mr. trump: now, i hear we are winning by one, tied at two another one. so, i just want to thank everybody. these just came out. won, ir, whenever we like to talk about polls. if we are doing badly -- i don't know about polls. [laughter] when we are doing well, i know about polls. chris christie is here. where is chris? [laughter] [applause] he was a tough competitor. is that we used to drive me crazy. i wasalk about polls, number one. if i was number two, we would not be talking. first of all, thank you very new hampshire was very had a big win. we went on to lots of other places, lots of other places. and we had tremendous support

from so many of our friends and tremendous condiments. tom brady and coach belichik. we does have great relationships. these just came out, literally just came out. rasmussen, national poll. trump, 43. clinton, 41. [applause] los angeles times, national, great paul because a leading. trump, 46 national, clinton, 42. [applause] mr. trump: upi national -- 47.p 49, clinton, reuters, south carolina, trump 49, clinton 44. south carolina is great. that is where we had another great attendance. i will tell you, results during the south carolina primary were amazing. great people. colorado, trump 45, clinton 43. i just left, that was a good

one. [applause] mr. trump: and wisconsin, where i am going tomorrow, they have trump 42 and clinton at 42, and that is ok because i was about 15 points behind three or four weeks ago, i think, right? i am telling you. anyone can check them. now, here is one that is a biggie, upi just came out, like a little while ago. virginia, i love the virginia. tremendous properties in virginia, lots of employees. i think all my employees are voting. i will tell you. 15, clinton,mp, 45. upi, that is a big one. that is a big one. a big surprise. look at the media. they're going crazy. [laughter] [applause] the media is going crazy. they do not know, they cannot

believe this. they are not happy, this is not the way it is supposed to be happening. [applause] mr. trump: the american people, right, this is not what they had in mind. the crooked, crooked media with the crooked, crooked hillary. [laughter] new hampshire, 48, 48. what is wrong? what is going on here? new hampshire, 48, 48. i do not like that. that does not sound like my friends. we are going to win new hampshire. we will win new hampshire. [applause] mr. trump: these all just came out a little while ago. arizona, 52, clinton, 42. how about that? here is a good one. north carolina, upi, trump 50, clinton, 46. woah, look at this one. the state of pennsylvania, where i went to school, went to college, pennsylvania, trump 50, clinton 46. [applause]

mr. trump: and here is another good one, great stay, the people of georgia. trump, 52, clinton, 43. wow. you send it back to the press, so they can examine it. so, i just want to thank you very much. it is really amazing. and i want to thank chris for being here, and all of my friends. steve, all of the friends i have, it is been incredible. you know, i wanted to be here because we have lots of energy and we love the people. and we love the people, in particular because it was my first day, it meant so much for me. and i used to come up, thank you. i feel the same way. i used to come up and we would have meetings with people and they kept talking about heroin, heroin, heroin. i tell the story all over new hampshire buried because it is so different from these beautiful valleys and beautiful

lakes and roads, you talk about heroin and it does not work. but it is a tremendous problem here and all over the country. and we will close up the border, we are going to build a wall. you know, we got the ice endorsement yesterday, great people. [applause] mr. trump: and we got the border patrol endorsement, 16,500. and sheriff joe's endorsement. [applause] sheriff joe is tough and good. but getting ice was tremendous force. i just want to make a quick remark. we will start with howie. and we will start. i know it is hot in here and we want to keep this small. this has nothing to do with sunday, we are just here because we wanted to be here. hillary, frankly, talks about debate prep. it is not debate prep, she is resting. [laughter] she is resting.

and i want to be with the american people, and the people of new hampshire, and she wants to rest. [applause] mr. trump: tonight, we will discuss many issues of great importance to new hampshire. and few states in america have been hurt worse by the trade policies of my opponent, and you know that. nafta has been a disaster, signed by her husband. and you have lost nearly one in three jobs, lost since we made deals with china, wto, what a disaster that was. supported by hillary clinton. the nafta deal signed by her husband, although he did a great thing two days ago, when he was willing to say how bad obamacare was, that was pretty good. that was pretty good. [applause] mr. trump: the open border policies, and i just wrote this

out but i feel it is so important, the open border policies of hillary clinton, including catch and release, another terrible practice, have allowed a massive influx of drugs into new hampshire, and frankly, into states all over our country. almost every state. and it has really fueled the tremendous heroin and drug crisis that we have. we will close up those borders. folks will believe me. and i promise that to you in new hampshire. more than anything else, and they talk about it everywhere i go. i mentioned this state. because really this was really the first glimpse i got of how serious the problem we have, they are poisoning our youth, more than our youth, poisoning everybody. but they are poisoning our youth. it is tough enough out there. our youth that does not have a chance with what is happening. we will not let it happen anymore and we will help the people that are so badly affected. we're going to help them. [applause]

mr. trump: i will bring your jobs that. jobs are leaving like you have never seen before, record levels. i will stop the drugs from coming in. i'm going to create school choice and we will get rid of common core, which is a disaster. [applause] mr. trump: and we will create something very special for every disadvantaged child in this country. of which, we have far too many. we are going to repeal and replace obamacare. [applause] mr. trump: which bill admitted this week is a crazy system. [laughter] can you believe it? mr. trump: hey, at least he is honest. boy, he has suffered. can you imagine that? has he suffered. [laughter] but he said, it is a crazy system. he says it is a crazy system that does not make sense and

does not work, and were people end up with premiums doubled and coverage cut in half. i could not have said it better myself. i have been saying it for two years, longer. i'm going to put him on the campaign. do you think anyone has called him? he did a minor retraction, but you can see he was unhappy about it. remember the name, jonathan gruber? i do not ever forget. the architect, admitted he was sold on lies. he thought he was talking to his friends, turned out not to be a good friend. his friend had a little cell phone, cell phones are brutal. just like e-mails are brutal , unless you want to delete them all. [laughter] [applause] mr. trump: unless you delete about 33,000. but jonathan gruber, the architect of obamacare, admitted it was sold on lies, and talked about the stupidity of the american voter.

right? remember that, the stupidity of the american voter? the only stupidity was that the politicians who ignore the american people and absolutely forced this thing down their throats, hillary clinton wants to double down and make it even worse. i mean, that is ultimately what is going to happen. in me, you have seen what we're going to do. we will have much, much better health care at a much lower price. and people will be very happy. extremely happy. and we are going to take care of those were disadvantaged and cannot afford to do what others can afford to do. we will take care of them better than they are being taken care of now. but you're going to have health care that works, health care wear companies compete to get your business, they will come up with plans you have not even seen or thought about right now, it will be a beautiful thing to see. and i'm sure we will be talking about it sunday night on the debate.

because there is no way we are lose this issue. it is a disaster. obamacare is a disaster. [applause] mr. trump: we will create a more honest government, our government is a disaster. how about the $1.7 million in cash. cash, remember it was going to be $400 million, it turned out to be $1.7 billion in cash. you know that is? that is more than this room/ . he would put it in 100th. although it was from all different nationalities. they said, anybody so stupid to make a deal like this, we do not want their money. [laughter] mr. trump: can you imagine this, these people? they never saw anything like it. and by the way, that is not going to fight terror. they have plenty of money they will use, going to their swiss bank accounts. just encase you have any questions. anyway, we gave it to them, and boy, did we give it to them. i want to let you know we are going to be a country that will

be run properly, and by the time this finishes, we will have tremendous amounts of money that i fund myself. we also have a lot of wonderful people, in terms of small donations. that is coming in fantastically. and we have some people who feel very good about our country under proper leadership. but we are spending a lot of money and we are doing it ourselves. we are very proud of it. we will be very proud of our country. when people call of to ask for certain favors that are bad for the country but good for them, the best part, i do not have to take their phone call. i do not need them. i do not have to take their phone call. [applause] mr. trump: before we go any further, i want to send our are with our hearts all the people and prayers, to , the millions in the past of

what is known as hurricane matthew. it is a big one and a bad one. hopefully it takes a right turn, but it looks like it is going in the opposite direction, not good. it is one of the strongest storms to hit in many decades, and our neighbors in florida and georgia and the carolinas are in the direct path, it seems. southeast florida is taking the brunt. we have a lot of friends in florida, a lot of buildings, and a lot of investments, a lot of great employees. southeast florida is taking the brunt of the storm. to all of my friends in florida, please know we are praying for you. and everyone in the path you have to take care of yourself and get out of the area. you have to listen. you have a great governor, governor scott. and you have to listen. because it could be a really, really bad one. so, it could be a rough couple days, maybe beyond that, we will see what the path is.

we have seen it, the damage in the caribbean, the bahamas, haiti. they say in haiti, they think around 270 people have been killed by this terrible storm. so, to folks in haiti and all over, we will be helping you and we will be with you. and we send our best wishes and prayers. we have a tremendous problem that i think is brewing right now, as we speak. we will know in about four or five hours. i just spoke to rick scott, and governor christie spoke to rick scott. it looks like it is just four or five hours away. but whatever happens, we are with everybody. because it looks like it is going to be a bad one, maybe the worst in a long time. with that, howie carr has been amazing. i don't know if he is allowed to

think he supports me. i do not know if he supports me -- i am not sure he has allowed to, but i think he probably does. [applause] mr. trump: he has been amazing, and he is a very talented guy, he is a terrific guy with a terrific family. they said, let's get how we -- howie. you have some questions. howie: i do. i have a clock on the store that says, two minutes. do you want me to call you when it goes over two minutes? mr. trump: tell you what, if i and doing well, do not call me. if i am answering the question poorly, please call me immediately. . you can go and 30 second. howie: first of all, if i have the name, i will have the first person to stand up. this is matthew, in bedford, new hampshire. mr. trump: hi, matthew.

matthew says after the first debate, some within the party suggest you should have gone after hillary more. did you hold back, and you plan on criticizing her more this weekend? mr. trump: i did hold back, i thought it was inappropriate to say what i was really thinking. and i think i held back for good reason. i think for good reason. i would much rather have it be on policy, and i did not like getting into the gutter. and so i did hold back. also, honestly, this was the so-called commission on presidential debates. give me a break. did you see where they came from? one of them comes from the hillary camp, had person. howie: how does your microphone work? mr. trump: my microphone works perfectly. it is ingesting, i went there before and said, boy, the mike c is so great.

unfortunately, they turned it up and down. everybody in the room saw it. we had a real problem. the head of the debate said, it was a serious problem. he told us to mayor giuliani. it was a serious problem after the debate. an hour and a half. he said now that the debate is over i am going backstage to find out what is wrong. [laughter] mr. trump: i said, oh great, that helps. but i really felt like one and to keep it on as high a level as possible. let us see what happens. let us see what happens. i think we are all better off if we can do that because it is about issues and policies. [applause] howie: you kept it at one minute and 20. mr. trump: good. howie: what do you see are the biggest foreign-policy failures of the last 15 years? mr. trump: do we have 24 hours to talk about it? look, we have had failures at every level, i think the iran deal is one of the worst deals i have ever seen, it will lead to nuclear weapons.

i was with bibi netanyahu the other day and talked about it. not to reveal what he said, but i can tell you what i said. this is horrible for israel and horrible for our country. it is a horrible deal because over a short period of time, within 10 years, going to be ending up with nuclear weapons. path.have like a o on top of it, we gave them back $150 billion. we paid ransom for our hostages, obviously, and obama said it had nothing to do -- why did they delay it? until august money came in? most importantly, it is a bad deal. i am all for deal. i happen to think that nuclear is about the biggest problem we have in the world today. obama thinks it is global warming. i think it is nuclear, in the hands of the wrong players. this is devastating, there is no winner. there will never be a winner with nuclear, believe me. and so i think deals are fine, but they have to be good deals.

the deal made by secretary kerry never left the table, he just agreed, agreed. you would want something, they would say no, he would leave the table. so sad, but there is one example of a horrible thing, we should never have gone into iraq. should never have gone into iraq. but of equal importance, but almost equal importance, how we got out. obama created this incredible vacuum, isis was formed, a lot of different problems happened. and totally destabilized. you know the surge, whether you , are in favor of going in or not, the surge worked. then all of a sudden, boom. then we announced we are leaving here. how about mosul? they keep saying we will attack mosul, why did they say that? a letter the bad guys, the leaders of isis are there.

isn't there an element of surprise? remember when we were young and we were studying history and they would talk about the great great attacks.e it was called the element of surprise? one that be nice if we attacked first, and talked about the great victory later? no, seriously. [applause] mr. trump: they're wasting their time attacking mosul. because everyone we want will be gone. it will be also billions and tremendous death and carnage. the people we want, hey, they will tell the leaders, get the hell out of here. it is a very sad thing. we are run by people who are incompetent. i will tell you that. [applause] howie: is charlene here?

mr. trump: how are you? howie: charlene says, mr. trump, i am an eighth generation american of mexican descent. i live in california, you have my vote. i want to help other hispanics see the truth. she talks about how the current administration and the border security and sanctuary cities are increasing drugs and crime. what would you say to convince hispanics besieged by barack obama, and hillary clinton, and the biased media to vote for you? mr. trump: thank you very much. i appreciate it. there was a gentleman who owns a radio station, all hispanics, and he was arguing with one of the hosts. he said you don't understand, the people who are calling in, hispanics, they're all for donald trump. i said i was even surprised, but i am for donald trump also. this is happening more and more. i just got back. i just got back from las vegas. we had a tremendous crowd of

people. a lot of hispanics. and latinos, they like to be called in that area, you know that, right? hispanics and latinos. we had tremendous response, just tremendous outpouring of love. it was amazing. and, you know, people that are here illegally, they don't want people coming across the border illegally, taking their jobs, homes, whatever they want to take. and we want people to come in. i want you would come in so bad, but have to come and legally. you know, we have a country, and we have laws. we have a border. and if you don't have a border, you don't have a country. but i think the biggest surprise, two surprises, we are going to do great with african-americans. you look at what is happening with the inner cities, it is a disgrace. and the democrats have been running them for up to 100 years. unbroken. and the african-americans, believe me, i think we are doing -- you see how the numbers are changing. one thing they don't have a lot of confidence in hillary clinton. she has lied to them for years. she does not produce, she just does not produce. but i think we're going to do great with the african-americans. you look at the poverty in the inner cities, the crime, the

education, and there are no jobs. and we are going to do fantastic with hispanics. i believe that. [applause] we are keeping it. well. doing sharon whitaker, from here in sandown. mr. trump: hi, karen. thank you. thank you. i like this audience. [applause] howie: how do you define the income range for middle-class? it cannot be based upon where you live, because the tax goes not discriminate on geography. mr. trump: the middle class has been left behind. taxes are too high, jobs have been taken away from you. a lot of our companies, a lot of great companies have left our country. they have gone to mexico and other places. china is making so much of our product, we don't make any product anymore, like we used to. and i will tell you, such a great question, because the middle class has been treated so badly by the politicians.

i mean, it is like for gotten married and we are lowering taxes, as you know, way down for the middle class. we are changing the tax structure completely. we had seven brackets, now we have three. and we are bringing it down actually for those making not a lot. it is zero. and we don't want them because it is huge bureaucratically and extremely costly, but we are bringing the rates down to numbers that are much lower. you have seen the numbers. much lower. and you are going to have a much lower tax rate. hillary clinton is raising your taxes way up. i don't even know what she's thinking. we are already the highest taxed nation in the world. just about. the committee find, every once a while, they will fact check me. now, there is a nation you have never heard of. where it is slightly higher. we are just about, of the industrialized nations, we are the highest taxpayers in the world. we are the highest taxed nation in the world. our business taxes will be brought from 35%, 15%, we're

cutting regulations. we want regulations, for environmental. we want regulations, for safety. but the regulations are massive, howie. they are massive. and we're cutting the regulations at a tremendous slope, and i would say 70% of the regulations can go. it is just stopping businesses from growing. and i think you are going to see a tremendous change in this country. we are going to see jobs come back. we are going to see companies come back into the country. right now, they are leaving. it is a one-way street. we have a one-way street right out of the country. and they are going largely to mexico and other places, but mexico is the eighth wonder of the world. i tell the story a lot. i have a friend who builds these massive plants. he says, donald, you have to see what is going on in mexico. i said how about our country? he said not so much. we will switch that around here . and we will get along the mexico by the way.

we have to switch that around. it is a one-way highway out of the u.s. inie: is cappa c. londonderry here? cappa c.? i recently graduated magna cum laude with a bs in chemistry and i'm having trouble finding a job. what is your plan to bring jobs back to america? mr. trump: that is the biggest problem, that takes place with so many. and even though it is 100 degrees in the room, it was not meant for that many people, you do know that. right? i heard the other night, i was making a speech and we had tremendous, massive crowds and it was really hot. so, a little warm, there might've been a little bit of sweat. and one of these dishonest people said donald trump was sweating. i said, sweating? it was 100 degrees. [laughter] [applause] and guess what, we are all sweating tonight? that is ok. that is good. that is healthy. the biggest problem you have is that people go to college. that is great. isting out magna, that

really smart. it is fantastic. but people go to college, they borrow money, up to here, up to their neck in debt. they get out and can't get a job. it is such a massive problem. they can't get a job. the really good jobs are gone, and they have gone to other countries. and so many other countries are making our product. i want to see the day when you can get those great marks, that incredible profession, which you love probably, or you would not have been so high up in the class, right, at the top? but i want to see the day we have those jobs back in this country at the highest level. i want to see the day when apple will make the iphone in this country, instead of making them in china, vietnam, all over the place. [applause] mr. trump: ok? and believe me, if i'm president, that is going to happen. i use apple, but apple is not making them here, mostly china, now vietnam, which is becoming very strong for this.

they are going to start making them here. we have the people. we have the most unbelievable people. if i have learned one thing in going around, we started on june 16 of last year, and i have got ten to know the people. and we have by far the biggest rallies that people have seen, far bigger than bernie, he was second, far bigger. now, bernie's not so big. by the way, they are very small. bernie made a big mistake. by the way, bernie sanders would have been legendary, if he did not make a deal with the devil. when he made that deal, his stock went way down, way down. i mean, honestly, even as somebody that has disagreed with him on a lot of things, other than trade, we agree very much on trade, very, very much. on trade, except i will do things about trade, because i like free trade, but i want to make great deal fair trade. he was right, because our country is being ripped off on jobs and everything. but we are going to have a country that makes product again. we are to have a country that apple and these other great companies are going to make

their product in our country, and we're going to have lots of people working, including yourself. we have to do that. ok? thank you. [applause] howie: is bob swanson here? bob swanson? mr. trump: hi, bob. howie: this is one of my favorite questions. when you become president, can you assure the american people you are going to clean house from the top, at the fbi, justice department, state department, v.a. and in what order would you start? [applause] mr. trump: well, i guess we will be talking about this for a while to come, but i have to tell you, it is one of the saddest things i've ever seen happen to our country. what has happened with hillary clinton, where you send e-mails , where they send a subpoena, and they want all of your e-mails, i mean, if you're in private business and you do what

she did, it is called -- ok, the united states congress, congress, sent a subpoena, wanting e-mails. and she gets the subpoena and she deletes 33,000 e-mails. and many other things, including lying all over the place. and you see people who have suffered greatly, including etraeus, for doing a tiny fraction of what she did. we can talk about it online. -- all night. but the lies she told the congress, and the lies she told to the people. you see the fbi give her a no anything, no swearing in. you don't have to even swear in? they questioned her on the fourth of july. and then, they released the

findings on labor day, right before labor day. everyone is gone, they're gone here and there. i think what has happened with respect to -- because i have respect for the people in the fbi, and i have such incredible people, what has happened to the fbi and to the justice department and the highest level, honestly, i think it is one of the saddest things i've ever seen in this country. whether we like it or do not like it, to look at what is happened and to look at the way it has been handled, and you know, every time i speak this is mentioned. the people in this country are very, very angry. and i would think that some of these great fbi agents and the people that work within the fbi, i would imagine they are just furious as to what has happened to the reputation of the fbi. so, i mean, i think it is an amazing question. honestly, it is like we are a third world country. it is one of the saddest things

i had ever seen happen in this country, and it happened to justice, and that is probably i guess the way you feel also? yeah, it is very sad. >> a quick follow up, what would you do with comey? mr. trump: i just am very disappointed. you know, when he read the charges and he is going 1, 2, 3, 4 -- i'm saying, wow, they're going to do the right thing. then, he goes -- essentially, however, it was amazing. to go point after point, and that was only a few of them. so, it is very disappointing. very disappointing. howie: sharon osbourne from auburn? sharon? sharon? >> with the conservative

holdouts that were not on the bandwagon yet, what can you say to convince them that you have support for traditional conservative rights, to endorse you? mr. trump: we don't have too many. i will be honest with you, the press likes to report we have some of these long-term people that have done such a bad job. look at the problem our country is in. i would never use these people. and they know that. so then they announce in a group they are going over to hillary, right? you understand. they announce in a group. we have tremendous support, including a couple of your very distinguished folks from new hampshire, who were against me, who are now for me. and you are allowed to announce the names, but we have tremendous support in new hampshire. one of them was very tough and very smart. go ahead. >> john sununu? mr. trump: that's true. i watched him as a boy. he is tough. >> his son is four points up. company that is good.

-- mr. trump: that's good. i thought it was terrific. i mentioned the other day. and, i'm sorry, i think they're great people, but he was tough. i tell you what, he was really hunting for trump. and you know what, i have respect for somebody who can go over -- who can go the other way, a pivot, as you would say. but i very much appreciate the family, and the fact that they are with me. and i am with them. and they are going to do very well. he will do very well. i see the numbers. you know, one of the things that happened, they thought oh, trump, i have never done this. but i've done very well in life and business, a lot of things very well, but i've never done this. all of the points that we will take down the center and the senator? you know how well their -- how well the republicans are doing? i guess there is a gentleman in illinois not doing so well. this guy was actually taking out ads against me. i said are you sure he is a republican? maybe he is a democrat. but that is his problem.

he was not for me. that was for political reasons. but if you look at what is going on, now they are all talking about -- in fact, the other day i saw very interestingly, you know, donald trump is having a very positive effect on these races. the republicans are going to hold. they're doing terrifically well, far better than anyone thought. and frankly, we are winning states and are going to win some states that would never in a million years -- you know this, be in play. we have some states like colorado, somebody else would not do well. we're doing great. i think we are leading colorado and -- in one of of the polls that came out. i just left, we are leading a lot of places, and doing at least very competitively in a lot of states that absolutely would not be for republicans. and one of the funny things, they do the maps. remember, i watched the people that do the maps.

it is tougher for the republicans, i have to tell you, but they said there is a very small path. i was watching the other day, and the same person was saying, wow, this pathway is getting a lot wider. does that mean they were happy about it, but -- now there are four different paths. nate silver, you know, he did not predict us in the primary. he never called a loser before. he has always been on the right side of what happened, in terms of at least his predictions. he did not predict me in the primaries, and in all fairness, he has never seen me, never spoken to me, never saw what we did. you know, we had 17 very talented people. one by one by one, it was a beautiful sight to watch. [applause] mr. trump: by the way, those people, most of them endorsed me. ben carson, chris christie, so

many of them endorsed me. they are great. scott walker has been incredible. >> he helped pence. mr. trump: mike pence has been incredible. he did a great job last night. [applause] howie: that brings me to another question from lois, and brentwood. mr. trump: thank you, lois. did you really say, lois asks, were you upset about mr. pence's debate success, as john harwood said? mr. trump: john harwood was the worst moderator out of all the debates we had. how many did we have, 11 or 12? he was so bad. this guy knows nothing about me. i was so happy. i saw today that someone on cnn, the clinton news network, who knows nothing about us, they use john king, actually. i like him on the maps, does a good job. i like them better than i did a couple of months ago, because a couple of months ago i had no chance area now all of a sudden -- no chance. now all of a sudden that map is getting very red. [applause] but john king said, you know,

they always have a source, they always have a source. nobody talks to him. nobody talks because he is, like, the enemy, the enemy, but a few of the people said donald trump was first happy, then he was unhappy because mike pence did so well. i said unhappy? we are jumping up and down. and i tell you what, he is a great human being. you cannot root against him. you can't. [applause] mr. trump: i was telling chris christie, can you imagine the people saying that i would have loved to, you know, see him not do well because that makes me look better? these people -- that is why a guy like john king has stayed in the same position. how long has he be in -- has he been at cnn? i used to say someday he would be an anchor. guess what? he is still doing the maps. no, i was so happy. i can give you my word on this, i was so happy that mike did well.

i was rooting him on, and we were talking all during the day, and i was giving him some ideas, and we were running things by each other. it is so disconcerting. even tonight, they said donald trump is going to new hampshire to practice for sunday. this has nothing to do with sunday. they make you like a child. i love the people of new hampshire. this was set up a little while ago. they were going to cancel it, and i said why are you going to cancel it? they said, well, you wanted debate prep. i said, forget debate prep. give me a break. do you think hillary clinton is in debate prep? she is resting. she wants to build up her energy for sunday night. and you know what, that is fine. but the narrative is so foolish. i'm here for one reason. i love the people of new hampshire. i said i was going to be here, and i am here. very simple. [applause] howie: this one is unsigned, but

it's a good question. mr. trump: that is trouble. howie: what advice would you give to people trying to pursue the american dream? mr. trump: always go into what you love doing. you may have parents pushing you one way, but you have to do what you love. i say this all the time in speeches and everything. i mean, i will speak in front of young people, because i love doing it. i say, always follow your dream, always go into what you love, and never, ever quit or give up. i have seen a lot of people, big people and not so big, usually not a big because if they quit they won't get big, the most successful people i have been -- i have met are the people who never quit and never give up. they just don't take no for an answer. do something that you really love doing, because that is not work. and never, ever quit or give up. do one or two more? [applause] mr. trump: thank you. howie: i think you have dealt

with this one before. it is from al. mr. trump: hello, al. howie: stand up, al. al wants to know what you are doing with the v.a. -- irump: the veterans have gotten close to some of you -- a lot of it started with new hampshire and iowa, but i really got close to the vets. in many cases, they are living in hell. what is going on with the veterans administration between longorruption, the long, waits, 22 suicides a day. when i heard that, i said, that's impossible. 22 suicides a day, much because they cannot get to see a doctor. howie, they wait in line for five or six days, and at the end of the sixth day, the doctor says, sorry, i'm going on vacation. vets tell me this, they have really great doctors, but

getting to see them is sometimes almost impossible. we are going to solve, finally, the problem of the veterans administration. we have illegal immigrants that in many cases are treated better than our veterans. you know that and everybody knows that. they are being treated better than our veterans. that's not going to happen. one of the things we're going to do is, the lines are impossible. just days and days to see the doctor. when that circumstance happens, we will let our veterans go across the street, around the corner, two miles away, and see a doctor, private, or a hospital, public or private, where they are looking for work, would have wonderful people looking for work. take care of their problem, and we will pay the bill. and that is going to be the cheapest thing we can do, the cheapest thing we can do. [applause] mr. trump: and al can tell you, a lot of the vets i recognize

in the room can tell you, everybody is in love with the plan. we will keep the plan, but keep the veterans administration, keep the hospitals, keep the buildings, because i think that is important. we have to take care of our vets. these are people that would not be here if it weren't for the vets. but when they are waiting in line, and they know there is no end in sight, and honestly, they are dying. they need a simple procedure, they need a prescription, they need something very easy, and they end up dying. is a very sad thing, so there -- so they are going to be able to go across the street to a public or private hospital, to a doctor, and we're going to take care of our vets. for the first time, we're really going to take care of our vets. ok? [applause] howie: is pete from nashua here? pete from nashua says hillary clinton wants to give social security and medicare to illegal immigrants through citizenship.

won't this bankrupt the programs? mr. trump: let me tell you, you have heard that, most people do not believe it, but it is true. she is open border. she wants people to just blow through. look, when the border patrol agents come out -- and i have never endorsed endorsed a presidential candidate before, -- and they have never endorsed a presidential candidate before, but these are great people. they want to do their job. it is much harder to do the job, but to stand back and let the men. catch and release is a disaster. but when they want to do their jobs, and it is much more difficult, and they come out and endorse donald trump, who is what happened to the jobs? we're going to build the wall, stopping them from coming from in. , if i win and i become president, first get the

nomination, and that happened, if i become president, i told the people of new hampshire that we are going to stop this crap from coming into your state. 100%. 100%. [applause] mr. trump: it can be done, and it can be done even before the wall goes up. the wall is necessary. i asked the border control, ice folks that endorsed me, and i asked the patrol folks that endorsed me, how important is the wall? you know, i am so committed to the wall. i was pretty sure they were going to say this, but i was not 100%. they said, mr. trump, it is absolutely necessary for us to do our proper job. which made me, you know, gave me a little additional security, as far as the wall is concerned. we need the wall. we have to stop the drugs. heroin, many drugs, we have to stop the drugs from pouring in. believe me, it is poisoning our country, poisoning our youth. and we are going to stop it, and we are going to stop it fast. long before the wall comes up.

we are going to start that wall fast. i didn't build fast. but i will tell you, long before, we are going to stop that poison from coming into our country. ok? one more? [applause] mr. trump: we will do another question. howie: i am going to ask you the kind of question hillary clinton gets sometimes. i'm in, easy. mr. trump: she gets easy ones. by the way, do you see the difference? i am getting boom, boom, boom. with her, what would you do to fix the economy? of course, that is actually a much tougher than you understand, and she doesn't have a clue, but you see the questions i was getting. howie: laura from hampton, new hampshire, are you here? laura: a fun question. mr. trump: let's have a fun question. howie: what is one of your earliest memories as a child, and why do you think it stands out? and then she says "go donald." mr. trump: thank you. i think just the relationship i

had with my parents. you know, my father built houses in brooklyn and queens, and apartments. he was a great negotiator. it was not that he taught me, he would be on the telephone negotiating with the plumber or electrician or sheet rocker, and i would hear this, and i would be playing with blocks at his knee on the floor. i would be listening. and it was always so vivid. and he was always negotiating. and you know what, that is what we need in this country, because people are running away with our country. you look at what is going on, whether it is the border, whether it is our depleted military -- the greatest people on earth are our military people, but they have old equipment. they show fighter jets that are 18 years old. they are so old they don't make the parts anymore. these are fighter jets that our people are flying now, and they have to go into plain graveyards to get parts. and they have to going to

museums to get parts, because they don't make the parts anymore. no, we need a strong military. we need to protect our second amendment. we need to take care of our vets. we need borders. we need great education, getting rid of common core, so important. we need so many things. and by the way, one thing, i and --hnson a new john sununu and a lot of other people felt this was so important when it came out so strongly, united states supreme court. we lost a great justice, justice scalia. we need great justices who are going to uphold our constitution. and if hillary clinton gets in, you are going to have a much different country. so many people feel that is so important. i personally feel it is the most important things. we have to defend our country, and we have to stop people from

coming in from parts of the world where they are looking to do us harm. believe me, they are pouring in. and hillary clinton wants to have them coming in at a rate of 550% more than president obama. we're going to stop it. you know the statement, we are going to make america great again. and it is going to happen quickly. so, thank you very much, everybody. howie: i've got one more question for you, donald. i will let you read it, and remember where you are tonight as you answer. mr. trump: oh, look. the world stairs. [laughter] [applause] mr. trump: of course, it is boston. howie: donald trump, give him around of applause. donald j. trump, the next president of the united states. thank you, donald trump. good luck in florida, good luck in wisconsin tomorrow, and good

luck in st. louis tomorrow night. thank you, donald j. trump. give him a big hand as he leaves. thank you, donald trump. [applause] >> trump, trump, trump, trump!

[indiscernible chatter] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: donald trump to campaign with house speaker paul ryan this saturday wisconsin. cristina marcos is following the story for "the hill." she joins us on the phone, in washington. thank you for joing us. cristina: thanks for having me. >> how did this all come together? cristina: it has been quite a long road for paul ryan and

donald trump. if you will recall, even as recently as last december, when it was not clear he would get the nomination, everyone thought he was still a long shot. paul ryan was denouncing his proposal to ban muslims from the country. and since then, he has criticized trump on a lot of fronts. and for a few weeks, he declined to endorse donald trump, after he effectively clinched the nomination. and as payback, donald trump withheld endorsing ryan and his primary over the summer. and now, here we are, when they will make the first campaign appearance together this weekend. host: it is called wisconsin fall fest. and it sounds like a typical republican event, in the sense that it is happening in a key swing state. republicanthe governor, former presidential candidate scott walker, in attendance. cristina: this happens annually. ryan and other wisconsin

officials normally go to this event. and a source familiar with the planning told me that trump expressed interest in doing a bit with ryan, so the speaker extended an invitation on the ground -- an invitation that he comes to this event that he goes to every year anyway. and this will be interesting. as of right now, there aren't any photographs that you see out there of donald trump and paul ryan appearing together on the campaign trail. so, for someone who has distanced himself quite a lot for donald trump, even after he did officially endorse him, it could potentially be a little awkward for paul ryan. host: senator ron johnson has his own battle for reelection, being challenged by former senator russ feingold, who defeated in six years ago. this is a state both parties say they need if they want to capture or maintain of the u.s. senate next year. cristina: that is right. and ron johnson will be at this event, too, that paul ryan and

donald trump are going to. so, an interesting strategy compared to some of the other vulnerable senate republican incumbents this cycle, like kelly ayotte, pat toomey, who have very much distanced andselves from trump generally don't like to say his name, even. they prefer to say the nominee. ron johnson, meanwhile, he is going to appear in person at the same event with donald trump. host: let me go back to the relationship you talked about the moment ago between house speaker paul ryan. he was mitt romney's running mate four years ago. .he republican running mate romney said he advises people to vote for gary johnson. he did so in a tweet. this relationship between house speaker and donald trump, or lack thereof, how is this going to change or even all war unfold

-- or evolve or unfold with 30 plus days before the election, and will it have an impact? cristina: this will come just one day before the second presidential debate between hillary clinton and donald trump. and the last 10 days or so have been some of the worst ones of donald trump's campaign. and the aftermath of his comments about a former miss universe. and so this could be a pivotal moment for donald trump if he wants to make a comeback in the debate. host: donald trump in wisconsin this weekend with house speaker paul ryan. the reporting of cristina marcos of "the hill" newspaper. her work available online at thehill.com. thank you for being with us. cristina: thanks for having me. announcer: the second presidential debate is sunday night at washington university in st. louis, missouri. previewr coverage for a of the debate, and at 8:30, the

pre-debate briefing from the audience. at 9:00, live coverage, followed by your comments and reactions. the second presidential debate. watch live or on-demand using your desktop, phone, or tablet at c-span.org. to live coverage with a free c-span radio app, available in the app store run google play. -- or on google play. -- as the has been nation elects a new president in november, will america have its first foreign-born first lady since louisa adams, or will he have a first woman president and first tillman? learn more about -- first gentleman? now available in paperback, "first ladies" gives readers the impact of every first lady in american history. "first ladies" is a companion to c-span's well-regarded biography series.

each chapter also offers brief eye on reviews of 45 presidential spouses and theiral photos from lives. "first ladies" in paperback, published by public affairs, is now available at your favorite bookseller, and now as an e-book. today treasury secretary jack lew talked about the global economy and the u.s. financial system, during an event at the peterson institute. topics included the transpacific partnership trade deal and china's economy. >> good morning.

the petersont of institute, and it is my great privilege to welcome the 76 secretary of the treasury of the united states, jack lew. [applause] he has spoken with us before, we are great full to have him back. you all know that secretary lew, prior to becoming secretary of treasury, served as white house chief of staff, previously as director of office of management and budget. we don't have the kind of permanent civil service at the ourest levels at -- that

friends in the uk or japan or france, or even mexico do. jack lew comes close to being a permanent civil servant. his distinguished career including omb director in president clinton's cabinet. i am not going to go through it all. i will say that among his accomplishments in the economic sphere were his final delivery through the congress of the imf reform commitments, which took skill and principle and which we are very proud of him and to be associated with that victory. personalsolely in my capacity, his team has been excellent in management of diplomacy in the last year and a half since the chinese financial turmoil.

we have seen stability and constructive management from the chinese government. which is to the credit of the chinese government in their own interest, but i believe diplomacy from the secretary has helped with that. thank you very much. today, he is speaking on the record. he chooses to do this in a conversational format. we are taking questions from the audience. it's my pleasure to turn it over to the vice president of can -- publications here at the peterson institute. a reminder for those that don't know steve, he joined the institute eight years ago in 2008. he was previously economics correspondent for "the new york times" and a member of the editorial board specializing in politics and economics. he has published numerous

articles both outside the times, bureau chief of the tokyo delhi. we at the institute published his book "the great trade-off: confronting moral conflicts during the great globalization." we are grateful for the foundation for its support of that work. most of all, he is an expert in thinking about tax issues. we look forward to the conversation he will have with the secretary. steve: thank you. thanks for the privilege of this conversation. secretary jack lew, thank you for being here. we have known each other for a long time. as adam said, the global economy is on the agenda this week. the outlook is very mixed.

the imf and others that have said that prospects for growth are not great. my colleague david stockton said last week the global economy is like a driverless car in the slow lane. you should not take that personally. tell us your sense of the outlook. especially, what are the prospects for fiscal stimulus, which everyone seems committed to, but in the case of the united states, it has been challenging to carry out. sec. lew: first let me thank peterson for posting, you for moderating, and adam for the kind introduction. the global economy has been a challenge to get into high gear. it is not a recession. we have to be clear we are talking about slow growth, not a financial crisis or recession. the question is, how do you go

from slow growth to the kind of growth that will help lift people around the world? how you deal with the frustration that is dealing with the benefits of a growing economy? you asked about fiscal policy. we have been trying for many years to make the case that the economic policy makers of the world have to use all the tools we have. you cannot just rely on monetary policy. you need fiscal policy and structural reform to get a coordinated use to get the economy into gear. when i became treasury secretary almost four years ago, there was a pretty heated debate over austerity versus growth. it was as if you could cut your way to growth was one theory, or

spend your way was the other position. we have always used the model of the u.s. economy, how do you use all of the levers? we had a quite aggressive use of monetary and fiscal policy. without a doubt, the recovery act and subsequent enactment of payroll cuts. and after a period of premature sizing, putting savings more in the out years and less in the front years. we had a said that used its monetary levers creatively. and, reforming our financial system, which is what we needed to rebuild the foundation. i would say four years ago, there was not a lot of support around the table for using fiscal tools. there was an exhaustion with

fiscal tools. perhaps it was because of the debt overhang. perhaps it was because of the immediate spending in the moment of crisis. i would say if you fast-forward to today, we've seen a different approach. if you look in the last six months, and look at the actions governments have taken. from china to canada, japan and south korea to europe, you are seeing more willingness to use fiscal space. not every country has an equivalent amount of fiscal space. it has to be a case-by-case use. look at japan. japan could've put more excised taxes in place and grown economy back into recession. they did not. that doesn't mean they don't have a big percentage of debt as

their gdp. they have a long-term problem. you don't solve that by causing a short-term recession. in china, china's national people's congress committed to using more of its fiscal space by increasing its deficit and if time, pushing structural reform. europepe, the spending has been burning with in dealing with the refugee crisis, it has been additive. i'm not saying all the fiscal space has been used. but the efforts to press all policy tools has broken through. we have also had political developments that have made it more acceptable to have this conversation. steve: you left out the united states. of course, that will be determined after november, but

it sounds like you are hopeful there. sec. lew: we sustained it for longer. if you look at the period between 2011-2014, because of the political situation in the united states, we shifted into short-term cuts in annual spending when we should have been doing long-term savings. in the last three years, fairly quietly, you have seen a couple of budget agreements that replaced short-term cuts with longer-term measures. there is a modest tailwind from public spending as opposed to a headwind. i don't want to over dramatize it. it is not a huge gust, but it is

in the right direction. looking at discussions like infrastructure, training, child care, there are domestic needs we need to address. not all of which should be done at the price of deficits. it would not be the worst thing if we rebuild our infrastructure with more long-term credit. steve: let me shift focus a little bit. in a few square miles around where we are sitting, there is a lot of support for globalization and liberalized trade. it is no sick great that around the world, especially in the united states and europe, there has been a backlash. were you able to anticipate that? shouldn't you have anticipated that? what can be done about it in this contentious era? sec. lew: having worked on

trade legislation over four decades, it has never been easy. i think in the current economic environment, we should and did anticipate it would be hard. when i think we have done is produced an agreement in the form of the transpacific meets the testch of improving standards on labor, environment, improving business playing field, letting the u.s. shape the terms of global trade. and when others come up to our standards, we become more competitive. i think we have produced an agreement that can withstand careful scrutiny. why is it a challenge? i think it is -- it is fair to argument,f you win an

the trade agreement grows the economy, you should be most of the way there. you should be able to make the case that a growing economy is better than a shrinking economy or one growing less quickly. you don't have the ability to help people as with an economy that is not growing as fast. growing economies don't necessarily get to where people live. it doesn't get it to factory workers, it doesn't get to people worrying about their children and their opportunities. i don't think this is about tpp. this is about what we're doing to address the concerns people have that government needs to be meeting domestic needs. if we were investing more in infrastructure, which i think we should, if we were investing more smartly in educational training and childcare, i am not

so sure we would be in the same place. around the world, this is a broader phenomenon. our tax policy has to reflect the fact that there is a lot of accumulation of wealth and assets and high incomes that are not very heavily taxed. that gives people a sense that it is not on the level. i pay my taxes, i'm not getting the services i need and now you're telling me that i am going to benefit when the economy grows, i am not seeing that. i don't think that is an excuse not to do tpp. i don't think you can win the argument by saying let's grow the economy more slowly. i think we will prevail in tpp with the quality of the argument, but we cannot stop there. we have to focus on long-term issues. steve: those are all long-term ideas. you have an urgent timetable to get tpp enacted next month.

how will you do that? the vote we had was a harder vote, it was an obstruction. -- abstraction. it was giving permission structure for an agreement. i can point to countries where labor standards are being raised because of tpp. it is already having the kind of effect we would predict it would have feared i don't know how you improve competitiveness by stepping back from that. i don't know how you improve competitiveness i saying that we will not write the rules, we will leave the space for others to write the rules. we have a strong geopolitical imperative. the arguments i am suggesting are not an excuse not to do tpp. it is a reason why you cannot only talk about tpp.

we have a habit about talking about things like trade assistance at the moment of passing a trade agreement, and there is a growing skepticism about what happens in between. we have to make it clear these are commitments that are important and don't begin and end with one vote. we can show a fair amount of credibility because we have put forward concrete proposals as an administration for several years. it will ultimately come down to votes. i think that if you voted for trade promotion authority and the standard was to have an agreement that would raise standards in me a high bar, i think we can meet that task and we will make the case over and over again. i think we can get there. steve: hope so.

let me switch to taxes. specifically, corporations going abroad for tax havens. your administration has been pretty tough on wanting to get rid of these tax havens. and yet, in the case of apple, you were upset that the forpeans went after apple getting a special tax deal in ireland. is there a contradiction there? sec. lew: no. i think if you look at what the european commission has done -- let's start with what we agree on. we agree that large multinational corporations should not be able to game the international tax system to avoid paying taxes anywhere, or to pay at such a low rate that it is offensive to our common sensibilities. we agree on that. what we don't agree on is having

one sovereign entity reach into another sovereign entities tax space and change tax loss retroactively, which is what we believe the decision did. we have a very clear proposals on the tax code. we built some bipartisan support for that the idea that u.s. income should be subject to a minimum tax. if we were doing that, i don't know that the pressure would have been as high. we have a statutory rate that is highest in the developed world. with lowther countries tax rates that are essentially a risk, the bottom can be a magnet for companies willing to avoid paying the average rate. we have to fix are part of the

problem, which is not being so far above the average. we have a tax code riddled with loopholes and deductions. others have to feel international pressure not to run the race to the bottom and create disparity. the answer is to not reach into each other's tax base. over the last four years, we made more progress on base erosion and profit shifting than people dead in 20 years. dealing with transfer pricing, how to coordinate our systems. i think the answer is more work like that and less reaching into each other's areas. steve: you mentioned bipartisan support. there seems to be a disagreement about how to handle that $2 trillion.

where is the deal? sec. lew: amongst tax writers there is a broad sense that there ought to be a minimum tax on income overseas. i would not say we have agreed on the rate. but if you can get around the negotiation table and there is a low and high rate, you are in a place for traditionally our political system has been able to find a compromise. this is not been in opportunity moment to save bipartisan agreements on policy issues. even in that space, there have been conversations that have laid a groundwork. there is a crossover on international tax reform. if you were to apply a minimum tax rate to money parked overseas, it would produce one-time revenue which cannot be used to cut rates because it is not recurring revenue.

the question becomes, what would you do with it? some would say to reduce the deficit. a stronger argument is to invest in infrastructure. i think the combination of europe moving aggressively on the state aid issue, and bipartisan desire to find a way to pay for more infrastructure creates perhaps the perfect storm where you can overcome the -- inner of in action, inertia of inaction, overcome an environment where making political compromises has not always been a popular thing. and maybe even overcome the special interests that don't want to change the status quo. one person's loophole is another person's treasure. reform can be done. if you put the senior tax writers to come up with a bill, you have the intellectual work moving towards consensus to do

that. it could happen early into a new administration. steve: let me ask you about deutsche bank. deutsche bank's problems seems to illustrate an issue identified by the imf and many others, which is the systemic risk posed by undercapitalized banks in europe. how do you see that? do you see that as a problem that has been unmet, unaddressed? sec. lew: i'm not going to comment on any individual institutions. steve: you notice i did not ask you to. lew: as a general proposition, we have been very clear coming out of the crisis that we had to make sure our financial and to his were well-capitalized. we need a resolution structure where if there was a problem

there was a transparency and process to resolve them. we have to make sure that we work globally to raise standards. coming out of the financial crisis, there was a real clear signal that no country has the ability to separate itself. we've worked very hard with international parties and the g 20 and fsb to raise international standards. europe has made a lot of progress. europe has raised capital and moved toward a resolution system that is still in development. they still have work to do. i think they are much stronger, europe's financial institutions much stronger than it were. -- than they were. we have been clear they need to do more. we've taken dramatic action in

our country, and i think it has increased confidence in our economy. i hope we see more pressure around the world. the danger is complacency. the danger is almost a decade away from the financial crisis, you can hear the united states, dodd roll back. frank -- frank. ease up on regulations. this would be the wrong moment to take your foot off the gas, or go into reverse. one thing we know for sure is that risks don't stop. they change and have many manifestations. that we made for the decades before the financial crisis was not thinking ahead. you need to keep your eye on

risks of the future and adopt to it. sometimes it means changing what you've done, but not saying, we are out of the woods, let's go l back reform. steve: thank you. let's go to the floor. questions please? i think there is a roving mic. gentlemen here. excuse me for interrupting, please i did yourself and keep your question an actual question and a succint one? >> i'm a journalist from greece. the topd greece is not issue anymore. the greek government is pushing for debt reduction. vice president biden was asked to use his influence toward the german chancellor.

i was wondering, is the u.s. working on that? is it a major issue anymore, or as it subsided? what is the situation with greece and the debt? sec. lew: we have been deeply engaged on greece and issues related to the financial situation in greece and the debt for a very long time. happily, we are not a moment of immediate crisis. when you ask the question at a moment when you can say, what should we do to avoid having another moment of crisis? we've been clear, and i think it was important in the last agreement that greece reached with the partners that debt restructuring had to be on the table. that there is an unsustainable debt, and greece would have to

make progress on its plan and there would have to be a coming together where debt restructuring was part of the picture. always believed the sooner you get to that the better. the only really stable answer for what is an unsustainable debt is to restructure the debt. the longer you put it off, the harder it gets. you weaken the economy that is supporting the debt. when you talk about debt to gdp, the thing you have to remember is that the percentage goes down when the gdp grows. even with a stable debt, you want a growing economy. when the economy shrinks, the burden is bigger. as greece continues to engage with its institutions, the issue of debt restructuring remains on the table. i believe it was put squarely in the mix the last time. obviously, with the question of how it should be executed, the

sooner it can be the we are through, the better. steve: next question. right here. >> i am from tudor investment corporation. you mentioned the discussions about corporate tax reform. seems like in the next few days , we have a new issue on the radar screen, distortions and personal income tax system. well-known issues related to that that i won't ask you about. do you think moore is a citizen looking head, do you think in administration, the issue of personal tax would come up as an issue given the distortion? sec. lew: our position as an administration is reflected in what the president called for in an active -- enacted

2013, where the top tax rate was restored to where was before it was rolled back. one of the things we've been saying is that you have to take a hard look at things like asset valuation increases. we allow assets to be passed on and assets to be stepped up so that the appreciation of valuable assets essentially goes axed forever.- unt that is not right. it is not right because a, that is where the wealth is, and b, working people do not get to say, i'm not going to pay income tax on my earned income. what we in our proposals have suggested is that by taxing the stepped up basis it will give you the resources to invest in education and childcare. the things that people need to see the government putting more effort into for the benefit of

growth to be broadly shared. if you care deeply as i do about both liberal democracy and free market capitalism, this is an issue that not just the u.s., but around the world we have to attend to. it's not even a question of populism, it's just simply a question of common sense. how do you pay your bills in a way that is fair? i think this is at the heart of what ought to be a discussion about balancing, where we need to invest in how we pay for it. steve: next question. >> thank you. when talking about the tpp, you said that trade agreements foster economic growth.

but i have a feeling part of the debate is about the distribution of the benefits of the growth of trade agreements. how does the tpp address this issue? so that it is not just benefiting the wealthier and harming poor people? and how does the government want to communicate about that? there is a strong anger on this issue. sec. lew: we know that jobs that are related to trade have higher wages. we know that with gdp that is growing faster, there is more income in the country. i think the problems we have are confluence of concern. winning the argument that tpp will grow the economy is easier than a dozen these longer-term

concerns like what does my economic future look like? it is not all trade. we have concerns about trade and business structure and changed income distribution pattern. all happening at the same time. tpp helps by growing the economy and making us more competitive. it opens up the fastest markets in the world to u.s. goods and services. i think we have to talk in a full voice about these other whatrns and separate out you address through a trade agreement and what you address through other ways. the worker who was concerned about their job or their kids having a job will not do better if we have a slower growing to -- gdp and see a decline in high wage jobs. that doesn't mean it is not fair for that same person to ask, what are you doing to make sure

we are dealing with other problems in our system? we have to separate the conversation. i think the case for tpp has been strong. i have not heard a compelling case that it does not grow the economy. and i don't think these other issues are being caused by trade agreements per se. they are what we have to deal with in terms of tax equity, how we invest smartly in the future. it is perfectly reasonable for people to be asking, what's the government doing to make sure that my kids have a chance to do better than i did? that is what we always ask in the united states. we have to answer that, but it is not by shutting ourselves off and growing more slowly. steve: a question in the first row. yes? >> thank you.

i have two questions for the secretary. the first one, in your perspective, what you think are the impacts of war economy? can you tell us about where we are with the u.s. china bilateral investment treaty? let me broaden that that to assess the major challenges facing u.s.-china relations. lew: the u.s.-china economic relationship is probably the most important in the world. the two largest economies in the world. i think that the desire to be included in this special drawing rights basket of the imf was a helpful incentive for china to make reforms in how it manages currency, how it manages the economy.

i think it is important for china to have made those changes. you can over read the impact of being in the sdr basket. it is not the equivalent of becoming a global reserve currency, nor does it reflect a completion of a reform agenda. it is an important step along the way to recognize that china has made important policy changes and they had met the standard of the imf. i think the challenge for china going forward is going to be to stick with the reform agenda outlined both in the third plenum and national people's congress to reform the economies so that market forces play a much more dominant influence. so that china does not end up choking on things that there is not a market for, and that capital does not get where you needs to for the innovation

economy. steve: you are referring to nash -- steel, i think. steve: steel, aluminum, real -- lew: steel, aluminum, real estate -- when you don't have market forces driving investment. when you don't have bad investments allowed to fail, you have resources allocated in a way that ultimately chokes the future of economic growth. it is fundamentally about china being in a position to do well in the next decade as much as it is about u.s.-china relations. for a decade, we had fierce debates about exchange rate policies. we prosecuted that case quite aggressively. china has changed how it is managing exchange rates so that is less of a hot issue today than it was five years ago. that is a good thing. it does not mean we have not

-- we have taken our eye off the ball. we will watch it consistently. the real test is when there is pressure for them to appreciate. china has certainly said all the right things, but the jury will be out until we see the macro economic circumstances that test that. it cannot be a good thing if excess capacity becomes the exchange rate issue of the next decade. it would not be good for china or for u.s.-china relations or global economy. it is not just a u.s.-china issue. this issue of excess capacity is deeply troubling around the world wherever steel and aluminum are made. which is most industrial countries. fundamentally, it's just not good for china because china will not end up having the economic strength that it needs. i believe there is still room to manage the hardest transition from a heavily industrial to a

much more consumer driven economy. it's the second largest economy in the world. they have space. but it's not infinite space. and sticking to the program, implementing it even though it is disruptive and something that may be unpopular in parts of the country is essential. in terms of the bilateral investment treaty, we've had strategic discussions on the margins of g 20 meetings. there is ongoing negotiations, exchanges of offers. it fundamentally has to be a high-quality agreement that offers access in both directions in a meaningful way if it comes to closure. we made the case this is the best time to do it. we will continue to the duration of our tenure to get it queued up. we want to get it as close to

done if not done as possible. making progress, but not there yet. we are looking at a calendar getting shorter and shorter. the time to put a shoulder into it is now. steve: our time is getting shorter and shorter. i am looking for a signal from your staff. i wonder if i could exercise the prerogative of asking a final question that is also in the news. sovereign immunity. when the justice against sponsors of terrorism act was passed over president obama's veto, the administration said it would have disastrous consequences. what's the treasury doing to avert some of those disastrous consequences? yorker, ii am a new was in new york on september 11.

forow how emotional this is victims and families of victims. it exposes the u.s. to great risk, both in terms of u.s. citizens who are working overseas, and obviously there is a question as to whether or not that will have an impact on economic activity. we are keeping an eye on it. i want to reassure you we have the deepest and most liquid treasury market in the world. we are not worried about the treasury market. we don't think it is a good thing. we worked very hard to have this be a world that is safe for u.s. officials and businesses to do business. we work very hard to protect the u.s. from harm.

this has many problems, which is why the president vetoed that solution. steve: there are other problems people have raised other than the security of treasuries. what else are you looking at to try to minimize? sec. lew: i think the risks we focus on most immediately are sovereign immunity risk that have to do with other countries, that would retaliate. effect on potential our armed forces, on public officials and private citizens citizens. going to anticipate what economic issues arise. obviously we have focused on the treasury markets because that is the most immediate one. i'm not concerned about the treasury market.

if you look at u.s. economic growth from our founding, making ourselves a safe haven for foreign direct investment has been, along with an immigration policy that welcomes people into our country, the two key ingredients to our economic growth. closing ourselves off in any way is bad. i think jeff deaths -- jafta puts a warning light out about doing business in the united states. that does not mean that we should be anything other than dogged in our determination to hold people responsible when they commit horrendous acts. i think we have proven that through our actions, not just our words. steve: secretary lew, you have been very generous on a especially busy week. we need to live up to our promise to get you out of here. thank you very much for joining us and your great answers.

wishing you good luck. i will let things turn back to adam. adam: thank you steve for managing this. again, our thanks to secretary for includingaff us in the busy schedule. we will allow the secretary to leave in peace, and i will keep the rest of you in your seats for one more minute. we should note that as the institute for international economics, as honored as we were to have the treasury secretary, we have a couple other people coming through today. in 10 minutes, will have a presentation by the european commission vice president. he is the vice president for social cohesion, vice president in charge of financial issues and economics at the commission.

we also later today at 1:00 governor ofave the the central bank of argentina discussing issues there. we hope you all can join us. thinks again to treasury secretary lew. this meeting is adjourned. [applause] watch live coverage from washington, d.c. at 1:00 eastern time here on c-span. >> every weekend, book tv brings you 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors. here are some of our programs at this weekend. saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern, hillary clinton gmail controversy is the topic of an

author panel discussion. then at 10:00 p.m. eastern, mary thompson jones details the day-to-day work of u.s. diplomats and look set the issue of diplomatic cables from her book. by the formerewed undersecretary of democracy and global affairs during the george w. bush administration. >> i think leaks are going to be part of government life, and the speed of which and the multiplicity with which we ,ommunicate with each other now short e-mails, text, tweets, he will all be part of the body politic. prizewinner joseph

stiglitz on the future of the euro. for theok tv.org complete we can schedule. -- we can schedule. >> the world bank will be holding their annual joint meeting this weekend and washington, d.c. -- christineegard discussheld meetings to international trade and alleviating global pop -- party. this is just over one hour. >> thank you very much. that morning. welcome.

is the 2016 annual meetings of the imf and world bank. delighted to see while this morning. we are on the record as usual, i will ask you to be as short as possible with your questions. we have with us today the managing director of the imf, christine lagarde, and the first deputy managing director of the imf, david lipton. we will begin in the usual way, i think you have the policy agenda already. we will begin with opening remarks from the managing director. >> good morning to all of you. before i go into the current economic situation and what might recommendations are, i would like to first of all express our deep concern for the countries that are currently affected by hurricane matthew. we are very saddened i the reports of lost life and damage,

and in particular haiti, which we been trying to serve. facility lines that will be in place shortly and we will do whatever we can to help. globaly have you had my policy agenda, but you also received the fiscal monitor and the global financial sector report. so you know that we are forecasting growth in 2016 at 2017 at 3.4%. the outlook for advanced economies remains subdued and the outlook for emerging and developing economies calls for some guarded optimism with great diversity between the various economies.

prospects for low income countries are beginning -- becoming even more challenging, particularly in sub-saharan africa. overall, and this is a point i made in chicago two days ago, we see growth as too low for too long and benefiting too few. itself, it is not good news, but is also fertile ground for political dynamics that can depress global growth even more. believe that countries can actually move from the a newt new mediocre to pact. for april, i called three-pronged approach. policy,des monetary fiscal policy and structural demands.

and that remains essential. action, so is now might message to the members of the imf tomorrow will be action, please. we believe that there is more policy than meets the eye, and by exploiting synergies between these three policies, we can generate more space in order to help the economies and resist the political dynamics that i have referred to. we also believe that each country has something to offer. it is not going to be the same, but each country can do something and my hope at the end of the annual meeting is that each finance minister, each governor of central-bank, will go back home thinking, what can i do in order to propel that growth which is currently too

low for too long benefiting too few? for example, when demand is liking and monetary policy is overstretched, fiscal policy can step up. placeill also help put in the structural reforms that are much-needed, which have been started in some places but which are seriously lacking as bold policies. we believe that some countries have fiscal space, and that they should use it. we are including in that category, countries like canada, germany, korea. space,there is no fiscal finance ministers can decide to reallocate spending within the same bonding -- budget envelope for productivity areas.

for instance, supporting research and development, financing infrastructure at a time when financing costs are low. so that is first point, they have to come together, three-pronged approach means conference of policies, not one or the other, but three coming together. second, we believe that consistent policies matter. stay the course and anger your policies incredible medium-term framework. this is seriously lacking, we have been calling for this medium-term framework for quite a while, whether it is in the u.s. or japan or other places. we believe that can help create space to support growth in the short term. while keeping inflation expectations anchored and debt sustainable. comprehensive, consistent. now is theieve that

time for international cooperation. 20se of you who follow the g per member the lisbon agenda, the italian agenda, the hunt do agenda, to propel growth higher. we are short of that 2%, and we believe there has to be more international cooperation because it will benefit all countries. if they pull together in the same direction, if they are in a more coordinated way, the positive spillovers will reinforce each other. if there's one thing we are it is a very strong interconnections between all of these areas. financial, trade, growth, that direction. we believe that globalization works for all. you will have see my global policy agenda, that is the we call for. we believe that more can be done to raise growth now and to make it more inclusive.

toin, having a determination include all in the social contract is great, but there has to be growth in order to allocate amongst everybody. we know that globalization has worked over the years, that it has delivered great benefits to many people, we don't think it is time to push against it, and we believe it is time to push forward with what we know have -- has worked, but it needs to be slightly different. it cannot be that push for trade as we have done historically. the inclusiveness, the determination to work for all, and pay attention to those who are at risk for being left out as a result of technology, digital economies or international trade by multiplication of -- that factor has to be taken into account. what does it mean for the imf? it means if we want to include,

if we want to address any quality issues, we need to have a strong international safety net to that countries that feel at risk because of policies determined elsewhere have the financing instruments to respond. in this context, i am pleased to note that our board recently approved the extension of zero interest rates on all bond concessional facilities until 2018, and thereafter if interest rates remain low around world. that is really important for low income countries to be able to actually absorb the shock without necessarily going to the international markets or relying on bilateral lending that can be expensive. i'm also pleased to announce that the membership has responded positively to my call to maintain the overall lending capacity of close to a trillion dollars by expanding access to bilateral boring agreements.

the new agreements that are being signed this week will run at least through the end of 2019 and will continue to serve as a third line of defense. as you know, the first line of defense is quota, the second is arrangement, the third line will be those bilateral loans. we have so far received pledges membersillion from 26 and we look forward to others joining this effort. we will provide more detail shortly and it will be some sessions organized "-- over the course of the next few days. so, we believe that with strong, conference of, consistent and coordinated action, countries can actually lift that growth, which needs to be more inclusive

, in order to resist the political dynamics that are not helpful. i will be happy to take questions. mr. rice: thank you very much, madame lagarde. i'm going to ask you again to keep your questions very brief. thank you. let us start with jeremy. jeremy: you mentioned the debate on globalization. i was wondering if you think the imf has given too much attention about the losers of globalization? and since we are one month away from the u.s. election, the you think that the anti-trade policy promises by the republican candidate will cause a big damage to the u.s. and world economy? thank you. dir. lagarde: well, we believe that the international trade,

that is what i will call it because globalization is sort of a much broader topic that includes integration, innovation as a result, and so on and so forth, but we certainly believe that international trade has been helpful over the course of the last two decades. if you look at the level of growth that has helped china, that has helped countries like india and other low income countries to pull himself -- themself out of massive poverty, it has been hugely beneficial on a global basis. now, have policymakers paid enough attention to those pockets, those regional areas where there were more losses than gains? probably so. that is why we are calling today for inclusive globalization, one that actually benefits all players. not one that reduces inequality between countries, but one that also allocates fairly within

countries, and pays attention to those that are at risk of losing out. i think, by the way, that this does not only apply to trade, but this more urgently applies to the impact that the digital economy will have on our societies. the ways in which not only manufacturing, but services are going to be impacted by automation, by 3-d printing, by new ways of earning and learning around the world, which will require that people be equipped, which is why we are recommending in many instances investment in infrastructure, investment in education, in order to bring people up to the level where they can participate and benefit from this new society. i do not comment on u.s. elections. i simply note that trade has

been in the main engine of growth, and if we want better growth in order to address all of the issues i have mentioned today, we need that in order to support and accelerate growth. mr. rice: thank you, madame lagarde. i'm going to stick close to jeremy there with cctv, thank you. >> my question is about the chinese financial reform. regarding the inclusion last week, to what extent in your mind it may affect domestic china to reform? and next, what is the domain in which you are most willing to see improvement among all of this economic reform in china? thank you. dir. lagarde: well, we did celebrate around the world the inclusion of the remedy in the special drawing rights basket.

it means two things. one, we can use the remedy as the currency as one in which we at the imf membership conduct financials. we are certainly operational in remedy. secondly, it certainly anchors the chinese economy in the group of large, international, open economies in the world. this is a process. we regard it as a major step. there will be probably more steps to come, in order to really consolidate that position, but we regard it as a really positive statement on the part of the chinese economy and the authorities to actually move in that direction in a decisive manner. we, as you know, we have worked hand-in-hand with the chinese authorities to help them through the process of reforming the financial market, making sure

that openness is not just the word on the shelf. and there will be more reforms coming along. and hopefully, the anchoring of china through the currency in the basket amongst the five currencies is a very valuable step. mr. rice: thank you very much. i will swing over to the front. >> thank you. madame lagarde, the imf has warned of political risk to world growth, but the same can be said of greece, where the debt relief is stumbling amongst others on political considerations in the eurozone, forthcoming elections. isn't that worrisome for greece, given that you are only protecting some growth in the next few years, if the primary surplus is lower? are lower primary surpluses a

necessary conditionality for the imf to participate in the program? and how do you respond to european officials asking the requirementand its for debt relief? article 4, which is the bilateral efforts between greece, our member, and the imf greek team. the results are very accessible, and indicate that some reform has been conducted. a lot more work needs to be done going forward, as we all know. and we will be actually sending a team and a couple of weeks time, in order to help with the assessment of the various commitments that have been made under the esm program. because, as you know, the imf is not part of debating any greek