want to be includes with you on that, im sure other members of the committee you. How do you see the Bilateral Agreements<\/a> coming together to create a High Standard<\/a> through the world, thats been touched on a couple members and my personal experience as one country, mister t very mention south korea and my discussions with assembly men and women in south korea asking the question after the korean agreement was finalized, what was their opinion as far as the impact it had on china . And their First Response<\/a> was china should start to Pay Attention<\/a> because High Standard<\/a>s now are in the region and will be developing and tpp was the thing that people were looking to so that one agreement with korea made an impact on that region and so again, emphasizing the need to reach out to those countries, tpp countries strengthening that position of strong standards. How do you see a Bilateral Agreement<\/a> with japan for example or others strengthening that standard, our standards through that region and the world. First of all i dont want to suggest were going to have a bilateral commitment with japan, thats something theyre looking at and all that sort of thing and i certainly agree the chairman basic point at the beginning that you have also endorsed which is the United States<\/a> moves in, we have an agreement of High Standard<\/a>s agreement in many cases on a bilateral basis. You can have Higher Standards<\/a> because that company your negotiating with may not have a problem in an area where you can get a good standard. A good example would be currency, if your negotiating with someone whos a currency manipulator, and intercept the standard so there are a lot of things that can be done like that but i think having those kinds agreements does push back against china, it does change the standards and does have people realizing the United States<\/a> and engage and it has ripple effects through the region so i completely endorse that point thank you mister thompson, you are recognized. Thank you mister chairman, mister ambassador thank you very much for being here. The priorities for our trade policy must support and help create Good American<\/a> jobs, grow the economy, set basic standards for our partners to live up to, improve Market Access<\/a> and protect the labor rights and the environment. And i think that congress has an Important Role<\/a> in this and i value the opportunity to work with you to make sure that this happens area and increasing export and eliminating trade barriers can really be a win for our economy, provided that the Playing Field<\/a> is leveland everyone operates under a fair and basic set of rules. And that those rules are enforced so i want to in that regard associate myself with the act comments that have been made by a couple of my colleagues on the dais and i also want to associate myself with something Richard Doggett<\/a> said when he asked if you thought that wages, suppressed wages and other countries are a subsidy to manufacturers in those other countries and i would ask similarly to poor environmental rules equal a subsidy to producers in other countries . Let me say first of all that i think low labor standards are an unfair advantage that someone with whom we are dealing. Whether itstechnically a subsidy under the , thats not something im addressing right now though i dont want that to be a misunderstanding. The same thing is true with respect to the environment. And i think it is, i look at the other way. I think it is wrong in the way we think about these things to have some things be a legitimate competitive advantage and to me, environmental pollution is not a legitimate advantage in the way we analyze trade because at a level, were all really free traders. The question is how do we get there . I look at it the other way around. I think it is not a legitimate competitive advantage to have very low environmental standards. Ask why im troubled by it and i think the same thing is true with respect to labor standards. I certainly know in my business if i didnt have to Pay Attention<\/a> to regulations and rules and particularly with environmental standards, i could make a lot more money than i do and that would put me at a competitive advantage over someone who had to do that. Us wine exporters continue to face highly burdensome trade barriers in canada. British columbia has a very discriminatory Growth Program<\/a> that prohibits American Wine<\/a> from being sold on the same shelves as domestic wine. Given the bc producers and enormous competitive advantage. In january 2017, ustr requested wto dispute settlement consultations with canada on this matter. But the consultations failed to bring about any type of rotary access for American Wine<\/a>makers. Given canadas continued refusal to modify its discriminatory ram in any way, will ustr network to fully enforce us rights under the wto agreement and formally request the settlement counts . Harassment, im of course very much aware of this problem. I completely agree with the sentiment of your question. Whether we go to the panel page is something thats under review right now. You can take from my general attitude that im very proenforcement. The only caveat i would add is this is something you are better off dealing with in a nafta negotiation so we have to think about that and the stakeholders have to think about it, members have to think about it and it has to be informed by all of you. Its a serious problem that ought to be brought to a panel if it cant be resolved. The only thing i would say is we have to think about whether this belongs in the nafta context in which case it would make more sense to negotiate and do it in a less hostile way but its a major problem, an extraordinary problem for those people that are affected, those producers and theres no justification. In modernizing nafta, is this something that eliminates, this discriminative practice we could see as a possibility . Its so certainly something were going to raise and deal with one way or the other. It was said that if nafta fails, it would give china an upper hand, how much time do you think we have to address that before they do in fact have an upper hand . Im 7 2. Im afraid we will have to come back to you on that. Thank you, mister buchanan, you are recognized. Thank you mr. Chairman. And i want to thank the ambassador, all of us look forward to working with you going forward. A couple boys from florida, one in five jobs in florida are tied to trade. Trade is a big opportunity for us and i believe im a free trader but i think trade needs to be a winwin. I am concerned especially with some of the bigger countries with large trade imbalances that its something we need to look at, im sure you will. But i think some of our trade agreements over the years have been in play, thats my opinion and that something we can talk about going forward. I wanted to drill down a little bit on a partisan issue in terms of nafta. They are the second largest state in terms of fruits and vegetables grown. We have the same growing season as mexico, a 12 billion industry. But a lot of people feel because of some of the techniques, the antidoping and other things going forward, it cost us about one to 3 billion in terms of lost opportunities down there and a lot of jobs. I want to get your thoughts if thats on your radar, is it something youre looking at . Texaco is next to us, a Good Neighbor<\/a> but we want to make sure its fair i would say that i completely agree, im familiar with the issue, not as familiar as you are but i thought to the governor who raised this issue a lot. When i say we have a frayed trade deficit in agriculture with mexico, what were talking about is the problem you raise because was with respect to Everything Else<\/a> we have a surplus. I think it is something that we have to work on area and id be happy to work with you on it. Its something we ought to be talking about in the nafta context and any issues of whether or not theres unfair trade involved here. Theres a lot of things we have to consider but i realize its a key problem and its become more and more acute and its really something that i want to engage on. I appreciate the opportunity to work with you going forward. I want to talk, camille has brought this up about detail. It seems to me then ive had the opportunity to travel in europe and met with American Business<\/a>es in europe. It makes a lot of sense, we have a lot of shared values and we look at laborrates, a lot of its fairly competitive. Comparablesize markets in terms of the eu , and i know that the last administration, because ive met with several holds in your office going back a couple of years ago. Theres been a lot of work product and effort. I know theres a lot of individual issues with various countries. But whats your sense of where that today, is that stuff we can resurrect or do you see that were going to move forward on a Bilateral Agreement<\/a> with every single country individually which would seem would take a long time to get anything done but i want to get your comments on it. First of all, its something that the president has spoken on. He mentioned it during his meeting with chancellor merkel some months ago. Its something were looking at, reviewing all these so i dont want to prejudge it. Its something i understand theres a lot of momentum behind, a lot of reasons to do it. There are obviously problems and if there were we wouldnt be talking about it at this point. Its in the group of things that we are going to review, agreements we are in the process right now, we need to decide where to allocate our resources. There are arguments against it but if it was so close to being done, we wouldnt have to worry about it. Right now it cant be done let me throw this out, ive watched you in congress for 10 years. Ive watched you trying to get agreements done and it seemed like forever so when you go at it in a bilateral basis and theres recent strategically to do some country that way. But it seems like theres been a lot of work product in terms of the eu because of shared values that makes some sense to see if there is not an opportunity to do something in a big way that would impact and i know its not easy because there are a lot of individual country issues but i would be interested in you guys being openminded to that as a possibility. And we are, its under review and i could make an argument if i had to that its a Bilateral Agreement<\/a>. Thank you and i kneel back. Thank you, mister lewis, you are recognized. Thank you very much mister chairman, thank you for this hearing today. Mister ambassador, thank you for being here. I want to like for you to give me some ideas when it comes to trade problems. What is your position on the issues of human rights, labor rights, protecting the environment. It is my belief that a trade policy should be a reflection of our own values. Id just like to hear your thoughts. Well, i think thats a very important point and its not really fundamentally different than the point the chairman made. We have a system and we are proud of that system and the system has created an enormous amount of good for not just americans but people around the world. And we have an obligation, to be honest personally, i view myself as worrying about the dollarsand cents part of it, im not worried about the foreignpolicy part. Are you suggesting and mister ambassador, that we make money, we get the dollar at any cost . Is that what youre concerned about . No, i dont think thats right. In the first place i dont believe that at all and in the second place, maybe my focus has to be on trade and economics, thats what im paid to do. And that isnt to say the other things are even more important but my focus is , where we overlap congressman is i think that labor and the environment are Economic Issues<\/a> and i approached them and Economic Issues<\/a>. Thats how i think. I think the United States<\/a> and many of the members of said this, every businessman, every farmer and worker has a right to get a fair shake in their own market and we have to remember that. This is not about exports. We have a contract with these people where we will pursue a certain economic policy, which we all think is the right policy which makes everybody richer. That contract is we will give them all a fair break and thats in their own constitution in their market and overseas and part of that fair competition in my judgment, are things like labor rights overseas and the environment. That isnt to say that i think you want to ratchet up or do any of those things, there are just certain minimum standards that are part of our system and to fall below that is an economically managed which i think is a fair advantage so i dont disagree with your premise. Im just saying im worried about the economic side of it, im worried about workers and farmers more money at the end of the day. The other things are important but theyre not my focus. But youre not prepared to commit to me, just one member, that our trade policy should be a reflection of our values for the country. We cant say one thing at home and do Something Else<\/a> abroad. I think it should be a reflection of our values. Thank you very much, ideal back. Thank you mister lewis, mister ross of it, you are recognized. Thank you mr. Chairman. , thank you for your time today. Just to shift gears a little bit, one of the big priorities is our relationship with israel historically and back in the last congress, we overwhelmingly passed into tpa one of the stated trade objectives of the United States<\/a> is to push back against the bds movement, the antiisrael boycott divestment and sanctions movement, this is into a larger context, the former ambassador from israel to the United States<\/a> michael oregon wrote an oped in which he a few years ago, he made this point. He said the first wave of antiisraeli activity was military and we know how that turned out. The second wave was the Terror Movement<\/a> against israel but the third wave is in some ways more insidious in that it is trying to take away israels legitimacy and therefore, just simply remove it from the world stage so one of the tools that you have, that trade ambassadors has the capacity to push back against that, particularly as it relates to european governmental actors, can you give us a sense of where that stands and how the ministration is adopting that tpa objective . Right now were not in negotiations with europe so but we understand that an objective and indeed, i would say its a threshold more than an objective, i think that i shouldnt speak for the administration on foreignpolicy but on this point i think its so clear, the administration strongly agrees with that sentiment. And we think that these boycott and investors are very dangerous, theyre not dangerous for israel, their dangerous on the whole Economic System<\/a> so personally im very sympathetic. I believe the president is very sympathetic and that will be an important objective, we need to get to the point where were talking with israel and europe about tpa or other agreements. Thank you, ideal back. Thank you mister larson, you are recognized. Thank you mister chairman and thank you ambassador. My state of connecticut, we have a great deal of exports. In fact, nearly 6000 companies in connecticut are involved in exporting and 90 percent of them are small businesses. That is why we believe its critical to ensure our businesses and workers maintain their economic and Competitive Position<\/a> in the international markets. I know you understand this but really. And are you also understanding that many American Workers<\/a> feel that the International Trade<\/a> has eroded the middleclass wages and led to job losses, here and in some of the settlements and the questions a number of our members are asking. That means that enforcement of labor and environmental provisions in our agreements and insisting on strong protections in any future agreements is essential. I know you understand that. But what i have and theres not enough time for me but i want to propose six questions on the commission of the chair if i could pose the questions and then have them in writing, those because i dont believe the ambassador, it would be fair to him but at least he would get the just and then we can further correspond behind the committee and i want, i will supersede the time ive been alive. Is with regard to nafta, how you plan to seek greater access to the canadian mexican procurement markets while protecting our own by american priorities . You seem to be in conflict and so what specific changes you see to the Government Procurement<\/a> chapter of nafta . That would be question number one. What kind of enhancements with regard to nafta, with respect to intellectual Property Protection<\/a> is the administration contemplating in the nafta rights . Thirdly, what is your plan when it comes to the enforcement of labor and environmental provisions in our future fdas . The fourth have to deal with currency, theres a number people that have discussed here what is the ministration intention with respect to seeking the inclusion of currency rules and its trade agreements. You have already elaboratedon standards and the need for those , and again, i would appreciate if you could respond to that. With regard to further in that regard, do you support including strongand enforceable disciplines in the nafta in other trade agreements . Finally, ambassador, we are very concerned about the issue that was raised when the president said that he might terminate the uskorea Free Trade Agreement<\/a>. A negative effect on the u. S. Trade balance. Having said that, its just in the group were looking at, there are no plans to drop out of course at this point. Just something were talking to the koreans. I have a meeting today and tomorrow with the koreans. A variety of issues that are costing us experts and those are all were going to raise and fits into the category of things i say, if you have a big trade surplus with the United States<\/a>, you better get rid of the barriers to our exports to you. And im going to insist with these people you cant have barriers to trade and have a 20 billion or 30 billion surplus. Were not going to tolerate it. Theres no such plan but its under review and seriously being looked at and the president is troubled by the trade imbalance. Thats reassuring certainly to hear, i know a number of people of the recess will be traveling to korea for a variety of purposes, not the least of which is National Security<\/a>. I do think its important that the message be reinforce and i would couldnt agree with you more in terms of the trade imbalance and the encouragement were not going to be dropping out of course. Thank you, now may set a record for number of questions stuffed into a fiveminute period. Mr. Smith. Thank you for assurringyear time here today sharing your time here today. My colleagues raised the issue of agriculture and nafta and the progress that has been made with nafta. Producers in rural nebraska appreciate the games that have been made and call us the agricultural delegation on the committee. You hear heard us hennings and em mention and emphasize that we not undermine the successes nafta has brought to u. S. Agriculture. Shifting garys a bit. Thank you for the work you and the president and others in the administration have done on pressing china on a number of trade issues. This isnt just a Market Access<\/a> issue. For the biotech terms, the lack of approval for products forces u. S. Producers to choose between the most current varieties or continuing access to chinas 1. 3 billion consumers and thats a big deal. As agreed to under u. S. China 100 day plan, chinas National Biosafety<\/a> committee, the nbc, note review approval petitions for eight u. S. Biotech products which have seen their approval for the Chinese Market<\/a> delayed by an average of five years. Pretty astonishing. So following the Biosafety Committee<\/a> meeting, nbc meeting, that the Chinese Ministry<\/a> of agriculture approved two of the eight pending products and thats disappointing, and im concerned that china will not honor the spirit of the 100 day plan, and approving the remaining six products. I understand the nbc is set to meet again by the end of june. Thank you, congressman. I would say that there was some progress made in the 100 day plan as you suggest and this is one of the principal areas where there was progress we are continuing to press china. We expect and will require that they after they follow their process and very quickly approve all eight documents i mean all eight applications, this is important not just because of those. It actually delays u. S. Farmers from implementing a lot of these hightech techniques in the domestic market as well as internationally. So, i can assure you that secretary ross is very focused on this, is makes it very clear this has to be done. We have been in contact with the chinese as recently as the last come of days on this, and my feeling is that before long, were going to have all eight of them agreed. To thats what we expect, and thats what we think was agreed to, and the secretary, as i say, who actually had that negotiation at that time, is very focused on it. Thank you. I know that theres a great opportunity and being good tours of the National Resources<\/a> with biotechnology, we have a great story to tell how far we have come using biotechnology and its promising for the future. Was pleased to see the president s budget included a renewal of the gsp program and this is very important, more specifically, the recent reauthorization gsp reauthorization included language to consider dutyfree access for a variety of goods. Previous administration did not provide the consideration for travel goods from all eligible countries as intended by the law, and instead only provided it to the least developed and agoa nations. I appreciate the ambassador delegating that deferring that expansion to the current administration. Can you give us an update on that effort and gs and travel goods . Yes. Well, dont necessarily appreciate them deferring that. I say that in jest. We are the process of looking at i right now. Were very close to. The documents are in front of me and i think youll see an outcome very soon, and my guess is you wont be disappointed. Okay. Thank you. Again, thank you, ambassador, and thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Smith. Mr. Kind, youre recognized. Thank you. I want to make a couple of comments before i ask you a question involving involving thy issue with canada and nafta renegotiation. The first comment is hope this is a good start today that your approach and dealing with congress will be extremely open, consultative, collaborative. Going to be beneficial that whatever you negotiate you have to come back here for approval, and its better for us to be on the takeoff rather than trying get to us on the landing. We have to justify and explain this to our bosses back home and secretary froman, i think set a very High Standard<\/a> as far as outreach and time he spent on the hill getting feedback from us and us getting feedback from him in the negotiations and also include language of what being negotiated. They have been loathe to share information and in the future that would cause problems. Recently just sit you and secretary perdue a letter inviting you to come back to wisconsin and have a good meeting with the agricultural producers. I think youll find getting out of the bubble of washington could be helpful, listening to people and getting feedback. We had a greet farm visit with secretary froman where he got a lot of input and i hope you seriously consider the invitation and possibly find time to come to the midwest and have that conversation with folks back home. In regard to nafta, i may be in the minority of this side of the dais or within my party but i believe our withdrawal from the transpacific will good down as one of the greatest mistake wed make unless you and this Administration Figures<\/a> out a way to get back into to the game. The Fastest Growing<\/a> economic market in the globe, the pacific rim area. Right now a tremendous vacuum has been created. These countries were looking to us for leadership and dont have it. We turned our back on them and that vacuum will be more than willing to be filled by china. If we have to operate from the outside looking in, trying to compete with chinas rules, that will be a race to the bottom. And that will not help us or our people economically in this country. With tpp in mind we talked to secretary ross about this seems to me just logically a good place to start with nafta renegotiations is what mexico and canada has already agreed to under tpp. He elevation of standards that were included in the agreement. The reduction of tariff and nontariff barriers and if you have ideas on how to improve upon that, lets go, lets do it. But if i see slippage in those standards from what they had already agreed to under tpp, thats going to be a problem from my perspective, too. Cant be going backwards on something that was already agreed to with canada and mexico. And a lot of people think nafta renegotiation mainly mexico. We also have problems with canada and one is the dairy issue with the class 6 and class 7 Pricing System<\/a> and the filtered milk. Wasnt addressed with nafta but many if not all of our Dairy Producers<\/a> feel theyre being treed in an treated in an unfair manner. I hope you have a plan moving forward and trying to resolve this and level the Playing Field<\/a> with the issues with canada with dairy. Id be interested to have if you have been thinking about this and have a plan to move forward on and hope to have more meetings where we can talk in more detail about what we feel needed be done with dealing with canada and renegotiation. Thank you, congressman. I do believe that this is a partnership, and we dont want to bring an agreement back here that doesnt pass. That doesnt make any implement as bill doesnt make sense. We want to be involved. Completely agree. Senator dole used to say the same thing. You want me on the plane when it lands, put me on it when it takes off. Thats good advice. Have some background on the hill and i understand the importance of congress and to be candid i enjoy working with congress. So, thats number one. Number two with respect to tpp, the president doesnt pull out of the asiapacific area home pulled out of l of tpp. He wants to be engaged and well do a better job. Nat going to happen in a week or two. There are questions about do you think tpp was going to pass anyway . Questions whether that train was i guess who your analogy, whether that plane was going to leave the airport. Having said that the final thing i would say because im so clock con sunday conscious here the issue of canadian dairy, we have this think of options. Something we are focused on fora whole variety of reasons. Id love to stay in touch wow you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Miss jenkins, youre recognized. Thank you for talking trade with us. National security should unquestionably be a priority of any government, but i worry that using National Security<\/a> as a basis for trade restrictions and nafta or elsewhere could backfire if other countries do the same to us. In particular, Food Security<\/a> for many countries is a vital component of National Security<\/a>. Along that vein, here at home, wheat farmers in my eastern kansas strict are just finishing the wheat harvest and the work continues to roll north and west across the state. Many kansas farmers will look to foreign marks in north america or abroad to sell their productness the coming months. What argument would you make to a country that tries to restrict its imports of u. S. Wheat or other products for Food Security<\/a> reasons . Well, in the first place, its legitimate argument, should you use National Security<\/a> in the case of steel. Believe its a legitimate argument. I however thing this a legitimateness of the statute of the president goes in that direction. Steel, aluminum, these are National Security<\/a> issues. In my opinion. Now, theres always the argument, are you worried about somebody else using it . Yes, i worry about somebody else using it but they have to have a legitimate reason also. Cant just willynilly use it or we would challenge them. My guess is any country that thought they had a legitimate reason to use National Security<\/a> would in fact use it whether we use it or not. Thats my own personal belief. I dont see how someone could preclude kansas wheat based on National Security<\/a> of food need basis. That doesnt strike me as a legitimate argument. If it happened we would have to decide what makes sense in our judgment, and i can assure you that the president will look at this very, very hard, and the reaction will be the same as well have with respect to anytime we take an action of trade at all theres always the possibility of somebody retaliating against us. It happens in antidumping. Always the possibility of retaliation and the question is what to do in response. If we get unfair retaliation against us it would affect the president dish expect the president to take the position that we wont tolerate that. Okay. Great. Thanks. About 50 of all u. S. Grown wheat is exported, making trade incredibly important to a wheat state like kansas. Mexico, for example, the largest export market for u. S. Wheat last year, made possible by the benefits of nafta. In fact, according to the National Association<\/a> of wheat growers and the u. S. Wheat associates, mexico imported 3. 1 Million Metric Tons<\/a> of wheat in the 20162017 marketing year. The view of many of my con constitute tunes nevada has been overwhelming by successful. I do agree theres room for updating in this agreement, which is more than 20 years old, to include strong and enforceable fps rules based on sound science. Like those that were in negotiated under the tpp. Kansas farmers and ranch chers ranchers are looking past nafta. Can nafta serve as a blueprint of securing future trade deals which mean the inclusion of strong spf provisions that will help the kansas producers gain new Market Access<\/a> . Well, sps is something that needs upgrading. Needs updating. And its an important objective. Generally, there are advantages in putting in model agreements and negotiation between mexico and the United States<\/a> and canada because we have a long history. We dont have a lot of the some of the outlier Economic Activity<\/a> you might have if you were negotiating with somebody else. Example, we dont have massive stateowned enterprise in any other place. I think that nafta is a great opportunity to put in place between the three countries very high level provisions with respect to a variety of things. Sps is one of them there are also others. People suggested currency, kind of a classic example where there really arent currency problems one the United States<\/a> and mexico and canada. That is a Good Opportunity<\/a> to put together a model agreement that ought to apply to everyone. I look upon nafta as a real opportunity to create a model, and i believe that in with respect to some things the canadians and the mexicans look at it the same way. And then take those provisions with additional legitimacy of being in the nafta and be able to use those in future negotiations. Thank you, mr. Ambassador. We look forward to looking with you. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Pascrell youre recognized. Mr. Ambassador, congratulations on your confirmation. Good luck. Youre going to need it. We have heard a lot of talk about what should be changed. Host meeting with the u. S. Ambassador of trade and white house officials i and many of my colleagues find yourselves confused by the inconsistency of this administration when it comes to trade. We need some very basic questions answered. Ill get into the be questions but i want to associate myself with the wofford mr. Buchanan concerning Bilateral Agreement<\/a> and regional agreement. I think he is on target and it would be foolish to deal never Bilateral Agreements<\/a>. This is a different world, and we need to understand that. Id like to associate myself also with mr. Larsons comments on the relationship between our trade agreements and stagnant wages in the United States<\/a> and the ability to create new jobs. Theres a lot of data coming out on this. Trade affects things in our own country, and we need to take a look at the labor market to understand it fully. Now, the president called nafta a disaster. And all im hearing so far is tweaking the edges. If its a disaster, then im looking at that least 22 speeches he made during the campaign when he riled up people, riled up people, about the trade agreements. Now, i voted against many of those trade agreements. So one would think were on the same side. We are not. We are not. The administrations notice to congress of an intent to renegotiate nafta, your office failed to provide us with specific negotiating objectives or detailed descriptions of what you would like to see changed. Many American Manufacturing<\/a> companies have moved to mexico, for instance, because of the much lower labor costs across the border. Mexican manufacturing workers make only 20cents on the dollar that we do. And they have yet to comply with minimum internationally recognized labor standards. Today, when mr. Levin asked about implementing reforms prior to renegotiation, you were not committing to demanding labor improvements and mexico and did the same thing yesterday when you were questioned by the good senator from ohio. Now, im disappointed you did not respond. So how will you ensure mexico how will you ensure that mexico enforces labor provisions in a new nafta now that were going abandon this disaster. If day have failed to meet basic internationally recognized labor standards. Before you an that question i want to remind you, i did submit to you the principles of trade which we are having as our standards. Want to know what your standards are. Thank you, mr. Ambassador. We expect to negotiate an agreement that has enforceable labor standards, and we expect them to be consistent with the agreement that the committee have had with the Bush Administration<\/a> on may 10th, 2007. We expect them to be enforceable and i look forward to work with the members of the committee to make sure that happens in spite of the disagreements you you articulated. I think with respect to labor standards, my guess is were not that far apart. My time is expired. I will submit the other questions to questions to the ambassador with your approval. Without next. Now move to two to one questioning. Mr. Paulsen, youre recognized. Mr. Ambassador, the movement of data robbed the world is essential for businesses of all types in the 21st century from automobiles to air planes and agricultural and differenting a to data is paramount important for businesses to compete in a global economy. Data flows today have increased grown by 45 times since 2005 and theyre expected to grow by another nine times by 2020. However, as you know, currently there are no enforceable trade rules specifically protecting dat flows which leaves American Companies<\/a> vulnerable to digital michigan by foreign governments, including data logs, source code transfer and other pernicious efforts that undermine competition from u. S. Company. Both you and secretary ross voiced public support for the digital trade rules. Does the Administration View<\/a> inclusion of digital trade rules as a top priority for a nafta modernization and other future trade agreements. Absolutely. Thats good to hear. You also mentioned you notified congress of the intent to initiate negotiations with mexico and canada regarding nafta. Given that nafta modernization will set the press depth for future negotiations with other countries and other agreements, its a tremendous opportunity to help break down barriers to digital trade and allow u. S. Companies to compete in north america. Can you share with us or the committee any information about mexico and canadas views on digital trade heading into the negotiations. I have not had discussions with mexico or canada with respect to this issue. We expect to have a digital chapter, as you suggest. We expect it to be a highlevel agreement. Will heal discussions with. The but i have to be careful because were not allowed to begin negotiations until we go through the tpa process, which we take as a very important commitment. Having said that i would be very surprised if they didnt agree we need this. Neither one of them are in the group of countries that are, as you suggest, trying to create new industries by using tactics like forced transfer of technology, like data logs rules. So, im optimistic well be able to put together a good chapter, but i certainly take it from our point of view it would be very difficult to pass a nafta implementing bit that doesnt have a very High Standard<\/a> and digital chapter. Thats good to hear. Let me just shift gears. The United States<\/a> and then my home state of minnesota is a leader in medical device innovation and greg experts that create growing exports that create a lot of good jobs at home and help improve Health Care Outcomes<\/a> the world and other countries are taking extreme and misguided measures to control health care cost. In indiana were seeing severe in yeah india were seeing price controls. India rejected requested by the medical manufacturers to withdraw affected products and has announced the intention to impose price control on additional categories of medical devices and then another example would be in italy where only u. S. Publicly traded companies are required to account for expected revenue losses related to a yet to be implemented and highly controversial pay bach law that would require any medical device spending in excess of an arbitrary predetermined level of spending. These policies hurt American Companies<\/a> and deters companies from introducing new inmotivatetive technologies in these enactors which markets which means patients have less access to this products. How will the Administration Work<\/a> with india or other foreign governments to make sure our country built in moved out of the market by spending measures that make it possible for companies to compete. I have with a group of medical device executives and have heard the horror stories. This is an issue that we are raising with india and were going to use the Prime Minister<\/a>s visit as a launching pad to make sure that this gets proper attention. So, everything you say we completely agree with. All we can do at this point is raise with them, show the unfairness of them, and thirtieses into the category of thing is if you have a trade surplus with the United States<\/a>, they should be trying to encourage imports from the u. S. , and their problem is even bigger. This is capacity maple the medical device area is an area where china has it on their made in china 2025 list of industries they want to become world class in. This is an industry we have to focus on and we met with them and expected to put together an action plan. Thank you. Mr. Martin, youre recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Ambassador. I have couple of questions and issues to bring to you about the negotiatings of nafta and how they may affect my district in texas. My district is the dfw airport, its the center of my congressional attract. It add thursday economy of 37 billion a year. The metroplex area that encompasses my Congressional District<\/a> is generating nearly half a trillion dollars in the gdp and the dfw airport is the driving force behind much of the growth. Most people in texas say the airport really is the economic generator for the whole state. Just recently, the mayors of fort worth and dallas and a del gracious traveled to toronto and their main concern was that theyre both parties both nose toronto and dallasfort worth are uneasy about the upcoming negotiations and want to make sure that these relationships that have developed over the past few decades are going to last. So id like to know what steps the administration is taking to make sure the areas of the country that experience Economic Growth<\/a> as a benefit of nafta wont be harmed or see a downnick the downtick in the results of the modernization. Were very much aware of how important the airport is to the state of texas and aware that texas is the number one exporting state in the country at this point, is a as i understand it. Our can betive is to have more trade, not less trade, and our objective is to first of all do no harm. We expect that as a result of this that the u. S. Will have more sales and we hope theres more trade, but clearly with respect to the provisions that have and a half has been successful nafta has been successful we want to secure that going forward. Thank you. Id like to bring up a letter send to you by our kuo two senators and states that nafta has played a key role in all american north American Energy<\/a> markets sun as oil and natural gas and the nafta agreement allows the United States<\/a> to maximize the benefit of being the Worlds Largest<\/a> energy producers. As the administration moves forward id like to echo the sentiments of the letter and ask for your point of the free flow of energy products, including electricity, oil, and natural gas, across the u. S. And mexico and canadian borders. Yes. I agree with you. We think that senator cornyn was on the finance committee where i testified yesterday and this did come up. We support the free flow of energy across the borders. We think its one of the advantage wes have at a north american market. You dont think that any of the nafta negotiations that we contemplate will have any affect on that free flow . Well, i am not privy to what the other people want to do. We think its been a success. We hope it fits in the category of do no harm, and we hope that everyone agrees with that. Although there are complications in this area, as you know. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Miss sewell miss del bene youre recognized. We talk about digital trade and digital trade is critically important. We have 3 million americans who are employed in the internet sector and its helped the United States<\/a> achieve a trade surplus, 159 billion trade surplus. A very, very important issue. In order to built on this i know you mentioned that digital trade would be a priority and nafta regorges. How will you make sure that digital trade is prioritized with appropriate levels at the agency . Well, first of all, as i went through any confirmation process and meeting with the members of the ways and Means Committee<\/a>, digital trade afterring agricule is one of the main areas. Its an area where we have a competitive advantage so its important. We have at usgr a position that was create last year and has not been filled for an intellectual property innovation ambassador who is a negotiator who is responsible. Were in the process of filling that spot and that will be someone who, along with a few other things will focus on this area. Its an important way to get the trade deficit down, which is a primary objective. Thank you. I urge you to fill that position quickly. Thats are you available between now and youre probably i also wanted to touch about Cloud Computing<\/a> and issue with china. Various chinese regulations are making it difficult or impossible for u. S. Technology companies to operate in china. Possibly any violation of wto commitments. Im concerned with chinas proposed draft regulations that when combined with existing chinese law would require u. S. Cloud providers to transfer valuable intellectual property and effectively hand over control of their businesses to Chinese Companies<\/a> in order to operate. Global Cloud Services<\/a> total i 100 billion in 2016. Has very strong presence in my district and my state so very critical that the u. S. China comprehensive economic dialogues hundred work plan includes a commitment by china to resolve this problem. So, i wanted to hear from you are you aware of this issue and can you talk about progress the administration is making towards addressing this issue . Yes, congressman, i am aware of the issue. Its extremely important issue and it to when i read about it, its another example of a country having an industrial policy an industry or sector that has value that, high technology, that has a grueling growing only that affects every sector. Its this linkage that it important and then they try to get themselves the in the position we where i take over in their own country beyond that. Its the same pattern. You have to hear a partner before you can go in. Anyone who has not followed this issue its worth looking at. A prototype how they have gotten where the are for noneconomic reasons. Its an extremely important issue and something im focused on that the secretary of congress is focused on and others in the administration are focused on and we are raising our complaints with the chinese and were looking at all of our options. This is were aware of the issue and realize how important it is and were edge gauged on it. Thank you. Chinas the enact that china has regulations is offensive in the fact that chinese Cloud Companies<\/a> dont face the reese strikes when they operate in the u. S. Thisandextremely important important. Theres no reciprocity at all and if we can take care of it through current law, we should do it and if we cant, congress should look at it. One quick point which will be nor record because we dont have time. Want to make sure youre aware of some of the concerns and questions we have heard about the cupboard grandma with respect to eu so ill submit a question on the record and appreciate your feedback. Thank you. I want to welcome the ambassador from one buckeye to another. We start down into wayne county. Because of that, wayne county actually is one of the Largest Dairy<\/a> producing sticks in the statement ohio dairy sector relies on exports and the potential to make good use of our engagement with canada. To tackle both excessive tariffs our industry still faces there and the nontariff policies canada has used to support trade. The pricing tools seem to be designed to let canada have its cake and eat it too at our expense. The program is of concern to companies exporting to canada and also those exporting Protein Products<\/a> reasons the world. The canadian programs are designed to undercut our sales on both fronts. How do we tackle the problem ofs with a canada on dairy. If you had said Ashtabula County<\/a> i would have made more attention. Were very much aware of this issue. Talked to the administer in canada about and it the way to think about it is exactly the way you put it. Not just about experts in the United States<\/a> to canada. Its about export from the United States<\/a> to everywhere. They created such a a as a byproduct a volume of milk they can knock us out of markets. So its way beyond a problem with canada. Its something we are engaged on and that we have heard from not only members from ohio but also members from wisconsin and all over the place and it is something that we want to deal with the context of nafta, and i have a our agriculture people at usgr are engaged and have a variety of options. Mr. Ambassador, im an avid motorcycle rider and Vice President<\/a> pence is a motorcycle rider. On the eubeef motorcycles on the approved list for 100 import tariff, specifically 51cc to 500cc. If tariff goes into effect it would do economic harm to motorcycle dealerships and facilitied in state of ohio and impact domestic consumers. My question to you is a number of us in congress have expressed corn over the import tariff proposals on motorcycles and how harmful on the constituents. Would you withdraw motorcycles from the import list in the trade dispute . Well, my hope is well negotiate our way out of this and that is our objective i realize there are a variety of products that are on the potential list and nothing has been happening to anybody at this point. I know the motorcycle industry and motorcycle riders have been very activated on this. Im sympathetic to their position but right now were just hoping to negotiate it out. Im not taking anything off of the list at this point. That would be counterproductive to the negotiation. All right. I would hope we take a good look at this and i want to thank you, mr. Chairman, for allowing me to participate in the hearing and i yield back. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, ambassador, for being here today. Many of the themes get repetitive but i want to attach myself to the comments made with regard to the importance of the free flow of data and the effort that we are putting in with the recognition that what you do here with nafta may also be may have some influence with regard to Bilateral Agreements<\/a> you intend to reach with other countries. Looking europe and other polices and the questions of privacy demands ands no the european sector create a genuine concern for the free fro of data. You said youre looking towards putting the highest level people in your organization as focused on the questions. May i inquire, the position youre looking for with the i. T. Ambassador, does that require Senate Approval<\/a> or within your own bailiwick . It requires Senate Approval<\/a>. This is part or a problem. I hope my colleagues on the other side who are concerned about the issue would be weighing in with their colleagues in the senate to assure that we would have this kind of support for that very, very important position. I thank you for your emphasis on that and hope in lieu of that appointment youll city look to assure there are certainly level people working on those negotiations. Another issue which i know you are well aware of but continues to have a great significance has been the patent protection for innovation that takes place in the United States<\/a> and the biopharma and area. There are questions about Data Protection<\/a> for biologic drug and other kinds of this has certainly been part of tpp negotiations in the past and we are resolved in a way that was as clear in tpp negotiations with the fiveplus three being about thebe the best, notwithstanding theyre looking for the 12 years of patent protection enjoyed in the United States<\/a>. Canada does not recognize 12 years of protections nor biologics and mexico is am bug guisse. Is it your intention to try to work in that space to maximize the protections for biologics . Yes, absolutely. We would be grateful for your continuing commitment to that. Can you address what you might be able to do with regard to mechanisms for patent disputes where they may arise in the context of that space . Well, this is another area where we want to have discussions and the whole protection of intel electric properties will be a part of the whole negotiations. In the disputed area there have been for those members who are not a way there have been a number of cases in canada where we think unfairly people have lost their patent protection, and this is something well focus on. We understand the issue. Its a significant issue and its a surprise to a lot of members who dont focus on it, like you do, this is something that would go on in canada. I thank you for your attention to those important issues and, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. Dr. Davis your recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and welcome, mr. Ambassador. I live in chicago, illinois, and my home town has the largest concentration of companies that process sugar contained products made in our country. Theyre currently, though, paying 75 more for sugar than their competitors who can buy on the world market. In the tpp Partnership Agreement<\/a> negotiations, a consensus was reached without significant dissent in the u. S. To increase the sugar export quotas for australia and canada, but my constituents would like to know, are these legacy negotiations regarding the additional access for the u. S. Sugar market going to be on the table during the renegotiation of nafta with canada and mexico . Well, we have with respect to mexico we have an agreement that was entered into, a suspension agreement that was entered into, and it seemed unlikely that thats going to change in the context of nafta. It certainly with respect to mexico and canada, its something that if members care about well be informed by what the members views or and it certainly take note of the fact that youre concerned about it. We do have the biggest sugar issue we have right now is mexico and our sense is in the context of that litigation of the title 7 litigation we have suspension agreement which i think will probably end up resolving that uthrough that issue through the negotiations. I serve as cochair of something called the sugar caucus, and of course, chicago used to be known as the Candy Capital<\/a> of america. Our members are expressing serious concern about the continuing domestic rise in sugar price, which is actually caused already a number of our companies and corporations and entities to move or relocate out of the country or to look elsewhere to purchase their sugar because they use huge amounts of it. Some of the candy and other things that are made, mostly could you share with us the administrations concerns relative to this continuing rise in domestic sugar prices for the businesses . Congressman, i dont have any views on that issue. Its an more of aning a tyler issue from my point of vow. Im concern about the trade expects of it and certainly want to engage with the committee on that it, but the domestic price of sugar is out of my purview. Im not unsearch athletic the opinions you make but its unsympatheticsearch the to uc to your concern and i have ill go from small chance do zero chance. So, i think i have to stay in the realm of trade. We would urge you add this trade issue anytime we can continue to lose jobs that we cant replace, that becomes for me a trade issue as well as an agriculture issue and we urge you take a serious look at this issue and this problem. I thank you so much for being here and yield back the babbling of my balance of my time. Thank you, are dr. Davis. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you, ambassador, for being with us todd. Now youre working on nafta and new trade opportunities and i also want to thank you for your work with secretary ross and the Commerce Department<\/a> on allowing u. S. Beef back into china. Thats huge for my state of south dakota and our Cattle Producers<\/a> and access to the 2. 5 billion market is welcome news. What concerns me is that our beef will have a tough time getting back up to the 70 import market share that was enjoyed previously. Australia, one of the cop people tote temperatures, negotiated a Free Trade Agreement<\/a> with china to completely reduce tariffs on their beef by 2024. So as we work to modernize nafta, other countries are working on Free Trade Agreement<\/a>s and were losing market share. Whats your plan to ensure that american agricultural experts will be on a level Playing Field<\/a> in other market so is we dont see a mark share reduction and getting there quickly before the other countries snap up the market share before we get other agreements completed. Well, first of all were very pleased with what was accomplished to beef in the china 100 day plan and we think there are lots of other restrictions we can ealmost nate with respect to all Agricultural Products<\/a> in china. Many times the u. S. Has the best and cheapest product and theres some reason for the delay in importation and the first thing we have to do is remove impediments to u. S. Trade. U. S. Agriculture is the best, the most competitive and the cheapest, and if we have a level Playing Field<\/a> well do like. Its stromly unlikely willll have a free trade negotiation with china but we do have a lot of luncher with chin no terms of them removing impediments and grant can access. They have 350 billion surpluh us and it people who cant have the that in the history of the world never anything that was so imbalanced and that gives us a certain amount of leverage. So continuing to push on those issues is important. In addition theres a lot of talk about other ftas, bilateral ftas. One of the ones the beef producers talk about is japan. So we have discussions with the japanese. Not moving in the direction of an fta because theyre not reedy to talk and knee their are we but we have a structure that is under the Vice President<\/a> , where were engaging in an economic dialogue and were talking about a variety of issues, these kind of issues, and its the kind of thing that at some point may lead to an fda which i know is very important to al cull agriculture. The final thing is has had a 60 billion trade surplus with the United States<\/a> and i have taken the position that on these kind of areas, at least temporarily, the japanese ought to be making unilateral concessions. The reality is its in their interest. Not like youre pushing out japanese. Thats something we ought to look at. They thought be letting our beef in at least on a temporary basis. Just as an effort to get the trade deficit down and moving forward and developing a closer relationship. I think any reassurance you can give that were not just focused on a seamless negotiation of nafta and were continuing to focus on china and japan, theres many of these i know that im our number one industry in south dakota ising a agriculture and was a farmer and they see other countries being aggressive and like reassures were not focused on renegotiating nafta, were continuing to push the other area. Appreciate your work on all another that and also just mention i know im out of time, but geographical indicators in the European Union<\/a> is an issue at well. Thank you for your time. With that yield back. Thank you. Mr. Holding, youre recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Ambassador, first id like to thank you and your very able staff for the assistant youve have provided and continue to provide to our sweet potato farmers as they face an issue in the eu, penning issue that could greatly harm their able to export, and North Carolina<\/a> makes great sweet to potatoes and dont want to deprive the world of their great taste and benefit. Other issues, as you can imagine dish know you know a lot of members of congress are looking forward to a Bilateral Agreement<\/a> with the United Kingdom<\/a>. I watched the press reports from the meeting that secretary ross had with secretary liam fox earlier this week, and out of that meeting they announced as early as july they would begin a preliminary scoping for u. S. Gt trade agreement. So id ask you to explain what preliminary scoping means, what does the working group consist of, do you have the lead in this . Is economy taking the lead in this . And then additionally, regarding tpa, will tpa proud procedures be followed in this preliminary scoping, including a consultation with congress during the scoping process . Thank you, congressman. As you say, secretary of state fox was good town last week. We was in town last week. We met with him also. Usgr negotiates agreements like this. While secretary ross bill we involved, usgr will be the hub of this negotiation. The first thing we have to remember is that the uk cant do anything for a while. I they have another several months, probably, until the early part dish guess maybe the middle of 2019 before they can get out of the eu and then they would be eligible. There are a variety of things you can do that arent a trade negotiation that we can both agree on. Things like licensing and this i think that is extremely important and in the last two decades since nafta was signed a lot has changed in our economy. The associate nafta with love just lost job. They know someone is making shoes or. Its incredibly important that up now to be updated and modernized and we need to do in such a way that puts American Workers<\/a>, businesses, farmers and consumers first. While the full promise of American Manufacturing<\/a> was not realized under nafta, american agriculture saw significant gains in the market. This must be preserved. The district i represent is the most diversifies agriculture district, outside of california. Every august i do a twoweek farm tour visiting all 30 counties promoting the diversity and all the different aspects of our dish district. In missouri, we are the fourth largest rice producing state in the country. All of that rise is produced in just the five counties in the hills of missouri which is my entire Congressional District<\/a>. Nafta is responsible for making mexico and canada the largest market for missouri rice. 87 of our experts are going to those two countries. Missouri farmers want to maintain the Market Access<\/a> that they currently have an article to trade with mexico and canada and any disruption of trade with mexico and canada is a concern for our farmers and our ranchers. What will your approach be in the renegotiations to be sure that no new barriers to Us Agriculture<\/a> trade are established under nafta . We certainly, intend in this negotiation, to do no harm to the agriculture sector. Our objective is to modernize, put in place, the things that have to be put in place to correct such things as rules of origin and the like that to become outdated and have led to a very large deficit. We clearly will not be part of negotiation where their new barriers in agriculture that come up, for sure. I appreciate that statement but the task you have at hand is not an easy one but i stand with you in the white house in this committee to make sure that we get the best agreement and the best deal for the american citizens. Thank you. Your recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Again, welcome ambassador. Were delighted to have you today and look forward to working with you in the future. I want to talk about one of the issues that is affecting some of the good people and Companies Back<\/a> in my state and that is the lack of fairness in selling across the mexican and canada porters where there is a very low dollar value in shipments threshold. Basically, it set aside as a low dollar shipments for faster and easier processing come in and out of countries, but at this point in time, its been years since that agreement was made and we really are in a situation where theres an unfairness. For instance, in the us the de minimis shipment level is 800. In mexico, its less than 50 and in canada, 15. Theres a real unequal treatment. And a real cost to some of those folks that are doing business such as fedex and fedex has thousands of workers and employees in my home state of tennessee that are affected by this. Id like to know from you if that is something you are looking at and that you think we can find some resolution and some quality for both our individuals and companies in this area. Thank you, congressman. Yes, this is something were looking at. We take very seriously and its one of those issues where you thank you know something about trade and then you look at this issue and you think how is this possible this is happening. Its a real burden to everybody who ships back and forth probably more in canada, as you say, going back to mexico. So, its a very large problem. Its the kind of thing that fits in the category of reciprocity. You say to yourself, how is it possible that we can be so much easier to ship it here then to those two back countries is what we will look at it. I hope theres a resolution that is satisfactory to your constituents. Its a priority, seems like the kind of thing it would be easy enough to fix. It can be in anyones interest, just might management point of view, to have these tiny little specials. It has to be a burden on them, i would think. I hope its not done intentionally. I hope its a question of something thats built up over time. Its something that will look at and focus on. I appreciate that. My understanding is that the pressure was that many many years ago and things were different as far as the way shipment was done, the cost of products and so on and this seems to be something that has been around for a while and needs to be revisited and the sooner the better for both individuals and for companies of the cost that is borne by this inequity. The second one i want to talk to you has, to my attention just most recently and it is the issue of the us, eu, covered agreement on insurance and it came to my attention from several sources. One was the Tennessee Farm Bureau<\/a> in my state which is a very large industry and does a lot of business around the country around the world as we well. I also heard from the tennessee Insurance Commission<\/a> and our own commissioner, julie, who is the commissioner of insurance and tennessee was here a couple weeks ago testifying before the senate and this agreement that was put in place and i understand it was pretty much rushed through by the Previous Administration<\/a> in the closing days to change the Way Insurance<\/a> products are treated across borders has not seen to be in the best interest and probably the biggest clarity theres a lot of questions they are about what do these agreements mean and i wanted to know if its something youre aware of and if youre looking at getting some clarity for these those who do insurance. I am very much aware of the issue and its something that the secretary treasurer and i have to come to grips on not just in the future but, in fact, have meetings scheduled. Its a good time to have your view on it. I say that. Ill think that the president is really adamant about America First<\/a> that we need to make sure that we are not, in some way, putting our companies and our folks here in the United States<\/a> behind other countries with a lack of clarity and making sure that there is equality in treatment there as well. Thank you, and i yelled back. Mr. Rice your recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for your patience in waiting for two and half hours to allow me to ask you a few questions. I think that im very much aligned with the administration that mr. Trump says make America Great<\/a> again and i say, make america competitive again. Two of the things that give me the most hope, most optimism, are about this administration is your appointment and the appointment of mr. Ross. Im really excited about fair in free trade. I appreciate your focus on the Steel Industry<\/a> and ive already had steel in his alkaline is close during my four years. Weve had a constant stream of legitimate complaints about abuse of trade practices in china and ive got steel in my district, that glass and conway, we lost employees because of these unfair trade practices and i very much appreciate your focus on that. I want to talk about something more fundamental and that is what mr. Nunez approach earlier about the fact that 140 other countries, including every one of our significant training partners, has adopted order adjustment taxes generally through the valueadded tax system. I know this hearing is about trade but weve heard how so many factors enter into fair trade, earlier today, whether the employee practices, environmental practices, taxes or others, what im particularly curious about is in negotiating these trade agreements how can you ensure that we achieve fair trade, trade where American Companies<\/a> and American Workers<\/a> cant compete on a level Playing Field<\/a> how can you ensure that when other countries are applying order adjustment taxes on our products when they had their source and were not doing the same thing to them . How can you, when you renegotiate nafta, account for the fact that mexico has a 60 border adjustments and we dont have the same offsetting tax and therefore American Workers<\/a> and American Companies<\/a> are at a huge disadvantage . Thank you, katzman. First of all, i have spent a lot of time thinking about this issue and i think this equilibrium between direct and indirect tax is a serious problem and there is a lot of just different ways to deal with it and im in a position where i want to say what the best way and in addition im not paid to work about,. I agree that youre not paid to work about taxes and this is the trade hearing but dont taxes have a direct impact . Absolutely. They have a direct impact on competitiveness and competitiveness is what trade is all about, at its core. Taxes are a huge issue in terms of director and indirect taxes i think there is a real problem but when i do my negotiations i take those systems the way they are and people make their own judgments for their own societal reasons about whether they want value taxes or income taxes and how they want to structure that. Im not blind to the fact that it does make a difference in the real world and the most important thing is to get taxes down and to do all the other things we do to become competitive and in the area of texas, theres a lot of different options and there has been a tendency on behalf of most countries, or at least many countries to move from income taxes to an indirect tax system. There has been a tendency and would you speculate that that tendency was due in some part that makes it more competitive with respect to manufacturing and importing and exporting . My guess is that they do it for a variety of reasons and probably thats one. In respect to some issues its always been an issue of concern to republicans and to some extent they think its easy to raise taxes. There are a lot of people conservative republicans have the view that one of the possible reasons that might be in a racemic but one reason europe has gone the way its gone is because of the raising of taxes. Theres a lot of things to think about. This competitiveness of American Products<\/a> is. [inaudible] absolutely correct. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ambassador, it is good to see you. Thank you for hanging in with us. I just wanted to thank you, im from the state of indiana and i want to thank you for indulging me when he first came in to talk and chat about the section 232. We talked a little bit about but i am more than concerned about the impact on aluminum and the aluminum industry as it pertains to my district in Northern Indiana<\/a> and my states. I would ask that to consider the anxiety from my constituents about the prospect of tariffs and quotas on imports that they depend on to make trailers, rvs and other products. Ive already been contacted and theyre already been impacted by price differences in their very uncertain as what will happen, as i am. I for your willingness to look into it. Could you convey to the president , secretary ross, my request that they conduct these investigations and decisions are making thoughtfully, thoroughly, transparently to determine the impact of what that might be for American Companies<\/a> and to avoid any type of quick action that could hurt these companies . Yes, i will. Id be happy to do that. I just want to associate my marks with the representative earlier remarks about the issue in india and our issue is the same type of thing and it goes along with medical Device Industry<\/a> and what we are seeing already in indiana we are full of medical Device Manufacturers<\/a> and theyre worried about the sun in an drastic nature of cuts and the products they may want to sell in the future. Myself and mr. Kind, previously spoke, sent a letter with 15 of our colleagues to the indian ambassador voicing our strong concern that i am happy to provide a letter to you in my letter to you is what can we do on capitol hill to help you with these issues, medical devices, we are looking specifically at stints and some of the prohibitions and some of things you for two earlier, is there anything we can do to help you . Well, the first of all, the issue is a very serious one. Secondly, i have met with the manufacturers and they are in a position where they are literally forced to sell something they dont want to sell way below the price of manufacturing. Its like you cant even understand it. I think its something that we are taking seriously, focusing on and just the Pressure Congress<\/a> can put on is the better. Specifically to the ambassador . Or any other direction . Its probably better if i dont talk about that in a public session. This may be one of the things that we have to go into executive session to talk about no, im kidding about that. The Prime Minister<\/a> of industry in india is coming and theres a lot of opportunities where there looking at at irritants and this is clearly a major, major irritant and its important that they know that. From their point of view, they have a different take on it and we press them and our arguments are stronger when theyre backed by the United States<\/a> congress. Its just that simple. The power in washington is right in front of me. I appreciate it. A final issue i wanted to raise to you previously is that canadas promised utility doctrine and its resulted in pharmaceutical patents being invalidated and going to be a big priority for us and any nafta updates, any comments on those projections and those doctrines . Investor, could you move a little closer to that microphone. You lose patents because someone makes a generic drug at the same product and makes it. Itll be a part of this negotiation. I appreciate it. Could you just give me the bottom line, 22nd, as you see section 232 as it pertains to steel and aluminum. Well, i think youll see decisions on both of them fairly soon. The view of the administration is that we have a very serious issue that the president has asked us to they had hearings on one today and the president wants action. Hes worried about whats happening in those industries in the present action. You have concerns about and it certainly timely mac i yelled back. Thank you, mr. Chairman and your presence here today. One issue i want to bring up is the effect treated humans have on the farmers of my bout south florida district. Many people from south for the might be surprised to know that Miamidade County<\/a> is one of the largest activities the counties in the state. Most people think about our beaches and were very proud of those but we also have a robust ag industry of in south florida. We had out of the, mangoes, tomatoes and many other specialty crops which can be grown yearround. As we negotiate nafta which i support, im concerned how the deal will affect our farmers across the country. We know a lot of farmers have benefited greatly from nafta, however, the stories a little bit different in south dade. I try to spend as much time as i can with these farmers and they have many issues that their concern about, immigration, taxes, but nafta is certainly a major one. Specialty crops like tomatoes, squash, eggplant, strawberries, pretty much anything that is handpicked, faces a significant disadvantage when it comes to mexican competition. Mexico has a similar climate and for a host of reasons can unfairly compete with many of our constituents. Ambassador i have raised these issues multiple times as nafta has been renegotiated from the fair treatment of south dade, especially these crops and the farmers that grow them. I mentioned to you and your staff, secretary ross, and mr. Navarro, this issue is of critical importance to the south dade Farming Community<\/a> we can you discuss what we might be able to achieve through this nafta renegotiation to put the south florida farmers on a level Playing Field<\/a> with mexico moving forward . Back we appreciate your input and those of other members from florida on this issue. We realize how important it is when i said before, we talk about important agriculture is and the agricultural sales to mexico and theyre extremely important. We have a trade deficit with mexico and its entirely because of this specialty crops youre talking about. There are a whole additional elements of the seasonality and there will be a lot of things that make it a completed issue. I assure you that its something that we are going to focus on in this negotiation and hopefully will get an outcome that will satisfy the producers in your district and in all of florida. Its a major problem and, youre right, its the one, maybe not the one, but its a major outlier in the whole agricultural story with respect to nafta. I think its something we have to be cognizant of and we very much appreciate your involvement on this issue back i appreciate your commitment and we will continue working with you and with your office and other Administration Officials<\/a> to make as much product as possible. Another issue i like to briefly tough on is the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, earlier this month, i joined members of the caucus including Seven Members<\/a> of the committee and setting a letter to your office in support of continued key to negotiations. Can you talk about the positive benefit see tip could have for our economy, especially with the inclusion of a dedicated chapter in the agreement identifying the importance of small and Mediumsize Enterprises<\/a> . We had an ongoing rivet of all of our trade negotiations right now. We are looking at the benefits and drawbacks, the tradeoffs that we see, but i think that the tip is a positive reason to go forward with that. It requires two people to be involved in the negotiation and for a variety of reasons, largely, electoral process, the European Union<\/a> is not in a position to be negotiating at this point. The last election that they had this year was in september in germany and i think at that point, the focus on this but then they have exit to focus on. We also have priorities but clearly this is a very likely potential and it was entered into because a lot of people saw benefit to it. As we go through this process, i think that we will make an analysis and will look at the Seven Members<\/a> of the caucus and it will be important,. Thank you, mr. Ambassador. Final question. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Last at least, however the saying goes, trying not to repeat any of the questions and when your last, a lot have been used up but first up, conceptually, have a great appreciation for how complex your world is. You have this area of authority but everything from currencies to local National Regulations<\/a> to technology, to infrastructure, everything ends up affecting ultimately how trade ultimately works. I do have a couple odds and ends. Being from arizona, where one of the states that if you look at the baseline data, nafta has helped our states economy. But, as you move to modernization, can i beg of you to have someone on the team fixate on this customs technology, the ability to have those vegetables moved across the border efficiently. The ability to say were going to embrace a i dont care that space in addition to the ledger where you have gps tags or rs ids but the ability to say how do you maximize the efficiency of those crossborder transactions and the movement of customs. Thank you, that is such an important person. We touched on it in various ways because we talk about diminished theres a lot of Different Things<\/a> but one of the things that we will focus on his trade facilitation i think the mexicans and canadians will be an agreement on this, how do we make whatever you decide your policy is, once you said it, it has to be easier to move product and data across the border. This is important, efficiency is our objective and studying trade is our objective. To be technical, problems of course, but a matter of direction, i cant imagine that the three of us would have an agreement on that. Would you say great opportunity with technology now, and the ability to track a truck or lori down to the certification at the dock to the movement to the backbone that tech proves and i embrace that technology. This may be slightly conceptual but as youre working on the drafting how do you design that partially future proof if this is substantially the driver of much of the Us Innovation<\/a> and technology, what happens when that handheld supercomputer is my transmission of making purchasing decisions or paying my fees or moving money back and forth that the agreement would be robust enough to understand everything from the way we transmit data to the way we house the data to the encryption of such data, its that digital trade world that were very good at that would also make the relationships with our trading partners more efficient. I think this has to be the focus. My guess is well miss the mark because no one knows what will happen and its always unpredictable. Hopefully we wont miss it that some of the great difficulties trust me, im part of the body where we make, commit the sin that we think we know what the future looks like. How do you design, at least, language that has Technology Improvements<\/a> move, the movement whether it be a crypto currency, whether it be documents of value, documents of certification, pigments of ownership that the weight youve written the agreement there are these grades of gaps that we have to wait 25 years for next meter negotiation to fill. This is so important and hopefully we are focus on it. I will certainly try to do we have to build in the process within the agreement that allow you to make amendments when you go back to the whole process and there is a huge directional change. But this is something were cognizant of and perhaps havent thought enough about it but certainly well and we want to work with the congress to do it. Laughing, transit shipments. Something that is a product made in asia comes to mexican port, brought into the same movements toward their dedication to technology can actually deal with what our products are part of the net agreement and what art does those who are passing through i yelled back. I want to think ambassador for appearing before us today. Please be advised that additional questions received here never had two weeks to submit written questions that will be answered later in writing. Those questions and your answers will be made part of the formal record. We look forward to working with you, mr. Investor, and expanding Economic Freedom<\/a> and trade. With that, the committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] this weekend on the tv on cspan two saturday at noon eastern from the Franklin Delano<\/a> roosevelt president ial library and museum in hyde park new york, the annual roosevelt reading vessel featuring presentations about president roosevelt and roosevelt era politics. Authors include steve and his book come down to pearl harbor the 12 days to the attack, Geraldine Hawkins<\/a> and her book elliott and Eleanor Roosevelt<\/a> the the story of the father and his daughter in the golden age. The gatekeeper, and the untold story of the partnership that defined the presidency. Joseph and his book his final battle the last months of bringing roosevelt. At 8 00 p. M. Eastern a conversation with bestselling author gabe from his home in new york city. The books i published in the last couple years at the same kind of odd characters written by an 8485 yearold guy that the 2425 yearold guy was writing about when i was that age. He talked about his career over the past 60 years. His books include the kingdom and the power, unto the sons. I wanted to write about unknown people. The little woman who said pigeons in central park or a woman who cleaned offices of the Chrysler Building<\/a> at 4 00 a. M. Or someone, doorman outside the plaza hotel and what he thought indigency. I wanted to write about what it was like to be a bus driver in manhattan or to clean the subways at 4 00 a. M. In the morning. Those obscure characters that ordinary people do not recognize. I wanted to be a chronicler of those unrecognized, untitled. For more of this weekend schedule to booktv. Org. Sunday night on after words, financial expert Rachel Steiner<\/a> and economics professor Jonathan Ward<\/a> of detail how low to moderate income families manage money in their books, the financial diaries how American Families<\/a> cope in a world of uncertainty. Mr. Snyder and professor are viewed by Catherine Eden<\/a> offer of 2 a day, living on almost nothing in america. The risk of the small decisions going badly is so much higher for people at the bottom. Wealthier people make decisions all the time and i can come up with some with me for the last year. For me, the consequence of that is really diminished but there is one. But the consequence for people who are struggling is often really big. One of the pieces of data that really surprised me, the Program Participation<\/a> that the government survey, between 2009 and 2011, there was a bit of an unusual. After the recession but during that period, 10 million americans were poor. Every month of that. But 90 million americans, at some point were poor during that period. A third of america experience poverty at some moment in that. , often for a short time but it means we have to rethink what going on back watch after words sunday night at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan to book tv back yesterday, Senate Republicans<\/a> released a discussion draft of their Health Care Law<\/a> replacement bill. The Congressional Budget Office<\/a> will score the bill early next week when the Senate Floor Debate<\/a> is expected to begin. We posted the bill at cspan. Org, follow live in Senate Coverage<\/a> next week on cspan two online cspan. Org and on the free cspan radio app. Alexander bolton, writing in the hill, on the Senate Healthcare<\/a> replacement write that for conservative public and senators iran paul, mike lee, ted cruz, ron johnson released a statement thursday afternoon announcing they dont support the legislation, though they are open to negotiation. Senator dean heller, most vulnerable republican senator facing reelection next year, that he has quote serious concerns about the bill impact on the nevadans who depend on medicaid. You can read more at the hill. Com and mr. Bolton joined us this morning on washington journal. We are back with alex bolton here to talk about the Senate Health<\/a> care legislation and how it compares to the other version of the Senate Republican<\/a> version","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800605.us.archive.org\/17\/items\/CSPAN2_20170623_020600_U.S._Trade_Representative_Robert_Lighthizer_Testifies_on_Trump...\/CSPAN2_20170623_020600_U.S._Trade_Representative_Robert_Lighthizer_Testifies_on_Trump....thumbs\/CSPAN2_20170623_020600_U.S._Trade_Representative_Robert_Lighthizer_Testifies_on_Trump..._000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240628T12:35:10+00:00"}