>> that's a question for ambassador lighthizer. i can say about trade, i was on a panel long time ago, i think i was a mccain adviser and also advising president obama and talking about trade. often as he often does, says something really, really brilliant about the role of the economist and the trade debate. because he said an economist wrote a free trade deal would be one sentence. it would say free trade. but trade deals have thousands and thousands of lines that are written by lawyers. so when we, as they can't talk about trade, the big talk about what trade looks like in our model. that can be interesting for academic purposes. .. about the impact that he can deliver. >> george from national journal. >> you are asked about phase two of tax cuts. he talked about the wisdom but i don't think you answered about the timetable and is there any sense of urgency getting that done while republicans still control the house? >> i have only a little bit more hair than he does. let's just not my lane. it could make sense. i know it's some

you quoted my coat lighthizer is -- you quoted my quote from lighthizer, that he is really good at this. really mindful of economics. i talked with him all the time. what he thinks about the economic impact on this or that, we communicate about it. i have promised that he can deliver what the president has promised which is better trade deals. linda: george from national journal. reporter: you asked about phase two of tax cuts. in your answer, you talked about the wisdom, the second bite at the apple. i don't think you answered the question about the timetable. along those lines, is there any sense of urgency about getting that done while republicans still control the house? mr. hassett: i am not mark short. i only have a little more hair than he does. mark -- that is out of my lane to discuss the timetables. i think that a second bite could make sense and make things permanent. removing uncertainty could make sense. when it happens, i'm not sure. i know that one of mark's top priorities, something i encourage you to think about and write about, is we have these nominees whose confirmat

hassett: that is a question for ambassador lighthizer. as a global issue outside that question, i was on a panel along time ago. i was a mccain advisor. we were talking about trade. austin, as he often does, said something really brilliant about the role of the economists in the tray debate. -- trade debate. it would be one sentence. it would say free-trade. the trade deals are thousands and thousands of lines written by lawyers. when we as economist talk about trade, we can talk about what trade looks like in our model. that can be interesting for academic purposes. when you think about what we should do with this, the deal has thousands of pages. he was then being humble about his ability to discuss the question was on nafta. maybe it was something else. when you ask about a trade deal there are 70 things going on in trade deals. things that we have agreed to that make no sense. negotiators are competent. lighthizer is really good at this. really mindful of economics. i talked with him all the time. what he thinks about the economic imp

president trump, ambassador lighthizer was very focused on the trade deficit, and they talk about it is a function of bad trade agreements. i think the tariffs are one way to remedy that. but i think anyone with an economics background will also tell you the trade deficit comes from our budget deficit and from the level of the currency. so, there is this interaction and calculus between the three. i don't think -- i believe in a conservative agenda tariffs have a place, but i think it is part of a calculus of all the tools in the toolkit. reihan: you might be among the world's leading experts on currency fluctuations and how to think about them. if you go back to the reagan era come you had the plaza accords. scott: the plaza accords and then the louisville courts, up and down. reihan: talk about whether you see large-scale currency intervention as an important tool for the next presidential administration. scott: i don't think it has to be a large-scale currency intervention. i think what we have to have is to go back to the 1980's and even the 1990's where there was a large-scale c

she was really the lead of canada's team, the counterpart to robert lighthizer. so she has a lot of name recognition. she's got a very strong personality and a lot of favorable views among canadians for how she might do as president. there are a couple of other leading contenders. mark hardy who was the governor of the bank of england but before that, governor bank of canada is very well respected in the financial sector from brookfield which is a large property company and also from bloomberg, an american company, he is chair of the board. very well-known, very well respected. not a politician in the sense of having been elected to office before, but he is somebody that the prime minister has tried to recruit for cabinet and i think he will be a leading contender. after you get past those to the contenders are a little bit harder to guess. christy clark, the premier of british columbia, a liberal has nothing to do with the trudeau government. she's been mentioned as somebody from outside the liberal government to have a fresh start. we've also heard some -- hear