That is an excellent question we see communitybased profiling in a certain kind of way that theyre not necessarily applied one specific example had to do with drug interdiction in units. S sundays at eight, published by Public Affairs books, now available at your favorite bookseller. Washington journal continues. Now joining us as representative john delaney. Hes a democrat from maryland. He represents the sixth district. Thomas mann, tell us about your background. Prior to running for office i was an entrepreneur and business person. I started to companies in the Financial Services industry. Infirst company i started 1993. I took it public in 1996 and assaulted a 1999. It is a company that focused on midsizedsmall to mr health care businesses. My background is in starting businesses. I grew up in north jersey. My father was a union electrician. My parents did not go to college. He worked for hart to give me an opportunity. Host to bring a financial expertise to congress . Guest i think so. As someone who started to Financial Services companies from scratch. Both companies were pioneering at the time. Capital services became the largest lender to small sized businesses in the United States. I had about 800 employees when i left. I created about 2000 jobs over the companys history. A lot of granular experience in starting some are raising capital, financing these businesses, and financing our clients. When i left, we had about 15 billion in assets. Host what made you want to come o congress . Guest guest that my experience would be helpful. I thought i understood how the private sector work, but i thought we needed to take that approach to strengthen our economy and create jobs. We are at a very significant Inflection Point in our economy. I think the debate we have in washington is overly focused on tax policy and the size of government. It is not really focused as precisely as it could be around what is really happening in the economy. If think about what is happened over the last 20 years of globalization and technology, it is unduly it has utterly transformed the face of the economy. Think from a Public Policy perspective we are preparing our country to compete as successfully as it could in that world. That is really the perspective i think i bring to the congress, which is how to make sure the country competes. We like to talk about the jobs crisis we have in this country, but what we dont talk about is how we actually create jobs and have decent standard of living. Delivery to do that is successfully competing in what is increasingly a global tech elegy world. We need to set Public Policies that enable the country to do that. Only through that we be able to create the jobs and one in this country. Is one of those policies that you would advocate . If i were setting the domestic agenda for the country, my number one economic writer artie would be investing in our infrastructure. I say that for a couple of reasons. First, if you think about competitiveness, improving our transportation, our communication, our energy, water, even educational infrastructure in this country is so critical for us to be will to compete in the future right in this Global Technology part of the world where people can do business anywhere in the world. After really bring to bear a strong portfolio of infrastructure that will allow businesses to compete. That helps individuals in improving the quality of their day. If you care about longterm competitiveness, infrastructure should do the top of the agenda. Should be the top of the agenda. Were either creating high skill jobs are low skilled jobs. When not creating midscale jobs for people can have a decent standard of living, you dont have to work two jobs. Theres a real shores of those jobs. Infrastructure more than anything else creates those kinds of jobs. Third, infrastructure is probably the second best investment we make as a nation. Every dollar we spend on infrastructure, we get about a dollar 92 of economic growth. If youre thinking about things a government has proven it is good at, and if youre thinking that things that turn out to be a good return on investment and position the country to be competitive, infrastructure is the top of that list. I think theres a lot of bipartisan support in that area. We have 31 house republicans, 31 house democrats, and it was introduced in the senate about two months ago. We have about half a dozen and republican senators on the bill. An incentive for private companies to invest in this Infrastructure Fund. The incentive is tied into their overseas earnings, which brings in a whole debate about what has gone on with you as corporate rash being overseas, the pfize transaction that was announced a few weeks ago. That is a problem. Would be reforming our International Tax system to do with the problem. Encourages u. S. Companies to invest in this fund. The incentive is that they get to bring back a certain amount of their overseas cash to the United States taxfree if they put money in the fund. Particularly, the bonds to by our 50 year term, you have one Interest Rate and theyre not guaranteed by the federal government. It brings together two important pieces of Public Policy that each party has been pushing for for a long time. Our republican colleagues have wanted to create mass for the cash to come back to United States. Thereve been hundred percent right about that. If theres a bipartisan agreement, lets start with the cash overseas. We keep hearing about all this cash sitting overseas that we cant bring back paraguay kelly bring it back . Why dont we pass something . The specific reason we cant bring it back is that the u. S. Has a special tax provision. When they went to repatriate her bring that aftertax overseas earnings back to the United States, you have to pay for United States tax. Most countries have a system thats as you make money overseas, you pay the tax, you bring it back to the homeland, taxfree. Ago, when bigears Companies Made 10 of their. Rofits overseas it is really creating a barrier, because these companies are basically saying, i have lower cost of capital. We should fix that system. Thereve been a lot of proposals out there to fix that system. I didnt agree with everything in there, but i thought it was incredibly thoughtful approach. He addressed a, the president talked about it, we really should be focusing on fixing the International Tax system. I personally think there is a golden opportunity to take some of that money overseas, because theres a huge revenue opportunity associated with giving that money home, and using some of that for Public Policy like investing in infrastructure. That is a natural deal that we should be focused on, particularly in the context of the Highway Trust Fund, which we will have to deal with. Thisf the vote projects in country are going to stop as a result. Thinking about that, forcing functions. The forcingut function creates a really big opportunity for congress to do something enormously positive for the u. S. Economy, which is to fix International Tax system, get that money flowing back to the United States. Think about it trillion dollars of capital flowing back toward country. Take some of that Infrastructure Fund i have been talking about. Wouldnt it be amazing if we could bring back cash without the government increasing its debt or deficits come increase the net investment we have an infrastructure in this country . That would be a Double Bottom line when for this country. An oped in the wall street journal, we must stop driving businesses out of the country in pursuit of lower tax rates. Guest he talks about couple of things. It would be great to talk about the loophole he was talking about. I have to believe every Major Investment Firm in the United States, the day after the pfizer deal was announced, was burning the midnight oil and analyzing this opportunity on behalf of their clients. I think every major u. S. Corporation is looking hard right now at what pfizer is doing. The scale of the transaction is what is taking people back. You have an obligation to do what is in the best interest of your shareholders. If you can do a transaction that lozier tax legally that doesnt mean you are going to do it, you have to look at it. That is the first thing. Think the inversion provision or provision of the tax code that allows the inversion can and should be looked at and potentially loopholes closed. That is the superficial issue. The more embedded issue is what is going on with the International Tax system and the fact that it discourages the flow of capital back to the United States. The pfizer inversion is premised on two things. One, them using the loophole to accomplish this inversion. Fact has to the the do with the fact that pfizer has a lot of cash overseas. Issueis a much deeper than just the inversion. If you look at the trends, with 2 trillion sitting overseas pretty soon there will be more cash sitting overseas than there is in the United States. If the u. S. Company makes have half their earnings overseas and half in the United States, they pay their dividends to shareholders out of the u. S. , and they also borrow their money to the extent they borrow money in the United States. Half the money overseas, half the money United States, they do not have a lot of uses for the money overseas. The overseas cash is growing. It is a situation where cash is piling overseas. Bye of them are doing it exploiting some of these loopholes, which i think should be cold should be closed. Correctly if you create International Property in the United States . Are you able to ship it overseas without a fair market value of that . The ld be enclosing should be closing these loopholes. Companies make money overseas, they pay overseas cash, it is really a low tax rate and they want to bring the money back. If they pay a decent tax rate overseas they ought to be able to float back to the United States tax rate. Increase the competitiveness of u. S. Corporations and prevent a lot of these inversion deals. Maryland,crat from serves on the joint economic committees. Talking about some Financial Issues but all congressional issues are on the table. Rick from tennessee on our democrat line. Caller it started with bush senior and maybe before that, nasa. And coming to fruition with clinton i lost my job and making mexico and was 1000 dollars per week. I went back to school and ended up in a job where i wasnt making anywhere near that. Are companies all over america this has happened to. It kind of touches base with what you are saying, theyre making more money out of the as ary but we are losing country. If you could touch on the the government is. Asically an oligarchy we do not have a read a free press. Host two issues, the trade and media. Guest i do agree with you the polarization of the media, which sells which is why they do is unfortunate because it leads to polarize asian of the country. We cherish free speech in this country. Hopefully our habits will change over time. Things that dont make sense ultimately dont continue. The intense polarization is the ideological orientation where people give you the answer before listening to the facts. You start saying something that people put into a box and say yes or no. It is a bad approach to informing our citizens create i think over time that will change. The first part of the question is about trade. We have a lot of trade agreements coming up. I think what we think about trade we have to do two things. We have to be focused on making sure the United States is as bad is as competitive as possible. Competitiveness is really important because this country will not create jobs that have a rising standard of living unless we are competing successfully. Theres a whole portfolio of things we need to do from a policy perspective to make us compete more successfully. Have a National Energy policy that allows us to keep our prices low. It is part of that portfolio. And doing things to continue to reform the educational system, we have a good bill coming up in the congress ealing with charter schools. A whole bunch of things to do to make ourselves competitive. We need to be doing that. As i think about trade we have to acknowledge that we are in a global world that is becoming more interconnected because of technology. When i graduated from high school 30 years ago there were 6 billion people in the world and about one billion of them were in a Global Economy. 16 of the world participated in an interconnected way and the rest were localized. Today we have 7 billion people in the world and 5 million of them are in this global interconnected economy. We cannot reverse thats nor would we want to because during that century of time we made major improvements as a world in terms of lifting people out of poverty, billions of people come out of abject poverty because of globalization, which is enhanced by technology. But it has heard the United States in many ways. That hurt the United States in many ways. It has been enormously what it has hurt the United States in many way. Enormously destructive. That is a huge challenge, how do we replace those jobs with other jobs that need a decent standard of living . I think a competitive agenda allows us to do that. I think that will be one of the big debates in congress over the next couple of years. Some of the big trade agreements that are coming up, making sure that we can exist in a Global Economy and our businesses can thrive and trade with other countries. These trade agreements are really important that they have to be tied to thinking about how do u. S. Companies compete on our soil to create the kind of jobs you are talking about. Delaney, offtive of twitter guest in terms of the funds that are in the Highway Trust Fund, the Highway Trust Fund has been historically financed with the cap tax. Led it is a tax that gets charged on our consumption of gasoline. The first problem is we havent raised the tax since 1992. Even though we have been increasing we have been increasing our investment in transportation and highways and roads. We havent raised the sorts of revenues to pay for that. That is our first problem. Patternsd problem is have c