when you look get china's history from the main dynasty to the presence of many of the forces in chinese history have not had to do with this profound domestic agenda, which is almost overwhelming every successful generation of chinese leaders. .. and it's not consistent with the characterization of actual

chinese i-8 here on the ground. so where do we go from here? and i will conclude on these remarks. in the centrality of this relationship, i believe both governments in the region more broadly because of the centrality of the relationship to the region to biters to build the and the rest of the world as well as the move into the unfolding decades at the new century. the china-u.s. relationship is a new narrative, a common narrative and here i don't simply speak in terms of some sort of foreign policy utopianism or some academic seminar. that is not helpful. i think you need a framework which somehow, someway with 158 es about a new type of great relationship. if you understand why president sheikh put that forward, is how

you construct a relationship, which doesn't replicate the inevitability of conflict is received in the history of great powers before. beyond that, it is basically a headline and an idea, a line. it is a sentence. if you go to chinese think tank land, as i do very often come at the actual internal conflict is very fluid indeed. so what could a possible common narrative look lakeway well, this is a very complex question. i would leave you with two or three thoughts. a common thread between china and the united states is important for the reason i just mentioned. those have narratives about each other, not a common narrative for both of them. chinese have many narratives

about the united states, most of them not publicly articulated. and the same in those directions. so why, given all of that, if possible in terms of a common narrative in the future? i think it requires that i have described most recently as a concept of constructive realism and a concept of constructive realism, which builds towards a concept of a common future. a word about each of those words. realism, if you spend enough time in this town and you have studied u.s. foreign policy in its 20th century history, this is a deeply realist foreign policy establishment. and for entirely understandable reasons. when you look at the school as it's evolved at the theoretical level, it is rich and deep and it's reflected in the behavior

of practitioners. in china, realism is called by various things, is equally apparent come equally positive with the chinese tradition of understanding foreign policy engagement and for every modern now, there's 10 people. it has all sorts of potential difficulties arising from nine of the south in terms of the expiration of mutual trust before the chances even given in the first place. but given this is such a profound reality, with conceptual hemispheres in washington and a sheen, it has to be watched. there are real and objective, continuing, conflicting interests and values between china and the united states at which the territorial issues that is mention in the eastern south china sea is about one

manifestation. the state to be accepted, closely recognized, but critically managed in a manner which concludes that allowing anyone of these matters to escalate into crisis conflict of words mutually unacceptable. that is the realist part. what is the constructive part quiet for constructive parties this. if you look at the possibility of constructing genuine public goods between china and the u.s., but bilaterally, regionally and globally, the scope is in fact the mind. i'm a strong proponent of the early conclusion for a simple reason. that is the more economies that, mashed through investment rather than just through trade, then frankly the more acceptable they become in the more the mutual interest in each other's progress with dance becomes an indelible imprint within each country.

so causing that investment treaty to come into being i think is a genuine public good because in the long-term it will transform many elements of the relationship. regionally i will touch on this concluding remarks, there is a value to be had in governments of those at the region, beginning to evolve further the existing architecture. they serve regional bully well, but there is a valuable role opening economies internally and to one another across the region. in terms of the more geopolitical and more national security related discussions, there's been some contribution by the regional foreign anything contribution by the east asia summit, but frankly this needs to be taken further. why would both countries be interested in not? i didn't didn't be shamed by the

united states wants to trip casually or for incident management into crisis conflict or war. the institution and does over a long period of time, which began to create confidence and security building measures between not just those two countries, but the other reasonable participate. and over time to begin to evolve through that head of government of regional discourse, any sense of common security rather than divided security. this does not replace the alliance structure. it supplements the alliance structure and of course international models such as the suffered by the european union are not readily applicable, but the idea and a concept in achievements, which we can attribute to the europeans must be borne in mind in this would constitute a genuine regional public for global public good of extraordinary turnaround in

china on u.s. postures and climate changes for me one of the great unwritten publisher stories of the last few years. having been a participate in the copenhagen on the into thousand nine, having not slept for two days and seeing that particular attempt to get a global climate change treaty advance in the face of much intransigence from the governments i just mention was i believe the tragedy. what is fundamentally changed since then as a 180-degree shift in chinese policy. the ability therefore for president obama and president she by making a national commitment to climate change i believe is a real element in the trust building exercise, which brings me to the final equation. first, the foundation is realist. secondly, if you like, the superstructure is constructive. what can we do in areas where

the interests are sufficiently overlapping but the values are sufficiently overlapping. the third element is over time have been a concept that you can harness the political and diplomatic capital from these areas of common cooperation, too in fact year with the underlying fundamental objective realistic problems that i refer to it via a, which constitute the constant source of friction. at present there's not a whole lot of diplomatic and political capital to draw on, but by virtue of process, which deals with teams like the investment, things like a new evolution of the region's architecture, things like lobo advances on climate change driven or the two largest in the world. but in time also on intractable questions like north korea and cybersecurity and also provides a militarism, there is a basis to construct a new element of

the evolving strategic trust between the two which provides a platform for dealing with the unresolved the challenges of the future. i conclude my remarks with how i concluded then here two years ago. duncan had this great saying about the chinese domestic reform process. what duncan said was way back in the late 70, they are going to reform this thing called china in the great openings of a new policy, economic reform opening to the outside world internationally. then it's going to be a long process. so use the analogy, which is due feel it step-by-step. i think we also need to have that concept to life in our minds about how you can possibly engineered that incremental trust building exercise between

china and the united states as well. step-by-step coming out when in fact there is a destination for the future. for chinese friends in the audience today, to talk about realism, if you talk about the constructive approach, it is a public term in the chinese context. and international public goods mean something to discourse. a common vision to frame a common conflict, but not today but not today but i figure he could then have an operational dimension put into practice by regular summitry between the two countries. i think provides us a way to navigate our way through. if we don't, then i fear that the tendency will be towards inertia, drift and drift becoming current and perhaps in a direction which nonetheless

would want to see for the future. i thank you. [laughter] >> thank you very much, mr. rudd. i would like to open the floor to some questions. if i occurred to him and i could start with one. the question is this, do you think that american or chinese economic strategy is sufficient, given the broad scope of the region that you've described to last? what advice would you have for both countries in that area quiet >> well, the wisdom of foreign policy is never provide public advice to any government. it is usually like to be unwelcome. let me make some broad observations. looking from the region now, rather from america or china and

, there's some basic metrics here. metrics, while boring are important. china as 2000, the last couple of years has become the world's largest trading power. the world's largest exporter, second-largest importer and if you were to put together trade metrics, china today is the number one trading partner of 127 different countries around the united world. depending who you believe, the world bank, the i am not for whichever journalists just wrote an interesting story and again the measures of the relative size of the chinese-american companies such as comparative pricing to market exchange rates calculations on what the price assumptions are a ppp, the chinese economy is projected by a combination of the bank, the imf or the oecd to be larger in size than the american economy,

somewhere between 2015, 2024 and 2025. the metrics are really important here. if you are looking for the region out, economics at her and china in terms of trade, and prospectively what happens at the legalization in the future, capital flows becomes a much more dominant factor in the economic reality of east asia than americans. i don't think people have quite thought that through in terms of where it will be. but if you take is your primary assumption from economic power, there is a fundamental shift occurring across the asian hemisphere. that in turn of course in terms of its trajectory goes to

questions like the sustainability of chinese growth over time, goes to questions about the pro three b. 7.5, 6.5 are the most negative projections in terms of averaging over the next decade to have to send the north of three or four. so there are whole series of assumptions, which goes to how you project. the projections by the thing in the fund and the oecd do not presume the projections. so while i am saying is the question of basic economic metrics, china is now more relevant to the economy at the economy of east asia than the united states. and that is a very thin margin at present. but as you see the investment flows unfold, you see the capital flows unfolds depending on the literary changes in beijing and will change even more profoundly. it is up to the united states to respond to that as they so choose. but that is an unfolding reality now of the world.

if you took the china trade out of the australian gdp issue, i present the china trade now would represent imports, exports about 7% of gdp. that is quite a lot of cash around the economy would've 1.6, $1.7 trillion economy. replicate across the smaller economies of asia that were at the fourth largest economy after and germany. this equation is unfolding. so part of the american responses to transpacific partnership in the diplomacy associated with that. and for which there is a chinese counter narrative as well. i will go into the probabilities of the proposals. >> open it up for one or two questions. the >> street here in the middle. thank you. >> i am on i am entrée and the

chief representative from the interstate company and it was a wonderful address. thank you so much. just taking notes from your remarks in the only thing i have a question on is in working towards this constructive realism, great term, you defined above. but it seems like -- >> seems like a well quick >> a fine obstacle, the main obstacle to working towards all those variables is that of all of the parties to the equation, only china -- only china continues to violate you think i went to intrude into the exclusive economic zones of the philippines and the denominator countries and deny that they are doing it yet i've been on business trips and i seen business trips and i seen them come into the exclusive economic zone using violence. >> i think the truth of all of

this to paraphrase an unconscious to cut the rest of the program to attend to an archive to be out of the door in a second. mike at the question. if you were to go through the analysis of the dispute from north to south, each has his own internal characteristics. the international lawyer sitting at the international court of justice on each of these to be sent with territorial blind play, i would have different resolutions on each of them and having spent some time looking at the underpinning the cookies to, concerning parasols in the intervening season that intervening season acclimatization of all seven parties, this is a highly variable fees. it's not just that we as mr. lim government have chosen to be neutral on this. there is a reason to be new show and that is that the underpinning legal cases if they came to jurisdiction are also

complex. so if we had another hour, we could go through each of these individually. that would be tiresome for people in this gathering. so both of them have an adjudication of who says he was wrong, i simply resort to the fact that china has a deliberately more activist, proactive foreign policy ejecta speed of its interest in has been for the last year or so for those who observe these things quickly and proceeds from a series of perceptions within the chinese leadership about the united states, which i sought to articulate before. there for the challenges do we do in response and that is what i have start to articulate today. i'm sure you not eternity to detect each other of each dispute. but that is not possible.

>> andrea, you mention -- >> which university? at catholic university. [inaudible] >> you mentioned the rhetoric of containment is a misnomer, a misperception of the chinese. how would you persuade the chinese that the u.s. strategic balance in asia is not a form of heart containment? it goes on to the question of the missions that can tame it. i mean, the structuring nation has existed as e-mail since the 40s and 50s. it was primarily constructed in those days as the principal reference to firstly a resurgent japan in the case of the australian alliance and not really in terms of the soviet union. so the alliance structures have long existed. there's often a long discourse of more marines going to die when. well, there used to be 1.5000

marines coming each year for three men. numbers 2.5 for each month. i would say holden extradition of the strategic talents put up by the double i double as because that is the strategic equation. it doesn't. it's kind of a normal evolution of alliance arrangements, which have multiple applications. so again, i go back to definitions of containment. it doesn't actually fit the term. there are probably other terms, which are better used in the international discourse to describe to a strategic responses, but containment is not one of them. if you are looking at the classic definition of it, as framed by the others in this town in the late 40s. >> ladies and gentlemen, please join me in yankee mr. kevin rudd. [applause]

>> good morning. -- [inaudible] i am scott miller, director of the international business program at csis and it is my pleasure to moderator first panel today, which is going to cover the economic issues that will be on the table and part of the conversation in the east asia summit and the apec leaders. it strikes me that for most of the past 25 years, international economic analysts have been able to rely on a couple of things. first, east asia and pacific economies would grow at a faster rate than the rest of the world economy, which has been true, you know, pretty consistently. there were some hiccups with the asian financial crisis in the late 90s and otherwise, but

overall there has been very solid growth. the second thing economist could count on was asian pacific economic policies tended to move very subtly and consistently towards more openness and greater economic innovation. the progress achieved if you take this long view is frankly stunning. whether you look at growth rates, but more importantly the reduction of poverty, the creation of large growing middle classes, it is one of the most remarkable performances from an economic standpoint. so there's lots that has been achieved and continues to benefit peace and security. having said that, today is not quite the same picture in my missile full text about today. today the view of east asia and the pacific in terms of economic growth is very positive.

our more numerically inclined colleagues at the street at the peterson institute yesterday helped the global economic forecast and once again, east asia and the pacific looks to demonstrate or growth over the next 12 to 241 in europe and the united states. however, there have been questions raised about the degree to which convergence or between developing and developed economies over the past 25 years will continue and at what pace it will continue. so there are questions raised. likewise on the policy front, there were questions about whether economic integration will continue or whether fact it's reversible. there's some large important economies in each asia-pacific, moved in the direction contrary and less liberal than in the past. i would know the proliferation of local content requirements,

many of the policies in indonesia, not the only example, but an interesting example of the indignation first policies, global content requirements, decisions to no longer an worse or abide by a bilateral investment treaties. a number of news headline to headline didn't amount to much, but you put it altogether and there is an open question about the degree to which east asia and the specific economic immigration will continue and that what pace. so that is the name of the two set for today's congress. we are delighted to have a terrific panel of experts to discuss these and other issues. you have their biographies in front of you, so i will read them, but i will introduce them all together and then let them speak in turn. we will start with dr. bob wang come a senior official at the u.s. department of state. he will be followed with another

u.s. of u.s. affairs at the office of u.s. trade representative. following that, mr. toshiyuki sakamoto, director for trade policy and the bureau, the ministry of economy, trade and industry of japan. says mr. sakamoto as a senior official of the summit and he is at least representing a role. that is part of his portfolio today. finally we would hear one of the great angst about east asia and the pacific and its economic integration efforts is the degree to which they incorporate business views on the perspective of enterprise. dorothy watkin a senior director of global trade policy for microsoft, but in her role today, she is vice chair of the policy at the national center for apec as the secretariat for the u.s. asia-pacific business

council members and very active in apec matters for almost 25 years. in any case that back, thanks in advance for the panel and let me turn it over to bob. >> thank you very much. just wondering before i start, i think the podium is blocking both of you on the left side and i wonder if someone is some point in commenting that the podium as possible. if not, don't worry about it. supposedly gave the live site a little more equal treatment. when they starred in the interest of time to just say that speaking about the effect directly at this year i believe would be a good year. we've only been doing this for about a year, so i think it's a good year for me in any case. his only been one year experience. but i think it's been a good year part of it is for one thing we know president obama this year will almost definitely

attend the apec. he hasn't done it in two years, so this year he will. he's also, i think most of you know, going to be doing a bilateral immediately after the apec leaders meeting, after which they go to burma as well as the u.s. summit meeting and being bilateral as well. after that, he will be heading off to brisbane in australia to ddg 20 in the 15th on the 16th. so he is a very long trip and i think this is extremely important because it gives obviously our highest literary chance to gauge directly with asia in all aspects, first of all bilaterally with china, with

burma and someone. also also regionally with an eas as well as in apec, with 20 other members in apec and the other team members. finally he goes to brisbane for a global agenda. i think in about seven or eight grueling trips, the president and a secretary and others will have the chance to press forward and engage their region and a lot of faulty issues across the board from economics to politics, security and so on. so it's already starting out to be a very good year at least in terms of our engagement with the region. but in terms of the substance of apec itself, in terms of 2014, working with china and with the other essentially 20 other apec economies, i would say at least from my perspective, seriously it is a good deer.

i lowlight you talk a little bit more about the trade and investment of apec and what apec has been doing this year. i will focus on talking about our work in trying to promote sustainable development and sustainable growth in apec as well as their work in trying to increase regional con activity within the region, which of course which of course as you know expands beyond the pacific over to peru, chile, mexico and so on. so we are doing a lot of good work on this and in many ways i caught part of what prime minister rudd was saying. in many ways, the cells of the cooperation he talks about in the regional architecture of the region in terms of working together on many different issues. again, that may just then very quickly, if you don't mind about

going to the list of what we are actually doing in terms of the sustainable development side of our portfolio. very think you could probably divided into three different areas. the first area would be environmental others say, meaning that having lived in china for 10 years in other places, we know that sometimes growth actually brings with it terrible consequences in terms of air pollution, water, food safety, so on and so forth. we think it is important to our death knowing that there are issues that will calm from fast growth. we need to at the same time, while we are growing, look at the consequences of that. so i apec this year, the ministerial in beijing i attended in august, our secretary was fair. we set a target of trying to double the share of renewable fuels by 2030 in the energy mix

within apec itself. we announced and talked about fossil fuel subsidy peer-reviewed is that peru has already completed. new zealand will start right after the election now that it's over. china and the united states have agreed to do fossil fuel subsidy peer-reviewed, with the goal eventually moving a lot of inefficient subsidies for fossil fuel and we are hoping that a few other countries will comment in november to announce that they will volunteer to do these, again to promote indirectly renewable fuels within the region in terms of the environment. at the ocean's ministerial, we had in august, dear we again had a lot of objectives within our oceans conference with secretary kerry held in the department in june. we translated a lot of good in

terms of getting more policy commitments to come commitments to, for example, expand protected marine areas along the shores. the one and we all have in common is that reported the pacific and so we are trying to expand their lives that are going to be protected. we began to remove the subsidies to prevent excessive fishing and to actually maintain, you might say can't manage a fishery, take measures against illegal fishing in the region. so all of these are the environmental area that we are trying to, i think, we were able to emphasize this year. the second area that i think is going to be important in china has taken a lead on this as well is anticorruption. this year we endorse at the anticorruption and transparency group in beijing in august and by november i think we should

have our leaders essentially endorse what we call one been supposed on the prevention of bravery and of bravery ending forstmann of bribery laws, anti-drapery laws. so this will be similar to what the oecd, a little bit similar to what we're doing in in the foreign corrupt factors that in the united states. so this will be endorsed as well as a sword apec general elements of effective corporate compliance programs. to try to get the private sector as well to get involved in producing the degree of corruption that is pervasive within the region. this is important for sustainable growth because a few of bribery, corruption, china's finding out today, it will eventually come back to bite you in terms of the reactions of people left out of the growth. so i think this is very key. similarly at the smb ministerial we had, the declaration, again

in september, dare we agreed to move ahead on sort of codes of ethics for two specific sectors. medical devices as well as biopharmaceutical. and they're the goal is to buy 2015 double for number of associations throughout the apec region double sign-on and adapt these goods of ethics in terms of how to deal in health sectors. they will set up an affix portal that people can have access to you. lastly in terms of the area of bioassay inclusive growth, we are very much focused as some in secretary clinton in the year in 2011 on economic empowerment. and there we are trying to do many things to take the lead on this in many ways. for example, in adding examples

of just become a set of best practices for try to make it easier, to facilitate within the company's health issues involved there. on our part, we are trying to essentially, we have set up a dashboard of data indicator is where we will begin to measure the sort of women participation in the economy throughout the apec economy and then start to set targets, look at gap analysis where we can improve. but at best practices. we are also setting up a portal or an electronic platform that would essentially putting all the women entrepreneurs within the apec economies together in this electronic form to begin to have you might say critical mass in terms of working together, procurement, sort of supply-chain procurement for looking at enterprises throughout the region, training,

access to finance markets and so on. so many of these areas we are working, lasting on con activity -- [inaudible] on con activity, of course we will, they say with a connectivity blueprint within apec that will establish certain targets in terms of physical infrastructure, in terms of regulatory convergence to get institutional convergence in terms of trying to get regulations for harmonized across the region and finally in terms of people to people. tourism in terms of finding different ways to increase the flow of education, within and among the different apec economy. and within the context, d.c. or apec will be establishing what we call a apec scholarship and

internship program and by the end of the year we will have about 100 of these to be announced. i will try to focus on getting students from especially apec developing economies to have a chance to go to other economies to either train or to study on scholarships that in our case will be provided by companies in the case of chinese taipei, china, australia, mark government provided scholarships. so we think all of this will bring together, in terms of the apec region, a greater connectivity. another thing to echo what prime minister rudd was saying, in my one year here working on apec, i find that working with my counterparts like sakamoto and others come in meeting 45 times a year at the apec meetings, getting together, that we actually have. i feel this bill to become rod with a group of people,

especially at the working level, who were together every quarter and meet intersessional he and that in many ways is building up this community at the apec over the last 25 years, which will be not a specific outcomes as this year, but in the long term extremely important for asia. thanks. >> thank you. ed, tell us about the trade stuff as it were. >> banks, scott. i'm happy to talk to you about the trade stuff. [laughter] and the investments that because that's an important part of apec, too. it's a pleasure to be here with you all today to talk about our trade investment agenda at apec and my remarks will be limited purely to apec and i'm happy to take questions in that regard. i would like to talk to you by their expectations for trade and investment initiatives in apec this year. the thoughts that come with that interesting work going on at apec on a wide array of issues,

many broadly supported, many push forward their posts, china and china in the united states are cooperating and i think it has been a very interesting, at least personally i'm a very interesting to watch china lead a multilateral after in the span of one year to see where that that. we've got one month before we are in beijing again for the minister of meetings that i could describe for you for specific initiatives we're working on. but before i go into that, what i would like to say is everything the year we have an overarching priority that we ensure that apec remains the premier economic forum in the asia-pacific for multilateral cooperation on trade and investment issues. if a significant priority because we ain't apec can do great names about what to make sure it continues to do great things on trade and investment in a concrete way. for the united states has since

apec in 2011 from what 2011 come with foster to that achieved the results oriented environment with meaningful, concrete results and outcomes to stakeholders in this included regulatory coherence, and a broad array of trade and investment initiatives. rather than discussing our visions about we developed an agenda that is very action oriented and focused on the tangible things apec can do to promote integration. every year we work along the same lines. we worked with our hosts in the past on these lines. for example in the year 2012 where we agreed on the apec list of environmental goods for tariffs on environmental goods. this was a very concrete initiatives. we make any outcomes as tangible

and concrete as possible. i think this is the most tangible example to do trade liberalization. and this is also an example because as many of you know, we just launched a new set at the wto at the present. we are hopeful we can expand on that list and implement the commitments and create a new initiative for wto that is meaningful for all of our stakeholders. in terms of our initiatives. i think to focus on a couple of areas. good regulatory practices supply-chain performance and

also environmental services i will describe exactly what we expect to achieve this year i'm not a global supply chains, which is a new area for apec and a very interesting area where apec can do more in the future. all of these areas fall under chinese priority area of economic integration. we try to work hard with the host to ensure what we try to pursue a trade investment also qualified. good regulatory practices. this is an initiative near and dear to my heart. we have a responsibility to address from occurring. one of the ways we can do that is how the regulators work better and produce more effective legitimate higher regulation and help regulators acquire better information about the proposed regulation so that they don't turn into barriers in the future.

there's three good regulatory practices that apec focused on in this started in our hosts here. the regulatory work which is how agencies communicate with each other about a proposed regulation, assessing the impact of regulations and conduct a consultation. they created a sense of action to improve how they are conducting consultation and acquiring information. these are things like early notice of proposed rules. build a web portal at the similar government by regulator approach for public consultations. they could do public consultations and acquire better information. the supply-chain performance.

in 2010 apec leaders set out a specific goal by 2015 in terms of production at time, cost and uncertainty. that's a very ambitious goal and i think we are on track to achieve it. but we try to come up with new ways that we can work on that goal. this year we agreed on a capacity building plan that helps developing economies to improve the obstacles we face. we think this is a great way, especially developing economies implement their future and these are very tangible projects that were doing. expedited shipments, pre-arrival processing, we will help develop economies at the economy level instead of doing workshops and information sharing exercises actually implement these types of programs. we also created a new body called the apec online chain con activity.

this is a public-private body double help us move forward these capacity efforts. and the resources of supply-chain experts to help us with these products. trade ministers endorsed both of these initiatives back in may in tsingtao. so we are going to recognize this progress in the leaders meetings. environmental goods and services. as i mentioned, we have this historic commitment, but what is the foremost priority is affirming its commitment and assuring economies implement this next year. it's a huge priority for the united states, but we are also seeking non-tariff measures and goods and services. if they don't, the terrorists production won't be as meaningful. globals.eugene, like i said, is a very new area for apec. this is how you add value from the inception of the idea to a delivery of a product. as we all know, production of

the goods and economies. it's drawn a lot of attention to this. they have the sad as a policy and the importance of services, the importance of investment. what we focus on in the united states is how we can actually address trade and investment barriers to impact global value chains. the primary example that we are focusing on abu want to actually do more work on this next year is how do we actually understand the phenomenon of localization requirements to charlie and f. scott mentioned, a big example of this is the requirement that you keep data centers locally. this is a concern we have around the world and i think someone can do great work in helping us

understand why economies do this and what alternatives are trade and investment friendly can we provide to economies instead of using these requirements. so i know there's a lot more to discuss on trade investment, but these are good examples of what we are trying to achieve this year. thank you. >> thank you, ed. >> thanks for inviting me. we are excited about the opportunity to talk about this. the united states with a farmer or a community. it explains the economic agenda. i will be just pointing out the

priority seen as this year's agenda. it is promoting, putting forth their own sovereignty. treating invests in the kind of result of the apec discussions. we are now overseeing services and manufacturing in the united states. next year, cbp will be hosting the apec meetings. you know, in the philippines how they have a very strong and very complex industries. so we intend to come back to the concrete plan next year. on sustainable development, as was mentioned, we are not implementing 50 companies,

exemplary companies in times of imparting women. 50 companies with a high opinion of 50 companies in which include seven u.s. companies. on the con activity, we emphasized the importance of infrastructure. the environmental performance and the safety, including resilience to natural disasters. the other epic priorities for japan. let me turn to das, the name won't fit is das ethic. i think many u.s. people consider in its foraker occur now make matters whereas it is political or security issues. i disagree because das, -- they

started from substantial discussions. the impact, from eria coming economic institute for east asia, they are doing some analysis on industry because the activities are now cross-border. for example, japanese automotive companies have now shifted its labor-intensive progress to neighboring countries like no pvr. they produce products in such countries and ship back on a daily basis. as such, japanese

recommendations i really cross-border and eria is now doing research in the future. and also and will come a accommodation at how infrastructure should be developed. they did that about five years ago. next year they will revise the study in order to put input into eas sunday. in this regard, i would appreciate if your businesses are interested in these and provide your input. let me turn to also diaz said. all i can airships. eas as the two trees that are

negotiated by state or country. the u.s. does not have interests there. it is negotiated by 16 countries and the six starter partners has its own. in 16 countries amount to 48. 29 times for the global gdp and 45% of japanese where it is 30% for tbt. people frequently ask the question, what is the difference ? my view is that the tpp is for

rule 30. it is to strengthen the base of the business reality. you may not how much information is taken the opportunity to briefly explain the united states can get from perfect. offset negotiating things. not only treating groups, but also rule-making such as npt, ppt, ds, protections, competitions and exeter property rights. these are applied to domestic policies on the area, differently out of other

countries. also if your company establishes one of our six companies, the companies can benefit from the commitment. so there's a lot of benefit for the communities that are effect did. i believe that the united states is very much interested both in the politics of ppt and enterprise florida. in this regard, i am very grateful for the publication by u.s.a. business council, which celebrated the 30th anniversary last night. they published a book called beyond the committee 2015. this is very remarkable piece of

work. it is a political recommendation for sne, x and me complex has. they forecast on what is very helpful for negotiations. actually i am now dropping a paper on e-commerce. i took the liberty of putting some paragraphs from my recommendations in japanese paper on e-commerce. and those are the economic communities. this is much more from what many of you seem. the countries of the donated 99% of terra. we will be eliminating 93 by 2015 and the remaining seven will be eliminated at 2018. and the fda is one of the most

by japanese companies. the national single wintel and also the revision are well sold very undertaking. so next year, 2015 is very important for eas because we are supposed to finish the negotiation by the end of 2015 and will be established between 2015 in the post-2015 -- in both the reverse. so what would be nice if japanese business communities in the u.s. business community's joined me to speak at for your business interests on these important issues. thank you. >> thank you.

dorothy. >> thanks. thank you, scott and thank you for asking us to have a bit of a business view on the panel. since it is baseball season, i guess i get to the cleanup back today. so i actually have sort of three had today and as scott mentioned, i am vice chair of the national center for apec, focused on its policy work. i am at microsoft, working on global trade and economic issues. unlike a few other souls that i see around the room, i am one of those recovery trade negotiators and that is the hat i don't seem to ever be able to take off. so let me tell you a little bit about the national center. so we are 53 companies in the united states across a wide

range of sectors and our mission really is to facilitate the private sector involvement in the apec. as scott mentioned, we provide a secretary to the private sector for apec issues throughout the year and support the three presidentially appointed advisory committee members to serve with the 20 other apec economy representatives. we are always looking for more u.s. companies that want to join. i don't get a commission or anything, but you're always welcome to join. what i thought i would do a sort of talk about the business viewpoint and we have been very fortunate in the past number of years that one of our knowledge partners and a member of the national center, pwc, has done a survey of ceos and business leaders in the region, to prepare for these annual ceo

summit. .. and more attention to middle income consumers and what that meant is according to the pwc the nature of investment in the

region is changing. it's coming from beyond just manufacturing capacity expansion into looking at new products and investments for example in services. so that was one finding. second finding was the partnership strategies of companies seem to be changing with more of an interest to the local partners this is helping with the skills and talent gap and it is also hoping to capitalize more on the local middle income demand. i said i work for microsoft obviously this was a really happy finding for us. there was an emphasis in the report about data and it's at the heart of customer demand and business opportunity. and they said that the four market forces that are individually and collectively redefining the customer demand and business opportunity mobile computing, class computing and

the intelligent devices it pointed to work that needs to be done obviously in the area of the data privacy, something that we've already done a lot of work and a growing number of business leaders identify that the legal framework for the cross-border data flow is becoming a barrier for the companies to benefit more from the digital economy. so that has been an issue that a lot of folks at the national center have been looking at. we have looked at the importance of technology particularly for the small and medium-sized enterprise and there is a pretty strong correlation between those who have adopted the technology and are more open to technology have become more successful, more integrated as a cloud computing becomes more pervasive.

there is more opportunity for others to join the global value team development. the fourth area they talked about is the need for the further improvements in infrastructure in order for the business to grow. as mentioned, there's been a lot of work pointed out to add the need for more work on power supply dealing with the clout of transit cloud transit networks and lowering the cost of broadband and really putting an emphasis on public private sector infrastructure models. again, one finding was uplifting the regulatory barriers is essential because we need to reduce cost in this area. another finding is that inconsistent regulatory and other standards are the key block to business growth around

the region and the different rules for products and services are increasing complexity and the ability to scale the region and this brings other disciplines for example such as corporate governance. i think of these findings are consistent with the work the government is doing. one thing i think ties all this together is in the findings, business leaders were asked about their view of trade negotiations in how this was going to help, and wasn't going to help or was it going to create problems and i think that the finding was that there is a lot of uncertainty but it would be very important that no matter how all of these approaches are developed that they really have to look to business to make sure that they are not inadvertently adding new barriers.

we had a good conversation yesterday about our interests and i'm pretty confident that japan is going to push for a high value in agreement that's going to help raise the gold standard within the lead i'm sure that we will get a really good agreement from that. we will watch what he's doing. but in terms of the national center for aipac to we have a lot of programs underway and i really want to flag those for you. we are doing something on infrastructure investment. we did help create a checklist to really identify for the government to sort of essentials to help deal with making the public private sector investment infrastructure really a reality. we pointed to the need for

example creating a business friendly environment that goes to a lot of the issues raised, you love and her agency coordination and some country benchmarking. we started at the national center and should have further meetings in china another contribution focusing on the cross-border data flow and looking at how the business takes advantage of the cross-border data or should. then it's really not just a technology issue for anybody that is competing in the global economy really needs to be able to have the data across borders and that gets you to privacy, security, and how all of these issues fit together. we also have done quite a lot of work in the health area. this year we have spent time

looking at the cost and productivity losses that are caused by preventive health conditions. they are called non- communicable diseases. this study is actually going to be reviewed by leaders and there is work there's work that has been done with mentioning respect to the comply chain. we have the asia-pacific financial forum and really looking at the integrated financial market that is what we are doing at apec. we obviously have been working very closely in the u.s. government as mentioned already. we are very supportive of the expansion of the information technology agreement. for many of you even if it is near and dear to my heart. the wto says that for all of the time that you leave, you

basically are leading to billion-dollar zone gdp growth annually on the table. so, that should be a good incentive to have a very meaningful and expansive and balanced i guess is the other word. and apec played an important role when we did the first agreement and i think that china had an opportunity to help show leadership said the negotiators can go back to an even keel back together. ed mentioned the work of the good regulatory practice that is obviously something that the private sector here in the u.s. has pushed very hard. there are a lot of disciplines that are already agreed to in the wto that need to be expanded. we had a lot of learning from our own free-trade agreements and the work they are.

so we think that that has been a really good exercise in consultation and development of the issues with the u.s. government. ed mentioned the goal with respect to the supply chain connectivity and a lot of our members are front and center in promoting the trade facilitation agreement that we hope will come to fruition in the wto and its great to see that the government is working on all of the ingalls to try to make that our partners in aipac are ready to implement the trade facilitation agreement. we've also done a lot of work on the food security partnerships, the mining and the ministerial good example of something where the private sector pushed a discussion about mining and we were able to have the first ministerial meeting. there's obviously been a huge number of projects on the whole question of energy and energy

security. and then, you know, the national center and its memberships are very engaged in what i would call the bread and butter issues, the investment issues. there was reference to the emerging problems on the local content and it's not just the data centers. if you want to be able to sell your product to market countries are coming back to the notion that you have to actually establish a manufacturing facility. this is obvious since i'm a recovering trade negotiator is a problem because we did a lot of the wto to reinforce the obligations to say that's highly illegal so we are going to have to find a way to make a conversation on a more serious conversation in the region because it's becoming a problem and it's becoming a problem for a lot of those apec members that have attracted manufacturing and

they are not going to be able to scale because there are demands for local manufacturing. scum of the localization of the data center is one issue. it's dismissed as people think if you put a data center in the country that it's going to be a huge job creator. it's not. there are lots of economic reasons for looking at where to put the data data center is not the least of which are some of the energy concerns that people have. obviously there's going to continue to be work work on the free-trade areas, the asia-pacific and work in studying the contribution to that. and then as i mentioned before we are looking ahead to what we think will be a really good meeting in beijing. will it be as historic as 2001? there was a lot of talk about joining to see how it sorts out. we are very excited and already

working next year with our friends in the philippines to see if we can't make an even bigger push on the private sector involvement throughout the year in the run-up to the leaders meeting. the are making our conditions and like i said we are 53 strong. we would love to be even stronger. if you have an interest in the national center we would be happy to talk with you. thank you for the everton v.. >> thank you commodore the end to all of the panelists. what i would like to do now is open up the floor for questions. there are three simple rules for questioning. the first one is when you are recognized, wait for the microphone. as you'll recall from the opening remarks, we have a large online audience and they will not hear a word you have to say until the microphone gets to you and is turned on to wait for the microphone. second, start by stating your name and the organization that

you represent. third, but i call the alex trebek will make sure that it's in the form of a question. no statements, please. with those, let me start. yes ma'am. the microphone will be here shortly. >> my name is jane and my question is about china pushing the coming meeting or the feasibility study. from the perspective how do you see the prospect of disagreement ? could you elaborate more about what does this mean? spinet officially issued

directives to the press office. i will give you a brief answer on this. this question was very much litigated by the trade ministers. there was no consensus at this time of the feasibility study proposal by china nor was there a question on the deadlines but there was a lot of support for the contribution to the realization of the backpack and i think that is the way that would the dorothy framed. the contributor. he does things like capacity building, information sharing on existing and ongoing fta. it's done and ellis is in the past. but it's not as a negotiation body and i think that our expectation is that it will remain as a contributor. that is just what will happen at the leaders meeting. >> on the construction question

and the connectivity blueprint, the key thing now is to note that as you know the studies have indicated that just about $8 trillion worth of the demand for construction and infrastructure construction in the region and asia and our view is in the analysis the private sector will have to step in to invest and actually build the infrastructure whether it is power stages or railroads or ports or whatnot. so what we are doing is to actually create a pilot center right now that is created in jakarta that but we are trying to expand to different areas where we will provide essentially advice on a checklist example on how to actually improve the investment environment in terms of being able to attract private sector environment environment so there aren't these regulations that block this and there will be these kind of guarantees that are needed and so on and so forth. eventually, we are putting a

finance ministry official in jakarta to work with people to look at the investment regulations and we are hoping to do this again across the economy and among those that really need and want to have the infrastructure investment that's what we are doing and public financing isn't going to be sufficient in the long-term. you need the private sector to step in and of the way to do it is improving the investment environment. >> since you mentioned the japanese business community, the japan has a strong ownership because the pathway in 2010 reached about how they should try to establish.

apec is a contributor as it is put into the incubator for the allied. apec is not a negotiation. we need to have -- we need to understand the creative distinction on that. but as we mentioned, there is a debate whether we call on the study. we have the combination to be allies. >> i would also note that it has been the area in the pacific has been a commonly agreed political goal and i think as far back as the city in 2006 if i remember right. if he were here he would correct me. he's been a long-standing political goal and in my mind it is consistent with the rules in

many ways and represents a important desperation. he had to be determined as the is the panelists subset but i do think it's important to recognize china's emphasis on if cat is fully consistent with the leaders meetings at least in the past six or seven years. other questions? esser thank you. >> good morning thank you. scott mcdonald united states strategic group. leading off of that comment and stepping backwards our architecture, how does tpp through aipac held we step back and use these structures in order to build an asia-pacific

that is more welcome for trade and security for all partners in the asia-pacific? in other words we talk about the specific trade initiatives which are all good, more freedom and it's better but how do we make that into an architecture tool? them happy to talk about what we are doing but on the questions please direct you to the press office. thanks. >> i do have a general comment. by the way, hello. going back to what was said the globalization part and then the nationalism part i think the idea is to promote trade in whatever form with more interaction and more interdependent and so on that is the architecture that

essentially binds people together and reduces the sort of nationalist tendency that occurs but that is the plaintiff to open the borders and trade with each other and have interdependence and i think that will create the type of stability that we need in this region. thanks. >> with the multiple passwords f. a. think it's important for the economy is to recognize that their interests lie in fewer, not more solutions along the way. this is a point we discussed at last year's conference. i think a practical way forward for me and matt is strongly in the interest of the country.

it's only in the southern economy's interests to make sure that the requirements are as similar as possible. it's the kind of way that you solve this and it's not necessarily a straight line. it's not all that direct by step-by-step you can get the immigration by recognizing the underlining incentives the national security program thank you so much for the presentation. my question is a little more than 30,000 feet level but pre- match following up on what but the doctor said. so, there is the development

that they sign off in july and now there is a proposal to have the infrastructure development down. i would like to hear the panel view assessment on what are the key drivers behind the sort of emergency of the new provincial architecture and what they do to the influence of the existing ones and not just the regional ones but also the imf, the bank, and lastly i guess including what their influence may be on the global sort of economic governance as we know today i think the driver for all that

and you talked about about aib and so forth i think that it is a demand in this case let's say for infrastructure development in the region there is a need especially in southeast asia and in a lot of other parts of the region. the main issue that would be a concern to the united states and others and when we have the multilateral development banks that we actually do have established the standards and we try to meet the standards in terms and i talked about this earlier making sure that we don't destroy the environment and when we come about the sort of investing in infrastructure made to ensure that the governance is no corruption because the construction industry generally has a number of issues in this area so we have to make sure that we need the standards of governance, transparency, environment, labor and procurement and so forth. as we move ahead with building different banks and what's not to meet with huge demand in the

region we need to have to keep this in mind. >> is there a question over here. yes, sir. in the spotlight. sorry. i have a question about when you design policies for trade, it strikes me that what that usually means as a business-to-business policy, but business to consumer trade is changing and i wonder do you when you design policies, do you take that approach him and do you look at it like that or is it just mostly do you think about it as a business-to-business? >> as a general response let me start by saying the world is changing really fast and whose an international commerce and the scale of the firms in the international commerce is subject to very rapid change and

that's being recognized by policymakers. for instance 30 years ago you needed a certain scale to be able to find consumers of door product or service. you need to be able to establish the operations and make the contractual relationships with the voters are customs brokers or whatever it may be. you also need to be able to back up and have the financing to carry off of the agreement. you look at today's world and/or business is a good example of this where an individual can find a product of service we have no way of knowing how to get two of ten or 20 years ago. i'm actually a user because i have a car in my garage and it's difficult to get parts for otherwise. it's operating as customs

brokers and other companies. as a firm or an industry, third allegedly simple financing and electronic financing is a vitally important to the transaction that cannot be done across borders. this changes the scale of operators on the international trading system. we've reported on this. so it's a very important dimension and it affects the way the government to do consulting. let me start with that and see if the panelists have anything to add. >> let me add something quickly. the answer is yes basically to your question because we had a economy actually session in beijing just in august and ali baba was there and we looked at the terms of business to

consumer, how it improved and also to look at the policy implications behind how do you facilitate that to allow others to grow and to continue to do business and consumers. >> one thing i would add to that in the initiatives i think that we usually do have the consumer in mind it's not just about the business. i mean, the supply chain chain for example, yes many transactions have been between companies then at the end of the day we are trying to help businesses produce the time to get the product and into consumers more quickly and efficiently. so, the consumers have been in the business where everybody benefits on the work we do on the supply-chain and i think that any of the initiatives that we have similarly are very expensive in that regard. >> do you have policies to make

sure there is a program of consultation i can speak for the experience in the united states where it's actually part of congress direction to the executive branch that far back as the trade act of 74 where there is a pretty extensive network of advisory committees that there is an idea of publishing and trying to get information about the cost of taking the position and it gets to the regulatory practices. in terms of developing the trade policy position, some of our best fights in the interagency back in the stone age.

when different agencies have had different responsibilities for consumer protection and some of the other issues take sure that as you were putting we were putting the policy together, that it actually worked for everybody i think it was a successful model that has gone through a couple of hiccups but it's a good regulatory practice and it makes it much more participatory and gives the opportunity to make sure that there is a better link between the business and consumer but i also think that there is a misunderstanding. a lot of the trade agreements don't tell you how a contract is to be written. there are a lot of things in terms of protections with respect to privacy and security that need to be written in the trade agreements but there are sort of some contract trouble

conditions that address some of the customer needs and then you let the dismissed move ahead. i hope that helps. >> we have time for one more question if there is one. yes sir go-ahead. >> i am a journalist and i want to ask a question that is on the trends and shall to the architecture aspects of it. one thing i never hear discussed in washington are discussions of the economic management right now the impact perspective of the political and economic integration. and that reason i ask this is i just got back from seven weeks in south asia and the political and economic implications of

this development are taking everybody's time but we talk about the kind of things we talk about in washington and paris in the trade negotiations and so forth. we talk about the implications that the see happening. and i'm wondering if the panel has any thoughts on this. thanks. >> thank you for your question. i mentioned in my first remarks he economic committee is very influential to the business economies and for the japanese business communities. ..

>> >> to pay more attention to the development

>> >> we now get to basically stretch our legs far -- for four minutes but before that please join me to say to our panel for this morning's contribution. [applause]

the district's incumbent congressman is running for lieutenant governor of arkansas leading the g.o.p. house seat open the report lists the race as leans republican and it took place in kabwe arkansas on monday in comes courtesy of the educational television

network. >>moderator: will come everyone in judy bates week here on the into arkansas educational television network. at this hour the race for congress in the second congressional district. the candidates in alphabetical order is patrick hays the democratic party candidate, french hill and the libertarian party

candidate to be standard they will be questioned by a panel of journalists including el latino. and steve, an independent journalist each will have two minutes for the opening statement each will have two minutes to respond to a question while the battles are limited to one rebuttal but each one of a closing statement in the order of opening statements questioning rebuttals in closing statements all determined prior to the broadcast by a drawing that they participated in or their representative. komer timekeeper tonight is from aetn.

hays: thanks and good to be with you. on behalf of sub my family certainly the campaign that we waged today. three weeks and one day the voters will go to the polls and one week from today early voting begins. ian dye will add that i would ask everyone to join me to help me sing happy birthday to minded old granddaughter who turns 10 today my grandson turned 65 days ago and one year ago when happens in the honor of their birthday? i am being facetious, the government shut down. 16 days nothing happened in washington and in the compromises that we may have worked across party lines but we did not care how we solve the problem other than dealing with a problem to make sure the lives of the

people that lived in barack were made better was the top of our priority. the kind of things going on in washington the bubble up to think of those grandchildren. i cannot sit on the sidelines that was not an option. and to make every day the citizens of our community to a point in a foreword direction so we made a commitment to move forward to make the lives of our kids and grandkids better that is why i run for congress. standiford: of with like to

thank aetn for the opportunity to debate. you are familiar with my opponents that you may not know much about me. i of the libertarian candidate here in the second district. you probably care my opponents complaining over the minor differences. undoubtedly it is about more government but the real solution to this bickering is called the non-aggression principal how the libertarian party was created. it simply states it is wrong to initiate foresee only the to the abuse is in defense of our natural right to life liberty and property each of us has the same equal rights and we'll have a small portion of those two government that will protect all of our rights together.

all laws and a matter how small, the implied threat of force for those that do not comply. that is why it is so important for the force of government be reserved and restraint to protect individuals' rights. as rigo through the topics i will attempt to demonstrate how to get government out of our lives but back to defending our rights where it belongs. hill: thanks aetn for the debate, aarp and also pats and debbie on the stage tonight. tonight i will tell you why are running for congress. because after 30 years in the private sector i felt a

calling to go back to common-sense business solutions for 30 years have brought people together and helped businesses be formed and help other people for businesses and create jobs, grum oil business will help people make a better life for themselves with a doctor's practice or church or a small restaurant. that is what i have devoted my life to the last two decades as a banker. but this year in the second congressional district fewer people are working than there were seven years ago. i have travelled the district over the last 10 months but it is about jobs and economic opportunities. my experience and leadership techniques can help create a

system to give us more opportunities with fewer government mandates one-size-fits-all solutions because that is what has gotten us in trouble with the career politicians over the past few years. i will take that common-sense leadership to washington. >>moderator: thank you for a the opening now we have the first question and it goes to patrick hays. >> united states is a world leader in research and discovery of medicine and assistance but the limitation compared to other progressive companies -- countries. our real people to not does it demonstrate efficiency in many areas. in other countries that use has easier access to lower

tuition and universities. what would you do to improve the level of student efficiency in access to schools of higher education and how would you find this an? hays: in terms of job production it is skilled training. what young people need to know to go into the increasing changing job market is so education is a critical part of the future. the cost of education is exorbitant. one of the things is the great opportunity is for example, with student loans that kind of of burden that the young people have hanging around their necks is incredible. i don't understand why we don't charge the same interest rates for student loans as what the fdic charges banks that would lower the interest rates

significantly, to make paying back student loans a lot easier. with the programs, that is another approach to help the young people. increased and the sissonne technical education with the job skills people need to find good quality education to take those into the workforce. or a technical college during the 24 years we've partnered with them with different aspects to help them grow and foster the increased educational opportunity. they went from over 4,000 students in excess of 10,000. level congress has to play to partner with state and local governments is absolutely critical and we will have to do more to reduce the cost of higher education and without that we won't have the skills of

the job applicants we need to have to have good paying jobs to help the economy grow. >>moderator: tune minutes mr. hll. hill: that is a good question and we suffer at the k-12 level. state and local governments must do a better job to connect with a good quality education. for example, we need to have people haven't aspirational tracked in a school and middle school it would be good to recognize that not every student is college-bound and many good jobs are afforded the high-school graduates in vocations. we need those workers we need manufacturing and over 50 percent of student related jobs in arkansas with in fact,, are available to those without a four year degree.

also work-force training programs like a lot of things in washington d.c. they don't work. we spent $18 billion on workforce education across 47 different programs scattered across the government. they need to be reduced in total scope to set back in the form of love lot grant to let the governments look -- work with local businesses for what job training is best. we take those dollars to turn it into a tax credit for those who do their own training for their own location with their manufacturing whenever a the businesses are in that area. standiford: it is obvious over the past few decades

throwing more money and education has not worked. what we need to do is to allow parents make the decision to institute school choice to allow the free market competition to improve the product they are receiving and improve the cost. i pay about one-third of the cost of private school that it costs to educate a public-school child the assassins are less than half the size, they can emphasize in areas that they want to. but they could excel in other areas. it would be better if they could focus on subjects. so my answer is school

choice as far as education goes to eliminate subsidies. the cost explodes while the rest of the economy remains stagnant. the areas reinvesting in this phenomenon because of the excess government subsidies. hays: what we haven't mentioned in terms of education that is important that we know to the community my wife was a teacher 35 years. but that ought to have a real focus.

and every day to have one quick example my wife had a student his name was jeffrey and she gave him extra reading out of the classroom and she kept asking him to read a sentence and he would not do it and finally broke down and said i'm hungry. so she took him into the cafeteria glossary bowls of cereal. the teaching community needs to port -- support and to make sure they are a partner in the educational system. >>moderator: the next question? in the arkansas leads the nation in reducing the citizens without health insurance what would you change about the federal health care lot? hill: that gives me a chance to talk about the affordable care active and the

important topic it is too much it is too complicated of a one-size-fits-all solution to meet challenges in the health care system. we want to help people with pre-existing conditions have better access. we wanted to extend health care to the most needy across our country and to make health care more affordable. those are the objectives of the affordable care acting and i don't think it succeeded. as too big and too complex we did not need to redo the entire system to tackle the issues. with pre-existing conditions all of those pools were put out of business last october with the affordable care actium president obama and were federalize. what we could have done at a lesser expense and with local government would to ask governors what is now

working with your pre-existing pool and see how we can work together to make that better. that is the key point. we have the insurance distribution system across the whole country we did not need to create the complexity of the affordable care act or read any the mandates to provide the health care that individuals that they may not want because the mandates make it more expensive. people lot to me during the course of the campaign to talk about how affordable care act has hurt their budget more expensive, double the price per month as they attempt to buy health care with a new government system. standiford: as recently as the 1960's we did have affordable health care for almost all americans.

even those with pre-existing conditions. what has happened since then is regulation and subsidies. more regulations and more subsidies have been added to this industry the higher the costs have gone. once again government steps in to regulate a free market and doing more damage than good. subsidies like medicare and medicaid with the regulations that doctors and hospitals have to follow make the cost sore -- go higher. and insurance companies getting insurance across state lines also the health care savings accounts that would introduce an element of the a free-market as well. people are not aware how

much the medical cost actually costs them. so they don't shop around the country to the medical industry as they would any other. with self long as we have managed to improve the product or lower the cost year after year that does not happen in the medical industry is no free market competition. hays: if i was in congress i would not have voted for the affordable care act. to complex and it costs too much and as we all know the rollout was absolutely terrible. one of the things we can do is to reduce cost we can allow medicare to negotiate to better drug prescription and prices are reduced regulation i was talking to doctors recently they had to

hire a firm simply to do the paperwork with of complexity of the new regulations that were required if someone had a cut to there were six different cuts -- codes as how they could have caused the cut whether a scratch or a pet it is incredible that they have the costs that explode but one thing to remember is with the democratic governor a very strong republican legislature came up with a solution in the private option that we came together but we never had coverage before. hospitals to have the financial challenges are now

receiving the type of coverage costs that patients are going into those so while i would not have voted against the affordable care act but there is an example of how people can work together to solve a problem and that is the message i take to congress. crossing party lines we care about the same thing. hill: i think the suggestion of greater use of that hsh and competition across state lines among insurance companies is the big source of a more competitive plan. but to mr. hayes you cannot have it both ways to be against obamacare before the private option they are one in the same is obamacare in arkansas and what happened is the regulatory cost is

the way the obama administration has gone as a job killing approach it is the impediment to create jobs because of obamacare because people work fewer hours to create a part-time economy. he called small businesses to say had led to have the burdens and costs associated with obamacare. is not the affordable care act. >>moderator: the next question goes to ms. standiford. >> in a survey last year from the research center listing 19 options for reducing spending, not a single one was favored by the majority of americans. with the spending cuts how would you balance the budget? standiford: i would balance the budget by eliminating the large apartments that we do not need. we do not need a federal department of education.

those powers need to go back to the parents with choices and how to educate their children also eliminate the department of hud, department of interior interior, there is no reason the federal government should only and to have a department of the interior to cover that waste time also the military budget. if we cut military spending in half we would still we the largest military aid budget and though world by far. cut in half again we would still have the largest if we cut in half again reduced at 183 would still have the largest military budget in the world. we need to bring our troops

home. and return to a system of national defense instead of international offense. hays: first of all, i would do what i did at city hall when rebalance those 24 budgets and cut waste to create jobs we took stainless line by line to go over what was the central to raise the quality of life and deal with public safety and what would attract jobs that is what we ought to do in congress and cut waste. it is incredible right now 1.$5 billion expense on real estate that is not needed that the federal government writes a check for every year. there is an ad that we have got now.

>> gantry even supported a puppet show is and long island. and then to reduce the cost of government because it is their. and then to go line by line. to have a benefit to the economy and cut spending that is unnecessary. hill: the budget is a key problem in our country now at $17 trillion in debt and climbing and in a fly 16 spending $1 trillion on interest on the national debt if interest rates continue the import trend. event you