c-span.org/landmarkcases. tonight, on "the communicators," we're in las vegas for the second part of our coverage from the consumer electronics show where each year golftec companies unveil new products and give insight to what's ahead. this week the latest on robot and drone telling using artificial intelligence and sophisticated cameras at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. also tonight, congressman michael mccaul, the chair of the house homeland security committee delivering a national security address at george washington university at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. on c-span2 hillary clinton will talk about women participating and leading in huh mantz rights at georgetown university. that airs at 9:00 p.m. eastern as well. and labor secretary alexander acosta talking to the western governor's association winter meeting last year discussing work force and labor trends in their states.

his speech is about 45 minutes. we have a very very special guest to address this audience, to engage with the governors. and to introduce that guest i am happy to introduce our honorable dennis dugard. >> thank you. before i introduce our guest, secretary acosta, i would like to take a moment to talk about the workforce development initiative i began as chair of wga. western stake, nearly all of us face the challenge of preparing our citizens for workplaces that look a little bit different than i did, started my working career or parents or grandparents certainly. at four workshop this past fall the workshop initiative brought together policymakers, busy leaders, educators and others who are working to create more opportunity and strengthen our economies by sharing best

practices and discussing common challenges and learning from each other to do what we can to address work force challenges. every persons western state is grappling with this. in my conversations with other governors identify this as a problem we face together. the workshops have enabled us to identify some common themes such as increasing career awareness among our young people. as they're making choices about pathways they follow they have a since which lead to job opportunities and which maybe lead to less of those opportunities, fewer of those opportunities. they helps us find work-based opportunities one needs to succeed in the career of choice.

the initiative started with webinars built on topics discussed at the worships and also have other opportunities for participants to engage and report at the first wga meeting next june. we have a short video here now that talks about the progress of the initiative. let's take a look at that video. ♪ our system is really not working for so many of our young people, they're either not getting through high school or if they graduate high school they're not pursuing post-secondary education to train themselves for the

workforce. if they do enter post-secondary, failing to complete and end up with debt and burden but no skill or credential that can make them valuable to employers who are seeking employees. ♪

given this information, one of the things we know is we need to tell our high schoolers, hey, some kind of skills training, some kind of post-secondary education is essential if you want to be successful in the world of work, if you want to have something to offer employers that is of value to them. ♪ >> good production, jim, very good. [ applause ]

>> that opening guy wasn't that good. there's probably not a better person to discuss work force development issues than the next gentleman. secretary of labor, acosta. he embodies hard work and determination, the son of cuban refugees, a first generation college graduate earning undergraduate degrees and law degree from harvard university. his impressive resume includes working as a law clerk for justice samuel alito jr. at the u.s. court of appeals, teaching at george washington universities and alia school of law and member of the national relations board, working as a u.s. attorney for the southern district of florida and serving as dean of the florida

international university school of law, college of law, excuse me. that breadth of life experiences serves as an excellent foundation for his current job as the united states secretary of labor, where he works to foster, promote and develop the welfare of wage earners, job seekers and retirees of the united states. it's an enormous responsibility and secretary acosta manages about 17,000 workers charged with this tax across our nation. i was very pleased when secretary acosta came to south dakota for the first of our four wga workshops and i've been impressed with his commitment to work on behalf of today's labor force and his vision for the workforce of tomorrow. please welcome our guest speaker secretary alexander acosta, the newest secretary of labor. [ applause ] >> governor, thank you for the

introduction and thank you for the invitation to join you again. as some of you know, governor daugaard has been very active on the work force front and serves on the task force of apprenticeship and i was so pleased to see this video, we've been working hard to foster apprenticeship and demand driven education, education that focuses providing the skills that the workplace is demanding. i like to say technology has changed so much. the iphone didn't exist 10 years ago, technology continues to change. the workplace is changing. work processes have taken over typewriters. the skills of today are not the skills of yesterday, yet if you look at education, education has really not kept pace. it's so important that education keep pace.

governor daugaard has been very much a leader in this effort. i wanted to take this opportunity today to talk about a different topic. i wanted to introduce it by really taking advantage of being out here in the west. because the west holds a very special place in the hearts and minds of america and it frame the way so many people see america, the old cowboy movies and what not has, in a lot of ways, determined a vision of america. how to convey that. you can go all the way back to theodore roosevelt, when he gave a speech in the dakota territory, he said the people in coming years will witness the power and glory of this country and its fullness here in the west. if you look at the five states with the lowest employment rate, four of those five states in the nation are represented right here at this table.

as i was reading my material on the plane coming in today i was seeing employment rate of state after state after state and the accomplishments of the governors and states of the west, for the most part with few exceptions for the most part in terms of employment rates is really phenomenal. in so many ways the west is a great place to reintroduce an important topic. the topic is this. the topic is job creation. president trump has charged me with a very simple set of priorities, job creation, more job creation and even more job creation. it's pretty simple. we want lots of jobs, we want good jobs and we want safe jobs for all working americans. how do we get there?

we get there through a few mechanisms. one is deregulation. let me take a nuanced approach to that. all regulations are not necessarily bad regulation, common sense regulations, particularly those that address health and safety have an important place in protecting americans. however, regulations that merely enacts through executive fiat what could not be adopted through the legislative process or regulations that protect special interests are a very different thing. as we look at regulation, we have to be mindful of the costs and the costs benefit analysis of regulation. these costs are incredibly incredibly high. in fiscal year 2016, federal agencies issued over 80 major rules. a major rule is a rule that has an impact of 100 million or more annually on the american economy. 100 million or more and 80 of those were issued in just one

year. so a study estimating regulatory compliance and economic impact of federal regulations are approximately 1.9 trillion annually. again, let me be clear. some regulations are important and some are very costly, but the hefty price tag is justified because they're necessary to prevent a serious harm. but we need to ask, is that hefty price tag justified. i'd like to say costliness is certainly, while the most common rationale and a very good one, i'd like to say it shouldn't be the only rationale. there's a second rationale very important to think about i think is particularly appropriate here. that is liberty. that is the impact that regulations have on liberty. the word liberty appears in so

many founding document, declaration of independence, discussion, pledge of allegiance, it appears in what really is the spirit of the west. if you look at documents and rules, where do you see the analysis a rule has on liberty. the way we write rules assumes human beings are solely economic beings and doesn't look at liberty. i'd say in part, that's because looking at liberty is very difficult because it requires we have discussions about the nature of liberty, about self-governance, liberty compared to equality and safety and accountability and prosperity. those qualitative judgments are so much harder than quantitative judgments, but they are so important. what i'd like to say is that as governors, you do this work all the time, you look at rules and

you look at cost benefit analysis, and at a more sort of quiet subtle level you think about liberty and evaluate whether rules are worthwhile. one state issue that is an important example of having a high economic cost of having a substantial impingement on liberty, while sometimes necessary is often not this is the debate that is taking place over occupational licensing. so i want to talk about occupational licensing in this context. in 1950, less than 1 in 20 americans required a license to work. today, more than 1 in 4 americans, almost 1 in 3 americans need, in essence, a permission slip to do something pretty darn simple, to just go to work and to earn a paycheck

for themselves and their families. there are measurable costs associated with this licensing, an economist with the federal bank of minneapolis and minnesota did a study and he estimated consumers pay an additional $200 plus billion a year, and that the economy loses 3 million jobs every year because of occupational licensing. brookings has done a study. brookings actually estimates the impact is higher. so we can talk about whether it's $200 billion, $300 billion, whether it's 3 million jobs, 4 million jobs, but the costs are real and the costs are significant. there are people willing to work, but they can't work

because they might have moved from one state to another, and they do not have the right license. so let me talk about three ways that licensing infringes on liberty. one a barrier to job entry. two, a barrier to job mobility, and, three, a barrier to jobs utilizing technology. let me take each of those in turn. the institute of justice recently performed an in depth study of the requirement for 102 occupational license is in the united states. in fact, they're now more than 1,100 professions that require a license. but they just took 102 of them. the average cost of a license is almost $300. requires at least one ask -- one exam and nearly a year of

education. in one state to be an optician and work at a lens crafter, you need 1,000 hours of education. in another state represented here you need zero hours of education. studies have been done. are eyeglasses better fitted in one state than in the other state. no difference in eyeglass fitting has been found. so here is the question. is that 1,000 hours about health and safety or is that about a barrier to entry? and especially for americans looking for mid-skills jobs, 1,000 hours of education is a real barrier, paying hundreds of for a license is a real barrier. second barrier to mobile. excessive licensing exceeds the ability of making transfers from

one state to another for skills. military challenges face moving more often than other americans. this issue is not limited to military families alone. i have met with military families on several occasions. this is one of the most substantial issues that they face. every time a military family moves, the spouse faces a very difficult question. break apart the family unit or give up your career. i met with one spouse who was an attorney, where she was told that she might be able to get a job at a grocery store. i have met with spouses that are teachers that have to start at the bottom of the pay scale each and every time. i've met with spouses that have just given up looking for work because they figure i can't get a license in the other state. and again, this is not limited

to military families. when a family moves for a job, they face the same issue. when a family think, should i just pick up and move? the economy is booming over in that state, the jobs aren't necessarily here. they face that issue. we all think that geographic mobility is higher today than it once was. in fact, the data tells you the exact opposite. that families are not moving, and i would argue that one of the reasons they don't move is that the regulatory state makes it difficult because if you don't know if you can get a job, you've worked hard to have your profession, you've worked hard for your license. if you have to start all over again, your family unit is going to have a discussion before you move. third, i'd say that it impinges the liberty particularly with

respect to exercising professions and work online. consider the example of telemedicine, allowing licensed medical professionals to better serve patients using modern technology is a good thing. however, one state recently amended its laws to require face-to-face consultations for telemedicine providers in an attempt to barte tell medicine patients from those traditionally served in doctors' offices. here's the question. many states here have substantially rural challenges. you confront the challenge of rural hospitals closing down. do we really want to require only face-to-face consultations or do we want to say that where medical judgment deems it appropriate, telemedicine may be a partial solution to rural hospitals closing down, to the

difficulty of getting healthcare to rural areas? my point is this, some regulations are necessary, obviously, when you're talking about medicine, health and safety is important and important to have licensing requirements. but 1,100 plus professions, i recently read that one state not represented here now requires a license for someone to dog sit. kennels became concerned because technology now allows for individuals in this room to, in an airbnb setting, perhaps make it known you're willing to dog sit a neighbor's pet for the weekend. and so this one city now requires a license to dog-sit. so as i understand it, you don't need a license to baby-sit but you do need a license to dog-sit.

enough said. [ laughter ] >> again, occupational licensing is certainly sometimes important. but if licenses aren't necessary, eliminate them. if they're needed, streamline them. if they're honored by one state, please for the sake of those 3 million or 4 million individuals that have given up practicing their profession, if they're honored by one state, i would argue, this is a great association and great group of people to work together because in the west the governors have a tradition of working together. consider honoring them with res pros tin your home state. so i really appreciate the opportunity to be here, to deliver this message. let me just say in closing, wrapping back to where i started, governor daugaard and the western governors have done so much on the apprenticeship front and work force front, i'm

excited to work with all of you. our unemployment rate nationally is now 4.1% yet we have 6.1 million open jobs. american job creators want to hire and american job seekers want to work. the largest challenge that we face is connecting those job creators and those 6.1 million open jobs with the job seekers. thank you for the opportunity to be here. [ applause ] thank you. >> mr. secretary, do you have time for some questions from the governors? very good. any questions from any of the governors? yes. john. >> you know, i would just add in a lot of what governor daugaard

and those working on the apprentice type program continues to bring us back to a skills-based discussion. that's the ultimate destination. i think we went through 25,500 rules and regulations. included in that were the licensing and able to get from the military folks when they move in frto the state of colorado, their spouses largely come and go to work immediately. when we went through that, there was a tremendous resistance, again, by the status quo forces that we're worried about. again, you only need one public, someone who suffered some consequences as a result of someone who had been poorly trained to get a couple newspaper articles, did it pretty easily. the large -- some of the large parts of this is looking at how many positions do we have that

we need college degrees for that we probably -- i think what we've all been working towards. we've now begun doing that in the state of colorado and trying to looking through why are we requiring college degrees for these jobs? how many of them really are a function of what they learned in college or is it really some level of training and skills we want to make sure they have acclimated. i think that might be another place to emphasize this -- you know, this systemic, i guess you call it the acceleration of connecting peoples with their skills to the jobs that -- where they're needed. >> i thank you for the comments. i couldn't agree more. i was in your state and visited, was it ario technologies. they had a really fascinating apprenticeship. this is a very high-tech company that does very high grade

mirrors and lenses, if i recall correctly. what was amazing was there were probably 17 and 18 and 19 year-olds working there, over the summer. i remember speaking to them, and they said, this is amazing, you know. my friends are playing nintendo, and i'm here anger a paycheck and learning a skill -- i'm here earning a paycheck and learning a skill as a summer job. this was an apprenticeship program sponsored and organized by the state around high-tech manufacturing. it was in conjunction with the school system. they were learning so much. one of the things that we're looking at on the task force that governor daugaard is on, is moving away from the traditional degree towards a series of stackable credentials.

if you look at the data, you will see kids will start college and not finish. most colleges are now judging time to graduation by six years, not four. four year degree judged by six years. a little more than half will finish. the question is, is there only one way of educating or can you have a series of shorter stackable credentials individuals can earn while they're working? in this type of apprenticeship program, while they're working in reo, they can take class in optics and stack credentials and working with community college and others to provide skills training and skills education that is, you know, acquired over a series of years rather than a, you're either working or you're in school and that sort of

binary mode of education. i think that's so important, because a lot of times you do not need the degree, you just need the skills and let's recognize that. so thank you. >> governor bullock. >> first, secretary acosta, thank you so much for being here. it means a lot for all of us as we grapple workforce issues and licensing issues and others. picking up on stackable credential, one of the things learned in work-based apprenticeship, it's been exciting for me we increased red shirt apprentice the last three to five years. i know to get somebody to go through a program like that makes you $20,000 more wage in montana. we looked back to 2011, 86% of them are still working right there in my state. trying to be createble with the credentials and what are our needs and started 15 new

programs in health care fields in the last two years alone and trying to incentivize it so our employers get a tax credit for every apprentice they hire, twice the amount if they're hiring a veteran. something we really look at is the possibility to go forward to address many of the work force needs we have and also not doing it in a way where we're even requiring somebody at a two year college to get a two year degree but get industry recognized credentials so important. i think we're making a lot of gains, in the last handful of years, the idea of an apprenticeship at one time was this crusty thought of it must just be a welder. we have over 1,000 apresence tisble fields. -apprenticeshipble fields. we had a meeting where they said it isn't working and we may need to make a different apprenticeship system.

i'd like to hear more about that. my only concern is we're making sure folks have those credentials and if they wanted to leave montana they'd have it and ensuring there's some standards of quality what they're learning are the skills employers need and they need to advance their careers. >> so gladly. this is a really important question. let me answer the narrow question and maybe the broader question. the narrow question the registered apprenticeship program exists and will continue and is fully supported. one of the issues with the registered apprenticeship program is that a number of job creators and large corporations and larger industries find that the registration process is very cumbersome. often you have to register in all 50 states. if you want to include veterans you have to register with the

v.a. in all 50 states, 100 registrations and register with the department of labor reporting requirements. by the time you are done, there is a large barrier to setting this up. going back to the point i made about regulations, if someone wants to set something up on a national basis, the register and apprenticeship model is a very difficult model. alongside it, what we're looking to do is create a different model and it would proceed as follows. let's take pharmacy techs as an example. you look at pharmacies across the nation, you have three, four, maybe five large pharmacies that really dominate the market in the majority of states, off the top of my head i would say cvs, rite-aid, walgreens are certainly three of those top five. if they come together and they say we are going to create a set

of credentials pharmaciy techs that are level one, two, three and four and it might be able to offer that to their employees and do so on a national level where you have quality, you have portability from company to company and from state to state. where you can set that up in a way very different from the apprenticeships currently happening whether in montana or colorado because they are nationally recognized and portable. we are looking to provide options and opportunities. you look at building trades. the building trades have a really interesting model. you have labor management

partnership between the unions and management, where a portion of everyone's paycheck goes into a training fund. they spend nearly a billion dollars a year of private sector money. they have 1600 different facilities across the nation, and they have high quality, but they also have portability from state to state to state. we're looking, we think this is a great idea and we want to empower a variety of options, so without taking away from the registered model, we also want to make it possible for the -- for industry to come together on a large scale and create portability from state to state. >> great question and great answer. thank you. governor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this, secretary. we're honored to have you here and thank you for your service. my question really has to do with a little more esoteric

issue a little harder to define, i expect. i was reminded, as you were speaking, i talked to the governor earlier i talked as a young man, and he said, i hope, gary your do how is equal to you know how. know how being defined as skills, you know, the education i had, what i brought as talent to the table. and do how being how much are you going to work? will you have a good work ethic and produce and be productive as an employee? i wonder, john and i were talking about this. are we in a stage in our society we are getting a little too much of an entitlement mentality? i'm entitled to -- fill in the blank -- versus i will go out there and earn my own way, pull myself by my own bootstraps,

those kind of things? i know that's a serious debate. as we look at the labor supply of america, what's your assessment? how are we doing on our do how compared to know how. we are talking about education and different ways to get skills and all? do we have a work ethic our grandparents and great-grandparents had or are we more lazy? >> i think these issues are related and i'll convey a story i think captures this. in my prior job i met a young man that really wanted to be a police officer. he graduated high school and his high school counselor said, go to college and major in criminal justice and that's how you become a police officer. he went to college and he took out loans, and he wasn't quite sure how to become a police officer but he continued studying criminal justice.

then he graduated and then he ended up as a security guard. he was really really disappointed. i would argue that he had a high level of know how but perhaps his do how, to use your terms, wasn't particularly high because after taking out a whole bunch of loans and studying for probably more than four years, really running into that issue, when it comes to applying for a job is so disheartening. so, here's what i've said in the context of this story. many colleges have study abroads. you certainly learn a lot of technical stuff, but when you go to study abroad you also learn about life, right? one of the younger appointees in my office told me about a

semester at sea, where he spent a semester at sea and learned a lot about the world and practical life. if you can have a semester abroad and at sea, why can't you have a semester at a police academy and why can't do you it for credit? anyone who says you learn less by sending a semester in a police academy than college has not been to a police academy. you learn a lot about the law and policing and learn about doing. if we were to expose our young men and women more to what it means to work, the excitement of the job, he really wanted to be a police officer. but by the time he started applying, that was kind of gone. one last example. i was at an education facility

for, i believe it was carpenters, and i came across, i was walking and talking to someone about, you know, i grew up in miami and i was talking to them about when hurricane andrew hit, our house lost its roof and quite literally blew away, i was talking to them about roofing. then i noticed this book on the table that was teaching them about roofing and it was opened up, opened up to a page. it had serious math and trigonometry. the carpenters were like working it all out. so here is the other top point i'll make. how much of what we teach is taught in the concept of theory rather than practice? if you teach high school math in the context of carpentry, a lot of people may get it that may not get it if you teach it as a book. i know this because in law school, there are a lot of kids that don't like the classroom

but they go on, and when they do a clinical course they love the law and love to go into court and argue. i think part of the do how comes from are we not exposing them to the interesting parts of the job early enough? >> governor. then governor walker. >> mr. secretary, thanks for being here. your last answer made a great case for experimental learning and maybe that will tie into this next question. as a country we're facing 1$1.1 trillion of student debt. all of us here at the head table have university systems that are producing graduates and consuming big chunks of our budgets yet we have the 6.1 million jobs that are available. you, i'm sure, in your role, had a chance to talk to board of regents and trustees and

university faculty as part of your work. what advice do you give them about reinventing higher education to help close the job gap in america, question one. number two, with this 1$1.1 trillion of of federal student loan backing -- do we have an education bubble occurring right now the same way we had a housing bubble occurring in 2008? >> so these are great questions. i have spoken to the board and to the national association and others. and it's interesting. i had the opportunity to speak to the board of regents and the presidents of all the state universities in one large state. and i'll tell you what i told them. this particular state was doing really, really well. of the ten large states it had the second highest graduation rate, which is great. 67% of students that started at

a state university in this particular state graduated within six years. two-thirds, second highest in the nation of the large states. of those 67% about another two-thirds, i think if memory serves 64, i could be off by a percentage or two, 64% found the job that paid $25,000 or more or went onto get another degree within a year. and this just so happens this is number two in the nation for placement for large state university systems. but if you do some quick math two thirds and two thirds is four ninths. and so the second best in the nation means that less than half the students that start college finish within six years and get

a job that pays $25,000 or more than even gives them a fighting chance of paying off their debt. second piece of data -- universities when i talk about this, and i won't put all of you on the spot, but i would say how many students do you have at the university of colorado or montana, or south dakota, and i can go down the line. and i'm willing to bet that every person here would know within a fair amount how many students there are, how much money is raised, again very public. ask yourself how many of those students graduate within six years. do you know? how many of those students that graduate get a job? do you know? we are in a position where we look at higher education based

on inputs and not outputs. and does that mean that we don't want to teach lifelong learners, because technology is changing very rapidly so we need lifelong learners. but we also need accountability. and so i'm not aware of any industry that judges itself based on inventory coming in the door. they ask how much inventory goes out the door, and then is it actually purchased, right? and so why are the metrics for higher education based on enrollment rather than graduation or rather than job rate? and i think if you think about that, that starts that can inform the conversation about some of the issues that we're looking at higher education and whether there are -- whether there is room for different types of education.

whether it's a series of stackable credentials or others. because, you know, the student debt is going incredibly high. and i'm going to sort of wrap that back around to the way we judge higher education. because a really interesting part of higher education is the ranking system. and one of the largest components of ranking is not how well a university is doing but how much it spends. and in the case of law school, for example, the more you spend, the higher your ranking. if you look at the u.s. news ranking, the more expensive you are, the more you spend per student, the higher your ranking is going to be. and so so much of this has to do with the incentive structure and is there incentives to keep tuition down or are there

incentives to increase tuition so you can have more facilities so you can go up in your ranking system? because if you're judged by input and judged by total revenue and not output, then you just want to maximize your revenue. >> we have time for one last question. governo governor walker. >> thank you very much for being here today. i just wanted to acknowledge the career and technology opportunities we had in alaska and what it has done for our graduation rates. the schools we have for technology, there's a waiting list to get in. and the waiting list is mid to upper 90%. so whether it's construction, media, culinary, and they just absolutely love it. and so i have a big belief if you teach someone to do it, they have something to do. so what i'm hoping on a state

level we've sort of taken our education department and our labor department and we said how can they be complementary. and i think that success model i know is done in other states as well, butts it's been just a significant improvement to our education and graduation rates and they just see a reason for what they're doing. i know on the federal level you've been supportive of that, and i want to thank you for that, but just acknowledge there could be more done on a federal level, recognizing the career and technical education piece of it. i know there are a lot of folks preparing to go to college, and that's a wonderful thing. and some of those who come out of career and technical schools some will go to law school. so it doesn't inhibit them. there's more things on the menu for those who may not go in that direction, but i want to be able to make a good living, and they certainly do.

i thank you. that's a good example. >> thank you for those comments, and let me make two observations. first in this year's budget we have asked for flexibility for the governors. my view is alaska is very different than montana that is different than colorado. and within the budget lines, my perspective is to the extent that i have authority to give flexibility to move the money around, that flexibility should be devolved to the governors and to states. now, i don't have all the flexibility i'd like in congress. but if i have it, my policy is to provide it. related to that i think whether it's this year or in future years we need to start thinking about education as one continuum. because right now we think college, work force college and education. and we're setting up these artificial distinctions that i think are unnecessary that imply

that one is better than the other and that artificially skewed choice. and so to me if you have a family sustaining job you enjoy, that is good thing. and whether that was obtained after going to law school or whether that was obtained because you went to culinary school. the question should be do you have a family sustaining job that you enjoy. and as we look to funding and work force program, and even in high school as we're offering dual enrollment opportunities and advice, having this artificial distinctions i believe is unhelpful. and to extent i can be an advocate for merging that, i'm gladly there. thank you. >> let's thank our outstanding speaker for his help today. thank you. [ applause ]

sunday on c-span's q&a, "the new york times" staff photographer doug mills talks about the photos he took while covering president trump. >> obviously he enjoys having us around. i really believe despite his constant, you know, comments about fake news and the media and so forth, i really feel he enjoys having us around because it helps drive his message, it helps drive the news of the day, which he can do every day and does every day. he's constantly driving a message. and therefore having us around really allows him to do that. >> q&a, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. c-span's history series, "landma "landmark cases" returns this month. each week historians and speakers join us to talk about

the stories behind these significant supreme court decisions. beginning monday february 26th at 9:00 p.m. eastern. landmark cases, volume 2, the book costs $8.95 plus shipping and handling. to get your copy go to c-span.org/landmark cases. a look at trade and the asia pacific region. that's followed by supreme court oral argument on the rights of criminal defendants. later some recent state addresses by the governors of alabama and rhode island. australia's prime minister is traveling to the u.s. later this month to meet with president trump at the white house. earlier today the australian ambassador to the u.s. talked about the state of relations during a discussion on trade in the asia-pacific