>> represented 350 people in 9/1 #, >> 97%. we must be doing something right when we set up the programs. but just remember, i am not here to wage another view here between burt and steve.

i think the trial system whether you like it or don't like that it's here to stay. it's such part of our heritage, such part of the fabric of our country that if you think you're going to change the seventh amendment or if you think that you're going to show undercut the rule of the jury in our society, you are dreaming. a better question for these two law clerks. [applause] >> a better question for steve and bert, why aren't there more trials. now that's a separate question. that's not a constitutional convention question. that's what's wrong with our system today that more people don't take it advantage of the seventh amendment, but what i do, folks believe me, it is

better studied not in a law seminar but in a history class because what i do is no threat to our legal system, to our lawyers or to our judges, these are rare, rare aboarations and they should be seen and not to be encouraged. [applause] >> superb. i think the question is excellent. the seventh amendment is here to say, but why is it that so few people take advantage of it. tell us what lead to numbers to decline in 1930 to less than 1% today and what will you do to increase the numbers? >> well, i think the trial

lawyers and judges have done a clear bad job, the question is always what is the competing dispute resolutions. people are always going to have disputes. you're going to have a service, what is the litigation competing with. if you're compete -- whatever you're selling, if your product is too expensive or not deemed to be safe, the exerts or is going to win out. that's what what happens with arbitration. arbitration is private dispute resolution. i think it's horrible that we have gone to so much private dispute resolution just as i think it would be horrible for every school in the country for private school, there's a room for private school and plenty of room for public school. it does not create any precedent, there's no blog built

up, these are paid-private judges, and so i think the lawyers have been at fault and the judges because they have in a way hobbled juries in finding the truth. the jury is not supposed to read anything in the paper or look at what's on the internet. it's totally contrary to what it used to be. it's supposed come to court because they knew something about the case. now we are looking for the lowest denominator. trials go on forever. instead of getting a week in court you get a month in court. so that's not good.

the jury instructions on the law are totally incomprehensible although they are written in english, you can't possibly -- a lawyer can't sit there and listen. listen to a jury charge in a patent or security's case and tell you what it meant. so there's a lot of things -- i read the book called a trial by jury written by a princeton professor, you don't get written instructions, a copy of written instructions, you're not allowed to ask questions, you're not allowed to discuss the case. anything you can do to make it people to comprehend, we have done to our jury. ..

every time you click on the internet, i triedi tried to get in with my iphone this week to the itunes store. there are knew terms and conditions. check here if you want to go further. if you did not check your to get in.

i'm going to see what these terms and conditions are. a 73 page contract. i'm not kidding. now, no one can read that life our laptop, but i'm sure in their is the waiver to a jury trial for limited damages during recovery. the supreme court has questions. consumer, borrower, employee, every time you set a contract you give up rights a trial by jury. that needs to be changed. [applause] badly.

because it is really interesting. the judge brings you before the bench and explains you have the right to a trial. you understand. makes these -- makes the accused speak so that we know that there has been a knowing waiver, the 6th amendment to the trial. why don't we do that under the 7th? is quick through contracts people give up their 7th amendment right. this march the results were problems. 90 percent of the people who

are subject to a mandatory arbitration law are not even aware that they are subject to that. you are losing your right because you are voluntarily. anytime you buy anything and big businesses overreaching corporate america, arbitration clauses to avoid a lot of reasons for this. another problem, eight of the nine supreme court justices have never tried a jury case. that is a lot different. justice black was a trial lawyer alabama.

he had done before. now you see these outlier verdicts, you know, reported in the popular media. so they don't -- there is all this popular lore about juries during bad and extreme things and about the expanse and if we got rid of it maybe we could say something better. >> there will be about at the end of our discussion. whether or not if you were. you would vote for the 7th amendment.

>> my early jury nullification was meant, which i have heard could be by those who know about it. >> i'll describe. the most important cases. steve mentioned the trial where john peters is liable for criticizing mccain command i did. you can argue because under british law by all accounts

he should have been found guilty when a civil jury did not think the judicious libel was. in a similar case under the 4th amendment jumbo criticized mccain. he is accused of judicious libel. authorize the search of his house and did not specify the place to be searched of the thing to be seized. they believe that these general warrants were authorized. so those are two examples of jurors of loss that they considered unjust even though they were in fact guilty. create the core of our constitution. democracy and no longer.

juries should not retain the right. >> yet. as you said, that context nullification is you have an arbitrary authority which may be totally unjust. no voice in shaping those laws. mccain has said i know what judicious libel is. clearly i provided here. we're not going to accept that. he is talking about debtors. okay. they might have a right, but it is unfair and to deleterious. well, no. it is making law. whywhy do you want people arbitrarily making law. we have a democrat. a littlea little bit different than the.i was making about nullification.

it's not so easy to support nullification when your alternative. and steve talked about arbitration. congress to change the federal arbitration act. no more of this. you can't explain it. here is something that will get you men.

>> yes. the panel illumination from the consensual arbitration is a remedy might affect different parts of the economy. would you work investment advisor if you knew that. >> defendants to a jury trial. the accumulation. such a causation in the particular majority. doesn't really have the right to a jury trial.

>> well, the answer -- i don't thinki don't think it will have that much of an effect on the economy. arbitration is only become big in the last decade. the economy was doing fine before then. so frankly two things i want to make clear. if the parties are equally bargaining they can resolve the settle there disputes in any way that they want including arbitration. arm wrestling, caching lots. i don't have any problem with that. when i want to buy something that i can eveni can't even read and i have to check something often give up my right. i don't really have too much of a problem because if i don't want to go to federal

i go find another investment advisor who does not require me to do that. in any event that's my view on that. >> i want to get back to the law school class. back in the day i developed a theory called the economic theory. i would like to hear from each of our speakers, we will you, the interaction, economic theory and the right to a jury trial. >> i'll start. do you want to explain? >> refresh our memory about guido's great theory. okay.

>> let's start with steve. abcaseventeen -- after seven >> i honestly don't know what that means. >> an idea. >> you lost me. >> and i did not go to yell either. you are talking about what role the court adjudication place in society. you know, and some societies , scandinavian you have a social contract with the state. the idea is something adverse, the public responsibility to care for you so that those societies attribute blame for secondary. you have reserved because you not only want to identify how to help who is injured or harmed but you want to at least have an incremental system. in the us we don't have a

pervasive social system. in that sense tort is a vehicle for people often stating themselves rancheria as well and it depends on the blame theory. you don't have to have a plan theory. california developed rules. you know, if you put a dangerous commodity you know you have to build that in the price. where the social believe come from. those kinds of things take away this question of finding blame for cases in which they're has been externality bad. there are many arguments for that kind of the system. but if everything is on price, to problems. that will come back. to because if you think of

people similarly situated in a tort system somebody thinks about going to a lawyer. you don't have social justice. everybody is entitled. in some ways it's random. it's like a nuclear deterrent. i think the jury trial in some of the myths around it, the behavior in there own way.

>> did you apply it? >> the end run on tort will be invite people voluntarily and do a system which does not affix blame, does not deter. now in 911 94 people decided not to come into the tort program. i met with them and said why are you coming into a program with an average award tax, average award of $2 million. and some would say i lost my

wife at the world trade center. she would want to sue and make the airline safer. that is calabrese, to make airline safer. i said to her, your not going to make airline safer by suing. the airlines are as safe as they are going to be, but even if you believe that a lawsuit will help make the airline safer, why don't you come in. if piling on. make the airline safer. some dead and some didn't. >> and without the threat of a simple jury trial, with when they ever have that kind of fun? >> i doubt it. i doubt that very much.

>> this question is report. tell me of the case last civil case that you are aware of where the biggest issue, one that most of the most money is not ten? isn't that? i have never try to case where i was not the key issue. >> just like it was in the obama care supreme court. what did the congress intend? what did the party intend? who better at ascertaining what people really me and think and did. >> you should think about that. >> what is the intent? the lies absolute. it is not imperative.

you don't have to prove it to win. all you got to prove is the claim of the patent. if you infringe the claim your liable. you know that better than anybody. anyway, and a lot of big-ticket cases that is not the issue. even if you said the liability case, did they really intense danger somebody? if the warning was inadequate and you really wanted to protect, sometimes yes, sometimes now, but intent is not necessary and does not have to prove. so they're are a great many cases where it is not an element. conventional common-law tort, the answer is yes. certainly we have moved away from that.

in a lot of cases absolute liability or strict liability. intent has nothing to do with it. >> the program has nothing to do with my ability, nothing. they have nothing to do really with justice. they have very little to do with these programs. what is just and fair, loss on an airplane. mercy. and they are very rare. and no one ever in any of these programs and says thank you, gratitude, appreciation. when i do this brace yourself. just brace yourself.

number because. no. because you are going to really -- is debilitating. you do it,you do it, but you get the money out and move on. it is mercy because it really is in fairness. >> ladies and gentlemen. [applause] >> the conversation, like a supreme court argument, you have heard the best arguments for and against. and the question on the floor is, if you were a delegate of the constitutional convention would you vote in favor of the 7th amendment are not? everyone who would vote in favor, please raise your hand now. everyone in favor raise your hand. everyone who would vote against crazy and.

please join me in thanking our panelists. [applause]

t10

>> >> [inaudible conversations]

>> because more sanctions won't produce the results that we want, we have to be honest. congressional rejection of this deal leaves any u.s. administration that is heavily committed to preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon with one option. another war in the middle east. i say this not to be

provocative but i am stating a fact. without this deal iran will be in a position, however tough rhetoric may be to advance its capabilities. it's not break out time which is fairly small, could shrink at new year's zero. does anyone really doubt that the same voices now raised against this deal will be demanding was ever present will bomb the nuclear facilities? if somebody does firmly believe that iran must not get a nuclear weapon i can tell you that alternatives to military action will be eggs got busted once we reject a diplomatic solution that the world unanimously supports. whets not mince words.

the choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war. maybe not tomorrow or three months from now, but soon. >> all over the colorado plateau here out of grand

junction we are surrounded by a rock we find a lot of dinosaur bones and fossils' and that has intrigued a scientist for a long time but we have a mineral or a rock that contains three different elements the id has radium that helps to solve and fight cancer and also used to strengthen steel so the buildup to world war ii is of extreme value. also uranium which as we know is one of the best sources for atomic power and atomic weapons. >> he fought the battle to reserve water for western colorado by making sure that

we got our fair share. how did he do that? beginning in his state career to the federal career, he climbed up the ladder of seniority to exercise, i think more power than you might normally have. certainly in the united states congress where he was able to make sure colorado and western colorado would be treated fairly in any division of water. his first major success was the passage of the colorado river storage project 1956.

the global economy and international trade. former undersecretary of commerce was among the speakers to say the issue should be a top the agenda for the 2016 presidential campaign. this is one hour 10 minutes. >> good morning. welcome to the heritage foundation it is the delight to have all of you here this morning it is the end of august school is starting in some areas but it is starting to feel that washington is getting back into the gears we're happy to help that process along. with the release of a new report global agenda for economic freedom this is a

study produced in tandem by the davis institute for national security and foreign policy in the institute for economic freedom and opportunity that our distinct entities inside the heritage foundation. i want to post my friend as the key speaker who were the smartest headnote in economics and a true gentleman but most importantly he is a fan of the blues as well i. >> host: to put together the economic freedom group. [laughter] but i was the founding adder -- editor with the addition of the index upon which the study is based in research a

series of the studies that will be discussed today the while i was president -- vice president at heritage ironclad to see these grow is one of the most important thing is the heritage foundation does, in my opinion. is timely to have this discussion with what is happening with china and the u.s. stock market the structural problems with china stockmarket is not limited to china alone with the huge debt and corruption in the lack of transparency transparency, a lack of rule of law and economic freedom. as you will learn many mistakes rasa done by this administration and so we should not be surprised our

economy is in trouble also. and to lead the up world out of recessions and that is that we will be talking about but grant will deliver remarks he wears many hats from 2001 through 2005 roughly at the same time he was undersecretary of commerce for international trade. with the normalization of trade relations for china as chief of international trade council and adjunct

professor at georgetown university and director of the international foundation and a senior advisor for studies after he makes his remarks will be joined by commentary by a senior recent scholar at heritage. he lived for a number of years in beijing and spend some time in moscow said he is unique perspective on the economies of these two countries anger sure he will share with you. also research fellow for economic freedom here at the heritage foundation's alaska grant to come up to deliver his remarks then after that we will hear from the others. >> i am at the age when

someone goes through your file you feel yourself aging all over again. i don't know how much i appreciate that. [laughter] but it keeps us young. my job here first of all, men to applaud the global agenda i have to say i look forward to the index coming out because it is a benchmark that it is recognized and the measure to the extent that they promote or undermine. so with that global agenda with the report coming out

were the united states is mired at this point and has been for some time because it has to be a beacon with economic freedom we cannot depend on hong kong. and assuming that leadership role in the global economy there is no alternative. that it depends on embracing that freedom elsewhere. but where i want to start to welcome the opportunity with the foundation has given me to reflect my own experience with war but also to read the "road to serfdom" so i will start with a personal reflection and then spend time on hayak as a reminder of the backdrop for the study then what ought to be

central to the 2016 presidential campaign in the items we are facing against china why that is central to the debate ruth and equally important the role of foreign policy going forward. but first to the personal side, ron and i am the fortunate side of a refugee from lithuania and like many before him he received a new name courtesy of immigration which is why his middle name is my family name of aldonas. he was extraordinarily conscious of the freedom he enjoyed in his adopted country because he could measure that against the

freedom he lost in lithuania. the first time it gained its independence in five centuries because of his teenage years there is a gradual erosion so the destabilization following the nazi invasion at which point all of his friends our jewish were murdered than they return to soviet forces from leningrad. as they approached my father who had gone underground tried to persuade his father to leave. his father refused arguing that things would return to normal after the war. my grandfather later expressed his sorrow for not

having five -- following my father's advice. and could not imagine how life would be in a totalitarian society my father and sister did escape and eventually on a boat in the event the german patrol votes woodstock 1 mile offshore my father had is from the last mile but it was qualified freedom among the group of refugees have found their way to sweden is oftentimes seen that his luck has held he was in stockholm and applying for refugee status and i never serving as a foreign service

officer in a hotel diplomat. it at that point the american embassy she was a shoe walk down the hall with darker green eyes i don't look lithuanian a book like the swedish side he saw this beautiful woman nearly six-foot tall herself plot and eyes and -- bonterre and blue eyes and saw a visa to america. [laughter] because you were fired even if you're married even to a u.s. citizen but they did marry in 1949 she returned to minneapolis rye was born. and roughly 70 years have passed since my father that

my mother and friedrich hayek attend that book known as the "road to serfdom". but long before that argument i had observed along the mississippi river so normally wave could walk together to and enjoy the beauty of the elms but every so often my father would turn to me in a solemn way to try to explain his experiences and what they taught him. ended reading in preparation he turned to me to say someday someone will offer you security in exchange for your freedom is you should never take the deal the casual end up without either. in a broad outline that was hijacked. at the end of the day in the

essence of what he warned about was just as relevant today as it was at the time my father of would explain that to me as a young boy in minneapolis. it cannot be dissected meet the. the reason that hayak warrant without political and freedom is a death sentence for a free society and underscored for the of his injunction that the control of production of wealth is control of human life itself. the the system of private property is a guarantee of freedom had only for those who own property but for those you do not only because it is divided among many people acting independently nobody has

complete power over us and that we can decide what to do with ourselves. but high-tech understood the freedom of individuals that shows the stronger explanation of the rationale with a famous discussion of the division with the discourse but it is about the free part not the trade part. at the end of the day it is the rights of the individual to choose free of coercion by the government or someone in society to indicate the idea behind free trade. but that a russian was threatened to but the basic

individualism that we have inherited but the supreme chat -- tragedy was those of good will men who admired the democratic countries to prepare though play for if they did not create the forces that destroyed that inheritance with that subtitle i thought would be what it would be attributed to saint bernard the road of good intentions but doesn't advocate limits do so as an appeal to the greater good. despite the fact of attacks unemployment itself the cbo estimates in terms of the jobs lost is a good testament to that fact but the affordable care actium

compels a river can to buy health insurance a certain package regardless if you have a need for it and that act of compulsion that is necessary to make it affordable to every american but it ignores the extent it paves the way for other notions of freedom economic and political. the president's willingness to restore the requirements of the affordable care act is symptomatic of their broader justification the end justifies the means regardless of what that means with respect of the law or constitutional limits or the erosion of individual freedom. now back with the idea is to be supported by researchers at the heritage foundation into underscore it confronted any particular moment it is easy to forget liberty is the ultimate end

we speak not just the instrumentality that the end justifies the means is either in a moral or a moral. so with becomes necessarily the supreme ruler. literally nothing that a collectivist must not be prepared juju that serves the good of all whole. bad as hayak puts it a gatt guided by the endeavors of the power they possess the by transferring the power to society or a government thereby extinguishing power in the exercise that is disenfranchised by people. of the tyranny of collective good that claim to represent the interest of the disenfranchised.

but to witness the evolution of german political economic thinking to reject the adn in favor of the interest of the state reseed german history through the prism of four to but what hayak is sought to remind us that hitler's rise it unparalleled was stall and was the end of the german economic philosophy pointed because the theory of the collective good could not be realized without compulsion. so the promise of security and this is her eye, back to my father as a german society recoiled from the chaos in the aftermath of

the armistice indeed freedom from choice dollar of choice and to increase in the chances of freedom that explained why the words echoed in my mind. so inclosing turning to do this year's report ino's the panel will debug want to focus on one of front but in 2010 it fell from the highest category for an economically free countries stuck in the ranks of the mostly second-tier freedom category of persons that is the core issue of the 2016 presidential campaign

because it is indivisible to make it a core principle of foreign policy to integrate as part of the foreign policy as we have never done even in the reagan years it was not fully integrated with the broader idea what it means to be an individual and to be free. thanks very much. [applause] >> as noted it has shown

that open economies lead the world in economic growth it correlates with more prosperity per-capita around the world. world wide increases of economic freedom this year have been driven by improvements of monetary freedom and freedom of corruption. regrettably in the past year average scores including business freedom property rights labor freedom and financial freedom have registered a small decline. more troubling was a loss of economic freedom to the size of government higher government spending causing a deterioration with a countercyclical interventionist stimulus policies that was mentioned based on these economic scores calculated using indicators the sense of

issues as challenges of every region for example, will international trade plays an increasingly significant role of the economies of the united states unfortunately the negotiations for further called whole trade organization has ground to halt there are some bright spots for global trade with the ongoing efforts in the trans pacific partnership. there could be benefits if a each dpp country would improve protection of intellectual property and investment rights to dismantle other government subsidies to limit support has documented in the 2015 index protectionist measures with specific subsidies and

protectionist enforcement actions had jazz anti-dumping a regulatory measures reduce efficiency and competitiveness to diminish the prosperity of all nations. all countries should resist these counterproductive policies and united states should the their resistance. our agenda argues more freedom for workers there higher in the countries with laws regulations of policies to give opportunity. it calls for a broad with less corruption and strong judicial corruption the biggest problem in the indian economy is land erosion that affects hundreds of people these ships can be decisive with property rights in other countries to strengthen the

rule of law to develop appropriate legal norms to map the property boundaries. the global agenda covers seven world regions plus the arctic i will call for the first floor in some detail the my colleague will cover the rest. in central herself carry -- south america and ranges from excellent as in chile to abysmal and in brazil the world's sixth largest economy has comparatively low scores because heavy-handed pretoria regime there are positive regional trends to have regional participants especially members said the alliance of the pacific and to bolivia and ecuador and venezuela

economic freedom scores have plummeted by members of the pacific alliance full access to international markets and strong liquidity and a positive inflation outlook with limited access to financial markets and vulnerability is into negative inflation outlook for gold at global agenda praises reforms that could create numerous beneficial all opportunities but urges mexico to continue to liberalize and removed some of mono - - monopolistic power. although already substantial and should be expanded for ruth day tpp to remove remaining barriers. turning to the rest of the

overall there in europe the former u.s.s.r. countries are struggling to receive more freedom with sub-saharan africa despite some setbacks with ebola over the last year's sub-saharan africa is the most improved region in the 2015 index. of all countries setter greater in the index was registered by sub-saharan african countries. as a whole it continues to underperform when it comes to following through on the dynamic kravis sector but more critically to continue in existence of the uneven playing fields with no week rule of law and those connections are still left out the global agenda that

calls for privatizing the fight against corruption and africa with that fragile prediction of property rights and elsewhere in africa to recall that a highly centralized governments with direct budgetary control and the process could result in the gains of decentralization of power of limited government and requires natalie enhancing liberal legislative capacity to encourage immigration africa remains that a weak level. with potential and then to

be pursued by the african union and to hinder the efforts. and if they're grown substantially sub-saharan africa with economic uncertainties with specific investment protections with and in china plays by different rules and africa but they carry with them a legacy of corruption. so the president of the northeastern africa with political upheaval during

the arab spring. long overdue economic reform continues to be postponed. as a result that gradual rise has come to a halt to structural problems abound even with more instability. with authoritarian rule that has power and resources in the hands of a few. if there dominated by the state sector political leaders are reluctant to share power of that diminishes access to state control so now i would like to turn over to cover the rest of the world.

[applause] >> nice to be here. my presentation will be a bit different i lived in beijing over three years and returned last year after living in moscow and putin after three years so i will focus on what i think is going on in the grout after talking to government ministers business people and property developers for cry have 10 minutes to talk about china and india and russia so if my remarks are quick i apologize me to leave time for questions and answers. first the big picture about asia from 60,000 feet is my feeling is very strong after been the global economic engine for a long time especially east asia economic growth has peaked

big-time in asia for a number of reasons. number one. demography. hongkong south to re-enter japan, fertility rates compared in the united states. much of asia had day demographic dividend now entering very rapid day a demographic deficit. reason number two that i go into detail is the china story that now accounts 45% of the gdp and the growth in china is slowing much more than you think it is.

since 2008 much of asia especially east asia sailed through the economic crisis because even outside of china and increase of credit growth that no one is talking about all throughout asia if you look at total debt or a government debt has a share of the age said gdp is higher now than it was the of the financial crisis in 1997. much of asia has manufactured growth the past seven years built on a surge of liquidity and debt. it is a huge story.

give the recent slowdown should the global economy be concerned? the storage area answer is absolutely. is the second largest economy at current exchange rates at $12 million with 80 gillian there is stowe close third is surpassed japan and is already twice the size of the japanese economy and the largest trading nation for 75 countries and by far the largest importer of commodities in in the world with the emerging markets and this is why commodity prices are at a 14 year low. and over the past seven years china has accounted for an incredible one-third of coal economic growth so

one that is a mathematical certainty. that china has to enter a financial crisis whether it occurs sooner rather than and later? with the chinese stock market collapsing 50% over the past month is a huge concern with the chinese market capitalization to% so that contagion effect from the chinese stock market even though the second largest in asia after japan if it falls further which i

think it will will erase all the gains that it had. with it is moving there. the focus should be on the economic fundamentals that are dramatically slowing the economy wetted is crystal clear is that china's economic model built on three big pillars with fixed asset investment and don't overload the property market. and all three of those pillars are well pass the expiration date. with the current-account surplus as recently as 2009 was 10 percent of gdp. guess what?

last year 2014 it shrank at 2.1% of gdp surplus. so contrary to conventional wisdom is a significant source of growth since 2008 and that in june is gone. and the fact compared to 2.5% but as recently as 2000 to talk to property developers on the ground the house the market is much more important than the stock market it is a critical that recipient and to have unsold units of the

unsold homes 70 million with the housing crisis with the backlog was 1.5 million. if that figure is correct then you should see housing prices fall. with the tier one or tier two or tears three cities our prices have been falling two years. the major sources savings for the chinese household now prices are falling for the first time in decades. now investment with the last two quarters is a mind-boggling 50% of gdp the into massive excess capacity of steel and cement

operating and growth that i will go into later i doubt it is 7 percent right now. but it purchases the index but more importantly it continues to slow. you are investing 50 percent of your economy. and that 50 percent is generating a 5% growth. so what we're seeing is a precipitous decline returns of investment better not reflected in the stock market. of the shanghai composite a major benchmark and will

finish with china, the anti-corruption campaign the intensity far greater than anyone expected end to my belief in the first 18 months more than a quarter million officials were formally charged with corruption, one quarter million. it is more than clearing the old guard has so far well over 100 have committed suicide. in india lysias the picture is any brighter there.

so now the intention is of the administration is quite revolutionary without political capital now evaluating the first year i would give him a gentleman's cb their expectations were exceptionally high but do be fair most economic indicators or even before they took office has been improving so machines reserves are increasing the deficit is shrinking so is the current-account deficit.

with said diesel subsidies. and there is no big bang reforms that india is so sorely needs right now. if india is getting enormous growth i'd like china that began declining in 2012 india has to create 12 million new jobs per year they will not do it. not 12 million. so far the only economic policy required was the of rollback the law that makes a hard to acquire land. and government needs the structure in the goods is

service packs meant to simplify the nasty complicated tax system mission of easily passed the first year but it did not. the bottom line so the perception it would be another thatcher and raisin -- reagan wanted a smaller government. i don't think smaller government was ever the intention. he wants more efficient government and there is a very big difference. i will finish with a quick comment on the other russia.

living in 24 months but has changed radically from the 1990's if you are canadian or english they cannot tell from the acts and. even during the '90s the russian parliament almost in impeached yeltsin in the 1980's. with flooded your putin and the media was relatively free i am telling you this year the media print radio tv is completely controlled

by the kremlin. all the important decisions go to the kremlin. the state run by the internal security apparatus so the population and has stabilized why? because per capita incomes rose. so another reason of the soviet union that generation is having babies. what happened the birth rate of the 1990's? it crashed and burned a decade from now is a resumption of the rapid decline of the russian birth rate and population.

and which i studied intently for two years is not very complicated. it is the petrol state even more now than eight years ago it takes $110 a barrel to run the budget. we're not to be been close. to have massive exchange-rate reserves but you can burn for those quickly but the economy is contracting least three-quarters. so russia has been floating on a blissful sea of hydrocarbons.

i know my presentations tent to be bleak why they call that a dismal science. when i present with my boss who was on vacation today, he only wants to present with me in eight in the afternoons and peking go get a drink. [laughter] i will finish with a'' from one of my favorite movies the classic wall street. and holbrooke tells them a man looks into the abyss seen nothing back at him.

i am an economist i like a crisis because you don't get structural reforms normally indienne 1981 and after that the large structural reforms but as for russia is vladimir putin and he will not change until he is gone. thank-you. [applause] >> the bar will be open after words. thank you for your presentation rehabed a few minutes left for questions

we have a gentleman here with the microphone if you could just raise your hand to identify yourself up briefly in the interest of time please ask a question and keep it short. >> but the other experts on that? but it is something my colleague would agree with that is continuity so a the marketplace expectation so

not only to understand the financial crisis so to consolidate power to make sense and a chinese political context it forestalls those reforms setter needed to move china from the economy of principles based on the rule of law. but to defer those economic reforms since the stage because it is the of reform to tackle those underlying issues. ice understand politically what he is doing and it upsets the old school to clear out the old guard but by a chief during that.

>> to decide but more thing. but simply there is no transparency. but i look at s&p 500 and variables of said graf with a reported cash flow for the process of u.s. companies the kitchen of extraordinary items right off. and how can that be they cannot pay i taxes if they

have a loss of low earnings the why would they do that? the worse here in one is to be audited for swann and also in shanghai are rated close to john. so a lot has to change first.

>> thank you terry from the heritage foundation and. but to link that back to freedom as recently as 2008 in the united states for the governments to enact structural reform to contribute to stronger economic growth in the future. how can we help insure that when we have a crisis from 2008 to help promote positive reforms to increase economic freedom that have

just the opposite impact. >> this is why we have to make a 2016 campaign resolution. so with that economic theory that reflex it is pay-to-play and one requires is someone to stand up face-to-face with donald trump that has reflected a a ted nor but point out that philosophy but 2.0 the underlying philosophy of the

reasons why the individual if he rejects that nativism isolationism with every you could attach to donald trump with the courage to evade but their willingness is remarkable. it was the crisis pleded did require that. we have the tendency to think america has declined there is of a larger share of the global economy simply because the institutional

setting in the united states is so strong to live with the benefits of that freedom. but with all due respect good for congress the from the point of the rest of us this is a protective and that is of the politicians seized. and why you need to fight for freedom is to see where hillary is going but it has to come out on the republican side standing up to china on what is where the country ought to go.

>> i hope that sounded as harsh as it was meant to be a. [laughter] >> there is always a great report there is one problem it is easy to miss the trees for the forest because day stick out. free data is good of my wallet? no part of my wife? no. there are limits to free trade is one of those. and the second to this crap going from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation 70% of electronics are made in east asia is there any particular problem?

>> i will start with of basic tale as well as the freedom side of free trade to date -- to debris have of leading opponent to the ford motor company there is a 25% tariff looking at entrepreneurs there is of lazy notion it takes place is silicon valley and we take to -- tend to forget it is a business like landscaping for the largest capital purchase is a pickup truck. we are imposing a 25% tax before anyone has earned there first dollar. that is what ford motor company is asking to maintain. so the team at tpp the first

thing i am thinking about why is that hispanic person trying to curry favor business in these jobs -- she saw acidulous it is subject to a 25% tax because they have that protection? . . >> reflects why we should be concerned about that. we should pursue the idea of

freedom choice for the benefit of eliminating the tax that is we see that injury our ability. we should be clear conscious of the areas that you are inviting the force which would limit down the road, my response would be on free trade and we are trying to vindicate our rules in the marketplace and deep concerns about whether and when other place that is violate those rules start the undermine our ability to deliver in abroad. >> okay, yes, sir. >> with cti of taiwan. will the volatility of the stock market have any negative impact on ping's position when he comes

here for a state visit next month? will it make him more acceptable or easier to make deals or concessions to the u.s. another issue with taiwan, we all know that the taiwanese is dependent on the mainland. it's slower than expected growth and potential financial crisis have any impact on taiwan. are there anything that taiwan can do to prevent that? thank you. >> yeah. >> let me say this. you look at the fact ris right now, brazil is in recession. recently four years ago china was growing at almost 10%.

it's probably half of that down and grinding down slowly. when ping comes to washington in september, he won't be strutting in. so you've seen -- again, the u.s. economy has always written off on 81-82. it's, you know, it's resuscitated once again. the fundamentals are pretty strong while asian corporates. >> loading, u.s. corporate balance sheets are in prestine condition. i was in they -- taiwan about

nine months. we used to be the largest trading partner during postwar period. a lot has reversed, a lot because of the proximity. 40% goes to china, in many cases preassembled and exported again. you have to be careful with the figure. it's a little complicated. 70% of taiwan's outward bound foreign investment goes to china and if they end up approving the service agreement, that could go both ways through taiwan. i mean, after living in china the service sector, the service sector is extremely poor. there's no culture in terms of -- in the surface industry

providing quality services. spending an afternoon in a restaurant, you realize that clear quickly. so there's a possibility taiwan could do well because it has a much more sophisticated service sector. of course, on the other hand, given the differences in size, the chinese economy now is 25 times largers. iit's ten times largers. it's worried about medium enterprises about being consumed and swallowed if the service agreement is passed. so we are concerned about that. >> so i think ping will come strutting into town because he has read his opposition accurately. the president has invested.

the idea the president obama tries to undermine what he views, same thing with iran deal, with other things, it's exactly what ping looks for. the reality is, lets not kid ourselves, the most revealing things we say is it's the criticism about other people. the chinese would describe the united states as a paper. the reality is much more unsettling. this is a country that has ruled for the benefit of people. not for the rest of society. we should be concerned politically and economically but that won't play out in terms of

meeting with president obama. >> i take the liberty of asking the last question. going back to the question that terry was asking about how do you -- how do you direct a chris -- crisis in the right direction. the one about ronald reagan and how that got turned in one direction. what were the differences? what was going on in the country that allowed the politics to go in different directions? i don't know the answer to that. maybe you do have it but it did remind me of another thing. clearly in the case of reagan and thatcher there was a widespread perception that the direction the country was going was not working and they thought they understood what the cause was. there wasn't a lot of confusion about it. there was a high inflation from the 1970's, leads me to the

federal reserve. by keeping the interest rates low and putting all the money into the system every time the stock market hiccups, same thing happens with china. this is creating the artificial perception that things are better than they actually are. it's hiding the structural problems. politically benefiting the party or the movement who wants the easy answers on security, collectivism and all the thing that is you mentioned. there's not 2,000 people in this room. we talk about hard things. we have -- i think we speak the truth. >> yeah. >> but the truth is not always what people want to hear. so my question to you is talk about the federal reserve, talk about this issue and is it possible to unwind that problem without having the kind of pain that actually could put the crisis in the direction in which direction i don't know it could go, but the point is right now

artificially a lot of americans are not seeing the reality of what's going on. >> you raise such an interesting question as always. it is the central problem. if you think about the debt crisis we've had, there's just an excess of debt that has been flowing freely for a very long time. what we've done is bent that with the existing policies. we are simply -- the federal reserve augmenting crisis down the road. how do you try and cock -- combat that despite its failings, it's a real problem.

somebody who is pragmatic, is one that is built in keep the money flowing. it's a traj -- tragical matter. he was disregarded in the 1940's and 1950. he was shun because he was speaking the truth. an economist in a clear practical way. when we measure inflation we look at goods and so we delude ourselves about the period of private financial crisis, even though you see inflation popping

up in other aspects. so ironically all the data that you're looking at that persuades most people that things things e steady as you go lets stay where we are, ignore the very feature, that's where we are stuck. china, frankly, because it had the opportunity to take advantage of the period with the rapid growth, investment, foreign reserves is now stuck with a problem that was once in the united states, once in asia, within russia, but it's money -- debt that's sloshing around the system. that really has to start with a little bit politics. there has to be some courage on the people to stand up and say this is not what it purports to be. >> any others? >> satisfying answer, i have to admit. [laughs] >> all right. i hope everyone will join me in

thanking the participants, i think it was an interesting session. i learned a lot. so stay tune for economic freedom. it comes out in january 2016. thank all of you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> we're showing on core presentation of washington journal normally seen in mornings on c-span, discussion on transgender rights followed by journalist on an article she wrote on paid family leave. members will consider a

resolution of disapproval regarding the iran nuclear deal. tonight we will bring reaction negotiated by president obama. in july the president explained the plan during a speech during the american university. here is some of his speech. [applause] >> now, because more sanctions weren't produced the results that the critics want, we have to be honest, congressional rejection of this deal leaves any u.s. administration that is absolutely committed to preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon with one option, another war in the middle east. i say this not to be provocative, i'm stating a fact. without this deal iran will be in a position however tough our

rhetoric maybe to suddenly advanced the capabilities. it's breakout time which has already fairly small could shrink to near zero. does anyone really doubt that the same voices now raised against this deal won't be demanding that whoever is president bomb those nuclear facilities? as someone who has believed and began since the beginning of my presidency, i can tell you that alternative to military action has been exhausted that the world unanimously supports. so lets not mix words. the choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form

of war, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now but soon. >> you can watch the entire event tomorrow night at 8:00 o'clock eastern on c-span, explanations and assessments of the iran nuclear deal every night this week as congress prepares to return to capitol hill next week and take a resolution to disapprove of the disagreement. >> a signature feature of book tv is day coverage with top nonfiction authors, here is our schedule. beginning this weekend we are live from the 15th annual national book festival from our nation's capitol. in early october the southern festival of books in nashville. the weekend after that, we are live from austin for the texas book festival and near the end

of the month we will be covering two book festivals. it's the wisconsin book festival in madison. and back on the east coast, the boston book festival. at the start of november we will be in portland oregon, followed by the national book awards in new york city. we are live for the 18th year in a row from florida from the miami book fair international. that's a few of the fairs and festivals this fall on c-span2's book tv. >> the american bar association hosted conference in washington, d.c. one discussion on the increasing number of drones, the security risk they impose and how to be regulated. this is just over an hour. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> i'd like to thank you and the rest of the team for putting

together premium conferences, not only that the ada puts on, that is anywhere, but i think the great thing about conferences like this is the information that's conveyed but the ability to see friends and make new ones. just to be a good guest, i'm going to be at the cocktail reception and trying to sample all the free aba cocktail which is clear good. in all seriousness it's an important part of the event. don has put together a tremendously talented panel here, myself excluded, and it really is an honor. i'm not going to go through their bios in a lot of detail. i'm going to talk -- just give you their title so you can who

orient yourself. we have jay stanley, from the aclu speech privacy and technology project, and, of course, we have don but also scott glick who is senior counsel, preparedness response in the national security division of the department of justice. and let me put something really hard here. we have some government officials on our panel. they are not speaking for the government, they're speaking for themselves. they were kind enough to share their views with us and fred is a retired military officer but he's not speaking nor am i speak for the air force or any entity. [laughs] >> and so that's a wonderful

thing. now, just to help us get oriented, we're -- there's a lot of unmanned systems or drones or whatever you want to call them, drones is kind of the bad word for industry, i think, as well as for the military because it implies things that aren't true about the technology. and in the military there's lots of classes of unmanned systems and in the civilian world as well. what we are going to focus is on the little uas. show and tell meaning it's not going to be flying in here, i don't think. if it is, it was unbriefed. we're not going to be talking about armed drones overseas. we are going to be talking about the challenge that we have here in the u.s. domestically because

there's been so much focus recently on safety, privacy and things like that. it's a -- it's a really complex problem and since i've dived into it i'm kind of surprised that some things that are not regulated and -- and i think it's the question of the technology or the administration, meaning the administration of the regulation has not caught up with the technology, and so there's lots of unanswered questions, and so what we're going to do is have a conversation here, i'm going to ask a few questions, it's going to go back and forth a little bit and then open to your questions. it's one subject where i think it's important and it will help us if you ask questions because as we're all developing our thinking on this subject, we really need to know what -- what practitioners and scholars and

so forth are thinking of and concerned about. what i found out that i as a scholar, scholar, don't laugh, don, that's my official title now, there's thing that i think are important but not necessarily -- may not necessarily be shared by others. lets start out by talking about -- well just the general question. it seems to me every time i look in the in your news paper, thers something about the little drones, sometimes there's good things and sometimes not good thing. i would like to ask our panelist, what do you perceive as the potential threat that these small unmanned systems prevent to our safety and security, if anything? >> i'll take that one, being a pilot with 4,000 flying hours of

22 different types, and my last job was chief safety amongst other things. the threat right now and a good friend general briggs said it's not a threat, what the question is about is divided into two parts. we have the threat if you're a passenger on an airline. they occupy the national air space clear easily, if you look at ewe -- youtube, you will see a individual bow of this one up at about 4,000 feet over the freeways of california, well within aviation traffic. if you say it's much of a threat, it looks like it's made of traffic, fred, what is that going to do, we know what the

birds did to the u.s. air flight over the hudson. this weighs a little bit less than that, inside it it has something that the birds don't have and that's a battery that has all those warnings and things the lawyers love to have on these explosive capable types of batteries. if that would strike a plain and go down your engine, that would be a threat. those probably aren't being flown by people to have a desire to do ill harm. they're on the ground safe and sound while those on the air are quite frankly at risk. they are done by people who are empowered to operate this because they are so easy and simple to operate. this has a gps. i don't know how to know how gps works. i can take you out and fly it

like an expert in less than five minutes. it's clear inexpensive and anybody can get it and you don't have to have a test to begin flying. you have a threat that has this capability that bureaucracy hasn't kept pace with that's able to fly it. on the other end of the spectrum, you have a capable crowd that has a determined purpose that could use this for ill purposes and use this capability. i'd like to say that it's a revolutionary in aviation because it gives all those aspects of an air force to an individual. only nation states used to actually own that capability to do intelligence surveillance, mobility or even ce -- strike. you can purchase one and have

all the capabilities. you can have those capabilities. that's been shown. just earlier this week in maryland there's an example of a small drone like this actually trying to deliver drugs and money into the prison. that's happened on two other occasions. one in georgia georgia -- and wound in south carolina. there's your mobility, if you will. they've also been used when they were building their plant had a drone that was flying in the construction of their building on a regular basis taking pictures, whoever that was didn't need to have the blueprints to understand how apple was organizing their building. they got it through the drone. and if you're overseas, you heard last october about the coordinated flights in frans and, of course, in japan with

the landing of phantom right on the prime minister's house with part of radio activity in it just to send a message, which sort of leads to another aspect -- >> before we get too much further, what is -- one of the things that surprised me, what is the threshold for the faa regulating these -- these devices? >> right now there are two aspects. number one you can operate commercially if you go through faa section 333, exception process. >> that's for commercially. if you're just a hobbiest. >> the regulations are quite light. there's a note before you fly guideline that if you go into the faa website you can see it, the guidelines is aairports by 5 miles. if you look at the regulations

you'll find that line of sight is the only one that really applies. you can call the airport if you're within five miles, but you don't have to wait for a response. actually, the guideline so to inform that you're there. of course, you do have to abide by restricted air space. you can't fly between 15 miles from ronald regan airport, but i doubt when you order your dji phantom on line that those instructions are on there. >> is there a size or weight that sets up the limitations here? >> 55 pounds or less. to tag on what fred was talking about, the regulation he's talking about is ffa's advisory circumstanceular 91-57 in case anybody wants to look that up. it's not that easy to