Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Just a few blocks from our studio here in Washington
Speaker 2: is another series of meetings that the President is sure
Speaker 2: to comment on. The FLMC, kicking off its two day
Speaker 2: policy session, expected to hold interest rates steady tomorrow, even
Speaker 2: in the face of growing pressure President Trump is putting
Speaker 2: onto the Fed, particularly the Fed's chair Jerome Powell. And
Speaker 2: joining us live here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg
Speaker 2: TV and Radio. On that and much more, is Democratic
Speaker 2: Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking member of the
Speaker 2: Senate Banking Committee. Senator, welcome back. We appreciate you joining
Speaker 2: us as we look ahead to the decision tomorrow. Knowing
Speaker 2: the next opportunity the Fed would have to cut rates
Speaker 2: is in September. What would the economic consequence be if
Speaker 2: they wait that long?
Speaker 1: Well, look, I.
Speaker 3: Want to see interest rates come down, because when interest
Speaker 3: rates stay high, families pay more on their credit cards,
Speaker 3: they pay more on their car loans, Mortgage rates stay higher,
Speaker 3: and that's a problem. Is exactly one person who is
Speaker 3: responsible for keeping those interest rates high, and that's Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: Jerome Powell said last month that he would have urged
Speaker 3: the FED to lower interest rates last February. But for
Speaker 3: the chaos that Donald Trump has been causing over tariffs
Speaker 3: and the kind of fallout that that's going to create
Speaker 3: in the economy. So if Donald Trump really wants to
Speaker 3: see interest rates come down, then stop creating so much
Speaker 3: chaos around tariffs. And I hope the FED could get
Speaker 3: it done.
Speaker 1: That said Senator, realizing you prefer lower interest rates. Does J.
Speaker 1: Powell deserve some credit for holding steady in the face
Speaker 1: of this pressure from President Trump.
Speaker 3: Look now it's like an upside down the world. I
Speaker 3: want to see Fed Chair Powell lower interest rates. I
Speaker 3: think that's good for families. I think it's the right
Speaker 3: thing to do in the economy. But I also want
Speaker 3: to see an independent FED. And when Donald Trump simply
Speaker 3: tries to persuade, he says, here are the arguments in favor,
Speaker 3: here's why I think you should do it. I get that.
Speaker 3: But when he threatens to fire Powell, when he blows
Speaker 3: up this whole pretext of trying to fire him for cause,
Speaker 3: when he does that kind of thing, now he threatens
Speaker 3: the independence of the FED. And there's a real cost
Speaker 3: of that, not for Jerome Powell personally, but a real
Speaker 3: cost for our economy. We have built much of our
Speaker 3: economic foundation on the notion that the FED makes its
Speaker 3: decisions independent of political pressure, and that they are a
Speaker 3: group of people who are economically informed, follow the data,
Speaker 3: and they make those decisions on monetary policy based on
Speaker 3: what they think the data are telling them about inflation
Speaker 3: and jobs. And when Donald Trump blows through all that,
Speaker 3: he undermines confidence in the FED and in our entire
Speaker 3: financial system. That's a real problem.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 2: Of course, part of what President Trump and others in
Speaker 2: the administration argue is that at the FED lowers interest rates,
Speaker 2: it will help to ease the issue we have in
Speaker 2: this country with housing in particular, at least on the
Speaker 2: interest rates side. But I know you and your colleagues
Speaker 2: in the Banking Committee are also trying to do things
Speaker 2: about that on the supply side. Is the measure you
Speaker 2: co sponsored with Chairman Scott, the Renewing Opportunity in the
Speaker 2: American Dream to Housing Act, passed unanimously through a committee,
Speaker 2: quite the bipartisan feat in today's political environment. Senator, my
Speaker 2: question is when we look at the contents of that bill,
Speaker 2: knowing that part of it is asking hud to establish
Speaker 2: new things like loan and grant programs for qualified homeowners
Speaker 2: or landlords, knowing at the same time the administration is
Speaker 2: actually trying to reduce HUD as we speak. Do these
Speaker 2: things run into conflict with each other? Can both be
Speaker 2: done at the same time?
Speaker 3: So if I can let me back out just a
Speaker 3: tiny little bit, we have a housing crisis in America.
Speaker 3: Prices are up, and for decades now, officials have just
Speaker 3: stood by policymakers and said, wow, prices just keep going up.
Speaker 3: That's a real problem. The real problem is we don't
Speaker 3: have in US housing. It is a supply problem. So
Speaker 3: what we have done with this bill is that we
Speaker 3: are pushing toward more supply. We need about seven million
Speaker 3: more housing units in America. This bill has twenty nine
Speaker 3: different provisions to it that mostly all row in the
Speaker 3: same direction. Some involve HUD, and many of them do
Speaker 3: not involve HUD. But the whole point here is to
Speaker 3: put the federal government in the position of saying it
Speaker 3: is a matter of federal policy that we want to
Speaker 3: encourage more housing development. We want more of it in Massachusetts,
Speaker 3: in South Carolina, we want more of it out west,
Speaker 3: down South, up north, we want it in urban areas
Speaker 3: in rural areas, and every member of the committee, all
Speaker 3: twenty four of us, have provisions in there to help
Speaker 3: make that happen. Yes, we need a functional HUD to
Speaker 3: help on parts of that, but I do want to
Speaker 3: underline here some of the provisions in this bill are
Speaker 3: about cutting red tape and slimming down some of the
Speaker 3: programs that HUD works on. Other parts are about we're
Speaker 3: gonna give some trial runs to some ideas and try
Speaker 3: a few things that haven't been tried before. We even
Speaker 3: have an innovation fund in this for cities and towns
Speaker 3: that are trying to build more housing. There are a
Speaker 3: lot of good ideas in this bill because the housing
Speaker 3: problem we have right now wasn't caused by one thing
Speaker 3: going wrong. It was caused by a lot of things
Speaker 3: going wrong. So it's going to take a lot of
Speaker 3: things to help fix it. And I'm excited say it again.
Speaker 3: It was bipartisan unanimous in the United States Senate. That's
Speaker 3: pretty amazing.
Speaker 1: Well, it is duly noted unanimously passed out of committee.
Speaker 1: That means every Democrat and Republican voted for this, suggesting
Speaker 1: there could be some momentum on the floor if we
Speaker 1: get that far Senator, there are a lot of questions
Speaker 1: about the interference that you could bump into when lawmakers
Speaker 1: returned to town following the August recess, assuming you get there.
Speaker 1: One of those distractions is the Jeffrey Epstein story. And
Speaker 1: I have to ask you about this, not that we're
Speaker 1: featuring this in our interviews, but it is apparently impacting
Speaker 1: the agenda. House lawmakers went home early because of this.
Speaker 1: The President of the United States has been talking about,
Speaker 1: or certainly asked about, a pardon repeatedly when it comes
Speaker 1: to Gallaine Maxwell, and I'd like for you to hear
Speaker 1: what he's said about this most recently and well asked
Speaker 1: you about it. Here's President Trump.
Speaker 2: High a pardon for Klain Maxwell, who landed?
Speaker 3: Is that something you would ever consider.
Speaker 1: A pardon for who?
Speaker 3: For Kalay Maxwell?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm allowed to give her a pardon, but nobody's
Speaker 1: approached me with it, nobody's ask me about it. And
Speaker 1: by the way, I never went to the island. I
Speaker 1: never had the privilege of going to his island, and
Speaker 1: I did turn it down. I don't know what we're
Speaker 1: calling a privilege here, Senator, but I'm just wondering your
Speaker 1: thoughts on this What do you think is more likely,
Speaker 1: Gallainne Maxwell testifying before Congress or getting a pardon from
Speaker 1: Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: I don't know what's more likely, and I'm not good
Speaker 3: at anticipating this, but I just want to be clear.
Speaker 3: The only way that this thing resolves itself is to
Speaker 3: be completely transparent. Put out all of the records, all
Speaker 3: the testimony, whatever it is that she has told the
Speaker 3: lawyers down in Florida just earlier in the week. Get
Speaker 3: all that information out there, Let everybody look at it,
Speaker 3: and let people evaluate what they think is true, what
Speaker 3: they think is not true, what they think is credible.
Speaker 3: But this idea of holding back information and kind of
Speaker 3: sorting through it a little piece here and a little
Speaker 3: piece there, well, I gotta tell you that is keeping
Speaker 3: everybody in churn over on the Republican side, sucking up
Speaker 3: a lot of oxygen, oxygen that we could be using
Speaker 3: to do things like work on a housing bill to
Speaker 3: bring down the cost of housing for every family across
Speaker 3: this country.
Speaker 1: Well, Congress pushed these files out in September, when everybody's.
Speaker 3: Back, Well, the House has already moved in that direction.
Speaker 3: If we need to. We have raised the issue now
Speaker 3: in the Senate. Yeah, Look, this is one of the
Speaker 3: things that Congress does. It's part of our oversight, and
Speaker 3: that is to say, when it's time to make these
Speaker 3: records public, let everybody see what's in the whole file.
Speaker 3: Because there have been a lot of contradictory statements here.
Speaker 3: Remember it was the Attorney General of the United States
Speaker 3: who says at one point is that she has the
Speaker 3: Epstein files on her desk. She's talking about backing up
Speaker 3: what was it, a truckload of documents and files, and
Speaker 3: then turns around and says, nothing to see here. Well,
Speaker 3: you know that doesn't have much credibility for anyone. I
Speaker 3: think the only way out of this mess is just
Speaker 3: to be totally transparent. Just put it all out there,
Speaker 3: let the American people sort through it. You know, Americans
Speaker 3: are pretty smart and they'll figure out what it is
Speaker 3: that's happened if they can see all of the pieces together.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad we could talk about all of these
Speaker 1: issues today. Senator, welcome back. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts,
Speaker 1: ranking member, Senate Banking Committee. We thank you, as always