I will speak to you about something a little less scary than what Julian Sanchez described. The state of u. S. Trade policy is closer to the libertarian model, libertarian ideals than any other public policy. That is not because the government is not encouraging in trade policy or particularly libertarian but government encroaches a lot more and these other spheres of public lives. Were long way from the libertarian ideals in trade policy and that would be free trade. The free flow of goods and services across border without tariffs, quantitative restrictions discriminatory regulations, free flow of investment across borders in and out of the country into any industry and penny and all industries the free flow of labor in and out of the country. The moral case for free trade is compelling and people are entitled to the fruits of their labor, entitled to dispose of their property as they wish. Government interfering in those decisions, trying to tilt the balance by subsidizing domestic producers so their product are cheaper or taxing foreign producers, that is where the and fairness is and it messes up incentives. It compels people to make political decisions instead of economic ones, instead of investing in r d, production facilities, making a better mousetrap, companies are more inclined to invest in politics. Even companies that dont want anything to do with washington and having to spend money in washington because their competitors are here asking for things and demanding things so it creates this problem. Producers dont know what to produce. Dont know how to satisfy consumer demands. So i will get off the high horse. The mission of the trade center at cato our goal is to education and public policymakers about the benefits of free trade and the cost of protection. The goal is not to achieve free trade or would have lost my job along time ago. Where do we stand with respect to the goals eliminating people to the benefit of free trade, this question is is the public more aware of benefits than they were last year or five years ago or 20 years ago . The evidence is mixed, you look at poll results, many see in American Public that is grudgingly accepting of the idea of the United States needs to be engaged in the Global Economy but you also see reticence, reluctance, skepticism about the impact of trade on jobs in particular. Lets look at the political dialogue, still fairly partisan. Republicans tend to favor freer trade representing business interests, not necessarily free trade but pro trade, pro export labor and anti corporate interests, the 14 years i have been at cabo prospects for trade liberalization are greater than at any time in that span and that is ironic considering the president presiding over the state of affairs is one who never made a case for trade liberalization, and i made a defensive case, we have to engage in these trade deals. China will write all the rules and it is something we have to do raptors and something beneficial that we should do. It is a way to pitch trade. Let me digress from one minute and give you 150 years of trade policy democrats werent always the party of protection the other way around from the civil war until 1934 democrats were the party of free trade, republicans were the party of protection, the tariff is that trust, big business interests didnt want competition so they liked it. Between 1934 and nearly 90s pushed on a bipartisan basis, bipartisan consensus and trade was a good thing. After nafta democrat started opposing trade, when george w. Bush was president at the beginning it seemed unlikely the trade agenda, at internal consistent going on in the United States but after 9 11 it was a new impetus for globalization to show solidarity and the majority republicans control congress, and didnt want to incorporate the demands of the democrats which word environmental provisions. And donna bipartisan basis all the subsequent trade agreements in the early 2,000s were rarely partisan, it was fairly partisan. When obama when democrats took control of congress in 2007 there were three pending agreements in the Bush Administration with colombia, panama and south korea which were taken off track by nancy pelosi not given fasttrack treatments. The climate prevails, when president obama assumed office recapitulated to the climate, didnt attempt to push trade agreement that all and for several years these agreements would follow. In 2010 when the republicans took the house president obama decided to get these agreements through. He announced we are ramping up efforts in the Transpacific Partnership negotiations. To negotiate the deal, never made the case for why we should we doing this. The rhetoric was very defensive on trade. Last year trade Promotion Authority legislation was introduced on a bipartisan basis but harry reid said dont even think about bringing this to the floor and they didnt. La we are at the stage where we are trying to negotiate, get trade Promotion Authority for the president , there is language being written in Senate Finance ways and means, by the end of the month something will come out. I think it is a good idea. And entering into foreign treaties, it is a compact, congress is making its objectives known. And we will vote yes or no with no chance to filibuster. And the executive power grab, it is giving away its responsibility and trade Promotion Authority, foreign negotiators will not put their best offers on the table, the deal they negotiate will stand congressional scrutiny. Theres a lot of opposition to the trade agenda the Trans PacificPartnership Negotiations and also the transatlantic negotiation going on. I think i am inclined to support it because it is more economically free because theres a lot of protection baked into them. Some tariffs are phased over a long period, the Auto Industry wants 2. 5 import tariff on automobiles the Auto Industry wants to phase that out over 25 years for 0. 1 per year. There are provisions for intellectual property provisions, and the monopoly. Do we need some . It do we need more than we have under u. S. Law . And pushing for Investor Rights for Foreign Investors to go outside the u. S. Judicial system if there has been expropriation treated unfairly and their asset values declined. Likewise u. S. Companies have access to thirdparty tribunal system as well. I dont think it is necessary. I will evaluate these agreements by whether or not they are liberalizing. Those who want to nit trade in the bud by denying fasttrack trade Promotion Authority had it wrong. The other issue i want to bring to your attention is the Export Import Bank that was supposed tos last year in september, it was reauthorize to temporarily through june 30th, it is an export Credit Agency which allegedly finances exports sales that private sector banks would be unwilling to touch. If that is what it does theyre putting taxpayer resources at risk. The vendors of the bank say they are making money for the treasury, there is no risk. That is like driving home drunk and rationalizing the next day i made it home safely last night, i can do it again tomorrow. Taxpayer dollars are at risk. This has not been a big part of that debate. There are costs. Americans love exports, imports are bad, and we love exports. Exports are so good the x m bank, a wheat underwrite exports, reauthorize our charter. There are costs to other companies in the same industries that dont yet subsidies are added disadvantage. The best example, delta has been raising the roof about subsidies to boeing. Boeings customers like air india or ethiopia, subsidies from u. S. Taxpayers are subsidizing the competition of u. S. Carriers and delta has made a big deal about it but there are 50 billion of subsidies over the last seven years in manufacturing. Each of the manufacturing beneficiaries as a dancing customer and these customers are put at a disadvantage the way it dealt the is. I am hoping the bank is not reauthorize, its life is through june 30th and that is something we standing for. We wrote about it in one of the papers the 140th congress. I will stop there. Thank you. [applause] we have time for 0 some q a. Theres only one rule and that is to express your question in the form of a question. Otherwise we are ready to go. I have a question to follow up on the import export bank. They believe they want the bank reauthorize it because of green technology. They want the republicans are going to change it so weapons can be included, the things we ensure. And then people tell me they dont want that because we have those going to afghanistan, we need people and dont have enough money for the of va to take care of people we need to take care of. My question is your statement about what export import made me happy because finally Somebody Just said that other companies are hurting by doing this. The issue is to get explain to the general public. I dont think Congress Really gets it. Excellent question. I wrote a paper about those costs a few months ago and distributed up here but people are having a hard time understanding it. I am going to revise it a middle bit and make it more accessible. What i find to be the most interesting twist in this debate is the support the reauthorization is getting. They spilled tons of zinc and shouted from the rooftops about corporate welfare and supporting it and the only reason i imagine supporting it is proponents of getting rid of the bank come from the right, the tea party and the tea party, we must be against it. That motivates lot of support for reauthorization among progressives. In the back. I have a question about the procession but do you think other crazies are possible. Can you identify any indicators that will show it out of position . I am reminded of an economic forecaster, a given number, give a date, but never give both. I am 99 sure we will have another financial crisis. I wish i knew when that would be. I would short it all and make some money but i dont know where it is going to be, there are several sectors of the economy. As a general rule of thumb when you have long stretches of time when they posed inflation rate of interest is really big and paying people to make money and vast parts of the public to take money somebody is going to do something dumb with it so we had six years, negative real Interest Rate policy. That to me is distorted property markets and distorted equity markets and the bond market so when we see that unravel it is a question of when. I thought the Housing Market was going to be in 2004 so i was off by a yearandahalf. Cant say when it will be but the next five years we are going to start to see property markets equity markets level off, go down in some areas, there were some positive the banks are undercapitalized but better capitalized than they were. The risk in the Mortgage Market is pretty big but not as bad as it was. There were other areas. I dont think the sovereign debt crisis is anywhere near being solved so that is a big overhang. I dont think we have done double the fundamentals, you rarely get a financial crisis to develop expansion and asset prices and we have seen both of that in this case, and the Companies Made to remains to be seen. Recessions happen, economists havent figured them out. Whether you want to call them they are complicated, economists cannot foresee when they are going to happen if you go to january of 2008 when the cbo introduced its budget projection it did not see the recession coming that had started in december of 2007. In january of 2008 there was a rosy future of actually rising growth, 2 , 3 , economists have no idea to project future economic growth, the forecasting record is terrible because we dont totally understand how the economy works. And changes in energy markets, the upshot is we ought to be prudent with the federal budget, get deficits and debt down now while we had a chance, the economy is growing now, now is a good time to make these reforms we need to make, but what if we get into a deep recession one of we have another major and costly war . It will put the country in a terrible situation because we are starting off from a high level of debt so we ought to be prudent, dont see much of that on either side of the aisle in washington. Nothing to add, i am wondering about your talk with contingent liabilities the u. S. Government had it is increasing its deficit every year and doesnt seem to care, the federal government has the markings of sub prime, the reason why they can continue to do it is people keep lending the money. Is all based on psychology because other people the investor class thinking investors with government money that is fine to lend the money. It strikes me as the week psychology, and do you envision any situation where the investor class will stop lending money to the u. S. Government that such lower interference . A lot of the fundamentalists are worried about what you raise about psychology and the thing that concerns me about that and we learned this repeatedly is the psychology situation can change quite quickly. It will all the sudden, great confidence, we all know despite that maybe they wont. That is only one example, certainly you are in a situation where so much of the Financial System, we saw this play out in europe but it is built on things like treasury debt, if theres any problem in that sector it the Financial System itself will crater. There is deep concern there, i dont think we have addressed it in any way, some of the attraction of cheap liabilities are easier for politicians to spend money that way. You make promises, many of the rules for instance, the accounting rules, many programs are mentioned as i talked in my discussion, premiums dont cover the administrative costs, salaries were not reflected in the premiums they charge. I would end by saying the problem is the government engage is enron style accounting, hiding liabilities of the balance sheet. When theyre back on the balance sheet, it is not ready. Time for one more quick question. Any hope for a freer flow of labor from this . I have not heard about emigration from any of you. Immigration later. To i think the prospect of good . Not really. I refer you to the work at cato, has written quite a lot. The republicans are not all that willing to embrace the idea but something we must continue to push forward. I will end on an optimistic note and emphasize his work but many republicans are starting to see the political calculus that being antiimmigrant doesnt necessarily work. I am not optimistic in the short run but optimistic in the long run. Most of us recognize our parents or grandparents contributed to this country resonates with most people. As an economist i do think part of this reflects a labor market. People are more secure in their own jobs and less secured about competition in their jobs. There you have it. [applause] policy priorities for 115th congress, essays from everyone on the panel. I encourage you to take one out. Thank you for coming, i appreciate it. [inaudible conversations] the Political Landscape has changed with the 114th congress not only 43 republicans and 15 new democrats in the house and 12 new republicans and one new democrat in the senate, there are 108 women in congress including the first africanamerican republican in the house and the first veteran in the senate. Keep track in congressionalchronicle cspan. Org with lots of useful information including results and statistics about the session. Un cspan, cspan2, cspan radio and cspan. Org. David brooks, a columnist for the New York Times on writing an article for the times and the awards he gives out at the end of the year, the sydney award. And obscure literary magazines. And the idea is between christmas and new years, the idea is that is a good week to step back and not read instance of tweets, newspaper articles but to step back and have time to read something deeper and longer and to celebrate those longer pieces. I do believe magazines change history. The republic which until recent destruction was the most influential american political magazine of the 20th century really did change history, created progressivism created a voice for modern liberalism. Conservatism barely existed before the national review, gave it a voice. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern and pacific on cspan q a. Former green Party President ial candidate jill stein announced an Exploratory Committee for the 2016 president ial election saying should we use the opportunity to reach out to those neglected by the democratic and republican parties. And specializing on internal medicine and an advocate for health and environmental issues. This is 30 minutes. [applause] thank you dennis, the media, and whether they here for, what were really dedicated to and working toward. This is the wonderful time to be doing that, and thank you to you all for being here today because this is an amazing historic moment. There is a movement for democracy and justice that is sweeping plan that and people are rising azdie c1pa the d bothpbeeping plan that and people of getting us out. The fight is building against predatory mass incarceration that holds one in three africanamerican men hostage to our vast prison state. Workers are fighting for a living wage and the right to a union. Students demanding an end to college debt that has crippled the generation. Hardworking immigrants are standing up for a few main path to citizenship, not simply a three year deferral of deportation. Front line and indigenous communities are leading the resistance to toxic fossil fuels that threaten to disrupt civilization as we know it in our lifetime. The list goes on because this movement is alive and well in our communities and marks the coming of age of a new generation so it is time for a generational shift in our national generation. We have had enough of rule by the Economic Police with their cult o