Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. We don't want to
Speaker 1: waste time. We want to get right to the Congressman.
Speaker 1: Mike Lawler is with us now, of course, the Republican
Speaker 1: from New York seventeenth. We spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: talking about everything from salt to yes government funding, and
Speaker 1: here we are again, Congressman, thank you for joining us
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg TV and radio. The conventional wisdom is we
Speaker 1: shut down after midnight, and I'm assuming you don't see
Speaker 1: a way around it. What comes after the shutdown?
Speaker 2: Well, unfortunately, it looks like we are barreling towards a
Speaker 2: shutdown because Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer have
Speaker 2: changed their position entirely on keeping the government funded and
Speaker 2: passing clean crs. Whether it was Joe Biden or Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: I have voted for every single CR to keep the
Speaker 2: government open and funded while we negotiate a final appropriations package.
Speaker 2: I think it is foolish to shut down. The government
Speaker 2: is going to create chaos in the markets. It will
Speaker 2: create chaos for the American people, especially those who rely
Speaker 2: on the social safety net, border security, our military veterans, benefits, etc.
Speaker 2: This is entirely unnecessary and does nothing to actually further
Speaker 2: the work of the American people. It is pure political
Speaker 2: posturing by my Democratic colleagues because they are not in
Speaker 2: the majority, and from my vantage point, that is not
Speaker 2: what you do. I was against it when Republicans wanted
Speaker 2: to shut down the government, and I'm against it here
Speaker 2: when Democrats want to do it. So we will see
Speaker 2: what happens over these twelve hours. As you pointed out,
Speaker 2: Republicans passed a clean cr through the House. The bill
Speaker 2: is sitting in the Senate at the desk. It can
Speaker 2: easily be taken back up right now and passed, and
Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer refuses to do that, despite his many pronouncements
Speaker 2: in years past about the need to pass clean crs
Speaker 2: and not pound your fists and stomp your feet when
Speaker 2: you don't get your way.
Speaker 3: So, Congressman, I hear you on the future of a
Speaker 3: potential clean CR. But do you see any room for
Speaker 3: negotiations here when it does come to those expiring Obamacare
Speaker 3: tax credits. We did hear from how Speaker Mike Johnson
Speaker 3: in an interview this morning saying that there might be
Speaker 3: some negotiating room, but that would have to happen after
Speaker 3: a funding bill is passed, since the tax credits are
Speaker 3: going to expire by the end of the year.
Speaker 2: Correct, and I am one of several Republican members who
Speaker 2: have signed on to legislation to extend the ACA subsidies
Speaker 2: for a year. Remember these were put in place during
Speaker 2: COVID to try and help those who were losing their
Speaker 2: jobs or unemployed because the government was forcing businesses to
Speaker 2: shut down. We don't want people to be unduly hurt,
Speaker 2: obviously by healthcare premium increases, but to try and shut
Speaker 2: the government down while negotiating some of these issues is foolish.
Speaker 2: We can easily keep the government funded through November twenty first,
Speaker 2: finalize all appropriations for fiscal year twenty six, and come
Speaker 2: to an agreement on these ACA subsidies for the next
Speaker 2: year or two. There's no reason to shut the government
Speaker 2: down in the middle of those negotiations.
Speaker 1: You wonder what would happen if if Mike Johnson said
Speaker 1: exactly what you just said. Although maybe there's sole little
Speaker 1: trust it doesn't matter right now, Congressman, But what should
Speaker 1: come of these after we've been talking about these extensions
Speaker 1: for some time now, everybody's become an expert on this
Speaker 1: or so they think if this was a COVID era
Speaker 1: a policy, should it be extended forever as Democrats suggest,
Speaker 1: you just pointed out a year, should they come down?
Speaker 1: Should be there be a gradual phasing out. What's the
Speaker 1: long term on this?
Speaker 2: Well, I think again this is a negotiation and a
Speaker 2: discussion to be had. I think many Republicans would like
Speaker 2: to see an income limit on these subsidies. Again, these
Speaker 2: were put in place during COVID. I think there's a
Speaker 2: larger point though, which is if the Affordable Care Act
Speaker 2: was supposed to reduce healthcare premiums, was supposed to increase access,
Speaker 2: why is it not working as intended fifteen years later,
Speaker 2: so much so that you need these subsidies to help people. Obviously,
Speaker 2: there's a broader issue with health insurance costs in this country,
Speaker 2: and I think that is something that Republicans and Democrats
Speaker 2: should work on together to focus on how we reduce
Speaker 2: overall costs. You saw the President today with the announcement
Speaker 2: with respect to Pfizer and certain prescription drugs and being
Speaker 2: able to purchase them at a much lower rate. That's
Speaker 2: important when you look at the challenges facing the US
Speaker 2: and Europe. Part of the problem with prescription drug costs
Speaker 2: in America is that Americans are subsidizing Europeans with the
Speaker 2: price controls that have long been put in place on
Speaker 2: prescription drugs in Europe. So that is something that we
Speaker 2: should all embrace reducing overall cost, but that's not something
Speaker 2: that you shut the government down over and really harm
Speaker 2: the very people that you're trying to help.
Speaker 3: Well, sticking with this idea that higher drug costs are
Speaker 3: a point of a political point on both sides of
Speaker 3: the aisle, I also want to ask you about some
Speaker 3: of the economic impacts here of a potential shutdown. You said,
Speaker 3: of course on house finn services. Are analysts at Bloomberg
Speaker 3: Economics estimate that the unemployment rate could reach four point
Speaker 3: seven percent in a shutdown. I'm wondering are the optics
Speaker 3: going to be difficult to navigate here, considering there's already
Speaker 3: concerns about the labor market. How are Republicans going to
Speaker 3: message around this when we know that economic impacts could
Speaker 3: really be one of those top top concerns and.
Speaker 2: Priorities we've seen in shutdowns prior. For instance, the stock
Speaker 2: market has generally grown the biggest concern has been on GDP.
Speaker 2: We saw for Q two revision a three point eight
Speaker 2: percent growth in GDP, which far exceeded what many prognosticators
Speaker 2: we're claiming was going to happen in Q two. So
Speaker 2: you know, certainly the economy is moving in the right direction.
Speaker 2: We got the tax package across the finish line that
Speaker 2: was critical for tax certainty. We don't need a government
Speaker 2: shutdown to create unnecessary chaos as we are working to
Speaker 2: enact critical policies that move the economy in the right direction,
Speaker 2: that create jobs, that create wealth and opportunity, and so look,
Speaker 2: unemployment obviously is a critical issue. We don't want to
Speaker 2: see layoffs, We don't want to see uncertainty in the market.
Speaker 2: Democrats have said for years, Chuck Schumer, Jeffrey's long on
Speaker 2: record about the impacts of a government shutdown and the
Speaker 2: need for a clean CR. They should look in the mirror,
Speaker 2: listen to their words of years past, including just last
Speaker 2: year with Joe Biden at the Helm, and vote the
Speaker 2: right way, which is to pass a clean CR and
Speaker 2: keep the government funded while we work through all these
Speaker 2: other issues of concern.
Speaker 1: What's your view on the Fed Congressman, as you sit
Speaker 1: on the Financial Services Committee. To Tyler's point, if this
Speaker 1: affects the release of the jobs report, for instance, on Friday,
Speaker 1: if BLS can't kick out the jobs data, at what
Speaker 1: point does that become a problem for the FED to
Speaker 1: make an accurate decision, say by the next meeting, when
Speaker 1: it doesn't have a complete picture of the data. Is
Speaker 1: this something you're worried about it you think government will
Speaker 1: be back open at time?
Speaker 2: Well, again, these are all the concerns and considerations that
Speaker 2: go into a government shutdown and why I fundamentally believe,
Speaker 2: regardless of which party is in power, cutting the government
Speaker 2: down is stupid. It doesn't serve a purpose but for
Speaker 2: a political one. And in this instance, Democrats are trying
Speaker 2: to use this for a political purpose, and that is wrong.
Speaker 2: It was wrong when Republicans wanted to do it in
Speaker 2: years past, it is wrong now when you talk about
Speaker 2: the FED. Look fundamentally, I believe the FED has been
Speaker 2: late to the game both when they needed to raise
Speaker 2: interest rates in the past and now in terms of
Speaker 2: reducing interest rates. I think they need to cut interest
Speaker 2: rates far greater than they have. Obviously, having all of
Speaker 2: the data and information is important, but I think all
Speaker 2: of us recognize the need for them to cut rates.
Speaker 2: So whether or not they have that data, they need
Speaker 2: to act on the reality of the situation. Jerome pal
Speaker 2: needs to advance rate cuts in a serious way so
Speaker 2: that we can continue to move this economy in the
Speaker 2: right direction.
Speaker 3: We heard from President Trump this morning saying that there
Speaker 3: could be quote a lot in his words of firings
Speaker 3: amid this shut down. We know the OMB was circulating
Speaker 3: this memo threatening permanent layoffs. Do you agree with this
Speaker 3: as what seems to be emerging as a negotiating tactic
Speaker 3: between the White House and Democrats on the Hill.
Speaker 2: Look, I said earlier in the week when that memo
Speaker 2: came out that I don't agree with permanent layoffs, but
Speaker 2: this is the challenge. When you have a shutdown. The
Speaker 2: executive will make determinations as to who's essential who is not,
Speaker 2: restructuring of departments and agencies based on a lack of funding.
Speaker 2: And I think if Democrats are so concerned about what
Speaker 2: they see as excessive executive overreach, then they shouldn't be
Speaker 2: playing games here past the clean cr and keep the
Speaker 2: government funded and then we don't even have to have
Speaker 2: that discussion. But unfortunately they are playing games here and
Speaker 2: changing their previous position. Every single House Democrat but for
Speaker 2: one Jared Golden of Maine, every single House Democrat either
Speaker 2: didn't vote or voted no on keeping the government funded
Speaker 2: almost two weeks ago.
Speaker 1: Do you take the White House quickly Congressman at their
Speaker 1: word when it comes to the layoffs.
Speaker 2: Look, I don't think they're kidding around. If they intend
Speaker 2: to do that, They've made that clear. And again, why
Speaker 2: play with fire here. There's a very easy way to
Speaker 2: solve all this. Pass a clean cr and let's keep
Speaker 2: doing the work of the American people. Negotiate a final
Speaker 2: appropriations deal. What they should be asking for is a
Speaker 2: top line number from OMB so that we can finalize
Speaker 2: the appropriations for fiscal year twenty six. That's what they
Speaker 2: should be asking for instead of trying to play political
Speaker 2: games here.
Speaker 3: All right, Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York, thank
Speaker 3: you so much for joining us here on Bloomberg Television
Speaker 3: and Radio Today.