Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg Sound On.
Speaker 1: We are not where we need to be if we're
Speaker 1: going to be able to quote live with. The virus
Speaker 1: remains a problem, and we're fighting it all you can
Speaker 1: to protect yourself against what might come. Floomberg Sound on Politics,
Speaker 1: Policy and Perspective from DC's top name. Stave borrowed and
Speaker 1: spent trillions of dollars that we just don't have, and
Speaker 1: that's thrown fuel on the flyer fire of the inflation problems.
Speaker 1: From Ohio, I don't kiss anyone's ass like him. Ohio
Speaker 1: needs an ass kicker, not an ass kiss. Floomberg Sound
Speaker 1: On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Is there another
Speaker 1: dark tunnel looming? Welcome to the fastest hour in politics
Speaker 1: with two big mornings for Washington Today. The I m
Speaker 1: F says the economic outlook is worsening globally thanks to inflation,
Speaker 1: and the White House says another COVID surge could be
Speaker 1: on the way. Tonight, we explore both with an analysis
Speaker 1: from Bloomberg Economics editor Michael McKee and from Dr Ja Varmah,
Speaker 1: chief medical advisor at the Croll Institute. Later this hour,
Speaker 1: Republicans in the House plan to use next year's debt
Speaker 1: limit deadline to squeeze concessions from Democrats, including possible changes
Speaker 1: to social Security. We'll talk about that with Bloomberg's Jack Fitzpatrick,
Speaker 1: who broke the story, and we'll try to make sense
Speaker 1: of it all with our signature panel back together today
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Genie Chanzano here for
Speaker 1: the hour. Today we peek over the edge of a
Speaker 1: couple of major political risks with four weeks to election day,
Speaker 1: the economy and COVID both being discussed with urgency today
Speaker 1: in Washington. Will start with the warning from the International
Speaker 1: Monetary Fund the i m F today cutting its outlook
Speaker 1: for global growth. It's been a big story throughout the
Speaker 1: day on Bloomberg, a market mover with risks of a
Speaker 1: miscalculation by the Fed or other central banks around the world. Again,
Speaker 1: this is a global view, ever increasing. White House Press
Speaker 1: Secretary Karine John Pierre was asked about its day. If
Speaker 1: you listen to this program, you can probably imagine the answer.
Speaker 1: We believe that they have the strongest monetary policy to
Speaker 1: deal with this moment, and we are going to allow
Speaker 1: them to do the work that they are currently doing.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to be responding to um to any
Speaker 1: actions that they're taking, because we truly do believe in
Speaker 1: the independence of the fact. Well, Mike McKee will get
Speaker 1: into it with us, Bloomberg's economics editor joins us. Now, Mike,
Speaker 1: welcome back to Washington. Thanks to be here. So the
Speaker 1: I m F spooked everyone today. It's kind of interesting
Speaker 1: to see the market reaction, but we woke up. The
Speaker 1: real doom and gloom this morning is the I m
Speaker 1: F warns of a worsening outlook. They cut the forecast
Speaker 1: for global growth and it's boy, this is the conversation
Speaker 1: the White House does not want to hear, right, Well,
Speaker 1: they don't want to hear it, but they knew it
Speaker 1: was coming. The outlook is a doer downbeat. Uh, however
Speaker 1: you want to describe it. Basically, they see the economy
Speaker 1: in worst shape than they did in July. And that's
Speaker 1: a combination of the ongoing war and the impact on
Speaker 1: energy and inflation, and the possibility that central banks could
Speaker 1: overtighten and send the global economy into recession. There seems
Speaker 1: to be the sort of growing narrative on Wall Street
Speaker 1: that you hear on Bloomberg TV and radio every day,
Speaker 1: with very few people expecting a soft landing or the
Speaker 1: odds of recession higher now than they were a couple
Speaker 1: of months ago. I think the odds of recession are
Speaker 1: higher now than they were a couple of months ago.
Speaker 1: But there are still some aspects to the US economy
Speaker 1: that suggests that it's a narrow window, but they might
Speaker 1: be able to pull it off. You look at the
Speaker 1: jobs report last week, and it was stronger than people
Speaker 1: anticipated in some of the underlying areas, particularly for unemployment.
Speaker 1: And so if we're going to see inflation come down,
Speaker 1: uh an, unemployment not go skyrocketing. That's what the Fed
Speaker 1: wants to see. The old status said vacancies. Job vacancies
Speaker 1: are falling, and so if people are who are who
Speaker 1: become unemployed or taking jobs that are out there, then
Speaker 1: they could do perhaps a soft landing. But we're still
Speaker 1: waiting for the other side of that equation, inflation to
Speaker 1: come down. Well that's the problem here, right It doesn't
Speaker 1: a report like Friday give j Powell just even more
Speaker 1: encouragement to pull out the sledge hammer here frontloading in
Speaker 1: a way that maybe we don't know how long that's
Speaker 1: going to take the kick in. Could they have already overshot, Well,
Speaker 1: they could, they're betting that they haven't. We get the
Speaker 1: CPI report on on Thursday morning and it is expecting
Speaker 1: to show that inflation is still rising, but at a
Speaker 1: slower pace. And if that's the case, then the Feed
Speaker 1: is going to feel they're getting closer to where they
Speaker 1: need to be. Perhaps not. A lot of this depends
Speaker 1: on what happens with the opaque announcement of higher oil prices.
Speaker 1: Is that going to push up inflation again? But right now,
Speaker 1: what the FT is thinking is they're almost They either
Speaker 1: are or are almost restrictive enough on the economy, um
Speaker 1: not stimulating the economy anymore, but actually retarding its growth.
Speaker 1: And if that's the case, then they feel they will
Speaker 1: be able to stop, but they think they need another
Speaker 1: hundred five basis points before they get there. Once they
Speaker 1: get there, then their plan is to stop and just
Speaker 1: leave rates there for a long time. And that's where
Speaker 1: people get nervous. Markets get nervous that they've already priced
Speaker 1: in at least one cut next year because I think
Speaker 1: the Fed can't sustain that. So they'll be a test
Speaker 1: of Wills coming up. You know, there's a conversation happening
Speaker 1: at the White House fairly quietly, although we've heard Dr
Speaker 1: fauci Uh talk about it openly, And that is the
Speaker 1: possibility of another COVID surge this winter, with potentially a
Speaker 1: new strain that could escape vaccines. Is that a game
Speaker 1: changer for the economy from what I understand? No, No,
Speaker 1: I'm not an epidemiologist or a doctor. I don't even
Speaker 1: play one on TV. But I do keep up with
Speaker 1: the latest news on it. And there are new strains,
Speaker 1: there are new variants, and wintertime is when these coronaviruses
Speaker 1: come back around. So every epidemiologist seems to be saying, yes,
Speaker 1: get prepared for another wave. But because so many people
Speaker 1: are vaccine and so many people have had it, we're
Speaker 1: getting past the serious illness death face. Still a lot
Speaker 1: way too many people dying. But but that doesn't worry
Speaker 1: about supply Chaine. You're you're not going to have to
Speaker 1: shut down economies, is as the general feeling, unless there's
Speaker 1: some sort of surprise variant out there, and so that
Speaker 1: is less of an issue than it was. What's more
Speaker 1: of an issue is COVID running through China because unless
Speaker 1: and until they change their one there's zero tolerance policy
Speaker 1: for COVID, then you're gonna see supply chains shut down
Speaker 1: on a regular basis. One of these days we'll talk
Speaker 1: about something positive. But hey, we didn't touch the job market.
Speaker 1: So Michael McKee, thank you for the expertise. Is great
Speaker 1: to see in Washington, happy to be here. Of course,
Speaker 1: there's no way to really predict what happens with COVID
Speaker 1: here or anywhere, but it is still here in the
Speaker 1: US and winter is coming. Dr Anthony Fauci speaking to
Speaker 1: the USC endin Berg Center for Health Journalism about what
Speaker 1: could be ahead. I think it would be a bit
Speaker 1: cavalier to all of a sudden say we're completely through
Speaker 1: with it, because remember we were going in the right
Speaker 1: direction in the summer of one, and along came delta.
Speaker 1: Then in the winter November December of one, along came
Speaker 1: a macron, and since then we've had multiple sub lineages
Speaker 1: of a macron. Fast forward to today, we heard from
Speaker 1: a Shisha, the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, with more specifics.
Speaker 1: So predictions are always hard on these things, right, because
Speaker 1: the virus continues to surprise us and continues to evolve. UM.
Speaker 1: There are three or four subvariants that we are tracking
Speaker 1: most closely. UM. They are you know, in different parts
Speaker 1: of the world. UM, and they all arise either from
Speaker 1: A B A two or A B A five kind
Speaker 1: of lineage. And the reason we're tracking them is because
Speaker 1: they either have a lot more immunovativeness or they render
Speaker 1: many of our treatments ineffective. And so we turned to
Speaker 1: another voice of authority on this issue. Dr Ja Varma
Speaker 1: is back with US medical advisor and fellow at the
Speaker 1: Cruel Institute. As you might remember, he was former spokesperson
Speaker 1: an architect of New York City's COVID nineteen pandemic response. Doctor,
Speaker 1: it's great to have you back. How worried should we
Speaker 1: be about winter? Well, there are basically two things that
Speaker 1: we've come to expect, you know, since this pandemic began,
Speaker 1: which is that every winter there are more COVID cases
Speaker 1: due to the change in seasons. And the second that
Speaker 1: the virus finds a way every two or three months
Speaker 1: to produce a new variant that can increase the risk
Speaker 1: of infections. So I don't think Americans need to be
Speaker 1: sort of unduly alarmed compared to previous winters. Um. But
Speaker 1: it's just very important to emphasize that one of the
Speaker 1: other constants throughout this has been that getting up to
Speaker 1: date in your vaccines is the best way to protect
Speaker 1: yourself and your loved ones from getting seriously ill. That's
Speaker 1: why a Shia was out there to begin with. He
Speaker 1: was speaking along with the Press Secretary Karine Jean Pierre,
Speaker 1: about the new combined vaccines that they're encouraging people to get,
Speaker 1: but he also talked about the unknown doctor into this,
Speaker 1: the curveball that we got last last Thanksgiving with O Macron.
Speaker 1: None of us, obviously can predict that with any certainty.
Speaker 1: So our job is to not be in the prediction business,
Speaker 1: but to be in the planning business. And so we
Speaker 1: have a whole set of efforts that we're leading in
Speaker 1: the U. S. Government to be ready should Mother Nature
Speaker 1: throw us a true curveball like what we saw last night,
Speaker 1: what should that response look like? Dctor not knowing what's
Speaker 1: going to happen. But O Macron, you know, stopped this
Speaker 1: in our tracks again, and as we just heard from
Speaker 1: the White House coordinator, it could happen again. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: there is a doomsday scenario that exists, and I'll explain
Speaker 1: with that is in a moment, but I personally don't
Speaker 1: see that. You know, based on the data that we
Speaker 1: see globally right now, the doomsday scenario would be a
Speaker 1: new strain of the virus that evades all of our
Speaker 1: pre existing community and by all of our immunity. It
Speaker 1: means that immunity that protects us from getting hospitalized and dying.
Speaker 1: That does not appear to be the case based on
Speaker 1: what we can see out on the horizon right now.
Speaker 1: Doesn't mean you couldn't emerge in the future, and unfortunately
Speaker 1: that happened. You're basically talking about a new pandemic and
Speaker 1: restarting those questions about you know, closing down you know,
Speaker 1: economic activity. I don't think that is a discussion or
Speaker 1: a scenario that is likely to happen any time in
Speaker 1: the future. I think the most likely scenario is, you know,
Speaker 1: hospitals getting overrun and what can you do to basically
Speaker 1: decompress hospitals, especially in those areas that have low uptake
Speaker 1: of vaccination. We obviously know how to work from home.
Speaker 1: Uh And I had asked this of Michael McKee before.
Speaker 1: Not everybody can and if we did have another Oh, Macron,
Speaker 1: what would it mean for for doc workers, for people
Speaker 1: who work in the shipping industry. Could there be worse
Speaker 1: supply chain issues than we've experienced or or anything on
Speaker 1: the scale that we've seen. Well, you know, I can
Speaker 1: tell you from my experience here in New York, we
Speaker 1: had a perfect test of the question about you know,
Speaker 1: is it the virus that shuts down the economy or
Speaker 1: is it aggressive public health policy actions? You know, And
Speaker 1: what we saw last December during Omicron is zero effort
Speaker 1: by city or state government to restrict business activity. Yet
Speaker 1: store everywhere we're closed because people were sick. And it
Speaker 1: really reinforces what those of us in public health say,
Speaker 1: which is the greatest drag on the economy is not
Speaker 1: the actions by the government to control the virus. It's
Speaker 1: the virus making people sick. And like you just said,
Speaker 1: not enough employees showing up at work to you know,
Speaker 1: take those goods off the docks that are are what
Speaker 1: we all survive on. And of course funding becomes another
Speaker 1: issue here. Uh, doctor, we didn't get any of the
Speaker 1: money that the administration asked for from Congress. Are we're
Speaker 1: gonna be paying for tests and vaccines in the near future. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and that's really what a lot of that money was
Speaker 1: meant to do what we need, you know, because we
Speaker 1: don't have a universal health care system in this country. UM,
Speaker 1: it's incumbent upon the government during emergencies to provide at
Speaker 1: least you know, essential free medical care for the priority diseases.
Speaker 1: So that means the test reflections. When these numbers start
Speaker 1: to go up, people are going to start to care again.
Speaker 1: And you'll remember this conversation with Dr Ja Varma. Thank
Speaker 1: you doctor. The panel's next, this is Bloomberg. This use
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Sound on with Joe Matthew on Bluebird Radio. Winter
Speaker 1: is coming and it could bring some very real challenges
Speaker 1: to the Biden administration, beginning with the economic trouble we
Speaker 1: just talked about with Michael McKee. Of course, it was
Speaker 1: just yesterday that Jamie Diamond, JP Morgan Chase predicted a
Speaker 1: recession on CNBC. This again, it's fairly typical. You know,
Speaker 1: markets go down for you know, people forecast the economy,
Speaker 1: et cetera. The I P O market closes first, that's
Speaker 1: kind of happened, hiye closed a second and structure credit.
Speaker 1: That's kind of happened for the most party, things can
Speaker 1: get done and then it starts to affect other credit.
Speaker 1: You saw with the guilt markets. Here you see a
Speaker 1: lack of liquidity and a lot of markets, a lot
Speaker 1: of intermediates can intermediately like we used to because of regulations.
Speaker 1: It is going to happen. It is going to happen.
Speaker 1: He's seen it happen before, he'll see it again, adding
Speaker 1: there as well at the S and P five could
Speaker 1: drop another that's not a recipe when you consider the
Speaker 1: potential upstick in COVID cases that we were also just
Speaker 1: discussing with Dr J. Pharma. Let's assemble the panel, Rick
Speaker 1: Davis and Jeannie Schanzano back together for our signature panel
Speaker 1: Bloombird Politics contributors. Rick, how concerned are you when you
Speaker 1: hear this kind of a conversation happening? What is it?
Speaker 1: The eleventh of October? Knowing that winter could bring some
Speaker 1: tough news on both fronts. For sure, it does seem
Speaker 1: in this case where the economy and its decline is
Speaker 1: leading this time the COVID surge potential. So I think
Speaker 1: last time we saw COVID brought the economy to its
Speaker 1: knees maybe the economy can bring COVID to its knees.
Speaker 1: So uh, I think Jamie Diamond is reflecting what is
Speaker 1: out there in the marketplace. And and you couple his
Speaker 1: comments with a lot of what we're hearing out of
Speaker 1: the Fed right now about real questions is to how
Speaker 1: to tackle inflation. It seems resistant to the growth in
Speaker 1: the jobs market. Um. You know, you really start to
Speaker 1: wonder whether or not there's a plan out there this
Speaker 1: sort of try to manage through this process. Layering on
Speaker 1: a potential COVID surge. Uh, you know, would just exacerbate
Speaker 1: those market forces like supply chain disruption that caused by
Speaker 1: healthcare that could really complicate the economy. It's the White
Speaker 1: House ready for this union. You know, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: they've quite wrapped their head around it. I have to say.
Speaker 1: You know, you add on to the I M F
Speaker 1: and Jamie Diamond Bank of America saying the economy is
Speaker 1: going to lose a hundred and seventy jobs per month
Speaker 1: and unemployment rises to five point five. You have a
Speaker 1: president talking at fundraiser about armageddon and the potential for
Speaker 1: nuclear war. And as a poster, I look at the
Speaker 1: polls and people wonder why are voters feeling so insecure. Well,
Speaker 1: they are feeling economically insecure because they're believing what they're hearing.
Speaker 1: They're believing what they're hearing, and, quite frankly, in some ways,
Speaker 1: and I don't say this often, they are ahead of
Speaker 1: the experts. I mean all the talk about we're not
Speaker 1: in a recession yet, voter have for a long time
Speaker 1: been telling polsters, we don't care what the experts are saying.
Speaker 1: It feels like a recession right now. Don't tell me
Speaker 1: gas prices are lower, because I'm feeling pretty insecure. So
Speaker 1: I think the insecurity is out there. And the reason
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that White House has grasped it is
Speaker 1: why would the President have been talking about nuclear war?
Speaker 1: You know, these are the signs that they haven't quite grasped.
Speaker 1: That's not the message they should be sending out four
Speaker 1: weeks to the mid term. Yeah. The message that the
Speaker 1: White House has been sending out through a Shia and
Speaker 1: Dr Faucci, though, is that Look this, I know the
Speaker 1: President said the pandemic was over on sixty minutes, but
Speaker 1: think otherwise we are not where we need to be
Speaker 1: if we're going to be able to quote live with
Speaker 1: the virus. We've talked about this up and down, Rick Davis.
Speaker 1: Since the twenty two billion dollars requested by the White
Speaker 1: House was not put in legislation to basically end the
Speaker 1: session here would have likely ended up in the Inflation
Speaker 1: Reduction Act, although there were many vehicles that came before.
Speaker 1: It not gonna happen. Will people complain or blame the
Speaker 1: admitted station if we have a lack of supplies or
Speaker 1: if God forbid we have to start paying for this
Speaker 1: stuff ourselves. Sure, after the fact, people will complain, no
Speaker 1: question about it. But if you look so far, people
Speaker 1: going for the Amcron booster, which has been out there
Speaker 1: quite some time, has been really lackluster, so they almost
Speaker 1: have nobody to blame but themselves. You can get an
Speaker 1: omacron booster today if you want it, and I know
Speaker 1: this administration said publicly many times they're very disappointed with
Speaker 1: how many people are going out there to do that.
Speaker 1: And that is how you avoid a winner surge, is
Speaker 1: by having these boosters in place so that there's a
Speaker 1: level of immunity that can take care of it. But Jennie,
Speaker 1: if it's still it's a boot line at Trump rallies.
Speaker 1: He won't even say the word vaccine. He says, I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna say it, and they all start booing. They
Speaker 1: know even though that well, I mean he he helped
Speaker 1: his shepherd the development of the vaccine and took it himself.
Speaker 1: This remains a political issue, it doesn't. I think that
Speaker 1: explains why the President goes out and said the pandemic
Speaker 1: is over, and yet we are looking at Europe. There's
Speaker 1: a surge in Europe and half hospitalizations, cases, deaths. We've
Speaker 1: always seen that come before the United States. So we
Speaker 1: may see that reach our shores. We hope we don't.
Speaker 1: And Rick's right, people can get the next booster. But honestly,
Speaker 1: if you ask people about this next booster, most people
Speaker 1: haven't gotten it and haven't even heard about it. And
Speaker 1: that is that that that is at the hands of
Speaker 1: public health officials and the administration and Congress, to your point,
Speaker 1: who didn't fund the billions of dollars needed to get
Speaker 1: the word out and get us ready to face another
Speaker 1: potential surge. Rick, you're a crisis management expert. The White
Speaker 1: House have a special room with the bunch of spreadsheets
Speaker 1: slate out here gaming out various options for both of these.
Speaker 1: How do you how do you prepare for something you
Speaker 1: can't predict? Well, I think a lot of what the
Speaker 1: White House tries to do is make sure that they're
Speaker 1: able to meet the crisis when it hits, you, right,
Speaker 1: I mean they they've seemed like they were really more
Speaker 1: adept at dealing with a crisis once it hits then
Speaker 1: averting the crisis to begin with. And in some cases
Speaker 1: there's nothing you can do about it, you know. There
Speaker 1: they are running advertisements on boosters, for instance, and you
Speaker 1: know if if if people don't go get them and
Speaker 1: you have a surge, they're gonna they're gonna have to
Speaker 1: deal with that search. But this is where they get
Speaker 1: marked down, is this administration has not responded in a
Speaker 1: way that shows competence. Rick and Jennie are together and
Speaker 1: for the hour on Bloomberg Sound On. We'll have more
Speaker 1: of our panel ahead as we turned back to what's
Speaker 1: happening on Capitol Hill and what might happen with the
Speaker 1: death ceiling next year. Jack Fitzpatrick with an exclusive Next,
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg broadcasting live from our nation's capital, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: to New York, Bloomberg eleven Frio to Boston, Bloomberg one
Speaker 1: oh six one to San Francisco, Bloomberg nine sixty to
Speaker 1: the country, Serious XM Channel one nine and around the
Speaker 1: globe the Bloomberg Business app. Then Bloomberg Radio Dot or
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg sond On with Joe Matthew. We spent
Speaker 1: the first half of this hour talking about the economic
Speaker 1: and COVID risks facing us this winter. Up next, we
Speaker 1: stare over another cliff, a fiscal cliff. It sure kind
Speaker 1: of sounds like if Bloomberg Government's Jack Fitzpatrick. We'll be
Speaker 1: up next with an exclusive here talking with key House
Speaker 1: Republicans who want to use next year's debt limit deadline
Speaker 1: to pull concessions from Democrats, and they are looking specifically
Speaker 1: at the major entitlements. Of course, so many people wondering
Speaker 1: what will happen with the mid terms and will the
Speaker 1: House actually turned to Republican control, And assuming that happens,
Speaker 1: some interesting things we're going to be on the way,
Speaker 1: as Jack Fitzpatrick reports from Bloomberg Government. Social security and
Speaker 1: Medicare eligibility changes, spending caps, safety network requirements all among
Speaker 1: the priorities for a couple of important Republicans in the
Speaker 1: House who are interested in serving as the next Budget
Speaker 1: Committee chair, and this could be tied with the debt
Speaker 1: limit that brings us to the whole idea of the
Speaker 1: fiscal cliff. He's with us now in studio. Great to
Speaker 1: see Jack, it's been a while. Yeah, thanks Fair. This
Speaker 1: was Chuck Schumer on the septemn Government funding is set
Speaker 1: to run out Friday at midnight, roughly forty hours from now,
Speaker 1: and there's no reason at all for us to get
Speaker 1: anywhere near that deadline. And we really didn't. I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess we walked up to it, but nobody was
Speaker 1: ever predicting a government shutdown. That wasn't part of the
Speaker 1: strategy this time. After I read your peace and I
Speaker 1: will encourage everyone to find it on the terminal. It's important.
Speaker 1: We could be having a very different conversation next year. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this would actually be much more explosive than the shutdown
Speaker 1: deadline to the You know, a shutdown is not a
Speaker 1: good thing. A debt limit standoff is the kind of
Speaker 1: thing that Janet Yellen has described as catastrophic. If the
Speaker 1: government cannot make payments that it agreed to make on
Speaker 1: the debt limit cuts those off and they don't have
Speaker 1: a deal that could cast doubt, that would cast doubt
Speaker 1: on the federal government's ability to make its agreed upon payments.
Speaker 1: It would be a huge deal. It's much more of
Speaker 1: an explosive kind of deadline that is coming around the
Speaker 1: third quarter of next year UH than a government funding one,
Speaker 1: because the repercussions of a failure would be much worse
Speaker 1: than a government shutdown. It would it could be combined
Speaker 1: with one, right, but sometimes they do, UH, combine them.
Speaker 1: But the the real issue here is that Republicans are
Speaker 1: kind of gearing up and saying, all right, that's the
Speaker 1: biggest point of leverage that we will have, especially if
Speaker 1: we win the House and or Senate. UH. There would
Speaker 1: need to be a deal of some sort to suspend
Speaker 1: or raise the debt limit to avoid that catastrophe. And
Speaker 1: they are in conversations among themselves now to say, what
Speaker 1: would our opening offer be, what would we consider a
Speaker 1: sort of victorious compromise UH. And I was a bit
Speaker 1: surprised to how directly a number I talked to all
Speaker 1: the members who are interested in being the next jet
Speaker 1: chair on the Republican side, who said social security and
Speaker 1: medicare need to be a focus. It may be the
Speaker 1: case that lower hanging fruit would be some sort of
Speaker 1: quote unquote welfare reform, work crime and s that kind
Speaker 1: of thing. But they're they're pretty direct about saying, you know,
Speaker 1: raising the age of eligibility for Social Security and Medicare.
Speaker 1: One member said, more means testing, limiting who it applies to,
Speaker 1: focusing it more on poor and working class people. But
Speaker 1: you know, targeting some sort of negotiations on those two
Speaker 1: major entitlements is something that they're talking about. It's something
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden's been talking about because Rick Scott had
Speaker 1: had this, had this idea and in the other chamber, right,
Speaker 1: it was part of his competing plan with Mitch McConnell
Speaker 1: to have sunset provisions for some of these major entitlements. Uh,
Speaker 1: this is essentially what the White House has been warning of. Yes,
Speaker 1: the White House Democrats, Uh, they are sort of on
Speaker 1: offense on these issues. There was a bit of a
Speaker 1: lull during the Trump years when Republicans kind of stopped
Speaker 1: talking about trying to reduce spending on Social Security and
Speaker 1: to care in some way sort of the end of
Speaker 1: the Paul Ryan era into the Trump era. It wasn't
Speaker 1: clear how much this was going to be a major
Speaker 1: devisive issue on the campaign trail, the Republicans seem to
Speaker 1: get to be getting a bit more at it. Uh.
Speaker 1: And you hear the president talking about you hear Democratic
Speaker 1: candidates going on air with attack ads on Republicans citing
Speaker 1: Rick Scott's plan. The Republicans Study Committee Budget, which is
Speaker 1: the largest caucus of House Republicans, somewhat leadership aligned, has
Speaker 1: has you know, proposals for increasing the rates of eligibility,
Speaker 1: things that have been characterized as privatization. So this is
Speaker 1: a big issue that you know, if you remember the
Speaker 1: old ad Democrats ran, it was showing Paul Ryan pushing
Speaker 1: a grandma off a rooftop. I believe was the thing
Speaker 1: that we're kind of getting back to that on the
Speaker 1: campaign trail here. All right, well, but your energy is
Speaker 1: palpable here. Uh And and and this is why people
Speaker 1: are going to run to read the story. But before
Speaker 1: they do, bring us into your reporting a little bit here,
Speaker 1: because I don't see anybody else with this and the
Speaker 1: and the the sort of our struggle that's happening ahead
Speaker 1: of a potential change in power in control of the
Speaker 1: House has got to be leading a lot of these
Speaker 1: lawmakers to be talking to you. Is this messaging or
Speaker 1: is this real agenda? Um? You know you can get
Speaker 1: ambitious if you're one of these safe seat conservatives. It's
Speaker 1: is notable that these are not swing district members who
Speaker 1: are feeling under attack themselves. The people Jason Smith, Jody Arrington,
Speaker 1: Buddy Carter, Lloyd Smucker, Kevin hearn is the budget guy
Speaker 1: for the RSC who I mentioned, These are people who
Speaker 1: are gearing up saying, hey, we as a House Republican
Speaker 1: Conference need to decide what's our opening offer on the
Speaker 1: debt limit? What would we consider a victory. They are
Speaker 1: not in say Ron Johnson's position in Wisconsin and that
Speaker 1: tough Senate race. So there's a bit of a difference
Speaker 1: between a swing district member who doesn't really want to
Speaker 1: get aggressive talking about this kind of thing and somebody
Speaker 1: gunning for a leadership position who has a safer reelection bid.
Speaker 1: These are not really household names when it comes to lawmakers.
Speaker 1: Is is there any ranking in terms of who's leading
Speaker 1: the race here the potential next year? So Jason Smith
Speaker 1: is he has a it seems a pretty good chance
Speaker 1: of actually becoming ways and means chair if he gets
Speaker 1: that and that's an even more influential position. It opens
Speaker 1: it up for the others to go for budget chair.
Speaker 1: It seems quite clear that if he does not get it,
Speaker 1: he would remain his budget chair. Uh, it's you know,
Speaker 1: it's an influential enough position so that they would help
Speaker 1: leadership go to their members and say, what are our demands.
Speaker 1: How can we get the votes to avoid a catastrophe?
Speaker 1: What do we attach to that debt limit measure to
Speaker 1: get something fiscally conservative out of it? What could Democrats
Speaker 1: get out of this or are they going to be
Speaker 1: on the ropes if they lose the House. They don't
Speaker 1: have that that leverage anymore. They would be on the ropes.
Speaker 1: And it has been a bit surprising the Democrats have
Speaker 1: not been gearing up to try to get this done
Speaker 1: ahead of time in the lame duck. I think they're distracted.
Speaker 1: They've got a fund of the government. They're they're trying
Speaker 1: to do the same sex marriage bill, and the lame
Speaker 1: duck they have other things to do, and Congress doesn't
Speaker 1: get things done months and months and months before the deadline.
Speaker 1: The latest estimate is the deadline is the third quarter
Speaker 1: of next year, So that kind of puts the power
Speaker 1: in the Republican's hands because they think they're gonna win
Speaker 1: at least one chamber if they do in the House.
Speaker 1: Just lastly, does December sixte become more significant or are
Speaker 1: we going to have a funding mechanism that goes beyond
Speaker 1: the middle of December. There's a portion, the conservative portion,
Speaker 1: the Freedom Caucus guys are saying we should not take
Speaker 1: a deal in the lame Duck. We should kick this
Speaker 1: into next year. There's a there's a division among Republicans.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's a catastrophe there. There could be
Speaker 1: a deal, but there is a push to delay that
Speaker 1: by conservatives. Great reporting from Jack Fitzpatrick, who of course
Speaker 1: we love to hear from on Bloomberg Sound On as
Speaker 1: he often holds this microphone. Thanks for being with us, Jack,
Speaker 1: great job, Bloomberg Government Congress reporter will reassemble the panel
Speaker 1: next for their take. Rick and Janie are on the way.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg So On with Joe
Speaker 1: Matthew on Bloomberg Radio, the fastest hour in Politics. Thanks
Speaker 1: for being with us on the radio, on the satellite,
Speaker 1: on the podcast. Enough scary news today to get us
Speaker 1: through Halloween. It's only the eleventh of October, and I
Speaker 1: haven't even talked about the debate last night. It wasn't scary,
Speaker 1: Actually it was I thought fascinating. J. D. Vance and
Speaker 1: Congressman Tim Ryan in Battleground, Ohio showed up for the game,
Speaker 1: both of them, at least in my humble opinion. And
Speaker 1: we'll hear momentarily from the panel on this well rehearsed
Speaker 1: and ready to rumble as you might expect. The big
Speaker 1: issues were at hand, and I really saw it as
Speaker 1: a microcosm for the national debate that we talked about
Speaker 1: every day. Here quickly opening remarks. Here, just a snippet
Speaker 1: to give you a sense of how this began, and
Speaker 1: we'll bring in Rick and Jennie. Here's J. D. Vance
Speaker 1: off the top. You know what issue he's pointing at, inflation. Simultaneously,
Speaker 1: they've borrowed and spent trillions of dollars that we just
Speaker 1: don't have, and that's thrown fuel on the flyer fire
Speaker 1: of the inflation problem. And at the same time, they've
Speaker 1: completely gone to war against America's energy sector. And you
Speaker 1: can't do both of those things at the same time.
Speaker 1: They're each bad ideas, but when you do both of
Speaker 1: them at the same time, you're gonna get record inflation,
Speaker 1: which is exactly what you expect to get. How Tim Ran,
Speaker 1: of course, just supported all of these policies a hundred
Speaker 1: percent of the time. Response from Tim Ryan those policies,
Speaker 1: all those bills that Democrats voted for, bipartisan infrastructure bill
Speaker 1: that's going to create six hundred thousand jobs here in Ohio.
Speaker 1: JAD advances against that. Rob Portman, the Senator who currently
Speaker 1: holds a seat a Republican, helped put that deal together.
Speaker 1: Look at the Chips Act, lands, the Intel project, that's
Speaker 1: gonna create a hundred billion dollar investment into Ohio, that's
Speaker 1: gonna ripple throughout this entire economy, supply chains, average wage
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty five thousand dollars a year just from
Speaker 1: last night. We have a lot more where that came
Speaker 1: from Rick Davis and Jennie Chanzano or Bloomberg Politics contributors
Speaker 1: of course our signature panel. Uh, Genie, this was quite
Speaker 1: a go around here. I don't know if you agree
Speaker 1: with me, but these seem to be fairly too, fairly
Speaker 1: well matched and very well prepared candidates, and it was
Speaker 1: a largely substantive conversation despite some of the arguments that
Speaker 1: we've seen over the last year. It was a feisty
Speaker 1: debate and it was well worth watching, and they hit
Speaker 1: on so many topics. I mean, I have to say
Speaker 1: everything from as you mentioned, inflation and China policing and
Speaker 1: same sex marriage and you know, the borders, certainly crime.
Speaker 1: I mean, it was you know, it was substantive. I
Speaker 1: agree with you, and you know, I think our assessment
Speaker 1: all along has been that this is a really, really
Speaker 1: tough state for Tim Ryan. But if any Democrat can,
Speaker 1: you know, to take on the herculean task of of
Speaker 1: flipping Ohio, it would be Tim Ryan. He is quite
Speaker 1: a formidable candidate for Democrats. He does take on his
Speaker 1: own party in his own leadership, but it is still
Speaker 1: really an uphill battle for him, and he's facing a
Speaker 1: candidate that I have to say, I was surprised by
Speaker 1: how strong vance came out last night. The real clear
Speaker 1: pole of poles. The r CP average has j d
Speaker 1: Vance up by one point four percentage points. Did he
Speaker 1: surprise he was, well, Rick, you know, I wasn't really
Speaker 1: surprised by him. I mean, he was tenacious candidate in
Speaker 1: the primaries. He he knows his stuff, he's a well,
Speaker 1: he's kided guy. I mean, I wasn't surprised by his
Speaker 1: debate performance. Um. Uh. If anything, I always thought this
Speaker 1: as being sort of a real professional uh. Tim Ryan
Speaker 1: a veteran of Congress, and j D Vance you know, Uh,
Speaker 1: somebody who has used the written word. Uh. No, no
Speaker 1: doubt that he can do well with the spoken word
Speaker 1: to advance his career. And so I've been watching this
Speaker 1: race very closely because I don't think there's a more
Speaker 1: important state out there than know how, and I don't
Speaker 1: think there's a more important race in this one, because
Speaker 1: this one is truly a dead heat, and and different
Speaker 1: from others where the differences between the candidates are pretty substantial. Uh.
Speaker 1: These two guys are party line guys, and Jade Vance
Speaker 1: is carrying the Republican line and Tim Ryan's carrying the
Speaker 1: Democratic line. And and the reality is they didn't stray
Speaker 1: far from that in this debate. There were a couple
Speaker 1: of um I would say, gratuitous moments last night, um
Speaker 1: and uh one on each of their sides, but that
Speaker 1: didn't attract from a generally UH, I think a very
Speaker 1: helpful debate for for voters of Ohio. So you would
Speaker 1: disagree with Congressman Ryan that he is closer to Rob Portman.
Speaker 1: I think he was making that suggestion there in that
Speaker 1: line than g d Evans. Yeah. No, look, I mean
Speaker 1: there's only one Rob Portman. Uh. Look, I mean it's
Speaker 1: pretty clear to me and all the debates that I've
Speaker 1: watched this year is Democrats are running away from Joe
Speaker 1: Biden in the Democratic orthodoxy, right, it's just not selling
Speaker 1: out there. They are critical of this administration on inflation. Uh.
Speaker 1: And the only place that they really sound like orthodox
Speaker 1: Democrats is when they start talking about abortion, which is
Speaker 1: the one issue that they seem to have some advantage
Speaker 1: on going into election day. So, um, I think it's
Speaker 1: it's much harder for a member of a party to
Speaker 1: distance themselves from that party. Uh and and co opting
Speaker 1: uh Rob Portman. I'm sure he's very impressed with his
Speaker 1: uh standing in the state coming to an end here,
Speaker 1: But the reality is, uh, most voters vote along party
Speaker 1: line anyway right now. And so the idea that he's
Speaker 1: gonna get Republicans to vote for him just because he
Speaker 1: thinks Rob Portman is a good guy, I would say,
Speaker 1: is shooting in the wrong direction. Okay, Jennie. Each candidate
Speaker 1: questioned the other guy has fitness for office. You know,
Speaker 1: you shouldn't even be here kind of thing, and they
Speaker 1: did let their differences air out. Tim Ryan really took control,
Speaker 1: grabbed the wheel with both hands when he went after
Speaker 1: Tim h J d Vance and his relationship with Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna walk you through the way this works here again,
Speaker 1: his Congressman Tim Ryan. And I think the problem is
Speaker 1: when you have guys like J. D Vance who can't
Speaker 1: stand up to anybody, Like just a few weeks ago
Speaker 1: in Youngstown on the stage, Uh, Donald Trump said to J.
Speaker 1: D Vance, all you do is kiss my ass to
Speaker 1: get my support. He said that that's bad because that
Speaker 1: means J. D Vance is gonna do whatever he wants.
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell's given him forty million, he's gonna do what
Speaker 1: he wants. And Peter Teal gave him a fifteen millions.
Speaker 1: Gonna do what he wants. And here's the thing that's
Speaker 1: most troubling about this lack of courage is that after
Speaker 1: Trump took J. D Vance's dignity from him on the
Speaker 1: stage in Youngstown, J d Vance got back up on
Speaker 1: stage and said, start shaking his hand, take a picture, saying, hey,
Speaker 1: aren't we having a great time here tonight? So look,
Speaker 1: whether this is important to you or not, Actually, Tim
Speaker 1: Ryan was pretty accurate here. Here. Let's go to the
Speaker 1: seventeenth of September. This is Youngstown, Donald Trump in New
Speaker 1: York Times to a fake story today big front page
Speaker 1: that j D wasn't sure if he wanted my support.
Speaker 1: J D is kissing my ass, he wants my silp?
Speaker 1: What's up? I'm eighteen points up. If I was eighteen
Speaker 1: points down, he wouldn't want my support. And then yes,
Speaker 1: j D. Vance was introduced to come up, brought him
Speaker 1: up on the stage at the podym. We're having a
Speaker 1: good time. Is a great day of the president? Back? While? Okay,
Speaker 1: so Tim Ryan essentially what he said again, you may
Speaker 1: not care about that exchange, but it's one that we
Speaker 1: spent a lot of time on last night. J D.
Speaker 1: Vance came back following the attack from Ryan. I'm not
Speaker 1: going to take lectures on dignity and self respect from
Speaker 1: a guy caught on video kissing up to Chuck Schumer
Speaker 1: and begging him for a promotion to his next job.
Speaker 1: That's the kind of guy that Tim Ryan is now.
Speaker 1: He just said, it's so funny. We're gonta close to
Speaker 1: Halloween and Tim Ryan is put on a costume where
Speaker 1: he pretends to be a reasonable moderate. You know what
Speaker 1: I'm gonna ask both of you here, Jeanie Chanzy, No
Speaker 1: was this a draw? No? I don't think it was
Speaker 1: a draw. There was a lot of kissing, but it
Speaker 1: wasn't the kind that if there's any kind of love
Speaker 1: on either side. But you know, I don't think I
Speaker 1: don't think it necessarily was a draw. And I'll tell
Speaker 1: you why I thought that, j D. I thought that
Speaker 1: Tim Ryan rather, he was able to differentiate himself in
Speaker 1: an important way. I mean this whole exchange about that
Speaker 1: you just played, so I won't repeat the bad words. Um,
Speaker 1: you know that came Becau has Vance kept accusing him
Speaker 1: of being in Congress for twenty years. And this is
Speaker 1: why I was surprised by how good vance His performance was,
Speaker 1: because he's not a politician. He hasn't been in office
Speaker 1: like Ryan. But Ryan was able to come back and
Speaker 1: he was able to say, and this is where I
Speaker 1: disagree with with Rick that I have not held the
Speaker 1: Democratic party line I've run against Nancy Pelosi, I put
Speaker 1: ads out early on China. I've been with Trump on
Speaker 1: NAFTA and defense, and I opposed Joe Biden on many things.
Speaker 1: So he was able to say that he is not
Speaker 1: a typical Democrat, and I thought he did that very effectively,
Speaker 1: And for that reason, I did not think it was
Speaker 1: a draw. I think Tim Ryan made himself heard in
Speaker 1: terms of who he is as an independent moderate voice.
Speaker 1: Whether that wins over Republicans is another question, And for
Speaker 1: that reason, I thought he did better. But I thought
Speaker 1: Vance did a good job for somebody who's not accustomed
Speaker 1: to debating like this. What's your thought on that reckon?
Speaker 1: Does this move the needle? Well, look, I mean I
Speaker 1: think by most polls that you just discussed um uh
Speaker 1: Vance as a slight lead UH. And it's a good
Speaker 1: year for Republicans, and so it's really incumbent upon Tim
Speaker 1: Ryan to change the dynamic and and and pleading UH
Speaker 1: with Republican and swing voters that he's not they're kind
Speaker 1: of Democrat after serving twenty years Congress and pulling the
Speaker 1: party line is gonna be really hard for him. So
Speaker 1: when you look at what Vance has got to do,
Speaker 1: to get his vote out and find that extra four
Speaker 1: or five points to be elected, versus what Ryan has
Speaker 1: to do, which is turning himself into a pretzel in
Speaker 1: order to convince people that he's not a real Democrat
Speaker 1: and overcome a deficit of probably two or three points. Man,
Speaker 1: I'd rather have that Republican line every day if that's
Speaker 1: the set up. Fascinating. Uh, We've got some important debates
Speaker 1: coming uh this week, the culminating with Friday Herschel, Walker,
Speaker 1: Raphael Warnock or any of these debates, Genie going to
Speaker 1: change the landscape. Because there's been a lot of single
Speaker 1: debate races. That's one of them. I'm assuming it's a
Speaker 1: one and done for for Walker and Warnock. Are we
Speaker 1: gonna get to a point where these are a thing
Speaker 1: of the past. Yeah. I Mean I've been frustrated, as
Speaker 1: you know about the lack of debates. I wish there
Speaker 1: was more, but of course our candidates and campaigns they
Speaker 1: don't want them. The one I'm really going to watch
Speaker 1: as a Walker Warnock because of course in debates, you know,
Speaker 1: you can't do harm. That's the that's the rule. You
Speaker 1: shouldn't harm yourself. And I think there's a potential that
Speaker 1: herschel Walker, again new to this style of of of politicking,
Speaker 1: could do that. So I think that's going to be
Speaker 1: a very important debate to watch. Otherwise, I don't think
Speaker 1: it changes much, and if people vote party line, it's
Speaker 1: not going to change anything. Rick, you prepared candidates for House,
Speaker 1: Senate and presidential debates, which you encourage your candidate now
Speaker 1: to take as many debates as possible, or that's an
Speaker 1: age gone by. I think if I were advising herschel
Speaker 1: Walker's campaign, and I would never try to do that,
Speaker 1: I would tell him run from any debate that he
Speaker 1: could possibly be offered. So it depends on the candidate.
Speaker 1: I think he means, Rick, great to have you back.
Speaker 1: Rick Davis and Jeanie Schanzano. Can't get enough of these two.
Speaker 1: That's why there are signature panel on the fastest hour
Speaker 1: in Politics. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg