tv Washington Journal Lauren Dawson Duncan Wood CSPAN September 19, 2018 3:53pm-4:53pm EDT
>> what does it mean to be american? that is the studentcam competition question. we asking middle school and high school students to answer it by producing a short documentary about constitutional right, national characteristic, or historic event, and explain how it is -- it defines the american experience. we are awarding $100,000 in total cash prizes including a grand prize of $5,000. this year's's deadline is genuine 20th, 2019. for more information, go try website, studentcam.org. we return to the nafta renegotiation and we are joined by experts from the wilson center, duncan wood is the director of the wilson center's mexico institute and laura dawson serves in the same role as the wilson center's canada institute.
we begin with a headline from bloomberg. it is crunch time for nafta with the u.s. and canada at odds. one of the crunch time deadlines we are working under? guest: this is a real crunch time. we have been talking about crunch time and have been nowhere near crunch time till this week. they finally got most of the issues on the table. they got a landing strip for settlement. they know where each side once to go. it is a matter of getting the political masters to sign off on that. mexico was there for several weeks. i would not be surprised if they bring mexico back in because the message from congress is this has got to be a trilateral deal. the canadians are not held to that theinterrogators americans in mexico are held to so they can rack the pot, delay but i do not think they're going to do it. host: who are you watching today
for news? i am watching the administer in charge of trade in town. she has been in town a lot. has beenecause there so much political drama and unusual issues surrounding negotiations we do not usually see. this is the real-time time when ministers have to come into town and signoff off on big decisions their negotiators do not have the authority to make on their own. host: president trump reached a bilateral deal. does mexico want to move forward with that deal without canada? guest: i think the mexican foreign minister said it well at a press conference they had after that deal was signed, which was we would like this to be a trilateral deal. we want canada to come in and use a wonderful mexican phrase: however, if we do not control makings decision
process, if canada cannot come to a bilateral deal. it has been interesting to listen to mexican policymakers say the bilateral deal is something that guarantees them access to the u.s. market. that it guarantees certainties to investors, a message they are desperate to relate. there is something else going on. that is there are deadlines in mexico that come into play. the current president leaves november.the end of the first comes in at the first of december. the mexicans would like to have this deal signed by the mexican president before he leaves office because the new president coming in, although he has expressed support by the nafta, there are political imperatives for him he may want to vacate a show and say i want this to be my ideal -- my deal.
they want to get it done before november. tradeif we are talking dollars, who needs a trilateral deal the most? who would be the biggest winner or loser if this does not happen? guest: i would say the private sector in all three countries. there is no doubt this is an existential question or mexico, but i would argue it is for the event estate in canada. mexico depends on the u.s. market. it was this desperate since 80% of exports appear. figures, iton trade allies the reality of the north american economy. this is a deeply integrated economy. laura and i have spoken about this. that is why a bilateral deal does not make sense. a bilateral deal between mexico and the united states excluding canada means you are a going the
reality of integrated production systems. host: politically, who needs a trade deal more, the united states or canada? guest: interesting. the united states, the president needs to have a modified trade deal he can claim winds on. but he can say see, it was flawed when i went in and now it is excellent. i think canada and mexico are mindful of not only having a good deal but having trophies on the self that the president can claim, i got what i set out to do and it was a tough negotiation. canada is very trade dependent on the united states. 70% of canadian exports go to the nine states.
manufacturers, really slowing down. that kind of instability is problematic. has been for quite a while. prime minister trudeau's political opposition is stepping out -- up and saying hey, you write be mishandling this. this is the first time throughout this process that permit mr. is getting domestic respect. host: if you have questions about the nafta renegotiation, give us a call. democrats: 202-748-8000 republicans: 202-748-8001 independents: 202-748-8002 special line if you are outside the united states, especially if you are from mexico or canada. 202-748-8003 is that number. you will be joining the discussion with laura dawson and duncan wood.
remind us what the wilson center is. guest: it is a nonpartisan think tank. it was created in 1968 to advance understanding of the world and u.s. relations with the world. we tried to bring the world to washington and take washington up to the world. one of the most important things we do is explain the political process in washington to folks in other countries and try to advance mutual understanding so the misunderstandings we have seen the last couple years happen less. host: dvd review think the negotiating nafta was a good idea? people have a -- for opening up a pandora's box. many of us have been saying nafta is an old lady of trade agreements. we need to come up with the nafta 2.0. this was not the way we thought it was going to happen but there
are things that will come out of it. i think a lot of us believe it was time to renegotiate. this was negotiated before anybody had internet. before we did banking online. before a lot of the things we take for granted. it is a pretty good deal for basic commodities but it did need to be updated. as duncan said, canada and mexico had said we ought to update yet -- this in the u.s. said i do not know. it could blow up. theya and mexico got what wanted, just not under conditions they would have chosen. patricia is up in washington, d.c., a democrat. caller: good morning. how are you? host: great. caller: how was this nafta agreement with mexico effective mexico -- offered to
offer to mexico regarding they areon money offering to mexico for the people to go back to their native countries? guest: that is a good question. the twole answer is things are entirely separate, at least officially. what is interesting about your question is since trump came haveoffice, the mexicans used a comprehensive negotiating strategy in the nine states. they have made a great effort to show mexico is an important part of the united states, not just an economic terms but protecting homeland security and in terms of controlling migration inflows from central america. from the trump administration to pay mexico to deal with some of the united states' immigration problems is not surprising. there is a wrinkle in the deals there and that is although the
current administration in mexico is willing to consider it, the incoming administration has already said that is not something they are interested in talking about. i think that is a deal that may not come to fruition but what i want to emphasize his mexico is a vital partner to the united states in terms of controlling migration flows. for the past six years, mexico has billions of dollars in its own infrastructure particularly with guatemala to control numbers of immigrants coming through the southern border and making their way through mexico to the u.s. border. the way that mexico does that save the united states billions of dollars and one of the things a lot of oak in mexico, particularly the government has been trying to communicate. host: tony is an independent in new york. caller: nafta is a good efforts. however, what i want to know is
and i think the american public , how muchow consideration is given to the value of labor across the three states, that is the displacement ?f labor nafta one created president not trump but not clinton president nafta, laborr displacement would be relocated, reeducated and we would not have the displacement we are faced now. guest: i will speak to that. that is a great question and i think in this nafta 2.0 we have not talked about enough -- talked enough about aber --
labor. what about labor? that was president trump's campaign statement. workers have been displaced. what are we doing? a lot of -- there is a great point to be made that labor has been displaced more by automation, more by changes in technology and by any trade agreement. the factor maine's workers still used to have jobs in the assembly line and do not. the new nafta does include labor provisions. we are waiting this week what is going to come out. we need to focus on all three countries' workforce development. we need to make sure people who are in a sector no longer viable get training they need. they need benefits so they can move from one part of the country to the other. they need education. they need daycare. we need to have those supports.
the original nafta was supposed .o have those kinds of supports you had to prove you lost your job because of a treat agreement. it is not just one cause. if somebody has lost their job, we need a program that is more comprehensive that will help put skills where they are needed. give people the new skills they need. we could all be more competitive. with if we move forward the u.s. mexico trade agreement are labor issues addressed in the bilateral deal? guest: superficially. what we have seen is there is text about guaranteeing a certain level of salary for a percentage of the content of automobiles. there are new provisions in terms of labor standards that are consistent with what was agreed to by mexico in the tpp.
but this is not a solution for the economic transformation we are experiencing. i would like to emphasize what laura said. this is a very real problem that is not going to go away. there is no point in blaming nafta but you cannot ignore the problem. something needs to be done in all countries. we focus on the united states but mexico is about to be hit hard by automation in the fourth industrial revolution, because of the kind of economy it has. the kind of manufacturing, relatively low skills. we need to focus on retraining. terms nafta 2.0, new nafta. if some trilateral deal does get done, do you think there is any way president trump cause it nafta 2.0? agreed nafta is the victim of a bad brand.
was usmc.s suggestion i think the united states marine corps would object to that. if they want to work on a better brand, go for it. i do not think anyone inside the tent is wedded to it. host: springfield, virginia, republican. to -- ii just wanted know in the u.s. we get tied up asinternal politics and someone who looks a canada from the outside, there seems to be -- there is not as much of good pleasure -- displeasure. i am wondering if you think as he continues to delay an outcome dostretch this negotiation, think canada will find themselves in a better position or a worse position to negotiate a trade deal? guest: it is a fine line.
negotiators have been clear since the beginning that this has body -- got to be a better deal when they leave them when they started. they cannot take shortcuts. been the school vice president obama -- vice principal in the room. they have a good negotiating team. there are political pressures in canada. there are economic pressures. canada does need to come to a deal shortly and if they do not do it well, it is going to be politically problematic for trudeau. host: companies pressuring to in a newda agreement, the heads of u.s. chamber of congress. the u.s. lounge table and national federation sending
letters. guest: that is the way we build things together. that is where the north american manufacturing sector works. there was a great thing in the washington post and it showed the path of alexis engine went through different plans in united states, when up to cambridge for other tooling and back to the united states to be put into the lexus. if you get rid of that one note, whether in canada or mexico, you simply disrupt the american supply chain. you make it difficult for andicans to keep their jobs for manufacturing to be as competitive as it could be. that thesurprise to me business associations are weighing in. the canadians are going to wait in harder. host: what would that look like? guest: i would like to see more americans aware of where the products come from and how much
of their jobs and livelihoods are dependent on that nafta trade. what is the number, duncan? how much u.s. content is in a mexican exports? average, 40% of the value that originated in the united states. so, frommilarly canada. when you are importing something from canada, cut off those canadian cars. not no such thing as a canadian car. not no such thing as a canadian car. that is a ford vehicle and you cannot get minivans from ford in the united states because canada makes the vans. the u.s. makes different models and mexico makes different models. happens when those manufacturers are no longer able to lose competitively in north america? they go someplace else. guest: i think there is an important point. we can forget about the consumer.
consumers save the use of dollars because of integrated money factoring systems. the conversation is developing over china and tariffs with china. we are looking at prices. we have done studies the wilson center, which looks happy between the united states, mexico and canada that has lowered rises dramatically. that allows them to have more money in their pockets, which they spent in the local economy. this is one of those things people forget about that if you dollarssave the hundred on a washing machine produced more cheaply in north america, you have $100 you can take your family out to the dinner. that is money that goes into your local economy. we have a special line for those outside the united states, 202-748-8003. for democrats,s republicans, and independence as usual.
bob come independent line. whyer: i would like to know cannotunited states, i put on the mexico book. touch with myin representative and senator in missouri. it all comes to a standstill. i have concurred. excellent shoot down there. he used the opportunity to go down there. -- cannot go down there. guest: it is a terrific question. it is a question which a lot of people who are watching will not realize are part of the reality. the movement of livestock across the border is an issue of critical economic importance to folks live down there. there are cattle that moved from
mexico into the united states to graze who suddenly moved back down to mexico. , and it's and back down to mexico. the -- the specific issue you're talking about is why can you not go down and buy livestock in mexico and bring them back united states? that is the question of agricultural regulations standards of the border. those are standards which are deeply complex and unfortunately you have seen certain interest groups that have lobbied to keep them in place to protect their markets in the united states. host: the u.s. has the top are standards at the border -- tougher standards at the border? guest: it is about regulatory complexity. spend so much time focusing on relatively small economic issues which have high media or political value.
they get headlines and not the things that make life better for the producers. i read it takes 20 pieces of paper to export account between united states and canada. there are all sorts of cattle and pigs moving back and forth. if we can reduce these regulatory costs, if we can cut the red tape for guys like, we would be better off. i did a lot of speaking in the u.s. midwest and the greenbelt this year and it breaks my heart that american farmers are bearing the brunt of these punitive tariffs. the total value of the tariffs we put on canada at this point? guest: it is changing by the day. we expect to see an auto parts tariff go on shortly. when the u.s. put the steel aluminum turks on canada, canada said that is not fair. we are not a national security threat.
of course, they pick the ones that are most politically visible. the tariffs go back to the united states from canada on agricultural products. canada has collected $400 million in tariff money they did not want to collect. they do not want this trade war and they have got this money because when the u.s. puts a tariff on another country, they retaliate and it blocks everything. the farmers are on the front lines of this. --ld people say let's what pick the washington apples? soybeans, etc.. similar to what has been happening with canada, we have seen with mexico and this goes back way before the trump administration. whenever there has been a trade dispute, mexicans are clever. they pick out the products of the most politically sensitive. it does not mean it is a voting
group united states that is powerful that they will pick folks on capitol hill and choose a -- within their congressional district and punish that because that is believed get pressure from capitol hill down to the white house. mexico has been very smart about this over the years. host: canada? i think this is a tried and tested model both countries are using. this brings back once again, was she said do not started tariff war. everybody loses from it. host: republican, good morning. caller: good morning. this is about the dumbest thing i have ever seen. obviously nafta needed to be tweaked after many years but -- theforget in 19 1970's, it detroit was building engines at a place called windsor canada which is across
the border from detroit. and that was the start of the whole thing. nuclear doro's shaped small businesses when nafta came in. now what are they doing? tariffs. tariffs are about the worst thing possibly could happen. this could not go at a worse time. we are going through a technological revolution and the industry is changing to electric cars. they are -- you know what? if i was canada, i would say forget you. i am not going to supply any parts of you. i will send them across the world. i do not have to send this to you. this is a very dumb concept of trying to fix nafta. nafta needs to be fixed by -- an not by a me back approach. guest: our communities are
integrated production, whether it is san diego, detroit, windsor. i am from ontario. people are really upset by these tariffs. canadian steelmakers supplied still for the twin towers and are told they are a national security threats. there are gas stations in michigan law longer serving canadian companies. we have been friends and brothers for so long. these tariffs and out about economics there about breaking up a relationship. it is important for all these countries and i know mexico, the mexico u.s. ties have been battered as well so i wondered if we can recover from these fractures. host: michael is in new york city. republican. caller: good morning. i have two questions i would like to ask.
the first is, when you are talking about the wilson's commission and trade understanding, what are some elements of trade understanding that has been brought back to the united states and incorporated into our system. my second question is, how are things changing now in the global trade environment? that, there were trade policies favorable to the united states and now the global trade is changing into this interconnected system. we feel a lot of the politics we had in place for a long time are antiquated as nafta showing us what is being done on a larger scale address the change in trade as a whole? let me take the second part of that question. i think they are both good
questions but the second part i find intriguing. which is, the global economy has changed so much and we still rely on the in international trade regime that was created in the aftermath of the second world war, when the united states was the dominant economic power in the world, and with the united states was trying to construct an international order that was trying to spread these and prosperity at a time when the united states when the united states was willing to make sacrifices that his partners were willing to make. i think one of the most important messages we have heard coming out of the trump administration is it is time for other countries to pay their way. to pay their fair share. this idea of reciprocity in trade agreements, in the past has been if you cut your tariffs percent come i look up my by 10%. you began at a 40% tariff level.
you are going to reduce from 40% down to 36%. 10% toarted with a reflect, i go down to 9%. that is a huge gap in the overall tariff level you are facing. now it is time for an honest and frank conversation between the greater economic powers to say should we bring our tariff levels down to the same level exactly? that kind of reciprocity. think that is a conversation we have been avoiding for a long time. that would be a positive step in the right direction. it would be something that would open up opportunities. guest: i like michael's question because that wants -- makes me want to put on my old professor had on. they were led by the united states is one of the surviving economic scholars. canada and mexico looked at the u.s. rules and said maybe we are not the rules we would have chosen but we are going to put our lot in with the winter.
we are going to align our roles with them. sayinggood example of's look at the dashboard in a european car, and then look at the dashboard in the north american car until people head to the site to see which system. most of the rules in the wto come out of u.s. commercial policy. they request laws for settling disputes for investors for movement of products, for tracking matters of dumping. what happens if you make the rules, the system works to your advantage. they have to switch when they are dealing with the u.s.. now, we have the united states absent itself, removing itself from global rulemaking. who fills that void? where do we go next? we are also looking at broader issues of security. onneed new rules on digital,
financial. i am not sure who else i trust to be that kind of global rulers later. sometimes the americans step out of bounds but at least always with a relatively -- with relatively good intentions. that is what canadians want. we are really at a loss. host: less than 25 minutes left. ? --ou want to join in, democrats: 202-748-8000 republicans: 202-748-8001 independents: 202-748-8002 202-748-8003. outside the u.s.. democrat. caller: good morning. comment thatake a when civilized countries get together to make treaties or lookinghey are usually
for a win-win situation for both parties. trump, thaty, mr. is a foreign concept to him. you have got to have a win lose and you have got to lose big. the otherely countries -- unfortunately the other countries know that. i do not know how you're going to get anytime -- any kind of viable deal. it is the same mindset as any two bit dictator. to her question, is that what happened in the u.s. mexico trade deal? host: mexico -- makes certain confessed to the united states but things are not what appear to be. and the beginning, folks particularly the mexican government have recognized this
to trump's to come away with negotiations. you need to construct a win for him and that probably means making some public statements and public commitments he can show to his voting base and the u.s. congress and say i got something out of the mexicans. one of the most important things the trump administration got from mexico was a side agreement theutomobiles, which limits total number of cars mexico consulting and estates on a yearly basis. that is put it to .4 million vehicles. that sounds as though mexico has -- now,o limit its own what, in fact is the case, mexico exports $1.8 million. a long timeto be before mexico bumps up against the barrier. they have said, well we are weiting our own exports and
have given this to trump administration. by the time we hit that barrier, probably trump is no longer going to be president. second concession they made was to this sunset clause the trump having.ration was the mexicans negotiated a great deal with the americans. you get your sunset course. is a 16 years. we get to review it. if we decide things are going great, we extend it. you go beyond anyone administration. you come up against four administrations before you rent and after. guest: negotiation's have been a three ring circus. we have had politicized issues that have taken up energy, the rules of origin and it has been a challenge to manage that. we see and the last negotiating text or fact sheet, it seems the u.s. has moved on those issues
so canada and mexico can make a deal. the other are things that will monetize the economy. things are focused on digital and making things better at the border. that is where the bread and butter is for most business people. the third ring is the greatest hits. .anada has got dairy u.s. has got the jones act, which makes it hard to ship off on the high seas. we have got things we're moving progressively moving down. --have got the highly put politicized thing. the messaging, the things that are coming out of the united states trade representative in congress seem to be a moderate track that is closer to the win-win the color is looking for. chris is an independent.
caller: thanks for taking my call. i wanted to see if your chris i. guests could touch on what is really the most important thing each of the three parties, mexico, canada and the united states, because when you listen to people talk, for instance, somebody says there is a 200% on milk. is that what is important or is it the integrated supply-chain for the u.s.? when you look at it from a dollar value perspective, what will change with this new nafta for each person and what is important? that is a challenging question because we know issues that each country has laid out to be parties in the negotiating process. chapter 11 it was cause of the original nafta. it was questions of maintaining
free movement of auto parts, the sunset clause we just talked about. you ended your question by saying, what is going to be the benefit to each of the countries? from the point of view of mexico, what they have managed to achieve by getting this --ancial deal, is they have in short insurance and the mexican economy for years to come. that was the most important thing they could get out of these negotiations. they did not want to see nafta and. they did not want to see nafta modified, damaging mexico. they have got that. they managed to get an agreement from the united states. that money will continue to flow into mexican manufacturing. investors see mexico as a viable destination for investment and it keeps mexico as part of the
integrated manufacturing system of north america. guest: we hear a lot about dairy. is dollar value of derry what 1% but it is a visible issue. it is one of those domestic support systems. that is a protectionless program. it does not distort trade too much and the u.s. has a ton of its own domestic support measures. canada is probably going to have to scale back its very protections and a lot of people would like that because it is going to reduce consumer prices for jerry. it is dollar for dollar, the most important thing for canada. it is probably accelerated process at the border, which has not been a controversial issue at all. they are really hoping to unleash that. between of that balance
highly visible issues and important issues, i would say the distance has been settlement. it is interesting. the u.s. has never lost. that investor state case there were canada and mexico trying to defend it. similarly, there are other disputes in chapter 19 and 20. one is about having a way to challenge when you think the other side is not following their own rules correctly. the other appeals mexican for dumping ninjas, voodoo, trade policy that i will not get into now. host: for viewers who want to get into it more, can you talk about the wilson center and the work you have done that is available for the public if they want to dive into these deeper. -- deeper? we produce regular
updates. we have a combined website somewhere. weekly updatesp of where the issues are, and it wilsoncenww. ter.org. host: join in the discussion for the next 15 minutes. i want to get somebody from outside the u.s. to get that discussion: 202-748-8003. catherine in st. joseph, michigan. republican. i am sitting here and listening to this this morning is thedering, what wilson's son of? one is the topic of nafta and the u.s. canada relations, where is the tie representative.
whitey had canada and mexico isn't that the u.s.? i am confused. lady froming the canada and the gentleman from mexico. where is the u.s. and all of this? catherine, we will let the viewers talk about their perspective. if you could review and will talk more about it. guest: thanks for the interest about the wilson center. not just because i work there but i believe the center is a national treasure. it was founded by congress in 1968 and dedicated to trying to explain the world to washington and washington to the world. even though you live away from washington, the great thing is we webcast most of our events you can choose him over the internet and watch what is going on. of our publications produced
are available online for free. we have a number of events so what washington journal where you can call in and ask questions. our mission is to try to help the american public understand what is happening in the world, understand u.s. relations with the world because we believe that greater understanding we have a better chance of getting positive win-win relationships in the world. on the issue of why canadians and mexicans, i have been doing trade for 25 years. i used to work at the u.s. government to the arlington diocese. had we get good agreements and had we work together? sometimes the americans are at fault but we need to focus in on this issue so that is why i have .ecome very captivated by it there are a lot of americans, it is important to them as well and
i was he just the u.s. timber of commerce, -- chamber of commerce, there are a large number of advocates that are going to tug openly about trade importance for the 90 states. host: we have had several on this program before, certainly not the first time we have talked about nafta. check out c-span.org and look at our web archive for discussions. we figured with everything happening, it would be good to bring in the director and candidates at the wilson center. john is in florida, independent. caller: good morning. we have artie had terrorists. it is called the exchange rate. canadian dollars like less than american dollars, so the tariffs are putting on the milk because it is cheaper for companies than the nine states to buy canadian milk because they are getting
23% discount. i will just make it the canadian dollar pie with the american dollar and you would not have to add because everybody would be on an equal playing field. that is the great equalizer in everything. it is not a fixed -- consistently that the canadians are $.75 to the u.s. dollar. it rises and falls and that drives manufacturers crazy. if it moves slowly, they have the opportunity to plan so sometimes when you're dollar is low, you want to sell and when you're dollar is high you want to buy more input to the equipment and they try to use that. when the u.s. does well, everybody does well. the canadian dollar comes up as well. it is when we have this kind of instability that we are in now the canadian dollar drops. you want to reduce that differential. if you want to make canadians
less attractive, finished the trade deal and stop driving them crazy. host: arlington, virginia. my for democrats. caller: i have one question based on what we have been talking about and hearing. haveexicans and u.s. concessions and revisions they have been looking for. at what point does trump have enough of his trophies and is willing to sign a deal rather than continuing with packing two valuable -- on the economic front. guest: i think president trump has the concessions he is going to be satisfied with indicates mexico. he hasn't sent a notification to the u.s. congress, citing he would like them to consider the service bilateral deal with mexico and hopefully canada will join onto the deal and the final text will have to come out at the end of this month for congress to consider.
he is already at a point where he believes his negotiators have got enough out of their counterparts to make this a deal with finding. the question is, of the canadians going to be able to give him enough? he says, all right canada can come into the deal and we can move forward and think about another part of the world and time. on behalf of everybody come the canadians want to make sure the deal is settled and 32 chapters. there are 32 chapters for this deal. make sure all of this stuff gets done. i am waiting to hear from major protagonists we always hear from in trade agreements and we cannot finish this deal until those folks are satisfied. that is intellectual property. we are starting to hear from the pharmaceutical industry on issues. we have not heard enough from labor. i think we need to -- could get more in -- labor input but we
have to hit one of these magical deadlines. we ranmportant to know out the clock on getting this still implemented last may. this is about getting a signed deal within the current congress that then gets through the markup and review with the next congress. what matter -- matter what happens, it is going to be the next congress. host: remind me what trade authority promotion is and what if congress was to see a trilateral deal instead of a bilateral deal. guest: i am going to mess this up. please do not phone. negotiation of congress delegated to the president on a time-limited basis. said theyears ago, it waffen do as many trade agreements as you can. the current nafta is covered under the former trade promotion
and the ustr is required to meet certain requirements that congress set down like it should be trilateral. host: that was -- guest: that was one of the requirements. you should talk about this from time to time. you should not just do the deal yourself. we are coming up to another deadline. under. get it covered usage be at a kick the deadline down the field if congress agrees things are going well. could be hepa deadline. could be other congressional mandates. could be the president's not want to do anything before the midterms or maybe once do something. it is anybody's guess. we seem to be in a pretty good period of productive negotiations. i would tell negotiators finish
it up because you never know. there are a number of fascinating scenarios that if the canadians do not get a trilateral deal and president trump says that is it. nafta is over. then you bring in an entirely new timeline of a six-month withdrawal process. it has to be considered by congress and everybody begins to lawyer up on this. guest:2 and do not forge\ court challenges. -- forget court challenges. host: what court does this go to? guest: this is going to take place in congress. going tocongress is debate whether the trump administration has the authority to and nafta. even if it does, they have to be the legislative process of unraveling who the latest registration around nafta, which is going to take years. similar to the travel
bans, that those bands have been connected to various courts' challenges and decisions. i think you would see something -- equally good for now. host: just a few minutes left. taking your questions, we will get to as many questions -- calls as we can. justin, independent. caller: thank you. i wonder if your guests could suggest -- discuss the sugar industry. the united states has barriers to competition with importing sugar or the alcohol we make from sugar. the administration talks about if the sugar industry was coming out with the nafta. happens to be one of the issues that has been controversial and nafta and that is because last year, mexico and the united states came to sugar exports.
the sugar industry is messed up. are efficient and effective producers. beenndustry structure has highly regulated over the years. there is a strong role played by the unions therethere is a stroy the unions there and it is not nearly as efficient of a role as it should be. there are very strong -- in the united states. one of the things we have seen is controversial between the two countries. you also need to think about sugar alternatives. , forfructose corn syrup example which is going into mexico. that is displacing sugar there. issueis a very important on a bilateral basis. it is one of the issues that the sums were able to agree upon a dust before the national negotiations picked up.
going back a year or so, when the mexican negotiators came to that deal with the united states counterpart, there was a sense of relief but perhaps we might be able to avoid the nastiness we ended up seeing over the past 12 months because we have been able to handle this issue and unfortunately it was not enough to calm things. guest: i am sure it is one of those great issues, the greatest hits it were. put it in perspective. of our trade tariff free and moves easily. we have dairy, sugar. inse are things we are put place to protect some sort of domestic interest. they are protected with a lot of lobbyist money, certain .egislator you do not see cane fields when you're driving through ohio but go further north and you will
see sugar beets. this is to protect sugarbeet industry and folks are not willing to give away the --efit, not to those exit pixie canadians. -- pesky canadians. they become more obvious when somebody says enough is enough. edward, line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. if we must have our jobs sent overseas, shouldn't the people of this country vote on whether or not that happens? if we must follow the laws of our land and enforce our laws, shouldn't we be following on what those laws are? , shouldn'tgo to wars they be in self-defense, shouldn't the people who were
just have to fight these wars vote on what wars we go to to prevent invading nations and killing our fellow human beings? host: thank you. that is an issue a lot of people have sympathy with. just in terms of having a discussion. do we want to encourage jobs to come to the united states or go overseas. i think the answer is we do not want to encourage jobs to leave the united states but we do want to make sure our economy works in the best way to possibly can so it creates as much prosperity to as many people as possible. in certain cases, it make sense to produce he things united states. in other cases it does not. the recent conversation over stilling aluminum tariffs is a great example of that. by opposing aluminum tariffs and trying to bring jobs back to the united states, which everybody
was taking would be a wonderful thing. you have raised the price of steel and aluminum products, which has impacted upon factoring which is going to cost jobs in the long-term. try to take a bigger, more posted approach to this end we needed an integrated world. we want to keep jobs in the united states. maybe that is done in a more effective way by allowing the free flow of goods and services in and out of the nine states, particularly as we see the economic transformation. guest: it is a fine balance. governments do not create jobs. governments create a more educated workforce and resilient workforce but it is the private sector that creates jobs. at the same time, as we have communities struggling with preserving the documents we have, we have the same community . do we let investment promotion trips to canada, mexico, we want
more investment? that is what creates jobs. for working people, at the same time, as we are not making cost so high and conditions are difficult. manufacturers do not want to stay in the united states. host: mark, line for republicans. go ahead. caller: i want to give a shout out to canada, which has the same natural resources, even more so than the u.s., if you count diamonds and things of that nature. likes a population florida, so they are the wealthiest people who have ever lived on the face of this earth. they live next door to the largest customer in the world, the u.s., and they are constantly crying poor us. donald trump offered, let's have more tariffs, let's have free
trade, and we cannot do that, we cannot do that. they are stupid not to take that deal because they will benefit more than anybody from it. mike, we will take your call. guest: i do not think it was a serious offer. i think it will be something but is a zero tariff offer, another element of trade is trade in services and communities love florida, you are living in a place where everybody wants to live in february. you look at canadian businesses, the investments from canadian snowbirds, canadians love to spend their money in florida and is a huge boost for the florida economy and tax base. and what the level animosity between the two countries right now, i go to canada and to see boycott the usa, do not buy
american products, enough is enough. i am afraid with this kind of animosity is doing to our long-term relationship, it will take a lot to pry canadians out of florida. they are looking for alternatives, perhaps mexico. host: we will have more on this down the road. thank you to laura dawson, duncan wood. announcer: washington journal, live every day with issues that impact do. attorney victoria tenzing will join us in the morning to comment on the nomination of brett kavanaugh, and law school professor joshua desser will talk about preventing foreign interference. watch washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on thursday morning. join the discussion.
tv is in primey time this week on c-span3. tonight on oral histories, our women and conquer series continues with congresswoman lynn woolsey and nancy johnson. thursday, historians look at the role of espionage over the past century and a half. and on friday, on reel america, the one were to film series "why we fight" about the upper go forward to to pearl harbor and the rise of -- in germany, italy and japan. watch american history tv this week in primetime on c-span3. the: stop number 41 on capitals tour takes us to springfield, illinois, located on route 66. springfield was the capital in 1937, and the city is known for being a hometown of abraham lincoln.