1
00:00:03,480 --> 00:00:07,560
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,640 --> 00:00:10,440
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:13,440
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:18,000
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

5
00:00:18,320 --> 00:00:22,640
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Is President Trump

6
00:00:22,800 --> 00:00:25,840
Speaker 1: escalating his long running feud with Amazon and its founder

7
00:00:25,920 --> 00:00:29,440
Speaker 1: Jeff Bezos, who also owns a Washington Post. Trump continued

8
00:00:29,520 --> 00:00:32,080
Speaker 1: his Twitter war this morning. Over the weekend, he tweeted

9
00:00:32,120 --> 00:00:35,519
Speaker 1: that Amazon must pay real costs and taxes now and

10
00:00:35,600 --> 00:00:39,000
Speaker 1: that this post office scam must stop. Amazon has said

11
00:00:39,000 --> 00:00:42,320
Speaker 1: the Postal Service, which has financial problems stretching back for years,

12
00:00:42,440 --> 00:00:45,479
Speaker 1: makes money on its deliveries, joining me as Robert Hocketed,

13
00:00:45,479 --> 00:00:48,920
Speaker 1: professor at Cornell Law School, Bob, the full details of

14
00:00:48,920 --> 00:00:52,720
Speaker 1: the agreement between Amazon and the US Postal Service are

15
00:00:52,760 --> 00:00:56,760
Speaker 1: not known because the postal service makes confidential deals with retailers.

16
00:00:56,800 --> 00:00:59,520
Speaker 1: So what do we know about it? We don't know

17
00:00:59,560 --> 00:01:01,560
Speaker 1: a great ill, June. I mean, we know a couple

18
00:01:01,600 --> 00:01:05,080
Speaker 1: of things. Right. Apparently post Office does indeed come out

19
00:01:05,080 --> 00:01:07,280
Speaker 1: ahead out of the deal with Amazon, which is to

20
00:01:07,319 --> 00:01:10,039
Speaker 1: say it's in the black, right It the costs that

21
00:01:10,120 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 1: it incurs in shipping Amazon things are less than the

22
00:01:12,880 --> 00:01:15,119
Speaker 1: revenue that it generates. We also know that the Post

23
00:01:15,200 --> 00:01:19,000
Speaker 1: Office offers similar deals for all package shipments. It's not

24
00:01:19,160 --> 00:01:21,920
Speaker 1: Amazon specific, and that, of course leads me to think

25
00:01:21,920 --> 00:01:24,360
Speaker 1: that this isn't really about Amazon at all. This is

26
00:01:24,400 --> 00:01:28,520
Speaker 1: probably more about the Washingtington Post and Jeff Bezos. Let's

27
00:01:28,520 --> 00:01:32,199
Speaker 1: talk about taxes, which it's apt month to talk about.

28
00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:36,520
Speaker 1: Jax is Amazon page fifties seven million dollars in taxes

29
00:01:36,600 --> 00:01:39,639
Speaker 1: last year. It collects them everywhere that has a state

30
00:01:39,760 --> 00:01:43,360
Speaker 1: sales tax. In most states, it doesn't collect taxes on

31
00:01:43,480 --> 00:01:46,600
Speaker 1: the products that third party vendors sell through the site.

32
00:01:46,720 --> 00:01:50,720
Speaker 1: Is it acting completely legally? It is acting quite legally.

33
00:01:50,760 --> 00:01:53,320
Speaker 1: There's nothing that's scammy about it unless there's a scam

34
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:55,320
Speaker 1: in the tax code, And of course I would be

35
00:01:55,360 --> 00:01:57,680
Speaker 1: prepared to countenance that um and I wish that the

36
00:01:57,720 --> 00:02:00,320
Speaker 1: President were prepared to countenance that there's a huge scam

37
00:02:00,320 --> 00:02:01,840
Speaker 1: in the tax code as well. But he seems to

38
00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:04,960
Speaker 1: have put or to have acted quite actively to put

39
00:02:05,040 --> 00:02:08,600
Speaker 1: some of additional scams into the tax code this past December,

40
00:02:09,120 --> 00:02:12,680
Speaker 1: and there's a Supreme Court case pending a ruling in

41
00:02:12,720 --> 00:02:17,360
Speaker 1: that case involving online retailers collecting sales taxes. Could that

42
00:02:17,440 --> 00:02:21,280
Speaker 1: have an impact on Amazon's collection of taxes? Well, in

43
00:02:21,400 --> 00:02:24,480
Speaker 1: theory it could. It really just depends on what, you know,

44
00:02:24,480 --> 00:02:27,440
Speaker 1: what how the court goes about interpreting the tax code

45
00:02:27,480 --> 00:02:30,800
Speaker 1: itself here, and that's of course a notoriously convoluted code.

46
00:02:30,800 --> 00:02:33,760
Speaker 1: It's difficult for people to interpret, and the tax lawyers

47
00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:36,679
Speaker 1: and judges with expertise and tax law are often thought

48
00:02:36,720 --> 00:02:40,200
Speaker 1: of as being eccentric precisely because they're able to sort

49
00:02:40,240 --> 00:02:42,680
Speaker 1: of know the facts of their hands, uh, these very

50
00:02:42,680 --> 00:02:45,000
Speaker 1: convoluted rules, and then of course the regulations that are

51
00:02:45,000 --> 00:02:47,960
Speaker 1: promulgated under them. So there might be some effect, but

52
00:02:48,240 --> 00:02:50,160
Speaker 1: bess far right. As far as we know right now,

53
00:02:50,200 --> 00:02:52,160
Speaker 1: the dominant understanding of the tax tode and what it

54
00:02:52,200 --> 00:02:55,800
Speaker 1: requires is such as to show that Amazon is indeed

55
00:02:55,800 --> 00:02:58,440
Speaker 1: in compliance with tax law. Hence, if there's a scam

56
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:01,720
Speaker 1: going on, that is in the law itself, not an

57
00:03:01,720 --> 00:03:04,960
Speaker 1: Amazon's use of that law. It's also ironic, I have

58
00:03:05,000 --> 00:03:07,200
Speaker 1: to say, right, because people have often noted that Trump

59
00:03:07,280 --> 00:03:10,480
Speaker 1: himself has declared bankruptcy multiple times and taken advantage of

60
00:03:10,480 --> 00:03:13,280
Speaker 1: that and his retort is always well, the bankruptcy Code

61
00:03:13,280 --> 00:03:15,519
Speaker 1: allows that. So I have simply taken advantage of the

62
00:03:15,600 --> 00:03:17,920
Speaker 1: law and what it allows me, and Amazon can rejoin

63
00:03:18,639 --> 00:03:22,280
Speaker 1: with the same reply to Trump on this one. Let's

64
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:25,920
Speaker 1: let's discuss what Trump could do about Amazon if he

65
00:03:25,960 --> 00:03:29,400
Speaker 1: decided to take the fight beyond the tweets. Could he

66
00:03:29,440 --> 00:03:35,200
Speaker 1: push for regulatory investigations of Amazon, either for antitrust, privacy,

67
00:03:35,320 --> 00:03:38,720
Speaker 1: or other reasons. He could I mean, in theory, he

68
00:03:38,760 --> 00:03:41,200
Speaker 1: could direct the Justice Department to conduct some sort of

69
00:03:41,240 --> 00:03:43,840
Speaker 1: an inquiry or some sort of an inquest. The problem

70
00:03:43,920 --> 00:03:46,000
Speaker 1: is that if this is simply based on his whim

71
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:48,400
Speaker 1: or on his sort of personal animus toward Bazos or

72
00:03:48,440 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 1: the post Um, He's going to get himself in trouble

73
00:03:50,640 --> 00:03:53,000
Speaker 1: because of course this will look like delicious prosecution on

74
00:03:53,040 --> 00:03:55,040
Speaker 1: the part of the Justice Department. Uh, and then will

75
00:03:55,080 --> 00:03:58,560
Speaker 1: of course reinforce growing perceptions that this man is treating

76
00:03:58,760 --> 00:04:00,600
Speaker 1: the White House and the President see as a kind

77
00:04:00,600 --> 00:04:02,720
Speaker 1: of personal play thing to sort of carry out his

78
00:04:02,840 --> 00:04:07,360
Speaker 1: various personal vendettas and to align his personal offers. Well,

79
00:04:07,360 --> 00:04:10,160
Speaker 1: we know that there's a case going on right now

80
00:04:10,360 --> 00:04:14,880
Speaker 1: where the Justice Department is suing and it's an unorthodox

81
00:04:15,200 --> 00:04:18,080
Speaker 1: kind of suit for an antitrust suit attacking the A.

82
00:04:18,200 --> 00:04:20,880
Speaker 1: T and T Time Warner deal, and that was after

83
00:04:21,080 --> 00:04:25,159
Speaker 1: Trump's criticism of the deal and CNN, which is owned

84
00:04:25,160 --> 00:04:27,800
Speaker 1: by Time Warner. But the judge is not allowing that in.

85
00:04:28,000 --> 00:04:32,400
Speaker 1: So it's already shown that it can take an orthodox step.

86
00:04:32,520 --> 00:04:36,240
Speaker 1: So might it do that here? I mean it could happen, right,

87
00:04:36,400 --> 00:04:38,479
Speaker 1: it could. But again, what's sort of go on here

88
00:04:38,560 --> 00:04:41,440
Speaker 1: is you know, I'm down with if I can put

89
00:04:41,440 --> 00:04:43,520
Speaker 1: it in that kind of skipster way, I'm I'm down

90
00:04:43,560 --> 00:04:46,200
Speaker 1: with getting serious about anti trust law again. And it

91
00:04:46,240 --> 00:04:48,800
Speaker 1: would be wonderfully being a good news if it looked

92
00:04:48,800 --> 00:04:51,480
Speaker 1: like Trump himself. We're interested in this in a kind

93
00:04:51,480 --> 00:04:53,080
Speaker 1: of an across the board way, in the kind of

94
00:04:53,080 --> 00:04:56,000
Speaker 1: a general principled way. But if you're just sort of

95
00:04:56,040 --> 00:04:59,839
Speaker 1: selectively targeting people who happened to be your personal enemies

96
00:05:00,200 --> 00:05:04,680
Speaker 1: for antitrust investigations or tax violation investigations and so quick,

97
00:05:04,880 --> 00:05:08,160
Speaker 1: all while your own companies and multiple other companies are

98
00:05:08,320 --> 00:05:11,359
Speaker 1: doing exactly what Amazon has been doing, and exactly what

99
00:05:11,440 --> 00:05:13,880
Speaker 1: Time Warner has been doing, and exactly what all of

100
00:05:13,880 --> 00:05:16,800
Speaker 1: these other large firms that are currently being investigated are doing.

101
00:05:17,160 --> 00:05:19,240
Speaker 1: Then it begins to make it begins to make it

102
00:05:19,279 --> 00:05:20,720
Speaker 1: look like this is not a case of the rule

103
00:05:20,760 --> 00:05:23,280
Speaker 1: of law. This is a case of again somebody who's

104
00:05:23,279 --> 00:05:25,960
Speaker 1: governing by women and on the basis of personal animus.

105
00:05:26,760 --> 00:05:30,919
Speaker 1: So let's let's turn to what again, what he could do?

106
00:05:31,000 --> 00:05:35,120
Speaker 1: What the president could do. Brad Parscal, who's managing Trump's

107
00:05:35,880 --> 00:05:39,359
Speaker 1: presidential campaign, said in a tweet last Thursday, once the

108
00:05:39,400 --> 00:05:43,560
Speaker 1: market figures out that a single USPS rule change will

109
00:05:43,600 --> 00:05:47,719
Speaker 1: crush Amazon's bottom line, we will see who raises the

110
00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:52,080
Speaker 1: post Office rates. Well, that's determined by the Postal, the

111
00:05:52,120 --> 00:05:55,440
Speaker 1: Post Office board itself. The president could have some influence

112
00:05:55,600 --> 00:05:58,479
Speaker 1: on that, right. I mean, it's not an altogether sort

113
00:05:58,520 --> 00:06:02,640
Speaker 1: of untethered agency. It is. It's a federal instrumentality. Um.

114
00:06:02,680 --> 00:06:04,640
Speaker 1: And that's another thing I kind of wanted to point

115
00:06:04,640 --> 00:06:07,440
Speaker 1: out earlier is I thought, well, if your concern is

116
00:06:07,480 --> 00:06:10,760
Speaker 1: that the Post Office is in charging Amazon enough, perhaps

117
00:06:10,760 --> 00:06:13,000
Speaker 1: there should be an inquiry into why the Post Office

118
00:06:13,040 --> 00:06:15,640
Speaker 1: is charging it so little, and indeed why it's charging

119
00:06:15,720 --> 00:06:18,719
Speaker 1: all it's so little for all package deliveries. My understanding

120
00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:21,160
Speaker 1: is that it charges about half to Amazon and other

121
00:06:21,200 --> 00:06:25,520
Speaker 1: package delivers what UPS, FedEx and other such shipping agencies do.

122
00:06:25,920 --> 00:06:27,560
Speaker 1: What if it were to raise the rates up to

123
00:06:27,600 --> 00:06:30,440
Speaker 1: three quarters of what those other firms do, that it

124
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:32,719
Speaker 1: would seem to me would keep the post office in

125
00:06:32,760 --> 00:06:34,880
Speaker 1: the black and still make it a better value for

126
00:06:34,880 --> 00:06:37,560
Speaker 1: the shippers uh than fed X or UPS or any

127
00:06:37,560 --> 00:06:42,080
Speaker 1: other competing private delivery service. Another thing is the stock market.

128
00:06:42,160 --> 00:06:47,080
Speaker 1: Amazon is down um more than four today and plunged

129
00:06:48,520 --> 00:06:52,200
Speaker 1: uh last week, so after an Axios report that the

130
00:06:52,240 --> 00:06:56,040
Speaker 1: President was quote obsessed with regulating the company. So this

131
00:06:56,160 --> 00:06:59,719
Speaker 1: is also taking you know, hitting his his stock market

132
00:06:59,720 --> 00:07:03,440
Speaker 1: bread rights. It is uh, it does do that, But

133
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:06,480
Speaker 1: on the other hand, it also of course diminishes the

134
00:07:06,520 --> 00:07:09,640
Speaker 1: size of Jeff bezos portfolio, right, And my understanding is

135
00:07:09,640 --> 00:07:12,520
Speaker 1: that Mr Bezos has lost something like four to ten

136
00:07:12,600 --> 00:07:16,400
Speaker 1: billion dollars in recent days from his portfolio thanks to

137
00:07:16,440 --> 00:07:18,880
Speaker 1: his Amazon holding was taking a hit. And my guess

138
00:07:18,920 --> 00:07:21,760
Speaker 1: was it would be that Trump maybe derives more pleasure

139
00:07:21,880 --> 00:07:25,120
Speaker 1: from knowing that Mr bezos Is portfolio is dropping, then

140
00:07:25,240 --> 00:07:28,720
Speaker 1: he takes pain that he finds pain in the suffering

141
00:07:28,760 --> 00:07:31,360
Speaker 1: that the tex Stalks as a whole are enduring as

142
00:07:31,360 --> 00:07:35,440
Speaker 1: a result of these uh strange and obsessive tweets. So

143
00:07:35,640 --> 00:07:40,480
Speaker 1: let's just go bottom line here, Bob, that seconds left.

144
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:44,520
Speaker 1: What what in your view will come of this? Will

145
00:07:44,680 --> 00:07:47,560
Speaker 1: just it just be another round of tweets and that's it.

146
00:07:47,760 --> 00:07:51,160
Speaker 1: Will anything really come of this? I think some I

147
00:07:51,160 --> 00:07:53,040
Speaker 1: think there will be more fall out in the sense

148
00:07:53,080 --> 00:07:55,440
Speaker 1: that there will be more gickering back and forth between

149
00:07:55,440 --> 00:07:59,960
Speaker 1: Trump and Bezos or Trump and Amazon um and maybe,

150
00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:02,840
Speaker 1: you know, Bezos will say something nice about Trump, or

151
00:08:02,840 --> 00:08:04,600
Speaker 1: will Cow tow in some way and then it'll all

152
00:08:04,640 --> 00:08:07,320
Speaker 1: go away, or Mr Bezos will sort of stand up

153
00:08:07,320 --> 00:08:09,880
Speaker 1: for his company and for himself, and this could end

154
00:08:09,920 --> 00:08:13,280
Speaker 1: up into you know, this could sert culminate in protracted litigation.

155
00:08:14,000 --> 00:08:16,320
Speaker 1: He's taking on a pretty powerful enemy this time, so

156
00:08:16,360 --> 00:08:19,800
Speaker 1: many forty times richer than he is. So I'm quite

157
00:08:19,800 --> 00:08:23,320
Speaker 1: interested to see how that plays out. Will we will

158
00:08:23,320 --> 00:08:26,160
Speaker 1: talk more about that as it goes along, if if

159
00:08:26,160 --> 00:08:29,680
Speaker 1: there's any more to these, any more tweets coming. That's

160
00:08:29,720 --> 00:08:36,120
Speaker 1: Bob Hocket. He's a professor at Cornell Law School. The

161
00:08:36,200 --> 00:08:40,480
Speaker 1: Environmental Protection Agency already has concluded that Obama era fuel

162
00:08:40,480 --> 00:08:44,079
Speaker 1: economy standards aimed at slashing greenhouse gas emissions are too

163
00:08:44,120 --> 00:08:48,120
Speaker 1: aggressive and need to be revised. Agency officials brief California

164
00:08:48,200 --> 00:08:51,560
Speaker 1: regulators on their conclusion last week as they put the

165
00:08:51,559 --> 00:08:54,800
Speaker 1: final touches on a document justifying the decision to roll

166
00:08:54,880 --> 00:08:58,600
Speaker 1: back automobile gas mileage and pollution standards. According to people

167
00:08:58,640 --> 00:09:01,959
Speaker 1: familiar with the discussions, e p A Administrator Scott Prude

168
00:09:02,040 --> 00:09:05,080
Speaker 1: is expected to formally announce the move tomorrow during an

169
00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:08,640
Speaker 1: event at a Virginia car dealership. My guest is Charles Warren,

170
00:09:08,720 --> 00:09:11,920
Speaker 1: head of the environmental law practice at Kramer levinef Talas

171
00:09:12,000 --> 00:09:15,439
Speaker 1: and Frankel. Chuck tell us about the changes the Trump

172
00:09:15,480 --> 00:09:20,440
Speaker 1: administration is going to propose to the Obama rules. Well,

173
00:09:20,760 --> 00:09:27,880
Speaker 1: the Obama rule June is in effect really requires by

174
00:09:28,160 --> 00:09:32,760
Speaker 1: that you have fuel economy getting fifty four point five

175
00:09:32,880 --> 00:09:37,040
Speaker 1: miles per gallon, which is for cars and light trucks,

176
00:09:37,200 --> 00:09:40,160
Speaker 1: and that's, you know, roughly double what it was at

177
00:09:40,200 --> 00:09:45,840
Speaker 1: the beginning of the Obama administration. And there they're supposed

178
00:09:45,840 --> 00:09:49,680
Speaker 1: to be a mid course correction look at it which

179
00:09:49,840 --> 00:09:54,200
Speaker 1: was done started to be done in and the Obama

180
00:09:54,240 --> 00:09:56,840
Speaker 1: administration then basically said we're not going to do anything. Now.

181
00:09:56,880 --> 00:10:03,360
Speaker 1: The Trump administration for the years twenty they now want

182
00:10:03,360 --> 00:10:08,439
Speaker 1: to roll those back and not even not even to

183
00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:13,760
Speaker 1: not not even anywhere near fifty four, and you know,

184
00:10:13,800 --> 00:10:16,880
Speaker 1: it may be closer to what it is in which

185
00:10:16,920 --> 00:10:20,240
Speaker 1: is like thirty eight or even below that. And so

186
00:10:20,280 --> 00:10:24,559
Speaker 1: they're trying to really turn the clock back quite a

187
00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:30,000
Speaker 1: bit on this and it's going to have obviously many repercussions,

188
00:10:30,040 --> 00:10:34,840
Speaker 1: particularly with the California waiver in place. Right. Let's talk

189
00:10:34,880 --> 00:10:38,360
Speaker 1: about the California waiver because that allows California to set

190
00:10:38,360 --> 00:10:42,920
Speaker 1: its own pollution and gas mileage standards and other states

191
00:10:42,960 --> 00:10:45,400
Speaker 1: follow that, and the state a G has already said

192
00:10:45,440 --> 00:10:48,240
Speaker 1: that the state is going to resist any changes. So

193
00:10:48,360 --> 00:10:52,320
Speaker 1: can we expect a long legal battle here? Yes? Here,

194
00:10:52,440 --> 00:10:56,720
Speaker 1: here's the problem for the automakers actually, and that's why

195
00:10:56,720 --> 00:10:59,000
Speaker 1: they're getting a little more than they bargained for with

196
00:10:59,080 --> 00:11:04,600
Speaker 1: this aggressive attempt to roll back the Obama fuel economy standards.

197
00:11:05,640 --> 00:11:08,120
Speaker 1: California has a waiver that's been in the Clean Air

198
00:11:08,240 --> 00:11:12,760
Speaker 1: X since seventy two, and the waivers have been granted

199
00:11:12,800 --> 00:11:15,360
Speaker 1: and they're allowed to set their own standards, as you indicated,

200
00:11:15,520 --> 00:11:18,319
Speaker 1: and other states can follow the California standards if they

201
00:11:18,320 --> 00:11:21,720
Speaker 1: follow them exactly. And they're about twelve states that follow that,

202
00:11:22,160 --> 00:11:24,120
Speaker 1: and those states if you look at them, you know,

203
00:11:24,160 --> 00:11:30,320
Speaker 1: they're like New York, Pennsylvania, bunch of other pretty big states. Uh.

204
00:11:30,440 --> 00:11:33,680
Speaker 1: They account for about thirty five cent of the cars

205
00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:37,920
Speaker 1: made in the United States. So if nothing else happens

206
00:11:38,720 --> 00:11:42,400
Speaker 1: and they roll back the federal standards and the California

207
00:11:42,480 --> 00:11:45,280
Speaker 1: standards stay in place, then the auto industry is going

208
00:11:45,320 --> 00:11:47,880
Speaker 1: to be faced with making two different kinds of cars,

209
00:11:48,120 --> 00:11:50,000
Speaker 1: which they hate. They're not gonna want to do that,

210
00:11:50,320 --> 00:11:52,800
Speaker 1: and so what it means they're gonna have to follow

211
00:11:52,800 --> 00:11:55,920
Speaker 1: the California standards as as a practical matter, They're not

212
00:11:55,960 --> 00:12:01,120
Speaker 1: gonna want to have a car marketed below the California standards.

213
00:12:01,559 --> 00:12:06,280
Speaker 1: So the what what will happen if it plays out,

214
00:12:06,559 --> 00:12:11,120
Speaker 1: is that the administration might try and challenge the California

215
00:12:11,160 --> 00:12:14,160
Speaker 1: waiver which is in place until and there will be

216
00:12:14,200 --> 00:12:18,240
Speaker 1: a titanic battle on that and Chuck, how long would

217
00:12:18,240 --> 00:12:22,840
Speaker 1: it take for the e p A to propose new rules,

218
00:12:22,920 --> 00:12:25,520
Speaker 1: have hearings, and do all the different things that need

219
00:12:25,800 --> 00:12:29,120
Speaker 1: that are needed for a change. Yeah, they have you know,

220
00:12:29,160 --> 00:12:33,280
Speaker 1: they they're going to say that the standards to twenty

221
00:12:33,360 --> 00:12:35,080
Speaker 1: five are not appropriate, but then they do have to

222
00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:38,679
Speaker 1: go through a whole rulemaking process and have a common period,

223
00:12:38,720 --> 00:12:41,520
Speaker 1: and that will be challenged and this could be any

224
00:12:41,600 --> 00:12:44,280
Speaker 1: a number of months, quite a few months before that

225
00:12:44,320 --> 00:12:47,760
Speaker 1: would happen. And meanwhile, you know, you you have lead

226
00:12:47,800 --> 00:12:51,840
Speaker 1: times for the auto industry and uh, they'll they'll be

227
00:12:51,880 --> 00:12:54,680
Speaker 1: faced at some point with a deadline where they have

228
00:12:54,800 --> 00:12:58,080
Speaker 1: to then say, Okay, we have to start manufacturing cars

229
00:12:58,320 --> 00:13:00,840
Speaker 1: and we're gonna have to contin in you, you know,

230
00:13:00,920 --> 00:13:04,480
Speaker 1: with the California standards. That's and that's my sim So

231
00:13:04,480 --> 00:13:08,439
Speaker 1: it's gonna be it's gonna be messy, very messy, exactly.

232
00:13:08,880 --> 00:13:12,320
Speaker 1: And I think the the industry asked for some relief,

233
00:13:12,360 --> 00:13:14,680
Speaker 1: but I don't think they wanted to go as far

234
00:13:14,880 --> 00:13:17,960
Speaker 1: as the Trump administration is taking it. They just wanted

235
00:13:18,400 --> 00:13:21,559
Speaker 1: the way you calculate the standards to be a little

236
00:13:21,559 --> 00:13:24,000
Speaker 1: more leeway so that when they had some of these

237
00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:26,840
Speaker 1: SUVs and other things, they would be easier to meet

238
00:13:26,880 --> 00:13:29,640
Speaker 1: those standards. But they really didn't want a wholesale roll

239
00:13:29,720 --> 00:13:32,800
Speaker 1: back to the kind of levels that the administration is

240
00:13:32,840 --> 00:13:36,120
Speaker 1: talking about because I think it makes them look bad

241
00:13:36,200 --> 00:13:39,320
Speaker 1: because a lot of these companies have said, we're on

242
00:13:39,480 --> 00:13:43,319
Speaker 1: board on fuel economy, we want to know, push electric cars, etcetera.

243
00:13:43,800 --> 00:13:46,880
Speaker 1: And so I think it puts them in a difficult positions.

244
00:13:47,200 --> 00:13:50,559
Speaker 1: It's speaking about difficult positions the e p A chief,

245
00:13:50,600 --> 00:13:53,320
Speaker 1: Scott Prue, it has come under more criticism. There were

246
00:13:53,320 --> 00:13:56,079
Speaker 1: disclosures about his use of first class flights to travel

247
00:13:56,120 --> 00:13:58,360
Speaker 1: around the world, trips to Italy, and now there are

248
00:13:58,400 --> 00:14:02,120
Speaker 1: disclosures about this lee sing of a Washington apartment in

249
00:14:02,160 --> 00:14:05,720
Speaker 1: a very unusual terms from a lobbyist. Do you think

250
00:14:06,040 --> 00:14:11,400
Speaker 1: he can survive this latest disclosure? Well, these are the

251
00:14:11,440 --> 00:14:15,160
Speaker 1: kinds of disclosures that usually have resulted in people losing

252
00:14:15,200 --> 00:14:18,679
Speaker 1: their jobs because the public takes a dim view of

253
00:14:18,679 --> 00:14:22,240
Speaker 1: people in high office sort of abusing their position to

254
00:14:22,320 --> 00:14:25,560
Speaker 1: make these kinds of special deals and that other people

255
00:14:25,640 --> 00:14:30,160
Speaker 1: can't get um. But Scott Pruett has been someone who's

256
00:14:30,200 --> 00:14:33,600
Speaker 1: been very in sync with THEE what the Trump administration

257
00:14:34,160 --> 00:14:37,800
Speaker 1: wants to happen. And it's possible that he could survive

258
00:14:37,920 --> 00:14:42,320
Speaker 1: because he's doing everything that the Trump administration wants him

259
00:14:42,400 --> 00:14:45,440
Speaker 1: to do and is pushing very aggressively to do that.

260
00:14:45,800 --> 00:14:49,320
Speaker 1: So I think it's a question of maybe if enough

261
00:14:49,360 --> 00:14:52,680
Speaker 1: stuff keeps piling up that hill have gone too far.

262
00:14:52,800 --> 00:14:57,080
Speaker 1: But so far he seems to be surviving. I've heard

263
00:14:57,280 --> 00:15:00,120
Speaker 1: something incredible. I mean that he traveled with third the

264
00:15:00,840 --> 00:15:04,960
Speaker 1: thirty in his protection detail, thirty people, and um, there's

265
00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:06,920
Speaker 1: there's been a lot coming out, so but we will

266
00:15:07,000 --> 00:15:10,360
Speaker 1: keep apprized of what's going on. And thank you so

267
00:15:10,440 --> 00:15:13,720
Speaker 1: much Chuck for being on the show. That's Chuck Kramer.

268
00:15:13,760 --> 00:15:16,760
Speaker 1: He's the head of the environmental law practice at Kramer eleven.

269
00:15:17,040 --> 00:15:19,960
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

270
00:15:20,000 --> 00:15:23,760
Speaker 1: subscribe and listen to the show on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,

271
00:15:23,840 --> 00:15:27,720
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

272
00:15:28,200 --> 00:15:29,480
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg