but i see that is a separate issue frankly. i think we are trying to use the wrong tool to give that some of those issues. what concerns me is the students organize and we have to deal with a union representative instead of the student what does that do to the application and the responsibility? i know you all feel it from your institutions -- to deal with the student-athletes with their life issues in the stuff that is not direct we involved with whatever they are doing off the field. what is that due to them? >> i think would be very disruptive. you're absolutely right congress meant that the relationship is a very individual relationship and it's not just the coach or the coaching staff. is that entire battery of support services. it's that tutor but it's also the faculty member. it's also the representative to the student athletic council. at baylor we have a fiber and

chapel c. program so there is the spiritual dimension as well so trying to channel everything into the age of 18 to 22 a set of labor law issues of wages and terms and conditions and so forth seems to be very artificial and arbitrary and not serving the ultimate interest of the individual student athlete. >> mr. muir do you have a vantage point on that? >> i think about the relationships we build with young people and it starts prior to coming to college. now it's becoming a sophomore or junior year of high school. others say when they get to the seniors and in that carries them out only for the four or five years they are on campus but we want them to have a relationship with us once they graduate and have a degree. that relationship is so important to us and yes we do have students of other issues that need to be dealt with. how do they cope and manage but they feel open and for the majority of them they are able to come to someone here in the university setting whether

faculty member at coach administrator and that's the beauty of the college environment. i think that's really important for us to keep in mind as we move forward. certainly as we know that there are many issues that need to be addressed and i think we are going to work our way to getting those done. it's always evolving evolving. crs is questioned to legal counsel here. you have heard the vantage point of people dealing with the student-athletes on things that go far beyond what happens in their actual athletic work if you want to call it work in this environment. is the end lra the right tool to deal with the issues that people seem to have with the ncaa? i will say this the ncaa -- least dark creating a bigger definition of employee it's going to affect a lot of people not just people who are governed by the ncaa so is the and lra

the right tool to do this? >> mr. byrne that's a great question one of the reasons why don't think that applies under the n lra employees have certain rights and the policies that judge starr and others have talked about based on recent decisions they would clearly violate them. the coach requires his players to be a facebook friend. the school has monitored facebook did they prohibit media interviews. recent court cases have made it clear that violates the rights of any employee whether they are in the union or not sought all 70 schools close the frame walk we are talking about violates the nlrb. it's just not the appropriate tool. >> the gentleman's time has expired. on my agenda is says we are doing closing remark so i'm going to yield to --.

>> mr. miller. >> i think this is a very important hearing. america is in the throes of celebrating on a daily basis socially and economically and anyway postel -- possible entrepreneurs and those who take risks. the list of grievances that these players presented is a list of grievances the players could've presented five or 10 years ago across the college community but they haven't been addressed. these players are put in the position of being on the edge all the time. scholarship, no scholarship, play, don't play. that's an interesting place to keep your employees to you care so much about. these players might play better if they had more certainty in their life. the ncaa doesn't let you do that as a university. we have remarkable examples of universities and programs.

you know you are not typical across-the-board in high-stakes football in this country. we know the athletes are not typical. the fact is you are graduating people but we also have clusters of athletes that go to certain classes for certain reasons that may not have, may not apply toward the graduation. they stay eligible like taking the classes. i'm not holding you responsible but we know this landscape. that is why the knight commission was set up to look at the landscape. no easy critics. out of the industry but the fact of the matter is that this landscape has changed magically. i've been in congress wanted to know that when i have seen tough issues on the academic side and they thought congress might get involved in the accreditation or what have you very often you don't meet the college president. he made the college coach and we know that the education journals

sports journals shows are constantly debating this question who is the most powerful person on campus for president or the coach? we know all hell can be paid for the mishandling of the hiring or firing up a coach. these concerns of these young men were willing to take a risk on exist on every campus. whether or not you have the security of the scholarship for how long. whether or not you will have health insurance. whether not what's going to happen with your injuries if you wish or scholarship? we have been over this. we have been over this and over this over this thread. i think i hope the first concussion hearings. this is not proper for public discussiodiscussio n. this is a sport. this is volunteer. people play until we started to

see the extent of the damage. i worked with many nfl coaches and many nfl players. we couldn't get to first base. i had coaches come and tell me the documents are here. we know what is taking place here. finally the players association went to court and we know the rest is history. that's just the beginning. the fact of the matter is the determination was made that it was better to run the organization the manner in which the way the owners wanted to run it then to deal with these issues. i imagine it could change the game. it is change the way people portrays it. they don't rerun those big hits because it obviously has a different reaction today. they know that's a damaging hit. they know there are consequences to that but before that was highlights. highlights now our liability so we can have all the credit pray to for a pulse about what could

happen with unionization. why don't we think about what could happen if you took care of the problems of the student-athletes. and not the conference. understand there has to be rules and regulations. we see arbitrary decisions made all the time by the ncaa. i remember talking to sports journalists. why are students who had nothing to do with the infraction losing their rights? if you think you're going to the nba are going to the nfl and you can't get a playoffs wherever that is focused on your performance. that's a huge punch. they're upholding their morality of a vision of football and they are going to show that they're really tough on the school? they were tough on a bunch of students who weren't there when the fracture took place pretty think there's a lot to think about on campuses. we spent a lot of time in this community with higher ed and approaches we take.

i think you are here because surely there's in this field. you are not immune from this. the list of easy classes that nobody knew existed and there but he said in happen to the professor said i'm glad it was on there. they said no, they major in eligibility. i guess the senate is going to hear from ms. william of north carolina? i don't know if she is here or not. there you are. senator rockefeller are going to hear this and you all know we have been through these panels before. you can really get unionization like the nfl like nba. you had better address the problem. this is college sports not ncaa. it's college sports and i appreciate. tested on the sidelines. i was so proud there and happen to be with the big donor of usc notre dame in los angeles.

the most exciting moment of my life. i played a lot of football but i never played at that level. so we know the influences here. we know the influences here. there are student-athletes i don't think you treat the other students like this on campus. i think somebody had better take control of the situation and most of the journals i have viewed the president is losing in this war against coaches for the say and standards on campus. mr. schwarz is right this is like that cap and comes in california. it's always calming but it never arrives. the ncaa just can't make these decisions and yet so we get these arbitrary actions against institutions and the students and in some cases against the -- against the coach now none. there's there's a lot to think about here. i've been here 40 years.

i've listened to a lot of people deny the problems and go to the symptom which is in the case in decision to join the union. a rational decision and there was no other outlet for them. i wouldn't be so concerned about whether or not they are going to vote. they are not going to go out on the field on saturday. i remember talking to bobby knight when the networks decided they needed a midweek game and now we have depending on what conference and in how many days of school you miss. you can keep defending it. i would work on changing it. thank you very much mr. chairman for this hearing. >> i thank the gentleman. and i want to thank the witnesses. a lot of expertise conquer real knowledge. appreciate everything offered. quite a diversity and

experiences and positions here. somebody who was a top level college athlete and then went on to play in the nfl has very strong feelings and opinions about these issues and as pointed out very eloquently. mr. eilers that we have problems out there is mr. miller again passionate pointed out the

that we need to address those issues we talked about and again that mr. eilers talked about so eloquently. the question is, is unionization of some sports some players in some schools the appropriate tool to get to that and? i have been very clear to say that i don't think that it is and we need to then focus on i think all of this perhaps in congress and certainly those of you in the field as it were as athletic directors and college presidents and those

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversa

>> it has real consequences for jobs here at home. a study by the peterson institute of international economics found foreign currency manipulation has already cost americans between one and $5 million jobs, ending the manipulation would reduce the trade deficit by as much as 500 billion in three years, increased annual gdp by between 300, 700 billion create 2.3, 5.8 million new jobs. it matters all law. i've long been an advocate in this fight against the type of activity that china, japan and others do when they manipulate their currency. i'm not alone. senator brown, senator stab in on this committee, graham,

sessions, collins on the other side of you have joined us. we brought our bill to the floor it would pass again with broad bipartisan support. we could take legislative action today and win. but administration after administration, including regrettably yours, as was president bush, democrat and republican, have taken the position of this issue can be better dealt with through country to country negotiation than through legislative changes. it's been 18 years since the treasury department has designated any country of currency manipulator. so i asked what vehicle do we have at our disposal to combat this type of activity which influences is wrong, if not agreements like tpp? i hope the president raised this with the japanese prime ministers last week. if he didn't do it in strong terms i hope you will do it soon. i want to make very clear, i cannot and will not support tpp agreement that does not include objective criteria to define and enforce against currency

manipulation. you wouldn't agree to play game of baseball where your team only got two strikes at bat and the other team got four. but if we enter into a tpp agreement without strong currency language, no matter what else is in it, that's exactly how we would be hamstringing ourselves. that's because currency manipulation hurts our exports to other countries and advantages their exports to us across the board, not just in an industry here or there, but every sector of the economy. any country taking this sort of action that is a testament to our nation's economy should not at the same time be granted preferential access to our markets. i guess my question is, has currency manipulation been discussed in the current negotiations on tpp? what do you think the outlook is for eating something real in the tpp bill -- forgetting something real in a tpp bill? >> thank you, senator, and thank you for your long-standing

leadership on this issue. we agree it is a critically important issue. from the start of this administration from the president on down we have been pressing china bilaterally as well as 3g 20, imf and elsewhere to move toward a more market oriented exchange rate and to allow currency misalignment to be adjusted accordingly. the treasury department as the lead on this issue and i know you've had an opportunity see secretary lew of you as well and to engage with him as well. we are continue to consult ourselves, with you, with stakeholders to determine how best to address the underlying issue. we take china, as i mentioned, from the president on down we've engaged with the chinese. in june 2010 they began to allow the currency to move again. it has moved about 18% in real terms. not fast enough, not far enough but we've made a certain degree of progress. and through the g7 and she 20 we make sure countries are focused

on -- >> my time is running out. hasn't been discussed in the tpp negotiations yet? >> not yet. >> i hope it will be because it matters a great to do all of us and i regret it hasn't been discussed yet given its level of importance. thank you, mr. chairman. my time has expired. >> senator stabenow. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman for this hearing. it's wonderful to see you again, ambassador froman, and i want to follow up on senator schumer's comments. no surprise want to ask you about currency manipulation as well. we talked extensively about that. i'm surprised it has not come up yet. i thought that this event something that was being discussed, or to emphasize again, as you know, we have 60 senators in a bipartisan way that a written a letter asking that we have an inclusion of strong and enforceable currency disciplines in all future trade.

60 members. majority members who feel very strongly about that so when you talk about trying to pass a tpp, i'm not sure how that passes given the strong feelings that people have. 230 members, 230 in the house wrote a letter also. and so senator schumer talked in general terms about this, so let me zero right in on one country, although this is certainly not about one country. we know about china, we know what's happened, issued late in the past. singapore, malaysia, korea, different places as you know talk, but let me talk about japan because we are doing specific negotiations with japan and, as you know, that, that japan has not directly intervene in the foreign exchange markets in more than two years, but the yen has depreciated significantly against the u.s. dollar. and while the depreciation

hasn't shown an impact on the number of u.s. imports of vehicles, we shared some information with me on the numbers, it does provide a massive advantage for japanese automakers. in fact, at today's exchange rate there's an estimated benefit of $5700 on every vehicle. so it's a windfall in operating profit. it may end up in advertising. it may end up in research and development. it may end up in cutting prices. it may end up in cutting prices on vehicles and other markets where u.s. automakers are directly competing with the japanese in other markets around the world. and so the reality is $5700 of vehicles, no small thing. and i guess from, you know, to add insult to injury on japan, china and everything else, even

though japan is not currently intervening, and i would ask if they are not currently intervening in exchange markets, why would they not support enforceable currency provisions in tpp? i'm not sure why they wouldn't. argue concerned about competitive trade advantage that these kind of numbers show? >> senator, yes, very much we are concerned about currency. and about making sure that there's a level playing field. it's been important to the world that japan get back on the path towards economic growth. it's the third largest economy in the world and its growing. there's a market there for our products as well. it's an important the g7 has an express to japan the importance of them pursuing domestic demand led growth and being focused on the domestic part of their economy. but it's something the treasury department which has the lead in this area directs -- we are

concerned as a mission to senator schumer this is one reason why from the top down we have made, focus on domestic demand led growth to rebalance the economy both our bilateral discussions and through the institutions like the g7 and the g20, a key part of our overall international economic policy. >> well, just to gain from this is incredibly important and let me also say that nearly two-thirds of u.s. trade deficit with japan is automotive goods as you know. we have also talked, pressure the focus on non-tariff trade barriers. this administration oversaw a highly successful restructuring of the autumn legal entity saving over a million jobs directly. we are now in a situation where we can't even get into the japanese market if you're an auto dealer in japan. you can put an american vehicle or any foreign vehicle on your business, on your car lot. as i grew up on a car lot, i

recall that. i guess, you know, in closing i would just ask that you continue very focused negotiations there as well. it does not take the place of currency, but it is incredibly important that we open up those markets as well. >> thank you, senator. as you know we both negotiated up front with japan about the phasing out of our terrace been the longest aging of any tears in tpp being backloaded which took substantial longer than the course agreement. we have a parallel negotiation ongoing about addressing nontariff barriers to japan's auto market which as you say correctly has been historically closed and we're making progress with issues like standards and distribution, along those lines. still more work to do but we're making progress. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator stabenow. senator cantwell. >> things are holding this thing. i know we've got a couple times and it's been delayed and i

certainly appreciate your focus on transparency because i think this is a keyword of our generation is to have transparency. that i probably do, this issue will differentl differently thae icollege. i like to say that before jefferson sent lewis and clark to the northwest we were already trading with china. to a region of the country looks a bit differently, probably one in three jobs are related to trait. i certainly support, for example, the reauthorization of the ex-im bank. as we approached this makes the reauthorization hopefully we don't find a bunch of consternation of people who don't want use manufacturers to export and get the help in getting those products overseas. i support the reauthorization of expanding the program for small business called step which is helping u.s. manufacturers and other small businesses export product to get access to export markets. i support the trade promotion authority. i think it is something like --

china has -- since our authority has lapsed, they have done something like nine agreements. the european union 11, japan eight, korea six. so that trade promotion authority our hands are tied. the key thing that i'm interested in, and after, is this news article about the rising middle class around the globe, to quote this article. it's going to go from 2 billion to almost 5 billion by 2030. so the world market, that is, again, to quote this article, global middle-class spending will rise from 21 trillion today the 51 trillion in 2030. most of this is outside the united states. if we don't have disagreements, then how do we get our products into these markets? and so i wondered if you could comment on that, and then comment on the point that when

you have tpa, it becomes the standard by, you know, you could do lots of individual long-term agreements. my point is, while everybody else is doing deals we are sitting here, and we know whether growth opportunity is. and if you do a tpa, it can set the standard for all these agreements. even people are very anxious about the situation, we want to set the standard of labor or environment are what have you, and tpa helps us do that. is that correct? >> yes, absolutely. i completely agree, center. to throw out another figure, right now an estimated 500 million middle-class consumers in the asia-pacific region, and that's expected to grow to 2.7 billion by 2030. and the question as we engage in tpp is who's going to serve that market? are they going to be buying made in america products or products told by somebody else? what are going to be the rules of the road for that region.

tpp is an opportunity to set certain standards for the asia-pacific and more generally throughout the international trading system. to raise labor standards, environmental standards, to ensure that the internet remains free and you don't see a vulcanized internet or national collapse. to make sure we're putting disciplines on state-owned enterprises, dealing with all the challenges of the digital economy. this is our opportunity to help, to be the table, to take leadership and to help set the rules of this vital important region. as you mentioned in tpp is intended to be a platform. right now there are 12 countries around the table but there are several more countries waiting in the wings who said they would like to join when the 12 of us reach an agreement. and decided to the high standards were able to negotiate. so gives us a chance to open market for our products which we will see a huge growth in the middlmiddle-class consumers reao buy our agricultural products, manufactured products and take our services.

at the same time to build a larger and larger platform of countries are going to sign on to high standards. that is a win-win for us to the alternative is that of the countries are out there negotiating their own agreements at our expense getting market access at our expense. a lot of other countries to put the same value on labor and environment or on protecting intellectual property or putting disciplines around the enterprises or about maintaining a free internet. that's what we are pressing for with our partners. we have a number of willing partners around the table and this is our opportunity to show leadership. >> market access is a keyword because people don't realize when you lose market share over a long period of time, and then you try to go in and compete, it's much harder. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. ambassador, thank you for your aggressive leadership on behalf of tpp and trade. i think i heard you say in your opening comments, i've written it down here, that you have met

1500 times with members of congress on trade, is that right? >> 1250 times. >> 1250, all right. of the 1250, have you met with it jordan leader, harry reid? >> i have met with the majority leader. >> and his response to any movement on trade or tpp or fast-track during this session of congress was -- >> well, i think leader reid's position on trade agreements i think is well known, but as a leader he is also worked with the administration and work on a bipartisan basis to the trade agreement -- >> did he give you any indication there was any wiggle room that we could do something like this in this session, like the chairman would like to see and everybody else would like to see? >> our view is that we are, ma we would like to see tpa move forward as and when this committee is ready to work on it and move forward. we look forward to working with

the chairman and -- >> the chairman will do a great job and so with a ranking member and all the rest of us as well. i just am worried a little bit about majority leader. i hope he can fill his glass. this glass is half-empty. make it full if you could, sir. i won't mention the vice president meeting, alleged by his presence meeting with the house and assuring members over there that people were worried about union concerns. don't worry, we're not going to have any trade bill. april 4, 44 of us wrote to you and secretary vilsack express our concerns regarding the european union's protectionist geographical indications, brand-new concept, or gis which they are insisting upon in trade negotiations under ttip. if the eu were to have its way, products such as armor john, baloney come and this is a lot of baloney, and black forest

ham, would no longer be able to label themselves that way. that's ridiculous. i am not interested in the ua dictating what we in america, i.e. the bread basket of the world, more especially kansas, cannot label its products. you responded to a letter and i appreciate that very much. i would like to hear what our negotiating position in is against view in regards to geographical indications of what assurance can you provide the members of this committee, and more especially the producers of meat and dairy and cheese that a final agreement will not prohibit these common food names. >> we share your concerns completely, senator. we have made very clear to the european union that we oppose their g.i. system, that we think it's unnecessary and that it's inappropriate for our trading agreement. august you an example. we have several parmesan

products registered here in the united states. and the eu exports billions of dollars of cheese and meats to the u.s. under these various means. we are not able to export any of our feta cheese or any of our parmesan cheese to the eu. they're able to live quite well under our system. were not able to live nearly as well under the system. we admit to we thin think the cn approach, the trademark approach, is a more appropriate. >> was their approach to their logical presentation that each is now defined or explained? >> i have not yet convinced them. we will continue to work and make the we think, name and trademark approach allows room for us to have access to each other's markets. >> you might have them read green eggs and ham, see if that might do something. i have one more question with regards to cool. many of us here who represent agriculture are waiting for a final ruling on the wto

regarding mandatory country of origin labeling, or cool. do you have any idea when we can expect final ruling? >> i will have to get back to you on that. it is still in litigation, and candid and mexico have not dropped their case. so i'll get back to you. >> if the united states were to lose the case, large sectors of our economy, a special agriculture, would be subject to retaliation from canada and mexico. are we taking any steps to prevent retaliation if it is on the cool does indeed violate our wto obligations because we believe the rule that has been developed is wto compliant. and so we have argued that at the wto and we will await the decision of the wto and then as we do in other cases we will engage with our trading partners. we firmly believe it is compliant. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator isakson is next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start out with the

question, with a comment and complement the first of all last august i was in ethiopia with you at the african union and i had 48 hours of time to watch you work with the countries on the go act and i was impressed to someone like as our representative my comment is though without tpa getting than i have little hope that we can get tpp or ttip done. i think what senator roberts said at some of the other says it is something we need to work on. this is just a comment, not the question, to try to raise the visibility let's have that debate. sherrod brown and i will have significant differences but we got to have those differences in the debate the results in the result rather than talking about across the board in terms of comments. that's my editorial comment. my two big points or questions on this. you mentioned keys in your remarks. 'tis is the important. there are 3.2 million service with jobs in the united states, insurance, financial service,

package delivery that depend on goods, goods trade in services agreement with the world. first of all, what kind of progress are we making on a tisa agreement and second of all what goals within our goals as a country effect tpp nt be a in terms of trade services? >> thank you, senator. and thank you very much her involvement and leadership on the africa issues. we look forward to working with you on the agoa. on services, we're making good progress in the tisa talks. we have countries around the table representing about 70% of the global services market. we have defined a text that is being worked out now, and virtually all the parties around the table have table offers and we're working through those offers but we are making good progress and there's a good work program ahead over the course of the next several months. services as you mentioned are a

vital part of our economy. we've export over $700 billion in services last year and, therefore, their key part of our trade negotiations, both tpp and in ttip the we are seeking market access in those negotiations for our critical services. one more thing, you mentioned express delivery and logistics. indecent we reached a wto agreement on trade this addition, the first multilateral agreement the wto has reached in its history. it's a very important agreement for reducing the cost of shipping goods around the world, help small and medium-size businesses into the global economy and it's very good for all those companies that are involved in shipping and logistics and many of our companies have active role to play in that. >> you're working at that agreement in terms of package delivery by the way indicates unborn a comprehensive agreement like tisa will be for all other types of financial services, insurance another service

products so wto has not been as successful as i would like to have seen over the last 20 years in furthering trade services agreement. this will be very, very important. class and i don't know if this is a question but i want to bring something to your attention. our youth more with a greater brazil play in? >> i am not. >> brazil is putting punitive terrorists on u.s. products in limitations on procurement of u.s. goods and services by governments in brazil to the extent they're shutting the market out. there are hundreds of u.s. companies that invested millions of dollars building facilities in brazil, they employ thousands of brazilians, build products for the world but included are products for pursue. they are being told to shut out from competition int competitioe brazilian market place. it's beginning to really hurt. it's a bad precedent for the western hemisphere. if we don't stand up for those countries that have made those investments and see to it that trade is as fair as we can make it with brazil, and other

countries will see it as an opportunity to do the same type of thing so i would like to bring it to your attention, which i have, and encourage you to get involved in the to was the world to see what we could do to ratchet up brazil's attention to wind as to what to do and their consequences treating the united states that way. >> i'm happy to follow up on the. we are looking for ways to engage with the brazilians to deepen and broaden our economic relationship. we have had a dialogue with them about the localization policies which we think creates adversaries trade and were happy to engage on this issue as well. >> the localization pulls are part of the greater brazil play by the way so i'm glad you on that. thank you very much. >> senator cardin is next. >> ambassador, always a pleasure to have you. you will not be surprised by my questions on how we are advancing on good governance in the tpp negotiations. tpp countries are a diverse group of countries, several have real challenges in good

governance, basic human rights, and in dealing with similar issues of corruption. i'm going to ask you to give us david asked that the negotiations are dealing because i know when you're dealing with trade, you have the country's attention. they are more likely to do things to improve the governance issues and anticorruption matters of when they know that it will have an impact on the willingness of a country to open up its markets. we have of course very strong anticorruption laws here, so it's difficult for our companies to be able to produce but in countries where bribery is a standard practice. anticipating that you might give me some glowing progress report, you could also respond as to whether you're willing for us to put into any tpa bill that we might be considering negotiating objectives that are strong on negotiating the rule of law,

anticorruption, and similar matters consistent with the universauniversal declaration on rights by the u.n. your comments. >> thank you, senator, and thanks for your leadership on these issues. we have worked to address the issues in tpp in the number of ways. generally on good governance through a series of transparency measures, good labor pulses, opening up processes that can otherwise be susceptible, for example, to corruption. in addition we have some specific anticorruption elements of the tpp negotiations that we're still negotiating with our partners. on issues of rights in particular, our focus has been as you and i have discussed, particularly on labor rights and focusing on the ilo core principles, forced labor, acceptable conditions of work, making sure that countries commit to those and have plans in place to achieve those. and as you say, this process is

an important process for bringing to the table countries on issues that they have previously perhaps not engaged on. i will just mention in the context of vietnam to you and i have had an opportunity to discuss the other day in the office that we are engaging with them on labor issues. it's a particularly charging set of issues for the country as you know, and we have also made clear the need for them to make progress on other human rights issues. the recently released a couple of dissidents and we are encouraging them to take further action to improve human rights situation. >> basic human rights go beyond the labor issue. labor issues are very the important to don't get me wrong, but fighting corruption, fighting for the enforcement of the rule of law, making fundamental changes in a country that we're going to be competing with to me is, needs to be, and since you did not direct response i assume that was that you don't object to a strong objectives in the negotiating

objectives to do with these issues. >> we will look forward in the context of the ledges of process to working with you on a bipartisan bill. >> let me talk about labor for the moment. start when invited. there was a time we can talk about environment. and after we said we would use sidebar agreement and that didn't work very well. we realize we needed to get into the core agreement if we're going to have something enforceable. in colombia we decided to use the labor rights action plan. i had offered and a minute that would be a part of the corporate suite to take action action if we did not follow up on the. that was not incorporated into the alumni agreement. now we have the congressional -- colombia agreement. questioning whether the columbia impact is of them in the labor action plan as it was anticipated at the time. my point is this. if we're going to make progress on environment, on labor, i

basic human rights, good governance, et cetera, continues to be part of the core agreement in order for it to be taken system. we have their attention at the agreement is executed, the once executed it's very difficult to get the type of actions we expect. >> senator, we completely agree. i think your description of the history is an important one, that 20 years ago labor and environment were afterthoughts or were sideshows, side agreements. now they are central to what we are negotiating in tpp and that's a very important development because we're able to take these labor and environmental standards that perhaps four or five countries have committed to as part of trade agreement and now have 40% of global gdp signed onto it. becomes more of a global standard. >> and let me thank you for your help on heavy truck issue in colombia, how the regulations could undermine the intent of the export of heavy trucks into colombia. appreciate your cooperation. >> senator cardin, thank you. thank you for raising human rights as a rule of law.

it's critical to trade enforcement and i look forward to working with you and, of course, ambassador. senator thune is next. >> let me at what some of my colleagues have said about encourage you to engage a sore foot as you can pick up support we get that done and get done soon. i'm concerned about reports from our agricultural producers, seed companies about china's unwillingness to approve biotech products. it's a critical market, $16 billion last year in corn, beans, but we are told that corn exports are down 85% from a year ago. and that corn shipments to beijing has caused grain companies. given the situation in china i'm wondering, i think the folks who were impacted by this would like to see this issue elevated as much as possible as much as possible. witches were utilizing existing venues such as the u.s.-china joint commission and the use of

china strategic economic dialogue to raise these issues in a forceful way with the chinese government and perhaps you could talk about other steps that ustr might taking to ensure that biotechnology concerns are consistent? >> absolutely. in fact, induce them winning of the joint commission on commerce and trade that secretary pritzker and i co-chair and secretary vilsack also purchase but it's actively in. this is one of the top issues on the agenda, talk about the biotech approval process, the need for to become regularized and more fluid and something that we will continue to work, continue to raise at the highest levels in china. we have raised with the vice premier as well as the secretary, the minister of a gold and will continue to raise it. we have opportunities in the coming months for engaging china. >> some of these venues like you is china joint, use -- economic

dialogue on those things you think would be appropriate to do that? >> absolutely. the jcct is the first one you mention and without more opportunity to that later this year. i no secretary vilsack has also been in touch with his counterpart following the visit to talk about follow up on that and some other agricultural related issues. >> hope you can keep a high priority. there are a lot of us in congress, myself included, who have been frustrated by the whole issue of not being able to get the keystone pipeline approved. it's something i believe is clearly in america's economic and national seed interest and so i've been asking some questions but you probably answered this hopefully yes and no. but is a ustr providing comments to state as part of the interagency review process for the presidential permit of the keystone xl pipeline? >> i don't believe we are. i don't think we are involved in it. >> so there's nothing your furnishing in terms of comments to the members of the committee

that's looking at this? >> i will get back to you to confirm that a don't believe were involved. >> if you are, i would be interested in knowing. there are concerns being raised about whether or not this would be any challenge to be brought under nafta, that if the canadians decided that is the ultimate rejection of the pipeline is the al, that they might be able to utilize nafta to raise trade consideration. so i would be interested -- i'm not sure if any my colleagues know what the imitations of that might be. i've talked to you about this in the past but i'm also, wanted to raise the asia of the eu's decision last year to impose 10% duty on u.s. ethanol exports. you briefly indicated that ustr is considering a challenge to the eu tariff and i wanted to comment briefly on what ustr is in the decision-making process and what american ethanol

producers might expect a decision from the administration's? >> we are continuing to look into that issue and develop our options with regard to the. we have not made any decisions. >> and i wanted to mention one other thing and that is, you heard this many times on agriculture groups about the importance of market access for agriculture to the japanese market. for those of us from farm country, making sure that tpp results significant new market access opportunities for years agriculture will be critical and i'm wondering maybe if you could elaborate on the president's discussion on the topic with japanese prime minister last week? how detector is market access negotiations following the president trip to asia? >> thank you. as you point out access to japan's market is a critical part of our overall tpp initiative. we made clear we have products

we can sell into japan and we need to address their historic barriers. we made progress in our discussions. we didn't reach an agreement but we made a milestone in terms of getting to sort out the parameters of how we would deal with market access and send more sensitive areas. we have further work to do certainly, but we think that there was enough progress there to give further momentum to the tpp negotiations overall. >> my time has expired. >> senator menendez. >> thank you, ambassador, for your service. i want to commend you as well for your outrage and your responsiveness. i can ask you to say that about administration officials but in your case, i can. i appreciate it. you are aware of my concerns

with the pharmaceutical patent violations and my concern is canada's regime. in a special report issued by the department yesterday you issued fairly strong statement about the need for improvements in both countries, which i both support and applaud. nevertheless, as we are looking at tpp and other elements, i am convinced our economy is increasingly based on innovation. i am looking for the administration to demonstrate it has a long horizon whole of government view and strategy on advancing international ip policies, one that i end of the members get behind and support. can you give me a sense of what is the administration's strategy, specifically with regards to emerging economies with ip reduction in enforcement is adequate?

>> as you know, yesterday we issued the special report. we focus on the number of problem areas. as i mentioned earlier we have been concerned about the deterioration of the innovation environment in india. we are looking forward for them to get to the election and engage with new comment on that. have a real dialogue about how they can address their legitimate public policy interest and public health, access to medicine. also respecting the intellectual property rights of innovative companies, including from the united states. similarly on canada we made clear our concerns about their utility approach to patents and will continue to engage bilaterally and have discussion with him about other ip issues but ncp we have a robust intellectual property rights agenda that enhances innovation while at the same time takes a touchstone to meet may 10, 2007, bipartisan agreement which noted

there should be temperature nation, countries depend on level of development. we are working with individual countries to ensure that they are strengthen their intellectual property rights regimes, consistent with the level of development and that were able to promote innovation and at the same time promote access to medicines. we're working individually with each country in the tpp and would very much focused on improving the overall level of intellectual property rights protection across the region, including small molecules and on biologics. >> while you are clearly at the lead of this trade, the trade value that you obviously possess in your portfolio, are there other elements for government promoting our interests in intellectual property rights, state department of commerce, other? >> we work very closely with the commerce department and the patent and trade office. we work with intellectual property rights coordinator at the white house. we work with the state department, work with health and

human services. so we work with, and the department of justice, several other agencies on interagency basis. >> on another matter bangladesh submitted their latest gsp action plan, progress report a ustr ended april. i understand it was discussed during the trade and investment cooperation a few days ago. given recent reports of union suppression in the garment sector, how realistic is the bangladeshi government self-assessment of the progress on the action plans requirement to ensure protection of unions and their members from antiunion discrimination? what is your assessment of the progress of this require that? >> we suspended it based on the labor rights and working conditions in bangladesh. we develop an action plan with them on steps that's it for them to take the our view including discussed earlier this week in

bangladesh is that they have taken some steps but there are still a lot more work to be done to we'll continue to engage with them on the remaining work that needs to be done and encourage them to take actions. >> finally, our trade policy agenda report of 2014 talked about you is a good exports to latin american and caribbean, increasing about 175% from 2003 to 13. the fastest rate of growth, export growth to any region in the world. almost 40% increase over the previous three years. on the other opportunities in latin america that we need to pursue based upon the tremendous growth of? >> i think there are further opportunities we can pursue. indeed, be a of course would not have only have asian countries at the table but also countries in latin america, mexico, peru, chile. we are all very interested in an

alliance in this region as they open up their markets to each other. there are other countries in latin america who would like to join tpp in the future. in response to senator isakson's question, we're still looking for ways to engage with brazil to deepen and broaden our economic relationship there, and to build upon the network of free trade agreement that we already have with latin america and the caribbean and deepen our relationship with them accordingly. >> senator carper is next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks for coming. i was just leaving when you introduce your wife and your family. nicety to come here and have his back. thank you. i have a number of questions. i'm going to go back to one, maybe reach out some ground but not too much i hope. as we negotiate to reduce barriers and increase the trade

and other nations, for example, japan and australia as you know, both have gone with us in the trans-pacific partnership. recently concluded a bilateral free trade agreement. colombia, mexico, peru and chile of which are also in trans-pacific partnership concluded their own agreement but as you know other partners are seeking deals with china and with europe. while many of these free trade agreements do not be as ambitious as the transpacific partnership is expected to become what do you expect the effect of so much negotiation, ma even with our own negotiating partners that do not involve our country? >> i don't think these are necessarily mutually exclusive efforts at a think as countries pursue bilateral, trilateral or other regional arrangements, if it allows them to open their

markets and utilize data can be a very positive step for. i think it does underscore, and this goes to syndicate was question, it does underscore the importance of us being at the table and as being engaged. because it would not engaged at the same time in negotiating market access and helping with her partners to establish the rules of the road going forward, they were going to be left out of the game and left on the sidelines of other people serve those markets. and while the rules of the system don't necessary reflect our interests or our values, so we want a trading system that has higher labor standards, higher environmental standards, protect and let your copyright, but disciplines of state-owned enterprises, protects the digital economy, allows for free internet and we will market access a faster growing markets in the world. we need to be at the table. we need to be engaged, we need to be showing leadership. because as you point out other countries aren't waiting for us.

they are moving ahead without us, and it's not a static situation and that's what tpp and ttip are so important because it's our way of engaging the global economy in th a way t is consistent with our interests and our values. >> good, thank you. i want to talk a little bit, i mentioned this to you before you came in, the word poultry. i've never discussed poultry with you. actually i do. but he did talk about other subjects come and we're never -- peoples of what he talks much about poultry with the trade rep? and i say we live in a state where there are more chickens per capita than any of the state in the nation. some 300 chickens per capita him and agriculture is pretty big industry in delaware. about 80% is agriculture related.

countries like canada continues to impose restrictions on our poultry products. australia, new zealand and japan are using nonscientific barriers to bring of it trade activity is products and poultry products to those countries. expanding into these countries means a whole lot more income for our poultry farmers in the u.s. and for those in larger supply chain, create more jobs here in america. i'm told that if we could actually start selling poultry in the eu and that's about a $600 million market and we would have to take all that, it would be nice to have a piece, a five and a wing in the market. as you negotiate the transatlantic investment partnership and the trans-pacific partnership, i hope opening up agriculture exports, i think senator thune

mentioned that. just take a minute or two if you would, please, to discuss what you and your team are doing to increase market access for our agriculture products. do you think we can find and accrue that opens up the poultry market in some of these agreements, and how are you preventing nations from erecting new trade barriers? >> sender, -- center, i would be disappointed if you didn't raise chickens spent a full restore a panorama, i want to get senator brown in spent let me say agriculture is a high priority in the market access discussion it is an area of high growth in our exports. both in terms of reducing tariffs and other barriers but also as you point out addressing nonscientific based barriers that affect our poultry as most other products out of certain market. both in tpp and ttip those are

high priorities. >> senator brown. sprint ambassador, thank you for working together in cooperation and the work you're doing that i want to start with a yes or no question. i have a number things a lot to talk about i'd appreciate you doing that. you responded to senator stabenow, senator schumer's questions about currency. senator stabenow pointed out stronger to of house members have insisted by the finding that letter, signed their name to only. stronger to senators have insisted that could to be part of tpp. my question, i would want you to answer this yes or no because want to get to some detailed in the weeds questions but are you prepared to risk tpp by not including meaningful currency cy provisions indiscriminate? >> i'm sorry but i can't answer that yes or no. all i can say is where containing to work, treasury

department, ourselves, on this issue in to see how best to address the underlying concern. >> you are unwilling -- i will answer that this would. do you plan to include a strong currency provisions? i know you say you're working on currency but are you planning to put in, put a provision as strong as the literacy received which have not yet answered by the way about currency? >> again we're continuing to consult with you, other members, stakeholders about how best to address the issue. >> okay. it's the best i'm going to get them all right. investor state dispute settlement. multi-national companies conduct risk assessment before including assessments of foreign countries before they invest. boston consulting group for example, provides risk management assessment that cover regulation, government, organization, culture process among others, multinational corporations can purchase private insurance policies to

mitigate risks associated with overseas investment to protect themselves. aig for example, offers a program options to address all financial exposures. u.s. overseas private investment corporation, opec offers political risk insurance to encourage u.s. investment. opec service are available in over 150 countries and support more than $200 of investment. u.s. companies going into these countries are planning for every kind of eventual problem through insurance, through risk assessment, studies, through opec's political risk coverage. so they're going into these countries, they're doing this investment in other countries with their eyes wide open. in addition we know isds, investor state dispute settlement has given big tobacco companies the ability to threaten small development nations, even the threat of a

big tobacco company and a small developing not very wealthy country has encouraged some of these countries not to pass public health and a tobacco public health laws. so we know the presence of the isds has empowered big tobacco to go into developing world and have their way. we have with all the other protections that companies have built in the private sector, so we have market-based options for these companies to protect themselves. we have u.s. opec overseas private investment corporation to protect these companies. why do we need isds to protect these companies? >> senator, underlying investor -- it's the notion that we provide here in this country both domestic and foreign investors a certain degree of protection under our court system, not discriminate in the

late. that every country around the world does. out investors have been subject in many countries around the world to discriminatory practices were ex-appropriation. there are 3300 agreements around the world on investment and the vast majority of which have some form of investor state dispute settlement the u.s. is party to 50 of those to countries all of the world have been signing agreements over the years over the last 50 years that have some degree of investor state dispute settlement. the standards vary significantly. what we're going to do is to raise the overall standards of the investor state dispute settlement machine. so provisions that would allow the frivolous cases to be dismissed, or attorneys fees to be awarded, provisions that would allow nonparties, ngos or others to purchase rate and isds by five increase. greater transparency around that. and also provisions to ensure a

government can regulate the interest of public interest health, safety and environment and not be unduly subject to those challenges. so through tpp, and i would say this is a true of labor, true of environment, true of isds, we are trying to take what is the status quo and raise standards, improve the standards and try and create new standards that can help strengthen the overall system international. >> thank you for the record, mr. chairman the opec does provide insurance for ex-appropriation. that flag is often raised i think a bit less than necessary. thank you. >> i intend to work very close with the senator from ohio on these matters as well. we are getting towards the end, ambassador froman. i want to get at the enforcement issue and then kind of recap where we are in transparency in trade promotion authority. a lot of americans when they

hear debate about a future trade agreement, the first thing that they say is, well, the people in washington, d.c., on enforcing the ones you've got. so why are we talking about new ones before we enforced the ones that we have? too often it seems that when we have a trade agreement, we honor it, our trading partners don't. the are a variety of excuses. they have they don't have the resources to do. to our political concerns. but at the end of the day we don't have the enforcement effort that is so important. in our experiences with china and korea and russia and others made clear that we lose out if we let agreements go into force before countries are able to comply with the commitments they have made. my question on enforcement issue is, outline what steps your office willing to take, ustr, to put in place a new commitment to trade enforcement.

>> we are very committed to trade enforcement and happy to talk about what further steps we can take. i've mentioned that we have brought more than nine cases, cases against china twice before. we brought the first ever case on a labor issue, guatemala and where continue to pursue that. we have created this in the agency trade enforcement center at ustr with great support from the commerce department as well as from other departments. that has allowed us to put together more complex cases than we've ever been able to put together before. we have people from all over the government, the whole of government approach, people with language resources, country expertise, domain subject knowledge and are able to put together these very complicated cases and bring them. we are very much focused and we agree with you completely that part of the deal of negotiating new agreements is to ensure that we are monitoring, implementing and enforcing our existing agreements that we are very much focused on doing that.

>> and there is no question in my mind that you all are stepping up the efforts to enforce trade laws. in particular i was pleased with the work your people did on the critical mineral issue which i think is almost a model for how to tackle a major trade enforcement issue. i just want you to know that even though i think you're stepping it up, i think there's a lot more to do. the reason why is that for those of us who have been supportive of trade, and i voted for every market opening agreement since i've been in public service, we have to better response to people who say why are you talking about new trade agreements until you have tougher enforcement of the ones that are on the books? so let's just kind of recap on a couple of issues where i think we are. on the transparency, you know, issue, and you and i went back and forth on some of the semantics of trade law. the american people are going to insist on being able to review

the tpp agreement before the president signs it, and so am i. i think the law is very much in sync with it. on the tpa issue, it just seems to me, and they think we agree on this and it just sort of recap in now, we need a tpa upgrade in order to reflect the needs of a modern trade agreement. and for the people that i have the honor to represent at home, one at a six jobs in oregon depends on international trade. the trade jobs often pay better than to a non-trade jobs. they reflect a higher level of productivity. so as we walk through these issues, some of which i now call smart track and we'll be flushing that out in the future, i just want it understood we are going to be working closely in partnership with you. i think you know that there are strong views on this committee. i happen to think we can forge a

bipartisan agreement to do trade policy right here in the united states senate. and if you would like to have the last word, we are happy to give it to you. you have been a patient person today. today has been somewhat of an orthodox they even buy senate scheduling and we appreciate your scheduling. >> thank yothank you very much. we very much look forward to working with you as the legislative process on tpa proceeds, and very much want to partner with you on the. on the transparency, our goal is to release the terms of the agreement as soon as we can. once we have an agreement we want to make sure that the terms are public as early as possible. but, of course, that means we have to reach an agreement and that's where focus is right now, in trying to reach the best possible agreement for the american people on tpp and on ttip. >> i understand that, in the reason that i focused on, i just came out of some internal

meetings at home in oregon. this comes up all the time and it reflects, i listed three '04 of what i called generational changes that we've seen in trade policy. i remember supporting those agreements in the 1990s. had a full head of hair and rugged good looks and that sort of thing. and, of course, nobody was online and expecting elected officials to give ongoing information. and when i talk about transparency, and i want to emphasize this point, nobody is talking about making available what i call proprietary information. in other words, if you're talking about coca-cola, of course you would make the secret sauce in coke, you wouldn't make that the table. that's proprietary information, but terms of a trade agreement that affect various policy issues with respect to coca-cola and other products is what i think the american people are going to insist on. and i think based on our conversation, that we're going

to be pursuing that together and being able to pursue it in a bipartisan basis. so there in record here in the senate finance committee is going to remain open until may 5. i think it again, ambassador, and look forward to working with you in the days ahead. the finance committee is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> coming up on c-span2, thatcher janet yellen testifies about the u.s. economy and federal reserve policy. than the house science hearing on the challenges and dangers of

debris in outer space. that's why that 10 a.m. eastern. later, president obama delivers remarks in san jose, california, on energy policy. live coverage here on c-span2 c. c-span snoozer book, "sundays at eight," a collection of interviews of some of the nations top storytellers. >> this country was built upon people who immigrated to this country. some of them legally, some of them illegally. in my case i came in with no documentation and the ability to get a job or an education. so what when i first came in into the united states in the late 80s, and i crossed the border between mexico and the united states, ended up coming into the san joaquin valley. there was no challenge to find a job here. ..