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, Cockley 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: Joe and I always have our eyes on what's happening
Speaker 2: on Capitol Hill in the way in which a legislative
Speaker 2: path forward for Congress, together with the Trump administration, is
Speaker 2: shaping up. It was actually at this hour yesterday that
Speaker 2: we were joined by Republican Senator Bill Haggerty of Tennessee,
Speaker 2: and Joe pressed him on whether or not it was
Speaker 2: the Senate or the House that was actually going to
Speaker 2: take those first baby steps. This was his answer.
Speaker 3: We know the American public expects us to address the
Speaker 3: tax package, and where we're going to do that. We
Speaker 3: have a number of other issues that we're trying to
Speaker 3: address at the same time. How we do it from
Speaker 3: a process standpoint, I'm much less concerned about. I think
Speaker 3: the concern is that we get it done quickly, that
Speaker 3: we get it done efficiently, and I'm optimistic that we
Speaker 3: will get it done despite the procedural back and forth
Speaker 3: between the House and the Senate. We're going to get
Speaker 3: it done, and we're very focused on it.
Speaker 4: We bring in a member of the Republican Conference in
Speaker 4: the House now, Congressman Frank Lucas, Oklahoma's third district.
Speaker 5: It's great to have you with us.
Speaker 4: Congressman, thanks for joining here on Bloomberg TV and radio.
Speaker 4: Our viewers and listeners should know that you have represented
Speaker 4: that district since two thousand and three, and you've been
Speaker 4: through a couple of funding battles here and I realized
Speaker 4: the concept of reconciliation is nothing new.
Speaker 5: So give us your voice of experience on this.
Speaker 4: The idea of marking up a reconciliation bill this week
Speaker 4: in the House appears to be out the window.
Speaker 5: How is this all going to work? Is it one
Speaker 5: bill or two?
Speaker 6: Well, first of all, I actually go back to nineteen
Speaker 6: ninety four. I was here for the last seven months
Speaker 6: of the old Democratic forty year majority. I was a
Speaker 6: part of the revolution of nineteen ninety four. I think
Speaker 6: the question becomes, do you want to base hit or
Speaker 6: you want a home run? The issues that are being
Speaker 6: talked about, my brethren and the other box would be
Speaker 6: basically be a base hit.
Speaker 1: It's the tax.
Speaker 6: Policy questions that really matter for the long term economy.
Speaker 6: If we run one belt, we get it all done,
Speaker 6: that's a home run. But I'm practical enough to know
Speaker 6: whatever the leadership decides, I'll be a part of because
Speaker 6: I want to make sure we don't let a massive
Speaker 6: tax increase take place immediately.
Speaker 2: Well, Congressman, I guess the question is whether this is
Speaker 2: really up to leadership or if this is more about
Speaker 2: what is going to take to appease the Freedom Caucus.
Speaker 6: Well, we have a two seat majority in the United
Speaker 6: States House of Representatives. In the Republican Conference. Soon we'll
Speaker 6: have a one seat majority. That's about as thinly as
Speaker 6: you can slice. It makes the sentence three seat majority
Speaker 6: look like a huge majority. And we have factions within
Speaker 6: our conference who have various agenda items. But the bottom
Speaker 6: line is this. If we don't extend the Trump Tracks
Speaker 6: relief from twenty seventeen, if we don't do the border issues,
Speaker 6: if we don't address the whole package, we're going to
Speaker 6: pay a price for it on down the road. I
Speaker 6: know the Senate's a different place. I respect him greatly,
Speaker 6: but I know in the House we need to do it.
Speaker 6: We need to do it one time and be done
Speaker 6: with it because of the environment we're in over here.
Speaker 4: We've got a funding deadline six weeks away. Congressman, are
Speaker 4: we going to be in a world a month from
Speaker 4: now where we're talking about another continuing resolution to kick
Speaker 4: the cans?
Speaker 5: So all the rest of this can be written. I
Speaker 5: hope not.
Speaker 6: I wanted to finish funding out the government to last
Speaker 6: December and not go through this gyration again. But funding
Speaker 6: the government is much like passing the budget resolution, much
Speaker 6: like dealing with budget reconciliation. We have a force that
Speaker 6: is available to us that we haven't had in a
Speaker 6: long time. It's called President Donald Trump. And when he
Speaker 6: engages on any or all three of these issues, I
Speaker 6: have to believe that my naysayer friends, and there's one
Speaker 6: or two of them in the conference, we'll see the
Speaker 6: light and we'll move forward together. Because if we fail,
Speaker 6: it makes it more difficult for the president, and President
Speaker 6: doesn't accept failure. We all know that.
Speaker 7: Well.
Speaker 2: I do wonder to what extent this is really just
Speaker 2: about President Trump and about you and your colleagues in
Speaker 2: Congress and the executive and legislative branches working together. If
Speaker 2: this ultimately is about budgeting and spending in the US government,
Speaker 2: what role is Elon Musk playing in these conversations, considering
Speaker 2: how quickly he has been trying to move at DOGE.
Speaker 6: I think all the factors are moving together, and DOZE
Speaker 6: is a classic example of trying, in the spirit of
Speaker 6: Trump forty seven, to make a dramatic difference. Anyone involved
Speaker 6: in business knows that ever so often or ever so
Speaker 6: many years, no matter the size of the corporation of
Speaker 6: the private enterprise, you bring in the efficiency experts, you
Speaker 6: look at everything, you sort out all the cobwebs, you
Speaker 6: make adjustments to keep the enterprise moving forward. I see
Speaker 6: that as what DOZE is all about.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 6: There's been lots of discussion about what DOGE has access to,
Speaker 6: and I was in a conversation with a number of
Speaker 6: other members with the Secretary of the Treasury on Monday evening,
Speaker 6: and it was made quite clear to us that that
Speaker 6: those people have the ability to view lots of things,
Speaker 6: they don't control those things.
Speaker 4: So as long as it's a read only status, you're
Speaker 4: comfortable with Elon Musk not having been confirmed by the Senate,
Speaker 4: not being an actual government employee, having access to that information.
Speaker 5: Even if it does not involve stopping payments.
Speaker 6: I'll just say that Elon has the confidence of the President.
Speaker 6: The president clearly on election, they had the confidence of America.
Speaker 6: And I believe that my Republican colleagues in the House
Speaker 6: and the Senate need to be very respectful of that situation.
Speaker 6: Will we agree with everything he does? Will everything he proposes,
Speaker 6: I should say, actually become law. No, this is the
Speaker 6: legislative process. But he's going to lay out before us.
Speaker 6: I believe a set of issues and circumstances that need
Speaker 6: to be addressed. Again, just like any good consultant brought
Speaker 6: in in a business enterprise to make sure it's running efficient.
Speaker 8: Well.
Speaker 2: And as you say, Elon Musk has the confidence of
Speaker 2: the president. Should he also have the confidence of the
Speaker 2: people in Oklahoma's third District who may be wondering about
Speaker 2: Elon Musk and those close to him seeing their personal,
Speaker 2: sensitive financial data and information.
Speaker 6: Well, the people in the third District of Oklahoma overwhelmingly,
Speaker 6: not unanimously, because that's not the way this country works.
Speaker 6: The people in Oklahoma have tremendous confidence in President Trump.
Speaker 6: And again we'll see how this process evolves. As long
Speaker 6: as it's viewing, as long as it's making recommendations, as
Speaker 6: long as it's not turning the switches on and off.
Speaker 6: How can you argue with trying to make things work better? Now,
Speaker 6: along that lines, I'm a part of a task force
Speaker 6: dealing with the federal reserve system and Trad's reason liquipment
Speaker 6: the issues to try and make sure those issues work
Speaker 6: more efficiently.
Speaker 4: Okay, if it involves closing a federal agency, however, and
Speaker 4: that could be us AID or the Department of Education,
Speaker 4: where it's told is the next target, Congressman, does the
Speaker 4: House of Representatives? Does the legislature need to have the
Speaker 4: final say on that?
Speaker 6: I'd say, ultimately we will have the final sale on
Speaker 6: whatever happens, because all of the actions so far have
Speaker 6: been challenged very aggressively in court. All the executive orders,
Speaker 6: that's regular process, that's regular order. We'll work our way
Speaker 6: through that. Ultimately, good recommendations. Even if the courts stop
Speaker 6: the executive orders, we'll still have the ability to legislatively
Speaker 6: address that. Now we have a simple majority one seat
Speaker 6: in a few days, maybe back to three seats or
Speaker 6: four seats by the summer. The Senate still has that
Speaker 6: sixty book culture rule to deal with again. That's why
Speaker 6: we need a budget resolution and reconciliation and not just one,
Speaker 6: but maybe three reconciliation bills in this calendar year to
Speaker 6: move legislation. This is not a checker game we're a
Speaker 6: part of. This is a chess gain and we have
Speaker 6: to be prepared to move the pieces carefully to accomplish
Speaker 6: what needs to be done.
Speaker 2: Three bills would certainly be something to behold. Congressman, you
Speaker 2: mentioned that you are leading this new task Force on
Speaker 2: Monetary Policy and Treasury market Resilience. Have you had a
Speaker 2: chance to speak with FED Chair J. Poweller? Will that
Speaker 2: wait until he testifies before the Financial Services Committee next week?
Speaker 6: Well, I'm having ongoing conversations a lot of people on
Speaker 6: a regular basis, and we are working with Chairman Hill,
Speaker 6: who chose to create this, and I appreciate the opportunity
Speaker 6: to lead it and the members who've been named to
Speaker 6: the committee. As we work through all of this, bear
Speaker 6: in mind it's not just a review of monetary policy
Speaker 6: and the Federal reserve system. We're not going to argue
Speaker 6: about interest rate setting. It's the policies and the laws
Speaker 6: since nineteen thirteen that make this process what it is.
Speaker 6: But we're also looking at Treasury's ability to keep the debt,
Speaker 6: the bonds, the bills, the notes moving. And in the
Speaker 6: last what twenty thirty years, we have half as many
Speaker 6: market makers as we used to have, but yet we're
Speaker 6: moving eight times as much paper. One bad treasury sale
Speaker 6: sets off repercussions that my folks back home don't even
Speaker 6: have a clue who what the net result will be.
Speaker 6: That's what we're looking at, making sure does not happen.
Speaker 6: A fluid, liquid, rational market and government securities.
Speaker 2: Well, we look forward to hearing more about how that
Speaker 2: work develops. Republican Congressman Frank Lucas of Oklahoma joining us
Speaker 2: live from Capitol Hill. Thank you so much. And I
Speaker 2: believe kind of throwing out a new number in the
Speaker 2: reconciliation bills, not just one or two three bills.
Speaker 5: We'll be here for it if that happens.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and our political panel will be as well, our
Speaker 2: signature one at that Rick Davis stone Court, Capital partner
Speaker 2: in Jeanie Shanzino, Senior Democracy Fellow at the Center for
Speaker 2: the Study of the Presidency and Congress. Rick is we're
Speaker 2: all here playing the one to two games. Should we
Speaker 2: be throwing new numbers into this equation?
Speaker 9: Yeah, this was a bit of an interesting interview there, guys.
Speaker 9: You know, first Republican in the House that I've heard
Speaker 9: who chairs a committee that we should pay attention to,
Speaker 9: saying that he's probably going to see multiple reconciliation bills.
Speaker 9: I know that committee chair on ways of me wants
Speaker 9: one big beautiful bill, and the Speaker wants one big
Speaker 9: beautiful bill. So it'll be interesting to see if anybody
Speaker 9: in the leadership here's this interview and calls up Frank
Speaker 9: and says, hey, what in the world are you talking
Speaker 9: about three reconciliation bills. Look, I think that the House
Speaker 9: Republicans are on their heels. They he aptly described the
Speaker 9: fact that the margins are so thin they can only
Speaker 9: govern with one hundred percent of their majority towing the line,
Speaker 9: and they don't have it.
Speaker 5: I mean, they're not even close.
Speaker 9: They're you know, many, many dozen votes probably short of
Speaker 9: being able to do one big beautiful bill. So my
Speaker 9: guess is they'll struggle with that continuing through the balance
Speaker 9: of this week. The Senate will continue to push their
Speaker 9: bill through. They've got a little more comfort, as Frank mentioned,
Speaker 9: and you're going to see the Senate sort of take
Speaker 9: over the agenda here and start pushing their two bill
Speaker 9: strategy that is highly likely to succeed, certainly in the Senate.
Speaker 4: What we heard from Congress and Smith, let's hear from
Speaker 4: the Chairman was on Bloomberg's surveillance this morning. You want
Speaker 4: the view of the House, at least we thought it
Speaker 4: was here you go.
Speaker 10: The House is focused on one big, beautiful bill. It's
Speaker 10: the Senate that continues to say that they're going to
Speaker 10: do two. But I would just remind all of my
Speaker 10: colleagues look at history. It has been thirty eight years
Speaker 10: since two different reconciliation bills were signed into law in
Speaker 10: the same year. We have smaller majorities in the House
Speaker 10: of Representatives now than in the history of Congress. Why
Speaker 10: do we think we can defy those odds is beyond me.
Speaker 4: Well so, Genie, based on what we just heard from
Speaker 4: Frank Lucas and what we have heard from John Thune
Speaker 4: and those in the Senate, is the call coming from
Speaker 4: inside the House or not?
Speaker 11: Please tell me that some great Bloomberg reporter is on
Speaker 11: the hill right now replaying your interview with Lucas. For Smith,
Speaker 11: and we can get his reaction of his head blowing
Speaker 11: off when he it's worse than two now, in fact,
Speaker 11: it may be three. At this point. I happen to
Speaker 11: think he is right when you look at the history here,
Speaker 11: which is all we can go on in these predictions
Speaker 11: with a majority this or a margin this small in
Speaker 11: the House, the idea that they could do this more
Speaker 11: than once, you know, really defies history. The idea that
Speaker 11: they could do it twice maybe, but three times it's
Speaker 11: gonna be really, really tough.
Speaker 5: And they know this.
Speaker 11: I mean, this is what Mike Johnson signed up for.
Speaker 11: He still has the hardest job on the hill trying
Speaker 11: to negotiate this forward. But the problem is, as we
Speaker 11: look at these numbers, they are still very very far
Speaker 11: apart when you look at what the conservatives are saying,
Speaker 11: you know, sometimes four to five trillion versus what we're
Speaker 11: hearing from the moderates, which is a much more moderate
Speaker 11: as you'd expect, you know, five hundred billion to a trillion.
Speaker 11: So can they do this, yeah, but it is going
Speaker 11: to take a lot of work. And the problem is,
Speaker 11: as usual in the House and the Congress as a whole,
Speaker 11: the calendar and really the clock doesn't work for them while.
Speaker 2: Here well, and this is just on reconciliation, let alone
Speaker 2: keeping the government funded beyond mid March or raising the
Speaker 2: debt ceiling, which is going to be required in the
Speaker 2: next few months here, Genie, Historically you would probably see
Speaker 2: bipartisanship and Democrats playing ball on those things. Is that
Speaker 2: going to happen this time around.
Speaker 11: It's such a good question, Kayllie. I was just listening
Speaker 11: to Kristin Gillibrand talk to some of her constituents, and
Speaker 11: I have to say, now, you know, this is not
Speaker 11: a broad swath, but just you know, people talking to her,
Speaker 11: they are very critical the base of the Democratic Party
Speaker 11: for Democrats going with the White House even on some
Speaker 11: of these nominations. So when you talk about supporting them
Speaker 11: as they try to keep the government open, I think
Speaker 11: Democrats are going to have a very tough time doing that,
Speaker 11: given that the President is going whole full hog in
Speaker 11: shutting down programs they care about, and what he has
Speaker 11: done in the last two weeks. So I think the
Speaker 11: pressure is going to be on Democrats not to go along.
Speaker 11: They're going to say, Republicans, you're in the majority, you
Speaker 11: do this on your own.
Speaker 2: You own it.
Speaker 11: And then of course the numbers don't work for Republicans.
Speaker 11: They're going to have to negotiate and they're going to
Speaker 11: have to give Democrats some of what they want. But
Speaker 11: you know, you're hard to press to see how that
Speaker 11: can happen at this point.
Speaker 4: So, Rick, does all that make a shutdown in March
Speaker 4: more likely?
Speaker 5: Hard to tell.
Speaker 9: I mean, I think it's a little bit premature. I
Speaker 9: think there will be a Senate bill, and I think
Speaker 9: that it'll be interesting to see whether or not Republicans
Speaker 9: can can hold their cauc escape together.
Speaker 5: To do it.
Speaker 9: It may require House Democrats to go along, and what
Speaker 9: the what are the givebacks for that? And we've certainly
Speaker 9: seen bipartisan reconciliation bills in the past, and so the
Speaker 9: question is is one in the mix here? But look,
Speaker 9: I mean, you know, sure, Chairman Smith's right, I mean, like,
Speaker 9: we rarely do two reconciliation bills, but we used to
Speaker 9: rarely do reconciliation bills. So like, where's the regular order
Speaker 9: that the House leadership promised us as part of their
Speaker 9: slate to get elected in leadership? How many of the
Speaker 9: appropriations bills are currently being worked on for next year.
Speaker 9: I mean, you know, it's just we're going to extend
Speaker 9: the do nothing Congress from last cycle to this cycle.
Speaker 9: Trouble is, they're party out in power running for reelection
Speaker 9: in a year, and if they don't get their act together,
Speaker 9: they better plan on having other alternative employment.
Speaker 4: Then the least dephonic makes it one. Right, they'll be
Speaker 4: a majority of one. Rick Davis and Genie Shanzo our
Speaker 4: signature panel back together against Today, guys.
Speaker 5: Thank you so much.
Speaker 4: As always, Rick's partner at Stone Court Capital or Republican strategist,
Speaker 4: and of course Genie is our democratic analyst. S Bloomberg,
Speaker 4: politics contributor, political science professor at Iona University. Project twenty
Speaker 4: twenty five came up a couple of times over the
Speaker 4: past twenty four hours here with regard to what the
Speaker 4: Doge was doing, whether this alliance or not.
Speaker 5: We're going to talk ahead with one of the authors.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the president of the Heritage Foundation is on his
Speaker 2: way into the studio, Kevin Roberts. We'll be here with
Speaker 2: us next on balance of power. Have a lot of
Speaker 2: questions for him now that we're a little over two
Speaker 2: weeks into this administration. And that's straight ahead right here.
Speaker 2: On Bloomberg TV and radio.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcasts. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and five pm. E's durn
Speaker 1: on Apple.
Speaker 8: Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Keeping in mind, it has only been sixteen days since
Speaker 2: Donald Trump was inaugurated as the forty seventh President of
Speaker 2: the United States, and very quickly, through executive orders and
Speaker 2: other means, has gotten to work on things he promised
Speaker 2: on the campaign trail, that's sure, and some of that
Speaker 2: not just executed by the President but by those close
Speaker 2: to him, including an unelected unconfirmed by the Senate, Elon
Speaker 2: Musk in the Department of Government Officials.
Speaker 5: What are they calling it?
Speaker 4: A special government employee, Yes, which gives you a certain
Speaker 4: period of time to do your thing. But he has not, been,
Speaker 4: of course confirmed by the Senate, which is why we've
Speaker 4: been asking some folks if maybe that should change, considering
Speaker 4: the level of access that he has. We've also heard
Speaker 4: the Project twenty twenty five come up a number of times.
Speaker 4: The thought that it was a roadmap for what we
Speaker 4: are seeing now, because this was a team that was
Speaker 4: ready to talk about flooding the zone.
Speaker 5: Hundreds of eos.
Speaker 4: He's going to sign another one later today, not to
Speaker 4: mention some of the sort of proposals that we've heard
Speaker 4: the president float here. Which is why it's a great
Speaker 4: opportunity to spend time with Kevin Roberts. He is back
Speaker 4: with us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio, the president
Speaker 4: of the Heritage Foundation, one of the authors of that document,
Speaker 4: the Pride of Lafayette, Louisiana.
Speaker 5: It's great to see you. Welcome back.
Speaker 12: It's kind of you to say that, and kind of
Speaker 12: hell back.
Speaker 5: By all means.
Speaker 4: So I'm curious to hear a lot of from you today.
Speaker 4: Number One, how you're dealing with the fire hose, the
Speaker 4: shock in awe here, is this what you foresaw? And
Speaker 4: to the extent that you're kind of squinting your eyes
Speaker 4: looking at the campaign and looking at the new administration.
Speaker 4: The document that you crafted has quite a bit in
Speaker 4: common with what we have seen over the past couple
Speaker 4: of weeks, hasn't it.
Speaker 12: I look at this as a historian. I was educated
Speaker 12: as an early American historian, and I'm hard pressed to
Speaker 12: think of another American president who has started with this pace.
Speaker 12: It really is from a conservative policy point of view,
Speaker 12: to your question, Joe Shock and Awe. To be clear,
Speaker 12: President Trump and Vice President Vance deserve one hundred percent
Speaker 12: of the credit. It is those two men and the
Speaker 12: great men and women they've assembled, I think what will
Speaker 12: be the greatest cabinet in modern American history, who deserve
Speaker 12: all that credit. I think the conservative movement, to your question,
Speaker 12: understood that we needed to be much better prepared in
Speaker 12: serving this president than we were the last time. And
Speaker 12: to the extent that any of us, you know, whether
Speaker 12: it's us at Heritage or a million other conservatives, had
Speaker 12: some tiny role in suggesting a menu of options. That's fine,
Speaker 12: We've done that at Heritage for forty five years. We'll
Speaker 12: do it for the next one hundred and forty five.
Speaker 12: But Trump advances your credit for this moment.
Speaker 2: Has anything, though, that we've seen take place in the
Speaker 2: last two weeks and change not aligned with that point
Speaker 2: of view, with the American leadership picture that was outlined
Speaker 2: in those nine hundred something pages.
Speaker 12: The real thrust of the work that we do at Heritage,
Speaker 12: as you know is to articulate an aspirational vision for
Speaker 12: revitalizing self governance, restoring freedom to American people. As President
Speaker 12: Trump said in his inaugural a revolution of common sense.
Speaker 12: And there is no exception to the fact that everything
Speaker 12: that he has done up to this point is going
Speaker 12: to do all of those things. Heritage stands ready, not
Speaker 12: just to help with these executive actions from the outside, obviously,
Speaker 12: but very importantly considering another aspect of our work, and
Speaker 12: as you've been covering in your show, making sure that
Speaker 12: our legislative leaders pass the necessary ten legislation to amplify
Speaker 12: the successful executive orders that have happened up to this well.
Speaker 4: Connecting the dots there is going to be an interesting challenge,
Speaker 4: and I'd love to hear more from you on that,
Speaker 4: but it sounds like you're happy with what we're seeing
Speaker 4: from Elon Musk, this individual who has been thrown in
Speaker 4: the middle of this whole thing. A lot of people
Speaker 4: in the first Trump administration and now the second said
Speaker 4: they voted for Donald Trump because they wanted somebody.
Speaker 5: To come to Washington to break it.
Speaker 4: I don't know if that kind of creative destruction or
Speaker 4: whatever you call that sounds like the right answer to you.
Speaker 4: What is Elon Musk is the richest man in the world,
Speaker 4: the got to do it.
Speaker 12: Creative destruction is precisely what Washington needed, and we're celebrating
Speaker 12: at Heritage the first phases of the unearthing of the
Speaker 12: grift and corruption that has happened in this city. That
Speaker 12: of course is bipartisan, but a bipartisan problem, but also
Speaker 12: is something that for all of us who want transparency,
Speaker 12: regardless of our politics, it's a good thing that happens.
Speaker 12: And I think that in addition to the creativity that
Speaker 12: Donald Trump himself brings to the office, the innovation the
Speaker 12: Vice President brings to the office, that having someone with
Speaker 12: the success of Elon Musk to be a partner in
Speaker 12: this is really good. And I find it sort of
Speaker 12: comical not suggesting that you were saying this, Joe, that
Speaker 12: all of the chatterers say from House and Senate Democrats
Speaker 12: about Elon being unelected, never was observed about George Soros
Speaker 12: or Alex Soros. And they, of course, with their creative destruction,
Speaker 12: have actually destroyed American institutions. The Trump Vance revolution that's
Speaker 12: two weeks in is actually restoring.
Speaker 2: Those except that there is congressional constitutional roles and things
Speaker 2: like appropriations that it does seem Elon Musk might be
Speaker 2: stepping on in his blanket, say, push to unauthorize USAID,
Speaker 2: get rid of the agency, or move the agency, which
Speaker 2: is something that usually would take a congressional act. Do
Speaker 2: you not see lapses with what is in keeping with
Speaker 2: the US Constitution and what has happened here?
Speaker 12: No, I don't see lapses. In fact, I see the opposite.
Speaker 12: I see that what Musk and Trump and Vance are
Speaker 12: doing is correcting what have been lapses by the radical left.
Speaker 12: Actually worse than lapses, I dare say, intentional desires to
Speaker 12: totally ignore the Constitution by creating a fourth branch of government,
Speaker 12: the administrative state, that sees as itself more important than
Speaker 12: any president of the United States. And all of this
Speaker 12: is a corrective to that. But to the heart of
Speaker 12: your question, there also has to be a legislative season,
Speaker 12: and that legislative season is going to be much more
Speaker 12: successful if the House incented, as we heard from on
Speaker 12: your show, from one important figure here, Jason Smith, gets
Speaker 12: going on the substance at Heritage. We're agnostic about the
Speaker 12: number of bills it takes to get this done. But
Speaker 12: the sooner they can deliver on closing the southern border,
Speaker 12: on ending the ridiculous over regulation of the American economy,
Speaker 12: on extending the Trump tax cuts, I think the more
Speaker 12: that we will see these dots to being connected.
Speaker 4: How about cutting spending in that reconciliation plan. We had
Speaker 4: heard a Freedom caucuss that wants two to three trillion
Speaker 4: dollars to emerge out of this bill. Steve Scalize came
Speaker 4: out of a meeting last night saying it's one trillion.
Speaker 4: Are you about to be disappointed on this number? With
Speaker 4: a Republican majority of one in the House.
Speaker 12: I think that's a very difficult mathematic problem. Yeah, in
Speaker 12: two ways, as you know, not just the budget itself,
Speaker 12: but also the math in the House, and Speaker Johnson
Speaker 12: and Leader Scalies have their work cut out for them.
Speaker 12: Having said that, the most important math problem that the
Speaker 12: American people have is that as the government continues to
Speaker 12: spend more money than it possesses under both Republican and
Speaker 12: Democrat administrations, the American people, with their own dollars, are
Speaker 12: able to afford less and less. That's the number that
Speaker 12: that heritage and all of us are focused on. There
Speaker 12: we understand that it might take a couple of bites
Speaker 12: at the apple in order to get this done. The
Speaker 12: first bite at the apple needs to be the most
Speaker 12: aggressive so that we can actually change that overspending trajectory.
Speaker 2: Russ vote, who, of course, you know quite well. Tomorrow
Speaker 2: night is expected to be confirmed by the US Senate
Speaker 2: to be the new OMB director. And given what already
Speaker 2: has taken place at the OMB in the last week
Speaker 2: and change the lawsuits that have followed from confusing messaging
Speaker 2: around of funding freeze, are you worried that he's inheriting
Speaker 2: a bit of a problem right when he steps into
Speaker 2: the job, around that ongoing lawsuit, around the needing to
Speaker 2: navigate with Elon Musk and the Doge as well. What
Speaker 2: is he walking into?
Speaker 12: Great question? I know russ vote very well. He's one
Speaker 12: of the great statesmen of our age. And I've never
Speaker 12: seen any problem, any dilemma that Russ is not up
Speaker 12: to the task. For having said that, I think what
Speaker 12: he's walking into is a tremendous opportunity to correct the
Speaker 12: over regulation, the overspending, particularly of the last four years,
Speaker 12: but also of the last several administrations. And not only
Speaker 12: is Russ up to that task. But I think, as
Speaker 12: I would argue, members of both political parties in Congress
Speaker 12: see Russ and his team in action, they will see
Speaker 12: that all they're doing is delivering on the will of
Speaker 12: the people with a sophistication and intellect that probably has
Speaker 12: not been in that office until the last time Russ
Speaker 12: was omb.
Speaker 4: Doronter has he been talking with Elon Musk? I wouldn't
Speaker 4: want to have to fit in the same room as
Speaker 4: Elon Musk. We've already seen an executive order stopping federal
Speaker 4: grant's Federal Aid. People at USAID have been put on leave.
Speaker 4: If you're running omb, don't you need to have some
Speaker 4: say in this?
Speaker 12: I assume that they're talking about that. There's no doubt
Speaker 12: in my mind that Russ will have say in that.
Speaker 12: That's all the more reason that he be confirmed.
Speaker 5: As quickly as possible.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you about something else that took
Speaker 2: place at the White House yesterday, which was a meeting
Speaker 2: between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In
Speaker 2: a joint news conference that followed, in which the President
Speaker 2: suggested that the US take over Gaza, that the Palestinians
Speaker 2: currently there be moved and essentially the US and US
Speaker 2: troops help lead what would be a redevelopment project. And
Speaker 2: I do wonder what your view is on US involvement
Speaker 2: in the Middle East in that kind of way. When
Speaker 2: we heard the President on the campaign trail repeatedly saying
Speaker 2: he doesn't want to see forever wars.
Speaker 12: Contrasts what Trump said yesterday and what have been related
Speaker 12: actions by his administration with the utter incompetence and fecklessness
Speaker 12: of the previous administration. I say that not as a partisan,
Speaker 12: which I'm not, but as a historian of American politics,
Speaker 12: and the contrast could not be more beneficial for free
Speaker 12: people on the planet, all free people on the planet,
Speaker 12: Palestinians included, absolutely. And I think what we were seeing
Speaker 12: from Trump with this comment yesterday about Gaza is the
Speaker 12: reinsertion of the American presidency and of America generally as
Speaker 12: having moral clarity in that region and around the world.
Speaker 12: We trust fully the details that President Trump will come
Speaker 12: up with regarding what we do with the Gaza strip
Speaker 12: with the Middle East generally, And I think over time
Speaker 12: passing days, passing weeks, as more and more people across
Speaker 12: the world enjoy peace because of Trump's moral clarity. We
Speaker 12: will understand that that kind of courage is precisely what's
Speaker 12: been lacking over the last four years.
Speaker 5: We only have about a minute left. Kevin.
Speaker 4: You must shudder at the thought of what it would cost, however,
Speaker 4: for the US to take over the Gaza strip, clean
Speaker 4: it out, rebuild the entire thing. If we're at a
Speaker 4: moment now where we're trying to enter a period of austerity,
Speaker 4: how do you have both?
Speaker 12: Yeah, I shudder at the two hundred and fifty billion
Speaker 12: dollars that we've spent on Ukraine for a ward that
Speaker 12: the Ukrainians could never win.
Speaker 5: Well, we were being lied.
Speaker 12: To by the deep state in Washington, d c. Which
Speaker 12: is probably financially.
Speaker 5: Confroming less to go around now, though, doesn't.
Speaker 12: That that's exactly right? And that's why I say, if
Speaker 12: you think about comments that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz
Speaker 12: said today, they're going to get the details on that. Right.
Speaker 12: If you look at Trump's track record regarding foreign policy
Speaker 12: and America's leadership in the world, it is robust, but
Speaker 12: it's also not expensive.
Speaker 4: It's great to have you with us, Kevin Roberts, Heritage
Speaker 4: Foundation President, with us back at the table, here on
Speaker 4: Bloomberg TV and Radio. Don't be a stranger, come back again, Thanks, Kaylee.
Speaker 4: Fascinating conversation. As we wait to hear the latest from
Speaker 4: the White House on this, we're hearing pushback from world
Speaker 4: leaders on the idea of taking over Gaza, but also
Speaker 4: a White House that has yet to kind of detail
Speaker 4: the plan.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we'll see if we hear more from the President.
Speaker 2: He'll be exciting executive orders later this afternoon, so we
Speaker 2: may have an opportunity for further clarification and we'll get
Speaker 2: more into this next with Natasha Hall from CSIS Straight Ahead.
Speaker 2: Here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast ketchs
Speaker 1: live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern.
Speaker 8: On Alma Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 8: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
Speaker 8: us live on YouTube.
Speaker 4: On the Wednesday edition Here on Bloomberg TV and Radio,
Speaker 4: I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines as we try to
Speaker 4: answer some of the many questions that were raised following
Speaker 4: President Trump's news conference last evening when he suggested that
Speaker 4: the US didn't suggest he said the US will take
Speaker 4: over the Gaza Strip, raising questions about how some two
Speaker 4: point two million Palestinians would be moved from that area,
Speaker 4: whether they would need to be moved forcibly, what it
Speaker 4: would cost to clean up the massive destruction left by
Speaker 4: the war between Israel and Hamas the unexploded ordinance. Then,
Speaker 4: of course, the idea of developing what Donald Trump calls
Speaker 4: beautiful waterfront property.
Speaker 5: Here's how it went in the East Room last night.
Speaker 13: The US will take over the Gaza Strip, and we
Speaker 13: will do a job with it too. We'll own it
Speaker 13: and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded
Speaker 13: bombs and other weapons on the site. Level the site
Speaker 13: and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out,
Speaker 13: create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of
Speaker 13: jobs and housing for the people of the area. I
Speaker 13: don't want to be cute, I don't want to be
Speaker 13: a wise guy. But the Rivi era of the Middle East,
Speaker 13: this could be something that could be so bad, this
Speaker 13: could be so magnificent.
Speaker 2: The Rivie era of the Middle East. It's on that
Speaker 2: note that we turn to nato Asha Hall, senior fellow
Speaker 2: with the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic
Speaker 2: and International Studies here with US on balance of power Natasha.
Speaker 2: As Joe outlined, we have many questions around this proposition,
Speaker 2: but I guess to begin with where I assume this
Speaker 2: would need to start. Before the US can go in
Speaker 2: and redevelop Palestinians would need to be moved out of Gaza.
Speaker 2: Do you see the Arab countries that Donald Trump has suggested,
Speaker 2: Jordan and Egypt agreeing to take in those millions of people.
Speaker 7: Well, they've been unequivocal to date. They will not. This
Speaker 7: is a non starter for both Jordan and Egypt. And
Speaker 7: previous presidents understood that invested quite heavily in the national
Speaker 7: security of Jordan and Egypt. Forcibly displacing two million Palestinians
Speaker 7: into those territories would create an enormous amount of upheaval,
Speaker 7: not just in those countries, but in the region and
Speaker 7: possibly internationally as well. And Saudi Arabia has also sounded
Speaker 7: the alarm and said that they would not agree to
Speaker 7: such a plan.
Speaker 5: Isn't that enough to stop this?
Speaker 4: The King of Jordan will be at the White House
Speaker 4: next week stop this idea. Not that anything is in
Speaker 4: motion here. Knowing Natasha that there was a hope to
Speaker 4: rekindle talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia that wouldn't be
Speaker 4: possible at the same time as a development like this
Speaker 4: would it.
Speaker 7: Yes, I mean, given this announcement and the hindering of USAID,
Speaker 7: I think next week's meeting with King Abdullah will probably
Speaker 7: want to be one of the most awkward with a
Speaker 7: stalwart US ally and recent memory, I do suspect that
Speaker 7: President Trump is probably trying to push Jordan and Egypt,
Speaker 7: as well as Saudi Arabia into accepting far more than
Speaker 7: they thought they would be willing to when it came
Speaker 7: to the Palestinian issue. President Trump might also be throwing
Speaker 7: a bone to Netanyahu's far right coalition who have been
Speaker 7: against the ceasefire from day one, and hopefully this moves
Speaker 7: us into the second phase, but it still is an
Speaker 7: unprecedented statement that is I think significantly throws international peace
Speaker 7: and security in jeopardy.
Speaker 2: Well as we consider a second phase here Natasha, knowing
Speaker 2: that this initial forty two day ceasefire is going to
Speaker 2: be expiring just weeks from now, is phase two going
Speaker 2: to begin or are these negotiations that are essentially going
Speaker 2: to have to restart along with a resumption of hostilities.
Speaker 7: So that's the big question. Netsagna, who in sort of
Speaker 7: the press conference yesterday, didn't seem too optimistic about Phase two,
Speaker 7: but one would hope that it starts immediately. We need
Speaker 7: to start to continue to see humanitarian aid coming in,
Speaker 7: but also heavy machinery. There is, you know, thousands of
Speaker 7: tons of rubble in Gaza right now. There are at
Speaker 7: least ten thousand bodies underneath that rubble. There needs to
Speaker 7: be some kind of operation in place to get to
Speaker 7: get the Strip moving again. Regardless of this forced displacement
Speaker 7: plan that President Trump announced yesterday, I think the foremost
Speaker 7: priority is getting the hostages home and safely those that
Speaker 7: are still alive, and really continuing to funnel humanitarian aid
Speaker 7: into the Strip.
Speaker 4: Conventional wisdom is Benjamin et Yahoo does not want to
Speaker 4: reach a phase two. Will he convinced Donald Trump to
Speaker 4: believe the same.
Speaker 7: Well, it seems like with the press conference yesterday they
Speaker 7: were in lockstep. You know. Prime Minister net Yahoo was
Speaker 7: smiling throughout President Trump's statements. It did not seem like
Speaker 7: he was optimistic about a Phase two. The Phase two
Speaker 7: would obviously be more aid, but also again the return
Speaker 7: of Israeli hostages, which the Israeli people want, and so
Speaker 7: I think this really puts them in danger at this
Speaker 7: stage and really throws the security of that region in
Speaker 7: danger as well. And we've heard from Israel's ambassador to
Speaker 7: the UN that Israel does not plan on reoccupying the
Speaker 7: Gaza Strip, has no plans to do so, but also
Speaker 7: does not want Hamas to be in control there, and
Speaker 7: they certainly are still in control there. So there's a
Speaker 7: lot of details to be worked out, a lot of
Speaker 7: loopholes that I think the United States and Israel could exploit. Unfortunately,
Speaker 7: it just remains to be seen what that will actually
Speaker 7: look like on the ground.
Speaker 2: So what is going to be the role here is
Speaker 2: This was obviously President Trump who was speaking about this,
Speaker 2: but he has Steve Witkoff who's a special envoy to
Speaker 2: the region. There's Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, who
Speaker 2: I would presume is going to be involved in this
Speaker 2: as well. Who are the kind of power players here,
Speaker 2: if you will, that will be helping push this narrative forward?
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean that kind of remains to be seen.
Speaker 7: Many of the people that we thought would be in
Speaker 7: the administration are not going to be But clearly Witkoff
Speaker 7: will play a major role in this, as he has
Speaker 7: with ceasefire negotiations in the past. Mike Waltz, the National
Speaker 7: Security Advisor, will also be moving things forward, and I
Speaker 7: assume Mike Huckabee, who is you know, will be the
Speaker 7: Israel's ambassador there as well, will be pushing many of
Speaker 7: these things forward. The question is, how is any of
Speaker 7: this going to happen when US eight has essentially been
Speaker 7: shut down, which is sort of the other piece of
Speaker 7: this puzzle, when US funding to ANUDWA has also been
Speaker 7: shut down as well, because that is essentially part of
Speaker 7: the second phase and the third phase of the ceasefire arrangement.
Speaker 4: Much has been said in the last twenty four hours
Speaker 4: following that New York Times report about Iran trying to
Speaker 4: advance its way to an atomic weapon. Will there be
Speaker 4: a preemptive attack against Iran's nuclear program?
Speaker 7: So many sort of security analysts are saying that the
Speaker 7: window to do this when Iran's air defenses are down
Speaker 7: is probably about eight to nine months. So I think
Speaker 7: if we do see some kind of premeditated, sort of
Speaker 7: preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear program, it would happen within
Speaker 7: that time frame. So many of us are holding our
Speaker 7: breath to see if that does, in fact happen, because
Speaker 7: it is the potential is definitely there with the maximum
Speaker 7: pressure campaign that President Trump just ordered restarted, and with
Speaker 7: this recent meeting with Netanya who as well well.
Speaker 2: So if the pressure is there in Natasha, do you
Speaker 2: see a greater likelihood that that happens under this administration
Speaker 2: Compared to the conversation we were initially having with the
Speaker 2: Biden administration encouraging Israel not to preemptively attack in the
Speaker 2: wake of Iran's second attempt to hit Israel directly.
Speaker 7: I think the potential is much higher during this administration.
Speaker 7: I think President Biden wanted to avoid any kind of
Speaker 7: Israeli US attack on Iran. But with this administration, really,
Speaker 7: who knows. I mean, every day we're waking up to
Speaker 7: a new reality. It could be just President Trump's bluster
Speaker 7: in order to get a new deal with Iran that
Speaker 7: is more advantageous to Israeli in US interests, But that
Speaker 7: remains to be seen, and undoubtedly, I'm sure it creates
Speaker 7: a lot of vulnerability for the Iranian regime at the
Speaker 7: moment too.
Speaker 4: President Trump said yesterday in the Oval Office that if
Speaker 4: there were an attempt on his life by Iran, it
Speaker 4: would result in total obliteration. What is the purpose of
Speaker 4: saying that out loud?
Speaker 7: I mean, I think it's the same purpose as he's
Speaker 7: been saying many of these things out loud. You know,
Speaker 7: I don't think Iran would ever try to assassinate President
Speaker 7: Trump at the end of the day. They are a
Speaker 7: pragmatic actor despite their errors. But you know, I think
Speaker 7: that this was essentially saying that everything is on the
Speaker 7: table if Iran tries to do tries to do something,
Speaker 7: and that the US would you work with allies in
Speaker 7: the region to inflict maximum punishment on Iran if necessary.
Speaker 7: Why he alluded to the assassination I have no idea.
Speaker 7: Maybe just speaking to his base and his audience.
Speaker 2: Well, when we consider Iran specifically in those who have
Speaker 2: aligned themselves with Iran or at least do have a relationship,
Speaker 2: thinking here of China Russia as well, I guess is
Speaker 2: typically included in what's frequently described as this access of
Speaker 2: evil by people we speak to on this program. Natasha,
Speaker 2: how do you think other adversaries like China and Russia
Speaker 2: are watching the way in which Donald Trump navigates the
Speaker 2: Middle East and the kinds of things that he is
Speaker 2: saying about what is going to happen in the future.
Speaker 7: Well, back to my original point on international peace and security,
Speaker 7: the way that President Trump is talking about Gaza right
Speaker 7: now parkens back to colonial days, and it certainly gives
Speaker 7: Russia and it gives China an excuse to go after
Speaker 7: its colonial ambitions. So the near abroad for Russia, including Ukraine,
Speaker 7: and for China Taiwan and the South China Sea, and
Speaker 7: so I think that that is the danger of using
Speaker 7: this kind of rhetoric, even if he doesn't plan to
Speaker 7: actually implement it in any way, it's quite dangerous for
Speaker 7: the world order, more generally, the world order that the
Speaker 7: United States was instrumental in creating after World War Two.
Speaker 7: If we go away from that and towards just real
Speaker 7: estate deals, I think it portends a very scary future,
Speaker 7: indeed for all of us.
Speaker 5: He was asked if he plans to visit the region.
Speaker 4: President Trump said that yes, he would like to visit
Speaker 4: Israel as well as Gaza. How would a presidential visit
Speaker 4: be treated on the Gaza Strip, Well.
Speaker 7: I think poorly. There would have to be probably unprecedented
Speaker 7: security for President Trump, It's unclear why he would do that.
Speaker 7: I would welcome him to go to the Gaza strip
Speaker 7: and see the kind of destruction that is there, but
Speaker 7: also talk to the people that have suffered through that
Speaker 7: destruction as well. He said that, you know, Gaza as
Speaker 7: hell and it's unlivable and all of these things, but
Speaker 7: there's a reason for that because of over fifteen months
Speaker 7: of devastating war, and so, you know, there needs to
Speaker 7: be reconstruction, but there needs to be reconstruction for the
Speaker 7: people that live there as well. And so you know,
Speaker 7: I suspect there will not be a warm response for
Speaker 7: President Trump and Gaza, but I do hope that he actually,
Speaker 7: you know, connects with people on the ground.
Speaker 4: Natasha, It's always great to spend some time. Natasha Hall,
Speaker 4: Senior Fellow with the Middle East Program with the Center
Speaker 4: for Strategic and International Studies c SIS. Thanks for listening
Speaker 4: to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe
Speaker 4: if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you
Speaker 4: get your podcasts, and you can find us live every
Speaker 4: weekday from Washington, DC at Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.