rights in 1968, our deborah spahr, former college president, and author of wonder women, sex, power, and the quest for perfection. she is also the author of the upcoming book fix matters. how modern feminism lost touch with science, love, and common sense. watch 1968, america in turmoil, amen's rights sunday at 8:30 eastern on c-span's washington journal and american history tv on c-span3. >> the trump administration recently imposed new tariffs on steel and aluminum. next, a look at the potential impact of that decision with international trade and labor officials. this event was hosted by the afl-cio. much.nks very we will go ahead and begin.

cio.me to the thank you very much for coming. is celeste drake, and i work on trade and globalization: the. i am very excited to be introducing today's panel and the really important topics we will be discussing. talking about washington, d.c. can be extremely frustrating. apply thers too often simplistic and frankly incorrect free-trade versus protectionist dichotomy and think they have brilliantly said everything there is to say on the topic. but they could not be more wrong. arellectual property rules a critical part of u.s. free-trade agreements and trade policy, but they represent a clear deviation from so-called free trade. afl-cio areke the often labeled as protectionist. even though we support duty-free fortment for most goods

most developing nations. that is a distinct lee free-trade position. interesting thing about this administration and its actions on tariffs -- if this vision to protect national security by 232 tariffscalled on global imports of aluminum and steel, and it's decision to address china's intellectual property theft by opposing what is known as section 301, tariffs on a variety of chinese imports, that represent outside the box thinking, even though they are actually in position of the most traditional trade enforcement tool ever. that is the tariffs. it is such willingness to approach -- is such willingness to approach this isolationist? we have all heard these allegations and worse on talk shows and read them online, but what is the truth? are these tariffs bad just because they are imposed by this particular president?

are they long-overdue? will they help create good paying jobs for u.s. workers? those are the kinds of questions we will investigate in today's panel. joining me to suss out the truth on the fiction are four really terrific panelists. i will introduce them briefly enough medical order, and then we will get down to the discussion. first, we're joined by respected .to litigator elizabeth boulton elizabeth currently a consulting counsel, is a former assistant general counsel and associate general counsel for the united states trade representative, and trade counsel for the ways and means committee for the united states trade representative. atzabeth drake is a partner shaker and associates. she has a broad array of international trade law matter s including section 301 petition and china safeguards. she has represented clients in proceedings before the u.s. international trade commission and the court of international trade.

and previously, she worked for the afl-cio. , ond, we have robert scott my far left. director of trade and manufacturing policy at the economic odyssey institute. economic policy institute. he has published in academic journals and the stanford and law policy review and "los angeles times." the los angeles times. on my right were joined by a comedian and president of the local that represents employees. started working at the plant 11 years ago. he's seen the impact of global overcapacity firsthand. let's begin with discussion the more open for discussion from the audience.

if you want to tweet you can he use the #, truth in trade. start with a question for everyone. let's say we just stepped into an elevator and will take us one minute to get to the floor. i ask you to tell me your thoughts, what is your one minute answer? >> i think the tariffs are a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to address a critical problem building up for the last two decades. massive amounts of overcapacity centered in china and other countries. these tariffs are important opportunity to build a wall

around the unfairly treated metal it's costing us thousands of jobs in the u.s. >> aluminum and steel are vital to our national security. it includes critical infrastructure, bridges, security, industries we need to have in the united states. how do you ensure these businesses through imports are sustained so we actually can sustained? >> is for national security. job creation is a trickle-down effect in put up that one or two u.s. skill jobs can create other jobs in the industry. that's a fact. it's part of our national

security and job creation. >> these tariffs are long overdue. everyone predicted to become a market economy play by the rules. the opposite is happening. there's still capacity has quadrupled the destroyed not only china's market but global markets scope and scale a problem. we tried dialogue and other challenges the problem gets worse. hopefully it will get the global community to address the problem before it gets worse. >> there's unanimous thought on this panel the steel and aluminum tariffs are good. let's get into it more. we heard about china cheating

and jobs having an effect on other jobs in the steel industry but we've also heard tariffs generally are bad, like a dirty word. if you're here mongering about the unintended negative consequences. i want to open it up and say what you think the impact is going to be on the economy will be more positive or negative and why for some of his not really familiar. >> i think the steel terms could be beneficial's to the economy if handled right.

in a way that encourages others around the world to coordinate and targeting countries like china and russia in vietnam. costing us jobs. we would encourage those companies to eliminate the capacity to balance trade. if we don't is not just a question of the jobs at stake the levels are critical for production of thousands of other products ranging from auto parts to wash machines and windmills and aircraft parts. they're all at risk if we allow these countries to produce the metal at subsidized prices.

>> for regular consumer why deal with on a regular basis, we don't go out and buy steel like that, we go on by like cheese. steel is going to go up and prices. you getting better made product is key a trickle-down effect. you need to support the data that means all of me may go up. since 2008 it has been down. so the car prices you not to get a discount price on the car.

regular consumer is not going to. >> you make a really important point. the price the manufactures are paying for the input goes down we don't always see that in the price of the good. it depends on many things in market power. the shape of the demand curve and all of this economic stuff. they need to know that just because the price goes up it doesn't translate we have a situation where american producers are subject to

profitability's so a lot of the discussion will say is not competitive. were just required to be profitable. let's put this in context. it's been unnaturally deflated for many years and tariffs are one way to get it back to her was. >> the question is what are you buying for the additional costs. what you're buying is the domestic aluminum industry. so if you want to generate a return chosen allowing the steel industry to return to 80% capacity which is what's needed. so that's the trade-off. if you don't to the if you are unable to reach that level

you're in a downward spiral. thousands of workers lost their jobs so is trying to sustain that. >> i want to get back to something rob said. talking about the importance of these tariffs being promoted in a coordinated strategic way. one thing that we keep hearing is that it's going to be the start of a trade war. president trump has said it's hyperbole to call this a trade war. it's a scare tactic. i like to hear from the panelists.

to think were ready in a trade war? if so, who started it and who's winning in his losing? >> the rhetoric is completely overblown. there been investigation over the years. numerous his restraint agreements that have been reached lessor seen with korea. everyone needs to calm down and take a big breath. this can be an important tool for the steel and aluminum industry. there are distortions and conflicts and that started with china's own drive to build up the steel industry without a rational demand. have more access capacity than our total capacity.

it's completely irrational. they sever gonna do something about it but it just goes up or not. unless something dramatic is to i don't know how you rate expect to get different results. >> we are at war with american jobs. just to think that china can produce -- in one month or one year. something unheard of. so we are at war but it's not a trade war. something me have to take care of up here with the tariffs being put in place. >> the microphones in front of your lives who please keep clicking a wrestling of papers to a minimum.

hanukkah back to comments about national security. we've heard about people questioning whether the steel and aluminum tariffs are legitimately related to national security. can you tell us more about why steel and aluminum are related to national security. >> was first enacted by congress and 55. it's important to remember that congress did this eight years after we signed. congress is aware that signing on to these will have ramifications. the gatt is a trade agreement signed in 1947 a precursor to

what we have today. that's history of section 232. the patriot act plays a role in this. after 9/11 congress was worry that we didn't have a way of planning for the protection of our infrastructure. we see this because when general mattis memo was released that national defense only have a certain percentage of aluminum and steel that was taken as a proxy that this was not a national security issue. cdp and border protection was charged with critical framework of infrastructure.

they designated aluminum and steel is critical components to sustain and. >> to continue on the theme we been hearing its controversy on really use. can you talk about that? >> the have been used in the past. i think a lot of the controversy doesn't have as much to do with the tariffs is the atmosphere and personalities associated with them. more calm discussion that looked at the merits and understood the background and reasoning there could be more room for agreement that something like this was needed to address a problem that was on addressable up until now. i agree with it broadly

communication, energy and there was a court challenge that it's not for national security. it's a part of national security. it has no basis. it was interesting to see the judge on the court reach the same conclusion as others looked at it more closely. >> try to use to be a particular problem and you also mentioned russia in vietnam. wire the steel and aluminum terrorists not just on those three countries? >> if we just put tariffs on those countries would be too

easy for china, russia, vietnam to export their goods to other countries such as japan or korea or even canada. and then transport those strictly to the united states. we want to block off that option. there's a more important reason which is that we want to provide incentives for other countries to join us in circling the way. this is the only way in which will be able to remove the excess capacity from the world market if we make it impossible for these to export to the world. concerned about the availability

of china and the exported steel which transforms an enormous amount of that metal and create cars are now the third largest source of imports the mortar vehicles in the united states. much of those are made and not impose duties on those cars because of their use of subsidized tools. so zone still by 30% we said nothing in that agreement about korea's ability to use this from china. i think the agreement was a good place to start. >> that's important point.

before opening up questions to the audience i have more pledges want to come back make this more concrete and less abstract. we known layoffs were announced last fall before the announcement of the tariffs at your plan. can you talk about what it does to the members of your local and what you're experiencing in all things are different are still the same. >> this is right outside of philadelphia. we were one of the main producers. back in 2005 we had around 400 to 425 employees at the plant. today we have barely 200. were going to be going down to

seven we had a yard that was adjacent to the plan. that is closed in the last few years. that industry in the those orders are not there. is due to not having tariffs in place. this is what happens when you don't have tariffs in place. you're losing jobs and closing part of the plant down. my plans was one of the major producers. back in 2005 - 2009 we were the only plant that made money for the company based on what we had coming through to the plan. we turned on a dime to actually support the military vehicle.

this is being destroyed for bombs and guns in those natures. we lost a lot of our small customers due to that. those will be the ones who will keep us afloat. but our dedication to the country military took that away. not having that really destroyed my plant in particular. we are not having tariffs in place and we really just took what we had in a plant and took it down to basically nothing. he go from 40271 people.

to just make us the facility. there's not another plan out there that could produce steel the way that we can make of the strength that we can. not a lot of industries out there that can compete because that's what our bread and butter was you just mentioned about the bridge this was a key issue raised. one of the managers in the bridge building association mentioned one thing the challenge with his bridge components for mexico made out of chinese steel. another illustration of the way these products are filtering

through global congress and having a negative impact. >> another point is that of my plan is going down they could be closed in the next year to then where will we get the steel from? who will we rely on? i have the facts to say that we produce over 200,000 tons of steel in the last three years between the war. those are facts if we don't have this plan in particular to make the steel if we had to rely another countries we might be in trouble. >> packets back to the fact that this is an important section of the trade wall.

it's actually really important to all of us. i like to open it up to questions from the audience. reese year hand if you have questions. >> there's question about jobs opening up. >> those are carbon plan. it's a more open market for carbon. aluminum is another market. there's not a lot of specialty customers out there beside. until there's some type of military spending plan ultimately this needs to be down. ultimately what were dealing

with are still over capacity. that has to come down more for us to start trying to think about rehiring. there are facts does not effectiveness at this time. >> was mentioning that the coordinating process will be part of that final version. is that a coordinated process over? or how do you perceive that? and also if you're with the exemptions and exclusions consider the place where a lot of interests are fighting over

particular aluminum products. could be the interest in those were fighting those issues. >> you mentioned that ideally that this results in coordinated action by all major markets to eliminate that excess capacity. we seem the e.u. being temporarily is an exclusion. then they announced the steel safeguard but comedians as part of theirs have developed a canadian steel border team were industry and officials making sure they don't become a conduit of overcapacity flowing into the

u.s. for return for them getting an exclusion. that's not an element of what they're trying to build and. they also need to take some action to create more coordinated global approach to squeeze out opportunities. is this just started it's been something like thousand request while in only a handful have been released. they're very specific in terms of widths and lengths and chemical content. part of it is a domestic source and others. it's hard to say how that will shake out. i've been talking to people who are part of the process during the 201 safeguard.

they defined those pretty narrowly and really based on if there is domestic capacity or not. it's a legitimate basis to fine-tune things. it shouldn't be a way to weaken those releases. >> did you want to follow up on the. >> were being very vigilant about the number of exemptions being granted. you have to take this and to have more long-term viability. you have to make sure it's not just open season on imports. >> the national press club main

points with all of you. he then also said he wished president trump would not use the words trade word when he talks about this. how is the administration stepping on itself or undermining its effort. >> does anybody want to take this? >> the administration really prefers to make headlines. we prefer -- over actual strategy. they seem to be shooting themselves in each other as they make policy. one day were making good policy and steel and the next regular reentry into the negotiations. that's part of why he was elected because he opposed it. . .

>> one of the benefits the way the president talks about this issue is focusing the mind we always had this idea that it would be in our long-run benefit but his tariffs and discussion of overcapacity is focusing people on what

exactly state capitalism is and what it means when you link it to the 2025 strategy even senator cornyn said we may be in a trade war and not fighting back even if you don't frame it that way isn't unhealthy to discuss if we are responding to a trade war. >> everybody has criticisms how things are rolled out or advertised or described but if you look at the work that was done in the congress report on china's compliance, there is a lot of substance there. they are very, very good. also they are rejecting the traditional wisdom to say no

this is not working. the system is not working we need to do something about it. sometimes people don't look at the substance it is easy to say that rhetoric is bombastic rather than understanding that work that is being done to challenge the way things are being done previously. >> a. [inaudible]

>> as i understand that the quota is two limits in the united states without regards to the origin. korea is the largest importer of chinese steel according to statistics from the un in some of the reports i have found. and to do with those tariffs for korea to impose tariffs on imports from china so i think

that you look at the op-ed that i wrote early april that others have said something similar he wins a candidate if exempted but only if they participate in further restraints. >> will rollout of the tariffs is showing one of the weaknesses of the wto. it is a really structure overcapacity, it isn't really

structured that similarly are harmed by overcapacity working together with coordination. so it really is showing that we need a comprehensive approach to trade strategy. we started with some good tactics with those tariffs that we talk about today but we need comprehensive trade reform where the nafta, wto and trade policies and overall those domestic policies and to achieve the goals that we want with goals and wages and how does that work together with the trade strategy to do that and not just be a source to outsource jobs and

exploitation of workers overseas. >> talking about the practical effects and then that was even accomplished even more? still trying to get that forward capacity out but now what is happened to the members. with the men and women who have been laid off.

because most of the members are veterans. but then being there 25 years in any lose their job. and with those programs to finding a job. because they were in the 50s. and with that new way to put in that fabrication then just walk up to get a paper application.

and to get politicians to understand what is going on. and then to try to give assistance to the veterans who are affected. and then in the trade cases. because the members acclimated and then what they can do to reach out.

then that would be affected more than the younger members. but they are more acclimated to the workforce. >> it is a difference. to make the trade adjustment assistance programs for those who have lost their job so they can demonstrate it was due to trade policies. rate. >> what every country wants to

have its own and to promote the jobs and to promote the jobs with the overcapacity and reduce capacity. but with china the scale is off the charts. and a lot of that has to do now just central government policy but at below market rates and every region once their own steel p.m. -- plant so there is that failure of coordination if it is creating

its own steel industry. >> there is a lot of complicated history and we just have not seen so with the kindness party you don't want to make a wave of unemployment so using that and working on a market basis and to come hundreds of times year even with the united states announced it can pass on -- produce about

1.6 billion tons. the largest exporter in the world. and then to show up in places like korea and japan. and to have a pernicious effect on trade and with the chinese they are consciously attempting as this was a result of a five-year plan every five years they target industries to take them over. china has a very effective state capitalist system. yes there are potential problems that china wants to

reduce access and that is the to the system and the last one is even though it. >> this is what they export to the rest of the world. they understand it is to shake so that is why these get to the root of the problem. >> living in the at job losses

are aerospace or washing machine parts that that is related to chinese overcapacity and steel even though they don't know that is one of the sources of the problem? >> china is the largest exporter of manufactured products in the world.

but what we found out through the whole economy it doesn't really work that way and there are a lot of us in the labor movement with the trade policy because that is china and mexico all the trees that we trade. are there more questions from the audience? i have a couple but those that

are hit by the retaliatory tariffs and those i guess maybe i would step back. but the way to order the

agreements between 2003 and 2009 there was a thrash. so it's not a surprise missionary to and that trying to get those farmers to retaliate, that is how we ended up. >> whether or not they are hurt is a false choice we export $12 billion for the soybeans u.s. have programs we could buy that and release

them it is terrible and the worst thing in the world starting a trade war and. >> but if drivers benefits and in the that you talk about

coordination into. but to look at the individual tactics and anybody can start. >> and then to get all of the countries to wake up so let's

choose

so now we are so consumed with nafta we have this. i would like to see that. i don't think that competitiveness is about tax cuts. that will not get us back what we need to be producing.

>> but one quick point is trade deals have been negotiated for the interest of u.s. investors and i think we need to stop negotiating trade deals to get rebalance trade the way it is discussed and those that help to level the playing the field like environmental standards with financial transactions and for everybody. >> and it should be a trigger. obviously we have to exception exceptions -- everything but if that is to

match the that is a gray recommendation this i know i have learned a lot and i hope that you have. thank you very much for coming. [applause]

>> him him sees them as " washington journal," live every day with news a policy issues that about you. johng up this morning, garamendi will join us at aqaba u.s. military action against syria on the increased tensions with russia. the pennsylvania republican congressman glenn thompson will talk about the farm bill have changes to the step program. also, chris edwards of the cato institute will discuss tech policy. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. this morning. join the discussion. >> california governor jerry brown has challenged the trump administration on a couple of issues, including sending national guard troops to the border, climate change, and environmental policy.

governor brown will be the national press club this morning. live coverage begins at 8:30 a.m. on c-span2. the u.s. pacific command and north american aerospace defense command take questions. the can find was events on c-span.org and with the free c-span radio app. this weekend, live coverage on book tv of the 22nd annual festival of books. starting saturday at 1:00 p.m. eastern with journalist jorge romo's in his book "stranger: the challenge of a latino immigrant in the trumpcare a," and k trump era,"

sarin david corn, "russian roulette." then another book "when they call you a terrorist: a black atrisseatter memoir" by p khan-cullors. and roger simon was "i know best." festival ofmes" books come alive on c-span2. >> a look at changing demographics in the u.s. and the impact on politics and elections. we will hear reports by a number of think tanks, the bipartisan policy center, center for american progress, brookings and americanprri, enterprise institute partnered on