Two actionpacked conversations. Were going to talk to the leaders of the industries that will be influencing the session. Around 4 00 will be joined by the secretary of commerce. Let me set the stage for a couple minutes then well get into our conversation. Those of you who follow our work w we try to accurately define problems. We have a quaint affinity to evidence and are best efforts to come up with rigorous facts on which people can have a good fight. We try to reform and develop practical and Creative Solutions we think and generate the kind of broadbased support to pass laws and resilient laws that have the actual investment of the American Public in their success. Finally we advocate. Action. A cb4 we dont think the world will fall to its knees just based on the genius of our insight. But we get up in the air and mix it up. In there and mix it up. It is not a gentle sport. It requires a real commitment and investment. We are proud to play that role where we can. For the last several months we have an in discussion around nafta because it is critically important and is far from perfect. Fax you are all generally familiar with, canada and mexico are responsible for one third of our nations exports. 43 of our nations 50 states trademark with canada and mexico than any other countries. And millions of jobs, some say 14, some say 11 come say 11, some time, this is an agreement that obviously needs improvement. Is 23yearold it is 23yearolds. It is 23 years old. It did not engage intellectualproperty in a way i think we believe it should. Were going to hear opportunities in the Energy Sector which could not have been contemplated when the agreement was first struck. But more than that this issue is emblematic of one of the core questions that where grappling with as a country what is the future of our nations economy and role in the world . What is the future of American Workers in the Global Economy . The idea of the American Dream that so many of us take for granted in this country is not real and the minds of many people who have lost jobs in the last decade. Flat, cost ofn college has multiplied by a factor of three. It a lot of that is channeled into the conversation into trade and inequity, which has become the nafta discussion. We believe this is an issue that is essential, but also essential to bring together the fabric of the country. With that heroic opening, i would like to now turn to two gentlemen who lead industries that are critical to our domestic security and our global power. Energy and agriculture industries. I want to introduce chip. Deal. He real a thirdgeneration farmer with over 1400 acres of grain production, soy, wheat. His family has been working since the 1700s. Chip is not new to the conversation and not new to policy. He has been working with the usda farm ranch committee. By chair of the u. S. Farmers and ranchers alliance. I think the first easter dinner to chair the corn growers. Chair the corn grower. Jack gerard, you are probably familiar with. The ceo of the foundation for the oil and gas industry. State, globale level. But some people dont fully appreciate that he also serves the industry. The core of the training, certification, best practices. A lot of what happens is below the waterline. It is incredibly important work. Jack is no stranger to these issues. Previously worked with the National Miners association. Two gentlemen who understand the importance of these issues. Let me start with you, chip. You run a farm. Why are you here . Why you care about the north American Free trade agreement . Chip i do run a farm. I live and work on a farm everyday. I live south of washington dc where most people dont think there is any farming going on. It is important to me because it has been working. Mexico is the biggest buyer of american corn right now. About 525 million bushels every year. They have been easy to deal with, they want our product and right now with the way input and crop prices are, nafta and mexico and canada are the deal for americas corn farmers. That the seamlessness of relationship became higher in transaction costs, what do you think happens . What fills that void . Chip what happens is we have other countries that grow corn like we do. They dont grow good quality corn like the u. S. From her does but brazil and argentina are waiting for mexico to buy foreign. Theyre are looking for customers just like we are. We need to work everyday day to protect that market that we have worked for years to build up. I have been to mexico on corn trade missions. They like our product, they like dealing with us, they like the quality. And it makes sense to have corn going from this country into their country on railcars, sometimes trucks. Vessels across the gulf of mexico. It is an easy deal for us and them and it makes sense. Jack, lets turn to energy. The Domestic Energy industry has exploded. Coincidence wes will leave to the crowd to decide. But the idea of north american which selfsufficiency, now actually feels like it is within our grasp. I wonder if you can talk not just about nafta but the importance of the integration of the north American Energy economy and what you see as the potential they are. There. Jack thank you for having me. A couple points, think you hit it right on the head. A few decades ago if you would of thought or projected that today the United States leads the world in oil and gas refining, yet just a short few years ago we were building to importminals natural gas to benefit the farmers and ranchers and others out there. Really what has happened is remarkable. When you put it in the context of nafta and you look at it more holistically across north america, we now have an integrated market that essentially is interdependent on each other. We have situations where we are importing heavier crude oil from canada. We refine it in the United States. Taken in froms we mexico, turn into gasoline and send it back to mexico. Taking place today across the broader north America Energy market. Byding experts believe that 2020 we could believe we could be energy selfsufficient. Selfsufficient as opposed to independent because what we mean by that is we have a capability to produce as much as we consume right here in the north american continent. Nafta, the stability it is brought in terms of our ability to move across borders with full import and export, has been more beneficial. Dead the realthe beneficiary is the American Consumer because the more you bring the law supply and demand into play, the efficiencies that come with crossborder trade, even the farming and ranching Community Get to experience the lower fuel costs. Aaa estimates the average americans is over 500 a year at the gas pump because of lower gasoline and diesel fuel prices. What is very important as we enter into this debate is to recognize the way the markets work, the real value for the u. S. In that broader context of the north American Free trade agreement. Jason let me ask you to were not going to forget about canada. We tend to focus initially on the question of our relationships with mexico. The mexican approach to energy in terms of foreign investment, openness of market, are fundamentally different today than when nafta was adopted two decades ago. How important an opportunity is that . How much has changed in terms of u. S. Investment in mexico . What you see as the future there . Jack it is still important and still in the early stages. Mexico has fundamentally changed their approach to energy just in the past few years. Different than what it was 60, 70 years prior. Have seen is stability brought to us by nafta and other regulatory regimes is the ability now for us to invest in this broader marketplace. Mexicans being more open to that. If you look at some of the sales in the gulf of mexico and mexico side, you see very significant investments in mindanao from u. S. Companies coming in from u. S. Companies. Foreign investment, for in job creation. It benefits us up and down the value chain. The Mexico Energy approach today is very different than it was a short your a few short years ago. Nafta brings us some of the certainty you need and the confidence you can have bringing judicial systems and others that gives certainty to those investment dollars to find a friendly place to land. Chip, if the environment became less favorable to u. S. Companies, what the you imagine happens with those mexican resources . Chip one of the concerns problems is the capital will go where it is most wanted. When you look at our business, we are a global industry. Were trying to find places where we had the greatest opportunity but also where we are welcome. The situation in mexico in particular provides great certainty to us now. Anything that would discourage that were create uncertainty or create uncertainty would perhaps chill the uncertainty chip stability. Day,ts fluctuate every every hour on the chicago board of trade. Ever since there has been talk about getting out of nafta, all add commodities have trended down. When we decided not to get out of nafta the market trended up. There are agriculture and farmers will be cant afford to drop any more than where they are. If you take u. S. Corn out of the market and the picture, then stability and uncertainty played the role. We grow 50 billion bushels of corn every year this country. We export about 2. 5 billion. Trade has been somewhat flat for us over the last several years. Any disruption in trade has a big impact on our farm costs, our financial picture. We have to make sure we dont disrupt that in any way. Jason are there other Global Markets you could see shifting american markets to . , we would like to go into the asian market. That is where the growing population is. We have some issues. We are working on china. The other asian markets, china japan, korea, we would love to get more in there. But when you have a Business Partner who is right across your border and the ease of trade back and forth, thats the best way to go. Sure you agree that no human enterprises perfect. Are there ways that you can imagine the agreement strengthening for u. S. Export, jobs . Chip any agreement can be strengthened. This is 23 years old. Work with theto administration and the usda as far as making the channels of trade clearer and easier. It works very well for us right now. You can always strengthen an agreement. We are open for negotiation. Jason jack, same question. I know the fundamentals you have said our first said are pretty sound. View to be clear, our comes from the energy standpoint. I cant speak for other sectors to where it might be important for them to update, modernize. But from our standpoint we believe the best principles are was the free market principles. You protect the environment, you protect the workforce. Then you allow the free flow of goods and commerce. Because ultimately it will find its equilibrium, which then benefits the consumer. I think at the end of the day as you look at north america as a continent, we talk about energy selfsufficiency. Activity inxport this country has increased significantly or are the same time we are moving away from other sources of Energy Around the world, thus making us energy selfsufficient. The applications from that are much longer than just the larger than just the trade question. The geopolitics of Energy Around the globe have changed dramatically. Is really becoming the epicenter of energy in the world. Again, something no one would have thought 10 years ago. Jason say it little more about interconnectedness. A lot of people imagine trade as you build something and you sell it to someone else. Linear. But there is a lot of integration between crude mexico going to the u. S. , then going exico and other markets. How different would it be if proverbially the treaty was ripped up . I think suggested in more political forms. What with the industry do in that reality . Jack again, uncertainty creates great concern. We left this behind somewhere, but we have shown a quick diagram, if you will, of the interdependence of the trade in the north American Community between mexico, the u. S. , canada and the u. S. The markets are finding their balance in her equilibrium. For example, we had todayries in the gulf that we turn right around and that same refiner has exported over 9 Million Barrels of refined product right back to mexico. In many ways, that interconnection is creating 3000 jobs in houston, putting americans to work. What we are doing is taking a mexican crude oil product, bring it to the United States and adding value, turning it right back around to consumers in mexico. We see the same dynamic and relationship with canada and others in terms of natural gas imports and exports. The graph is you a simple visual to show you the quantity of the movement, both north and south, on both borders. Jason lets turn to our polite neighbors to the north. The agriculture connection to canada are as significant as mexico. Corn and grain to mexico. Whats the dynamic look like with our northern border . Chip wheeler with we work with canadian corn growers as an organization. We dont send a lot of corn to candidate we send corn byproducts. Sweeteners, ethanol goes into canada. Livestock. They feed corn to the cattle in canada and a important a lot of livestock products. It is indeed a big part of our trade barrier there. Jason in a few minutes about theask you parlor game of prognostication. Always challenging, probably more so challenging now than ever before. Do you think congress should resolve this . Should the administration . Obviously something is going to change with this agreement. Do you have any suggestion for the best process to achieve that . Im looking at you, jack. Jack i was waiting for chip to enter that one. Answer that one. President has given a notice to congress in their interaction back and forth, think they both have a role to play. The appropriate level of each at the end of the day, we need to balance that with the broader u. S. Interests. It is hard to predict at this point in time as i think we are in the early stages of a substantive conversation. We have had a lot of Public Discourse about that is good or bad, etc. , but now it is time to really sit down and back to the point you made about bipartisan, we need to focus on the facts and reality. That is an area where i think energy brings a cooler effect to the broader conversation. When you look at that interdependence today, a greatly benefits the United States of america. I think we want to take a breath and think long and hard about how we approach any potential changes, and then clearly understand the implications, not only for business, investment, different industries, but ultimately at the end of the game, the American Public and American Consumer. In many instances they are the ones concerned about these relationships and these agreements. And so we should not lose the Vantage Point of that perspective. Jason chip, i know like us you are a big fan of secretary center purdue. He was very engaged in these questions. Say what you can about your interactions. Chip as we know, the administration will be heavily involved with what happens with nafta. We can hope for, along with the help of mr. Purdue, would be to bring people like me to the table, corn, soybeans, wheat, any agriculture commodity bring us to the table. We know that nafta has worked. We dont want to have any part of blocking trade. So they bring a sin, work with all of us as a unit, and make sure that if they are going to be bring a sin, work with all us ruralarmers out in america are making less money and having trade issues, it affects people way down the line. It affects thousands and thousands of people. I could keep going for a thee, and i may, but with but i will throw to the audience to ask questions if they like. If folks could just announce who you are. If we have a microphone back here. Why do you stand up and project there you are. Hello. Jack, two years ago there was a for crude. T your organization spent a lot to make it happen to allow u. S. Producers to export crude. But you did not imagine that the biggest threat to energy trade would come from a republican administration. I wonder obviously this is a process. Are your members prepared to spend as much resources and efforts to keep nafta energy trade flowing . Is that a comparable effort or is there something you are going to do along with other things . We work on a lot of different issues. You talked about the u. S. Crude oil ban being lifted. I think it is very consistent with the broader conversation were having today about trade generally. We operate in the foundation of freetrade principles. Our view is the American People benefit most when we allow for free trade, when we allow for open borders, and allow the markets of a capital to find what is friendly to invest and produce that energy for the benefit of consumers. Usc what happened in the marketplace as a result of lots of supply coming on, primarily driven by Technological Advancements on horizontal drilling. Yet again, the consumer is the major beneficiary. Overtime, we believe we have a constructive dialogue with the administration and with congress on this issue and our hope and expectation is as we ground this and affect the conversation, the outcome will be positive. We will eventually get to where we be in this conversation and many others because we will grounded in reality and fact. I think it is premature to project exactly where it is going to go. But clearly we want to be engaged in net dialogue. Right now it is a very constructive dialogue with the secretary and others to make sure we have open avenues of communication. Jason other questions . You could pull over thank you. Im a reporter from the toronto star. In april the president complained about canada on a few issues. Some of which are known as bilateral europeans like of lumber. He also mentioned energy. None of us in canada really knew what he was referring to. Did you know what he was talking about . Are there any irritants that you can see in the u. S. Candidate Energy Relationship . Da energyana relationship . Jack im not sure what he was talking about at that time either. Our view is as long as the border is open, i think some of the irritants that the president may have been referencing i would have to see this quote might have been over the keystone xl pipeline conversation. In our view that was totally unnecessary. Through multiple reviews it showed there was minimal impact to the environment. Yet once again it was consistent with freetrade principles allowing some of the heavy Oil Production to be brought to the United States. Much of our midwest refinery capacity relies on heavy oil coming in from canada. I am not sure other irritants he may have been referencing at the time. The Keystone Pipeline was a big part of the conversation and that may have been what he was talking about. Jason right up front. The National Association of Foreign Trade zones. I was interested to hear your thoughts or concerns if an overarching objective of these negotiations is to reduce the bilateral merchandise trade deficits with canada and mexico. For us it would be huge because there is a deficit when it comes to Agricultural Products coming from mexico into this country. We rely on them buying a lot of our product and we rely on them being able to do that relatively easy. Have a willingwe customer that wants to buy our product. If they cant return the favor,o to speak, by us buying back unfortunately it is one of those casualties of war i hate to say it that way, but we have a willing purchaser of our product and want to make sure to keep it that way. Jack in the sense of the energy trade, it cuts both ways. You a net import, sometimes you net export. The president s directive is focused on job creation and Economic Activity in the United States. Thats why it is so important we understand what that means. The refinery i referenced earlier, bringing in product from mexico then send it back in ,he form of a refined product that employs 3000 americans. These are not small institutions, these are big industries. When you balance all that out i think you need to look at it at a holistic way to make sure you dont unintentionally adversely impact something by merely relying on a number and not thinking through what the numbers really represent and what it means for our society and our workforce, for that matter. Jason i have another question while our shy group mulls. Trade is obviously a very significant aspect of our economic capacity. Deficits are one part of that conversation. If we really are focused on the underlying essential goal of increasing economic strength and jobs, where do you place the nafta issues in the broader context of tax reform and the fully reform, basket of aspirations to strengthen the economy . Its all part of an integrated global system. Earlier it talked about the u. S. Lifting of the crude oil ban. That was a significant shift of policy. It brought us to a global marketplace, an opportunity for us to produce more domestically with our modern techniques and technologies, yet have markets for the free flow of exports, to have product to be able to find markets elsewhere. As a mentioned earlier, when you look at this in the broader geopolitical perspective, we had a lot of allies in europe would love to import u. S. Produced energy. When you look at nafta, while it is north americacentric, itll country it all contributes that broader cover station. Conversation. Impede or need hinder that free flow of goods. We were talking about increasing our imports in this country to fuel our domestic economy. Now a decade later we are talking about so sufficiently selfsufficiency. It is brought about by supply and demand, freemarket principles. Were hoping modernization of this agreement will take all that and a global context in mind, not just limited to north america. Jason do you see what happened to nafta being a predicate for the global trade discussion . Tpp is a conversation of the past but those issues remain. Does your industry see nafta as a predicate for that conversation . Chip we do because it will probably be the first one that comes up as far as being renegotiated. Yes. We cant afford to not have trade all around the world, as jack said, global trade. We need to make sure our product moves freely to whatever product is willing whatever country is willing to buy. Of naftarenegotiation will set the precedent for other countries to see how we manage the situation and how the u. S. Is looked at if we are a willing seller and a buyer. This verse is going to be the biggie. Jason another question here . Right up front. Bill thompson. Nowis looking into tariffs of ideas for new tariffs, duties on mexican products as part of this renegotiation. Is that one of the things that concerns you . If there are new tariffs on mexican products there are no terrorists right now on corn or wheat is that what you would consider to be collateral damage, maybe, a possibility . Chip there is no tariff right now on corn going into mexico. We have heard is there could be a 37 tariff makes brazilian and argentinian corn cheaper than u. S. Corn. So, the mexican officials we talked to come we had a reverse trade mission last week when we had mexican grain buyers and feed manufacturers here in d. C. They had already said started to negotiate with brazil and argentina. Falter on u. S. Corn going into mexico, they have willing sellers that come from that country. On,here is a 37 tariff put it does not make us the cheapest supplier anymore. Jason ladies and gentlemen, you could not get a better warmup. Im pleased to share with you that the secretary is in the building. So if you could join me in thanking our panelists. [applause] they promised they are going to work out this ethanol thing as they head out. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] jason mr. Secretary, we got you a fresh glass of water. Welcome, sir. [applause] everyone says that our guest needs introduction and they go forward to introduce, and of course thats what im going to do. But im going to keep it short. As you all know, secretary wilbur ross is the 39th secretary. He was sworn in february this year. He was recently in for quite a few years the chairman and chief Strategy Officer of the wl ross company. The secretary has restructured over 400 billion of assets from just about every industry you have ever heard of and if you you probably have not. Oran orale director of director of over 100 companies. The only person elected to the private equity hall of fame and the term Management Hall of fame. Neither of which i have visited but i look forward to it. Is aly, secretary ross very generous philanthropist. Now he is also a Public Servant with the trust and clear devotion of the president. And honored tod have you here. I believe this is the first time you have had a chance to talk about the nafta issues since the formal letter of renegotiation was sent over to congress. I do just maybe ask you to start off by situating most broadly, what are the main concerns that have animated this discussion . At the end of the day, what is the president really try to a college through this me negotiation trying to accomplish . Sec. Wilbur ross a number of things. The guiding principle is do no harm, because there were things achieved under nafta and other trade agreements. So the first rule is do no harm. Then the second rule of thumb would be, there were a number of concessions the nafta countries made in connection with the tpp. And so, we would view those as sort of a starting point for discussion. But think about it it is an old agreement. It didnt address digital economy, a really didnt address much anyway a services, especially not much in the way of financial services. There are big holes in it. Beyond that, there are issues like intellectual property rights, regulatory practices, customs procedures, sanitary regulations, labor issues, environmental issues, issues about dealing with the snes, and most of all, enforcement. There is not much point going to the trouble of making an elaborate trade agreement if you are not going to enforce it and really get the benefits of it that you bargained for. Jason thats a great list and we are to have a chance to dig into a lot of that. I think a lot of people in this room and others are really comforted by your initial statement, which is the goal first and foremost is do no harm. The president made some people nervous a few weeks ago. I think the president was elected on a mandate to shake things up. Nafta certainly is among the things that was being shaken. What can you share with us about that kind of commitment to do no harm . An people not take it as given that the idea were going to tear up the agreement is no longer part of the opposition . The conversation . Sec. Wilbur ross the president never announced he was going to tear up the agreement. That was speculation, mostly in the media. So i dont think you can hang that on him, or for that matter, on me. Jason fair. [laughter] jason all the list that you mentioned, you talk about tpp concessions, where you see some of the lower hanging fruit that could be the engine of that negotiation . You have a lot of places you can start. Where are some places you might pick first . Sec. Wilbur ross well, the easiest ones will be the ones that were not contained in the original agreement because that is new territory, that is not anyone giving up anything. By and large, though should be the easiest issues to get done. But they are important because one of our injectors will be to try to incorporate into nafta basic principles that we would like to have followed in subsequent freetrade agreements rather than starting each one with a blank sheet of paper. Mr. Grumet say more about this principles. I think we had a conversation before you joined about the importance of nafta and the first step of this much larger global conversation. What are some of the predicates that you think are going to be critical . Sec. Wilbur ross well, one of our big objectives is to reduce our trade deficit. There are lots of ways of doing that. The way that we think is the easiest, not just for these two gorgeous but for anybody with whom would partner, would be to divert to u. S. Sources products that are already they are already buying from abroad from the u. S. Some of the Agricultural Products a buyer from brazil. This would give us a better market share than we have now. That is just one example of many. Mr. Grumet the issue of deficits is obviously significant in the administrations policy. The department has held public hearings on this. Are all deficits created equal . It means a lot of Different Things to a lot of different people. Sec. Wilbur ross i dont know if i would classify them good, medium, and bad. I think theres no question that trade surpluses are more beneficial to a country than trade deficit. But within deficits there are two categories that i would call. One is what i would call blameless deficit. For example, we are not yet selfsufficient in energy. So naturally we are going to have something of a deficit caused by importation of hydrocarbons. An important consideration because relative to canada, more than our entire deficit comes from hydrocarbons that they export to the u. S. I dont call that blame full exports. Blameful exports. Are thingsmeful that come from some other inappropriate hader rather than a natural course. Behavior rather than a natural course. Mr. Grumet talk about renegotiation. One process in which the tosident has initiated what extent do you think it is possible the changes could begun within the scope of the existing statute . To what extent you think congressional action is necessary . Is there the possibility of a hybrid of those approaches . Sec. Wilbur ross by and large, any be change would mean would need congressional approval. That is why we labored so hard to deal with the socalled fasttrack approach. Stepsas some procedural that still have to be followed. Socalledthe ninetyday letter on may 18. That will mature on august 16. That is when the debt negotiations can first get going. There is also a waystation in between in midjuly 30 days before the end. We have to have a very full discussion with the congressional committees about more detailed objectives then we have put forward so far. Mr. Grumet so obviously that would be formal negotiations. There have been quite a few informal conversations happening between the three countries. How productive have those been and what can you share with us about the tenor and focus of those conversations . Those heavenll, trying to clear away some longstanding issues between the countries. In the case of mexico, sugar is a principal one. And in the case of canada, there are two. Softwood lumber and dairy products. Mr. Grumet and do you imagine those will be solved within the context of the renegotiation, or do you think they will be readdressed . Sec. Ross well, we have been negotiating on both for quite a while. They are many years in the making. So whether we can get them finished in the remaining few days before nafta, i dont know. In both of them, if there is no formal negotiated solution, there is they are the outgrowth of trade cases, so we will impose the duties and antidumping in those cases if there is no negotiated settlement. Mr. Grumet i want to ask about the process of government here. The trade focus and commerce obviously has the lead. But there are Significant National security questions. Having Close Friends on both our borders matter a lot. There are questions about immigration enforcement. What has been the process through which you and your peers seven having this conversation . Well, Security Issues are pretty clearly defined. They are not name of the province of trade negotiations. Homeland security has spent quite a bit of time with their mexican counterparts and with canadian counterparts, for that matter. So, there may well be some issues incorporated into nafta, but those are sort of separate discussions. Mr. Grumet and you think from a political standpoint, it is possible there will be more security conversations maturing in that same timeframe that could come as a package . Sec. Ross i think there are Border Security conversations underway all the time. Mr. Grumet i want to ask a little bit about, beyond just ux mexico and u. S. I would be curious in your sense, how specific are the conversations between canada and mexico. These the same as like chancellor merkel . Sec. Ross they are a member state of the european union. All trade negotiations are handled at the European Commission level. So while there are differences in our trade relationship with the various member states, it is not possible to have separate negotiations. So that is not on the table. , and overallowever trade deficit with the eu. So in that sense, it gets subsumed within it. Mr. Grumet i want to turn back to a broader question about the importance of nafta, net just in just the psyche of the nation. The president spoke passionately during the campaign about people who we felt had been who he felt had been left behind. The American Dream have been less available to so many people in this country. , emblematic around , hasonversation in nafta become a symbol of that larger conversation. I wonder if you agree with that premise. My second question is, the expectations that we are creating about the influence that improving nafta can have on that broader conversation. Are we setting people up for unrealistic aspirations . Sec. Ross well, not all the unemployment problems and not all the joblessness problems are result of nafta are a result of nafta or any other trade agreement. Some of them are simply due to increased automation, robotics, artificial intelligence, things of that sort. And those are problems that will recur on an even broader beiges future. In the so no one is saying this is the Silver Bullet that solves every problem for the country. But it is one of the ones where we have some degree of control, and therefore it is one that very much should be addressed. A onet do you have of the questions that a number thereple have raised is is a significant elections process happening in mexico. And obviously one of the candidates doesnt have the same kind of affinity for the u. S. Capitalist system as the other. Tot is the sensitivity having this conversation happening right in the middle of that domestic political challenge . Sec. Ross well, we had hoped to have had it earlier, but it took longer to get congress to the point of the ninetyday letter. So it would have been preferable to have had it even earlier so that it was a little further separated from the mexican election. But there have also been elections British Columbia just had an election, and some of our trade conversations with British Columbia. So there is always somebody having an election. And my guess is that we probably have the best window from now until december or early january. Heir election is mid year so the closer you get to it the more complicated it will become, particularly in terms of getting the Mexican Congressional approval. But we also should not prevent trade expires next year. We too have midterm elections. Those will undoubtedly have some impact on congressional views. Mr. Grumet im not asking you to name any names, but have engaged, how effective have individual members been in addressing their concerns . Do you think there is a constructive, delivered effort underway . Sec. Ross concerns about what . Mr. Grumet concerns about ways in which changes could undermine their district. Are you hearing a lot about members from congress . Sec. Ross we hear a lot from members of congress all the time on a variety of topics. , onndividual trade issues individual problems of individual companies. We hear from the all we hear from them all the time. They are not at all shy about expressing their views. Andgrumet not being shy not being effective are not necessarily the same thing. Sec. Ross at the end of the day people will hopefully have a new agreement to look at and then you can judge of what has been effective in what has not been effective, and if we have overall done an effective job. Mr. Grumet a couple other questions before i let you go. I know you have to be across town. Of change chris uncertainty. You cant have progressed without uncertainty but there has been quite a bit of anxiety and youve seen a lot of Market Movement around different stages of this process. When people thought they would be ending the agreement is it to put boundaries around the negotiation . I think you laid out a particular framework a pretty clear framework. But there is an imagination that the u. S. Might walk away from this agreement. Can the administration say more explicitly that these are the boundaries of the conversation, these are the components that you think are meaningful and should be sustained . Sec. Ross i think the last thing you want to do in any negotiation is to announce an advanced your ending point because that will become the starting point. Mr. Grumet i wouldnt to the outcome, but you could talk about what is on the table for discussion. Again, i think the list you laid out sec. Ross well, i just did. Mr. Grumet well thats important new information for the country, that i appreciate very much. Breaking news here. Secretary, i want to and by giving you an opportunity to talk about where you see other opportunities to discuss the president s opportunity for growth. The youer aspirations have a congress and other places that will provide that kind of package . Growth that would make us all very happy. Sec. Ross trade is one. Regulatory reform, which we have also been helping out on, is a very major one. Maybe in some ways the most major one. Infrastructure is another important one. Not least of all, tax policy and energy policy. All of those are essential components of getting to a more rapid, more rep more robust growth rate. Mr. Grumet mr. Secretary, you have a big job ahead of you. Im going to let you go back at it. We greatly appreciate you joining us this afternoon. Sec. Ross thank you. Good to see you. [applause] mr. Grumet we have a 10 year lease on the building, so i will come you all to spend time and interact with one another but we are going to try to let the xitretary exit staved e stage left. Thank you, sir. Announcer you can see these discussions from the Bipartisan Policy Center on www. Cspan. Org. Lots of discussion this afternoon on the north American Free trade agreement, nafta. A representative from new york tweeted that any renegotiation of nafta, i will continue fighting for the ny21 economy. She is calling for modifications affected United States and canada to be limited to amendments allowed under the original 1994 agreement. President trump tweeting, i will be announcing my decision on paris accord over the next few days. Make America Great again. Members of congress reported to press reports the president has decided to withdraw. Illinois, if the president withdraws from the Paris Agreement it will be a win for big oil and gas at the expense of our future. Earlier this year and introduced a resolution asking the president not to withdraw from acres agreement. The Paris Agreement. I agree with vern buchanan. Protecting the eve i am at and growing the economy are not mutually exclusive. And from ted cruz, i hope potus will take the opportunity to withdraw the u. S. From the Paris Agreement. On sunday, met idb matt taibi will be our gest. Ce, youdaisy that fas fall in was like that, but the opposite. I first thought, this is a. Erson who is unique, horrible put on earth to specifically for me to appreciate, or unappreciated, or never the verb is. Whatever the verb is. I have really been spending the last 10 to 12 years without knowing it, preparing for donald trump to happen. Announcer he is a contributor to Rolling Stone magazine and is the author of several books including smells like dead elephants. His most recent book, insane clown president. During our live threehour conversation well take your calls, tweets and facebook questions on his literary career. Matt taibi,th with live from noon to 3 00 p. M. Eastern sunday. Held aer David Schuelke briefing at the white house