Most Recent Posts

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, (R-Wis.) says approving a massive trade package sought by President Obama will allow the U.S. to "write the rules" of the global economy. Parts of the package are now in limbo in the House.

Ryan spoke with NPR's Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep about the trade deal and about Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track, which would allow the president to negotiate the trade agreement with Pacific Rim nations known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and then have Congress pass it with an up-or-down vote.

On what the trade package does for the U.S.:

"What we're requiring in these negotiations, as we direct in our trade promotion authority legislation, is that these other countries level the playing field — they treat us like we treat them, they open their markets reciprocally to ours to our exports, and they raise their standards to our standards. Play by our rules with respect to things like intellectual property protection, rule of law, those kinds of things that are very important to make sure that we set the standards for the global economy.

"So if it goes like people like myself hope it goes, then America along with our allies are writing the rules of this global economy at the beginning of this 21st century. If we chose not to engage, if we say America shouldn't bother negotiating trade agreements ... then we're simply saying, 'We forfeit the leadership role in the world to write the rules' and we let other countries such as China write the rules instead of us."

On arguments that deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership will cost American jobs:

"Since ... 2007, there have been 100 trade agreements struck around the world without America. And that means other countries are already doing this, getting better access, getting better market access, and we're not, and that means we lose jobs."

On arguments from some Democrats that the trade deal will allow other nations to effectively lower U.S. wages and standards for financial rules, labor regulations, and the environment:

"There really isn't any justice in that claim, it's really kind of a straw man or what I'd call a red herring argument, because we make it extremely clear in our trade promotion authority that only Congress can change laws. You can't enter into an agreement that Congress doesn't approve that changes our laws.

"We make it very clear that the goal of this is to have other countries raise their standards to our levels and not degrade their standards. That's one of the criticisms from agreements back in the 20th century. So we want modern agreements that raise high standards to get other countries to play by our rules, and we do not allow other countries through any mechanism to require or force changes in U.S. laws."

On whether the treaty would mean foreign trading partners can challenge U.S. policies and regulations that they think adversely affect them:

"No. They can get monetary damage penalties, they can't challenge or change regulations at any level of our government."

On criticism that the treaty is being written in secret:

"It's one of the reasons why we're trying to pass trade promotion authority, so that we can guarantee that the public gets to see any trade agreement that is reached. We do not have trade promotion authority in place right now, and ... as a result of that, the kind of transparency that occurs is whatever the administration wants.

"What we are demanding and insisting on in our trade promotion authority is not only that members of Congress have full access to anything that's classified for the moment, but once an agreement is actually reached between countries, that agreement must be made public ... for 60 days for the public to see before a president can even sign an agreement, and when he signs it he simply sends it to Congress and then Congress spends a minimum of 30 days ... considering the agreement.

"The reasons some things are classified right now is it's in negotiations. You don't want to go into negotiations at any level, whether it's transactions or government-to-government with all your cards face up."

trans pacific partnership

Paul Ryan

Just how much is Donald Trump worth?

"I'm really rich," Trump declared during his presidential announcement Tuesday in New York at Trump Tower, one of the many buildings around the world donning his name.

But just how rich has always been a question. It was one before the real-estate mogul declared for president and, well, it remains a big question afterward, too, despite Trump holding up a one-page form declaring he is worth roughly $9 billion.

Trump has never liked to get specific about his wealth, but presidents and presidential candidates have no choice. Federal ethics law requires them to file annual disclosure reports, including a financial disclosure form 30 days after officially announcing.

"A lot of pundits on television said he'll never run," Trump boasted. "He's too private, and he's probably not as successful as everybody thinks."

And with that, he brandished his answer: a one-page "Summary of Net Worth," which he said was produced­ by his accounts and a "big accounting firm, one of the most highly respected."

The summary puts Trump's assets at $9.24 billion and his liabilities at just $503 million, giving him a net worth of just over $8.7 billion.

That's more than double an estimate from the Forbes list of billionaires, which pegged it at $4.1 billion. But, particularly at this level of personal wealth, the numbers released hardly tell the whole story. The one-page summary makes it difficult to unravel how the math is calculated. Specific buildings, real estate and holdings are not itemized, like they are required to be in a more detailed candidate financial disclosure.

The properties Trump owns can be assessed at book value — roughly speaking, the initial cost minus depreciation — or they can be assessed at fair-market value. The real-estate market can be volatile, and sometimes there are big gaps, especially if the real estate is Trump Tower and the Grand Hyatt hotel in midtown Manhattan.

Trump appears to be leaving millions of dollars on the table, a real-estate investment adviser said, by paying off his mortgage debt rather than using low-interest loans to leverage the real estate for reinvestment.

Another questioned whether the real-estate values might be overstated. Both advisers asked to speak on the condition on anonymity.

Donald Trump Jumps Into GOP Presidential Race

4:04

Playlist

Download

Embed

Embed

"There's not enough information to really understand it," said Frederick Chinn, an advisor at the Atalon Group in Henderson, Nev. "There are a lot of questions I would have just looking at the statement."

Then there's the value of the Trump brand. Trump's statement judges his "real estate licensing deals, brand and branded developments" to be worth $3.3 billion.

But to Forbes, the brand is worth less than $300 million, said Anand Chokkavelu, managing editor of the Motley Fool investing website Fool.com.

"I side with Forbes," Chokkavelu said. "I don't see any reason to take his self-reported net worth at face value."

Trump has a July 16 deadline for filing the official disclosure. He said he would do it on time.

"Everything will be filed eventually with the government," Trump declared at his announcement, "and we don't [need] extensions or anything. We'll be filing it right on time. We don't need anything."

There are legal liabilities for misreporting. Although the feds can grant deadline extensions, Fox News might not. It has a Republican debate scheduled Aug. 6, and candidates must file if they want to participate.

But even when a candidate files a more detailed disclosure, accuracy is hard to nearly impossible to enforce, watchdogs warn. Newt Gingrich in 2011, for example, filed a disclosure that did not list his paid speeches or television analyst contract. They were lumped in with income from Gingrich Productions, obscuring the details.

"Once you throw your hat in that ring, there's a bunch of laws that are supposed to apply to you, not all of them are enforced with the same level of rigor," Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, told NPR's Joel Rose. "And the financial disclosure is one of those areas where candidates have a lot of leeway to fudge the numbers."

financial disclosure

2016 Presidential Race

Donald Trump

Republicans

Eighteen months have elapsed since Parvez Henry Gill first began tackling one of the more unusual and sensitive assignments that anyone, anywhere, is ever likely to receive.

Now he is close to completing the task: the construction of a 140-foot tall Christian cross in the middle of Karachi, the business capital of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Wrapped in bamboo scaffolding, the cross juts into the sky above this turbulent port city, where Sunni Islamist militants frequently target religious minorities — usually Shia Muslims, but sometimes Christians too.

Gill says the order to embark upon this ambitious project came from on high — from God, in fact, who encouraged him to build the cross as a way of raising the spirits of Pakistan's downtrodden Christian minority.

"The idea came from God in a dream," explained Gill, 58, a life-long devout Christian, as he stood proudly beside his cross, during a typically steamy June afternoon on the edge of the Arabian Sea. "I promised God I will build a cross soon," he said.

He was as good as his word.

i

The cross is being built at the entrance to the main Christian cemetery in Karachi. Phil Reeves/NPR hide caption

itoggle caption Phil Reeves/NPR

The cross is being built at the entrance to the main Christian cemetery in Karachi.

Phil Reeves/NPR

Related NPR Stories

The Two-Way

More Than 100 Charged In Mob Killing Of Christian Couple In Pakistan

The Two-Way

Suicide Bombers Target Sunday Services At 2 Pakistani Churches

Built In A Cemetery

Gill started building his cross in December 2013, planting it just inside the gate of Karachi's largest Christian cemetery, where many hundreds lie beneath white marble gravestones, including English colonialists from the former British Empire.

The cross dominates the immediate neighborhood, dwarfing the scruffy homes and alleys around the edge of the cemetery and the huge billboards emblazoned with burgers and mobile phones along the highway running past the cemetery gates.

It is the same height as a high-rise apartment block and is the highest Christian cross in Asia, according to Gill.

This addition to Karachi's skyline is built from concrete, steel and iron, and stands on 20-foot deep foundations.

The Two-Way

Death Toll In Pakistan Church Attack Reaches 85

Gill laughs at the suggestion that this makes his cross bullet-proof. It is not meant "as a challenge to anyone," he says. It is simply a "symbol of peace and hope for Christians who are worried and hopeless."

Christians in Pakistan have reason to worry. They account for just a tiny percentage of the 190 million population and tend to be on the bottom rung of the economic scale, performing jobs like street sweeping and trash collection.

Attacks On Christians

They often face discrimination and, at times, outright persecution. This includes being accused falsely of blasphemy — a crime that can carry the death penalty — by rivals who wish to acquire their property or settle a feud.

One of the worst recent atrocities took place last November, when a mob forced a young Christian couple into a brick kiln and burned them alive.

Occasionally Islamist extremists bomb Christian churches and congregations. In 2013, they killed more than 80 people at a church in the northwestern city of Peshawar. In March, the militants struck again, by dispatching suicide bombers to the eastern city of Lahore, where they attacked two churches, killing 15 people.

Gill is happy to talk about why he's building his cross, but he imparts little personal information.

He says he's a businessman, who, with his family, is bankrolling the construction of the cross. He declines to reveal much more than that, apparently because of security concerns. There have been "so many threats," he remarks.

Such is the sensitivity and fear that surround the issue of religion in Pakistan that initially Gill decided not to tell his Muslim laborers what they were building. They only realized it was a giant Christian cross when it began to look like one. More than 20 of them promptly downed their tools and walked off the job.

No such concerns seem to trouble a knot of Muslim men, who are whiling away the day in a nearby alley, smoking and gossiping. For many months, they've been watching the cross steadily rising higher and higher, yet they insist they have no grievances with their Christian neighbors.

"It's their religion. It's in their graveyard. We have no problem with it," says Salman Shareef, an off-duty policeman, while others nod in agreement.

The cross hasn't turned out quite as he anticipated.

"I wasn't expecting it to be so tall. We thought it would be, like, 10- or 12-feet high," says Shareef.

However, evidence of Karachi's underlying communal tensions is easily found nearby. The cemetery wall bears one of the Islamist extremists' favorite slogans: "The punishment for blasphemy is death!" it says, in big black letters.

Within the graveyard, a woman's tomb from the British colonial era stands amid a sea of trash, tossed at it from the homes next door. A few yards away, a gravestone is covered with graffiti.

Gill waves away questions about whether he finds all this alarming. He simply states that he trusts in God: "Everything comes from God. God, he will save us."

There's only one moment when, just for a second or two, there's a flicker of anxiety in his eyes.

"Pray for me," he says suddenly, "I request to all. Just pray for me."

When the finishing touches on the cross are finally complete, Gill wants to hold a grand opening ceremony. He says he plans to invite Pope Francis, Britain's Queen Elizabeth and Hillary Clinton.

Let's not forget — he's a dreamer.

Karachi

Pakistan

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, (R-Wis.) says approving a massive trade package sought by President Obama will allow the U.S. to "write the rules" of the global economy. Parts of the package are now in limbo in the House.

Ryan spoke with NPR's Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep about the trade deal and about Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track, which would allow the president to negotiate the trade agreement with Pacific Rim nations known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and then have Congress pass it with an up-or-down vote.

On what the trade package does for the U.S.:

"What we're requiring in these negotiations, as we direct in our trade promotion authority legislation, is that these other countries level the playing field — they treat us like we treat them, they open their markets reciprocally to ours to our exports, and they raise their standards to our standards. Play by our rules with respect to things like intellectual property protection, rule of law, those kinds of things that are very important to make sure that we set the standards for the global economy.

"So if it goes like people like myself hope it goes, then America along with our allies are writing the rules of this global economy at the beginning of this 21st century. If we chose not to engage, if we say America shouldn't bother negotiating trade agreements ... then we're simply saying, 'We forfeit the leadership role in the world to write the rules' and we let other countries such as China write the rules instead of us."

On arguments that deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership will cost American jobs:

"Since ... 2007, there have been 100 trade agreements struck around the world without America. And that means other countries are already doing this, getting better access, getting better market access, and we're not, and that means we lose jobs."

On arguments from some Democrats that the trade deal will allow other nations to effectively lower U.S. wages and standards for financial rules, labor regulations, and the environment:

"There really isn't any justice in that claim, it's really kind of a straw man or what I'd call a red herring argument, because we make it extremely clear in our trade promotion authority that only Congress can change laws. You can't enter into an agreement that Congress doesn't approve that changes our laws.

"We make it very clear that the goal of this is to have other countries raise their standards to our levels and not degrade their standards. That's one of the criticisms from agreements back in the 20th century. So we want modern agreements that raise high standards to get other countries to play by our rules, and we do not allow other countries through any mechanism to require or force changes in U.S. laws."

On whether the treaty would mean foreign trading partners can challenge U.S. policies and regulations that they think adversely affect them:

"No. They can get monetary damage penalties, they can't challenge or change regulations at any level of our government."

On criticism that the treaty is being written in secret:

"It's one of the reasons why we're trying to pass trade promotion authority, so that we can guarantee that the public gets to see any trade agreement that is reached. We do not have trade promotion authority in place right now, and ... as a result of that, the kind of transparency that occurs is whatever the administration wants.

"What we are demanding and insisting on in our trade promotion authority is not only that members of Congress have full access to anything that's classified for the moment, but once an agreement is actually reached between countries, that agreement must be made public ... for 60 days for the public to see before a president can even sign an agreement, and when he signs it he simply sends it to Congress and then Congress spends a minimum of 30 days ... considering the agreement.

"The reasons some things are classified right now is it's in negotiations. You don't want to go into negotiations at any level, whether it's transactions or government-to-government with all your cards face up."

trans pacific partnership

Paul Ryan