When we treat everybody fairly. Equalen we truly have opportunities. This is not a zerosum game. David i am the fellow for trade and economics at the Baker Institute. Thealso a law professor at university of arizona. I am pleased to welcome all of you on behalf of the center for nd mexico at baker and at rice. This is the first of our five planned webinars on the ,mplementation of the usmca which Everybody Knows went into effect on july 1. Just a quick plug for the other events. September 24, investor settlement, or the lack of. In october, the usmca governing trade and auto parts. That sector accounts for 25 plus Percentage Points of total manufacturing trade within north america. In november come november, environmental provisions. In december, we will focus on the stakeholder issues. Those Companies Directly involved in importing and exporting across the north american borders, who are dealing with new enforcement provisions, a different kind of certificate of origin, and other challenges in the customs area. The nittygritty that really determines whether the freight will work or not. All webinars are free. You will get notices periodically. And you need to register to get on board. We thought it would be appropriate to begin the series with a discussion of context. You have the usmca, it was negotiated in the summer and fall of 2018, signed on november 30, 2018. Bt you did not but it did not move forward until all of last year, november, particularly december, where it was modified through a series of what appeared to be extremely difficult negotiations between the ways and Means Committee members, two of whom are here today, led by chairman neil and Speaker Pelosi as well, and the administration, principally the u. S. State representatives office, headed by Robert Lighthizer and Steven Mnuchin from the treasury department. We are fortunate in convincing members, senior members come of the ways and Means Committee to join us today on the this discussion factors that led to approval of the usmca. A large margin. These members of the committees will share their observations. For those who do not follow these issues, ways and means is by far and away the most Important Committee in the house, not only responsible for iff policy, but also protects, social security, welfare and related legislation. In other words, what they do affects all of us every day. So, we are going to start with kevin brady, a republican from the eighth district of texas, the ranking republican member of the ways and Means Committee. Before his service in congress, he was an executive for the chamber of commerce and also served in the texas house. Is a person of broad interest. In addition to tax legislation, Small Business chair of the health subcommittee, he has been working hard over the years to try to improve American Health care without increasing the cost. And he has been a keeper to spit in bilateral participant in bilateral efforts to deliver Disaster Relief for communities affected by hurricanes, like harvey and maria and irma. , theessman don beyer eighth district of virginia, is completing his third term in the house. In the past, he has held other important posts. He was the u. S. Ambassador to switzerland. He also served as Lieutenant Governor of virginia. Broad has also very interests, like climate change, individuals with disabilities, welfare programs designed to discourage high school dropouts, teenage pregnancy, and probusiness reforms in the state of virginia. Also quite important for many, proponentery strong in switzerland during that period, working with the u. S. Justice department to try to halt the abuse of Swiss Bank Secrecy by americans who were trying to shield their income from u. S. Taxation. Again, we have two experts. And we have asked them to speak for about 12 or 15 minutes each, giving us their observations and any other thoughts that will help us understand this process. I have asked congressman kevin brady to speak first, then he will turn the virtual podium over to congressman don beyer. Once he has completed his remarks, i will use my prerogative as the moderator to ask questions. Those in the audience and that have questions, use big markers q a function. And the questions short focused on the subject matter, and i will try to have as many of those answered by our esteemed colleagues here, as possible. Rep. Brady thank you very much for having me here today. Thanks for your leadership at rice. , the countrylly really is fortunate to have you in that role. So, thank you for that. It has been almost two years since you had me to the Baker Institute to talk about the prospects of the usmca, and i am glad to come back and talk about the dynamics of it. And especially proud to be joining don beyer, who is a while, who is relatively new to the committee of ways and means, you would not know it because he brings his business expertise, working hard to find common ground, so it is an honor to be here with you, don, today on an issue that affects so many working americans. Thank you for that. I thinkin a world where there is so much where people try to divide us. And im one of those who believes that there is so much more that unites us, both in america and in congress as well. And with it turns out, the usmca, has turned out to be a historical moment in the midst of impeachment, where members put their differences aside and achieved something very important for the american people. You asked us to talk about the context and the dynamics of this. Which will be followed by a series of seminars and webinars dealing with the specifics. Lets talk about the dynamics. I will give you my view from having worked on 13 of the 15 trade agreements in place today, having led several of them, including the Central America free trade agreement, a couple brawls over reforms. Let me give you some of the dynamics. 25yearoldd a nafta agreement, the largest of its kind in the world, that had achieved many of its original goals, including quadrupling trade between the three partners, making products more affordable, emigrating the economy so that our businesses er abroadpete bett because of the agreement. It was economically successful, yet politically unpopular. We had a president ial candidate renegotiated to the nafta. So, notetermined to do just because of his campaign promise, but as we know President Trump has held strongl decades thatfor america had not been a winner in past trade agreements or in global institutions, like the wto. In his view, it was bluecollar workers who had paid the price for this. There was a recognition among north american political and traded leaders at that nafta, despite its successes, was outdated and needed to be modernized. There was a recognition in america that there had been a bilateral trade agreements that often left america outside of it. What we knew politically, and what i had seen, was since nafta, with very few exceptions, within congress there had been a dramatic i mean, deterioration of bipartisan support for trade in congress. There was a opposition within the democratic party, oftentimes leading to very sparse support for trade related issues. And in some cases, political punishment for in the primaries, for democrats that crossed the trade line to join the overwhelming majority of republicans for new trade rules. At the moment, there was opposition in the Democratic House to initiatives by President Trump, yet very strong support for continued trade with our largest trading partners, canada and mexico. So part of the untold story here is what happened next among all of those dynamics. Not even mentioning steel and aluminum tariffs and other issues. I think what surprised me in looking back is that President Trump, and is trade ambassador bob lighthizer, made it very clear from the start that the usmca would be a bipartisan agreement. And it would gain strong support by democrats and republicans. I think that don would agree that that was met with skepticism from all corners here. Including me. The objectives that they set forth immediately reinforced this approach, as well as extensive confrontations and that Robert Lighthizer held with what had been traditionally antitrade labor democrats, as well as labor unions, who had always been opposed to trade agreements. Whe then agreement came out in october of 2018, it did a number of things, but it was clear it had given labor democrats concessions in trade that they had long sought, but never achieved with past administrations. Especially in dispute settlement and automotive rules that required higher wages in mexico and higher content in north america, with these vehicles and cars. Robert lighthizer continue to listen to and meet with democrats and republicans in the labor unions throughout congress. His background in steelate with ustr as a labor attorney gave him the skills to work with both parties. And i think it was crucial to working group that speaker something that focused on standards and funding, as well as leadership by democrats, such as our chairman reaching new. Whatnk that contributed to turned out to be historically, and somewhat shocking bipartisan vote in congress. Theres no question of the agreement is sound and retains the successful foundations of nafta, including zero tariffs on u. S. Goods that we sell to mexico, nearly all products we sold to canada. It open to the market for diary and wine dairy and wine. It locked in many key reforms in mexico on energy and telecom. Integrated a level Playing Field for financial services, investment, and established really the best digital trade rules of any trade agreement in existence today. So which helps people in their online commerce, regardless of the size or type of business. Theres no question, because it protected u. S. Intellectual property, tools to guard against piracy and counterfeiting. It will spur u. S. Innovation. I will make this point, too. The business relationship between the u. S. , mexico and canada was very strong. So our question was, how much bigger with the agreement grow that relationship . The short answer is it welcome and it will be significant over time, but i think the benefits of this agreement were not in quantity but in quality. R what astandards fo treat agreement ought to look like trade agreement ought to look like. It set standards for regulations. It removed barriers to trade, modernized of the custom process, so we can move legitimate boots goods more affordably. I think it was vital that america came up with a number of key changes there. And of importance the democrats and republicans is this includes the strongest and most enforceable labor provisions in u. S. Trade history. And i think this agreement requires mexico to create a true union system, including rights that all workers will be guaranteed, like collective bargaining rights, the right to strike, and tools to protect Mexican Union workers against violence. Se many ways, this was tho sections were in effect dream provisions fair labor democrats tohad who had long worked see this in trade agreements. The finald point, i think the whole agreement is enforceable, unlike nafta. So that means no countries can block the panels that can resolve disputes the ultimately occur. I also think because it created certainty where there was uncertainty within the trade and economic community, i think this was an area where the usmca will create further growth in all three countries. This is an area where ultimately republicans, democrats, President Trumps trade team worked together to find consensus. It was an all hands on deck effort, as don will tell you. He was deeply involved in this. And i am immensely proud of the bipartisan support. I counted noses for a lot trade agreements over the years, and fermi watching for me, watching the house and senate vote yes for this agreement was something i never thought i would see. With that, thank you for having me. I yield the floor to my friend, don. Rep. Beyer thank you very much. I am thrilled to be part of this. My youngest is a rice graduate, so what i have heard is the Baker Institute this was an instant yes. Thank you for hosting us, david. And for moderating this. I agree with you on the importance of the ways and Means Committee. As they chairman often points out, it is the only committee mentioned in the u. S. Constitution, the oldest committee, and the one that we get to brag about most. You mentioned also that i was in switzerland. One of the most or biggest responsibilities in representing your country overseas is trying to stimulate positive trade relations between that country and home. And i was very proud that switzerland was the number one investor in 2010. I wish i could get credit for it. And i am delighted to serve and do this with kevin brady. I served with kevin when he was the acting chairman of the joint economic committee. And watched with envy as you chaired the ways and Means Committee for a number of years. And, kevin, you are such a good guy, and often we had different viewpoints in the hearings and debates, so it is a thrill to be here to agree with almost everything you said. [laughter] notion thatirm your we have much more in common than what divides us. So, thank you for being with us. The usmca really does stand as one of the few bipartisan achievements of the last few years. It is the product of two negotiations, that at times a little closer to failure than success. It was a courtship between Robert Lighthizer and his canadian and mexican counterparts. And i was part of those. Betweennd negotiations House Democrats and Robert Lighthizer was no less could go to the success of the final product that went into course earlier this summer. After the president had signed the original agreement, we knew that it had many positive elements, a lot full from nafta, but also from the perspective of the House Democrats, were fundamentally flawed. There were concerns around the mechanism, which is written because the panel blocking was fundamentally broken. That meant whatever its merits, with legal force. This was especially true when it had to face votes from the house and senate democrats. Suspected of trade agreements and of the impact on the american worker. Remember that only 27 House Democrats voted for a democratic president s trade agreements, and very few of House Democrats were enthusiastic about the tpp, as it was presented. Im one of the few, so i can say that. So if i had to handicap the prospects of the agreement at that time, i would have been pretty pessimistic. However, there were key elements that made the ultimate deal achievable, including recognition across the aisle that after 25 years nafta needed to be updated. In fact, people on both sides, those who are making public statements, had underlined the difficulties, but also outlined the elements that would make the deal possible. Once governments understood the process we had to go through in the u. S. , and were willing to make the necessary changes to be part of the negotiations, that it led to the bonus areas agreement. You know, in certain areas, like the dispute resolution mechanism, i learned American Partners probably prefer the house position, but mexico in particular was asked for a difficult political move. The negotiating structure was clear. Robert lighthizer was motivated and empowered to make a deal on behalf of the president. We see in the current impasse over the covid assistance has mr. That im sure brady worried every night, that it is difficult when there are too many cooks in the kitchen. That really conveys the message and the situation. I believe if nancy pelosi and Steven Mnuchin alone were doing this, we would have a deal already. We are hoping and praying they will get one soon. Despite what people said about the negotiations, Speaker Nancy Pelosi was committed to a workable agreement. She kept saying, we want to get to yes. Something that could pass the help with then uncertainty over the american economy. Process thatd a ensured the final agreement had the necessary buy in from the House Democrats and senate democrats, that assured a remarkable he strong remarkably strong support. They were the house counterpart it was not always popular in a party. People who serve on the trade committee, for exhibit, let me. There were many of us. And it drew criticism from people who thought that members of the working group signaled a hardline approach unlikely to get to yes. For example, rosa delauro, who led the fight against trade promotion authority, was on that working group. Jan schakowsky, not a fan of trade agreements, on the working group. The final product actually made the structure pretty clear. Stalling or personal to the present, but when we finally got to an agreement to it shed light on that theory, that we were ready to go to work as long as the administration recognized that political pressure could not substitute for reform. So the reforms, kevin mentioned the good things, including language that allowed parties to block the formation of the dispute settlement panel, which had be devoted the original agreement. And for the First Time Ever it created rules of evidence that would help the u. S. Litigate disputes. Of course, the most difficult and the most consequential part was the labor enforcement mechanism. Chairman kevin brady talked about the dilemma with developing meaningful trade unions, labor unions come in mexico. But unions, in mexico. But this was able to set the structure, including in mexico, to move forward on that. It is underappreciated how important and progressive it is to have an agreement that holds participating Companies Accountable for bad behaviors, companies, not just countries. On itsike putting the head. They had rights of action to sue countries, but here we are rebalancing the dynamics by making the companies, the greatest beneficiaries of the trade agreements, also accountable. Its remarkable that this agreement what it does not contain. That was top for some republican friends, to follow the restrictions on the and that the industry demanded. But that also helped to do the tpp in. So despite advances in environmental enforcement, there was still heartburn of our inability to secure provisions about climate change. I would say that most of the no votes from democrats were because of the lack of climate. Hange in usmca but that was not part of the original nafta. Howthe debate will go on on we enforce it, it comes on up every day. One of the things i am thrilled about is the environmental package. I was with bloom and hauer and the Wastewater Treatment above the Tijuana River and we watched the untreated human waste dumped into the pacific ocean, flowing north to san diego. Helping withwas security was millions just to address the crossborder wastewater into the pacific. Ais is not an easy process or perfect one, but it does represent a remarkable achievement, given the context it occurred in. It is my hope that the passage of this agreement with a bipartisan vote would have put an end to the uncertainty that has governed the trade relationship between these neighbors, and it is good that this agreement provides economic certainty. I confess that i was disappointed by the tariffs on canadian aluminum. We i certainly hope that minimized the adversarial stances between our countries. That also suspect that will be decided in november, whether it is joe biden or donald trump or kanye west. And i look forward to the congressional role in the process. I have studied a lot of development economics, and i learned a country cannot grow from within. Trade is essential. In the postliberal world that we live in with international been reductions in hunger, poverty, and huge increases in health and life expectancy. The usmca, improved by discussions with the house working group, a new archetype is here to be measured against new trade agreements. So pursue a new bipartisan commitment of trade. I look forward to working with chairman brady on this and the other 13 trade agreements in the years to come. With that i yield back. You both, members of congress for your illuminating remarks. Forn, my congratulations this remarkable bipartisan achievement. I was off for a couple of comcastdue to my internet going down it seems to be backup for the moment, so i apologize for being away for a while. I would like to talk about a couple of things that i believe both of you have touched on but pursue further, particularly s lastsman beyer; comment. To what extent do you believe significant part of the usmca can be a model for future trade agreements . The Current Administration has begun negotiations with kenya and africa and with the United Kingdom which is in the process of withdrawing from the european union. Some other countries have been mentioned from time to time. Working,u see this as depending on who is elected in november, discussions with u. K. Is likely, but even with kenya or even that new panafrican customs union, what about those, what about others . Is there something that we have learned besides the bipartisan cooperation that would make moving forward on those future agreements easier . I will start with kevin brady. Rep. Brady the short answer is, i think there are a number of standing usmca that are the Gold Standard globally. The Digital Services side of this, trade would be one area, the service sector, 21st century agreements have to do two things , not just focus on goods but services, and america is very good at this. It makes up a large part of our local economy. Past agreements have often overlooked them. The other 21st century realworld challenge is that barriers to trade are pretty sophisticated. They are just not done at the border with tariffs and quotas. Beyond that, we see in regions and countries, barriers that are not always clear. For american businesses, it can be like putting an american plug into a european socket. It is designed not to match. These trade agreements go beyond the borders into removing those barriers. I think, sets some real standards in tearing those barriers down, regulatory, facilitation, fairness, Small Business, a number of those issues i think are very key. The labor and environmental provisions have always been a flashpoint in trade. Forward model goes depends on the country we are negotiating, region we are negotiating with. Each of them face different challenges. , labor,ve discovered canronment, services, ag play very different roles depending on whether you are dealing with kenya or a u. K. , whether you are reaching out into latin america, strengthening the trade partnership in europe. The short answer is i think a number of those provisions have that standard. Models,the will also be terrific starting points for discussions with other agreements. Don, i agree it is not we haveo buy american, to sell american all throughout the world. We have a lot of barriers that we need not apply around the world. Trade agreements that are free and fair, that our 21st century models, can help us sell more around the world. Dr. Gantz thank you. Congressman beyer . I agree with everything congressman brady has said, including selling more. Only 2 of american businesses export. It is a relatively small part of. Ur gdp i speak of the things i know. Times thed has seven export volume per person then we did. They are a Little Country and they have to, but it would be good for us to grow that piece of it. Kevin, i was reluctant to use the phrase Gold Standard because i dont want to move back to the Gold Standard, so archetype sounded better instead. I agree, what usmca has done has shown democrats, who have been very trade reluctant, skeptical for a couple of decades now, can come back to the table and support them, as long as they know there are strong environmental and labor considerations. I think there is a real win for everybody. My strong support for tpp was laborlistening to standards and those asiapacific countries. That was necessary. You think about the environmental challenges. The one thing we did not mention was the multilateral agreements included in usmca, marine pollution, wetlands, whaling, etc. , all of these can be included in future agreements, andher it is kenya, u. K. , that will be good for the world. One of the small differences that i think Many Democrats have with ambassador lighthizer is the strong emphasis on bilateral agreements. Nothing wrong with bilateral and i know he is very skeptical of the multilateral but there is a middle ground where you can go plurilateral trade agreements. , or howeverntries many there are, bilateral could take a long time. Dr. Gantz thank you very much. Related guess a again, i guess a related question. Taiwan, vietnam. For some in the administration, they have also talked about an agreement with vietnam partly because there is a huge trade deficit. Have you thought about that congressman buyer . Rep. Beyer i would love for us to reenter tpp. Leftcame the tpp 11, they a space for us. Exact same as the what was negotiated in the obama administration. I think maybe even President Trump, if reelected, would be open to that if it looks more like usmca than tpp of president obama. Dealailing that, we can with a subset of that. This administration has worked very hard to mix success on the china trade stuff. Any simplefer solution because it is incredibly complicated. Think the more we can a group of countries around china to work with us, vietnam, malaysia, japan, korea, australia, the stronger negotiating position we will have with president xi and china. Dr. Gantz congressman brady . Rep. Brady some great points here. One thing in context, when you look at what this administration is focused on, whether renegotiating nafta, which had been promised by administrations and not follow through on, continue discussions with europe , u. K. , the phase one agreement with japan, the phase one , theyent with china targeted where the sales and markets are. Probably three fourths of our exports around the world. It is the top priority in trade, to close out those agreements, whether with the u. K. , i hope the eu can get serious about ag, some issues there. A second agreement with japan. I think the second phase of the china agreement, which, frankly, i was stunned in a pleasant way during phase one. Barring covid, i believed we would have seen a phase two by the end of the year. Nonetheless, while we look at more bilateral in areas where we clearly have a u. S. Interest in engaging, such as africa, really important. I think the top priority for any executive in the white house finishing out a super ambitious trade agenda already, frankly, in the works. Dr. Gantz thank you very much. Let me move now to a couple of questions from our audience. I am doing some paraphrasing. One of them has to do with what both of you mentioned briefly and maybe you can elaborate on. Are the labor provisions going to be effectively enforced by mexico, the u. S. Administration, and more any, doy, what role, if you see for ways and Means Committee Going Forward in helping this process work the way that Everyone Wants it to . ,ou have bipartisan support some republicans thought it would help to raise wages in mexico, which many of us think is a great idea, others of us were simply worried about a years,on where, for many independent unions have essentially been barred. I think one of the key enforcement issues under the agreement would be appreciated. Congressman beyer. Rep. Beyer thank you, dr. Gantz. I am pretty optimistic about it. Among other things, there is an independent mexico labor board created by the legislation. Membersrent members, among u. S. Agencies. Was 3, 4,member if it or five, but we are sending labor at over to mexico to see over this. To make sure that they were not only passing laws but to allow democratically elected labor unions to form, as opposed to the ones that are formed by the companies before the workers are even hired, and that they are properly funded, that mexico has the people to do that. We will be watching that closely , continuing to work with a lot of pressure on our mexican folks. It will not be easy to have this remarkable culture change among their workers. We want them to be much closer to where we would like labor to be in the United States, but many pieces are in place to do that. Dr. Gantz thank you. Congressman brady . Microphone please. I am not hearing you. Rep. Brady there we go, it took a minute. Sorry about that. The changes in mexicos law on labor in my view are transformational. Ien congressman cuellar and from texas visited mexico during the negotiations, i was struck mexicossire from leaders to transform their labor environment. As one of of their their ministers told me, in mexicos Economic Future, it doesnt lie in low wages. We have tried that. In Economic Future lies productivity, competitiveness, innovation. What was important about usmca is that it reinforced and supported those types of changes. Secondly, there are a number of important mechanisms here that i think are key. Thehe negotiation with working group, and faster lighthizer, in a sense, that was a negotiation between the democrats and the white house. It was almost negotiation between congress, the white house, and mexico. Drilling deeper into the enforcement mechanisms, to ensure mexico and canada were held accountable, were working together to make those changes real. View, we did delay far too long on this agreement. I believe 99 of the agreement stayed in place. End,hat 1 , in the that it in the sense really created a process for down,democrats to drill even those who were not going to anport it, i think it was opportunity for ambassador lighthizer, the white house to drill down deeper with mexico on specific timetables, funding and all of that. Again, working, on a number of these agreements, i think the labor provisions matter in a big way in the enforcement, where republicans and democrats both support. And as you mention, no trade agreement is agreeable to all. There are areas of this that i strongly disagree with. Resolution, not protecting American Investment in new medicines. And i think don could probably provide a list as well. Nonetheless, this agreement found a way to bridge that gap. I really commend every player in this for finding a way to do this. Dr. Gantz thank you. A question from someone who says , with the onset of ecommerce, among other provisions, as you know, in usmca, it makes it much easier for american suppliers like amazon to send small packages backandforth to both canada and mexico, which up until now had ridiculously low thresholds for such transactions. With ecommerce, there is a problem not limited to north america. If americans are buying pharmaceutical and Food Products , sometimes by ecommerce rather than the supermarkets, how do you assure the regulatory agencies in the u. S. , department of agriculture and others, and their counterparts in mexico and to be able toing police some of this expansion in commerce. It could affect not only our own citizens but also those in mexico and canada, particularly with food virus. Congressman beyer . Rep. Brady that sounds like something that congressman brady likeep. Beyer that sounds something that congressman brady should answer. Rep. Brady if it were autos [laughter] it is not a phrase that most americans use, but the diminished rule simply means, at what value of a product moving across our lines and duties attached to it . In the u. S. , it is very high. Mexico and canada were unacceptably low. Ambassador lighthizer gained some space in there, certainly not as much as he or others would like. I do not believe those thresholds contribute to less , especially in the types of products that are brought across national lines. I think there has been terrific bipartisan work, both in stopping shipments of fentanyl from china and other countries. There has been a concerted effort on shipments between the u. S. , mexico, canada. Our customs and border patrol, 2015, we redesigned that agency to focus on the security and the speed at which goods travel across our country. We have seen significant reforms goodst area that moves both quicker but with more security as you do that. I will finish with this. Every country is very aware of ecommerce and its upside, which is just dramatic. Usmca again sets that standard for that modern 21st century economy. We also know that we have to be even more vigilant on the evidence for illegitimate trade of those goods crossing borders. I think that will continue to be a priority. Dr. Gantz thank you. Rep. Beyer going along with minimus,omments on de those are standards that canada and mexico arrays, which makes sense. As we are seeing in this covid19 world where so many things are being shipped to our home. To the larger issue of what is in these packages, we have been struggling for years with medications coming out of china in particular that do not include what they are supposed to. This is part of a much larger , many that proceeds usmca other regulatory agencies, to figure out how to protect americans from things that come through the mail rather than picked up off the shelf. Fore can be no substitute lots of reporting by individual consumers to the relevant agencies. Dr. Gantz thank you very much. I will modify the question but the question essentially says, we can talk about the obama administration, trump administration, we can talk about the future how does the president s views translate into an agreement . In this particular case, mr. Lighthizer and the president worked well. Perhaps it is worth while talking about how tpp worked out. What is the relationship there, what makes it work . Pa,ping in mind, under the ta members of the committee should be deeply involved in the process. Representative brady . Congress holds authority over approving trade agreements. We delegate to the administration the ability to negotiate based on our objectives, our goals. We require considerable consultation throughout that process, and then Congress Holds the ultimate power with regard to the Voting Agreement up or down. Smartly, any administration is going to listen to congress, republicans and democrats, in negotiating and shaping that agreement. Not that you get everything you want you dont, as a country, or individuals sincerely. That is key. Tradeher thing, too, policy is implemented by the administration. Who is president matters. Usmca no question reflects the priorities of this president , to see that bluecollar working class man or woman getting a better deal. Final point and you sort of ask this in your last question. Don and i referenced it. Ways and means plays a key role. Approved bynt is congress, the hard work begins. There is a tremendous amount of work to be done before an agreement enters into force. I think the white house was right to push for a july 1 entry into force. It really required everyone to dramatically engage, industry, government within the three countries to move forward. We have a lot of work to do. A roll of ways and means here will be in monitoring the implementation, taking the viewpoint of our businesses and stakeholders home into this implementation process. The oversight of issues like enforcement that don talked about on these provisions, all of that, in the house at least, rests with the ways and Means Committee. Is asmplementation equally as important as the negotiation of the agreement itself. You have to make sure that agreement follows what we reach consensus on. Big role for ways and means, members, and again, we are fortunate to have leaders like don with his background as we move into this phase. Dr. Gantz it is fun to hear the former chairman of the ways and pointing out just how important the ways and Means Committee is. Obviously whoever is president hesitant normas impact on what happens in our legislation and trade agreements. I think every president in our lifetime has been protrade, recognized that america can best grow if we are able to fairly tear down barriers, tariff barriers. Im not sure kevin is as much concerned about it as i am, but if i was president , the concentration of power in the presidency has been moving in that direction away from congress. Im not sure how you reverse that. As a member of congress, i would love to see a better balance of power. In the meantime, i dont think it is affecting the trade agreement very much. Dr. Gantz thank you. One or two more questions. Challengesn normas that businesses, particularly in the u. S. , but all over the world are facing, one is covid19, and one is the trade war with china which has raised prices for goods coming from china for a lot of businesses. Covid19, theeen trade war, National Security fores, this is a great time better investment in north america, not just u. S. , which is the administrations preference, but also in mexico. For example, to take the automobile example, the domestic content requirements in usmca 62 to 75 . Most of that presumably will come out of asia and chinese production. Some of it may benefit mexico. How do you see these affecting things congressman beyer . Rep. Beyer i think basically in a positive way. We have already had a number of roundtables and hearings on supply chains in the United States in the wake of the covid19 crisis. And manyered for ppe other things, we may have been party dependent on china. To the extent we can rethink u. S. Manufacturing with a greater emphasis of building it and buying it here, i think that is good for all americans. Dr. Gantz congressman brady . Rep. Brady i think there is a real opportunity for north america. One of the lessons from covid19 is american learning that we are vulnerable to bad actors like china on crucial medicines, medical supplies, ingredients, as well as technology. It is a lesson that we need to learn from. Ways and means republicans have introduced a package of bills within the last month on behalf of house republicans, to make america more medically independent from china. It includes very aggressive , nottives to anchor reliablebut anchor production of those medicines that we can stockpile, the ones that we need for defense. Frankly wes that need to have stockpiles ready to go. Ands those production lines supply chains that should run through reliable trading partners like mexico and canada. I think it is a real opportunity, both for medical put our, and to frankly countries together again, for everyones benefit. I want to add to those wonderful comments that kevin made. I think back to a paper that david trias petraeus wrote years ago. If the 20th century was the american century, the 21st century could be the north american century. If you put the power together of the u. S. , canada, and mexico, we would beat everybody. Dr. Gantz that is a very good point, one that Prime Minister trudeau said months ago, north america ought to be developing 5g as a group rather than relying on other countries in europe or china. I dont know how much time we have, i think a couple of minutes. But i will ask one quick question. One of our listeners asking why are we calling it different names . Call it what it is in each country. That works just fine. Leadome country ought to with this agreement. Terrificallyome off your tongue, no question about it. But the benefits are real, and i think that is what matters. Rep. Beyer a rose is a rose is a rose. In gantz i would point out mexico, nafta was different. I suppose if this had been nafta 2, nobody would have complained about it, but it doesnt seem to be causing problems compared to some of the other challenges we have. I believe we have to quit soon. Do i have more time . We have more time . The endall and beall of this arrangement. Ahead and cutgo since wethis point have exhausted the audience questions and most of my own. Esteemed members of congress have added useful context. Once again, i congratulate both of you in being instrumental in getting this Historic Deal for north america through. You. Ank [indiscernible] shortly, joe biden will talk reopening schools during the pandemic. Live coverage from wilmington, delaware, start shortly. Then President Trump will deliver remarks at the battleship at wilmington. You can watch that at www. Cspan. Org or listen with the free cspan radio app. Reporting locally, the nosha news, President Trump this is going to heal very quickly. President trump met with law red thement and tou damage following the shooting of jacob blake
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.