I am really looking forward to hearing substantive talk today about both candidates and their economic policies and not some of the other things people in my profession at the been sent talking about the past week. Mark halperin has great guests lined up, and it will be fantastic. I will bring up the executive Vice President of the Peter Peterson foundation. Thank you guys so much. Have a great event. [applause] guys so much. Have a great event. [applause] thank you soi much for coming this morning. My name is loretta ucelli, and i am the executive Vice President of the peter g. Peterson foundation. We are a nonpartisan organization, and our mission is to educate and engage americans in the nations longterm fiscal challenges. And find solutions that help us achieve and maintain a prosperous and growing economy. We believe that longterm debt is a critical issue for the economy. Whatever the issue is that you care about, education, the environment, national security, our ability as a nation to deal with it is grounded in addressing our longterm fiscal challenges. We also believe that debate, discussion, and dialogue are critical in this president ial election and thats why we are , a very proud and enthusiastic sponsor of events like this with bloomberg politics. We are certainly looking forward to this mornings discussion with a range of policy experts. And with everything going on in the news, i think theres a lot more to talk about as well. And im sure that mark will take us through all of that. But thank you for joining us, and it is great to be here for this discussion. [applause] announcer ladies and gentlemen, please welcome to the stage Mark Halperin, managing editor bloomberg politics, host of with all due respect, and bloomberg television. Mark halperin so were going to the big policy discussion today but thats not all were going , to talk about because the question of whose policies are going to be thought about is treated seriously come january is hanging in the balance. I was in lakeland, florida, yesterday at 6 00 covering donald trump, and between the time i left that event to come here and now, a lot has happened thats going to impact this race in ways that are not currently knowable. So Ken Goldstein, my colleague , is going to, and we are going to talk a little about what is happening in the news. And we will dabble in some of that with everybody else, but we are mostly going to have a discussion of the themes and issues the Peterson Foundation does so well on, and they are obviously one of the few groups i would say sadly but thank god for them that is always going to inject substantive discussions into what is happening. I am actually relatively optimistic no matter who wins the white house over who controls congress that well see we are going to see a flurry of substantive activity on fiscal issues and Economic Issues in the beginning of a new administration, the new congress. Because theres actually a fair amount of agreement about what are the right issues to work on. We will talk about that, but we first, will talk about whats going on in the news. I want to a few to get volunteers to just watched Donald Trumps twitter account during the event and tell me anything that goes on because any time i am moderating a discussion like this, there is a chance something will be overtaken by events in 140 characters or so. Ken goldstein, professor a cross, he is disciplinary genius about polling and advertising and now hopefully an expert on allegations of Sexual Harassment too because thats what were going to start. Thank you. Kenneth goldstein thank you very much for having me. Mark halperin friday morning donald trump was behind. , he had a plausible path to about 265 electoral votes. No obvious path to to waited 70 path to 270, but once he gets to 265, you were within hailing distance. Since then weve had the access access hollywood video. We had the debate and now weve , had this latest round of allegations. So if youre the Trump Campaign, just talk about, theres very limited public polling. Bloomberg has a poll in pennsylvania that shows trump doing very badly, but hes been doing very badly in pennsylvania , and their Electoral College calculations do not hinge on pennsylvania. If you are the Trump Campaign now is it possible to get good , data to figure out where you stand, or are things moving too fast . Kenneth goldstein there is also the question about whether they invested in the infrastructure to gather that data. But when you were just saying you want a couple people here to keep an eye on Donald Trumps twitter account while were talking, mark was not joking. Right . I mean actually on friday, it seems like a long time ago, i was on the set about to talk to mark when the trump news broke. People were screaming in my ear. I was actually out in san francisco, and the blue angels were out there, and theyre like zooming by, and car alarms were going off. And i am like wow, what im , going to talk about . I was going to talk about the pennsylvania ad by. You have heard Michelle Obama say at the convention and in and then Hillary Clinton said, when they go low, we go high. So when things get crazy, i get boring. Mark halperin use a little boring. Kenneth goldstein let me be boring. At the end of the day, elections are about what the shape of the electorate looks like and how those different segments performed. It is always a little embarrassing as a political scientist. We spend all this money, determine democrats vote for democrats and republicans vote for republicans. Thats the big finding if you remember that from your intro to american politics course. So when you have two candidates are so deeply unpopular we can talk about how unpopular donald trump is, and he seems to be coming less popular. Hillary clinton is also the second most unpopular person to ever run for president of the united states, to be a major party nominee. So this race sort of devolved to a generic democrat versus a generic republican. And when you have that, democrats have about, depends on what turnout is, but between 7 percentage point advantage in the shape of the electorate. Donald trump needs to maximize republican loyalty and needs to win independence by independents by significantly won than met romney independents. Do we think things happen in the last couple days that are going to maximize republican turnout, minimize democratic turnout, make republicans more loyal and get swing voters to swing to trump in a way greater than romney got them . And i think the answer to that is unlikely. I think we can see some movements over the last whatever it is, 28, 27 days here that make this a threepoint race or fourpoint race, getting into fieldgoal range. Since everyone seems to be using sports analogies this week, although different sorts. But currently we are not there. Even when trump was having a little bit of movement before the first debate and seemed to have stabilized things before friday in the second debate, he was still not ahead. And as you said, it still would have been an inside straight to get to 270 Electoral College votes. Right, Mark Halperin right, so picking a fight with the speaker of the house who is a member of his own adopted party, is it possible that could help him with at least a piece of appealing to independents . Maybe at the extent of losing some republicans. Ken goldstein it depends what you mean by independents also. This is a big squishy concept. Many of you are involved in politics and no that the true number of independents is probably like 10 of the most, not the 30 or 35 that you see in most polls. So maybe it swings some of those disaffected republicans who are Tea Party Folks who dont want to say they are republicans, so they fall into the independent category. But at the end of the day, thats not the path to 270, thats not a path to 50 plus one. Mark halperin is the strategy begun at the debate and according to our colleague josh green, going to continue today of highlighting bill clintons personal life something that can allow them to consolidate support amongst republicans . To get that piece of it done . Ken goldstein i think thats a possibility. Weve not had a lot of public polling. And if i can get to your phone, i can see the text you have about the internal polling. So you are going to move that away. [laughter] Ken Goldstein we dont have a lot of public polling. Trump is still getting to support you see these stillnes trump is getting massive republican support. It is not high. It is the 70s rather than the high 80s, and that matters. So i think the continued focus on the clintons gets him that republican support back up to the high 80s. He needs that to be in the 90s. He needed to turn out to be high, and he needs to be winning independents. Theres been a lot of this analysis. Everyone became an expert on white people in the last month, especially like white people in pennsylvania. No one here has ever been to western pennsylvania unless you were driving through the driving through. Everyone became an expert on white people in western pennsylvania. Theres not enough of them, is the truth. When you talk about missing white voters in places like ohio, michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, there are missing white voters. The problem is for republicans is they are mostly dead. They are missing white voters from 10, 20 years ago. Didnts not enough that turn out that will turnout in the president ial election. Mark halperin lets talk about the mystery of the Republican Partys place with the electorate. A lot of hand wringing if they lose the president ial. They will have lost the popular vote in six out of seven, and yet lots of states have , republican governors including a lot of blue states. They control both chambers of congress, they control lots of state legislatures. Take wisconsin a state you know , well. How can a state that elects scott walker discover three times basically a very conservative guy with policies that are opposed by labor unions and lots of groups on the left, how could that state be an impossibility for the Republican Party at the residential level . President ial level . Ken goldstein thats a really interesting question. Not that your other ones were not as well. Mark halperin up my game. Ken goldstein even in high turnout state like wisconsin, you have a million more people voting in a president ial Election Year than a midterm Election Year. I think its understudied by nerds like me is the difference between the composition of a midterm electorate and a president ial election electric. Remember my big brilliant political science, democrats vote for democrats, republicans over a couple cans . Republican . 7 , 8 ts have a 6 , advantage in president ial Election Year nationally and in a state like wisconsin republicans, even republicans have a percentage point advantage. So the republicans have lots to figure out at the president ial level, but at the midterm level, democrats need to figure out how to get those drop off voters. Young people, nonwhite out to the polls, or you will continue to see republican state legislatures, republican governors which also have an impact on the u. S. Congress because they are the ones drawing the lines for the Congressional Elections as well. Mark halperin right. Tell me what you think Donald Trumps floor and ceiling and in the popular vote are right now. Ken goldstein i think Mark Halperin the fourway popular vote. Ken goldstein i think the floor is 37, 38, and the ceiling is 42, 43. A very narrow range. Mark halperin so 43 he cant , win basically what youre telling us. Ken goldstein i think if you have i think hillary wins by five. Mark halperin if he gets down to 37, does that mean the republicans lose the house or not necessarily . Ken goldstein when things go crazy people talk about theres got to be a wave or not a wave and to talk about the way wave too early. When these things happen, mark and i first met at abc many, many years ago. I think we met in a midterm election. When crazy things start happening is when it is the last weekend, and you are like that , race is competitive. So i think it would be difficult for the democrats to take control of congress, but if you see a complete explosion, weve already had explosions, i will not say complete explosion of the Trump Campaign, it may bring some seats into play. But whats been interesting is the republicans are holding on in some of these senate seats. I would not have thought i would have a conversation with you today where, i cannot imagine ron johnson wins in wisconsin but Charles Franklin has a dust , bowl, within two. Mark halperin our pool today shows donald trump losing badly, double digits in pennsylvania, and yet pat toomey is within the margin of error as well. Ken goldstein exactly. Mark halperin take a minute to explain how that could be. At a time when people say there is not ticket splitting, theres ticket splitting. Ken goldstein at the time where theres not ticket splitting, theres ticket splitting. Mark halperin and then tweak that. Ken goldstein and republicans vote for republicans. Listen, if i was the republican , and i think what you will see in ron johnson, he will basically start airing ads, and people will start airing ads on his behalf saying going to lose the presidency. If you want to have a check on Hillary Clinton, you need to vote for me. Either way because i cannot talk about ads. I had written off wisconsin for ron johnson. He had close to a hundred thousand dollars i have not looked at the poll, that they must have had a poll that was consistent with what charles was saying. Mark halperin we scratched the surface but thats all were , going to get to do today. Thanks. Ken goldstein. [applause] so we are going to move on. We are going to talk about some policy and some economics, and our first person who is going to join me up here is Peter Navarro. He is a business professor at the university of californiairvine and economic trumpsto donald president ial campaign. How are you . Thanks for coming. Im going to start off by asking you about the news but on this level. You are a guy that cares about ideas. You support a candidate do you who you think will be the best president. When you see stories like weve seen lastly, allocations, how does that make you feel . Peter navarro i love the headline of the post today. Did you read that yet . Mark halperin which story . Peter navarro emails, wikileaks. I dont how you can start a conversation about whats going on without the bigger story of the wikileaks. We are going to see a constant stream of emails that are going to basically undress Hillary Clinton before the voters of this country and exposure as a expose her as a corrupt and incompetent official who is micromanaged by people inside her organization. And wikileaks are beautiful. Let me give an example, because we are going to talk about the economy today. One of the things in economy is trade. The 2012 south korean deal, this was all hillarys baby. She went around asia as secretary of state promising the American People that that deal was going to create 70,000 new jobs. The Peterson Institute by the way was part of the think tank apparatus that gave her the analytics for that. Ok . What do we know now . We know that deal cost 95,000 jobs, mostly in the swing states of ohio, indiana, illinois. Our exports did not move a bit. That needle did not move to South Carolina south korea, but our imports would off the chart. We doubled our deal with south korea and wikileaks, this is beautiful. Its like weve got John Podestas emails, right, and her foreignpolicy advisor is warning her not to touch the south korean deal in public because it would quote drive them nuts, right . And this is whats going on at least from the Trump Campaign looking at that. Its corruption versus allegations, and youve got to talk about it. And the Peterson Institute i love being here really, because the Peterson Institute has been the leading think tank on globalization, and they have been wrong every time, before they were even the Peterson Institute. There were economists who told us nafta was going to give us 200,000 new jobs. Right . What did we do . We lost 850,000 jobs at our and our deficit with mexico went from zero to 60 billion a year. The Peterson Institute told us that china going into the wto was going to the last 15 years our average and Median Household Income has increased by what . Zero. And our growth rate has gone from 3. 5 which we entertained from 19472001, the 1. 9 present 1. 9 . That is 1. 2 million jobs you dont create. You do that for 15 years, youre in trouble. Now the Peterson Institute is telling us that Transpacific Partnership is going to provide us the same kind of goodies for the American People. We are not buying this at the Trump Campaign. The American People are not buying it and the swing states are not buying it. And emails are really revealing about this. This will thing about how Hillary Clinton speaks, ok, lets suppose you folks are donors come your corporate donors and on Hillary Clinton. Im telling you i am for the tpp and im telling you im for keeping the regulations so they will not hurt you do and then i go out on the stump and until people just the opposite. That public force versus the private voice. Its in the wikileaks. I was in i was debating Austan Goolsbee in springfield ohio two weeks ago. He was obamas advisor and he will be hillarys advisor. In 2008 when obama was running against hillary, he went to cleveland and gave a speech promising that he would repeal nafta. He promised he would repeal nafta. Does that sound familiar . Thats what donald trump says hes going to do, right . At the same time Austan Goolsbee was sneaking into the canadian consulate in chicago telling the canadians that dont worry, we got you covered. Thats just maneuvering. Im not being facetious, but i want to bring about darfur is grave and move on to some of things he just appeared someone is dedicating a lot of time helping donald trump get elected how did you waking up to reduce other headlines about allegations . If you want to talk to you want to talk about those things . Weve got to bill clinton who abuse in terms, who raped women, and the woman basically who enable that and punished women. If women in america want to vote for the clinton team, thats what youve got the what do we have with donald trump . Weve got words and weve got false allegations. Do we want to go down this road bloomberg . I would rather talk about the economy. One question and had responded you say they are false allegations. Im here to talk of economics. Look, we want to have an election about the issues. Lets talk about the economy. Lets talk about foreign policy. Immigration, health care. But every time i come to places like this are good on the radio or tv its like theyre asking the questions that are outside my later im going to stay in my lane and tell you we go over all those quotes. Donald trump is talked about trade quite a bit but he said he is for trade agreements. Tell me if he got to penetrate agreements he would want, passed and signed, explain how quickly and in what ways that would affect Economic Growth in this country, how that would work our mission is to get back to 3. 5 growth rate we did that for five decades. How much of that would be simply through trade . Probably about half, half of that. A fairly detailed conservatively estimate report, we went through the benefits of to growth from tax cuts, reduced regulation, modest, and trade. And have would be trade speak with the same roughly, yeah. But heres the problem. When you ask me that question what we all do in this world, particularly the analytics is we sidle stuff. Its like lets look at tax policy, lets look at energy policy. Think about the synergies and interaction. On tax policy he cuts the Corporate Tax from 35 , the highest in the world among developing countries, down 15 . What does that due to the trade equation . What it does is it changes the incentives to afford and gm to stay in michigan rather than go to michigan under in mexico. It increases nonresidential fixed investment which moves the growth rate but if you also have your Production Facility in michigan, you also are selling into the American Market which helps your trade deficit rather than going to mexico and some back into the American Market. When you say which of these, which parts of growth, its synergy speak what country and time period pursue the tiger trade policy that led to faster growth speak with let me show you how this would work. Lets do the numbers but if you think about who we have trade deficits with its a relatively small band of country. Germany, japan, south korea, china, mexico. Now, the approach, the trump strategy takes it to recognize first of all the problems we have, the reason that deficits with each of those countries is different. China is im going to answer question or chinas problem, mexico is a trade deal problem, rules of origin. What we want to do surgically is negotiate bilaterally with each of these countries and say look, for example, germany, japan, south korea, by a little bit more of our petroleum products. That will help us. Use our Bargaining Power tickets can like when youre a big business and youve got small vendors, you negotiate better. Thats the whole thing. We are cutting back trade deals and the think tanks telling us they a good deals and then we wind up getting what we got pursued a strategy and they all do. If you look, look, europe has got trouble. They grow slower than we do so you cant talk in absolute terms but you got to talk in relative terms. In europe its overregulated. They have nowhere near the Energy Resources we have. They have what we call in economics and or potential output in a lower structural growth rate. The problem is we are underperforming. Every country out there besides us which is taking advantage of our markets is engaging in a mercantilist state run kind of approach to reducing their trade deficit and selling products to cause. We are not doing that. We are just saying, and into our markets and its ok. We have a president whose Approval Ratings are in the 50s, the mid 50s remarkable, isnt . With the worst economy since world war ii. He looked out the trump economic proposals to everything youre talking about on trade, energy, the affordable car Affordable Care act a bad idea to talk about how donald trump if elected would work with 40 plus democrats in the senate and Public Opinions to make those things are reality. I think he would be great at that. Thats the art of the deal. Lets think about what the obama and clinton administrations have offered us. Really she makes no bones about this on the stump. Shes going to raise taxes. No economic textbook tells you that could help us grow. Shes going to continue with the increase in regulation that the Obama Administration has done, particularly on energy. Nobody tells you that stimulative. They are responsible, obama led for the tpp just like clinton did, democrat against labor for china into the world trade organization. I dont know what their game is. What i do know is it took us over 230 years to run up a debt of 10 trillion. It took barack obama eight years to double that. Its a misdiagnosis. Its the idea that whenever we have a problem we can solve this through a keynesian stimulus. What do they do . They ran the fiscal seems to imply that the Federal Reserve Balance Sheet by printing a bunch of money and that is not working to the reason is they misdiagnosed the structural problem associate with sending our factories and investment offshore and running massive trade deficits that but arithmetic and definition drag us down. Should the transit have a federal system, a policy in place that has universal Health Coverage . I dont think so. Now. Look, the trump plan, and thats my opinion. Trump, what donald trump is almost is to get rid of obamacare. Obamacare, barack obama was a child when you get obamacare for for this reason that there were two things. Lets go back to that debate. They were two things he had to accomplish in that mission. Coverage and Cost Containment. The hardwon was Cost Containment. The easy one was coverage. Just wave a wand and say let it be done. He waved that want and select be done. He didnt do with Cost Containment and now the whole thing is imploding. The people were getting hurt worse by the thirtysomethings and the late twentysomethings who are caught in the advice. Lets make no mistake about that. That was bad policy and bad politics. Democracy does have universal coverage. What is the right goal regarding coverage for the federal government . Not my lane. I can tell you this. Obamacare is gone and we will start over because thats not working. By the way, when canada, when canadians need good care, they come across the border, right . When they need good care can they come across the border. So if donald trump as the Republican House and say he has a Republican Senate if elected, what the realistic deficit reduction goal over the first thats a great question. One of the problems that we have in the analytics of all this is that all these think tanks out there that are hostile to us, just look at the tax cuts. We have very positive offsets. If you got big deficits the way washington things, here i am, is if your a democrat its raise taxes, if the republican its cut spending. What if you increase your growth rate by just one point or you soar. Thats what were going to do. Lets talk macro numbers. He takes office if he wins in january 2017. What you would we have 3. 5 growth . Cop a plea by the end of u2. We want to eliminate probably by the end of the second year. Thats doable with good deals. Day one, moratorium on all new regulations that dont threaten Public Health and safety are not congressionally mandated. And we have all agencies do a review and try to cut by 10 . We are not going to suppress a coal, oil and Natural Gas Industry anymore. Book, we are going to have a plan that grows and be revenue neutral over 10 years as Peter Navarro think about this. It will be on a much larger gdp. So the effective deficit goes down dramatically. We want to grow in a revenue neutral way, create 25 million jobs and get things going. Whats the alternative here . This,o mistake about everyone in this room, the best you will do with Hillary Clinton is 2 and probably worse. Pastes no way you go that without raising taxes, regulation, oil, natural gas and writing trade deals like south korea. Did regarding fiscal policy and economics you think its worth copying to bring down the deficit . The clinton years were last in the most inventive explosion of technological innovation that weve ever seen since the invention of the steam engine. Is your golden years and everybody remembers them fondly. If you got out of the stock market, you can did. That had little to do with anything the government did. Theres a big debate on that and economics teacher. I go through this in my courses and theres a big debate about whether Herbert Walker bush actually said at the clinton recovery by resisting the keynesian call to stimulus or not. You can probably give credit to both of those administrations for what happened. The real credit doesnt go to them. It goes to technology. Make no mistake about what happened in those eight years. It was remarkable. We dont attribute to anything in terms of policy. What i would attribute to bill clinton nospace. He made the worst decision of any american president in his tree on the economy when he pushed for china to get into the world trade organization. Our world changed after that and you can look at the data. 3. 5 growth since china came in with 300 billion new workers over the 15 year period. Dumping, cheating, its been difficult. Whatever you want to attribute to bill clinton in the 90s, 10 times over. I think that the best president weve had in terms of Economic Growth is reckoned. If you look at what happened with reagan. The per reagan is interesting. Reagan came into office and heres a horrible situation in the 70s for some of us in this rumor number. Heres three through eight of the administration he was hitting on 4 growth. But again, our gdp was growing so relative to our gdp, you almost have to bring that factor into the consideration. [no audio] the good, the bad and the ugly. We get Hillary Clinton in cleveland talking to a bunch of high schools to dance the same independent movies analytics basically scores the trump then its going to create a recession in specifically named mark c d. She told back to High School Students and implied that he was a republican to give him credibility. Fact checker. Work out all over her because that is the repeated lie. A big donor to the Democratic Party and to her. Theres a credibility issue there. The Tax Policy Center is coming out with this court today as aei and the Tax Foundation says their plan looks great. Tax policy centers books back. Ideology comes into play. What they dont do and direct answer to your question. First of all they dont dynamically score the plan. Thats critical. We live in a Dynamic World in its second and one of my missions has been over the past month is to get people to do the analytics and evaluate the whole plan. If youve got tax cuts taking revenues down, ok. But if youve also got Energy Regulatory and trade reforms taking revenues up, lets look at the whole picture. Peter, thank you so much. I would say slightly different perspective as an adviser to the Clinton Campaign and former chief economist of the Vice President on budget and policy priorities. Please come up and join us. Thank you for coming. Thanks for coming. Im going to respond to what peter said. We will replace that. I was not a political statement and all. You are someone like this election to be about policy differences between the two candidates. The Clinton Campaign says you shouldnt talk about personal things. It should be about policy. They spent a fair amount of time would you say both campaigns are guilty but not. Both campaigns are actually talking more about policy in the last debate policies came up with the name id expect to but i do think that temperament are relevant and particularly issues that is germane in this campaign when trump has really elevated this issue that its not so much what i would call the policy framework changes in equality, changes in globalization, changes in Bargaining Power and unions in all the policies they think about good labors anders. The middleclass income than wages. The mexican permit immigrants. It is deeply divisive end of her from a discussion i am involved with for 20 plus years as a member of the obama Economics Team was trying to intervene in that space. So that is the part that i think is kind of damaging. One other question outside your lan. Regardless of whether wikileaks obtained those evidence documented from the mouths of russia or not, is that proper for news organizations to report on them versus catastrophe desire John Podestas private emails we should report on them. Thats a hard question. Let me see. I think its really important to confirm that what you are seeing is what you really but they are telling you they are seeing. Before people release that information, they need to make sure it is true. The fact is we are learning some important stuff that people didnt want to be publicized and im not sure that is obviously a bad thing. Theyve avoided saying the fair accurate documents. The Clinton Campaign hasnt confirmed the email says britain. They shouldnt be reported on. I cant speak to the clayton campaign because i have a polyp that. They should be reported until they really know what were looking at. I have a real problem with things that have come out and get everybody wound up and turn out to be false. It is not that hard to do that sort of thing these days that that is definitely rubs me the wrong way. Youall didnt notify me there is a donald trump to eat 35 seconds ago. I thought a similar but im not going to talk about that. That is not news. The current administration. Unemployment has come down. Poverty has come down. With peter previously of Economic Growth in the importance of more robust growth to solving all the challenges come energy, entitlement reform, deficit reduction, health care in terms of trying to break the gridlock. Your estimates are that more palatable. What has gone wrong over the last eight years . Stipulating you inherited a tough situation. It has gone wrong that we are stuck at 2 or. First of all, its a great question and i will answer it. I may disagree with one sort of subtle part of that question thats very important to distinguish. In the age of income and wealth in wage inequality, with great imbalances and power in Bargaining Power, it is not a correct assumption to assume that if the economy grows quickly that the middleclass and the the poor will be better off. One of the characteristics of noninclusive growth is that too much of the gdp growth does an end run whether thats an Economic Growth for too many people in the middleclass is a spectator sport. You dont experience it yet as you correctly pointed out, that is beginning to change in ways that are really important and economically in terms of economic policy, extremely germane to the debate we are having. The games that you reference, the fact that Median Household Income grew 5 last year, 50 on middle class. By the way, this wasnt reported as much. The income of the 10th percentile or 8 . I work a lot on this issue of full employment, how it is a verb market were done for the benefit proportionally is precisely what i would rebate. When the economy begins to tighten up, this is not a rosy scenario. Everybody is fine. Everybody is far from fine. A year or two of positive growth does not make up for decades of stagnation. Dont get me wrong. But it is the very much predict both outcome of a tightening job market which delivers more outcome. Im growth you have to really look at a couple things. Economic growth is largely a function of what it is at a growth in the growth of the labor force. The growth of the labor force is following because of old people like me you are aging, retiring. One issue is a function of demographics baked in the cake. The fact productivity growth has slowed and that goes back free obama, the factor productivity growth has slowed is by far our most important economic problem. I have a set of ideas that i think would help, many of which are quite closely linked to Hillary Clintons investment agenda. I will tell you what would hurt. It would deport 7 million working people. We already have a problem with the slow growth of the labor force. People talking about marxian b. And you can impugn mark anyway you want. All he did was run transplant or a standard macroeconomic model and what he ended up with is a recession. The main reason he ended up with a recession is because he assumed trump is able to deport a significant chunk of the labor force which continues to say we want to do. Thats terrible economic policy. 75 of the country thinks her on the wrong track. Mentally from talking to people in the kidnap polling is some large amount of that is because 2 growth unevenly distributed even now people are not optimistic. The election to some extent on the democratic policies of the last eight years, is that there do ask. Isnt it fair to ask another democratic resident pursuing some different policies that a lot of continuity how we can expect Hillary Clinton to have growth rates more like 3 in 2 . It is a good question think that the constraints of the macroeconomy are such that when president ial candidates start saying i will get you three or 3. 5, you should leave the room because theres nothing there. I havent heard bill clinton say anything like that. What i have heard her say if the policies will ensure that more of the Growth Continues to go to middle and lowincome people through things like increasing minimum wage, through debtfree college, through investments in being able to balance work. And most recently, making sure that the Child Tax Credit reaches down to the very lowest poor people who are excluded from it now. This is your idea to expand the tax credit and how to start taking up 1 dollar of earnings for 3000. 45 rate right now at 15 rate. Hillary clinton will get the economy from 2 to 3 . The answer is no president has the ability to do that in a way that would convince any reasonable economist. It just doesnt work that way. We dont understand well enough the factors in productivity growth. We do understand the demographic pressures. If you ask and Hillary Clinton policies increased the growth rate, the answer is yes. Its a matter of basis points. Basis points or hundred of a percent. The main way that would occur is through investments in public is room for structure investment. More government spending. As far as i know shes not proposing any cuts in spending that i know a beard is that correct . I dont theres none that i can think of. The reduction of spending. Some increases on a variety of programs. They have some institutions. The key is that her tax an institution is a group of people. They take about 250,000. I think its so important to solve a lot of the problems. While those policies that increase, there is no specific goal in mind that would increase very much. Yeah, i dont hear Hillary Clinton saying i can get to three. You the tighter policies. He said radical policies people should be optimistic about the growth would go well. Thats not what i said. Its short of a generic question. Theres no set of policy establishes beelzebub realistic as we can. I know that there is a lot of silly talk. Peter is a friend and i agree with a lot of what he says on the trade deficit by the way. Theres a lot of really ridiculous talk about the three, 3. 5 during the primaries. Somebody said for in somebody else at six. That is complete and that are not meant economically illiterate. What is true as Hillary Clintons plan in my view can boost the productivity growth rate, which again is a good chunk of the equation. She can boost the productivity growth rate for investment in infrastructure and r d which are critical and by the way theres bipartisan support. This is sent and that might interest some of the folks in the room. If you want something that could realistically happen, the answer is clintons infrastructure plan. Let me say one other thing. Not only can Hillary Clintons plan boost the productivity side for investment in infrastructure, two areas i believe theres a strong untapped elasticity right now. But her work family balance, paid family medical leave can boost the labor supply side of the equation. Trump would kill the labor side supply of the equation. If you listen to sandy, his plan is recession. So i do believe Hillary Clinton policies to let the growth rate. Im not going to tell you its going to get to 3. 5 or 3 or whatever . It will improve. A stock with more specificity but everybody talks about the guest speaker ryan penny president clinton. This will be tax reform in infrastructure. Maybe a repatriation one time. We must be in d. C. Because her talking about repatriation at 9 30. Youre in the room. With Chuck Schumer and paul ryan and they say put on the table for us a grand bargain that involves taxes whether individual or not in infrastructure. But with that look like . Great question. I would say would be in infrastructure program. Hillary clinton talks of a 275 billion program in roads and bridges and mass transit, in broad air and, in schools which i just love this idea that our Public School in a serious investment often in energysaving areas. In 25 billion to capitalize infrastructure could be leveraged numerous times. So how do you pray for it pay for it . Some broad argument tax reform is likely to go anywhere because of the resistance to tax increases that have been so pervasive and frankly this tax reform thing becomes kind of a unicorn for me. My big distraction because everybody means Something Different by. The corporate site which you alluded to is a hot knife is something everybody agrees upon and we really could perhaps find some compromise. A good place to start is with some kind of a repatriation that was attached to a reform of international Corporate Taxation. Ive got aside a colleague of mine. This woman is like the expert in all the different flavors of repatriation. Youve got to read the latest paper on that if youre into this because it really goes through the details. The worlds foremost scholar of different types of repatriation. If you do a tax holiday, thats a lousy idea and Chuck Schumer agrees thats a lousy idea. That is the idea you allow companies to repatriate earnings in some favorable rate and is purely voluntary and thats it. Usually they wanted to be five. According to the scorekeepers, thats a big money loser because all it does is transduced corporations to do more and more deferral. So that leaves you with the compulsory repatriation. The best idea is a repatriation tied to some sort of International Tax reform. I like president obamas idea which is the repatriate at a 14 rate. At the same time you plug in a 19 minimum rate. Thats the best is not good fund deep dives. Enhancing infrastructure. Some areas where you think you and iran agree on what needs to be done. One area we robustly agree on and i think its great is expanding the earned income tax credit to reach childless adults. Something paul ryan has talked about. I remember the Campaign Marco Rubio talked about an expansion of the Child Tax Credit that looks like what weve been talking about. Paul ryan has talked about poverty and many of his ideas are orthogonal to my own good da da you sort of wanted job. Thats implicit and i know thats wrong. One day we really agree upon is that these prorefundable tax credits. Expanding is an area were in. Ill bet you paul ryan. Others may know i would think that this infrastructure i. T. Would have some appeal that we know he wants to reform the corporate side of the code. I have pretty good friends i have good republican friends, some of whom say why are we doing infrastructure . These are business people. So this is the bipartisan thing. 50 mark questions, but im a student at the clock. Jarrett, thank you very much. My pleasure. Thank you. Our last panel, our last discussion with fresh water is coming. Going to be joined now by two folks who talk more about economics. Former Deputy Director of the White House National economic eakin who is president of the American Action for them and former chief economist for the president s council of economic risers if you could both come up, please. Thank you for coming. Have a seat. Lets start with you and just tommy what you thought about the conversation so far, areas where you agree, optimistic, pessimistic. I think i will pass on that one. Not my area of expertise. They only heard part of the discussion so far, but i think i agreed with a lot of what jerry just said that i heard in terms of blood are some of the longterm drivers and policies that hold the most promise including expanding childless workers come in many whom are young adult in the labor force. A secretary clayton one, how would you answer it . Should i be thinking about economic puzzles that could win paul ryan support or should i be thinking of gainesville rejected traded to the American People and wear him down assuming he still speaker. I mean, i think theres going to be a compromise. If i were her, i think about what our good policies. Paul brand appears to be someone who cares about good policy, too. They have different views on what strengthens economy the most by trying to find Common Ground and things that are a combination of what you believe will have the strongest impact on inclusive growth with what hewitt is probably what i would advise. Or your supporter donald trump candidacy . Your preferred outcome . John mccain. [laughter] i am still there. To me this is from a truly policy point of view, to my eye, the democrat had given up on growth. Theres really nothing in that it is going to genuinely affect longterm productivity growth and the things they need to know need to move from a 2 economy to the American Economy that we deserve and can achieve. I find that very troubling. Its all a set of new entitlement programs with promises to pay for from taxing the rich and thats about it. The argument is some of the programs with this project to the d. And giving that novel not affect productivity. They make it a onetime bump in Labor Force Participation at us. Thats not going to affect longterm productivity growth. His policies are a hot mass and dont really add up in any coherent fashion. When you look at the u. S. Economy right now, the most compelling feature is unlike the postwar period of 2007 in the standard of living doubled every 35 years in the American Dream is visible to people, it is now on track to double every 75 years in the American Dream is disappeared over the horizon and theres nothing that addresses that in any deep way. Lets talk about the Affordable Care at. If youre comfortable voting front of everybody, you can close your eyes. Raise your hand if you think it is on track to control health care costs. Raise your hand. One in the back. I asked that question in almost every group i speak to him to both is actually about. The notion that controls costs. What has gone wrong but at least the perception of business people, academics, even people within the upon it and its duration is one of the two primary goals that it has. If you look back to 2010 before it was an act did, in we actually have Lower Health Care i wasnt sure i think it is naral progress. If you go back to 2010 we actually have Lower Health Care spending every day projected from that time plus we have 20 million more people covered by health insurance. More of a political question, but why is it no one to think that except for you in a handful of people in the administration . Responsiveness to it. So i think what is important or what are the real effects and so far it seems to me that we have had a very positive trend in terms of controlling healthcare costs. Yes, it would be better to control them even more but the effect of aca has apparently been very positive. As i understood it as being enacted, one way costs were going to be controlled by the payment advisory board. Members have not been named for that. It does not exist. Isnt that the fact that thats not there a problem of cost control . I dont think we have gotten to the point that thats supposed to go into effect yet but the cost control have come through payment reform in the medicare system, for example. Thats not exclusively the way to achieve costs control through the act. How would you score the Affordable Care act because now on track to do more for businesses and individuals and for government . It never was going to. There were two objectives. It was very expansion heavy, lots of check in medicaid, the changes to cover people and very light on genuine attempts to change the Delivery System. The features that were supposed to be important and theyve all been modest at best and largely failures. So thats not surprising to me because there really wasnt a genuine effort to control costs in the aca. I have to ask what you think of that answer. Do you think healthcare costs have been better since 2010 . It started to slowdown prior to 2010 and so its certainly not an acarelated phenomena. In part because of the recession . In part recession and other things. People cared about how much spending was going on. I think the sort of basic attitude in that area where people are worried about being at Financial Risks for big patient costs is real. I think we have seen some important transformation because theyre not really driven by the aca in a way that, i think, we could have cemented those things. You look at premiums its been sponsor market. Gee, they are only going 34 . The places it touched are right now disaster areas. The exchange are a mess. Medicaid programs are uneven and never a great program. So i dont think it deserves any real credit in the pace of spending. So lets say secretary clinton is president and paul ryan speaker and schumer is majority and you two are negotiators of making changes in the Affordable Care act which would likely happen in the administration. Where would be areas where you would look to on the cost side where you would look to say, here are way that is speaker ryan and a president clinton could agree, lets maybe make changes in the program. Is there any Common Ground you two would say lets start doing the numbers on x and y, what would those be, anything . Im not a healthcare expert. Im a tax expert. I could not go into the details of that. I do think shes had compelling proposals to deal with the higher out of pocket costs. Medicaid is also a issue, because of Supreme Court case there are some hold in coverage that we are not by the act but that needs to be address so those are areas that i would look at. The reason i give the answer and the basic idea whether its child care costs or out of pocket costs or healthcare costs, the strategy is get people to buy more of this stuff, that increases. Shes going to have some say in it. I agree. She is going to want to keep exchanges from melting down further and theyre in bad shape. You can do that, change the age bands to 3 to 1 and 5 to 1. Minimize grace periods. Some things you can do with margins to help prop them up and in exchange what the republicans would want is a real focus on medicare as the Delivery System reform mechanism. It pays a lot of bills in this country. People practice for medicare some as other patients. If you drive a Delivery System reform through medicare, you have a real chance. Medicare advantage are problem republicans want to focus on. Use that as a vehicle to try out different coordinated care Delivery Systems across the country. Medicare grassroots up and grassrootsup approach. They want reforms, she gets the expansions preserved. Right. Republicans as you know have been completely willing to raise any taxes over the last several years. A president clinton making a proposal on under domestic agenda involves as jared said what she says are fully paid for by raising certain taxes. If the house of representatives is still speaker ryan, wont raise any taxes. What happened to her domestic agenda . Well, so i think there are a couple of possibilities here that i would be optimistic about, one is infrastructure coupled with Business Tax Reform and there have been longstanding proposals to combine the two of those things. And including proposals by former chairman that would couple revenue raise from Business Tax Reform principally to pay for infrastructure. There are instances where republicans are voted for targeted tax increases in the context of finance and infrastructure, one would argue about whether the expiration of the highincome bush tax should be considered for or not raising taxes. Right now the Republican Party appears to be somewhat in given the president ial campaign. [laughter] they can throw the house and senate, governor of massachusetts, governor of wisconsin. [laughter] there are lots of republicans in very stable positions but at will have oh controversy that this presidency has generated. Theres question after the campaign if secretary clinton wins what kind of republican parties the Republican Party wants to be and, you know, one question is would the Republican Party begin to think about Immigration Reform again. Would they begin to think about how to attract female voters and paid leave and child care. Perhaps they wont, perhaps they will. I think these are really open questions that if secretary clinton wins will require some soul search. Do you accept the democratic that Immigration Reform, that thats good for the economy, do you accept that . Absolutely. Thats the fundamental fact is the nativeborn population in the u. S. Does not have replacement fertility n. The absence of immigration, we are japan, we shrink as a nation and we get very old. The flip side of that, everything about our future is dictated by our immigration decisions. So Immigration Reform is a real opportunity to to set the economy on a path of the future and i think republicans are very shortsided not to take that opportunity. I want to go back to gdp growth. Jared seem today say that might raise growth but 3 is not realistic. A lot of republicans believe and some republican that is you have to get 3 growth. Is that something Hillary Clinton should be thinking about or talking about or not a big area of emphasis in your her mind . I think Hillary Clinton is focused on accelerating growth and the economy and the estimates are that trumps proposals would revolt in a recession, result in significant lower growth because of immigration you think the proposal would never happen so scoring it that way is misleading . Under trump . Yeah. Yeah, i would hope that it does not happen but we are sort of confronted with what each candidate is proposing. I know shes for higher growth, but is it whether im going to get 3 growth or not, is that would that be the result of policies, is that an important result to get to or not . Absolutely. We shouldnt strive just for growth per se and a lot of the investments that shes talk about whether its in child care, whether its the expansion of the Child Tax Credit, whether its in education, are things that there is extensive evidence lead to longterm improvements, if you look at something at the taxcredit expansions. Similar expansions resulted in improvement, health outcomes, education outcomes, earning outcomes. Drive growth longterm. So you worked for senator mccain and defense spending is obviously a huge part of the budget. Where would you say the debate is within the Republican Party on whether the rhetoric of, you know, president obamas military should be met with increase defense spending or not . I think theres a lot of agreement that it there should been increased spending. The only disagreement is willingness to increase the nondefense Discretionary Spending as part of that deal. The budgetary fact is that these large entitlement spending programs, medicare, medicaid, Affordable Care act and Social Security has been steadily crushing and pushing out of the budget the nondefense discretionary, thats national security, infrastructure, education, all of the things founders saw roles of government been pushed out. Thats got to be undone. I think people recognize that. The trouble is to undo it you have to deal with the existing entitlement programs and if you look at the two president als, they are both saying, no, im not going to touch Social Security and medicare and Hillary Clinton is saying expand these things. I dont here other leaders talking about cutting entitlement programs either. No, i dont think we have seen a serious discussion about this in a couple of years but the reality is that barack obama will leave budget that if left in autopilot and that 60 is interest of previous borrowing. No one has done promised to fix it, both trump and clinton have promised not to make it worse, thats it. If secretary clinton pulls you aside during a transition, president elect, so we have all the domestic policies out there, tax policy, spending policy, where would these lead me after my first term on the deficit . What would you tell her . Whats your analysis of where would that leave the country . Basically if you include her money that she is proposed to set aside for Business Tax Reform, finance infrastructure, she does not increase the deficit whereas trump would increase it by about 5. 3 trillion. And its not increasing the deficit a good enough goal or should she add just things to try to have reduction . We are going to have deficit reaction but thus far the efforts which have been significant have been heavily weighted towards spending. A lot is aging of the demographics. I have looked at policies and looked at deficit reduction, you know, i think its important that i get some deficit reduction in my first term. I want to change my policies. What would you do to get reductions . We need to look at revenue side. She said i want more deficit, raise taxes more than youre currently proposing it . I would consider it, yes. Which ones she is not raising that you would want to raise under is that scenario . I think you could potentially go higher at the very top end. Individual . Individual . Yes. How high would be fencible to go . I cant give you exact number but i can tell you theres a recent study in the journal and literature that finds that no they found no reasonable evidence or convincing evidence that raising the rates on highincome people will actually result in real economic behavioral effects. So there are changes, for example, in the timing of realization of income, but its not clear that you actually generate a lot of distortion by raising taxes on more wealthy. Could you actually raise meaningful money for deficit reduction . Absolutely. And how high would you have to raise it . We would have to sit down with a spreadsheet. You dont see a downside as you suggested . No, i think theres always a tradeoff but at this point what we have done so far in deficit reduction has been heavily weighted on the spending side and we need to do more on revenue. Most president ial candidates ran on boilerplate antiobama notions repealing the Affordable Care act, they all had tax cuts, jeb bush a lot like Donald Trumps, marco rubio had some original ideas although they were criticized as being too activist. Did you see in the context of the president ial nomination, boy, that should be in front and center of republican tax policy now . So i thought something jared mentioned about the income tax of first single earners. Thats important for people to focus on, you know, the house agenda targeted a new strategy toward poverty. I think that has to be at the center of the Republican Party going forward. The basic reality is that for three elections in a row now the economic message has fallen, mccain, romney and now trump. Its fallen on deaf ears. People are not interested in it. They have to wake up and think of this. Its focusing on the antipoverty, a genuinely important issue and something to worry about it. I like rubio because the tax plan meant something, it wasnt a collection of things. I want growth and families. It had a set of values embedded in it. I think thats really important. Im a big fan of the House Task Force tax reform for the same reason. Its an emphasis on growth in the time we need better growth and i think they are going to have to think hard of the social safe net. The reality is this, the next president is going to have a recession. I dont know what year, we dont know how bad, the odds are they will. They have to city about buying insurance against that recession. Do you think thats inevitable . To date the structure of the economy a twopart economy, the household sector, 3 roughly in the business sector and Everything Else really not that good with the exception of those recent durable goods orders thats been the character for a while. That cant persist forever. Either the business sector has to look at household sectors saying things are ok, lets higher more rapidly, spend more money on investment or the house is going to take a look at business sector and say, oh, thats really the future and theyre going to cut back. I just dont see this kind of uneven economy growing for much stable period. President obama did inherit a very weak economy from president bush. You could turn the clock back of the Obama Administration, are there different choices he could have made to see more robust growth over the eight years . I mean, its tough with the congress that weve had. So there are certainly policies that would have increased growth even further, whether its getting proposal for the childless worker enacted or stimulus initially in response to the recession, theres a whole bunch of education investments, Child Care Investments that would stimulate the economy and promote growth in the longterm. Actually going back to your prior question that even if you just adopted secretary clintons proposals that are deficit neutral, they are expected and at least in my opinion stimulate growth. So you would end up reducing the debt in the longterm as a result of that. But the question is, you know, is there something more that president obama could have done with its congress and im not sure. I think he pushed really hard for some important priorities and got some of them enacted and some blocked by congress. In the clinton proposal, its instructed to look at evaluation. If you take out Immigration Reform. Theres no growth there. All the jobs come from Immigration Reform. Thats it. The median Family Income declines. It is not inclusive growth because of good Market Performance and underlying economics, only good because of the middle class. A big tax and transfer program. Mark how do you know that . Douglas read the report, look at the tables. Mark i assume you disagree with that . Douglas that is exactly what it says, creating 600,000 jobs over the next 83 years. Does that. Ok, that is fine. That is the policy. If you look at median Family Income on the tables, and declined. Lily i think one of the issues in general is Macro Economic estimates. They cannot include all the different factors that will drive growth. A lot of them for example do not include the positive effects of getting more people to go to college, having a Higher Quality childcare. Decreasing Labor Force Participation douglas im all for education reform, but 18 years lily were the longterm deficits douglas i am word about shortterm, no longer mark i do think everybody agrees whether tax reform happens or not, that will be a big part. Both talking about major infrastructure spending, donald trump proposing more than her. What are the best practices we have learned from the stimulus bill . How to spend it most efficiently, so youre actually building things useful for society and are not wasteful . Lily again, i am more for tax than infrastructure, so i might focus more on the aspect of how he will pay for this. And i think we have a business tax code that is broken. And we need to think about reforming both the International Side and the domestic side. But right now , we have sort of the worst of both worlds, on both sides, distorting investments, encouraging money to stay offshore, when if we had a world life system, as some have proposed, we would limit the blackout effect. The structure, a trump mcconnell beale, what do you to make it maximally efficient . Douglas do not promise to quick. That is where the great promises. It should be verboten. Do not overpromise how big a measure of gdp effect you will get, because there is infrastructure that is very valuable. I can fix the roads, commute more easily, leave later, get home sooner. My life is better , but why do the office is unchanged. Productivity is unchanged. Dont overpromise on this thing. And require a genuine Economic Impact analysis before you give any state or locality the money. There is a lot of evidence like in the kansas city reason, they require this, they have some phenomenally productive infrastructure investments. Chicago is required to do it , but not to award money. I will say no more. Mark thanks to you both. And thanks also to Ken Goldstein and navarro. Thank you for coming to the Peterson Foundation, where we can talk a little bit about twitter and a little bit about policy. Thank you all. Have a great day. [applause] announcer washington journal. Friday morning, david brody, chief Political Correspondent for cbn news, will discuss the split in the evangelical community over voting for Donald Donald trump. Then, a talk about the role millennial voters are playing in campaign 2016, and what s are driving them this cycle. Join the discussion. Tomorrow, president obama delivers remarks at a Campaign Rally for Hillary Clinton in cleveland, ohio. We will cover that life on cspan at 11 15 a. M. Eastern. Then, House Speaker paul ryan visits College Republicans in madison, wisconsin. His remarks will be live on cspan at 1 00 p. M. Eastern. Before the final debate between Hillary Clinton and donald trump, we are looking back to past residential debates. This saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, the 1984 debate between president Ronald Reagan and former Vice President walter mondale. We must understand that we are a democracy area and we are a government by the people. And when we moved, it should be for very severe and extreme reasons that serve our National Interests and end up with a stronger country behind it. Make age angoing to issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit my opponents youth and inexperience. Then, the 1988 president ial debate between george w. Bush and michael dukakis. You have a president who will work with the congress and the American People. You can bring the deficit down ,teadily, build Economic Growth build a good, strong future for america, invest in those things which we must invest in economic development, good jobs. Join me ine would appealing to the American People for the balanced Budget Amendment for the federal government. Nd the lineitem veto i would like to have that for the president , because i believe that would be extraordinarily helpful. Announcer and the 2008 debate with illinois senator barack obama and arizona senator john mccain. The situation today calls out for bipartisanship. Senator obama has never taken on the leaders of his party on a single issue. We need to reform. Its take a look at our records as well as our rhetoric. That is part of your mistrust. Pres. Obama we are going to have to make investments, but we will also have to make spending cuts. Mr. Mccain will say i am producing a whole bunch of new spending, but actually i am cutting more than i am spending so it will be a net spending cut. The key is whether we have priorities working for you. Watch past president ial debates, saturday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Listen at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on the cspan radio at. Next, a look at efforts to get millennial voters to the polls. Washington journal set down with jason moore, Vice President for city engagement with rock the vote. It is 50 minutes. Jesse moore is with us to discuss efforts to increase millennial turnout the selection. He served as Vice President of Civic Engagement at rock the vote. Remind our viewers what rock the vote is. It is a nonprofit organization. We are nonpartisan. Our job is what you just said, engage the millennial voters and turned them out. That is everything from building the technology they need to make registering and voting as easy as possible to chasing them down with reminders when it is time to register or
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.