on this friday afternoon we are live at the heritage foundation for a discussion on the possible impact for tariffs on steel and aluminum. life here on c-span. a process for other countries to seek resumption turkey process that will be determined. i think that the first thing to mention here could set the stage -- the continuing messages here at the heritage adopts the issue.

the administration has time and time again said that china is the issue was steel, maybe russia is the issue was steel. will not do much, if anything, to impact our imports from china. 2% of all u.s. steel imports come from china. that number has decreased significantly over the last 5-6 ghares because of anti-dumpin activities. seen here is despite the exemption for canada and mexico, a lot of impact on our security partners, brazil, -- the-- korea, japan list goes on and on. here -- perpich is

purpose is here is we reiterate the position of this institution on this issue and on the issues of terror -- tariffs overall. the duty of the heritage -- that true north is driven by her mission. to build an america with freedom, opportunity, prosperity and civil society. leave our i will experts to discuss the issues further. laura is president of the trade , an economic consulting firm that she started sheand dr. dean --

has been an international economist since 1977. the firm produces detailed assessments of the programs based on traditional economic modeling. from columbiaees and georgetown. finesse it is vice president of legal affairs for trade and investment policy at the national foreign trade council. prior to joining, she served as

vice president of the emergency committee for american trade, her experience includes working in the private sector. her experience provides a diverse group of clients, mel devices, and tracking. she appeared before the u.s. trade agency at the department of commerce and the trade protection border and the u.s. trade representative. protection and the u.s. trade the fda and consumer protection safety commission. quite the list of accolades.

she worked on negotiation and implementation of a free trade agreement with respect to services and settlement obligations. served as legal counsel during the negotiations of the general agreement and participated in implementing the bill. she was a trial attorney and beinumpng. anti--dump she is a member of the district of columbia bar her she earned her bachelor's degree in history

and masters in economics and her jd from yale law. [applause] thank you. it's a pleasure to be here today to talk to you about trade policy development. every minute it seems to change. provide somecan information that is current as of today. when i first heard about the potential for these tariffs and the president's motivation, i had to agree that i thought that this is a proposal view that was coming from the heart. i can't imagine it must be hard to travel in the midwest and

everywhere during a campaign with so many communities that have been decimated and unemployed workers and the hardships they are going through. would care about that and want to do something about that. i think his motivation is good. that we have is there are many reasons that someone can lose a job and sometimes it is important petition. it has shown to be things that don't have anything to do directly with imports. it's technology, productivity changes, changes in the economy and structural changes in the way a product is being perceived by consumers. it is new epa rules on mileage economy, a host of other things

that cars and is the street that ship and react to changes to consumer demand. politicians tor blame foreigners on all the problems for our ills. your to say that then say i will take away our technology so you can do your job again. who wants to do that. in the bushack then administration put tariffs on imports of steel and 2000 and 2001, we learned then that there can be some serious unintended consequences when you attempt to limit imports with a trade barrier with tariffs. closely with a coalition of consuming industries, most work manufacturing. manyof them is a join us,

would say they were laying off workers. it was very clear from that that shows that people did lose jobs in other industries when tariffs were put on imports of steel. there are unintended consequences associated with import and attrition. when i read the commerce department's 232 reports on steel in particular i was impressed. first i saw that there really was an effort to do some theomic modeling on what tariffs are to be and what effect it would have. aey used something called deliberate model, that the international trade commission uses to estimate the up and down

effect of trade policy. what are the effects of a free trade agreement with korea in this model. the structure -- to get u.s. producers to 80% capacity utilization. report,ort in the 232 these are the tariff rates we came up with and this is what will reduce imports and enables and production to go up allow the utilization to hit 80%. they did some serious thinking. i happen to know that these models are showing a lot of other information. what is the impact of tariffs on gp, the effect on prices, the impact on other stuff not just the steel industry. i look for that information and it was not there.

alarm bells went off that the president was not being president -- presented with the full pictures of what these tariffs would do. it, but what the cost would be with the anywhere in the report. there is no information in the report about what effect the tariffs would have on jobs. we thought ok, we need to get this information to the white house before he makes a decision. it is important to have the full picture of what these tariffs could do. -- theded we used to same model, we impose tariffs on imports of 20% -- 25% and 10%. we calculated the full range of .he effects, and we drove down not just on the steel industry,

through the 3000 jobs would be anded in the steel industry aluminum combined. we found a lot of other jobs would be lost because as prices industries consuming get less competitive spirit they have to cut costs somewhere to stay competitive. they might cut wages, reduced workers.t, cut there is a range of things that they can do to try to stay competitive. we know they tried to do this back in 2009 and job losses were one of those effects. the models told us that it would be nearly 13,000 jobs lost in fabricated industry, 5000 lost in motor vehicles.

net manufacturing as a whole jobs. annette hit for manufacturing. it doesn't stop there. likef this activity construction and even services they don't go to the movies or out to dinner anymore. service sectors after -- have to retrench. we werel was telling us looking at 179 thousand job losses. when you add that negative to the positive for the steel industry we came up with a net loss of 146,000 jobs. internet.t out on the

we are -- we don't represent any of the aluminum producers. we serve as a convener of companies and the downstream industries. we were approached by a our members, we recently formed an twoance that is composed of partieses, steel, and that stand to be hurt by the retaliation. clear, study she is very they did not model the effects of the retaliation.

history teaches us that the primary sector that feels the is agriculture. we have agricultural commodity groups. our views are composed of those all thee have industries that are representative -- represented. battles are won -- wars are won battles.us adults, -- us -- the bush tariffs were only in effect for 18 months.

we are hopeful that even though -- we hope it will not be a huge drag on our members. in terms of how this tariff they areus right now, worth looking at. there are hidden pieces of .nformation in the drafting to sort of make sure we're on the same page, these are tariffs of an indefinite timeframe. there is no time limit in the proclamation. there is an undertaking by the president to look at the effects of the terrorists -- tariffs

from time to time. that is the first bit of information. the scope is very broad. there is a list of tariffs that are affected. aluminumuse of the way is fabricated. there is some sort of secondary materials that are needed. that's the second tip that i will leave you with. about canada and mexico, the proclamation says there will be additional time to explain how they are going to contribute to national security. the rhetoric that has been

produced by the administration and the nafta negotiations -- having been in mexico recently i will see that things are not going swimmingly well on that. we will see how that comes around in april. that sort of fits ,ith the turkey day timeframe some sort of implicit proclamations. -- that appears to be part of their thinking. they are going to run out of time if they want to submit it for this congress. just because of the way the calendar falls.

if you are a canada and mexico watcher keep your eye on that ball. allies, itt to other is back in time. there is a process by which people can come in and explain how they are going to deal with the administration with national security threats. make of that what you will. it will not just be security issues on the table. our allies are justifiably concerned. key -- u.k. and japan have the strongest arguments on the security side.

that are notducts made in this country and could not be made without changes to the way we produce at the moment. i think those countries are the first three to get in the door and the first to present -- prioritize. an exception is a term applied to countries. the last piece of the order exclusions. familiarity,ny which says myess problem is not -- they're for my product should not be covered by the order. processhink about this went into thousand one, you go in and you claim what your then you explain why

your product does provide some guidance that says you are able to make an argument that the item is not produced in the if it's nots or reasonably available, a short , and you'll ben able to argue for national security situations. i will tell you that the process is not an exact process. i was not doing this in 2001, i asked how many orders can be 100,000 and they said or something. every digital is number. there is a ridiculous number.

we are supposed to get some guidance on how that process will run. i told my company not to expected to be reasonably quick. a lot of other people will be rushing in the same time. you will be putting money on the table. one -- if you win you will get your money back. devise your supply chain that is coming. it matters what you get in the door on march 22. on the 23rd you will be paying these duties. to get contracts that were long-term and the water but as far as we knew none of those have been granted. on march 22.uts

a lot of cause for concern among our alliance members. what i have learned from talking to the members of the alliances there are a lot of small these are notd going to be able to mend -- jump to other sources of supplies. say you are a big beverage manufacturer, you probably can shop but if you are a small fabricator in michigan or ohio, you use foreign metal, or because there is some relationship you have, the supply chains will be cut off by these tariffs. you will have a hard time jumping to a new source. consumers, it

will hit people who buy food at the low income levels are people who buy cars that are older. mostly by smaller businesses to do not have the resources who will need other sources of supply. do companies will be able to that because their relationships are deeper and they will be able to implement. that gives you basic information. i was writing down multiple questions. thank you so much for your time. your very insightful and helped in our minds in the realm of and are the ramifications

what are the revocation set are unknown. the daughter of a small business owner, my dad went to school in michigan. this really hits home for me. it hits home for my family and all the businesses that my dad works with. i think that putting that in the perspective of small to medium-sized businesses, the largest employers are the movers and shakers when it comes to growing the economy and creating jobs. but as i think i could listen to you speak all day long. if you want to come teach a class at gm you -- >> i've always wanted to come teach a class so maybe. >> you should. i'm going to start things off with one technical question. you mention exclusion process and some of the exemption america when it

comes to not available and reasonable quantity, not made here. one thing i noticed was missing is price. there is no indication of if this is going to increase the price of your goodbyes 50 or 60%. yesterday percent if it is going to increase the price of your goods -- if this is going to increase the price of your goods by 50% or 60%. >> this is a problem for small businesses and that brings the point that i should have made that we are also going to suffer in our exports ability. if you are making a product in japan and you can make it with cheaper steel then we can, we are going to lose.

you guys did not model what the export losses would be in terms of product losses. >> it included that, but not in terms of retaliation. >> but exports that are not going to be sold because of the ability of foreign product to underprice us when it comes to competitive markets. you probably know this -- one in every four acres of u.s. agriculture products is for export. that is a great concern for people who may be subject to retaliation or even our companies that are having fabricated metals. -- this isns of this the pebble in the pond that has a lot of ripples. the more you think about it, the more you start to realize how interconnected we are can have theof these affects across

u.s. and in our markets where we are competitive and selling u.s.-produced products. and autos is a great example of that. autos are very price sensitive. the steel and aluminum that goes into autos will be more expensive and i will make the car is more expensive when they go abroad. they are filling up the middle because they are the center of nafta and now they are going to hardard on this -- get hit on this as well. every time i hear them talk about it, i realized that they just realize, wow. .hey feel, why me there is a lot of concern of how the auto industry will weather this.

, youthink, vanessa lead to perfectly into my next question. that has to do with the reactions from the administration on these price increases. lastsure everyone saw week, secretary ross on fox business with his campbell's soup can saying the price would only increase by a penny or a penny and-a-half -- and that is not a big deal. but that adds up. i would love to hear you guys' reactions to how the administration is responding to these price increases. do you feel like they are out of touch with what those price increases could be when they add up for americans? would love to hear your thoughts. are do think that they

mischaracterizing the real costs of those price increases. when you look at this at the retail level, it looks small for certain products. as i was indicating earlier, most of the job losses that we are seeing are at that little level of the value chain. it is the company that makes -- they arehinery going to see much bigger price increases relative to the can of soup. you are not going to see that because who goes to ac -- ae hardware store -- ace hardware store and goes to buy machinery. those price increases are going to be bigger and they are hidden from most average people.

the other thing, you may have seen that wilbur ross put out an editorial this morning and one isthe things he says his, -- , the price increases are not going to be that big. for a car, for example, it'll be four dollars a month more to save a steel job. he does not mention anything about jobs and i would counter that the person who lost his job might have a problem paying four dollars a month more for that car. ofy are ignoring that side the discussion. he ignored it in his report to the president. it is troubling. -- a story was told to me recently. there also decisions made eye companies about structural changes in the business.

a beverage manufacturer and you can choose between building a new aluminum canning line which is a pretty big investment or going plastic, there is a point in time we have to make that decision. your business is growing, you need to bottled more bottles -- bottle more bottles. if to make a strategic decision about planning for the future -- what do you choose? this has an impact on the topic for at least five to 10 years but you have to make a decision based on what you know now. that has ramifications all up and down the supply chain. , your choose plastic supply sources are going to be different than where you source aluminum jobs. that decision is being made in the context of uncertainty and business people are rational for the most part. tore will be decisions made delay projects, to choose to go

with plastics versus metals, decisions to halt certain construction products. we are hearing about all sorts of deadlines that are being pushed. those are decisions that are being made in that strategic sense and we are not capturing that harm as well. he is not recognizing that when he talks about the soup can, he is missing the part of the business where they are basing decisions on market uncertainty. people are going to have to try to hedge for that. >> those are all great points. our last question and then i will open it up to the audience. one thing we have been talking about at the heritage foundation is what can congress do? this is the next question on mind.one's

have asn't congress role? what can congress do and what are the next steps? at heritage, ways to reinsert congressional authority. senator mike lee has a bill associated with this which would -- require a joint resolution by congress if the president wants to introduce tariffs. another option we have been discussing his appropriation. for theation institutions that actually implement and collect tariffs testrevent in preventing them to use in those processes. what do you think about those options? do you think that congress has to do more than write a strongly worded letter? right.here is been us --

there has been a strong congressional reaction. senator schumer put up statements -- everyone understands that we have a problem in the structural economy with employment and with our manufacturers, there are .ight -- issues the chinese are not feeling any pain today at all. they are feeling more pain from the tpp announcement yesterday. i guess i will quickly run through my thoughts. a bill,flake introduced senator lee's bill haslam and been out for a while -- anything that you do has to be -- senator out for a has been while.

anything you do has to be veto- proof. there is a lot of discussion on and the and -- hill business community about what we could do. there is a general recognition of both nafta and this. there is a bouncing that is struck between congress and the president. balance is always been somewhat awkwardly managed. tpa is the best thing we have, up with to manage it on the trade agreement front. we do not a tpa for 232. the question of what to do is on a lot of minds and very good people are thinking about it. i wish there was a simple way. historically, congress is the interests and the president is the visionary.

congress tends to be more worried about protecting the jurisdictions and constituencies and seen as the institution that does that. we may be in a situation historically where we are flipping back and we have to figure out how to grab some of -- powerident back back from the president. i do not think constitutional law professors are any happier. you put two lawyers in a room that has any interest in that, it becomes hours of conversation while our spouses look at us. we have lots of conversation about this all the time. i anchor and anyone who is interested in this field to dive oh gosh i encourage anyone who is interested in this field to dive in. in terms of what else you can do, i think there will be

hearings. meeks and larson just requested hearings. there will be an appetite for hearings as there have not been that many relative to other congresses. i think we may be getting to a flurry of hearings. been a shocking lack of shareholder and stakeholder discussion between the administration and the business community. there is been a large discussion with the union and that is great. i understand that that constituency matters. if you only me with that side of the table, you only hear one set of use. we have had a lot -- set of views. it is not been a very welcoming to administration was meeting for business and i think we feel like that is the problem. we are not getting to say our piece.

.hey do not talk to us much that is another piece. yesterday was the beginning of a long discussion and a lot of, to be on the front page of the post. north korea will be there, but this is going to be there. the last point i would make is this is really incumbent upon us to try to stress to the administration that the solution -- china is a huge problem. every single company will tell you that china is the highest on ,he list in terms of concern frankly, because it is hard to do business but out of an attractive market. the trend we are seeing with china is moving back on all of the reforms they said they were going to do.

and a current administration who does not seem to be inclined to helping the u.s. companies do business there. we have to figure out how to engage our allies and an effective way. this is not the greatest away to open the door for the discussion, but those of us who are not the government do have a lot of ways to talk to those friends and other capitals. we really need to encourage conversation -- a discussion of chinesean spain the with collective action. i really think that is going to be the key to this. a weird collective action in these proclamations. --, andke, common intelligence are you going to get out of this bad thing we are doing to you. that is kind of an invitation to talk about a solution but it is a weird way to start a

conversation, right? just the way that countries diplomatically have to be seen by the domestic constituents, people are not going to welcome that. when i was in mexico. common the mexicans looked at us and they were like, what are we going to do now. now there is no private diplomacy, now you are just telling everybody with the common and and debate. they are in the middle of a difficult election cycle. the kimye on the left is leaving and i feel like they can feel like it is not worsely timed. that conversation is being drowned out. it is always going to be taught suffering. those whos to engage in these conversations, you are never more needed.

we have got to engage with our partners. when to work outside of the government -- let's do it. i needake this need among partners and not just our problem. there is no way we can solve the chinese problem. i do not think we can solve this problem just by the u.s. is saying it will be so and the chinese will suddenly come to realization that they are going to fix everything. it is not going to happen. multilateralism works. >> absolutely. >> anything? [laughter] >> i'm going to take notes. >> with that, i'm going to open the floor for questions. please wait for the microphone and announce your name and affiliation. please make your question a question. >> thank you. i am brian riley and thanks to heritage for having this event.

wanted to restate something you said make sure i understand it correctly. this is not an issue where the proposeddepartment tariffs and you went out and ran a model and came up with different results than what they came up with. if i understand correctly, they ran the same model, came up with similar results, and covered up the parts that they did not like and only told half of the story. those are my words, i am asking if you have a comment on that. >> all they reported was the effect on the steel industry. the do not report the effects on anybody else and they did not report the job effects. we wanted to get all of that into the discussion. >> i am from the pakistani fact checker.

my question is that many s think this is a political stunt and not going to have long-term effects. trump is trying to please or appease the people ump really diehard tr followers and it really is not much substance because he is going to say, we are taking canada out, we are taking mexico for and we are raising these countries and in the end, it would not have any long-term effects. i am asking this question because a couple of years ago, , they are a couple out of a think tank. would not let you talk. i met him privately, he is very thoughtful and he knows these

things very well. -- it isthink if he is not going to make much difference because at the end, everybody will be happy as long as people who work for trump are happy. it is aelieve that political game or charade. thanks. >> i will start. all trade is political, there is no -- that is why trade at boats are hard to get through the congress because trade plays very poorly at home with the electric people. it is a very divisive -- with the electorate people. it is very divisive. we can live here and not deal ith the outside world much, is highly politicized within this administration. be an element of politics and it may be in the

deep recesses of its mind that peter navarro thinks is not going to be sustained in the long-term. you have to work with what you have. the proclamation right now says effectively indefinite. regardless of this lasts for 12 months are five years, businesses do not make decisions just about tomorrow, they make decisions about six to nine months down the line. the spot price on steel and aluminum, i do understand that the prices have been trending up for a month now and we can expect that once the terrorists are in place, there is a certain amount of price increase that will happen for the domestic producers because it is right -- rent that can be achieved and captured by those that can benefit from that. there is room to do so and congressional businesspeople will want that rent, if you

will. , andtter how long it lasts practically speaking even for these exemptions and exclusions to get put in place, we are talking six to nine months, you are going to have an effect on business people who have to make choices. it is not true that you can just do these things and remove them. even if your ultimate goal is to have a certain amount of political theater, you have an actual impact on businesses and on companies. once a company lays off a worker -- i am told it is not just a matter of changing your mind and having the person back. there are decisions that are made and ramifications to that. the only thing that i would add. i do not know the president i have never talked to him, everything that i read suggests that deep down, he really believes this stuff. it is not politics to him. >> excuse me.

[inaudible] they have a boss that is demanding actions or reason that does not think it's political. he thinks in his heart that this stuff is horrible and import protection will fix it. he has peter navarro telling him, go for it. it'll mark obligated -- complicated -- it is a little more complicated than politics versus non-politics. he has my boss telling me, i have to do x. >> especially with career people because they are being told. our action was, this is where you set this capacity, you work

backwards, and you do not look at any of the effects. i do not fault the people who wrote the report. i do nothe information want and this is what it should look like -- and that is exactly what the report looked like. it is out of they are not capable people working at the agencies. love and i think the people work so hard but i think there is a top-down direction that is not allowing for policy discussion. you're going to do it the way i wanted to be done. i think that is part of it. we have time for one, maybe two more questions. >> hey, i am clark at the trade policy council at our institute.

one of the things i notice from the white house rhetoric as they keep talking about this issue of elinese transshipment of ste without it knowledge and that we gave anti-circumvention tools to the branch several years ago. the question i want to ask is, do we have a sense for how pervasive that issue is? yes, 2% or 3% of steel from the united states is from china. but do we have a sense of how pervasive this is trying to skirt anti-dumping countervailing duties. for the -- >> for the people who do not know what this means, you take take it to vietnam or somewhere. it avoids dumping because it is not captured within those terrorists -- it is changed just enough. this is a chinese art form.

they are very good at this and they are very good at telling their affiliate how to do this. the reality is -- it is a problem and it has been a problem for the steel industry not --larly print i do particularly. they tried very hard to get at this problem to give the administration more tools. at the end of the day, tracing these commodities is very hard. do not leave china was a stamp that says, i am chinese steel. be even awant to sieve, they can find ways. the chinese have developed this into an art form so there is no question there is transshipment issues. that is why some countries will not get exemption. the administration has been cut -- sort of cagey about that.

there's a certain amount of transshipment that i would say through south korea, vietnam, thailand -- and those countries will find it hard to argue their case the administration. that is what the koreans have been very quiet over the last 24 countrieseas other like australia and the u.k. -- those are not countries that have a history of transshipment problems and they will be able to go in with a straight face, we do not have this is a problem and the immigration will say, we believe you. keepountry that really track of this are the u.s. steel and aluminum producers. they have people on their staff who look for transshipment. assumes that information will get frontals of the administration and i'll be on the table when they destined people come in and say, i want an exemption. >> last question there in the back. >> edgar, retired. no, sir.

apologize. i'm selecting people very randomly. henry hector, retired government. you have not mentioned the recycling industry of aluminum or steel. or so theyo mentioned that u.s. steel moved and thatare sold out recycling would replace the losses that are produced initially would be able to recycle it still. how does all of this work? will this increase as far as the method of production are will we still be importing aluminum? i read in the newspaper that aluminum was still being imported. it did not say whether with products or some states, maybe we still need more aluminum. the number of products produced continues to increase here let alone in china. how about recycling -- willis

increase our decrease our will is have a big impact on the terrace -- will this increase or decrease is have a big impact on e tarr iffs? >> is there a potential at least in the short term adjustment that could provide some benefit in stimulus to american industry? >> do you want to? i have not an expert but talked to a couple of companies that are in that business. the good news is, we are much better country at recycling. we have all sort of learned to recycle. it is not true in every community across america, but certainly in urban areas and areas where you have densely

populated people with garbage, people have learned to do it. the problem with recycled product is and is not suitable for every use. you can use it for something for you cannot use it to build oil pipelines. you cannot use it to build electrical grade scales. the recycled product gets impure overtime. you can only use it for the uses that allow for impurities. the reality is, we will still be a net importer of aluminum, steel even after the t ariffs go into effect. in some cases, the user will absorb the premium. it is only used in recycled product -- it will not completely a -- erase imports. i do believe the president does care about these people.

there are huge follows in the country where we need to find ways to help people who do not see that they have options and job opportunities -- me to find ways to provide a pathway. interestingly enough, steel jobs are not as many as you would think. were very they labor-intensive. the reality is now, that line has one guy on the end to that works in a control room. modern steels application, a lot of it is done by robots and machinery. that is where we are all headed in terms of the fabrication. even though there is some protection provided by the iffs, the re-investments are hugely expensive and they are not labor-intensive.

a problem for the aluminum and steel companies because this protection is only going to be about two or three years in length and that is not really a live protection if you are going to build out a new 21st century plan. this is not necessarily help them with that problem. short-term,m in the clearly they will get some money out of this because of the right issue. the whether it will give them enough money to build out another 21st century plant or a male that is really competitive with the mills that we see an , time willsia tell. laura did a study in 2002 and yet real data collected and you are able to say, we did the experiment with the bush administration and this is what happened. i feel the results will be the same. as aally global tariffs solution to global structural problems is not the best solution.

that is not make your point any less valid, it just means we, all of us that our thinkers, we need to come up with better solutions. we do go to congress and the white house and try to press our point. >> i would just add that we need to be very clear about what the problem is, what the cause of the problem is. it is really easy to blame foreigners. but in this instance and many other instances, that is not the biggest reason why we have unemployment, hollowed out factories, depressions in many communities in the midwest. the commerce department analysis as well as ours did show that as the economy as a whole, the negative that the gdp level. decline. the --

rossignol estate and said it was negligible. it is still negative. there is something wrong with that solution to the problem. when to look elsewhere. >> thank you so much. please join me in thanking our fantastic panel. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

+ >> the labor department this morning released the latest unemployment figures. 313 jobs were added in february, the most since july 2016. wage gains fell from january from 2.6% year over growth. the unemployment rate remaining unchanged at 4.1%. sarah sanders has a briefing coming up in about an hour at

2:00 p.m. eastern. after that, a group of young chicago residents will discuss gun violence in their schools. -- can talk about that today you can watch that today at 3:00 p.m. eastern. the response to the opioid epidemic and the help they may need from the federal government -- that is coming tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. this week and on book tv, live coverage from the 10th annual tucson festival of books featuring author discussions and viewer call in segments from the university of arizona. starting saturday at noon eastern. who talksedward luce about politics in his book "the retreat of western liberalism." and then a discussion about the trump administration with the journalist david kay johnson, author of "it's even worse than you think -- the trump

administration doing to america." and the spacex oration with the book "endurance, i year in space, a lifetime of discovery." on sunday come our live with women in the military featuring thebook "code girls -- untold story of the american codebreakers of world war ii." and then a discussion with the book "citizen newt." the book "goabout back to where you come from." watch our live coverage of the 10th annual tucson festival of books on c-span2's book tv. ♪ >> in this year's a studentcam competition, we asked students

to choose something in the u.s. constitution. they competed for the chance to win cash prizes. we received entries from 46 states. the first prize winner for the goesschool east category to a student from montgomery blair high school in silver spring, maryland. the first prize winners of our high school central category are two students, one from whitefish bay, wisconsin. goes to first prize boise, idaho. the first prize winner prime minister east category is three students from it eastern middle school in silver spring, maryland.

special for creativity goes to three missions and sozo braden 10, florida. enton, florida. we are happy to announce our grand prize winners, two students from iowa for their documentary all -- "old enough to fight, old enough to vote." we are just calling to let you know that she won the grand prize. [cheering] with this year's topic, it was such an open-ended question so we really had some time to focus in. when i looked online and i got the contact information for the

person who authored the 26th amendment, i said tyler, we have to get in contact with this person. we censor me mails, we started filming, more a males -- after that -- we sent in emails, we started filming, more emails come after that. >> is a lot of controversy going really affected us and we are heading in the college next year. the 26th amendment, we were able to get in contact with some important people here in iowa. entriesop 22 winning will air on c-span in april. you can watch every studentcam documentary online at studentcam.org. next year on c-span, former

national security adviser and u.s. ambassador to the u.n., susan rice, joins npr's joshua johnson to talk about the global security. she also gave career advice to students at the american university school of international service. this is just over an hour. [laughter] -- [applause] >> welcome to american university school of international service. i'm so happy to be able to introduce both a good friend and a colleague here at a.u. ambassador rice and i have actually also shared a title recently and that title isn't president and that title isn't ambassador but it is actually