Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business App, or listening on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcast.
Speaker 2: We've got a lot to talk about, of course, all
Speaker 2: the issues we're discussing here when it comes to fiscal policy,
Speaker 2: monetary policy, funding the government in Washington all plays in
Speaker 2: to what Charlie's talking about in the markets, what the
Speaker 2: Fed is going to be dealing with today. The Speaker
Speaker 2: is sounding more optimistic this morning. We're eleven days out
Speaker 2: now to a possible government shutdown, and Kevin McCarthy telling
Speaker 2: reporters we are going to solve this problem. That's the
Speaker 2: line this morning. We're making some progress, he says, not
Speaker 2: sounding terribly upbeat last evening when an attempt to get
Speaker 2: a vote on the floor, a procedural vote just to
Speaker 2: move forward with the stopgap budget, was pulled off the
Speaker 2: floor because he didn't have the votes, sounding frustrated as
Speaker 2: he headed back to the Speaker's chambers.
Speaker 3: What they're voting, they're voting against even bringing the bill
Speaker 3: up to have a discussion about it, to vote on
Speaker 3: if you're post to build vote against the bill. At
Speaker 3: the end, you've got more than one hundred and seventy
Speaker 3: amendments you could change if you don't mind it. But
Speaker 3: the idea that you vote against the rule to you
Speaker 3: to bring it up that makes sense for.
Speaker 4: War makes no sense, he says.
Speaker 2: But waking up this morning having spoken to some people,
Speaker 2: presumably feeling better about things, but we still have no
Speaker 2: real path forward. There's no plan B here that we're
Speaker 2: looking at the problem Solver's caucus again apparently cooking up
Speaker 2: something that they might present in the waning hours of
Speaker 2: this debate. But we're waiting for something concrete, and that's
Speaker 2: why we want to talk to Douglas holtz Eken. It's
Speaker 2: been a while the president of the American Action Forum.
Speaker 2: He spent time, as I mentioned, on both sides of
Speaker 2: this issue, as the chief economist Council of Economic Advisors
Speaker 2: and the director of the Congressional Budget Office. So, Douglas,
Speaker 2: what's your thought here? Because a lot of Washington seems
Speaker 2: to think that a shutdown is inevitable at this point,
Speaker 2: it's good to have you back.
Speaker 4: What's your thought?
Speaker 5: Well, I understand why they think it's an there doesn't
Speaker 5: appear to be anything that can pass the House with
Speaker 5: strictly Republican votes and then pass the Senate where they're
Speaker 5: going to need sixty and so they need bipartisan support.
Speaker 5: And in the absence of that, the government closes. Because
Speaker 5: Democrats in the House have no incentive to participate and
Speaker 5: let their problems off the hook. They'll they'll let them
Speaker 5: take the blame for shutting the government. Then they'll come
Speaker 5: back and pass something in a bipartisan fashion in both
Speaker 5: houses and this will be behind us. But we first
Speaker 5: have to go through the ritual of shutting the government
Speaker 5: and hopefully that is very short lived and has a
Speaker 5: very small impact on the American people.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Intelligence is putting, i believe, seventy percent odds on
Speaker 2: a shutdown that would last roughly a week. We've heard
Speaker 2: from some Republican members say, get ready for a ten
Speaker 2: days shutdown. At what point, Douglas, does the duration matter?
Speaker 5: Well, the duration matters because you know, while lots of
Speaker 5: essential government activities will continue, there are things that people
Speaker 5: think are essential in their lives that will not happen.
Speaker 5: So if for example, you want to close on a
Speaker 5: home and you need flood insurance. If they close on
Speaker 5: September thirtieth, we're not going to have a national flood
Speaker 5: insurance program. New policies can't be issued. People can't close
Speaker 5: on their homes. Is that a big macro event?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 5: Is it a nuisance in an American person's life? Yes? Absolutely?
Speaker 5: And passports don't get renewed, and all sorts of the
Speaker 5: routine functions of government can interrupted. People don't like it,
Speaker 5: and every day that it goes on, congressmen hear about it,
Speaker 5: and pretty soon it's over.
Speaker 4: So let's say they blow it.
Speaker 2: Your view, as the former director of the CBO, at
Speaker 2: what point will the calculation be made?
Speaker 6: Then?
Speaker 2: If this, say, goes beyond a week or beyond the
Speaker 2: weekend on what we pay for, how will those decisions
Speaker 2: be made? Is that the Office of Budget Management or
Speaker 2: is this CBO overseeing this?
Speaker 4: Where does it come together? So there are.
Speaker 5: Some shutdown rules that have been drafted, guidance that will
Speaker 5: come from the Opfice of Management Budget and they'll send
Speaker 5: it out to all the agencies, and they will identify
Speaker 5: essential employees who want to show up for work, whether
Speaker 5: they're paid or not, and the others will be furloughed
Speaker 5: and then the Treasury will have the responsibility of using
Speaker 5: its cash as available to pay bills as possible, and
Speaker 5: the responsibility will lie there.
Speaker 2: Kevin McCarthy says he's asked the White House to work
Speaker 2: with Congress and not just send requests for supplemental What
Speaker 2: role should the President be playing.
Speaker 5: In this, Well, I mean, I think you think about
Speaker 5: the endgame. The endgame is there's a large omnibus appropriations
Speaker 5: bill that gets drafted in the Senate and thus can
Speaker 5: get bipartisan support. By definition, has to have the support
Speaker 5: of the White House. There's no point in vtailing such
Speaker 5: a vehicle. It will have in it whatever necessary funds
Speaker 5: for the Disaster Relief Fund, which is a real pressing issue.
Speaker 5: FEMA is running out of money and any additional funding
Speaker 5: for Ukraine supplementals, and it will come over from the
Speaker 5: Senate to the House. It will pass with both the
Speaker 5: support of Democrats who the White House will be getting
Speaker 5: lined up and Republicans who choose to support it, and
Speaker 5: that's where we'll end up. So if I'm the White House,
Speaker 5: I'm shaping what does that look like right now, because
Speaker 5: you want to have that ready to go as soon
Speaker 5: as possible.
Speaker 2: So The first matter to deal with here is potential
Speaker 2: continuing resolution. There are a number of Republican members of
Speaker 2: the House who say, hell no, we've heard about a
Speaker 2: triggering emotion to vacate if that happens, But that's number one.
Speaker 2: I just want to get your take on these, because
Speaker 2: the CR buys some time, maybe a month.
Speaker 4: Do you think, first of all, that that will pass.
Speaker 5: I don't, and I don't have any special insight. I'm
Speaker 5: listening to Bloomberg and reading the papers like everyone else.
Speaker 5: But if you start counting on your fingers, you get
Speaker 5: to five Republicans who have said they will not support
Speaker 5: a CR. Well, they can't lose five votes, so that
Speaker 5: doesn't appear to have a path forward at the moment.
Speaker 5: They might be able to add onto a CR some
Speaker 5: additional supplements like the disaster relief to make it more enticing.
Speaker 5: That'll get it out of the House, but the Senate
Speaker 5: won't pass that. The Senate will insist on Ukraine funding
Speaker 5: and that won't pass the House. So this is where
Speaker 5: I see the logjam. It's the initial bill that won't
Speaker 5: make it through because House Democrats have non centerve to
Speaker 5: participate in House, Republicans can't muster the votes. That's the
Speaker 5: real problem.
Speaker 2: Well, that's fascinating because a lot of people are looking
Speaker 2: at the end of the year, maybe walking up the holidays.
Speaker 2: You think it just happens now the fiscal year, we
Speaker 2: go into a shutdown in October.
Speaker 5: I think it happens quickly, you know, bluntly. I think
Speaker 5: there's some members of the House who want to shut
Speaker 5: the government and they have the power to do it.
Speaker 5: I mean, if you can get four of your friends,
Speaker 5: it's over. So that'll happen because they want it to
Speaker 5: happen and they have the ability to make it happen.
Speaker 5: And then we start figuring out the realistic future where
Speaker 5: the Congress and United States funds the federal government, which
Speaker 5: has to happen and will happen. And the question is
Speaker 5: how long is the disruption that we have to suffer
Speaker 5: before we get to that business.
Speaker 2: It's looking like the Ukraine funding will not be part
Speaker 2: of a continuing resolution.
Speaker 4: That appears to be a deal breaker.
Speaker 2: But to your point, you're not passing a budget without
Speaker 2: some increase in funding here to get it through the Senate.
Speaker 2: A lot of this might hinge on this meeting tomorrow
Speaker 2: when President Zelenski comes to Washington. Kevin McCarthy was asked
Speaker 2: again today about the questions that he and other potentially
Speaker 2: skeptical members of his conference will have for Zelensky when
Speaker 2: they meet. A little bit less downbeat than we heard
Speaker 2: from him twenty four hours ago.
Speaker 5: Here he is, these are hard working taxpayer dollars. I
Speaker 5: want to make sure there's accountability where the resources are going.
Speaker 5: I want to see a plan of what we're looking
Speaker 5: for for victory, and I think members will sit and
Speaker 5: have their questions as well.
Speaker 2: I won't ask you to be a military analyst for us, Douglas,
Speaker 2: but when it comes to this issue of accountability, what
Speaker 2: would that look like? How could that actually work in
Speaker 2: a way short of a full audit of everything that's
Speaker 2: already been spent.
Speaker 4: Maybe that's part of this.
Speaker 2: How would you sell that to members who say, not
Speaker 2: necessarily no more money for Ukraine, but new accountability for Ukraine.
Speaker 5: Well, I think the number one thing would be to
Speaker 5: have a convincing demonstration presentation on their efforts to root
Speaker 5: out corruption and fraud in Ukraine. This has been an
Speaker 5: ongoing issue. People have lost their jobs over so it's
Speaker 5: not a secret, and some members are nervous about sending
Speaker 5: more money to a government that has an ongoing corruption problem,
Speaker 5: and the money may not be going to fight military.
Speaker 7: War.
Speaker 5: So you know that, I think is the key. What
Speaker 5: evidence he can bring about his efforts to clean up
Speaker 5: the operation of his government. I'm not sure, but I
Speaker 5: think that's the key issue.
Speaker 2: So a shutdown in October, when do we actually get
Speaker 2: a budget for next fiscal here, Douglas roe Am, I
Speaker 2: just asking too much right now?
Speaker 5: Well, there isn't going to be a budget for next
Speaker 5: for a few years. So, as it turns out, while
Speaker 5: we're having this conversation, the House Budget Committee has finally
Speaker 5: marked up a budget resolution, something it should have done
Speaker 5: in March, and the Senate Budget Commute has no intention
Speaker 5: of doing one, and neither chamber is going to vote
Speaker 5: on a budget. So we have flunked the let's budget
Speaker 5: and figure out how to govern steps that they're gone.
Speaker 5: All we're going to do is pass a very large
Speaker 5: spending bill that has enough money in different places to
Speaker 5: get sixty votes in the Senate and two eighteen in
Speaker 5: the House. And that's going to be a reactionary way
Speaker 5: to find the government, not a plan, not a budget.
Speaker 5: There's nothing to be proud of in this, but we
Speaker 5: will get through it.
Speaker 2: So much for regular order. Douglas Holtzecon, don't be a stranger.
Speaker 2: It's great to have you back meebe. We'll talk again
Speaker 2: on the other side of this thing, because we've got
Speaker 2: a lot to learn still. He's the president the American
Speaker 2: Action Forum. I'm Jill Matthew in Washington with an eye
Speaker 2: on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Speaker 4: Let's assemble our panel.
Speaker 2: We're going to be hearing in a few moments from
Speaker 2: Gary Gensler at the SEC who talked to her own
Speaker 2: Kyley Lines earlier today. But Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano
Speaker 2: jump in now as Bloomberg Politics contributors, our signature panel.
Speaker 2: As we spent some time with Douglas holtz Ichan, I'd
Speaker 2: love to hear from both of you. With an eye
Speaker 2: on this conversation over at Ukraine. You heard Kevin McCarthy
Speaker 2: talking about Ukraine. Rick, have you heard Ran Paul. Because
Speaker 2: this is in the Senate, of course, where there's supposed
Speaker 2: to be more galvanized support, and I think we can
Speaker 2: credibly say that there is for the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 2: But the Senator for Kentucky is apparently done. Here's what
Speaker 2: he said on the House floor.
Speaker 8: It's not just that this is not helping our national security.
Speaker 8: The very threat to our national security is our debt.
Speaker 8: The more we send money overseas, the more we deplete
Speaker 8: our munitions, the worst things get. No matter how sympathetic
Speaker 8: we are to the Ukrainian people, we must put the
Speaker 8: American people first. And to that end, I encourage my
Speaker 8: colleagues to pose any effort to hold the federal government
Speaker 8: hostage for Ukraine funding.
Speaker 2: So Rick Davis ran Paul apparently the one to crystallize
Speaker 2: the argument against Ukraine funding.
Speaker 4: Will others join him in the Senate?
Speaker 6: Very few? I mean, there are some that have expressed
Speaker 6: reservations about the use of the funds for Ukraine. And
Speaker 6: ran Paul, though, is in a distinctly minority position. I mean,
Speaker 6: you probably have eighty five to ninety Senate votes both parties,
Speaker 6: the support increasing and funding and support for Ukraine. And
Speaker 6: I don't know what he thinks about, like holding on
Speaker 6: to all those munitions. Is he waiting for Russia to
Speaker 6: invade Florida and then he'll go ahead and use him
Speaker 6: or what's his plan?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 6: I mean, I don't understand the idea that we don't
Speaker 6: want to use the weapons we make to create peace
Speaker 6: around Europe, especially, So it's a frustrating thing to hear
Speaker 6: him talk. But you know, not many people are listening,
Speaker 6: certainly not other senators. And so he's making news, but
Speaker 6: he's not making history.
Speaker 2: What does this tell those negotiating a budget plan? Though, Genie,
Speaker 2: it's not getting any easier here in the House. And
Speaker 2: now you've got a senator crystallizing an argument that others
Speaker 2: might be able to lift others on the House side
Speaker 2: who are pushing back on Kevin McCarthy.
Speaker 9: Yeah. I mean, you know, it's interesting because I have
Speaker 9: talked to several people in the last couple of days
Speaker 9: who privately have expressed concern, as much as they support
Speaker 9: Ukraine in the effort against Russia, expressed concern about making
Speaker 9: the case that this is in the interest of the
Speaker 9: United States to keep spending this money. And so I
Speaker 9: do think that this argument, I agree, it probably doesn't
Speaker 9: have many legs in the Senate. It's going to give
Speaker 9: some oxygen to some of these Republicans in the House,
Speaker 9: but I do think there is a necessity for the
Speaker 9: administration and for Vladimir Zelensky when he comes to make
Speaker 9: the case, and he's making it forcefully right now in
Speaker 9: the UN that this is in the interest of the
Speaker 9: United States of democracies around the world, and that we
Speaker 9: have an obligation here because this is something you do
Speaker 9: hear Americans scratching their head about. So as frustrating as
Speaker 9: rand Paul is, I think he's raising something that does
Speaker 9: need to be addressed straight on to make this case.
Speaker 9: And I think the President tried yes yesterday, but more
Speaker 9: needs to be done on this score. So we move
Speaker 9: public opinion on this issue. It's critical.
Speaker 2: Well, the democracy argument is clearly not enough for everybody.
Speaker 2: Rick when it comes to accountability, what kind of a
Speaker 2: system could be put in place that would give skeptics
Speaker 2: the ability to track the money?
Speaker 6: Well, first of all, I mean there's not a penny
Speaker 6: that's spent that we don't have, you know, federal government
Speaker 6: employees tracking where it goes and what it does. And
Speaker 6: the vast majority of this Remember, these are checks that
Speaker 6: are going to the US defense industrial complex. They're not
Speaker 6: going to Ukraine. Where do you think the munitions are
Speaker 6: coming from? You know, we have American jobs building you know,
Speaker 6: this kind of weaponry and shipping it off to the Ukraine.
Speaker 6: So there's only a fraction, especially the economic aid that's
Speaker 6: actually being spent by Ukrainians. And I'm actually encouraged by
Speaker 6: the steps that President Zelensky has made recently in cleaning
Speaker 6: house in defense ministry of his own country to keep
Speaker 6: people who might see some profiteering being made to kick
Speaker 6: him out. I mean, that's really tough in the middle
Speaker 6: of a war effort to clean house like that, And
Speaker 6: kudos to him for keeping frankly common cause with the
Speaker 6: American taxpayer. I think we can be encouraged by.
Speaker 2: That fascinating conversation as always with Rick and Janie, and
Speaker 2: we add another voice to our conversation today and that's
Speaker 2: the Chair of the SEC. Bloomberg's Kaylee Liones, was on
Speaker 2: Capitol Hill this morning spent some time with the Chair
Speaker 2: as he was up there for a hearing talking about
Speaker 2: a range of issues, including this matter of a shutdown.
Speaker 2: We're trying to hear from as many policy makers as
Speaker 2: we can in Washington for their view on this. Of course,
Speaker 2: his agency would be subject to some changes in a
Speaker 2: government shutdown, and that's where Kayley began the conversation with
Speaker 2: the impact on financial regulation here he.
Speaker 7: Is I would say first the market regulators, Security IS
Speaker 7: and Exchange Commission. I'll leave Chair Benham to speak about
Speaker 7: the other great market regulator, the CFGC. But we're appropriated
Speaker 7: agencies and so public should understand we will largely be
Speaker 7: a skeletal staff under the laws, and so the normal
Speaker 7: oversight we have in markets will not be possible, just
Speaker 7: simply not for how many days that happens. Companies that
Speaker 7: want to go public may not find that their filings
Speaker 7: could even be reviewed by the SEC and the like
Speaker 7: during pendency of a shutdown. Those are the most immediate functions.
Speaker 7: But also we won't be able to oversee the markets
Speaker 7: if there's significant events or in the like.
Speaker 10: But you don't anticipate significant events could emanate from the
Speaker 10: government shutting down potentially for a prolonged period of time
Speaker 10: that would be disruptive to the apsual activity.
Speaker 7: We have the deepest, most liquid capital markets, but the base,
Speaker 7: the absolute base of that capital markets, is our US
Speaker 7: treasury market. It's about a quarter of the market, it's
Speaker 7: twenty five trillion dollars, but it's the base, and the
Speaker 7: trust in that market is in part just that we
Speaker 7: function well that we are able to resolve our differences
Speaker 7: in our democratic ways. But importantly, the treasury markets will
Speaker 7: still function, They'll be trading in the stock markets. You
Speaker 7: just want to have the oversight of the market regulators.
Speaker 2: Gary Gensler, a chair of the SEC, talking with our
Speaker 2: own Kayley Lines earlier today on Capitol Hill as we
Speaker 2: bring back Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano. It's just a reminder, Genie,
Speaker 2: he doesn't sound terribly worried about things, but yet another
Speaker 2: element of a shutdown that we don't always think about.
Speaker 2: That's the watchdog, I guess would be what in the doghouse?
Speaker 9: Yeah, that's right, And I think these conversations are critically
Speaker 9: important because we keep hearing from Republicans. You know, we
Speaker 9: heard from Andy Biggs in the last forty eight hours.
Speaker 9: My constituents are okay with a shutdown. It's a pause,
Speaker 9: as he describes it, and the impact is going to
Speaker 9: be minimal. But as that conversation just suggested and showed
Speaker 9: us in so many ways, the impact is real, and
Speaker 9: so I think we need to and also to go
Speaker 9: back to your conversation earlier.
Speaker 1: You know, the.
Speaker 9: Reality is is that you cannot run and function a
Speaker 9: government this way. This is no way to run anything,
Speaker 9: let alone a government. And so there is an impact,
Speaker 9: as much as we're told there's not. If people want
Speaker 9: to get religion on spending, God bless them, we should,
Speaker 9: but this is not the way to do it. There
Speaker 9: is damage on the other side when we proceed down
Speaker 9: this path.
Speaker 4: Where's your head on this at this point?
Speaker 2: Rick, Obviously a government shutdown isn't going to shake the
Speaker 2: world here. We avoided a default earlier this year. There
Speaker 2: are some Republicans like Mick Mulvaney who sat right in
Speaker 2: this room and said, hey, calm down here, we're not
Speaker 2: shutting down the government. It's you know, it's a partial shutdown,
Speaker 2: and we can direct money to places that we need
Speaker 2: to go for a pretty good chunk of time. Where
Speaker 2: does duration become a problem for you?
Speaker 11: Yeah?
Speaker 6: Well, look, I mean duration matters on those things that
Speaker 6: you know, checks need to be delivered. I think you know,
Speaker 6: Cheermyer makes a good point, right, is that on the
Speaker 6: regulatory agency side, Well, your paperwork just sits in a
Speaker 6: bin until we get back to work.
Speaker 4: Tough luck.
Speaker 6: You should call your congressman. But in things that we
Speaker 6: need to cut checks for military pay things like that,
Speaker 6: especially if it goes beyond just a limited shutdown. Uh,
Speaker 6: those really have a pinch, and those can affect us.
Speaker 6: But the latter part that he makes and Genie picked
Speaker 6: up on, is, you know, we we need to quit
Speaker 6: operating like a third world country. You know, we're we're
Speaker 6: supposed to be the standard of democracies around the world.
Speaker 6: We have to actually start acting like it if we
Speaker 6: want others to participate in this great democratic experiment, and
Speaker 6: we have to show them way to do it that
Speaker 6: looks a lot better than what we're currently doing.
Speaker 1: You're listening to The Bloomberg Sound on pun Cast. Catch
Speaker 1: the program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 1: the tune in alf Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa
Speaker 1: from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play
Speaker 1: Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Rand Paul, who we heard from earlier, was urging his
Speaker 2: colleagues to vote against increased Ukraine funding. He said, this
Speaker 2: isn't a democracy anyway over there in Ukraine. They canceled
Speaker 2: their presidential election. Of course, things are a little bit
Speaker 2: difficult there at the time. But we heard from Voladimir
Speaker 2: Zelenski himself in an interview with CNN this following his
Speaker 2: address at the UN yesterday, and he was asked about
Speaker 2: Donald Trump's claims, as we hear frequently, to be able
Speaker 2: to negotiate an end of this war in twenty four
Speaker 2: hours in his first day in office. He says, not
Speaker 2: only is it possible, it'll be easy. He's speaking in
Speaker 2: English here, but I think you'll get the point in
Speaker 2: his response.
Speaker 11: The question is to Trump, or maybe it's not his idea, somebody,
Speaker 11: what what the United States really ready to give to
Speaker 11: put him from your territories? What you are ready to
Speaker 11: give but for the possibility, possibility not to risk after
Speaker 11: his public wars about nuclear weapon.
Speaker 2: So after he's invoked, after Putin has invoked the possible
Speaker 2: use of a nuclear weapon, how can you negotiate with
Speaker 2: him about anything?
Speaker 4: What would you be willing to give him?
Speaker 2: As what he's saying, Genie, how does that argument resonate
Speaker 2: tomorrow in Washington?
Speaker 9: I think it's gonna resonate incredibly strongly. And he makes
Speaker 9: an really important point, And you know, these are the
Speaker 9: exact points that the American public needs to hear over
Speaker 9: and over again. You know, Rick was saying earlier something
Speaker 9: I wish the administration would say about this money. These
Speaker 9: are exactly the arguments that need to be had, because
Speaker 9: what we're hearing, or what people are hearing out there,
Speaker 9: is that we are giving billions of dollars away to
Speaker 9: a corrupt regime while we have trouble at home that
Speaker 9: is got to be countered. And so Zelensky does a
Speaker 9: very good job making the case and asking Donald Trump
Speaker 9: and anybody else who has this idea, what are you
Speaker 9: planning to give up? And likewise we have to ask,
Speaker 9: we have to explain to people where this money is
Speaker 9: coming from and what it's for and why it's critical.
Speaker 9: Those arguments have to be had over and over again
Speaker 9: so people feel assured and rightly so, that their money
Speaker 9: and their time and their energy is being well spent.
Speaker 9: And the fight that we are in, as distance that
Speaker 9: we are from it, is one that we should be
Speaker 9: in as it pertains to Russia and Ukraine.
Speaker 2: How does President Zelenski need to compose himself tomorrow? Rick,
Speaker 2: He was criticized, for instance, for not wearing a suit
Speaker 2: when he addressed a joint session of Congress. He's going
Speaker 2: to be going with his hand out to Speaker McCarthy
Speaker 2: and other members who might, according to McCarthy, have some
Speaker 2: difficult questions for him.
Speaker 4: How does he approach this?
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean obviously his brand is military warfare outfits, right,
Speaker 6: and I guess that's that's part of it. But look,
Speaker 6: I think he has to be appreciative of what the
Speaker 6: United States has already done. We've done a lot, We've
Speaker 6: done more than anybody else. And I think he needs
Speaker 6: to those stress this urgency. These aren't you know, these
Speaker 6: arguments that people are making against this aren't moral equivalents.
Speaker 6: You know, if Vladimir Putin is able to threaten Western
Speaker 6: countries with nuclear weapons, to leave him alone and let
Speaker 6: him take land in the Ukraine. What's the stop from saying, hey, Germany,
Speaker 6: you got to get rid of those US bases there,
Speaker 6: or I'm going to New you know, one of your city,
Speaker 6: or Poland you know, how about those missile defense systems
Speaker 6: that you just bought for the United States? Take them down,
Speaker 6: or I'm going to New I mean, like, this is
Speaker 6: not the kind of behavior you want to start rewarding.
Speaker 6: And so unless you take a strong stand against this
Speaker 6: one dictator, you're going to have a European turmoil, which
Speaker 6: affects all of our security and economic prosperity.
Speaker 2: We're going to be throwing to our special FED coverage
Speaker 2: in just a couple of moments. I want to get
Speaker 2: both of you on this matter of a dress code.
Speaker 2: Since we're talking about this, I guess President Selenski won't
Speaker 2: need to worry about what he's wearing if he enters
Speaker 2: the Senate chamber. We told you about this in response
Speaker 2: to Senator John Fetterman's preference wearing shorts and hoodies, and
Speaker 2: that will keep him on the floor without having to
Speaker 2: give a thumbs up from the door like he's been doing.
Speaker 2: But I just saw him presiding over the Senate when
Speaker 2: Ran Paul made his comments on Ukraine, John Fetterman was presiding.
Speaker 2: Where's short sleeve shirt? And we've got a bit of
Speaker 2: an update on this. A group of forty six Senate
Speaker 2: Republicans that's almost all of them, sending a letter to
Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer asking that he reversed his decision here to
Speaker 2: relax the Senate dress code. I believe it was Susan
Speaker 2: Collins Rick who said that maybe she should start wearing
Speaker 2: a bikini in the Senate. I don't know where either
Speaker 2: of your heads are on this, Ricket. Is this going
Speaker 2: to turn around? Or do we wait for a potential
Speaker 2: different leader? What's the future dressing?
Speaker 6: I just think, you know, I think it's a mistake.
Speaker 6: I think Chuck Schumer is lessening the value of the chamber.
Speaker 6: The Senate is the greatest deliberate body in the world,
Speaker 6: and it should look like it, and looking like it
Speaker 6: is not a weekend at Bernie's where everyone's wearing shades
Speaker 6: and shorts. And I certainly think that Susan Collins made
Speaker 6: the right point, although just the concept is just so
Speaker 6: bothersome to me that you should wake up, Chuck Schumer
Speaker 6: and rescind and go back to a policy that you know,
Speaker 6: really I think maintains the level of the Senate Away
Speaker 6: it should be.
Speaker 2: The response from John Fetterman Genie talking to the Hill newspaper, quote, America,
Speaker 2: it's about freedom and choice. It's like a burger king
Speaker 2: you rule kind of thing.
Speaker 4: Unquote.
Speaker 2: Is this working for you or does this go right
Speaker 2: back when Republicans potentially take control of the Senate someday
Speaker 2: or both?
Speaker 4: All right with you?
Speaker 9: The burger king thing that goes over my head completely.
Speaker 9: You know, I do think it's a bit of a
Speaker 9: bridge too far for Susan Collins to be talking about
Speaker 9: wearing bathing suits on the floor. That's not what the
Speaker 9: senator with the majority leader is talking about. I think
Speaker 9: we should have faith that our leaders can make a
Speaker 9: dignified choice for clothing, and that the rule that they
Speaker 9: have to stand in their Jim Shortz on the you know,
Speaker 9: with one foot in the cloakroom and one foot on
Speaker 9: the floor to vote is a little fashion at this point.
Speaker 9: And let them have their way. And good for Zelenski.
Speaker 9: He's in a war. He should wear his military dress.
Speaker 4: All right. So where to go with the That was
Speaker 4: my follow up?
Speaker 2: There go with the the olive thing and where the suit?
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to the Sound on podcast. Make sure
Speaker 2: to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, and
Speaker 2: anywhere else you get your podcasts, And you can find
Speaker 2: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at one pm
Speaker 2: Eastern Time at Bloomberg dot com.