1
00:00:00,720 --> 00:00:03,760
Speaker 1: You're listening to Taking Stock with Kathleen Hays and Pim

2
00:00:03,840 --> 00:00:09,480
Speaker 1: Box on Bloomberg Radio. No TPP has been a popular

3
00:00:09,560 --> 00:00:13,039
Speaker 1: slogan in chants and printed signs at the Democratic National

4
00:00:13,080 --> 00:00:17,480
Speaker 1: Convention because of broad opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership

5
00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:21,000
Speaker 1: trade deal. It is heavily favored by President Barack Obama,

6
00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:24,720
Speaker 1: but it is also heavily opposed by primary loser, Senator

7
00:00:24,960 --> 00:00:29,120
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders. Here to tell us more, Irene Vanelle Hanigman,

8
00:00:29,240 --> 00:00:34,120
Speaker 1: adjunct Professor of International Affairs at Columbia University, and she

9
00:00:34,280 --> 00:00:37,120
Speaker 1: joins us now, Irene, thank you very much for being

10
00:00:37,240 --> 00:00:40,879
Speaker 1: with us. UM. How is the Democratic Party going to

11
00:00:40,960 --> 00:00:45,879
Speaker 1: reconcile the opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership inasmuch as

12
00:00:45,920 --> 00:00:50,200
Speaker 1: President Obama is so heavily in favor of it, UM,

13
00:00:50,240 --> 00:00:53,880
Speaker 1: I think this is going to be actually a major problem.

14
00:00:54,240 --> 00:00:58,080
Speaker 1: Having been in the Clinton administrations in the nineties nineties,

15
00:00:58,200 --> 00:01:01,520
Speaker 1: I feel like we were living battles of NAFTA twenty

16
00:01:01,680 --> 00:01:06,200
Speaker 1: three years later with a lot of residual bitterness. Perhaps

17
00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:09,400
Speaker 1: we never paid attention to what the actual impact was

18
00:01:09,959 --> 00:01:14,720
Speaker 1: of NAFTA on particularly a small and rural areas across

19
00:01:14,760 --> 00:01:19,800
Speaker 1: America over these decades. The problem is that Hillary Clinton,

20
00:01:19,959 --> 00:01:22,639
Speaker 1: in many ways is now caught in a bind because

21
00:01:22,680 --> 00:01:25,839
Speaker 1: she originally called it the gold standard. A Secretary of State,

22
00:01:25,920 --> 00:01:28,520
Speaker 1: she promoted it. It is very much part of what

23
00:01:28,600 --> 00:01:33,000
Speaker 1: Obama would like to see as his legacy. However, because

24
00:01:33,120 --> 00:01:36,640
Speaker 1: of the Sanders campaign, and what to me is even

25
00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:40,240
Speaker 1: very odd is this is a time where both Democrats

26
00:01:40,480 --> 00:01:45,959
Speaker 1: on the left and Republicans have voiced very strong disapproval

27
00:01:46,080 --> 00:01:50,200
Speaker 1: of this deal, so she now appears to be completely

28
00:01:50,360 --> 00:01:55,480
Speaker 1: against it. However, the question is how in fact will

29
00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:59,520
Speaker 1: she be able to perhaps have to calibrate or recalibrate

30
00:01:59,800 --> 00:02:03,480
Speaker 1: the biggest problem she faces if she cannot appear to

31
00:02:03,560 --> 00:02:07,240
Speaker 1: be fudging on this issue, uh as she could risk

32
00:02:07,400 --> 00:02:11,120
Speaker 1: totally losing the Sanders supporters that she does. She definitely

33
00:02:11,160 --> 00:02:15,960
Speaker 1: needs um. I think the problem to me is that

34
00:02:16,040 --> 00:02:19,200
Speaker 1: this is a code word, and it almost seems like

35
00:02:19,280 --> 00:02:22,040
Speaker 1: t p P is not really understood for what it is.

36
00:02:22,320 --> 00:02:26,800
Speaker 1: A tremendously complex trade agreement which in fact as supposed

37
00:02:26,800 --> 00:02:31,360
Speaker 1: to promote exports and help particularly small and medium businesses,

38
00:02:32,160 --> 00:02:35,480
Speaker 1: but in fact has simply now been equated with losing

39
00:02:35,639 --> 00:02:38,600
Speaker 1: American jobs. And this is sort of the cry on

40
00:02:38,680 --> 00:02:42,280
Speaker 1: both the right and the left. UM not at all

41
00:02:42,360 --> 00:02:46,040
Speaker 1: clear how she will proceed, but I certainly do not

42
00:02:46,280 --> 00:02:48,440
Speaker 1: see this as a topic that's going to go away.

43
00:02:48,639 --> 00:02:51,920
Speaker 1: We just saw it explode and almost explode. Uh just

44
00:02:52,000 --> 00:02:55,480
Speaker 1: two days ago when Terry mccauliff suddenly stated that she

45
00:02:55,639 --> 00:02:58,960
Speaker 1: may want to rethink her position, and he was immediately

46
00:02:59,000 --> 00:03:02,400
Speaker 1: put down by Camp Pine chair John poggested that will

47
00:03:02,480 --> 00:03:05,400
Speaker 1: not be the case, so clearly ongoing problems. Well, I mean,

48
00:03:05,480 --> 00:03:09,240
Speaker 1: you know, economists, the consensus view, of course is that

49
00:03:09,320 --> 00:03:12,040
Speaker 1: trade is good for the economy, and I think that

50
00:03:12,160 --> 00:03:15,280
Speaker 1: the more complicated question then is he yes, is it

51
00:03:15,320 --> 00:03:18,799
Speaker 1: good for big corporations who who benefit? Is it good

52
00:03:18,800 --> 00:03:21,800
Speaker 1: for American workers who might lose their jobs because some

53
00:03:21,840 --> 00:03:23,440
Speaker 1: of these jobs go to the countries, and that's what

54
00:03:23,520 --> 00:03:28,040
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has been exploiting. It also seems that since um,

55
00:03:28,240 --> 00:03:31,359
Speaker 1: Barack Obama now is going to go on the road

56
00:03:31,360 --> 00:03:34,280
Speaker 1: apparently for the next three months and try to help

57
00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:39,080
Speaker 1: Hillary and other Democrats running for office. This is something

58
00:03:39,120 --> 00:03:41,400
Speaker 1: he pushed for on his watch. So it's very tough

59
00:03:41,400 --> 00:03:45,680
Speaker 1: for Hillary now, I think, for to shift her position.

60
00:03:45,880 --> 00:03:47,640
Speaker 1: And where does that leave Barack Obama won't there be

61
00:03:47,640 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 1: a lot of questions on the trail about this. Well,

62
00:03:51,400 --> 00:03:54,320
Speaker 1: I am quite concerned about that. And the question is

63
00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:57,920
Speaker 1: are they going to be able to deflect it uh

64
00:03:57,960 --> 00:04:01,560
Speaker 1: and simply to turn it around to more mediate issues?

65
00:04:01,920 --> 00:04:05,000
Speaker 1: And uh, you know, in a way, will Donald Trump

66
00:04:05,040 --> 00:04:09,440
Speaker 1: continue giving them gifts of very strange, outrageous tweets Uh

67
00:04:09,560 --> 00:04:12,440
Speaker 1: that sort of distracts them? But at the end of

68
00:04:12,480 --> 00:04:15,280
Speaker 1: the day, yes, she is finally going to have to

69
00:04:15,440 --> 00:04:20,880
Speaker 1: explain much more clearly why she is now specifically against it,

70
00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:24,919
Speaker 1: uh and in a way try to square that with

71
00:04:25,080 --> 00:04:28,400
Speaker 1: the president's position. I'm not sure how she is going

72
00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:31,919
Speaker 1: to manage to do this. Uh. The other problem, of course,

73
00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:35,800
Speaker 1: is that both labor unions and environmental groups that are

74
00:04:35,800 --> 00:04:39,280
Speaker 1: a core part of the Democratic constituency have come out

75
00:04:39,400 --> 00:04:42,560
Speaker 1: very strongly against it. Uh. So this is going to

76
00:04:42,680 --> 00:04:46,000
Speaker 1: make the the issue even even more complex. As the

77
00:04:46,080 --> 00:04:50,200
Speaker 1: co author of International Banking for a New Century, what

78
00:04:50,320 --> 00:04:53,760
Speaker 1: does a Glass Stiegel Act for the twenty one century

79
00:04:54,040 --> 00:04:59,800
Speaker 1: look like? Um? I was, you know, both amused of

80
00:04:59,880 --> 00:05:04,640
Speaker 1: a little bit stunned when Senator Sanders made that claim

81
00:05:05,240 --> 00:05:09,640
Speaker 1: that that should definitely be part of the platform. Again,

82
00:05:10,040 --> 00:05:13,520
Speaker 1: I think there is an oversimplification, and this was in

83
00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:16,560
Speaker 1: part one of the problems that Senator Senders had when

84
00:05:16,560 --> 00:05:19,479
Speaker 1: he came to New York during the primaries and spoke

85
00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:24,240
Speaker 1: about breaking up big banks. Uh, it is very unclear

86
00:05:24,279 --> 00:05:27,520
Speaker 1: whether you can go further than what is already now

87
00:05:27,560 --> 00:05:30,920
Speaker 1: in place, which is the Vocal rule, like in the UK,

88
00:05:31,200 --> 00:05:36,800
Speaker 1: the Vickers Rule, which clearly separates basic banking from trading

89
00:05:36,839 --> 00:05:40,800
Speaker 1: functions in the most basic terms. Uh, is it now

90
00:05:40,960 --> 00:05:45,640
Speaker 1: possible to actually bring American banks back to the type

91
00:05:45,640 --> 00:05:48,920
Speaker 1: of structure and methodology they had in the nine nineties.

92
00:05:49,000 --> 00:05:52,560
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I think there's too much interconnectivity

93
00:05:52,720 --> 00:05:57,159
Speaker 1: between US banks and foreign banks. Would this put US

94
00:05:57,240 --> 00:06:01,359
Speaker 1: banks in a position of losing competitiveness? Where does this

95
00:06:01,480 --> 00:06:06,200
Speaker 1: put foreign banks with major presence in the US. I'm

96
00:06:06,200 --> 00:06:08,360
Speaker 1: gonna have to leave it there. Irene Vlhana would thank

97
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:12,440
Speaker 1: you so very much for joining us from Columbia University.

98
00:06:12,800 --> 00:06:13,680
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg