all the coverage begins saturday, september 2,'s at 10:00 a.m. eastern with authors including electric prize-winning authors david mccullough and thomas friedman, former secretary of state condoleezza rice, and best selling authors michael lewis and jade events. -- jd vance. september 2, starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2's book tv. c-span, for history unfolds daily. c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies, and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> as washington gears for busy fall, we're joined on "newsmakers" this week neil bradley, cheap policy officer for the u.s. chamber of commerce. to help with our

questions in studio we're joined by heather long, economic reporter with "washington post" and sahil kapur a bloomberg news. sahil , you're up first. >> neil thank you so much for joining us. i want to ask you about one of the issues a top of the congressional agenda funding the government. how worried are you about a government shutdown? the president said he will insist on a border wall. the you think he was right in digging in? >> i think concern about a government shutdown is growing. i am not prepared to say it is likely at the moment. i think it is right we should be concerned and thinking about it. in terms of drawing a line here, my experience has been whoever tries to hold government funding hostage to get something, it's usually not a strategy that historically worked out very well. it seems to me there are better ways for the president to get his priority of a border wall

done other than threatening of government shutdown. >> any concerns about the debt limit being raised? niel: i feel like we're in a better path to the debt limit. there seems to be agreement in white house and senate and house. this is something that has to be done and needs to be done in a timely fashion. i think there's less concern about debt limit and probably more concern about potential government shutdown. >> at what point do you think members will be concerned. we're talking little over a week before labor day. when does it start to become an issue for members? niel: i think we have to see how september plays out. these things usually have highs and lows and ramp up. you want to watch where the rhetoric ramps down. you will see who joins and drawing these lines. i think we will know a lot more a couple of weeks into september. one of the things we're doing at the chamber is remind folks the consequences of government shutdown what that means to other priorities, the ability of businesses to permit and function, ability of people

to get their visas to go on vacation or something like that. we have time. no one hitting the panic button yet. we'll be reminding policymakers that nothing really good comes out of government shutdown. heather the biggest issue this : tax reform. take us through where we're at now. it's been a month since that statement came out that was just very broad based, have they actually -- is there cohesion between the white house and congress on how to pay for tax reform or tax cut? niel: heather, i think they are making a lot of progress. the principles are out of town. their staffs are here. they're doing a lot of work. our sense is they are closing the gap on the concrete outlines of tax reform plan. i wouldn't be surprised if we saw a fairly detailed proposal. perhaps end of september beginning of october. ,it will provide a framework for

them to work off of. you mentioned the group of six announcement kind of end of july , the beginning of august. we took that as a positive sign. in some respects is a finally resolved that they were moving past the top line, here is the talking point we want to achieve. they realized they're going to be trade-offs here. the rate competes with what you're willing to close in terms of loophole. you will make those trade-offs to arrive. heather let's talk about the trade-offs little more. what's the business community willing to put on the table to trade off and make this happen? is the chamber supporting lot of people talking about the mortgage interest deduction possibly going away? is that something that the chamber would be willing to support? niel: we're focused on the business side. both corporations and small businesses. mortgages interest is less a part of that. we found universally talking with our members the lower the rate is,

the effective tax rate, the much more willing to give up an increasing number of deductions. this is all about achieving competitiveness. we are a long way from having internationally competitive tax code at the moment. there's a pretty strong growing -- willingness to give up deductions and give up credits and get back to a competitive tax code. heather in your mind what is : that rate? is it under 20? niel: well, people would love a rate under 20. the president talked about 15%. wouldn't that be fantastic? internationally competitive, you're somewhere in the 20's. the lower we get the better off we are. at 35% federal corporate rate, cutting that by a third or more and getting in the 20's, that's really going to help grow the economy and create jobs. >> you mentioned the progress that the group of six made in congressional leaders made.

they have not announced any sort of decision yet. do you have a sense of what is likely to be on the table in terms of closing loopholes? state and local taxes, is it carried interest? is there anything to have her the gift of the sense they are ready to raise real money to pay down the rate cuts? : yeah, if you go back to the blue print that house republicans released a year ago. if you look at the policies the white house has talked about, certainly on the individual side, state and local. the current system of unlimited state and local tax deduction is something that is clearly on the table. the trade-off for increasing the standard deduction as families pay taxes. on the business side, certainly interest deductibility is something that's on the table. carried interest gets talked about a lot. it is pretty small in terms of dollar

amount. but again, as you get the rates lower, all those things matter a lot less. >> do you think the corporate rate to come down below 25%? niel: i think it is possible will see it below 25%. >> before we leave the group of six, what are your thoughts on the group of six setting aside the border adjustment act? whether do you think that was a good idea or not. niell -- niel: it's a matter of necessity. leaving aside the policy. it was pretty clear there wasn't the support for a border adjustable tax in congress. you can't let one policy hold up progress in the rest of the tax reform. setting that aside unlocked their ability to make progress on some of the other issues. in that respect, it was the right call. >> how did your members feel about border adjustment? niel: there were member on both sides. one of the things depended on what your business was and how you operated and whether you're an importer or exporter,

kind of your colored your view on the border adjustable tax. the thing we found the most was really kind of a lack of understanding and lot of questions about how it would work. it's a pretty radical step for the u.s. tax code to move to a border adjustable system like that that's base on consumption. i think the first thing was create a lot of questions. heather: another controversial one that's come up this week, is the notion that taxing 401k retirement plans. that does go to the heart of some business issues and saving issues in america. has the chamber taken a stance? niel: we have talked to senate and house about the importance of retirement savings to individuals. the importance of it as a benefit that the employers provide. my sense is that policymakers are unlikely to do something that results in a disincentive to say for retirement.

heather sounds like you will be : in on that one. niel: listen, the important way to approach tax reform is to approach it in its totality. it's important to see it the whole package with the trade-offs are and whether that leads to growth. my sense of it is, the tax treatment of retirement is really about retirement saves. not really about tax code and raising revenue. i think there is a strong desire business community, republican , and democrats in congress. if anything, to strengthen incentives for retirement >> speaking totality, one of the big questions republicans are pondering on capitol hill, whether this is permanent as speaker ryan and leader mcconnell said. or it would be a series of temporary rate cuts it with my like 2001 and 1986 would you to be a temporary tax cut that expires in the budget window if congress will raise the money to pay this down permanently?

niel: we got to start what's the best for improving the economy, creating jobs and raising wages. clearly the best policy you can in the tax reform era is something that is permanent. the goal is we want to eliminate the disincentive in the current tax code that causes companies committee move abroad or locate facilities abroad. instead we want to make the u.s. competitive. we want to incentivize u.s. companies to invest here to create factories here. we want to incentivize foreign companies to locate facilities here. that's the goal, then clearly the best way to do and encourage companies to make those long term decisions is through a permanent change in the tax code. the risk that you run with a temporary measure is that people aren't going that make the long term business decision. long term growth decision i think everyone is hoping they will make as a result of tax reform. >> in a bigger picture

standpoint we're about seven , months in this presidency. they don't have major legislative achievement to brag about. tax reform is the next big thing they trying to do. if they don't succeed, what do you think it would mean? do you think it would affect the way the chamber interacts with republicans? niel: actually we made very clear end of july, our ceo, tom donohue sent open her to member of congress. tax reform is not an option. first, failing to do tax reform is not an option. this is what our economy needs and it's what american families need. this is once in a generation opportunity for policymakers to enact tax reform. the second point, we're going to hold them accountable. we do a lot in the political space every two years. about whether or not they help get tax reform across the finish line or whether they stood in the way. that's going to be a big factor

as we think ahead to the 2018 midterm and ultimately the 2020 generals. the people help get tax reform done. >> tell us more about that. what do you mean hold them accountable. potentially support primary challengers the people who get in the way? niel: we have to see what individuals help or hinder getting tax reform done. our belief is, tax reform will get across the finish line. get across the finish line relatively soon. we'll all enjoy the benefits of what that means. we engaged pretty heavily in the political process. we've engaged in primaries and general elections and endorsed candidates we have done that for over 40 years. there is no question when you have an opportunity like this if , there's a failure, you have to look closely who is responsible for that failure and what that means. >> you noted twice, you engage havilland in the political sphere. how much the chamber will be spending in 2018? >> we don't talk numbers.

we do engage actively. we've been engaged in some of the primary -- special elections that occurred already this year. we'll see how much progress we've made on the policy. we'll see where the politics are and that will drive our decision. >> how much do you spend in the last midterm? just to give folks what big means? niel: we'll don't talk numbers. we're seven or eight figure organization. heather we understand the : chamber about ready to do some advertising spending on tv to try to educate people around the country how critical tax reform is. can you tell us what areas you're targeting? targeting the freedom caucus? is there moderates? what will be the sticking point do you think towards getting this tax reform done? niel: we are preparing to go on tv advertising and support tax reform.

that is a supplement to what we have been doing already. the three weeks of august, our team both here in d.c., across the country, done 120 plus events focused on tax reform, most of those were with members of congress, members of the senate. pushing on the issue. that will be supplemented paid television. we're not quite prepared to announce what states and congressional districts. we don't view this as one part of the republican party or one part versus another or a particular ours versus them. you'll see us talking to the entire spectrum of the republican conference, but also talking to democrats and our advertising about the need it get tax reform done. >> are you expecting the next stage of this process to come from the white house? there was mixed signal of potential document emerging from the white house in early september. it seems more likely that the

committees will take the wheel on the hill. what is your take on it? niel: i think the committees are taking the lead. it's possible that we see kind of further refinements of the product, group of six revealed in in outline. we'll see some fill in that the white house would be involved as a part of announcing. i think we're quickly reaching the point where we're kind of moving from broad outlines to actually drafting legislation. that's going to be directed by the committees in the house and the senate. >> we have about ten minutes left in conversation with neil bradley. you talked about support during the election cycle. what is does it take to get support from the chamber during election? is there a litmus test of certain issues? obviously this time around, i assume supporting tax reform will be on that list. niel: for about 40 plus years, the chamber has had a score card based on key votes.

the chamber identifies before lawmakers take a vote in house and senate, this is an important piece of legislation, the business community and we want to see it pass. we believe this is a piece of legislation that would be detrimental to the free enterprise system. we communicate that to members of the house and members of the senate. at the end of each year, we look back over all those vote. we look to see how members voted. generally to be endorsed by the u.s. chamber, you have had to have a probusiness, pro free enterprise vote record at least 70% of the time. we also look at their historical averages as members come back year after year. they are consistently with the business community or they consistently with expanding opportunities for jobs and wage growth or they consistently on the other side. >> are your member concerned about the president's response in the wake of charlottesville violence?

niel: i think we've been focused on what our response is. our ceo sent a note out to all the chamber employees talking about our core values. there's no room in the chamber organization for racism, for hate, for any of some of the ugliness that we saw in charlottesville and we've seen in other places. we also talked about our core mission. our core mission is the protection and the further of -- furtherance of the free enterprise system that really gives people the opportunity to go wherever their abilities can take them. in the midst of all the post charlottesville discussion, we've focused on our work to protect that system and further it. that's what we've been doing for over a hundred years. and we will continue to engage

of policymakers to continue doing that. >> the back and forth between president and senator mcconnell. he's gone after some other republican senators. how do you see this impacting the legislative agenda? is this unhelpful? niel: it's not helpful. i think clearly it is not helping move the agenda along. that said, a lot of people jump to conclusion that it's somehow it's fatal to the legislative agenda. fatal to getting tax reform done. i don't believe that either. my sense from talking with folks in the house, folks in the senate, other folks in washington is even in all of this, the folks on capitol hill including leader mcconnell, are , really kind of putting their nose and figuring out they get things across the finish line. it's certainly not helpful. i don't think it's fatal to the agenda. heather do you think there's too : much

uncertainty? is the white house and all the drama going on just creating a dynamic where businesses don't want to invest and not help the economy grow more? because we've seen really anemic capital spending for the business community for years now. it seemed like we were finally going to have a clarity with a pro growth president. yet day-to-day, there's all this whiplash and drama that isn't focused on these core issues that could help in the business community. niel: i think we're making progress to restore some level of certainty. the untold policy story of 2017 in our opinion is what's been done on the regulatory side. the regulatory rollback that occurred in the first part, the action of agencies currently undertaking as they roll back the regulatory overreach. particularly of the last several years. that's improving the climate for business investment. other key part of that is tax reform.

i think one of the reasons you're not seeing more of a rush to investments people want to see how that plays out. and what the resolution is. that gets back to sahil's earlier point about permanency. if you really want to unlock that type of capital investment that you need, that's kind of the seed of future growth, permanent pro growth tax reform is kind of the linchpin. that's one of the reasons that we're pushing so hard to get it done. heather if we did tax reform, do : you think that takes the economy to 3% growth economy? niel: well, i certainly don't see how we get there without it. there's a lot of factors that will contribute to whether or not we get to 3% or beyond 3%. if we're stuck with the current tax code, very difficult to see how we get the capital allocations right and incentives right for business investment to ever return to 3% plus growth.

>> with congress looking at september deadlines, i'm turning page to taxes, do you believe obamacare repeal is dead? neil: it's something they moved on for right now. that's probably a smart move. it's clear that there wasn't the votes on capitol hill for any of the various proposals that were out there. sometimes you can take a break from something, let folks stew on a little bit. let some creative folks think of new ideas and come back to it. i think that's quite possible. i am not prepared to say it is dead, but i think they made the right decision to suspend where they were on it. they didn't have the votes. make the turn to tax reform. we will come back to health care and see what is possible. >> there's some taxes in aca that the business community isn't fond of. such as the 3.8% net investment income tax. are you going to be pushing to

repeal that in a piece of legislation? neil: it's certainly one of the things that we wanted to see repealed with healthcare. it didn't make sense to tackle healthcare prior to tackling tax reform. i think the important thing is weather you're moving taxes back and forth between healthcare and taxes is to see the framework where overall tax reform is going. if it turns out some provisions will be held for when they return to healthcare, that's also a reasonable policy position i think for the hill to take. >> you study the politics of this. when would be the right time to come back to healthcare if they do come back? are we saying not until after the 2018 election? in your mind, when would be the right time to come back? neil: when you have 218 votes in the house and 51 votes in the stat in -- in the senate.

heather after tax reform would : you rather see them go back to healthcare or infrastructure? neil: we like it see them move to infrastructure. i believe they can probably walk and chew gum at the same time. the folks will be working on infrastructure package aren't necessarily the same folks who will be working through the difficulties that they've had on the healthcare. this is kind of one of those things that sometimes it's really difficult from my experience to put a hard time line on this. sometimes this is one of those things policymakers wake up one day, they find out they agree on more than they thought agreed on more than they thought they agree on but they've been talking past each other and a path to resolution appears. i wouldn't discount that could occur in 2018. >> what does infrastructure mean to you.

chief strategist have suggested, borrow that money. what do you think of that idea? neil: well, we look at it more of investment. we think there are multiple ways to do it. one of the things chamber long champions, we haven't raise the motor vehicle fuel tax. which fund highway and bridge infrastructure since are the early 1990's. there are a number of state who including republican states, who are moving themselves to raise the motor fuels tax. that's one way potentially finance it. it will be a long term solution. >> are you open to that? raising the gas tax? neil: we were very much open for it. we've supported raising the gas tax. there's also private investment. most of the rest of the world utilizes private sector investment for infrastructure. it bring some of the best elements of the private sector in terms of accountability,

creative financing mechanisms, reliability and project deadlines to building infrastructure. we don't really do that. we believe there's a huge opportunity to do what australia and so many other countries doing bring private investment there with respect to public infrastructure. heather it's amazing we haven't : talked about trade at all. coming into the white house and from the time president trump arrived there was so much concern from the business community, we'll start a trade war with mexico and china. here we are and that seems -- is that off the table? is that a diminished concern? is there fear that president said this week, nafta, he was ready to walk away and disband nafta. where do you read the head wind on trade? neil: this is another issue where the rhetoric doesn't seem to match the policy reality. take nafta for example. 14 million american jobs depend on nafta.

it is in no one's interest to see the agreement terminated. modernized yes, we're working with the administration to help modernize it. we look forward to a successful conclusion. >> neil bradley, thank you so much for being our newsmaker this week. now we turn to the round table part of the discussion on "newsmakers." with sahil kapur, bloomberg news. heather long of the "washington post" with us. let's start with the influence of the chamber of commerce, particularly when it comes to this tax reform issue. how much weight can the chamber bring to bear here? how big of stick can they yield in the priorities that mr. bradley going through now? heather well, i think it's a : huge amount of influence. obviously they're willing to spend possibly millions of dollars on tv ad campaigns around the country to try and galvanized support on the ground for this. nowink what we have seen is that this eeo counsel has been disbanded after trump's comment

on charlottesville there is a real need for the white house and congress to find ways to interact with the. you can see that he is was really trying to almost downplay those and sort of say that the door is still open. they're still talking. i think the chamber becomes more important voice at the table. they represent so many of those businesses now those ceo's aren't going to go as often themselves. they don't want to be seen standing alongside trump. >> i think republicans are concerned that they'll lose the chamber's support in the long run. it is such a bulwark of financial string politically it would motivate them. i tend to doubt that the chamber would ultimately do that. they align with the republicans on too many issues. we will see. >> when it comes to tax reform is the chamber, white house and republican leadership are they on the same page now? >> i don't think so. they're on the same page in

the sense they agree taxes should be lower on individual and corporate. they're not on the same page how to pay for it. they are not on the same page for basic questions like it should be temporary or permanent. a number of republican senators think tax bill would be pretty anemic at the have to raise revenue to cover it. he is the exact word when i asked him. they have more differences than similarities and agreements right now even though you hearing a lot of happy talk. heather i would say they are on : the same page. nobody knows how to pay for it. nobody wants to really come out publicly and say you can see him waffle on that and say what they're willing to pay on the -- put on the table to pay for this. >> they're on the same page about the sugar. they all want the sugar but don't agree on the spinach. in terms of priorities it is the chamber, the white house and congressional leadership on the same page. we didn't talk about trade until the end of that 25 minute discussion right now. surprised by that?

heather i think so. : it's surprising when you look at the arc of the trump presidency and his campaign. he may trade and putting up -- stopping all these cheap chinese and mexican goods coming into the country was a key part of his campaign and a key part of his base and concerned business leaders. some said it could cause a recession. now you hardly talk about it anymore. it really seems to have stayed from the agenda. >> it's fascinating that neil bradley said there is a disconnect between the rhetoric and reality. it's a good thing the president did campaign aggressively on confronting china and mexico's trade policy. that hasn't happened. i think the president has advisers who inform him there will be trade offs to each of these things. pulling the trigger is a very different thing than campaigning on it. >> lastly, you talk about campaigning. mr. bradley talked about the role that the chamber plays, how much money they spent in campaigns.

in 2016, 95% of spending went towards republican candidate . you think that changes the cycle? >> i don't think so. i don't think they see the democrats more aligned with them certainly. i think there's a little bit of frustration as we heard from mr. bradley about the white house being not helpful in his words and going after republican senators. some of his conduct. it's still far more closely aligned with republicans. the question is, do they maintain a high level financial support. or do they see a taper off if the republicans are not able to deliver? heather it makes sense. :if your key issue is tax reform you're not expecting democratic , votes. you will not spend money there. >> we'll have to leave it there. kapur, heather long, thank you so much for joining us on "newsmakers" this week. >> thank you.

>> whether he was the only conservative he admired. 8 eastern on c-span's "q&a." anouncer: c-span's "washington journal" live every day with issues that cy impact you. coming up monday morning, loomberg news white house reporters discuss the week ahead white house. thencentric project nick t

about space cent candidates in 2018. be sure to watch c-span's live 7:00 journal" a.m. eastern monday morning. the discussion. thursday, senator elizabeth warren and representative bill keating in ed a town hall meeting mar marshfield, massachusetts. this is just under an hour. . pplause] beingnk you very much for here. this is a terrific crowd and the crowd that we just spent a few overflow th in the room is here and excited as well. senator warren and i are here, no. 1, to thank you because i look backyou, if they historically at this period of time in our country,