Skip to main content

tv   Texas Tribune Festival - Trump Mexico  CSPAN  October 13, 2017 4:03pm-5:07pm EDT

4:03 pm
coming up next here on c-span3, a conversation on u.s.-mexico relations since president trump has been in office. we'll hear from texas congressman henry convey har and a judge in el paso texas. this is about an hour. hello, everybody and welcome to this panel. it's called trump and mexico. allow me to introduce the panel. i'll start on the end over there. congressman henry kwahar, democratic from texas who was elected in 2005 to represent district 28. he serves on the house appropriations committee and on the subcommittees of homeland security and transportation housing and urban development previously he served as secretary of state of texas and before that he was as we say
4:04 pm
house trained and house broken in the texas house of representatives. as i said miller a republican from stevenville, texas has surfed as agriculture commissioner since 2014. also house broken. miller served six terms in the texas house during his tenure miller changed the ag and livestock committee and homeland security and public safety committee. he's an eighth generation farmer and rancher, also served on or serves on the state agriculture policy board and was appointed to serve on the national energy council. signature next to sid miller is veronica escobar. she's serving her second term as el paso judge. she served as county commissioner for precinct two and as a member of numerous boards and commissions in el paso where she was born and very proud of and is focused on border policy, education and
4:05 pm
youth leadership development. in august escobar announced her candidacy for the 16th congressional district which is currently held by representative. tony garza a native of brownsville, texas served as the u.s. ambassador to new mexico from 2002 to 2009 before his appointment he served as the texas secretary of state and is chairman of the texas railroad commission. he is currently counsel in the mexico city office of wide and case and chairman of adventures a management consulting firm specializing in cross border business development. >> not house broken. >> not house broken, correct. governor, francisco garcia has served as governor of the excan state, our neighborhood which borders texas from webb county to brownsville since 2016. he previously served as mayor of border city across and also is a
4:06 pm
federal senator. as governor he's advocated for great railroad cooperation between texas. here's a fun fact. he was born in mcgowan texas, went to high school there and the only dual national governor in mexico. so i think it's really cool that we have four of the five panelists were born along the border. sid miller and i were not. so the title of this panel is trump and mexico but it might as well be called trump versus mexico. we all remember the line about rapists and drug traffickers and a few good people coming across the u.s.-mexico border. the relationship remains tense whether it's over the wall, daca, nafta, you name it. so let's start with the a shove hands. who on this panel supports something, anything that donald trump is doing when it comes to his policy and rhetoric directed
4:07 pm
at mexico? let's start with tony. >> and this is actually going to be sort of curiously enough. it's not so much that i support the positions the president has taken, i support the responses to the position the president has taken. if you look at 23, 24, 25 years, we have nafta, we had taken for granted that we would have an open and efficient trading relationship with mexico. and i think until the president started to really challenge those assumptions we weren't very good about defending the importance of the relationship. we weren't good about everyday stepping up and saying, this relationship means hundreds and thousands of jobs to texas, it means opportunity and prosperity in mexico, it means the opportunity to have a cooperative relationship with a single most important partner that we have in terms of
4:08 pm
security, in terms of immigration, in terms of all those issues that impact the border but are lives generally in the united states and mexico. so in a sense, until there was this -- this threat to this relationship that we had gotten so comfortable with, we weren't willing to step up each and every day and defend it. so it's not that i defend so much in any way the positions the president has taken with respect to trade or daca or immigration reform and the need for it, it's that i think it was important for us to start being far more vocal about how important it was to the quality of our lives each day and the nature of the security relationship and the importance of the relationship that we have with our sister states, and country of mexico. >> commissioner miller, i'm assuming that's not what you
4:09 pm
have in mind. you actually agree with trump on a lot of -- >> on most things. i would say that with a caveat. i think i think a kindler, gentler approach than our president does. i think people think of our president in his current political position which he is not a politician. he's a businessman. he's a deal maker. he wants to make america great again and part of making a deal is positioning yourself, let's take nafta, for instance, which i agree with him on. it's an old document, over 20 years old, you know. consumers have changed, technology has changed, per capita consumption has changed. it's like a house you built 20 years ago. it's time for a new coat of paint. we need to modernize it. the line is when i served -- came on board as one of his agreed to be an agriculture adviser to him, he agreed that
4:10 pm
agriculture would have a say in whatever we did with nafta or mexico or immigration and he's kept that word so far. so he'll throw out a lot of bombastic statements like i'm just going to scrap the whole thing and start over. >> you have a problem with bombastic statement? >> not really. somebody said i was one of the reporter said you were trump before trump was trump. any way, as i know the man and know his background, that is part of positioning yourself in bargaining. if the other side thinks you're walking away from the table and scrap the whole deal, they start vam bling and say wait, wait, hold up just a minute before you scrap the whole thing. what was it you wanted? let's see if we can work this out and get to the table. i think it's in our best interest that we do that. my advice as an advisory, nafta
4:11 pm
is the ground floor. we start there and make it better for both sides, for mexico, for canada, for texas and we don't do any harm. if we can't make it any better than the status quo. we take that agreement and we build on it. we don't tear it down. so that's where the agriculture advisory committee, even though agriculture has profited greatly with nafta is advising him to go forward on that because there are some things that we need to tweak and update. >> congressman kwalar is that donald trump has presented an opportunity whether you like what he says or don't like what he says we're talking about nafta now and even people who didn't be want to talk about nafta want to talk about nafta. do you agree there's an opportunity here because of trump? >> i disagree. we actually had that conversation before hand, before i think it was in june of 2016
4:12 pm
or whenever he started his campaign saying that the mexicans were rapists and murderers. if you remember there was an agreement called the or there was an approach that we're looking at called the transpacific partnership and under the transpacific partnership we did the nafta 2.0. everything we're talking about except for the fury and fire was done under tpp. the only bad thing on the third day of the presidency, the president got out of the transpacific partnership and the only one that was really happy was china because we got out of that leadership itself. and trade is very important and i live in la radio. i represent all the way down to the valley. so trade is very important. every day there's $1.3 billion of trade between the united states and the united states. that's over a million dollars a minute. then when he talks about all the rapists and murderers, look what
4:13 pm
the mexicans have sent. last year they sent almost 20 million -- we had 20 million mexican visitors that year. that's one out of four people that come into the united states are mexicans, which means that mexico sends more than the uk, japan, brazil, china, germany, franz, everybody put together. billions of dollars are spent and tony we all know this, they come in, they spend money in our hotels, restaurants, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. so if somebody's such a good businessman, imagine if two business people got together and say, before we get started, i want to tell you that your family, you got rapists and murderers, can we get started on a negotiations? you don't do that because if you see russia as a friend and mexico as an enemy, our world has been turned upside down.
4:14 pm
[ applause ] >> i want to get everybody on this question because this is really, you know, the whole nut here is for you, for example, governor can you say anything nice about trump and mexico? isn't that hazardous to your political health to do something like that? >> first of all, we need to keep -- the federal government has to take regarding nafta. sometimes i wonder if we forget that this trilateral agreement canada is involved as well. so we need to hear what they have to say regarding all the -- that nafta has to take place and another thing that sometimes i wonder if we need to look across the border instead of looking across the ocean. are we competing with each other
4:15 pm
or we really competing with other countries like china, japan, korea and some others? if we're talking about lowering the trade deficit, what we need to do is work together and make sure we obtain the competitiveness between our countries. where's the idea of the nafta? it's to lower the cost of the products. if many changes are made in the nafta, if they start putting some tax on products, whose going to pay for the increase of those products? the government? no. the consumers are the ones that are going to pay the increase of those products. >> but do you think, though, getting to the question of trump that whether you like trump or hate trump or whatever that he sfarked the conversation about nafta that needed to be had? do you agree with that? >> the thing that i agree is we
4:16 pm
need to modernize the nafta. there's some other issues that are not included in the nafta or the -- that had to be put on the table. let's remember that mexico has become a real good ally, partner and friend and many other issues had to do with security issues and those things need to take count as well. so back to the question. i believe that we need to review the nafta with the idea of benefit the three countries. >> jessica, what about it? do you feel like trump has actually in a strange way provided an opportunity to talk about some of these issues? >> i do and first, jay, to you and evan, thank you for hosting us and to everybody here. i'm so glad that you're interested in this conversation. it's a really important conversation. i told several folks yesterday
4:17 pm
that instead of a moderator with this topic, we probably needed a psychotherapyist or social work to help talk us through some of these issues. interestingly enough, when trump first talked about blowing up nafta, our community is much like laredo where a quarter of our jobs are dependent on trade so there was a real fear in el paso about how this would impact our local economy and what it would mean to our jobs. we had already suffered through the implementation of nafta where we had our unemployment rate sky rocket when manufacturing moved south of the border and we had to regroup, we had to reinvent ourselves and our economy and to have to do it again if nafta were blown up it's a hard thing for community to take over and over and over again. but i will tell you there is an opportunity and i think it's up to all of us to ensure that we
4:18 pm
maximize this opportunity through conversations and advocacy and through congressional votes and a push through the government to make nafta better, but we also have to look at the other side of the border and i'll give you an example. when there were a group of women who were advocating for a salary increase, they were fired and they camped out outside of their manufacturing plant in the dead of winter as protest and to draw attention to the fact that they had very few labor rights and we should never benefit from other's misery. so there's an opportunity to create better working conditions for labor on both sides but especially in places like mexico. and i think additionally if we look at the other issue that trump has brought to the forefront which is immigration, immigration and trade go hand in
4:19 pm
hand in my view. when you have a rapidly industrialized area but human rights and workers' rights don't keep up with it and people are struggling, they are going to want to leave their homeland to find something better and so it increases immigration, undocumented immigration. nobody's going to want to leave their neighborhood, their family, their language, their country to go some where they are not wanted unless they feel absolutely desperate to do so. so it's an opportunity to create better conditions for people who want work and who want a better life and who want to stay in their country and then trump solves, you know, two issues that he claims the american public wanted him to solve, immigration and -- undocumented immigration and trade but in a positive way. do i think that will happen? it's going to be up to us. >> while you're --
4:20 pm
[ applause ] i want to ask you about the wall. we talked about this on the phone before. but you have existing fencing right now in large stretches in el paso county. let me ask enthusiasm, do the fences work and if they -- and if they do, you know, is there anything really wrong with adding to more physical barriers or should they be torn down? >> the whole wall idea is -- it's offensive and absurd and it's intended to be. we already have a wall. [ applause ] >> but does it work? >> yeah and i'll answer that. i do believe there are probably areas where you need some kind of fencing but what we have in el paso is absurd. it's disgusting, it's rusting. it is intended to send a negative message to our neighbor and with all due respect to the
4:21 pm
commissioner, when you have a good neighbor and say what you want about u.s.-mexico relationships, there's a lot of blame on both sides on the issues that we're grappling with together whether it be drugs, insatiable appetite for drugs and the supply that's coming. there has to be a realistic discussion, but you don't treat your neighbor and your most important strategic ally in a very disrespectful way. >> let me ask you this, you're the governor of the state of -- which is we have a huge section of the border down there and cameron county where there's a lot of existing physical structures, do you take offense at those physical structures and do you take offense to adding to them? >> i don't believe in building more walls, i strongly believe we need to build more bridges. we share 17 border crossings.
4:22 pm
we're talking about $1 billion. this is not going to be the first or the last time that i say this, but sometimes it's very important for the people in mexico city and washington to understand -- they understand that we're not only laborers, we're friends and allies and many cases we're family. we depend on each other and we need to work on that so i'm going to use this panel to once again invite president enrique pena nieto and president trump to come to the border so they can see for themselves what goes on every day. how we depend on each other and that working together we're going to benefit the quality of life of the people that live on both sides of the border. >> you made that same invitation with sid miller on the bridge.
4:23 pm
what is up with your bromance? >> let me tell you what's likely and they hit on it, if you looked at that period when nafta was most threatened a couple months ago before the first round of negotiations, it was actually the -- that marched into the oval office and said, timeout, slow down, before we get too far ahead of ourselves in terms of condemning and threatening withdraw from this agreement, let's look at the impact on the midwest and texas in terms of exports to mexico and so i think once we started looking at nafta more clearly in the context of what it really meant to the united states, there's a tendency when we talk about immigration, jay, and trade in the united states to think it's a zero sum game or somehow it's only benefiting mexico. this is really about the benefits to the united states and even if you looked at it
4:24 pm
through that prism, even if you said let's look at it through an america first prism, you would say it's still in the best interest of the united states to have a constructive, efficient and good trading relationship with mexico. >> sure. >> even if you look at immigration and you wanted to take a zero sum, put your blinders on and say how is this good for the united states, immigrants have always been good for the united states. so it's one of these things that even if you looked at it very passionately and said as the united states what is in the very best interest of this country, you would say trade, immigration reform. talk about this wall and henry, i don't want to speak for you, maybe it's because we're the old guys on the panel, but in the '60s i remember physical obstacles and that was the most efficient way to have security along the border. this is not the '60s any more. there are ways that you integrate technology and the truth is, if you're really
4:25 pm
talking about security and you're looking at the transnational threats to the united states, whether they be terrorism, cartels, almost by definition when you say transnational it means transnational cooperation. it means that the only way that you're going to confront these menaces effectively is through cooperation with mexico, so it's about technology. sure, maybe fences and some physical obstacles were the appropriate responses in the '60s, '70s, but we don't live there any more. >> and there were parts where it still made sense but the truth is any wall that needs to be built has probably already been built and the fact is in this daily and age, if you're still looking at physical obstacles as opposed to technology and cooperation, you're looking backwards and not forwards. >> that's right. [ applause ]
4:26 pm
>> commissioner, i want to get you very quickly. explain this relationship that you have struck up with the governor here and what it might say about, you know, even in this heated era with trump, you know, tweeting out obsenseties or whatever it is he's doing, what -- on what basis -- give me some specifics because you're talking about -- just very briefly describe what you and the governor have done? >> well, i think the governor -- actually before he ever took office we had our first meeting in my office. we sat down, we discussed things that how texas relationship with -- how can we help them? what can we do to help you and the texas farmers and ranchers? we just hit it off. we will practiced the good neighbor policy. at that time it was a lot of visit tri ol and rhetoric where that was shutting down and a
4:27 pm
wall was driven between our mexican counterparts and the united states. but we saw through that, we worked through that and what you mentioned the bow evil program, we have an eradiation program. we manage that from here to texas. it's a huge pest. we've eradicated that from all the southern united states. we still have a hot pot down on the border and i was explaining this to the future governor at that time. he hadn't opinion sworn in that we needed their cooperation to eradicate the bow weasel down there. i showed him pictures of cotton plants that were 20, 25 foot tall that people using for shade trees in their yard and i don't think he was aware of that. so once he was sworn in through consulting with our people and their people, they went in and destroyed thousands and
4:28 pm
thousands of those rogue cotton plants, put in new guidelines and sprays for those farmers down there. new guidelines on spreading seeds and we've had our first growing season since then and i'm proud to report that our bow we'val hot spot that promised is diminished about 90%. that's how the good neighbor works back and forth. i appreciate that. he needs something from me. i'm johnny on the spot. whatever i can do to help my neighbor to the south. we're on it and that's just working together and building good relationships. >> let's turn to another issue that is always a major sticking point and that is corruption. governor, 11 former governors of mexico, including two of your president saiders are being investigated or have been indicted on serious corruption issues. do americans have the right to be sceptical about partnering --
4:29 pm
i want to get into our own corruption in the u.s. in a minute but before we do that, i want to ask you, do americans not have the right to be a little except teecal about partnering with mexican law enforcement and political leaders, that's the first question and secondly would you be in favor of extraditing your two predecessors to the united states. >> the problem with corruption, it goes on both sides. in order for the -- the criminals go back and forth and that's something we need to work on that. i strongly believe that communication and working together with institutions, you know, on both sides -- the only way is to stop criminals going back and forth. regarding the governors -- they're just applying the law. they commit a crime, they're going to go to jail.
4:30 pm
regarding the two ex-governors it is going to depend one of them on the mexican authorities that decide to leave them in mexico or in the united states and regarding the security and police officers. in the case of -- i said it back there and i'll say it again, i was the president of the army committee when i was a senator and i worked with the united states because what is good for tamaulipas is good for texas. what is bad over there is drugs and weapons going back and forth. it's also bad for the united states. right now i'm on the record, i'm willing to work together with the united states in order to -- my state and help texas as well.
4:31 pm
>> congressman cuellar, donald trump has turned mexico batching into a sport and corruption is one of the things that people complain about. the governor is right, we don't talk much about corruption on our side of the border. the texas tribune we looked into this and we found just so many instances where customs agents getting paid off. shouldn't that be more part of the conversation in congress? why aren't we doing more to reform the border patrol and maybe bring in more lie detectors or whatever it is, have a more robust discussion but it doesn't seem to be part of the discussion? >> i do sit in the homeland appropriations and we do work on those issues and there are those investigation that's are ongoing right now. any time as a governor said, any time there's a lot of money flowing in from the bad guys, they going to try to influence people one way or the other because what their aim is, is to get their product into the hand of the consumers and the u.s. is
4:32 pm
large consumer of drugs, 25, $30 billion of a year of drug monies go back over there and sometimes they go back as weapons as we're talking about and that's another issue that goes in. so that's an issue and that's why when we're trying to hire the border patrol, if you remember some years ago, we have the largest number of border patrol right now but there was always the fear about -- we got to make sure we vet them properly to make sure that we get the right people in and that's something that we also when tony was the ambassador that we also work on -- is to make sure that as we are training the mexican federal police and i think pretty much we're there maybe a little bit at the state level was to make sure we properly vet the police officers and the folks we have to deal with that enforce the law on both sides of the border because as the governor said, the corruption is an issue that
4:33 pm
addresses should be addressed in every country itself. >> let me -- do you mind? one of the things you did, you didn't mention nearly 30 years ago was a county judge in south texas. one of the things that the judge and i appreciate it is that along that border and i compare drug money and the launders to saltwater to an engine. at first it ca rhodes, then it rusts and then it destroys and that's what drug money does to our systems, to our democracies, to our local governments. at first it gums up the machinery and then it destroys it. so unless you get at not only the sources but the facilitators of money and drugs across that boarder, you're not really hitting at truly the public corruption. >> why don't we talk about that? we do talk about -- >> let me -- let me allude to something the governor mentioned. if you look at the prosecutions
4:34 pm
or the indictments, the allegations against that governor, or the numbers of sheriffs, cameron, star counties, in terms of the focus on those prosecutions, how much better it might be if u.s. attorneys not looking for just the quick conviction but really building cases about -- not only how was this individual office holder involved but who were the facilitato facilitators? everybody that has created this sort of environment that allows for the movements of drug money, who facilitates this because until you really get at that
4:35 pm
system, that ecosystem you're not going to address what is essentially the dna along the border that has corrupted and is created this sort of environment of public corruption. it's not just the border. the temptation is to say it's those people along the border. it is much larger than that. i think, again, you're not going to get at this unless you have the cooperation between both at the federal level and we've done some good things as the united states government in mexico so you have that cooperation, but it's going to take that and you're not going to get that level of cooperation on the prosecution by pointing fingers at each other and that's the environment that we've created. we have -- we have exhausted a great deal of good will that had been built up over two decades in the last year and a half and i think -- i think that's going to make cooperation tougher. >> when you talk about that ecosystem and congressman cuellar, you brought this up about the demand for drugs.
4:36 pm
60 minutes ran a piece recently about the -- and they mentioned one little thing at the beginning about the mexican came from mexico or whatever but we're not really tieing this as part of a national debate to the people who is taking the dope and it's us and we're also hiring the workers so judge escobar, what about that? why isn't that part of the discussion? >> it should be. any kind of corruption should outrage all of us without a doubt. part of what i always find troubling whenever we have leaders in d.c. and trump is no different who want to create a border surge of agents and say i want to hire, you know, 5,000 more agents or i want to hire 3,000 more agents. in order to do that rapidly what happens then there's a weakness on the vetting. i was sharing with you in the green room earlier i have a couple of friends who are in
4:37 pm
another federal agency who get lie detector tested constantly. they can walk into work one morning and they're federal law enforcement and there's a -- they get called into a room and they get plugged into a lie detector test and they complained bitterly to me that that was not the case for cdp. and so -- frequently you have -- customs and border protection. and so when you have national political figures saying we need to send more people to the border, there's a price to pay for that and so we have to recognize -- we have to be sceptical as americans whenever we hear something about that, how is that going to be executed? how quickly will it be executed? and what process these will be skipped in order to achieve this political goal? and we have it. we see it. you wrote about it. >> commissioner miller, i want to ask you something. now donald trump has not only stirred up americans about
4:38 pm
mexico, he's also stirred up mexicans about the united states and about him and we're not the only ones who have a populus politician like donald trump. they have in mexico a leftist candidate named manual. he has shot to the top of the polls in part because some of the stuff that's going on to the united states and mexico. is that what you want in mexico is a leftist populus? he might take control because of this. what do you think about that? >> i can't imagine any scenario where i would want a leftist anything. i'm more of a small government guy and a conservative and, you know, and believe in giving people a handup instead of a handout. i guess the answer to that would be no. in the general sense of things seeing a change in the political world and how things happen. it's not like it used to be. it's not mayoralers in the mail and now we have social media and
4:39 pm
people are tired of status quo and they want change and basically in a lot of cases just want somebody to go in there and blow it up and start all over and i think that type of people is what appealed to donald trump to those people. >> has it occurred to you at all that all of this rhetoric could be provoking a reaction that could actually come back and bite us in the you know what? >> if you don't pick the right people it could. i think we got a good man in donald trump. i think he loves this country. i think he means it when he says he wants to make this country great again. you may not believe in the pathway. i think he's genuinely in this for the country and not hiself. he is not a politician. he's a businessman. he's a new yorker. he's a little gruff and roughly around the edges and plain spoken. but that's the man's personality. >> congressman, what about the
4:40 pm
internal situation in mexico which is said to be leaning toward a guy that some people think could be like -- other people who dispute that but he is a leftist populus and he's in the hot top of the polls. what would it mean if -- were elected in mexico and do you think that presents a real risk? >> certainly, mexico has to decide who their elected officials are but there are repercussions from our words and our actions. some of us have been working on this for many years. if you remember mexico in the '80s and tony you remember i think we're probably 13 or 14 years of age at that time but we were working on this, we were trying to bring mexico closer to the united states and we finally succeeded. we got, you know -- we talked about -- and we got of course nafta and now we have a three
4:41 pm
countries that are working together very competitive that provides us as a region to be able to compete with other parts of the world and now we have somebody that is trying to effect that and certainly it has an impact on somebody like -- up to the mexican people to decide whose going to get elected. that does concern us. if you have somebody that's far left and far right, states like texas on the border or el paso, whatever the city, we're the ones that are going to be right in the middle of all this. so it does concern me that we address it, but do you blame mexico as a country when we call him every name that we can think of and you insult him and this is why everybody knows what -- let me give you an example. you have a lot of mexicans that come over and spend money.
4:42 pm
they come over spaend money. if you talk to cbp or talk to folks, the numbers have gone down. if you go to restaurant or places, they will tell you that they've lost about 50% of the -- and remember the 19, 20 million individuals that have come in. there's less money for our hotels, restaurants, the malls, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. there's less money and when you ask the mexicans and you say, why you not coming? first of all, we're afraid what's going to happen. good. they might treat you different at the border. number one. and number two, why am i going to spend money in a country that calls me a rapist, a murderer, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera and they're -- the ones with money go some where else. so we're losing out. not only the tourism but also in -- i'm an attorney by profession. i know talking to my colleagues, they will tell you that there's less money on equipment, on
4:43 pm
warehouses because they don't know what's going to happen with nafta and all this. words do have repercussions and i don't blame the mexicans for reacting and we don't know what's going to happen on july 2018. that's up to mexicans but we might be facing a situation that it would be interesting to have a far left and far right presidents in both countries. >> i think you were ambassador in the 2006 elections, right, when it seemed like a florida all over again. i covered that. what was going on in the state department and the embassy was like oh, my god amlo? was there a freakout moment? >> i don't think there was so much a freakout moment but let me take this in a slightly different direction, i think we're -- somehow in the united states we think that the mexican elections are going to be driven
4:44 pm
entirely by the -- their perceptions of our president? and i think that's a little bit presumptuous. if you look at the surveying -- and i still live in mexico. i'm there four or five days a week. if you look at the surveys and the polling done in mexico, the first tier issues that mexicans are most concerned about orr orrer -- are security, corruption, economic growth. you have to go down a little ways before they talk specifically about what our president is doing. to a certain extent nafta is not even all that much an issue because there's a general accept answer that trade is good in the country. yeah, i think there could be some feedin from the relationship to the mexican elections but the first, second
4:45 pm
and third tier issues in mexico are largely domestic. they are people each and every day asking themselves how is the quality of my local state and federal government impacting the security in my life, how do i feel about public corruption. that's an important point to make. the second point that is very interesting in mexico and it's a little more subtle, but because of this need, if you will, to be strongly in a negotiating position, i think mexico has one become quite frankly, more confident of their position as it relates between the united states and canada because they had to carve out a negotiating position. secondly i think they have recognized that there are other trading partners in the world that they have to start developing more robust
4:46 pm
relationships along the pacific and latin america with places like chili and columbia and peru. you saw where the president was in china and i recognize that that's never going to replace the united states for mexico because it's just not terribly complementary. their relationships with the europeans and so in a sense, this has forced them to be a more confident country. now the third point is, when we get to the other side of this and i think ultimately we'll muddle through this somehow and there will be a trade agreement, we'll be -- we'll have a much more -- they'll be much more parity in our relationship in a sense but the challenge and this is the last point, the challenge is going to be for all of us to recognize that this has been a very difficult time for the united states and mexico relationship. that even if we get through it with a trade agreement that
4:47 pm
works for everyone, we have drawn down on the good will account between the two countries and it's going to be very important that we as sort of people to people in the united states, mexico and canada start replenishing that account. whether it's cultural exchanges, academic exchanges. those sort of exchanges that can start to replenish that good will account. we'll come through it with a better trade agreement because economic interests have a way of defending themselves but the good will account is something we'll have to work very hard on. >> do you fear an amlo presidency? do you think that a leftist, populus in mexico would be bad for the united states or do you think we'd get over just fine? no big deal? >> honestly, i'll sort of fall back on what henry said. it's not for me to say. it is not for me to say. if you ask me specifically, do i
4:48 pm
think it will endanger trade, no. i think if we get to the other side of this and we have a trade agreement, we'll be fine. will it endanger energy reform, that was done constitutionally and at the state level and if it becomes part of the new nafta it'll be belt and suspended pretty good. will it present challenges, yeah, probably. the same sort of challenges that trump presented to mexico and advice versa. we'll manage this -- >> spoken like a -- >> it's not -- ask the governor. >> governor, you're obviously a different from a different political party than he is, a conservative, he's a liberal, but is it something that you worry about? will this be bad for mexico do you think? >> i believe that the mexicans
4:49 pm
are right enough to choose the best person. can be a woman as well. let's remember that we don't know yet who are going to be the candidates for the other political parties and right now there's a movement going on in mexico where pan -- are getting together with citizen movement that is going to be maybe a surprise, you know. the exit polls or the poll that you were talking about, they put this movement real high, even higher than mr. lupez. i believe that the -- wise enough to choose the right person to be the next president of mexico. >> i want to ask you a question about daca. daca is the program as you know
4:50 pm
that shielded people who from deportation who were brought here as children and polls of course show that most americans what i've read want show most a want to keep daca or some version of it and mexican leaders have been very critical of the decision, donald trump's edition to wipe out daca. now, he want he wants congress to do it. as somebody who lives in mexico and is a mexican politician, why is mexico not doing more to ensure a very rich country that produced one of the richest men in the world. why isn't mexico doing more to ensure that we don't have kids like this who have to come here to look for a better life? >> well, the idea is to have a better economy in mexico. obviously we're working on that. i'm doing my job and the in
4:51 pm
their sector, but coming back to the daca let me tell you something. i know a little about. people are going to be real upset if this deal goes down, but also there's great chance of opportunities for mexico for all these persons that are well prepared. they went to school here in the united states. you never know. maybe in future will become a new silicon valley. if that happens -- >> okay. we're going to start wrapping up here. i want to ask a kouchl lightning round questions here. but so i think they're going to be pretty soon be putting out microphones where people can line u line up. in terms of the question progress, don't come up to make a statement. we want to get to as many questions as we can, so please ask a question.
4:52 pm
i want a yes or no then a brief explanation. would you be in favor of legalizing marijuana in mexico, the united states and canada recognizing there are a lot of u.s. states that already have recreational marijuana. you can go to colorado and spark up all you can and you get arrested for, you know, why are we spending money u on this, congressman? >> no. >> why not? >> wi think drugs are drugs. >> no. it's a gateway drug. >> yes. and i love that you used sparked up. in your question. >> yes but if you think that's going to address the security, corruption and cartel issues that mexico faces, you are wrong. >> i agree. >> those are issues of
4:53 pm
institutions and the need to build institutions in mexico. >> in mexico, they blame it entirely on the demand side and to a certain extent, they're right. but even without that demand, you have some weak institutions that need addressing in the country. >> no. why? because we are not prepared for that. prz we're not prepared for that right now. >> one more then i think we'll be ready to go to questions. what is the one thing that you think needs to be fixed under nafta. you wave a wand and fix it. >> kus tucustoms facilitation. we need to make sure we ease the process move goods across and by
4:54 pm
custom facilitation, it's not only the procedures, but we got to make sure we have the right infrastructure, the bridges, the equipment, to move trade as efficiently as possible. >> commissioner. >> that, too. part of that is we need to move inspection stations down to the interior. the governor and i talked about that. on the agriculture side of it, our produce farmers, they've suffered in the previous years. recently. we lost nearly all our tomato production. watermelon protectiduction. it's not profitable anymore. we have competing interests each growing season, so that's one of the things we need to work out in nafta. right now, neither side is winning. no one is is making a profit. we need to fix that where american farmers can make a profit. mexican farmers can make a profit and we can all live harmony. >> those labor issues that i spoke earlier about, i think when we create --
4:55 pm
>> living wage. >> absolutely. when we create conditions where we strengthen a middle class on our side and where we create a strong middle class on the mexican side, you end up addressing a whole host of other issues including drug use, including corruption, including undocumented immigration. it is a real opportunity if we seize it. >> ambassador. >> all these and in addition, that whole space that you would call technology. when you think 25 years ago, none of it was even a really part of the framework. so whether it's intellectual property, the movement of goods and service, i would say the whole technology space. >> one more and i think we've fixed the treaty. go a hhead governor. >> first of all, we can see each other as competitors. we're partners to start with. what we need to do to make sure
4:56 pm
we do all the changes. in order to lower to cost for customers. or the consumers. that's the way i believe of nafta. to make sure of the quality of life. canada, the united states and mexico. >> we're going to move the questions. go ahead, sir. >> mike. >> i work here locally. and what we do is we organize sol dare di movements with people on this side of the border here in texas and people just across the border in mexico who work in sweatshops. and my question for anyone really who wants to answer it is if nafta is renegotiated or replaced or whatever, what role can human rights play in that
4:57 pm
and if we're going to go forward with a free trade agreement, how can we create fair trade agreement as well to limit some of these problems we see across the border from texas. >> you want to take that? >> can you repeat? >> basically, should human rights be incorporate rated into the that have tall agreement. you want to take that one? >> i'll talk about labor rights and environmental rights. >> i go back to the trans p pacific partnership. before did that, we did other trade agreements. we learned a lot. from nafta years ago, very different time. we have digital, all this. even on the labor standards on the environmental standards, if you look under the obama administration, we actually worked out pretty good environmental and labor standards. the tpp apply and i'm hoping we
4:58 pm
can add those same standards to nafta because we have move d totally from the last 20 years. >> only thing i would add is is absolutely yes as to the movement transporting of people. just you thiunconscionable whats in that space. putting in bright lights on the trafficking of humans. shown a bright light on it. >> thank you for the great conversation. governor, you make the voluntary move from the u.s. in mexico and as pecht of immigration that clear clearly talked about in the media. what inspired you to make that decision to build your political career in mexico as opposed to the u.s.?
4:59 pm
>> first of all, the family are from mexico. i just have been to been born in -- my dad, my mom, they're mexicans, but that's not the only case. my case. there's a thousands and thousands of people that are binational and what happened to me is that i had the chance to go to school here. i had a soccer scholarship at the university. and maybe that helped me. helped me know many things that were going on you know in my country that i didn't like. so that's why i decide d to get into politics. to make a change. i've been senator, now governor. that's the whole idea. to change things for the better. >> thank you. ma'am. >> hi, i'm sophie thomas.
5:00 pm
my question is for the panel as a whole. with the conflict around the border, specifically concerns and talks about the wall, kind of concerning the environmental side, is there continued binational work done through ibwc to figure out u what's happening with the rio grande? water sources both countries share concerning virmal takenablety along the board e. trz. >> you can ask somebody else. >> did you hear it? >> no, i'm sorry. >> can you just boil it down? >> yeah, sorry. my question is with all the conflicts around the border, is there a sustained binational work done with the rio grande in terms of water resources for communities on both sides or is this coming down to a halt.
5:01 pm
what's the -- for us to handle water? >> there's an agency called tila. which is binational. they control the water for both sides. the agreement was in 1944 between these two countries. the united states gives water to the california part of mexico and we give water here to texas. i believe it's a good deal. we're all going to be having trouble with water. it's a worldwide problem. and i believe that we need to work more than that. there's water that is going to the sea that can be brought to the water. an there's some projects on the table that i believe we can work them down between these two
5:02 pm
countries. in order to help enough water for the generations. >> i'm getting the hook over so we're going to have f to stop here. and unfortunately, we can't take any more questions. please give a round of applause to our great panel. >> okay. thank you. >> this weekend on american history tv on cspan 3. saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on the civil war. kelly mizo ururic on southern ml after black troops were assigned to guard confederate prisoners. >> one might assume well that's why they choose these black troops because in the mid 19th century, most people did believe
5:03 pm
black men were not talented enough to fight, they weren't brave enough to fight. >> at 8:00, middle tennessee state university professor ashley riley souza. >> the indian men are cowboys and dressed like a band. they're dressed really, really nicely. that kind of shows you the value that missionaries placed on the work these cowboys did. first of all, to ride horses. they dressed pretty nice. >> at 7:00 p.m. on oral history. we continue our series of photojournalists with david valdez. former director of the white house photo office. >> if i say something about his hair and i take this photo and his hair looks nice, no one will ever believe this president set
5:04 pm
up, so i just took the photo and and wound up running two full page in life magazine and then over the next 20 years or so, it was in the best and classic moments in life. in 2011, it was selected in the issue, one of the best photos "life" magazine for the past 75 years. >> american history tv. all weekend. every weekend. only on cspan 3. this weekend on our companion network, cspan, utah congressman rob bishop, chair of the national resources committee who sponsored legislation to limit a president's ability to create national monuments. he'll also discuss disaster aid to puerto rico, wildfires in the west and the republican agenda in congress. congressman rob bishop is our guest on newsmakers this coming sunday at 10:00 a.m. and :00
5:05 pm
p.m. eastern on cspan. and coming up next week on cspan 3, donald trump's long-term attorney will testify before the senate intelligence committee as part of its investigation into russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. live here on cspan 3 and on and you can listen with the free cspan radio app. it's a radio station in the nation's capitol. covers some 6 million people. this is a very heavily automobiled city. and it will just extend our brand and give people who are involved in the process here a chance to listen to. that's how it happened. it was that simple. >> cspan radio. marking 20 years of public affairs programming from the nation's capitol. listen to the "washington journal" live each morning beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. hear recaps of the day's political events on "washington
5:06 pm
today" and get the latest from congress, the administration and important events from across the nation. cspan radio is available in washington on 90.1 fm. on our website or by download iing the free app. cspan radio at 20 years where you hear history unfold daily. >> earlier this month, the u.s. supreme court heard the case of sessions versus dimaya. it was on whether he came to the united states as a legal permanent resident in 1992 can be deported because of burglary convictions and other crimes. this lasts about an hour. we'll hear an argument next in case 151498. >> mr. chief justice and may it please the


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on