finally, he finished out his career at ustr as assistant u.s. trade representative for multilateral trade negotiations from 1985-88. this was the. of the gatt uruguay round trade negotiations. a masters degree from the university of pennsylvania and has taught as an adjunct professor in business for the school of business. it is a pleasure to turn of our program now to charlie. [applause] you, less, for that kind introduction. it is more respect than old trade negotiators usually get. am personally very grateful for that area do i'm grateful also to economy in crisis and the bar association for sponsoring this program and to all of you who raved the ice storm to get here so early on a monday morning. i think your presence here is testimony to the timeliness and importance of the larger debate that is shaping up or cross this town and in my experience all across our country. there is a lot of confusion among americans about what trade promotion authority really is, whether it is necessary or desirable and the specific role that fast-track authori

charlie then moved on to the post-deputy assistant ustr for industry 1982 to 1983 and then was promoted to the post assistant u.s. trade representative for industry where he served from 83 to 85 and then finally understood as distinguished career at ustr stasis and trade representative full marks the -- for multilateral trade negotiations from 1985 to 1988 the period a figure grave -- uruguay trade negotiations. charlie has a masters degree from the university of pennsylvania and has taught as an adjunct or thus are the business at the american university school of business. it's a pleasure to meet -- for me to turn over our program to charlie blum. [applause] >> thank you for that kind introduction. that certainly more respect than we usually get them i'm personally very grateful for that. i'm grateful to the economy in crisis and the our association for sponsoring this program and to all of you who've braved the ice storm to get here so early on a monday morning. your presence here is testimony to the timeliness and importance of the larger debate that is shaping up all across this to

secretary of treasury and every former ustr or u.s. trade representative that was around. all of them. plus the very top company corporate leaders from around the country who all came together to sign on to the importance of nafta and getting it done. and getting it ratified. and as close as the nafta fight was, i don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the ratification was in large measure contributed to by this institution, csis, and by dalal and by sidney and by george and a little by the junior canadianist, but not very much. [laughter] so coming back 20 years later, we've tried to take a look at where this relationship could go. and i'm not going to repeat what my colleagues said, but i want to underscore just a couple of things that i think deserve just a bit of additional anticipation. attention. one is we have to recognize that in 2001 this relationship changed again. it wasn't just nafta that we're thinking back on, the september 11th attacks brought us a much more robust byrder than we had had and added heavy compliance across supply chains that cross north

nobody really thought about what sequestration was going to do to ustr. well, they don't have a bunch of other programs and other things. our trade representatives couldn't go to the table in some of these trade agreements, you know, because their budgets got cut from travel and a whole host of other things, so making sure things are tailor made to the different agencies and what they have to do critically important. when you talk about the deployment of agencies for different things like health care, you know, some of our agencies are operating with, you know, last century's technology. if we don't invest in these agencies that are going to be implementing rules and regulations, you're exactly right, we're going to have agencies that are behind the curve in getting things out. i think some of those things are really important and providing flexibility with peer review, to this gentleman's point, is making sure that industry's at the table and making sure that they actually have a say so that when things these to be deployed, they can be deployed. >> host

secretary of treasury, and every former ustr trade representative, plus the top leaders from around the country, who all came together to sign on to the importance of nafta and getting it done, and getting it ratified. as close as the nafta fight was, i don't think it is an exaggeration to say that it was in large measure contributed to by this institution and by all of them. coming back 20 years later, we tried to take a look at where this relationship could go. i am not going to repeat what my colleagues said. but i want to underscore some things that deserve attention. in 2001 this relationship changed. it wasn't just nafta we are thinking back on. the september 11 attacks brought heavy compliance cost to the supply chain across the american borders. we want to be secure. it is not about abolishing security. we have to find ways to make our borders work more efficiently. second, they built the covenant on east and west infrastructure, and we need more infrastructure, road and rail. even i.t. infrastructure. that is something that government must do. we need more pipelines, more power

involved with the ttip discussions but the usr and other folks who are deeply involved with it, they ustr the u.s.. rep, and others to consult with our staff from time to time about technical issues particularly when it comes to issues around privacy enforcement because again trying to explain what we do and how it's done in the united states again is not a sentence, it's a paragraph. so we are not at all at the table in this discussion and we are really focused -- my job is to focus on protecting consumers and protecting competition and with respect to privacy and data flows, to make sure that we have appropriate law enforcement and we are engaged in appropriate law enforcement as well as policy development around those issues. and you know, i have been a cop on the heat weather at the state level or at the federal level now for a long time and i'm a big believer in enforcement. that is our job which is different and separate from the. negotiations. >> i just want to comment in two ways on that. one is a thing or haps part of what is coming up is that a lack of the nsa revelations create

within the department, the ustr's responsibility is committed by those of the assistant security -- assistant secretary of defense. in the wake of the navy yard shooting incident, the secretary of defense initiated concurrent, internal, and independent reviews to identify and recommend actions and adjust gaps or deficiencies in dod programs, policies, and procedures regarding security at dod installations. the reviews covered the granting and renewing of security clearances for dod employees and contractor personnel. in order to address the department's facilities security practices and policies, it is important to describe the retirement -- the requirement for military commanders or civilian equivalents to conduct a security evaluation of a facility or activity. the purpose of this evaluation is to determine the ability of the insulation to deter, withstand, and recover from the full range of adversarial capabilities. based upon a threat assessment, compliance with protection standards, and risk management. based upon the results of these evaluations, active and passive measures are tailored

secretary of treasury, and every former ustr trade representative, plus the top leaders from around the country, who all came together to sign on to the importance of nafta and getting it done, and getting it ratified. as close as the nafta fight was, i don't think it is an exaggeration to say that it was in large measure contributed to by this institution and by all of them. coming back 20 years later, we tried to take a look at where this relationship could go. i am not going to repeat what my colleagues said. but i want to underscore some things that deserve attention. in 2001 this relationship changed. it wasn't just nafta we are thinking back on. the september 11 attacks brought heavy compliance cost to the supply chain across the american borders. we want to be secure. it is not about abolishing security. we have to find ways to make our borders work more efficiently. second, they built the covenant on east and west infrastructure, and we need more infrastructure, road and rail. even i.t. infrastructure. that is something that government must do. we need more pipelines, more power

within the department, the ustr's responsibility is committed by those of the assistant security -- assistant secretary of defense. in the wake of the navy yard shooting incident, the secretary of defense initiated concurrent, internal, and independent reviews to identify and recommend actions and adjust gaps or deficiencies in dod programs, policies, and procedures regarding security at dod installations. the reviews covered the granting and renewing of security clearances for dod employees and contractor personnel. in order to address the department's facilities security practices and policies, it is important to describe the retirement -- the requirement for military commanders or civilian equivalents to conduct a security evaluation of a facility or activity. the purpose of this evaluation is to determine the ability of the insulation to deter, withstand, and recover from the full range of adversarial capabilities. based upon a threat assessment, compliance with protection standards, and risk management. based upon the results of these evaluations, active and passive measures are tailored

charlie then moved on to the post of deputy assistant you ustr for industry 1982 to 1983.n was promoted to the post of assistant u.s. trade representative for industry where he served from 1983 to 1985. finally he finished out his distinguished clear at usgr as the assistant u.s. trade representative for multilateral trade negotiations from 1985 to 1988. fm was the period of the trade negotiations. charlie has a master's degree from the university of pennsylvania and has taught as an adjunct professor of business at the american university school of business. it's a pleasure for me to turn over our program now to charlie. >> thank you, les, for that kind introduction. that's certainly more respect than old trade negotiators usually get and i'm grateful for that. aim grateful also to economy of crisis in the bar association for sponsoring this program and all of you who braved the ice storm to get here so early on a monday morning. i think your presence here is testimony to the timeliness and importance of the larger debate that is -- shaping up all across this town. and my

ustr does not have other programs and other things.equestration hit it in a way that our trade representative's could not go to the table in some of these trade agreements because budgets got caught from travel and a whole host of other things. making sure things are tailor- made to different agencies and what they have to do is critically important. when you talk about deployment of agencies for different things like health care, some of our agencies are operating with last century's technology. if we do not invest in these agencies implementing rules and regulations, you are exactly right, we will have agencies behind the curve in getting things out. some of those things are really important in-flight -- providing flexibility with peer review, making sure industries at the they have making sure a say so when things can be deployed, they can be deployed. >> i am not exactly sure what the senator means when talking about your review. when we issue major or minor rules, there is an open process. regular people are able to comment and in