tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN March 3, 2016 12:00am-12:59am EST
another job and you might find it transitional or temporary but that could last for decades. >> and that is why raise the question is this could be different in some ways. i was looking to try to stay away ahead of the curve. your report estimates high likelihood that jobs today paying less than $20 per hour will eventually be automated. >> there doesn't seem to be a hard timetable that accurate? >> that's accurate. we're drying on research that was done at oxford in that regard. >> the current administration supports raising the minimum wage. every policy is trade-offs. that's what i try to hash out in these debates and one of the things we discussed in this committee are the economics
implications of policies like that would, if low-paying jobs are the ones that are most threatened, by automation doesn't raising the minimum wage raise the cost of low skilled work and incentivize employers to accelerate the process of automating these jobs, the very jobs that were most concerned about? >> the evidence i've seen for moderate increase in minimum wage over time has found they do not have adverse effects on employment. certainly if you were to raise the minimum wage to $30 per hour i would expect to have a trade-off. >> at some point you're going to get to a trade-off and perhaps when you enter in the effects of automation that trade-off could be significant. >> i think it's important as part of an overall strategy to make sure our workers have more skills and more productivity. >> i want to be clear, not trying to get you to disavow the president's policy here here, i know that's not something that
will happen what i'm asking is if our goal is a society is an honest days work should earn an honest day's wage and machines are going to make it harder, and in some cases impossible for those entry-level workers to find entry days work doesn't the basic design of our social safety net have to look different than it does today? >> i think it's really is implications of how we design our social safety net and i think that's an important conversation to have. i would not throw out the lessons of the last 50 years and we have an idea of what has worked and what is not, minimum wage has were, earned income tax credit has worked. we should be thinking hard about the questions going forward. >> thank you very much.
>> thank you chairman, i appreciate the words about the improvement of the economy, i think we've all seen that, our statist out to 3.8% unemployment, we also know there's challenges, you raised one about income inequality, we have challenges for workers that are retired and have issues with their pensions, impact right right behind you i'm going to meet with later sherman who is from northern minnesota. he started his whole life as a janitor with a t's terms is were trying to work on some issues that are affecting him but another issue in northern minnesota that i know you're well aware of is the current employment situation with iron or mining affected by the overproduction in many countries
combined with illegal steel dumping that we know is going on. i appreciate the recent moves of the administration to try to be more aggressive in the enforcement including adding nearly 40 new inspectors to the budget money that we got last year as well as working on the enforcement actions including new tariffs today. could you talk about that industry what's going on and what you think the future is. >> yes, thank you it is an issue we pay a lot of attention to. the backdrop for this is a global overcapacity and steel. that steel capacities 70% outside the economy much of an economy that have made very heavy state investments supporting their steel industries. so capacity has collided with a
collapse in worldwide demand for a range of commodities and products including steel and the result has been a 35% decline decline in steel prices in 2015. that is having a significant impact on our industry and on your stay. we have as you said taken 149 anti- dumping actions, 40 in in 2015 alone. as the highest rate of action in at least 14 years. that has contributed to the fact that steel imports are down 13% over the last year. we are going to continue to rigorously enforce our trade laws including taking advantage of some of the new tools that congress gave us with customs enforcement bill that the president signed last week. it's important to understand
that domestic trade enforcement is an important part of the answer but coordination is also critical. u.s. imports represent only 10% of global exports and we need to be working together with other countries both steel importing countries who are dealing with the same issues our economy is as well as steel exporting companies like china to push on their overcapacity. >> as i said we've had thousands of layoff and it was really helpful to have them there. i will ask you more in writing some questions about the pension issue. you do talk about the importance of the millennial's in the gay
economy and having trouble saving because they don't have that kind of structure in place that we once had a many have seniors who have retired but things change with their pension and it makes it very difficult for them. could you talk about this importance? >> security retirement security is very important. a lot lot of people are not prepared for retirement. social security is an area, private savings and pensions both defined contributions and defined benefit. defined-benefit have faced a number of challenges in our economy especially in multi employer segment and that's an important issue. in that place important role in helping to make sure those pensions function as well as they can. >> you know this issue with the central state pension plan which we can talk about more in the future is affecting two thirds of the participants and they will have their pensions reduced by 70 percent. it's a big
concern in northern minnesota which is the same place where all the layoffs are occurring. thank you. >> thank you for calling on me i am honored to have a chance to be on a committee with you. one of the things we can agree about is the labor is disappeared disappointing. one of the biggest complaints employers have is having a hard time finding employees. on the other hand they also feel their major competition for those employees is the government themselves which you mentioned the unemployment rate has dropped her the obama administration which it has but the same time snap enrollment has gone up by 12 million. so it seems we are paying people either not to work at all or not to work to their abilities. could you comment on whether or
not you feel all of the benefits out there that are available to you if you are making less money are contributing to the low labor participation rate are contributing to people not achieving their full potential? >> thank you for your question. for men between the age of 25 and 50 for their labor force participation rate has following nearly every year since the 1950s, this is a very long-standing phenomenon. for women since late 1990s. even though we changed our socialist system to be much less something that you would get regardless of whether you are working to something that you pretty much, in most cases requires you to work to get. many elements. >> i think you're talking to earn income tax credit which
requires you to work a little better suited to work more than a little they take it away. >> is going to say the evidence on that does increase laborforce participation, it's a several thousand dollar difference and then there's a range and those can have effects as well but those appear to be dominated by a large amount of money that you get as an additional bonus for working. >> i'm going to disagree with you and mention another problem. economists economists have found there's a positive correlation between stable two-parent households. it's not very difficult come up with hypotheticals which people are losing over 30,000 dollars a year year by getting married a single person. i'm hearing exactly examples of that my district. my son can't get married, will lose will lose the benefits and that sort of thing. can you think of anything to do in the remaining time of this administration are plans for the future you could suggest for do something about this huge
problem have. >> thank you for your question. president bush passed meaning meaningful marriage relief there is tax credit that was reduced in 2009 that which is made permanent on a bipartisan basis this past december, one of the proposals of the president's budget which i alluded to get to the back that secondary earners often pays higher tax rates in the united states than other countries and it can discourage them from working. so we have a tax benefit. >> which you agree that we still have over 30,000 dollar penalty for a single parent with a couple kids making ten or 15,000 year. a year. if they do marry someone taking
40 or 50,000 a year, do you agree with those figures? >> i think for most middle-class families we don't have a marriage penalty in the tax code anymore. >> i'm talking about all the benefits, the earned income tax,. >> that's higher than i would put the number at. in part because we have taken a number of steps. there there certainly more we can do. >> i will have to give you those figure. >> before you talk about the fact that you felt we cut spending too much in 2011 or 2010, and it was better not to so you can believe that deficit spending approves the economy. in the budget that president obama has recently submitted to congress you also have a larger deficit. always makes me wonder about you folks, i love all people but if the time to run a
deficit is when the economy is weak as it wasn't ten and 2011 and now that we've had a long period of time of lower employment sore income is not where we want. you're still running large deficit, is there ever a time and economists like yourself would suggest running a surplus? >> the goal that we have in mind is having the debt on a declining path relative to the size of the economy so that you are shrinking it relative to the economy. that's not something under current law we would achieve. the. something additional steps including greater spending reduction reducing tax benefits especially for high income households would help us achieve. >> thank you very much mr. chairman and thank you for being here. we have a day when folks are voting in the senate is voting
so i will probably just have one question. but i think it's a critically important topic. we we could spend hours on this one topic and i'm glad that you have in your work and in the administration focused on what we sometimes called early care and learning, early care meaning quality affordable childcare and learning prekindergarten education. i think they're both essential and a relationship between the two, i noted on on page four of your testimony that you said and i quote, the one of the chapters focuses on disparities and opportunities that appear at an early age and the long-run benefit of of the investment of education, health, and well-being of children. you then go on to talk about the gaps in the early health and cognitive skills of children
then he conclude by saying research demonstrates that direct investments in children can help close the gaps in these important outcomes and can have a lasting positive effects and many have a chart there about cognitive skills, kindergarten versus fifth-grade, i've been working on these issues for years and i think the connection between learning and earning is not only demonstrated but something we should bear in mind that if kids learn more now in those early years that they will literally earn more later and frankly were all better off with that investment. i guess i want to ask you, number one is just can you walk through some of the benefits you
see may be. from an economic or were forced perspective on making those investments in children in the dawn of their life? >> thank you so much for that question and bringing up that issue, i think it's an important chapter of the report and an important example of how we can promote productivity growth and make sure that productivity growth is shared more widely when you do an economic analysis of these programs you see that it has two sets of benefits, one is actually an immediate benefit because it enables the parents more often than not the mother to work more if she chooses to do so. it facilitates greater income for that family which itself is important for a learning environment for that child. the second set of benefits are a robust connection between education as young as three, four, five and how much you earn later in life.
when you look at the extra tax revenue collected on the future earnings that is enough to repay a substantial portion if not all of the initial cost of these programs. not suggesting suggesting we take that into account in the budgetary treatment but evaluate and whether it's a good to undertake those programs that is relevant. >> i know there's a that showed the return on investment which is extraordinary. sometimes you spend a buck on high quality learning and you get back multiples of that. sometimes in the teens. it significant. i will yield back one minute and seven seconds. >> on to say that i cannot agree more with senator casey, the arnie duncan strong start for
children act i've supported and am pleased to be the leader of that every possible matrix suggests that universal pre-k or as near as we can get to it is one of the best investments society can make. on another matter, you talked about corporate conversions, are high corporate tax rate with other countries and you mentioned that you believe it's an issue, how would you corrected because it's been demagogue by both sides in ways that are not helpful. my opinion about it i think there is a good way to address it and there's an even better way, the good way to address it would be to take a simple step of banning the practice of
merging with a smaller foreign company and changing your tax over overseas, that's a step we could take today and it would reduce inversion. even better way to deal with it would be to do that at the same time that we make it more attractive to invest in the united states by reforming our business tax system. >> but ultimately want is an effective if you do not to the other. the inversions are happening so quickly that i don't think we can afford to wait. if it's it's going to take a long time to read form the tax code as a whole i would just deal with the inversion issued by itself i think that that the the economic improvement thing to do.
>> were talking about larger businesses being co-opted by smaller ones but you also can't stop the reverse and the idea of building an environment that makes it fundamentally attractive to be here which chairman brady supports i think and that's really what we should be considering, the fact that we have the highest corporate tax rates among them is a fundamental problem when you look at companies like pfizer and johnson control and apple i want to ask you about something i am afraid we are not going to be addressing this year and that is the trans- pacific partnership, i would like to give you an opportunity to talk about it in any way you would like without running an opinion if you don't want to but the
idea that we are not taking up this conversation is deeply disturbing to me regardless of where it goes. >> thank you for that, as i said in my opening statement, one of the challenges facing the u.s. economy is that it is hard to export it, increase your exports two oh world where growth and the rest of the world is slower. in that environment one of the steps that we could take to help make it easier for us would be to reduce or eliminate 18,000 taxes that that our exporters face we tried to export abroad that the 11 other countries in the gdp has. one study found that there are not be just substantial benefits it also found that if you wait a year to do it you lose it $94 billion. you would lose more than six or $700 per household in our economy. i think it's not just important to do but it's important to do as quick as possible.
>> you heard that unions are deeply against it but people are uninformed or misinformed, what you say about those people. >> i say the united states is already an open economy. it's easy for other countries to sell here. what were trying to do is break down the barriers are other companies face. we have high standards in our country, labor, environment, this would ensure other are raising their standards and put us in a better position to compete on a level playing field. >> and that's a big benefit for workers. >> how do we get that message out, it it doesn't seem to be getting attraction. >> it's been trying to something to get out.
>> my understanding that congressman buyer had some questions. feel free to take whatever time you need. >> thank you on this committee we have often focused on the lost economic gap between perceived or growth rate versus the one or two that we have. we look back over our lifetime and have had hired lights of growth. i keep reading that absence undramatic new technology, the agricultural revolution, that we are destined to long-term growth rates between one and 2%, your perspective? growth rates are function of two things, one how much labor is growing and how much is productivity growing. labor is growing more slowly now
than in the past for demographic reasons, if you look during the 1980s for example and a look at the growth of the population between age 25 - 54, this is the people most likely to be working that was 2.3% annually. now the growth of the population in that age bracket is 0.1% annually. not who is working and who is not working just who is alive in that age range. so the baby boom really helps propeller growth forward, that's turning into a retirement boom and for that reason the labor component of growth is lower today and will be lower in the future. >> the second is what the outlook of productivity growth is, i think no one really knows
and it depends on what inventions people have in the future. if i knew what it was i go out and invent them myself. and not be before your committee today. i think there is a lot of reason to think that we have a lot of potential. the questions about how to apply them and make sure that we are using them as well as possible. i would feel better if we were investing more and infrastructure, tray, business tax, all the difference to we should be taking. >> china has lost about 100,000,000,000 dollars in currency reserves over the last 12 months, what are your views on the drivers of this outflow, do you expect it to continue and how about china's reserved and the impact on our economy. >> that's important question. china has suffered from not
always communicating its policies as clearly and transparency as we would like to see them do and as the market would like to see them do. one consequence when you don't have transparent market oriented policies that are communicated clearly is you can see various sub abrupt changes and i think that's part of what is it going on with china. china still has very substantial reserves, they have more than enough wherewithal to deal with the economic challenges they face, the question is of a going to make sure they are doing the right reforms, the right policies in the right way such that they are taking advantage of those resources to address the challenges they have. >> i you back. >> congressman. >> going a little different then
the way congressman hannah went here. i know there's places in the world here that you emphasize that headstart is a good way to improve economic success in children. your own study has it has no impact and three-year-old's who attend headstart are doing worse in math than their peers. i know before that they came out with an idea that headstart was not up to snuff. given the studies that show, isn't it greater better to leave their kids with their parents, why do you keep pushing this
daycare stuff to get their kids away from the parent. >> in the report we review several dozen studies conducted over a few decades in any given study is going to have a different finding, we show that in broad terms they consistently find positive results, number number of these studies were authored by a
>> i don't comment on policy actions of the federal reserve his actions they need to take independently but they have a dual mandate with legislation and i think any steps that they take consistent with that mandate oh i would agree in the best interest of our country. >> am i wrong that with quantitative the easing gives you immediate benefit to the wall street banks. >> there is large economic literature and i don't think any major economic research can set monetary policy one way or the other. >> okay. thanks for the additional time.
>> thank you chairman furman for you to be here today in your sincerity on this difficult topic just to keep in the back of your mind with what the senator centcom i worked at mcdonald's my first job and i was excited from the minimum-wage increase but the impact was good for me but not for those after me. that is what the senator was talking about i have a better example. my next job was pumping gas and gas station i am dating myself. you can get anyone to pump gas anymore. i remember the owner is small businessman saying the biggest costs was us so we
better perform. so i learned how to pump gas but today that job is:and in many service areas to reduce cost it one of those few areas in packs the high school kids that don't have the skills it in the state of ohio more and more to fight those service jobs that were plentiful and is even more tragic war unemployment among black and hispanics. to have meaningful well
intended regulations but sometimes they have just the opposite effect for that skill set to be left behind. >> if you thank you are dating yourself i see senator peters has arrived in the nick of time. >> and then the chairman says your odd when you sit down. >> and talk about issues related to the economy. >> but it is with
significant challenges in the decades ahead. with that economic reports is that discussion of growing income inequality. the issue that is addressed in here with studies related to it as well deals of the pace of technological change and has always been this topic quite a bit. in that jobs would be destroyed to have a much higher unemployment as a result of that technology
has destroyed jobs tend to be higher paying in routine jobs have been displaced by those requiring higher education but it seems there are those that think we're getting to the inflection point where technology is a financing to the point even those higher knowledge jobs can be undone with the technology when you looked at watson more than those physicians there are those better than a radiologist. then getting to the point that can radically transform the job market.
with 50 percent of the job classifications could be done better with technology. is that something we have to be concerned about? >> i don't think is a partisan issue. but to a the first approximation one hypophysis that you stated it is right. we have invented new machines in we are much better off as a country for it to. when that happens is abruptly and you're not prepared the consequences can be one of two things.
one is in the quality it is higher than that. and lower the and 50% is higher and if you see those lower wage jobs and reduce is that demand that raises inequality. the second is that i believe over time you lose a job you can find another kid hopefully better but sometimes that process can be long and painful. should people have more skills? into benefit from them to move people from job to do job.
to help people get back on their feet with that wage loss associated with the job. and probably a lot more than that we need to do as well. it with artificial intelligence and with of promise and that there is some certificate challenges but it may be difficult to treat people. but it is something we should be very concerned about. i have done a lot of work to be passionate about in detroit did most importantly
to save tens of thousands of lives leading to autonomous vehicles but those could have great promise did you talk about what needs to be happening estimate that is an important question. and autonomous vehicles everybody is interested in them. u.s. car makers are making significant investments in israeli technology. to have those state regulations that allow that experimentation with cars with drivers on the road is already quite dangerous. to make sure you don't let
your freer get in the way to undertake that experimentation and. and as an important complement by what is undertaken and with that infrastructure as well as other types that could be the chicken and that a problem but the government can play a role with those types of chicken and egg externality with a number of different steps that we need to think about. >> i appreciate it. >> i want to follow-up while i have you here.
take yourself out of your current job while teaching at harvard did i came to you to talk about of minatory runaway spending that existed with the baby boom generation we have done a number of things to address that with that to raise in taxes of that economic growth and with that baby boom generation to be effective and you know, the
numbers. if we could summon though will to bring together a bipartisan issue by cameral to work together what would you recommend? or the next administration or congress should think about? with the challenge of the long-term problem in doing that in a way to preserve the program to assure the american people that their retirement benefits will be available to them and they are not a risk to be available to them with that concern what would you recommend?
to say we want to go forward what type of formula given what we have already done? and now what we clearly know that we need to do that is a disruptive to the economy. >> thank you for that. did to have lots of great ideas one of them is competitive bidding to except the reimbursement rates. with drugs using the same way to purchase of drugs to the benefit structure with more cost sharing like home
health to reduce the available of the gap to have more income related premiums. but what i would say just broader than medicare and with that cadillac tax of high cost employers sponsored insurance is one of the most important steps that we have to slow the growth of private health care to result in additional revenue. is i would say more broadly you want to think of the elements of the tax code and the benefits in the
preferences in my predecessors in to serve under president reagan and president bush have said we need to look at those there on autopilot not in the fishing way in to curb those tax expenditures with the help housing and pensions. >> thanks for that program hope we can get to that point from 1983 when social security was not ready to go belly up. and with out of politics
after solvency it has been done. to have the pistol at the temple of the politician to get that. often times space can be made in a crisis rather them laying it out. that we end up making mistakes to put people lot of risk. i appreciate it added hopefully we can reach that point. end your continuing availability. did we appreciate you being here. to keep the record open five business days if you so
>> did go isabel's saying we don't think donald trump is good for the country into we are incredibly disappointed christie's the weekend diagnosed since he said he would never endorse trove then turned around to endorse trump. >> we're watching chris chris d. kiss his ring and make excuses that he said was something for the presidency demonstrated but
now six papers are calling on the governor to resign or face a recall. >> yes. we should have paid more attention to those new jersey read newspapers when they were suggesting our endorsement of chris christie was wrong headed and now this week after they ask for his resignation we wonder where we signed up for that. >> you had a chance to talk to donald trump on many occasions with those conversations like? >> exhausting. he sucks the energy out of room. so much of a monologue that he tells me including his goal scorers, what he is doing there isn't a lot of
depth so we decided he wasn't the guy we would support. >> why did chris christie decide to endorse him? >> he has no scruples and no future and is rolling the dice hoping to get a job in the trumpet administration is all i can think you see anything to retract an earlier endorsement? >> no. even the boston herald endorsed governor christie in the same reasons we had issued the same day but pretty much the mikulka -- may have a cold but. >> are you surprised at the amount of attention?
>> i told my wife this editorial getting all positive comments more than they do to endorse people. it has been interested to governors who said it was the right thing to do of course, we have the usual firebird cars on the comments cited some said they shouldn't have done in the first place but at least you exited your mistake. that is part to being. >> right here in washington senate republicans are worried about losing control of the senate. seven republican senators that barack obamacare read with the tough reelection battle how is that playing out? >> i don't know how the
trump phenomenon will play out. i think senator a yacht makes a good case for reelection. into the a governor for a couple of terms the governor of new hampshire is beacon doesn't have a lot of power but certainly she is opening that democrats hold sway in november and at the top of the ticket will help her but i don't know. i should probably endorse the governor to insure the senators reelection i haven't thought about that. >> clearly to capture the imagination of the republican electorate what is it about him or his message and what about the republican party moving ahead? >> i saw an observation
today of those that only republican registered voters he is only carrying one state people are turning up that haven't paid much attention lately and he has tapped into the gate of distrust and unrest with the washington rascals' but i think he is a terrible vessel for the righteous anger that a lot of people have but the phenomenon is no matter what he says or what is set of golf his followers for don't care. , they are so fed up in he can do no wrong profile if he makes it to the general
alexian -- to the general election and it plays out. >> there is a major speech tomorrow in the tidy think anything will change the dynamics so are? >> i think governor romney announce trump and bad dynamics i think will still changeful there are people in new hampshire that trump was though twitter but not by the majority and he finished with the second lowest percentage of the republican primary votes in the state's history. we had a right given back in the day from henry cabot lodge had a higher percentage.
i don't think it is over. he doesn't have the majority he needs there will be a sober assessment and now that dr. carson has to decide hasn't least four people they will tune in to find out who knows what about the issue. >> calling governor crist christie a bad choice. joining us from manchester. thanks for being with us. >> thank you to c-span. you do a great job.