Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
Speaker 1: noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android
Speaker 1: Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Non farm payrolls growth in January just one hundred and
Speaker 2: forty three thousand, lower than the one hundred and seventy
Speaker 2: five thousand estimate, but an unemployment rate lower than the
Speaker 2: estimate as well, at four percent. Then you have wage
Speaker 2: growth which was hotter than expected on both a month
Speaker 2: on month and year on your basis those figures at
Speaker 2: zero point five percent and four point one percent on
Speaker 2: average hourly earnings growth, respectively. So when you put it
Speaker 2: all together, there is some sign of a little bit
Speaker 2: of weakness here in the new White House. The Trump
Speaker 2: administration is casting blame on the old one. We spoke
Speaker 2: with Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council
Speaker 2: here on Bloomberg about the data earlier today.
Speaker 3: The Biden jobs market was way worse than market slot,
Speaker 3: and that's sort of consistent with the rest of our
Speaker 3: views that their policies were unwise and there's a lot
Speaker 3: of cleaning up to do. And I think that if
Speaker 3: you look at ism that just came out, the people
Speaker 3: market participants believe that President Trump is going to be
Speaker 3: able to turn things around. And with these big downward divisions,
Speaker 3: we can see that there's actually a lot of work
Speaker 3: to do.
Speaker 2: We want to get more insight now into the work ahead.
Speaker 2: And just frankly, where we are with a former chief
Speaker 2: economist at the Department of Labor, Diana Firschcott Roth, is
Speaker 2: with me here in our Washington, d C. Studio. She's
Speaker 2: now director of the Center for Energy, Climate and Environment
Speaker 2: at the Heritage Foundation. Diana, thank you so much for
Speaker 2: being here on Jobs Day.
Speaker 4: It's great to be with you. Katy, Well, it's.
Speaker 2: Lovely to have you. As the White House is framing
Speaker 2: these figures of a worse buy an economy than previously thought.
Speaker 2: But what we're talking about here is an unemployment rate
Speaker 2: of four percent, which is still historically pretty low. Is
Speaker 2: that too? How you see this data?
Speaker 4: Well, I think that there's two surveys. There's the unemployment rate,
Speaker 4: then there's the establishment data, which is jobs created and
Speaker 4: the unemployment rate. Those data have just been revised because
Speaker 4: they revised the population totals. But what's really important to
Speaker 4: focus on is the establishment data and the jobs created.
Speaker 4: There was one hundred and forty three thousand jobs created,
Speaker 4: which is why the market is looking down on this.
Speaker 4: But it's not so much the number of jobs. It's
Speaker 4: that they were all in low paying or government sectors.
Speaker 4: So if you look at manufacturing, tiny gains, losses in oil,
Speaker 4: losses in mining and logging, in motor vehicles and parts.
Speaker 4: When other countries want to buy our oil, and you
Speaker 4: have President Trump who says he wants to sweep away regulations,
Speaker 4: have lower electricity prices, have first to permitting to allow
Speaker 4: those high paying jobs to come back to the United States,
Speaker 4: and that's what's important that American workers have the upward
Speaker 4: mobility they need through these higher wage jobs.
Speaker 2: Well, when we consider those some of these lower wage
Speaker 2: jobs and different sectors of the labor market in which
Speaker 2: migrant labor specifically is relied on, how are you thinking
Speaker 2: through the deportation effort that is underway and has been
Speaker 2: accelerating in the last few weeks, and how ultimately that's
Speaker 2: going to trickle into the labor market.
Speaker 4: Well, we see that the labor force participation rate is
Speaker 4: still lower than it was during before the pandemic. It
Speaker 4: has not regained its pre pandemic levels. So there are
Speaker 4: plenty of American workers who want to do many of
Speaker 4: these high wage manufacturing jobs that we're focusing on. The
Speaker 4: point is to bring these high wage jobs back to America.
Speaker 4: There are plenty of American workers who want to do.
Speaker 2: Them, so there won't be any labor shortages with those
Speaker 2: roles that American workers may not be so eager to fill.
Speaker 4: There's paths for legal migration, and President Trump has always
Speaker 4: said he wants legal migrants. So if there are job openings,
Speaker 4: if there are gaps in the labor force, there's plenty
Speaker 4: of scope to bring in workers who want to come legally,
Speaker 4: who have been waiting for years and years Kayleie to
Speaker 4: come into the country. Why shouldn't those workers come and
Speaker 4: do those jobs that are needed rather than people who
Speaker 4: just walk across the border.
Speaker 2: Well, something else President Trump wants to see is a
Speaker 2: smaller federal workforce, which is why we've seen this administration
Speaker 2: offering buyouts that tens of thousands of people, we understand,
Speaker 2: have signed up for to leave the government by the
Speaker 2: end of this month. That deadline now obviously extended until Monday.
Speaker 2: But even if not enough people take it, the administration
Speaker 2: has suggested they're still going to be trimming down a
Speaker 2: lot of these federal agencies. What ultimately will that do
Speaker 2: to the labor market, As you mentioned government jobs and
Speaker 2: your very first answer.
Speaker 4: Right, Well, I have the utmost admiration for anybody who
Speaker 4: wants to take President Trump's deal and have nine months
Speaker 4: of vacation and move to a different kind of job afterwards.
Speaker 4: And there's a lot of opportunities to do that and
Speaker 4: the federal workforce, as everybody knows, it's very difficult to
Speaker 4: trim the federal workforce. And so President Trump is offering
Speaker 4: this buyout opportunity, and he wants to make it more efficient.
Speaker 4: I mean, if you have a private sector company that
Speaker 4: doesn't do a good job, it goes out of business
Speaker 4: and those workers find other positions to go to. That's
Speaker 4: not the same in the government, where people just keep
Speaker 4: jobs even if they're not doing a good job. And
Speaker 4: I have to say most government workers are doing a
Speaker 4: great job, but for those that are not, it's very
Speaker 4: difficult to get rid of them.
Speaker 2: Well, and we do understand that might be the next
Speaker 2: stage of this that they've asked for a list of
Speaker 2: low performing employees, and that may be where some of
Speaker 2: this calling happens from here. But I just the notion
Speaker 2: of a smaller federal workforce overall. Is that going to
Speaker 2: lead to some messiness in the economic data that we
Speaker 2: could receive in the next several months.
Speaker 4: I think this is going to be swamped by low
Speaker 4: electricity prices leading to more manufacturing coming from Europe. I
Speaker 4: mean here, we're going to get rid of net zero.
Speaker 4: They have net zero in Europe and in the United Kingdom,
Speaker 4: driving prices higher, deindustrializing. So if we could reindustrialize to
Speaker 4: pick up some of those jobs from these European companies,
Speaker 4: we're going to be doing great.
Speaker 2: We got other data today as well, in the form
Speaker 2: of University of Michigan consumer sentiment, which actually hit a
Speaker 2: seven month low, in part because inflation expectations for the
Speaker 2: next year picked up to more than four percent. There's
Speaker 2: concern around tariffs here, specifically on the part of American consumers.
Speaker 2: It seems we've heard from plenty of people close to
Speaker 2: Trump were aligned with his kind of economic thinking that tariffs,
Speaker 2: if anything, would be a one time price increase versus
Speaker 2: something persistently inflationary. But if people expect inflation and inflation
Speaker 2: expectations start to run away, will not not have the
Speaker 2: same effect. Ultimately, will they not start then demanding things
Speaker 2: like higher wages? And we see this trickle back into
Speaker 2: the labor market as well well.
Speaker 4: President Trump has shown that he wants to use tariffs
Speaker 4: as a negotiating tool, so he put the tariffs on
Speaker 4: Canada and Mexico. Then Canada and Mexico said they would
Speaker 4: increase Borda security, so he took off the tariffs. China,
Speaker 4: he left the tariffs on at ten percent. But China
Speaker 4: is very much dependent on its exports to the United
Speaker 4: States for its economic growth, it might very well swallow
Speaker 4: some of these tariffs. And in China, China subsidizes energy
Speaker 4: labor with slave labs, burn forced labor in Shinjog, capital
Speaker 4: with low interest rate loans. I mean, Kaylee, did you
Speaker 4: know that China is selling a car for thirteen thousand
Speaker 4: dollars in Europe byd the major auto company Explorer for
Speaker 4: thirteen thousand dollars in Europe. China is subsidizing and undercutting
Speaker 4: its industries. We spend money on providing Medicare and Medicaid,
Speaker 4: social security, housing vouchers. We keep people living well. They
Speaker 4: take their government money and they subsidize their companies to
Speaker 4: undercut ours and European companies. Volkswagen layoffs in three plants
Speaker 4: partly because of these cheap Chinese vehicles.
Speaker 2: We don't want that here, all right, Diana, thank you
Speaker 2: so much for joining us for these important Jobs Day conversations.
Speaker 2: Diana fir Scott Rotha's director for Climate, Energy and the
Speaker 2: Environment at the Heritage Foundation, also former chief economist at
Speaker 2: the Department of Labor.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcasts. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and den on Apple, Cockley
Speaker 1: and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can
Speaker 1: also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New
Speaker 1: York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: And as we end our conversation on tariffs, we of
Speaker 2: course got some news on tariffs from the President in
Speaker 2: the Oval Office earlier today when he said that he
Speaker 2: would announce next week reciprocal tariffs on our trading partners.
Speaker 2: Will have to await the details on that, But he
Speaker 2: also didn't rule out tariffs on Japan, as he said,
Speaker 2: he is looking for an end to the trade deficit
Speaker 2: with that country. All of this happening as he meets
Speaker 2: at the White House with the Prime Minister of Japan,
Speaker 2: which is underway as we speak. Shigu or Aeshiba is
Speaker 2: sitting down with him. We expect a press conference to
Speaker 2: take place at some point this hour, and as we
Speaker 2: consider what is on the agenda for this meeting, we
Speaker 2: turn now to an important voice, the former US Ambassador
Speaker 2: to Japan, having just wrapped up several years serving in
Speaker 2: that role. Rama Manuel is with me now. He of
Speaker 2: course also served as chief of staff to President Barack Obama. Ambassador,
Speaker 2: thank you for being here. When we consider what the
Speaker 2: Trump administration specifically might want to get out of this
Speaker 2: meeting and what Japan is hoping to get in return.
Speaker 2: What are you looking for?
Speaker 5: Well, it's across a broad range of issues. One, Japan
Speaker 5: is our number one foreign direct investor for the last
Speaker 5: four years, about a million Americans work for them, So
Speaker 5: ensuring there's a stability in that economic relationship, it's a
Speaker 5: principal not only trading partner, but then that kind of
Speaker 5: ripples into the next period. For the United States, which
Speaker 5: is Japan's a long pole in the Indo Pacific for
Speaker 5: the United States. Indo Pacific is a home game for China,
Speaker 5: it's an away game for the United States. You level
Speaker 5: the playing field with your allies. Our largest military footprint
Speaker 5: outside of the United States, in any single country is
Speaker 5: in Japan, well over fifty plus thousand American servicemen and women.
Speaker 5: It's the only place in the world we have a
Speaker 5: permanent aircraft terrier permanently based there. In addition to that,
Speaker 5: whether you're looking at the quad with India, Australia, Japan,
Speaker 5: the United States, the Tryla, or relationships from the United
Speaker 5: States Japan, the Philippines, United States, Japan, and career, the
Speaker 5: constant there alongside the United States is Japan on the
Speaker 5: diplomatic front, and it's key and essential when you looked
Speaker 5: at some of the export controls that the United States
Speaker 5: put on and dealt with from China on semiconductors and
Speaker 5: other high technology. Who's the other partner that walks walk
Speaker 5: with the United States Japan. So when you look at
Speaker 5: that composure, there's a lot to work with both on economic,
Speaker 5: state craft, national security, and also on the diplomatic to
Speaker 5: slack political arena.
Speaker 2: Well when it comes to economic state craft, though, when
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is suggesting that tariffs on Japan potentially would
Speaker 2: be on the table, what would that do to potentially
Speaker 2: this relationship which you've just just been described as being
Speaker 2: incredibly key in the endosement Pacific.
Speaker 5: Not only is not only for the last four years
Speaker 5: has Japan been the number one direct FORIGN investor in
Speaker 5: the United States. A million of Americans work for Japanese companies.
Speaker 5: About forty three percent is the back of the envelope,
Speaker 5: so it's not for peer review, but about forty three
Speaker 5: percent of that investment is in the manufacturing industrial place.
Speaker 5: You put tariffs on, you're going to affect a lot
Speaker 5: of that investment in the industrial area. Second, the United
Speaker 5: States represents about nine ten percent of Japan's LNG.
Speaker 6: There's clearly a place.
Speaker 5: To improve on that or Japan can turn to other markets.
Speaker 5: I think we're the fifth largest United States LNG exporter
Speaker 5: to Japan. There's a place to be worked on from
Speaker 5: a nuclear SMR capacity, So there's a lot more economic
Speaker 5: engagement to be happened rather than just tariffs. And I
Speaker 5: think in fact, when I was there as Inbassador, we
Speaker 5: improved Japan's involvement with the United States on ethanol and
Speaker 5: other soybeans and beef, a whole host of areas agriculturally,
Speaker 5: let alone industrially.
Speaker 6: We're the largest foreign directrofessor in Japan. So engagement is
Speaker 6: where I.
Speaker 5: Would start rather than tariffs, because there's more to be
Speaker 5: gained giving you have a willing partner on a whole
Speaker 5: host a front. And again you're right to say, okay,
Speaker 5: let's talk about economics. But it ripples and it doesn't
Speaker 5: stay within a lane.
Speaker 6: It affects. Then what are we doing on national straity?
Speaker 5: I mean before there was a single tank on the
Speaker 5: Ukrainian border. Japan agreed to go to two percent defense
Speaker 5: budget two percent of GDP for the defense budget. They
Speaker 5: are the largest acquired of US weapons. They're going to
Speaker 5: become the third largest defense budget. The entire investment gained
Speaker 5: in Japan on the defense side is not in personnel
Speaker 5: but in the equipment, and we're the largest export of
Speaker 5: that area. So there's a lot of leverage points here
Speaker 5: for a more engaged partnership rather than.
Speaker 6: Kind of hostile. Let me also then take this to
Speaker 6: a separate place. If I can't. You can have a
Speaker 6: conflict or confrontational.
Speaker 5: Approach to your adversaries, but if you treat your allies
Speaker 5: in the same way, you then become isolated. One of
Speaker 5: the unique things we did over the last four years
Speaker 5: is isolate China in its own backyard, isolated more and
Speaker 5: more in the and around the area. If you constantly
Speaker 5: are confronting allies in the same venue which you're confronting adversaries,
Speaker 5: you become isolated. And that doesn't play on America's strength.
Speaker 5: America's strength is not replicating mirroring China's might through right,
Speaker 5: right through might. China strategy United States strategy is to
Speaker 5: replicate its strengths, alliances, values, economic integration.
Speaker 6: That's where we excel. And if you do a cheap.
Speaker 5: Version of China's wolf warrier and economic coorsion, you're going
Speaker 5: to end up in the same place where China's economy
Speaker 5: is a mess right now, the political sport at home
Speaker 5: is a mess right now, and doing that will end
Speaker 5: up with the consequences. We were able in the last
Speaker 5: four years to isolate China because of their own actions.
Speaker 5: Doing the same thing China does and a poor version
Speaker 5: of it will only isolate the United States well.
Speaker 2: As we talk about Japan as being an ally, the
Speaker 2: very fact that it is such an important ally was
Speaker 2: what led to a lot of confusion when the last
Speaker 2: administration moved to block the takeover from a Nipon Steel
Speaker 2: of US Steel. We learned from the President in the
Speaker 2: Oval Office today that he hasn't changed his mind on
Speaker 2: the idea that that deal should not go through. Now
Speaker 2: that you're out of the administration, looking back with hindsight,
Speaker 2: do you still stand by that call or should this
Speaker 2: be revisited?
Speaker 5: As I said then, I believe said then, and I
Speaker 5: believed it then, I believe it now. One of the
Speaker 5: United States Japan relationship is deeper, stronger than a single
Speaker 5: economic transaction. Second five years ago with the United States,
Speaker 5: when US companies were looking at Tushiba, Japan put up
Speaker 5: the same barriers that the United States talked about as
Speaker 5: relates to Nippon Steele and US steal. Third, about four weeks,
Speaker 5: five weeks, maybe a little long longer. Prior to the
Speaker 5: Nikon engagement, the United States granted a Japanese company a
Speaker 5: twenty billion dollar contract to replace all of China's cranes
Speaker 5: in every American port. Now I can't speak to what
Speaker 5: says trusted ally greater than a twenty billion dollar contract
Speaker 5: to replace Chinese cranes as Japanese built manufactured cranes. They
Speaker 5: would be manufactured in the United States because we trust
Speaker 5: Japan not to use that technology and data to spy
Speaker 5: on us and to engage in intellectual and economic espionage.
Speaker 6: That is a deep relationship. Will you have disagreement sover issues, Yeah,
Speaker 6: but they're the largest. They are one of the largest
Speaker 6: purchases of American weapons.
Speaker 5: They're a big purchaser of American agriculture trucks, They're a
Speaker 5: big purchaser of American LNG. I'm not here to kind
Speaker 5: of advocate for Japan, but I'm saying engaging an ally,
Speaker 5: saying here's what we've got to see is a better
Speaker 5: strategy than to treat that ally as it's if that
Speaker 5: as if it's the same as an adversary. We have
Speaker 5: a technological channel with China. This is not a cold
Speaker 5: war of the ideological like Russia. It is a technological
Speaker 5: challenge with China. Japan is a major technological country. From semiconductors,
Speaker 5: there's about eighteen companies that produce anywhere close to eighty
Speaker 5: percent of market share. You want them on your side
Speaker 5: in this technological warfare?
Speaker 3: All right?
Speaker 2: The former Ambassador to Japan, Rama Manuel, joining us here
Speaker 2: on Balance of Power. Sir, thank you very much for
Speaker 2: your time.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple,
Speaker 1: Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
Speaker 1: live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: I am d Kaylee Lines in Washington. We're at the
Speaker 2: White House as we speak. A meeting is underway between
Speaker 2: President Trump and Prime Minister Ishidaba of Japan. We are
Speaker 2: expecting a joint press conference from the two was slated
Speaker 2: to begin actually about thirteen minutes ago. It seems we're
Speaker 2: running a little bit behind schedule after some extended remarks
Speaker 2: in the Oval Office from earlier. But when that joey
Speaker 2: press conference begins in the East Room of the White House,
Speaker 2: we will of course bring it to you, and I'm
Speaker 2: sure the President and his team are eager to get
Speaker 2: that underway. Is he has a pretty jam packed schedule
Speaker 2: for the rest of the day. Expected to sign some
Speaker 2: executive orders later this afternoon. Before heading to joint Bass
Speaker 2: Andrews and then getting on Air Force One to go
Speaker 2: down to mar A Lago where a dinner will take
Speaker 2: place this evening with the President and with Senate Republicans
Speaker 2: and their spouses. The question is going to be is
Speaker 2: an opportunity for those Senate Republicans to convince the President
Speaker 2: to go with their plan on budget reconciliation. Remember, the
Speaker 2: Senate idea is to split things up, do two different bills,
Speaker 2: reconciliation bills, one focusing on border and energy and defense first.
Speaker 2: We actually just got that resolution outline from the Senate
Speaker 2: Budget Chair Lindsay Graham, then deal with tax policy later.
Speaker 2: This run counter to what the House wants to do,
Speaker 2: one big, beautiful bill, roll it all into one, and
Speaker 2: that is what they spent hours working on at the
Speaker 2: White House yesterday. The House Speaker Mike Johnson, as of
Speaker 2: yesterday evening, was suggesting they could have a framework and
Speaker 2: details out by today, but today he's saying it's going
Speaker 2: to have to wait until the end of the weekend
Speaker 2: or perhaps Monday. So things are squashy here, to say
Speaker 2: the least, and we want to get into it now
Speaker 2: with our political panel today Jeanie Shanzeno is with me,
Speaker 2: democratic analyst and senior Democracy Fellow at the Center for
Speaker 2: the Study of the Presidency in Congress, alongside Republican strategist Leinster.
Speaker 2: Lester Munson has been a long week, y'all. He's head
Speaker 2: of the international practice at BGR Group. So, Lester, when
Speaker 2: we consider here, and you spent a lot of time,
Speaker 2: of course, in the Senate, this notion that the Senate
Speaker 2: is essentially trying to front run the House. They're losing
Speaker 2: patients here and want to move first. Is this likely
Speaker 2: to happen or does President Trump put his foot down
Speaker 2: at dinner tonight?
Speaker 5: Uh?
Speaker 7: Great, wonderful mystery to have, Kaylee. I don't pretend to
Speaker 7: know the answer. How this is going to shake out.
Speaker 7: The Senate's been sticking to its plan. The House has
Speaker 7: been sticking to its plan. It's a great lesson in
Speaker 7: civics and the differences between the two houses. The Senate
Speaker 7: is a little more able to resist the enthusiasms of
Speaker 7: the President and the people, and so their definite views
Speaker 7: on these issues are a little more kind of solid,
Speaker 7: whereas in the House you can see the Speaker and
Speaker 7: the President want to kind of build up a lot
Speaker 7: of momentum behind all of these wonderful Trump policies, put
Speaker 7: them in one bill, and then Yahoo, get all the
Speaker 7: Republicans to vote for it. Because the House is a
Speaker 7: little more subject to kind of the emotions of the time.
Speaker 7: So it's I don't know how it plays out, but
Speaker 7: it's a great lesson in civics.
Speaker 2: Yeahoo, Genie, Well, when we consider the House specifically, of course,
Speaker 2: their whole idea of one big bill is essentially because
Speaker 2: they need sweeteners for people who are going to be
Speaker 2: unhappy with parts of it, and that's why they want
Speaker 2: everything included. The hardline conservatives who may not be happy
Speaker 2: with the level of spending cuts for example, or things
Speaker 2: like the salt cap being raised, at least getting what
Speaker 2: they want when it comes to the b or and energy.
Speaker 2: If you split these things and you do the border
Speaker 2: and energy incentives first and then the tax policy, the
Speaker 2: salt people don't get what they want, it becomes less
Speaker 2: likely that both both of those reconciliation packages can get
Speaker 2: through the House.
Speaker 8: Right, That's absolutely right. You know, I'm getting a sense
Speaker 8: that the Senators don't feel for Mike Johnson the way
Speaker 8: I feel for him, thinking about how he's gonna thread
Speaker 8: this needle. You're absolutely right. They want the big bill
Speaker 8: because they want to put sweeteners in there, because he
Speaker 8: has a one vote two votes depending on when these
Speaker 8: specials occur majority. And this is the challenging part of it.
Speaker 8: Usually it's the Senate because they have to meet a filibuster.
Speaker 8: Not in this case, it's the House that has the
Speaker 8: uphill battle. And so you'd think the Senators would have
Speaker 8: mercy on Johnson, let him try to push through his
Speaker 8: one big, beautiful bill, but they're not. And I was
Speaker 8: fascinated to hear Jody Errington say, we still want essentially
Speaker 8: the one big bill, but if Donald Trump wants to
Speaker 8: go with the Senate's plan, we'll go with that. So
Speaker 8: maybe there's an opening there, and maybe it's going to
Speaker 8: depend really on where Donald Trump lands on this. And
Speaker 8: of course he seems not to care so much the process,
Speaker 8: but he wants what he wants in these bills, and
Speaker 8: that includes, you know, no tax on tips, no tax
Speaker 8: on social Security, all of those things that he wants
Speaker 8: to include in there. He seems to say that if
Speaker 8: he can get all those, he doesn't quite care how
Speaker 8: this moves forward. So it may be up to Donald
Speaker 8: Trump in the end.
Speaker 2: Well, and add to that list that Gene began lester
Speaker 2: obviously the salt cap which we mentioned, but apparently also
Speaker 2: ending the carried interest tax break, ending tax breaks for
Speaker 2: billionaire owners of sports teams. Interesting to introduce that idea
Speaker 2: as he gets ready to have travel to New Orleans
Speaker 2: for the super Bowl this weekend. But when we consider
Speaker 2: all of these disparate ideas, is it likely that he
Speaker 2: actually is going to get all of it, whether it's
Speaker 2: one piece of legislation or two.
Speaker 7: No, but these are all great negotiating tools and items.
Speaker 7: I think what the President really cares about is this
Speaker 7: no taxes on tips idea, which has proven to be
Speaker 7: enormously popular. I recall President Trump's opponent in the last
Speaker 7: campaign immediately adopting the same issue as a great idea.
Speaker 7: So I think this a lot of what we're seeing
Speaker 7: is still kind of shaping the negotiation to come. We've
Speaker 7: got a long way to go before anything gets passed.
Speaker 2: I think, well, we don't have that much longer to
Speaker 2: go though, before some government funding bills or continuing resolution
Speaker 2: needs to get passed, because yes, we still have to
Speaker 2: deal with that. By mid March, and we got some
Speaker 2: conflicting messaging today Genie from the Speaker of the House
Speaker 2: and others, with Mike Johnson warning talks over the immediate
Speaker 2: spending had stalled on government funding. The House Minority Leader
Speaker 2: Haking Jeffries saying that Johnson's comment was just projection since
Speaker 2: Republicans hold all the power. But does this portend over
Speaker 2: the coming weeks Democrats, it's not being willing to play
Speaker 2: ball on these must pass measures as they have been
Speaker 2: for the last several years.
Speaker 8: I think that's exactly what we're hearing. You listen to
Speaker 8: Democrats on the ground, they are incredibly frustrated given the
Speaker 8: first two to three weeks of Donald Trump's administration and
Speaker 8: the way he is plowed ahead with They feel little
Speaker 8: respect for the separation of powers and the right of
Speaker 8: Congress to control the purse and many other things. They
Speaker 8: feel that it is the height of insanity for their
Speaker 8: elected officials in Congress to agree to anything with Republicans
Speaker 8: at this point. So there is a big debate on
Speaker 8: the Democratic side. Do we go ahead sort of agreeing, say,
Speaker 8: with his nominations, and we saw yesterday with vote the
Speaker 8: answer is no. And so I think it's it's going
Speaker 8: to become excuse me, Kaylee, It's right, it's going to
Speaker 8: become increasingly difficult for them in the face of their
Speaker 8: own base if you will, to negotiate with Republicans on
Speaker 8: many of these things unless they get very big assurances
Speaker 8: on things like say USAID and so many other things
Speaker 8: that are critical to Trump. So you know, the reality
Speaker 8: is Republicans own it, and Democrats are saying, you want
Speaker 8: to plow ahead like this, you have to bring your
Speaker 8: own people along, and of course on things like the
Speaker 8: debt ceiling, that is a non starter for conservative Republicans.
Speaker 8: So it is a going to be a real battle
Speaker 8: in the Congress.
Speaker 2: So with all that said, Lester, what odds do you
Speaker 2: put on a mid March government shutdown.
Speaker 7: I still think it's low. I think I know it
Speaker 7: seems like it's imminent. I think it's still four or
Speaker 7: five weeks away, plenty of time for Republicans to sort
Speaker 7: out these trivial differences.
Speaker 2: Trivial, Okay, Well, and your point is well taken. Four
Speaker 2: to five weeks can be a long time, as it's
Speaker 2: been less than three weeks since Donald Trump took office,
Speaker 2: and I think we all know how long these last
Speaker 2: several weeks have felt this week included, just given the
Speaker 2: pace of news that we've been receiving. But Lester, are
Speaker 2: some of the things that Genie was alluding to here
Speaker 2: that Democrats may be looking for, For example, assurances on Usaid,
Speaker 2: which the President was talking about today as something that
Speaker 2: needs to be closed down, the ongoing efforts of Elon
Speaker 2: Musk in Doge, which we've obviously discussed at length at
Speaker 2: this point. Are any of those things likely to change
Speaker 2: in the immunate future given the political reality of Republican
Speaker 2: control of Washington.
Speaker 7: Well, my sense of the of the aid issue in
Speaker 7: particular is that the kind of the destruction part of this,
Speaker 7: of this this effort is coming to a close, and
Speaker 7: the rebuilding part is kind of imminent. So I think,
Speaker 7: you know, the administration still has a certain amount of
Speaker 7: money from Congress that it's obliged by law to spend
Speaker 7: on foreign assistance that is going to happen in some form,
Speaker 7: and it looks like they're starting to put to put
Speaker 7: together the pieces to actually spend that money. So I
Speaker 7: think we'll know a lot more about this Usaid issue
Speaker 7: in a week or two and what and how the
Speaker 7: Trump administration actually plans to be positive on these issues
Speaker 7: in some way instead of just destroying everything. So I think,
Speaker 7: I think this thing's about to take a turn in
Speaker 7: a different way, and that and what that looks like
Speaker 7: and what the priorities are and how many people actually
Speaker 7: end up being fired, and that kind of thing is
Speaker 7: to is going to be the thing that's discussed, not
Speaker 7: so much what's happening today.
Speaker 2: Genie. Do you see this as a phoenix will rise
Speaker 2: from the ashes kind of scenario.
Speaker 8: No, you know, I really don't. And I'm listening to
Speaker 8: Lester and he's saying, they have time, they have a
Speaker 8: little bit of time to resolve their differences. But let's
Speaker 8: just think back to December. There was no resolution of
Speaker 8: those differences. That's why they pushed this until March. And
Speaker 8: so I'm not quite sure what is changed. I mean,
Speaker 8: you still have Republicans in the House who say, like
Speaker 8: Chip Roy, there is nothing that is going to change
Speaker 8: my mind. I'm lifting the debt ceiling. You have to
Speaker 8: have pay for us. You have a president who wants
Speaker 8: tremendous cuts. You know, the list just goes on and on. So,
Speaker 8: you know, sure, if they can resolve these differences, with
Speaker 8: you know, sticks or carrots. In some way, they may
Speaker 8: get to a resolution, but I'm hard pressed to imagine
Speaker 8: how they do it. You know, the reality has been
Speaker 8: it is Democrats who have gotten Republicans across the line
Speaker 8: in the last few years and kept the government open.
Speaker 8: If Republicans have to do it on their own, which
Speaker 8: is seeming likely at this point, how do they thread
Speaker 8: that needle? When do the chip Roys of the world
Speaker 8: come along? And what do they get in return for that?
Speaker 2: All right, Geenie Shanzeno and Lester Munson are a political
Speaker 2: panel on this Friday. Thank you both so much for
Speaker 2: joining me. And I just want to point out, as
Speaker 2: Genie brings us back to December. December fourteenth was actually
Speaker 2: the Army Navy football game in which President Trump or
Speaker 2: he was then president elect, and Republican leadership in Congress
Speaker 2: all went to the Army Navy football game. They were
Speaker 2: supposed to hash out reconciliation during that game. Now Here
Speaker 2: we are on the eve of the Super Bowl, with
Speaker 2: both the Speaker of the House and President Trump's slated
Speaker 2: to attend. Still don't know what that reconciliation path forward
Speaker 2: will look like, but maybe they'll figure it out in
Speaker 2: New Orleans as they watch the Chiefs and Eagles.
Speaker 8: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
Speaker 8: sure to subscribe if you haven't already an Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 8: or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
Speaker 8: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern
Speaker 8: at Bloomberg dot com.