News on Youtube Mar 28 2018

Seoul and Washington appear to be in their final stages of their bilateral free trade

agreement negotiations.

South Korea has agreed to a number of U.S. demands on cars, but has won guarantees for

its agriculture and steel sectors.

Seoul also secured a permanent exemption from the Trump administration's new steel tariffs.

Kim Hyesung with more.

Right after he reported to the Cabinet, South Korea's Trade Minister, Kim Hyun-jong, held

a press conference Monday to explain the results of the negotiations on the Korea-US.

Free Trade Agreement.

"Uncertainty has been growing in the global market following the U.S. plan to impose sanctions

on China, and the latest agreement has removed two of those uncertainties.

One, South Korea is exempt from the steel tariff.

Second is the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.

"

Kim, Seoul's pointman on trade talks, said South Korea is the first country to receive

an indefinite exemption from Washington's 25-percent steel tariff measures.

Currently, five countries, including Canada and Mexico, plus the EU, received a temporary

exemption from the U.S. import duties on steel and aluminum that went into effect last week.

In exchange, the U.S. will introduce a steel import ceiling.

South Korea's quota will be set at 2-point-6-8 million tons of steel exports a year, or 70%

of its average annual shipments to the U.S. between 2015 to 2017.

Seoul has also agreed to lift some its safety and environmental regulations, and allow U.S.

automakers to ship Korea up to 50-thousand vehicles each, up from 25-thousand previously.

Tariffs imposed on Korean pickup trucks exported to the U.S will be extended by 20 years to

2041.

South Korea on the other hand, secured revisions to the investor-state dispute settlement clause

and other areas it has demanded since start of the trade talks.

We defended the red line.

There is no further opening of agricultural markets or mandatory use of U.S. auto parts.

In addition, the two sides agreed to improve the transparency of the trade dispute settlement

process, which covers issue like anti-dumping duties.

The tentative agreement comes less than three months since the first round of trade talks

began.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also described the agreement as an absolute win-win

in an interview with Fox News Sunday, local time.

South Korea's trade ministry said working-level officials are ironing out the details so that

Seoul and Washington can finalize their amendments to the six-year-old trade deal soon.

Kim Hyesung, Arirang News.

For more infomation >> Seoul and Washington agree 'in principle' on FTA amendment - Duration: 2:51.

-------------------------------------------

Fact Check: What's the deal with the line-item veto? - Duration: 2:16.

-To prevent the omnibus situation

from ever happening again,

I'm calling on Congress to give me a line-item

veto for all government-spending bills.

-Give me a line-item veto. -Line-item veto.

-If you give me the line-item veto,

I'll remove some of that unnecessary spending.

-Coming up, President Clinton signs the line-item veto bill.

The bill would give the president the power

to cancel items line by line in spending bills

unless Congress overrides the veto by a two-thirds vote.

Currently, the president may veto an entire bill,

but not specific items.

-It gives me great pleasure today to sign

into law the line-item veto.

This is a bipartisan achievement

that has been long sought by presidents.

-But the move was not without vocal opposition.

Just two years later,

the Supreme Court struck down the provision.

-I think -- I think they should give

the president a line-item veto.

-That's been ruled unconstitutional

by the Supreme Court, sir.

-Well, again, Congress could pass a rule, okay,

that allows them to do it.

-No, no, sir. It would be a constitutional amendment.

-Chris, we don't need to get into a debate in terms of --

there's different ways of doing this.

-Have you been able to find a workaround

to that Supreme Court ruling that says it's unconstitutional?

-Well, there are certain things being discussed

with respect to House and Senate rules.

I don't want to get ahead of anything

that we may come out in favor of.

-Experts say that one way of doing it legally would be

to give the president

the power to suggest line-item vetoes to Congress.

In this workaround scenario,

Congress would pass a spending bill,

send it to the president, who would edit the draft

and send it back.

Congress would have to vote on the edits

and then send it back to the White House

for the president to sign.

But that's not really a line-item veto so much

as another round of traditional legislating.

Mnuchin should brush up on his government 101.

He receives four Pinocchios.

For more infomation >> Fact Check: What's the deal with the line-item veto? - Duration: 2:16.

-------------------------------------------

George Will: The American president is no longer the most powerful person in the world - Duration: 2:17.

The president has been, presumptively, the most powerful man in the world for so long

that Americans might be startled to know that it's not written in the laws of nature.

"Tear down this wall."

Beginning about 1942, the U.S. president became, and ever since has been, the most powerful

man in the world.

I believe that that is no longer the case.

In part because the current president, Mr. Trump, has pulled America back from the alliances,

which made the president so powerful.

The power of the United States militarily rests inevitably, at the end of the day, on

the power economically.

The confidence that other nations have in the stability and steadiness of American leadership

is diminished when the United States goes to arduous lengths to negotiate something

like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and then, almost on a whim, says, "Nevermind.

Come to think about it, we'll just take a pass on this."

This means that into this vacuum created by the American withdrawal will flow Chinese

power.

So as the power of the United States president is diminished, that of the president of China

increases.

The president of China being, I believe now, the most powerful man in the world.

The one constant in the remarkably shifting set of convictions and pronouncements of this

president has been hostility to free trade.

He has an awfully unsteady and hard-to-follow application of his protectionism.

He announces protectionism, and then he begins to announce carve-outs for certain preferred

nations and preferred industries.

Of course, that's the problem with protectionism, is it doesn't just give rise to crony capitalism,

it is inherently crony capitalism.

It's very hard to make clear what the principle is when the president imposes these, because

he imposes them on friends like Canada, jeopardizes uncertain allies like South Korea, aiming,

we're told, somehow at China.

But it's very hard to follow the principle in this scattershot pattern of president's

protectionist behavior.