1
00:00:02,640 --> 00:00:05,320
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Penl Podcast. I'm Paul swing you

2
00:00:05,360 --> 00:00:07,680
Speaker 1: along with my co host Lisa Brahma Waits. Each day

3
00:00:07,720 --> 00:00:10,240
Speaker 1: we bring you the most noteworthy and useful interviews for

4
00:00:10,280 --> 00:00:12,520
Speaker 1: you and your money. Whether at the grocery store or

5
00:00:12,560 --> 00:00:15,480
Speaker 1: the trading floor. Find a Bloomberg Penl podcast on Apple

6
00:00:15,520 --> 00:00:17,959
Speaker 1: podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts, as well as

7
00:00:17,960 --> 00:00:21,800
Speaker 1: that Bloomberg dot com. Do you feel good about yourself

8
00:00:21,840 --> 00:00:24,959
Speaker 1: because you're drinking water instead of soda? Be wary of

9
00:00:25,079 --> 00:00:27,520
Speaker 1: that water? Are joining us now? Is that? Seek all?

10
00:00:27,600 --> 00:00:30,360
Speaker 1: He is author and active as member of the Council

11
00:00:30,360 --> 00:00:32,680
Speaker 1: of Foreign Relations. Do what I guess here at our

12
00:00:32,680 --> 00:00:35,440
Speaker 1: interactive broker studio is he is the author of a

13
00:00:35,520 --> 00:00:39,040
Speaker 1: new book, Troubled Water, What's Wrong with What We Drink?

14
00:00:39,680 --> 00:00:41,760
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about the book and

15
00:00:41,880 --> 00:00:44,520
Speaker 1: about the sort of larger concept here. And you said

16
00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:46,519
Speaker 1: right before we went on air, I'm not here to

17
00:00:46,560 --> 00:00:50,440
Speaker 1: scare anybody. And yet when I was reading through your materials, Uh,

18
00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:53,559
Speaker 1: it's a little bit unnerving to think that a lot

19
00:00:53,600 --> 00:00:55,800
Speaker 1: of the water that people drink, it's not just flint Michigan,

20
00:00:56,760 --> 00:01:00,120
Speaker 1: is contaminated. It's correct almost everywhere in America, there are

21
00:01:00,240 --> 00:01:02,880
Speaker 1: contaminants in our drinking water, and this is probably the

22
00:01:03,000 --> 00:01:06,840
Speaker 1: largest unspoken of public health threat or menace in the

23
00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:10,200
Speaker 1: United States. There's a large number of different chemicals that

24
00:01:10,240 --> 00:01:12,560
Speaker 1: get into our systems through our drinking water that are

25
00:01:12,600 --> 00:01:15,400
Speaker 1: having unknown effects on our bodies, on our endocrin systems,

26
00:01:15,400 --> 00:01:20,000
Speaker 1: as the technical phrase that affects growth, attention, spans, sexual interest, fertility,

27
00:01:20,360 --> 00:01:22,399
Speaker 1: as well as the possibility of cancer. Some of those

28
00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:25,080
Speaker 1: things are already proven scientifically and some are now in

29
00:01:25,120 --> 00:01:27,800
Speaker 1: the process of being investigated. But I would argue that

30
00:01:27,880 --> 00:01:30,480
Speaker 1: not being investigated aggressively enough by the e p A

31
00:01:30,480 --> 00:01:33,680
Speaker 1: an organization that whether it's a Democratic or Republican president

32
00:01:33,760 --> 00:01:37,480
Speaker 1: or Congress, is unfortunately inactive. We're not active enough in

33
00:01:37,600 --> 00:01:39,880
Speaker 1: pursuing what we need to have pursued to get the

34
00:01:39,920 --> 00:01:42,520
Speaker 1: best health profile for all Americans. All Right, So if

35
00:01:42,520 --> 00:01:44,880
Speaker 1: you don't have the best water, what needs to change

36
00:01:44,880 --> 00:01:47,800
Speaker 1: within the US to improve the quality of our water. Well,

37
00:01:47,840 --> 00:01:49,760
Speaker 1: first of all, there aren't nearly There are about a

38
00:01:49,800 --> 00:01:52,600
Speaker 1: hundred thousand chemicals that are in commerce in the United States,

39
00:01:52,600 --> 00:01:57,480
Speaker 1: maybe even more, and you would think that the would

40
00:01:57,480 --> 00:01:59,920
Speaker 1: be under some type of investigation or regulation by the

41
00:02:00,120 --> 00:02:03,080
Speaker 1: PA because some significant percentage of them get into our

42
00:02:03,160 --> 00:02:06,560
Speaker 1: drinking water and some percentage of those have effect on

43
00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:09,440
Speaker 1: our health. But of that hundred thousand chemicals that are

44
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:11,560
Speaker 1: in commerce the United States, sounds hard to believe this,

45
00:02:11,600 --> 00:02:15,959
Speaker 1: but it's true, only seventy seven zero are being regulated

46
00:02:16,000 --> 00:02:18,400
Speaker 1: by the e p A for drinking water purposes. And

47
00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:21,280
Speaker 1: as shocking as that low number is, even more shocking

48
00:02:21,520 --> 00:02:24,040
Speaker 1: given how much chemicals is used in daily life in America.

49
00:02:24,280 --> 00:02:26,400
Speaker 1: Even more shocking is the fact that the last time

50
00:02:26,760 --> 00:02:29,760
Speaker 1: the e p A regulated any chemical whatsoever or any

51
00:02:29,760 --> 00:02:33,799
Speaker 1: contaminant whatsoever, was twenty three years ago. They have been

52
00:02:33,840 --> 00:02:37,080
Speaker 1: inactive for generation and longer, and that is putting our

53
00:02:37,160 --> 00:02:39,800
Speaker 1: health at risk. Is there any map of where we

54
00:02:39,880 --> 00:02:43,040
Speaker 1: can and can drink water? Well, tell me who you

55
00:02:43,080 --> 00:02:44,560
Speaker 1: live and I'll let you know. Okay, I'll give you

56
00:02:44,600 --> 00:02:48,600
Speaker 1: my address after this. Seriously, it's anyone tracking or sort

57
00:02:48,600 --> 00:02:50,920
Speaker 1: of trying to do this scientifically. Well. Actually, there's an

58
00:02:50,960 --> 00:02:54,079
Speaker 1: organization called the Environmental Working Group where on their website

59
00:02:54,080 --> 00:02:56,359
Speaker 1: you can punch in your zip code and they can

60
00:02:56,360 --> 00:03:00,519
Speaker 1: tell you, under the federally filed documents by each hility,

61
00:03:00,840 --> 00:03:03,880
Speaker 1: what contaminants have been found in that ZIP codes water.

62
00:03:04,280 --> 00:03:07,280
Speaker 1: Whether or not that's particularly to your particular tap, Lisa,

63
00:03:07,360 --> 00:03:09,480
Speaker 1: I can't say for sure, but invite me over for

64
00:03:09,560 --> 00:03:13,600
Speaker 1: lunch and I'll bring my testing you. All right, So,

65
00:03:14,360 --> 00:03:18,040
Speaker 1: water filtration plans, I thought that was the answer. Yeah,

66
00:03:18,080 --> 00:03:20,680
Speaker 1: you would think so. The problem the problem POLL is

67
00:03:20,760 --> 00:03:24,680
Speaker 1: that both on the wastewater side and on the water filtration,

68
00:03:24,720 --> 00:03:26,400
Speaker 1: which is the where they distribute the water to our

69
00:03:26,400 --> 00:03:29,560
Speaker 1: homes from, on both sides, we're using technologies that are

70
00:03:29,600 --> 00:03:32,800
Speaker 1: about a hundred or more years old. And although in

71
00:03:32,840 --> 00:03:35,000
Speaker 1: the interim places have been rebuilt and they're pretty and

72
00:03:35,000 --> 00:03:38,120
Speaker 1: they're nice parking lots and beautiful reception areas, the truth

73
00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:41,080
Speaker 1: is that the technology is being used never grew up

74
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:43,280
Speaker 1: along with the time that America became what will call

75
00:03:43,440 --> 00:03:47,600
Speaker 1: highly medicalized society, where now one of where seventy of

76
00:03:47,640 --> 00:03:50,960
Speaker 1: all Americans twelve and overtake at least one pharmaceutical product

77
00:03:50,960 --> 00:03:56,080
Speaker 1: to day. Um people people about Americans twelve and overtake

78
00:03:56,360 --> 00:03:59,240
Speaker 1: five or more prescription pills a day, and that all

79
00:03:59,240 --> 00:04:01,640
Speaker 1: gets into our water a stream. On the inbound side,

80
00:04:01,960 --> 00:04:03,840
Speaker 1: we still do we did a hundred plus years ago

81
00:04:03,920 --> 00:04:06,400
Speaker 1: to get rid of cholera and dysentery and typhoid fever.

82
00:04:06,680 --> 00:04:10,360
Speaker 1: We put a dot of chlorine or chlorine like product

83
00:04:10,400 --> 00:04:13,200
Speaker 1: in it to to cleanse the water, but we don't

84
00:04:13,240 --> 00:04:17,200
Speaker 1: do anything to remove from that water these pharmaceutical residues

85
00:04:17,240 --> 00:04:19,440
Speaker 1: and other chemicals that have found their way into our

86
00:04:19,480 --> 00:04:22,200
Speaker 1: water stream, such that I'll give one example of many

87
00:04:22,240 --> 00:04:24,039
Speaker 1: that are in my book Troubled Water, of just one.

88
00:04:24,760 --> 00:04:28,159
Speaker 1: A scientist, independent scientists, with no act to grind, went

89
00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:30,760
Speaker 1: ahead in the Great Lakes vast amount of water so

90
00:04:30,960 --> 00:04:33,640
Speaker 1: be diluted like crazy would think. She tested fish and

91
00:04:33,720 --> 00:04:36,000
Speaker 1: all five of the Great Lakes, and in all five

92
00:04:36,040 --> 00:04:37,680
Speaker 1: of the Great Lakes she found in their brains and

93
00:04:37,680 --> 00:04:41,280
Speaker 1: in their organs and their muscle, she found residues of

94
00:04:41,279 --> 00:04:44,880
Speaker 1: of all kinds of psychiatric medicines like solof and Selexa

95
00:04:44,960 --> 00:04:48,880
Speaker 1: and fourteen other medications. Now, if that's going there, that

96
00:04:49,000 --> 00:04:50,880
Speaker 1: water is then being sent back to our homes for

97
00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:53,680
Speaker 1: us to drink, and we are getting that dosage is

98
00:04:53,680 --> 00:04:57,240
Speaker 1: back in micro quantities, and we're getting that in magnified amounts.

99
00:04:57,240 --> 00:04:59,800
Speaker 1: Also for eating the fish. I'm just trying. I'm going

100
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:03,760
Speaker 1: through the sub extrapolation getting increasingly concerned. I'm just wondering,

101
00:05:03,960 --> 00:05:06,280
Speaker 1: you know, how normal is this with other countries as well?

102
00:05:06,279 --> 00:05:08,320
Speaker 1: I mean, is there just sort of this problem globally

103
00:05:08,440 --> 00:05:11,800
Speaker 1: or is the US particularly bad. The more the more industrialized,

104
00:05:12,000 --> 00:05:15,520
Speaker 1: the more industrialized society is, the more likely you are

105
00:05:15,600 --> 00:05:18,400
Speaker 1: to have these problems. Now, there are some countries, UH,

106
00:05:18,520 --> 00:05:22,719
Speaker 1: particularly Israel and Singapore that have very aggressive systems for

107
00:05:22,800 --> 00:05:27,160
Speaker 1: purifying their water for reasons unrelated to UH necessarily health reasons,

108
00:05:27,160 --> 00:05:29,400
Speaker 1: but really for water scarcity reasons. They have a reason

109
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:31,040
Speaker 1: to do this. And there are some parts of the

110
00:05:31,080 --> 00:05:34,200
Speaker 1: United States, and I talked about in a chapter Orange County, California,

111
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,760
Speaker 1: which has made a decision to basically ignore the e

112
00:05:36,839 --> 00:05:40,120
Speaker 1: p A guidelines, go way above it, and they demonstrate

113
00:05:40,120 --> 00:05:43,600
Speaker 1: the fact that using known technologies at very reasonable prices,

114
00:05:43,920 --> 00:05:46,280
Speaker 1: you can have the safest drinking water possible you can

115
00:05:46,360 --> 00:05:48,120
Speaker 1: of pure water. All you would think that if they

116
00:05:48,120 --> 00:05:50,760
Speaker 1: had Zoloft in the water, Prozac or something, everybody'd be

117
00:05:50,760 --> 00:05:53,640
Speaker 1: a little b happier a little bit exactly. So it's

118
00:05:53,800 --> 00:05:58,120
Speaker 1: seth So private versus public water utilities tell us the

119
00:05:58,480 --> 00:06:01,039
Speaker 1: compare and contrast there. Okay, So, so this was a

120
00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:02,400
Speaker 1: piece that I wrote the other day for The Wall

121
00:06:02,400 --> 00:06:05,080
Speaker 1: Street Journal, and I wanna I wanna highlight something that

122
00:06:05,200 --> 00:06:07,640
Speaker 1: is a completely unknown fact in American life. Even when

123
00:06:07,640 --> 00:06:09,760
Speaker 1: I talk to members of Congress and senators, they have

124
00:06:09,839 --> 00:06:12,960
Speaker 1: no idea. This is the case. You would think, rationally speaking,

125
00:06:13,000 --> 00:06:15,960
Speaker 1: fifty states, maybe every state should have at least one

126
00:06:15,960 --> 00:06:18,600
Speaker 1: water utility, maybe two, maybe three. So maybe there should

127
00:06:18,640 --> 00:06:21,159
Speaker 1: be three hundred, four hundred, maybe five. What are utilities?

128
00:06:21,240 --> 00:06:24,560
Speaker 1: United States? Tops? Even though you could say that one

129
00:06:24,640 --> 00:06:27,320
Speaker 1: utility could cover several states, we have in the United

130
00:06:27,360 --> 00:06:32,800
Speaker 1: States over fifty thousand what are utilities? One county, Los

131
00:06:32,839 --> 00:06:36,520
Speaker 1: Angeles County has two hundred separate water utilities. These are

132
00:06:36,680 --> 00:06:40,400
Speaker 1: very tiny. They have no ability to have the financial

133
00:06:40,520 --> 00:06:44,279
Speaker 1: well wherewithal in order to get the financing that they

134
00:06:44,400 --> 00:06:46,919
Speaker 1: need to make sure that they can hire up to

135
00:06:47,040 --> 00:06:49,720
Speaker 1: date up that they can buy up to date technologies,

136
00:06:49,960 --> 00:06:53,800
Speaker 1: hire the most advanced scientists and engineers, and also fix

137
00:06:53,839 --> 00:06:57,160
Speaker 1: their broken infrastructure. Because this is crazy, just real quick, here,

138
00:06:57,320 --> 00:06:59,679
Speaker 1: who has the interest of keeping all of these smaller

139
00:06:59,720 --> 00:07:03,080
Speaker 1: util it is open the utilities, okay, so, but no

140
00:07:03,120 --> 00:07:05,920
Speaker 1: one in the public, Lisa, nobody in the public should

141
00:07:06,040 --> 00:07:08,360
Speaker 1: for a second think that this is a good idea,

142
00:07:08,400 --> 00:07:10,360
Speaker 1: and it isn't a good idea. That's why one of

143
00:07:10,360 --> 00:07:13,040
Speaker 1: the main thrust of my book talking about public health

144
00:07:13,080 --> 00:07:16,080
Speaker 1: and water is to say that four big takeaways from

145
00:07:16,080 --> 00:07:19,520
Speaker 1: my book, one of which is we must consolidate our

146
00:07:19,640 --> 00:07:22,800
Speaker 1: drinking water utilities. And by the way, a second point

147
00:07:22,800 --> 00:07:24,360
Speaker 1: that I made in the Journal article is that it

148
00:07:24,400 --> 00:07:27,440
Speaker 1: turns out that about fift of American utilities are in

149
00:07:27,560 --> 00:07:30,360
Speaker 1: private hands, which is invest your own hands, whether they're

150
00:07:30,360 --> 00:07:35,200
Speaker 1: public companies or private companies. Remarkably, digging deep into e

151
00:07:35,360 --> 00:07:39,040
Speaker 1: p A health data, which a couple of professors have done,

152
00:07:39,440 --> 00:07:42,240
Speaker 1: you you learned something remarkable, which is that although you

153
00:07:42,240 --> 00:07:45,040
Speaker 1: would think that public utilities have the public's interests in mind,

154
00:07:45,480 --> 00:07:49,520
Speaker 1: actually there's a much higher incidence of contaminated water in

155
00:07:49,720 --> 00:07:52,120
Speaker 1: public utilities. And the reason for that is because mayors

156
00:07:52,160 --> 00:07:54,960
Speaker 1: want to keep the price of water low and therefore

157
00:07:55,200 --> 00:07:57,840
Speaker 1: they don't get the outcomes you want. Set Segal, thanks

158
00:07:57,840 --> 00:08:01,840
Speaker 1: so much for joining fascinating thing discussion. Set single activist, author,

159
00:08:01,920 --> 00:08:04,840
Speaker 1: member of the Council Foreign Relations, author of Troubled Water,

160
00:08:04,920 --> 00:08:07,720
Speaker 1: What's Wrong with What We Drink? That's coming October one,

161
00:08:07,720 --> 00:08:10,520
Speaker 1: and also author of Let there Be Water Israel Solution

162
00:08:10,600 --> 00:08:13,240
Speaker 1: for water star starved world. I am very interested in that.

163
00:08:13,320 --> 00:08:15,720
Speaker 1: Tom Freedom of New York Times op ed today on

164
00:08:15,800 --> 00:08:29,160
Speaker 1: that topic, using the work of Seth. Very interesting. Time

165
00:08:29,160 --> 00:08:31,480
Speaker 1: to check in with Bloomberg Opinion. We're joined by Pining

166
00:08:31,520 --> 00:08:34,160
Speaker 1: columnist Eric Outunus. He's a senior et F analysts for

167
00:08:34,200 --> 00:08:37,319
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Intelligence and Eric, when you come in here, typically

168
00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:41,199
Speaker 1: we talk about what new cool et F. Vanguard is

169
00:08:41,280 --> 00:08:43,959
Speaker 1: launching a little bit different twists. Today Now they're talking

170
00:08:43,960 --> 00:08:47,440
Speaker 1: about getting into the private equity business. What's going on

171
00:08:47,440 --> 00:08:51,000
Speaker 1: one of our favorite ETF issuer. Yeah. I mean, anytime

172
00:08:51,040 --> 00:08:54,000
Speaker 1: you hear Vanguard getting into something, most people shutter, especially

173
00:08:54,000 --> 00:08:55,760
Speaker 1: if you're in that business. But I would say, if

174
00:08:55,800 --> 00:08:58,280
Speaker 1: you're in private equity, don't worry so much. This is

175
00:08:58,320 --> 00:09:02,199
Speaker 1: really aimed at the advisory business, wealth management. This is Vanguard.

176
00:09:02,280 --> 00:09:04,600
Speaker 1: That's what they want to disrupt here. So if you

177
00:09:04,640 --> 00:09:07,000
Speaker 1: are an advisor and you want to get bigger clients,

178
00:09:07,040 --> 00:09:10,120
Speaker 1: institutional clients, you need private equity. So this is just

179
00:09:10,200 --> 00:09:12,720
Speaker 1: to sort of round out their other offerings. It's right

180
00:09:12,720 --> 00:09:14,679
Speaker 1: in the press release. It says here part of an

181
00:09:14,720 --> 00:09:17,680
Speaker 1: ongoing effort to further expand the suite of products to

182
00:09:17,880 --> 00:09:21,800
Speaker 1: our advisory clients, and Tim Buckley said back in March

183
00:09:21,840 --> 00:09:23,920
Speaker 1: of last year, we have been really he's the CEO,

184
00:09:24,440 --> 00:09:26,960
Speaker 1: He's the CEO of Vanguard. To me, this quote is

185
00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:29,839
Speaker 1: really who should be on alert here. We have been

186
00:09:29,840 --> 00:09:31,880
Speaker 1: really pleased with the price competition we have introduced in

187
00:09:31,880 --> 00:09:35,440
Speaker 1: the mutual fund sphere. We liked that we have had

188
00:09:35,480 --> 00:09:37,280
Speaker 1: that much of an impact that the area that really

189
00:09:37,280 --> 00:09:40,320
Speaker 1: needs to come down in price is advice. Okay, this

190
00:09:40,400 --> 00:09:42,800
Speaker 1: is this is really a compelling point because my first

191
00:09:42,840 --> 00:09:46,480
Speaker 1: initial uh take on this was this is where the

192
00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:49,600
Speaker 1: fees are private equity, and so of course Vanguard's gonna

193
00:09:49,600 --> 00:09:51,839
Speaker 1: want to get into private equity, but it's being submanaged

194
00:09:51,840 --> 00:09:55,480
Speaker 1: by somebody else. This isn't necessarily them building out their

195
00:09:55,520 --> 00:09:59,360
Speaker 1: own private equity capacity within the house. This is more

196
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:02,080
Speaker 1: about what are saying, which is to have a bigger

197
00:10:02,120 --> 00:10:04,920
Speaker 1: suite of offerings to institutions. Is that is that the

198
00:10:05,000 --> 00:10:07,680
Speaker 1: right read of this? Yeah, I'm gonna bet there's no

199
00:10:07,880 --> 00:10:09,920
Speaker 1: uh that. There was nothing in the press release about

200
00:10:09,920 --> 00:10:11,920
Speaker 1: the what the cost would be, But I'm gonna bet

201
00:10:11,920 --> 00:10:13,600
Speaker 1: it's going to be on the cheaper side for a

202
00:10:13,640 --> 00:10:16,840
Speaker 1: private equity fund, probably on the expensive side. If you're

203
00:10:16,880 --> 00:10:19,280
Speaker 1: talking et F prices, but Vanguard is not going to

204
00:10:19,320 --> 00:10:21,840
Speaker 1: do anything that's like, you know, too controlled price wise.

205
00:10:22,000 --> 00:10:27,760
Speaker 1: So then granted, the big loser here is the advisory business.

206
00:10:28,400 --> 00:10:31,160
Speaker 1: But does this also start to put pressure on private

207
00:10:31,160 --> 00:10:33,000
Speaker 1: equity fees in a way that we really haven't seen

208
00:10:33,080 --> 00:10:36,520
Speaker 1: until now. It can, and you know, you cannot underestimate Vanguard.

209
00:10:36,559 --> 00:10:38,880
Speaker 1: I was looking at the flows this year. Vanguard takes

210
00:10:38,880 --> 00:10:41,360
Speaker 1: in more than everybody every year, but this year what's

211
00:10:41,360 --> 00:10:45,480
Speaker 1: interesting is Fidelity, black Rock, Schwab, they're all starting to

212
00:10:45,559 --> 00:10:48,480
Speaker 1: catch up to Vanguard. But the reason they're catching up

213
00:10:48,520 --> 00:10:50,560
Speaker 1: is because they've all just copied Vanguard and they offer

214
00:10:50,640 --> 00:10:53,839
Speaker 1: dirt cheap beta. So in a way, Vanguard is responsible

215
00:10:53,880 --> 00:10:57,080
Speaker 1: for the whole enchilada. Now, if they get into private

216
00:10:57,080 --> 00:10:59,560
Speaker 1: equity and they see clients, maybe come over and work

217
00:10:59,600 --> 00:11:03,520
Speaker 1: with them, possible, But I see the price pressure in

218
00:11:03,559 --> 00:11:06,679
Speaker 1: private equity and it talked to Paul Goldberg RP Analysts

219
00:11:06,679 --> 00:11:09,880
Speaker 1: and he's very adamant about this as well. That's not

220
00:11:09,880 --> 00:11:12,199
Speaker 1: gonna come for a while. We think medium long term

221
00:11:12,240 --> 00:11:15,120
Speaker 1: at best. But right now their advisory business is up

222
00:11:15,160 --> 00:11:18,240
Speaker 1: to a hundred and sixty one billion, and it basically

223
00:11:18,520 --> 00:11:20,439
Speaker 1: is only a couple of years old, so that's a

224
00:11:20,480 --> 00:11:23,000
Speaker 1: fast growth for that business. And remember they have all

225
00:11:23,040 --> 00:11:25,679
Speaker 1: these fund investors who grew up with them and now

226
00:11:25,720 --> 00:11:28,480
Speaker 1: have more complicated life matters. So they've got this natural

227
00:11:28,800 --> 00:11:31,320
Speaker 1: pool of money coming in that they're gonna offer advice on.

228
00:11:31,800 --> 00:11:34,240
Speaker 1: And their fees are low. The highest fee you can

229
00:11:34,280 --> 00:11:36,120
Speaker 1: pay is thirty basis points, but if you have over

230
00:11:36,160 --> 00:11:39,920
Speaker 1: twenty five million, they charge you five. Wow, it's just extraordinary.

231
00:11:39,960 --> 00:11:42,880
Speaker 1: So who are going to be initially kind of the

232
00:11:42,960 --> 00:11:46,440
Speaker 1: customers for this private equities I wouldn't think it would

233
00:11:46,440 --> 00:11:51,000
Speaker 1: be appropriate for every you know, individual investor for example, Uh, institutions, right,

234
00:11:51,040 --> 00:11:52,800
Speaker 1: so you're gonna have to be qualified. So here, I mean,

235
00:11:52,840 --> 00:11:54,920
Speaker 1: here's the quote from the Pressure least many institutional clients

236
00:11:54,920 --> 00:11:58,240
Speaker 1: seek alpha sources not readily available in the public markets.

237
00:11:58,280 --> 00:12:01,480
Speaker 1: This also speaks to a bigger issue, which is, Uh,

238
00:12:01,559 --> 00:12:05,640
Speaker 1: the private equity markets are growing, public equity markets not

239
00:12:05,920 --> 00:12:09,640
Speaker 1: growing as much, and some people estimating that regular fund

240
00:12:09,640 --> 00:12:11,640
Speaker 1: companies are going to have to get into private equity

241
00:12:11,640 --> 00:12:13,040
Speaker 1: to keep up at the times. So who are the

242
00:12:13,040 --> 00:12:16,160
Speaker 1: big advisory firms that should be onnotice? I'd say, well,

243
00:12:16,200 --> 00:12:19,720
Speaker 1: all the big ones Meryl ubs uh. And then also

244
00:12:20,200 --> 00:12:22,080
Speaker 1: I think r A is to a degree. I think

245
00:12:22,120 --> 00:12:24,120
Speaker 1: the r A business. If you are a specialist and

246
00:12:24,160 --> 00:12:27,600
Speaker 1: your local probably fine. But anyone in the middle middle level,

247
00:12:27,920 --> 00:12:30,480
Speaker 1: we're bigger. I think that's who Vanguard typically takes out

248
00:12:30,520 --> 00:12:35,680
Speaker 1: the big guys. How does Vanguard lower the advisory fees here?

249
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,760
Speaker 1: What's their secret sauce? Well, the secret sauce is the

250
00:12:38,840 --> 00:12:42,120
Speaker 1: mutual ownership structure. They're basically designed like a co op,

251
00:12:42,559 --> 00:12:46,680
Speaker 1: so their investors are vanguards, not a public company. That's

252
00:12:46,679 --> 00:12:49,079
Speaker 1: why not much is known about it. But it's rest

253
00:12:49,120 --> 00:12:53,320
Speaker 1: as Mounvern Pennsylvania private company there. They keep such a

254
00:12:53,320 --> 00:12:57,720
Speaker 1: low profile and yet six point two trillion assets under management. Yeah,

255
00:12:58,040 --> 00:13:01,160
Speaker 1: every time they get new profit in they instead of

256
00:13:01,280 --> 00:13:03,600
Speaker 1: you know, doing things with that money, they typically vote

257
00:13:03,720 --> 00:13:06,439
Speaker 1: because the fund investors are the shareholders, so of course

258
00:13:06,480 --> 00:13:08,480
Speaker 1: they're going to vote to lower the fees. So for

259
00:13:08,559 --> 00:13:11,079
Speaker 1: fifties some years they've been lowering the fees on funds,

260
00:13:11,679 --> 00:13:14,120
Speaker 1: and I'd like to say they they were lowering fees

261
00:13:14,160 --> 00:13:16,400
Speaker 1: before it was cool. Now everybody wants to do it.

262
00:13:16,440 --> 00:13:19,640
Speaker 1: They're already at ten bibs everywhere, so in their mind,

263
00:13:19,720 --> 00:13:22,800
Speaker 1: I think they are much more playing a different game.

264
00:13:22,880 --> 00:13:25,240
Speaker 1: They're not looking for profits, They're looking to just lower

265
00:13:25,280 --> 00:13:29,640
Speaker 1: costs for investors everywhere. So if Fidelity gets UH flows

266
00:13:29,880 --> 00:13:32,360
Speaker 1: offering index mutual funds for two basis points, I think

267
00:13:32,400 --> 00:13:34,880
Speaker 1: Vanguard takes that as a win for them, And I

268
00:13:34,920 --> 00:13:37,040
Speaker 1: think if they can maybe have an effect on private equity,

269
00:13:37,080 --> 00:13:39,079
Speaker 1: they'll probably take that as a win as well. But

270
00:13:39,120 --> 00:13:42,000
Speaker 1: I think ultimately, right now their purpose is to build

271
00:13:42,000 --> 00:13:44,880
Speaker 1: out this advisory business called the Personal Advisory Service p

272
00:13:45,000 --> 00:13:48,319
Speaker 1: AS probably the three scariest letters if you're an advisor

273
00:13:48,400 --> 00:13:52,719
Speaker 1: right now. Yeah, p AS, Eric Valcinez, thank you so

274
00:13:52,800 --> 00:13:55,240
Speaker 1: much for being with us of Bloomberg Intelligence r et

275
00:13:55,360 --> 00:14:08,960
Speaker 1: F grew here. It is a busy time down in Washington,

276
00:14:09,080 --> 00:14:11,800
Speaker 1: d C. What with the State of the Union address

277
00:14:11,960 --> 00:14:15,200
Speaker 1: last night by the president, impeachment wrapping up today in

278
00:14:15,240 --> 00:14:19,080
Speaker 1: the Senate UH, and then the Democratic presidential race well underway.

279
00:14:19,160 --> 00:14:21,840
Speaker 1: Let's get the latest returned to Lonnie Chen. Lonnie is

280
00:14:21,880 --> 00:14:26,160
Speaker 1: a David and Diane Stephie research Fellow WHOEVER Institution, also

281
00:14:26,160 --> 00:14:29,120
Speaker 1: a director of Domestic Public Studies and a lecture in

282
00:14:29,160 --> 00:14:32,760
Speaker 1: the Public Policy program at Stanford University. Based in Stanford,

283
00:14:32,800 --> 00:14:35,760
Speaker 1: Lonnie Thanks so much for joining us. Let's start with

284
00:14:35,840 --> 00:14:39,080
Speaker 1: the State of the Union address last night. What are

285
00:14:39,080 --> 00:14:42,360
Speaker 1: your key takeaways? Well, you know, I thought that the

286
00:14:42,400 --> 00:14:45,560
Speaker 1: speech was effective, as you know, the president's sort of

287
00:14:45,640 --> 00:14:48,600
Speaker 1: campaign kickoff in earnest. You know, obviously the President has

288
00:14:48,600 --> 00:14:51,360
Speaker 1: been running for re election, but the speech last night

289
00:14:51,400 --> 00:14:54,120
Speaker 1: was an opportunity for him to articulate what he believes

290
00:14:54,160 --> 00:14:57,320
Speaker 1: the accomplishments of his administration has been. And if you

291
00:14:57,400 --> 00:14:59,720
Speaker 1: look at the policy he discussed, a lot of it

292
00:14:59,760 --> 00:15:02,800
Speaker 1: was aims squarely at the base of the Republican Party,

293
00:15:02,840 --> 00:15:05,480
Speaker 1: really trying to animate and turn out those voters, which

294
00:15:05,520 --> 00:15:06,960
Speaker 1: is going to be key to the success of his

295
00:15:07,080 --> 00:15:11,520
Speaker 1: reelection campaign. So you saw themes like immigration, cultural issues

296
00:15:11,520 --> 00:15:15,600
Speaker 1: like abortion. These are issues obviously that aren't necessarily aimed

297
00:15:15,640 --> 00:15:18,600
Speaker 1: at swing voters or independent voters, are aimed at Republicans

298
00:15:19,040 --> 00:15:21,000
Speaker 1: and getting that vote out is going to be critical.

299
00:15:21,080 --> 00:15:24,120
Speaker 1: So I thought as a re election campaign speech, the

300
00:15:24,160 --> 00:15:27,000
Speaker 1: President did what he needed to do. Uh And and

301
00:15:27,040 --> 00:15:29,400
Speaker 1: now I think it's up to Democrats to define their

302
00:15:29,480 --> 00:15:33,960
Speaker 1: race and pick a nominee. Lonny, You're an incredible guest

303
00:15:34,000 --> 00:15:36,200
Speaker 1: for us to have today. I'm very glad you're here.

304
00:15:36,240 --> 00:15:38,880
Speaker 1: Given the fact that you've advised the Romney and Rubio

305
00:15:39,000 --> 00:15:42,720
Speaker 1: Republican presidential campaigns, and you've seen the way that the

306
00:15:42,800 --> 00:15:45,800
Speaker 1: sausage is made in a lot of ways. I'm wondering,

307
00:15:45,880 --> 00:15:47,920
Speaker 1: especially as some of the polls come out, the Gallop

308
00:15:47,960 --> 00:15:51,040
Speaker 1: one in particular, showing President Trump with a record high

309
00:15:51,360 --> 00:15:55,359
Speaker 1: approval rating, the bifurcation right now, the sort of dispersion

310
00:15:55,400 --> 00:15:59,400
Speaker 1: between the Republicans and the Democrats becoming increasingly sort of

311
00:16:00,040 --> 00:16:03,120
Speaker 1: excuse me, a hard line in their approaches. And I'm wondering,

312
00:16:03,160 --> 00:16:05,720
Speaker 1: from your perspective, do we have a sense of whether

313
00:16:05,720 --> 00:16:09,000
Speaker 1: the Republican Party or the Democratic Party is getting bigger

314
00:16:09,360 --> 00:16:14,120
Speaker 1: in terms of representing overall population in the country. Yeah,

315
00:16:14,160 --> 00:16:17,960
Speaker 1: that's a really good question. I think the Republican Party,

316
00:16:18,000 --> 00:16:22,400
Speaker 1: by and large, the base has consolidated in the Republican Party.

317
00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:24,960
Speaker 1: And what I don't think you're seeing necessarily a whole

318
00:16:25,000 --> 00:16:27,760
Speaker 1: lot of people affiliating with the Republican Party now. I

319
00:16:27,800 --> 00:16:30,280
Speaker 1: think what you are seeing is a lot of people

320
00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:33,360
Speaker 1: who have decided that they'll support President Trump regardless of

321
00:16:33,400 --> 00:16:37,000
Speaker 1: the partisan label. Uh. You know, we oftentimes talk about,

322
00:16:37,080 --> 00:16:41,200
Speaker 1: for example, Midwestern voters in states like Iowa and Michigan

323
00:16:41,240 --> 00:16:45,160
Speaker 1: that voted for President Obama twice, but in voted for

324
00:16:45,200 --> 00:16:48,000
Speaker 1: President Trump. I don't know they would consider themselves Republicans

325
00:16:48,360 --> 00:16:51,200
Speaker 1: or Democrats. I think they might consider themselves Trump voters

326
00:16:51,240 --> 00:16:54,840
Speaker 1: first and foremost on the Democratic party side. I don't

327
00:16:54,880 --> 00:16:59,160
Speaker 1: see their share of the electorate growing, unless you're talking

328
00:16:59,200 --> 00:17:03,400
Speaker 1: about again, because solidating their support in coastal and urban areas.

329
00:17:03,960 --> 00:17:07,440
Speaker 1: So I think what's happening is increasingly a phenomenon where

330
00:17:07,520 --> 00:17:11,719
Speaker 1: voters are are trying to say that they're independent, and

331
00:17:11,760 --> 00:17:14,439
Speaker 1: we have to really dissect what independent means. That mean

332
00:17:14,520 --> 00:17:16,640
Speaker 1: that they're truly independent in the sense that they could

333
00:17:16,680 --> 00:17:19,240
Speaker 1: vote for a Republican or a Democrat, or does it

334
00:17:19,280 --> 00:17:21,600
Speaker 1: mean that they're independent in a more traditional sense, which

335
00:17:21,640 --> 00:17:23,760
Speaker 1: is that they lean one way or the other and

336
00:17:23,800 --> 00:17:27,000
Speaker 1: are inclined to vote for a Democratic Republican. I tend

337
00:17:27,000 --> 00:17:28,840
Speaker 1: to think we're in an era where people are are

338
00:17:29,040 --> 00:17:32,639
Speaker 1: dealigning themselves from political parties, and what that means is

339
00:17:32,680 --> 00:17:35,080
Speaker 1: opportunity for politicians like Trump who are a little bit

340
00:17:35,080 --> 00:17:38,280
Speaker 1: out of the box, a little bit Lonnie. So the

341
00:17:38,359 --> 00:17:42,879
Speaker 1: impeachment process wrapping up today, officially at least within the Senate,

342
00:17:42,920 --> 00:17:46,560
Speaker 1: what do you think, if anything, the lasting impact will

343
00:17:46,600 --> 00:17:52,160
Speaker 1: be on President Trump, particularly as he heads into reelection mode. Yeah,

344
00:17:51,680 --> 00:17:54,400
Speaker 1: I've been saying for a while, I think that this

345
00:17:54,720 --> 00:17:57,439
Speaker 1: impeachment saga is going to be a distant memory by

346
00:17:57,480 --> 00:17:59,880
Speaker 1: the time we get to October and the fall campaign

347
00:18:00,280 --> 00:18:03,520
Speaker 1: leading into the November elections. I really think that, you know,

348
00:18:03,600 --> 00:18:07,200
Speaker 1: while it's dominating the news now, I think by and large,

349
00:18:07,320 --> 00:18:09,800
Speaker 1: voters are going to be concerned about a whole different

350
00:18:09,840 --> 00:18:12,480
Speaker 1: set of other issues, not not impeachment, by the time

351
00:18:12,480 --> 00:18:15,200
Speaker 1: they go to cast their votes. I think the pocketbook issues,

352
00:18:15,800 --> 00:18:18,720
Speaker 1: jobs in the economy, healthcare, those are going to be

353
00:18:18,720 --> 00:18:20,639
Speaker 1: the important ones that voters are going to turn to.

354
00:18:20,800 --> 00:18:24,600
Speaker 1: So I know the the impeachment saga is difficult to

355
00:18:24,600 --> 00:18:27,880
Speaker 1: to not cover, but the reality is that for most

356
00:18:27,960 --> 00:18:30,000
Speaker 1: voters this is not going to be an issue that

357
00:18:30,000 --> 00:18:33,280
Speaker 1: they particularly care about. Lonnie, Since you've advised both the

358
00:18:33,280 --> 00:18:37,320
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio and Romney campaigns, both of those individuals have

359
00:18:37,400 --> 00:18:41,600
Speaker 1: come out against President Trump throughout his presidency, certainly early

360
00:18:41,720 --> 00:18:46,120
Speaker 1: on and before he became presidents have their views changed?

361
00:18:46,160 --> 00:18:49,360
Speaker 1: I mean sort of among moderate Republicans, are they are

362
00:18:49,359 --> 00:18:53,320
Speaker 1: they more supportive of President Trump now? Well, I think

363
00:18:53,320 --> 00:18:58,000
Speaker 1: Senator Rubio has has been, you know, pretty supportive, particularly

364
00:18:58,080 --> 00:19:01,440
Speaker 1: over the last couple of months or so. I think

365
00:19:01,480 --> 00:19:04,399
Speaker 1: he's been supportive on policy. I think with respect of

366
00:19:04,440 --> 00:19:08,520
Speaker 1: this impeachment debate, it's been pretty clear. He's been pretty forceful,

367
00:19:08,560 --> 00:19:10,560
Speaker 1: I think, in arguing that he doesn't believe this is

368
00:19:10,800 --> 00:19:14,080
Speaker 1: a removable offense. And he also, you may recall, voted

369
00:19:14,119 --> 00:19:16,520
Speaker 1: against trying to hear from additional witnesses. So I think

370
00:19:16,600 --> 00:19:20,359
Speaker 1: he's been fairly conventional. He has spoken out against the

371
00:19:20,359 --> 00:19:23,120
Speaker 1: president a few times on on some foreign policy issues,

372
00:19:23,160 --> 00:19:25,520
Speaker 1: but by and large, I think he's been he's been

373
00:19:25,520 --> 00:19:28,760
Speaker 1: pretty consistent in supporting the president. Senator Romney, I think,

374
00:19:28,800 --> 00:19:32,000
Speaker 1: has been in a slightly different position, and he's obviously

375
00:19:32,080 --> 00:19:35,000
Speaker 1: been seen as more of a maverick. I think that

376
00:19:35,040 --> 00:19:37,480
Speaker 1: reflects the fact, first of all, that, um, you know,

377
00:19:37,520 --> 00:19:41,760
Speaker 1: Senator Romney has been somebody who comes politically from a

378
00:19:41,760 --> 00:19:45,720
Speaker 1: different kind of constituency. He's got got some more political safety,

379
00:19:45,720 --> 00:19:48,760
Speaker 1: one would argue, than Senator Rubio does in Florida, which

380
00:19:48,800 --> 00:19:51,120
Speaker 1: is a swing in your state. And I do think

381
00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:53,240
Speaker 1: that Senator Romney is a different phase of his career.

382
00:19:53,320 --> 00:19:55,960
Speaker 1: Quite frankly, Um, you know, he's been the nominee the

383
00:19:55,960 --> 00:19:58,479
Speaker 1: Republican Party, he's been somebody who's been an elder statesman

384
00:19:58,480 --> 00:20:01,200
Speaker 1: in the Republican Party for a while. Um, I think

385
00:20:01,240 --> 00:20:03,800
Speaker 1: he's had the latitude in the freedom to frankly speak

386
00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:06,280
Speaker 1: his mind or but this is this is a this

387
00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:09,480
Speaker 1: is a compelling point. He's more in a position to

388
00:20:09,520 --> 00:20:13,800
Speaker 1: speak his mind. Do other Republicans feel similarly to him

389
00:20:13,840 --> 00:20:18,240
Speaker 1: when they're not speaking in public? Yeah, Well that's the

390
00:20:18,359 --> 00:20:21,840
Speaker 1: that's the key, uh modifier there, lisays when they're not

391
00:20:21,880 --> 00:20:25,000
Speaker 1: in public. I think a lot of Republicans privately, are

392
00:20:25,080 --> 00:20:28,280
Speaker 1: are you not happy with the president's behavior on the

393
00:20:28,400 --> 00:20:32,120
Speaker 1: Ukraine situation? They would say that privately, but publicly they haven't.

394
00:20:32,160 --> 00:20:34,480
Speaker 1: They haven't stood out and said that because they fear

395
00:20:34,520 --> 00:20:37,359
Speaker 1: the repercussions and or they believe that the way the

396
00:20:37,400 --> 00:20:40,359
Speaker 1: Republican Party is now, there would be electoral consequences to

397
00:20:40,400 --> 00:20:42,919
Speaker 1: speaking out against presidents. So yeah, there definitely is this

398
00:20:43,000 --> 00:20:46,760
Speaker 1: dichotomy between private and public. Lonnie, just real quickly thirty seconds.

399
00:20:46,760 --> 00:20:48,879
Speaker 1: How do you handicap the democratic field? We had that

400
00:20:48,920 --> 00:20:51,760
Speaker 1: Debacco in the Iowa caucus is just right now? How

401
00:20:51,760 --> 00:20:54,800
Speaker 1: do you handicap that field? I think it's going to

402
00:20:54,880 --> 00:20:58,480
Speaker 1: consolidate to you know, one progressive and one moderate. I

403
00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:01,359
Speaker 1: see probably Bernie standards as the inside track on the

404
00:21:01,359 --> 00:21:04,000
Speaker 1: progressive side. On the moderate side, it's tough to tell.

405
00:21:04,040 --> 00:21:06,639
Speaker 1: Pete Bota did well in Iowa, but it remains to

406
00:21:06,640 --> 00:21:08,840
Speaker 1: be seen if he can win in diverse states. And

407
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:11,520
Speaker 1: I think the biggest beneficiary from last night might actually

408
00:21:11,520 --> 00:21:14,080
Speaker 1: be Mike Bloomberg because of the opportunity he has going

409
00:21:14,160 --> 00:21:17,040
Speaker 1: forward to compete and really the only person with the

410
00:21:17,119 --> 00:21:19,760
Speaker 1: resources to compete once we get the Super Tuesday, which

411
00:21:19,760 --> 00:21:21,720
Speaker 1: is a big hall of delegates, which is at the

412
00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:24,320
Speaker 1: end of the day, what matters. Lonnie Chen, thank you

413
00:21:24,359 --> 00:21:26,320
Speaker 1: so much for being with us. Lonnie Chen is the

414
00:21:26,480 --> 00:21:29,120
Speaker 1: David and Diane Stephy Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution,

415
00:21:29,200 --> 00:21:32,240
Speaker 1: also Director of Domestic Policy Studies and lecturer in the

416
00:21:32,240 --> 00:21:35,440
Speaker 1: Public Policy Program at Stanford University. We should say Mike

417
00:21:35,440 --> 00:21:39,200
Speaker 1: Bloomberg is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP,

418
00:21:39,359 --> 00:21:43,000
Speaker 1: which owns this radio station. Just as a disclaimer, and

419
00:21:43,080 --> 00:21:47,120
Speaker 1: we will continue to follow what happens with respect to

420
00:21:47,440 --> 00:21:50,640
Speaker 1: the ongoing elections. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg pen

421
00:21:50,760 --> 00:21:53,280
Speaker 1: L podcast. You can subscribe and listen to interviews at

422
00:21:53,320 --> 00:21:57,040
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform you prefer. Paul Sweeney

423
00:21:57,080 --> 00:21:59,800
Speaker 1: I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney and Lisa Brahm Woyd's

424
00:21:59,800 --> 00:22:02,840
Speaker 1: I'm a Twitter at Lisa Abramo. It's one before the podcast.

425
00:22:02,880 --> 00:22:09,359
Speaker 1: You can always catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio h