Speaker 1: Politics, policy and perspective from DC's top names. So, even
Speaker 1: though I won't be your nominee, I remain deeply committed
Speaker 1: to Pennsylvania and to the United States. Premaricans President is
Speaker 1: encouraged by the discussions that are happening currently in the
Speaker 1: Senate and it shows the urgency. Bloomberg Sound On with
Speaker 1: Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Boris Johnson survives the confidence vote,
Speaker 1: but the rebellion was larger than many expected. Welcome to
Speaker 1: the fastest hour in politics. Will get the latest from
Speaker 1: London for you. Discussed with David Smith, Washington correspondence at
Speaker 1: the Guardian. Lawmakers are back in the bubble back in Washington,
Speaker 1: and so is talk of reconciliation. It's been a while,
Speaker 1: possibly on guns, possibly on inflation. We're going to discuss
Speaker 1: that ahead with Ed Mills, Washington Policy Analysts managing partner
Speaker 1: Raymond James. Seven states holding primaries tomorrow, including California. Jack Pitney,
Speaker 1: the political scientist from Claire Mott McKenna College, will help
Speaker 1: us understand why the race for mayor of l a
Speaker 1: has become one of the most expensive, if not the
Speaker 1: most expensive, in the country. Our signature panels in place.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Politics contributors Jeanie Chanzano and Rick Davis with analysis
Speaker 1: on these stories. Boris Johnson will wake up tomorrow as
Speaker 1: Prime Minister once again, but he may be thinking about
Speaker 1: a new approach. I don't know. After surviving a confidence
Speaker 1: vote by less than well he likely had hoped, it
Speaker 1: was said of more than a hundred and thirty three
Speaker 1: MPs voted against Johnson today, he may have bigger problems
Speaker 1: than he realized, certainly bigger than Theresa May faced turned
Speaker 1: out a hundred and forty eight voted against him. Let's
Speaker 1: get a bit of perspective here. Political perspective from David Smith,
Speaker 1: the Washington correspondent for The Guardian. It's great to have
Speaker 1: you on a busy day, David. Is this suggests the
Speaker 1: tally here, the size of the rebellion suggests that Boris
Speaker 1: Johnson maybe nearing the end of his time as Prime minister. Yes,
Speaker 1: quite possibly. I think it is a bitter disappointment for
Speaker 1: Johnson that that total of one d conservative MP's voting
Speaker 1: to remove him from office and not enough to do
Speaker 1: it mathematically, but it's it is quite a body blow.
Speaker 1: And I noticed um for example, David Lammy, who's the
Speaker 1: shadow Foreign Secretary, a labor MP, pointing out this is
Speaker 1: actually a worse percentage for Boris Johnson than for past
Speaker 1: Tory Prime ministers Margaret Thatcher, Theresa May and John Major,
Speaker 1: none of whom lasted very long. And so Lammy writes
Speaker 1: on Twitter, Boris Johnson is a dead man walking. He's
Speaker 1: got to go. And I think quite a few people
Speaker 1: saying that and agreeing with that, and I would agree
Speaker 1: with that, but for the fact that we live in
Speaker 1: the political era of Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and those
Speaker 1: other leaders who don't necessarily played by the old rules
Speaker 1: of accepting defeat or displaying shame or humility. And Johnson
Speaker 1: has survived so much in the past that if anyone
Speaker 1: can survive this again, maybe he just about can. So
Speaker 1: maybe history does not rewrite itself. Maybe he's not out
Speaker 1: of work in six months, but I wonder, you know,
Speaker 1: just imagining and recalling the images of him walking around
Speaker 1: the streets of Kiev just a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 1: He's central to this war in Ukraine right now, certainly
Speaker 1: as a partner to the US. David talked to us
Speaker 1: about his relationship with this white House and what a
Speaker 1: different prime minister might mean for continuity in a wartime. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean you're you're reminding me of the roller coaster
Speaker 1: ride here where Johnson did seem completely doomed. And then
Speaker 1: a few weeks later, as you say, he's strutting around
Speaker 1: Kiev or this a sort of Churchill in figure with
Speaker 1: President of Ukraine. At that point people were saying he's
Speaker 1: untouchable and the attempt to remove him from power has failed,
Speaker 1: and now here we are back again with him, you know,
Speaker 1: dangling by a thread. And and and part of that
Speaker 1: Ukraine effort was indeed this uh close relationship between the
Speaker 1: UK and the US militarily and diplomatically on the Ukraine crisis. UM.
Speaker 1: I think it has brought those two countries together, and
Speaker 1: indeed brought the US and Europe together. I think Boris
Speaker 1: Johnson was trying to construct an argument that parties at
Speaker 1: Downing Streets are pretty you know, small fry, pretty trivial
Speaker 1: compared to the future of the West and the geopolitics
Speaker 1: visit the Russia. Um. And it perhaps helped build some
Speaker 1: bridges between Biden and Johnson, even though I don't think
Speaker 1: they are a natural fit. And done in the past,
Speaker 1: they've been wrinkles there. For example, Joe Biden a few
Speaker 1: years ago describing Boris Johnson as the physical and emotional
Speaker 1: clone of Donald Trump. So Ukraine seemed to be sort
Speaker 1: of cementing that. But but look, I think if if
Speaker 1: Boris Johnson is a actually ousted and replaced by a
Speaker 1: new British Prime Minister, Joe Biden will not be weeping
Speaker 1: tears over that, will be happy to get It's great
Speaker 1: context and appreciate your time. Fascinating conversation once again, uh
Speaker 1: with David Smith, the Washington correspondent for The Guardian. You
Speaker 1: can follow him on Twitter at smith in America. He's
Speaker 1: been very good on this, keeping us up to Daton.
Speaker 1: Come back and talk to us soon, David. All the while,
Speaker 1: in Washington, lawmakers are back. It was a busy day,
Speaker 1: a busy night at Reagan National Airport. They're back in
Speaker 1: the bubble, and of course the first question that everyone
Speaker 1: is asking is what's the situation with guns? Do we
Speaker 1: know that senators have been talking about a gun safety
Speaker 1: measure through telephone and zoom meetings basically since you'valdi. They've
Speaker 1: been out for for some time. Here Karine John Pierre,
Speaker 1: the Press secretary at the White House, was asked about
Speaker 1: this just today. We are going to see how the
Speaker 1: negotiations go. We're going to give it the space that
Speaker 1: it needs, uh and we're not going to speak to
Speaker 1: what exactly is being discussed the pieces of legislation, but
Speaker 1: we are encouraged and we think these incremental steps, these
Speaker 1: steps that they're taking, this conversation that they're having is
Speaker 1: very important. During that word incremental a lot. And as
Speaker 1: lawmakers return, you know there were several different efforts under way.
Speaker 1: You've got this one in the Senate. In fact, there
Speaker 1: are a couple of groups in the Senate. We know
Speaker 1: that there is a massive package of gun safety gun
Speaker 1: control measures being marked up in the House, just went
Speaker 1: through Judiciary Committee last week, and now we're hearing more
Speaker 1: talk about reconciliation. The focus on what Democrats say is
Speaker 1: important legislation on the economy, the Bipartisan Innovation Act, which
Speaker 1: includes the Chip Act, and a reconciliation bill aimed at inflation,
Speaker 1: I should say reconciliation. It's been a while. This is
Speaker 1: why we want to talk to. Ed Milsey's back with
Speaker 1: us today Washington Policy Analysts, Managing director at Raymond James,
Speaker 1: and are we going to talk about a reconciliation bill
Speaker 1: for the rest of this year only to see nothing
Speaker 1: happen again by November? Joe, It's certainly possible. Um. What
Speaker 1: I'm telling clients that Raymond James is that what the
Speaker 1: Biden administration and Congressional Democrats are attempting right now is
Speaker 1: a bit of a economic sprint between Memorial Day and
Speaker 1: Labor Day that starts with this Bipartisan Investment Acts, that's
Speaker 1: the U. S. China Competition Bill. There'll be decisions on
Speaker 1: China and tariffs, and they would like to cap that
Speaker 1: off with reconciliation. The odds are going up on reconciliation,
Speaker 1: but it is far from a done deal. Senator Mansion
Speaker 1: once again is at the center of all this. But
Speaker 1: even if you get a negotiation um in a deal
Speaker 1: with him, how do you sell it to the rest
Speaker 1: of the Senate? How do you get the progressives on
Speaker 1: board in the House? That fragile flower of consensus is
Speaker 1: going to be very difficult to achieve, not impossible, but
Speaker 1: that is the goal here between now and when members
Speaker 1: go off to their August recess. So is this the
Speaker 1: last gasp of the Democratic majority on Capitol Hill, because
Speaker 1: it's not just economic issues we're hearing about. I spoke
Speaker 1: earlier today ed with Congressman Don Buyer, the Democrat from Virginia,
Speaker 1: is proposing a gun control bill of sorts. It would
Speaker 1: actually impose a one thousand percent tax on all assault weapons,
Speaker 1: the idea being that it would have the same effect
Speaker 1: as a band, which could never pass the Senate. Instead,
Speaker 1: he could do it through reconciliation with only Democratic votes.
Speaker 1: I'm assuming that's not likely to happen, but these are
Speaker 1: the kind of ideas coming up here when the time
Speaker 1: is short and another party has breathing down your neck. Yeah, Joe,
Speaker 1: I listened to that was a great interview you had,
Speaker 1: and it is, you know, I think, kind of showing
Speaker 1: you how they are trying to get creative. Uh, they
Speaker 1: are looking for solutions that might not necessarily require that
Speaker 1: sixty vote threshold in the Senate. Congressman Buyer was very
Speaker 1: clear about how he was attempting to do that. But
Speaker 1: I do think that if they get something done, it
Speaker 1: is what you highlight it at the beginning of the segment,
Speaker 1: which is that incremental. What Democrats are hoping to do
Speaker 1: is work with the kind of their colleagues in the
Speaker 1: Senate to show them that they can get something done
Speaker 1: on gun control and that it does not harm them
Speaker 1: at the ballot box. Uh. That is not in in
Speaker 1: terms of what a don buyer is looking for. It's
Speaker 1: more in terms of what uh the Senator Murphy, Senator
Speaker 1: corn in corn did we lisen? Well, now you cut
Speaker 1: out there for a minute, all right, the Murphy corn
Speaker 1: and Bill are we talking about a red flag incentive Bill?
Speaker 1: I mean, this is it's kind of the lowest rung
Speaker 1: of the ladder here, right, and getting something done. It
Speaker 1: is it's it's it's money to states to implement red
Speaker 1: flag laws. That's going to be them though. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: it's it's it's things that um, you know, kind of
Speaker 1: have so pork by of voters. UM. And Republicans are
Speaker 1: in the potentially difficult position here because they are kind
Speaker 1: of looking kind of at their polls and it looks
Speaker 1: pretty good and they don't want to be completely on
Speaker 1: the wrong side. So at the bare minimum from a
Speaker 1: political perspective, they have to go through the process of
Speaker 1: negotiations and seeing what can be done. We'll see if
Speaker 1: they can kind of find that agreement that it would
Speaker 1: be enough for Democrats to also be supportive. Murphy talks
Speaker 1: about that increment full view. Um, I'm not fully sure
Speaker 1: all of his colleagues things incremental is enough. Well, no,
Speaker 1: and of course it depends which colleagues you ask and
Speaker 1: who might be up for reelection. Uh this time around.
Speaker 1: And just to get back though you you mentioned the
Speaker 1: mansion on the hill, Joe Mansion. Talking again about not
Speaker 1: build back better. We'll find a different name. It's it's
Speaker 1: what does it build America? I don't even they'll they'll
Speaker 1: be a hat for it at some point. But this
Speaker 1: is a stripped down version of what they could not
Speaker 1: get done last year. Does this have a better chance? Um,
Speaker 1: better chance because we're still talking about it. If something
Speaker 1: gets done and it's two core things, one something on healthcare.
Speaker 1: I think what doesn't get discussed enough is the healthcare
Speaker 1: cliffs that occur later this year. Uh. The subsidies for
Speaker 1: the Affordable Care Act that we're part of, the American
Speaker 1: Rescue Plan last year would cause massive increases UM in
Speaker 1: exchange paid plans at the end of this year. Democrats
Speaker 1: would like to avoid that. The public health emergency could
Speaker 1: move millions of people off of Medicare Medicaid. I'm sorry
Speaker 1: once that is lifted, so they're really focusing on that
Speaker 1: that's more politically popular than other parts of the plan.
Speaker 1: And then on energy, Ed Mills, come back and talk
Speaker 1: to us. That story also is not getting enough coverage.
Speaker 1: Come back and talk to us here on Bloomberg Sound
Speaker 1: on Washington Policy analyst Raymond James will assemble the panel. Next,
Speaker 1: We've got Rick and Genie on the way. I'm Joe Matthew.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg. You sound on
Speaker 1: with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Somebody mentioned Joe Match
Speaker 1: and say his name match and look at the headline,
Speaker 1: not just reconciliation. Talking about the economy, he says he
Speaker 1: would consider backing a ban on assault weapons, telling CNN
Speaker 1: that he supports raising the age for purchasing semi automatic weapons.
Speaker 1: Also said he would consider backing a ban on assault
Speaker 1: weapons depending on the proposal. And that's a big covey
Speaker 1: oft there, because we can't even seem to define them
Speaker 1: in most cases. For these conversations, let's assemble the panel
Speaker 1: right now. Pick up on where we left off with
Speaker 1: Ed Mills, Rick and Genie are with us on a
Speaker 1: Monday Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Genie Chanzano. Does
Speaker 1: the Mansion headline move this story at all, Rick, or
Speaker 1: is he just too far ahead? We're talking about red flags,
Speaker 1: maybe expanded background checks in the Senate right now, as
Speaker 1: opposed to raising the age of for buying a weapon. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure about that, Joe. I think that there
Speaker 1: is a debate going on about the raising of age. Uh.
Speaker 1: It was in part of the Florida laws that were
Speaker 1: passed uh in um in in twenty nineteen, and so
Speaker 1: I think that certainly Republicans see those as having been
Speaker 1: effective in Florida, and and the question now is will
Speaker 1: they be willing to do it on capital A lot
Speaker 1: of Republicans UM like Adam Kinzinger have been speaking out
Speaker 1: about it. Uh, positively. I think more likely for long guns,
Speaker 1: uh specifically, and UH, I think Joe Manchin was talking
Speaker 1: about semi automatics, you know, but I do think it's
Speaker 1: on the table. A ban on assault weapons is another story, correct,
Speaker 1: for sure. I think that that's a totally different kettle
Speaker 1: of fish. It hasn't worked in the past, As you say,
Speaker 1: you get into this whole debate about what is an
Speaker 1: assault weapon? Uh, and I don't imagine that is likely
Speaker 1: to occur other than maybe some elements of it, like
Speaker 1: clips and things like that that U that have been
Speaker 1: subject to regulation in the past by the federal government.
Speaker 1: Genie Jane Harmon told us earlier today on Balance of
Speaker 1: Power that she voted for the assault weapons ban in
Speaker 1: and almost lost her seat over it. It was within
Speaker 1: nine votes or something. This is a Democrat from California.
Speaker 1: I realized it was not considered a liberal district. But
Speaker 1: my goodness, fast forward to two and it gives you
Speaker 1: a good sense of what that would mean for a
Speaker 1: lot of lawmakers. It does, and it's fascinating because of
Speaker 1: course that's n as you mentioned in California for a
Speaker 1: Democrat of all places. And you know, I am sitting
Speaker 1: in here in New York and we've got Chris Jacobs.
Speaker 1: He loses ten people in his district. He's a freshman
Speaker 1: from New York. He comes out in support of fairly
Speaker 1: common sense gun regulations, and he within two weeks is
Speaker 1: pushed out of his run for re election. And that's
Speaker 1: again New York. He is a freshman Republican, But it
Speaker 1: just tells you what the state of the party is.
Speaker 1: And you know, I have to say that Joe Mansion
Speaker 1: went through this, you know, the Mansion to Me bill.
Speaker 1: You know, once we even get language on one of
Speaker 1: these things, the amount of misinformation that comes forward about
Speaker 1: that language was one of the things that upset their
Speaker 1: ability to pass that that bill. So we have a
Speaker 1: long way to go before we get what I still
Speaker 1: believe is going to be really incremental focused on mental
Speaker 1: health and and maybe a school safety, but they're not
Speaker 1: going to be addressing any real restrictions on our new
Speaker 1: gun laws. Do we have this week essentially for timing
Speaker 1: on a deal? Rick? Yeah, I think this is the moment, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've talked so many times about these crisises,
Speaker 1: these attacks that occur and that, and that the focus
Speaker 1: wanes after a week or two, people look another direction,
Speaker 1: And so this is the time. And I do think
Speaker 1: there's a bipartisan effort that's that's really open. I think
Speaker 1: Chris Murphy Democrat has done an enormously good job of
Speaker 1: not demagoguing this issue and bringing people to the table
Speaker 1: to try and find solutions. I think I think this
Speaker 1: could be a package that people could stand up and say, hey,
Speaker 1: we've actually done something about it. And I do think
Speaker 1: that age allows them to go out if they raise
Speaker 1: it from eighteen to twenty one for long guns and said,
Speaker 1: you know what, if this had been law, uh, you've
Speaker 1: all day would not have And boy, isn't that the point, Genie?
Speaker 1: How many times have I asked, whether it's lawmakers or
Speaker 1: or activists on one side or another this issue over
Speaker 1: the last several weeks, would would your idea have stopped
Speaker 1: those last shootings? The answers usually no. And of course,
Speaker 1: my goodness, we got another pile of them over the weekend.
Speaker 1: So that changes the rules here all over again when
Speaker 1: you're asking that. But that's that's going to be the
Speaker 1: test for a lot of lawmakers. You can pass something,
Speaker 1: but would it have prevented any of these from happening? Yeah?
Speaker 1: And you know, and as you mentioned, in so many cases,
Speaker 1: I mean, we've been listening to you do these interviewes.
Speaker 1: In almost every case, unfortunately, the answer, as you mentioned
Speaker 1: is no. In a spade of violence over the weekend.
Speaker 1: And I think the question we're going to be asking
Speaker 1: if something does get PAS is going to be was
Speaker 1: it a meaningful would it have made a difference at all?
Speaker 1: And you know that is usually, again the answer to
Speaker 1: those questions going to be no, particularly if it doesn't
Speaker 1: address the number of guns in the country in a
Speaker 1: meaningful way, and by any stretch of the imagination, it's
Speaker 1: hard to believe we're going to get there. Cornan who
Speaker 1: seems to be negotiating in good faith, he wants to
Speaker 1: be majority leader of his conference at some point, he's
Speaker 1: not going to be able to do this with just
Speaker 1: ten Republicans of they can even get there. So I
Speaker 1: think we have a long way to go if we're
Speaker 1: going to get something meaningful. We're talking about a fairly
Speaker 1: narrow slice of this story here, Rick does if something
Speaker 1: gets done to the extent that we're describing UH in Congress,
Speaker 1: could that open a conversation about, for instance, illegal guns,
Speaker 1: how to control illegal guns in street crime, how illegal
Speaker 1: guns are impacting UH communities of color, for instance, in
Speaker 1: cities all over the country. Never mind the idea of
Speaker 1: of on fatal shootings, of which there are so many
Speaker 1: that would never make the news. Gun violence is more
Speaker 1: than school shootings, Joe. We've seen so many facets of
Speaker 1: this gun debate go beyond what we're talking about. As
Speaker 1: you say, um, you know, we just saw the administration
Speaker 1: take real action, uh, from the executive branch, you know,
Speaker 1: on these ghost guns, and and now you're talking about
Speaker 1: something that's at the heart of an explosion of crime
Speaker 1: across the country, and that's illegal weapons in the cities especially,
Speaker 1: And so I think all of this stuff is going
Speaker 1: to get aired out, especially during this election cycle. I
Speaker 1: hope it's a way to get to that conversation here
Speaker 1: with Rick and Jennie. We do this every day, try
Speaker 1: to air out both sides on the fastest hour in politics.
Speaker 1: We'll turn to primary day next after we check traffic
Speaker 1: and markets for you. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: We'll have more of the panel a bit later on.
Speaker 1: Rick and Jeanie are with us for the hour. As
Speaker 1: we now turned the primary day tomorrow. We've got a
Speaker 1: big one here seven states, California, Iowa, New Mexico, South Dakota,
Speaker 1: New Jersey, Montana, Mississippi. This is the biggest day of
Speaker 1: voting basically in the cycle until election day itself. As
Speaker 1: I read on the terminal, Greg Joro has got his
Speaker 1: great piece as always by the way if you want
Speaker 1: to get yourself together, here with all the breakdowns on
Speaker 1: the races to watch in each state. Not just the
Speaker 1: busiest day of voting, but we'll be voters will be
Speaker 1: selecting general election nominees in almost a fifth of the
Speaker 1: four hundred and thirty five House districts in just one day.
Speaker 1: The race for l A mayor has really captured our
Speaker 1: attention that we've been talking about it a lot, and
Speaker 1: we wanted to hear about it from Jack Pitney. As
Speaker 1: you've got a mayoral race. I realized it's l A.
Speaker 1: This is a big city. But to become what could
Speaker 1: be the most expensive race in the country is saying something.
Speaker 1: Rick Caruso has spent thirty four million dollars on this race,
Speaker 1: single handedly making it what it is. This is remember
Speaker 1: the Republican turn Democrat. His main all is Representative Karen Bass,
Speaker 1: who with an allied superpack has spent about two million dollars.
Speaker 1: That's thirty four million to two million, Caruso outspending her
Speaker 1: to one. Jack Pitney Again, political scientists from Claremont McKenna College,
Speaker 1: does this race have your attention as well? How expensive
Speaker 1: good this get? Absolutely? It was going to be expensive
Speaker 1: because it's the Los Angeles media market, which is a
Speaker 1: notoriously expensive by and Caruso has been all over the place.
Speaker 1: My home is not in the city of Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: but I'm getting Crusoe ads all over the place. So
Speaker 1: he is spending a lot of money, and uh, it's
Speaker 1: paid off. Polls indicate that he is going to make
Speaker 1: the top two. Whether he uh Outpoles Karen Bass is
Speaker 1: another question, but it seems very likely that the result
Speaker 1: tomorrow night will be that Karen Bass and Rick Crusoe
Speaker 1: will be on the ballot in November. And that's important.
Speaker 1: This is the way it goes in California. Right, You've
Speaker 1: got you've got the two top vote getters moving on
Speaker 1: to the general That's right, but with one important difference.
Speaker 1: In a mayoral race and most statewide races, the top
Speaker 1: two just proceed to the general election no matter how
Speaker 1: many votes either of them get. In a local election,
Speaker 1: if one of the candidates get game over, that person
Speaker 1: wins out Right, That's possible tomorrow night, but not very likely.
Speaker 1: Rick Caruso has resonated with the crime story in l A.
Speaker 1: Is that what has also brought him this far crime
Speaker 1: and homelessness. If you talk to anybody who's recently visited
Speaker 1: Los Angeles, they'll be shocked at the homeless encampments all
Speaker 1: over the city. Uh. It's a huge humanitarian problem and
Speaker 1: one that the city government has not been able to
Speaker 1: manage very effectively, and both candidates have had a lot
Speaker 1: to say about it. I wasn't going to ask you
Speaker 1: too much about the gubernatorial race because Gavin Newsom is
Speaker 1: apparently going to have a pretty great day. But Michael Schellenberger,
Speaker 1: homeless advocate, has done pretty well for himself on that
Speaker 1: issue on a state level as well. That's right. The
Speaker 1: question is whether he is going to make the top two.
Speaker 1: He's running as an independent now in the top two primary,
Speaker 1: that shouldn't make much of a difference, but Republicans and
Speaker 1: Democrats tend to stay in their partisan silos, and the
Speaker 1: polls indicate that, Uh, the number two candidate is very
Speaker 1: very likely to end up being a Republican and that
Speaker 1: person will get crushed in November. Well, what's Karen Bass's
Speaker 1: message to voters if she's not throwing nearly the money
Speaker 1: that her rival is. If we can get back to
Speaker 1: the l A mayor's race for a minute, competence and compassion.
Speaker 1: She has a long record public service. She was Speaker
Speaker 1: of the California Assembly. Those state issues, those local issues,
Speaker 1: what national issues, and she has a reputation for even
Speaker 1: though she's pretty progressive on the issue. Uh, she's a
Speaker 1: practical dealmaker. She can get things done. That's her message.
Speaker 1: And uh it's actually the same message as uh Rick
Speaker 1: Caruso as a practical problem solver. There are a couple
Speaker 1: of interesting House races to watch in California as well,
Speaker 1: particularly uh, those who voted to impeach Donald Trump. Uh.
Speaker 1: There were ten House Republicans, and one of them is
Speaker 1: in California. Of course here David Valado, if I'm saying
Speaker 1: his name correctly, is that Valadeo? Excuse me? Is that
Speaker 1: going to bite back in his primary tomorrow? It's possible. Uh,
Speaker 1: it's uh, it is within the realm possibility that a
Speaker 1: pro Trump Republican could outpoll him, uh and get into
Speaker 1: the top two for November. We'll we'll see how the
Speaker 1: vote shakes out. But that's something of great concern. Tod
Speaker 1: we talked about crime and homelessness. What else is motivating
Speaker 1: voters to actually get to the polls in California in
Speaker 1: an off election year. Those are the big ones in California.
Speaker 1: And the thing to remember about crime is that this
Speaker 1: state has a reputation for being very democratic, very blue,
Speaker 1: but we also have a relatively conservative streak when it
Speaker 1: comes to crime. Uh. In the last election, California voters
Speaker 1: by a fairly substantial origin voted down a measure to
Speaker 1: abolish cash bail. And if you look over a time,
Speaker 1: the voters have tended to indicate that they favorite a
Speaker 1: tough on crime stance. In the city of San Francisco,
Speaker 1: for instance, the very progressive district attorney is likely to
Speaker 1: be recalled tomorrow. Uh. So that's an issue that probably
Speaker 1: works to the advantage of Rick Crusoe in Los Angeles. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this point, there's nothing like California politics. Jack Pitney knows that.
Speaker 1: That's why we had him in and we thank you
Speaker 1: for your insights. Jack, political scientists from Claremont McKenna College.
Speaker 1: I'd love to just get quickly with Rick and Jennie
Speaker 1: on this because we covered a lot of ground there.
Speaker 1: But this l a mayor's race. Something I heard you
Speaker 1: both discussing earlier today is a race about money. Is
Speaker 1: there going to be a lesson learned here, Rick that
Speaker 1: you know, money doesn't buy everything in politics. Well, I
Speaker 1: think it's gonna buy Crusoe a ticket into the general
Speaker 1: election and then watch how much gets spent. So I
Speaker 1: don't think we've even scratched the surface. I mean, obviously
Speaker 1: the primary was a key thing for him to buy
Speaker 1: name I D and get into this runoff. But it
Speaker 1: sounds like that's what's going to happen. I can't imagine
Speaker 1: what he's willing to spend, mostly of his own money,
Speaker 1: by the way, uh, you know, to get elected in
Speaker 1: the general election. So I think we're gonna see this
Speaker 1: is probably a record breaker for for California mayors versus
Speaker 1: maybe for the rest of the country. Can Karen Bass
Speaker 1: helped to make up the difference with money from Washington,
Speaker 1: Gene She may be able to. But I think the
Speaker 1: real story here is this, you know, fight in the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party between the establishment and progressives, and progressives are
Speaker 1: having a hard time in a democratic state right now.
Speaker 1: It's a great set up for our next conversation. We've
Speaker 1: got to talk about Pennsylvania as well, fetterman Oz. It's
Speaker 1: on and so are Rick and Genie. Next. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg. You sound on with Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Radio. Well, so much for the recounts. In Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: After a couple of weeks of pins and needles, the
Speaker 1: race for senator is set after David McCormick conceded on Friday,
Speaker 1: even though I won't be your nominee, I remained deeply
Speaker 1: committed to Pennsylvania and to the United States of America.
Speaker 1: Nice and easy, he said. He called Dr Roz and
Speaker 1: let him know here. So Oz will face John Fetterman
Speaker 1: in the general, which sets up a race that Rick
Speaker 1: Davis described earlier as I believe a doctor patient contest.
Speaker 1: Having learned that Fetterman's heart condition. Remember he had a
Speaker 1: stroke right before the primary. They put a defibrillator in
Speaker 1: his heart. I guess it was worse than first revealed.
Speaker 1: Let's reassemble the panel for more on this, Rick, it
Speaker 1: seems like opportunities abound for a candidate who is known
Speaker 1: as a medical doctor, as a surgeon, being able to
Speaker 1: question his rival here about disclosures when it comes to
Speaker 1: medical health. Well, I think that even if he just says,
Speaker 1: I hope every day of the campaign that Lieutenant Governor
Speaker 1: Fetterman is is doing well. It just reminds everybody that
Speaker 1: he may not be. Uh. And so it's it's it's
Speaker 1: really not incoming upon him. I think to put it
Speaker 1: out there, I think every single day, reporters on the
Speaker 1: campaign trailer are gonna be asking Fetterman, how do you
Speaker 1: feel today? I mean, he's not going to escape this. Um.
Speaker 1: It's one thing to have gone through the health scare
Speaker 1: that he had during the primaries, but evidently he was
Speaker 1: diagnosed back in two thousand seventeen of a heart condition
Speaker 1: and and did not follow his doctor's instructions. So um.
Speaker 1: I think there's a lot of splaining to do for
Speaker 1: the Fetterman campaign. And I think this is going to
Speaker 1: dog them for the rest of the election. How damaging
Speaker 1: is this genie does? The Fetterman campaign needs to be
Speaker 1: proactive here, you know, start putting out the E K
Speaker 1: G scans. I mean, how do you manage this? You know?
Speaker 1: I think they need to show that that they didn't
Speaker 1: withhold any information. There's been a lot of questions about that,
Speaker 1: that they were honest about his health. Um, and so
Speaker 1: they're gonna need to put information out there. But let's
Speaker 1: not forget. You know, Fetterman won all sixties seven counties
Speaker 1: fifty nine percent of the vote against a Canada and
Speaker 1: Connor Lamb, who people, you know, at one point thought
Speaker 1: was the future of of the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: You juxtapose that with Oz, who barely scraped by with
Speaker 1: less than a thousand votes against McCormick, was in a
Speaker 1: recount and had to wait. So you know, yes, Fetterman
Speaker 1: has had this horrific health scare, and we hope he's well.
Speaker 1: But Oz has been damaged as well. And we've already
Speaker 1: seen the Fetterman campaign come out and they have a
Speaker 1: bumper sticker or a pen now that says Dr Oz
Speaker 1: for New Jersey because of course he's you know, not
Speaker 1: from Pennsylvania as they like to talk about. So there
Speaker 1: is gonna be a lot of back and forth here.
Speaker 1: It's certainly a Republican year. But you know, Fetterman, for
Speaker 1: this health scare, was sort of a poster child for
Speaker 1: showing how Democrats could do this and be this outsider
Speaker 1: sort of does this impact a tough guy image, Jennie
Speaker 1: not so tough now, and you've got a heart problem.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm genuinely asking it does I mean, it doesn't.
Speaker 1: They're going to have to address that. Some people like
Speaker 1: to describe him as the Paul Bunyan common man. You know,
Speaker 1: you know he's not a superman. But you know, I
Speaker 1: thought they did a good job when he said a
Speaker 1: lot of men his age don't like to go to
Speaker 1: the doctor, and he was the same way. That's an
Speaker 1: honest view, and I think that's the kind of argument
Speaker 1: that he's going to need to make to say, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm like everybody else, but I've learned and again he
Speaker 1: he may have to be forthcoming about his physical health
Speaker 1: going forward more than they have been. I suspect a
Speaker 1: lot of people could relate with that. Rick, but wait
Speaker 1: till Donald Trump gets ahold of this right, or maybe
Speaker 1: Donald Trump shouldn't be the one talking about heart health. Well,
Speaker 1: I think the more Donald Trump stays out of the
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania Senate race, a better off it is for Dr Odd.
Speaker 1: I really think that, uh, as you described, this should
Speaker 1: be a good turn out. You're would he be the
Speaker 1: comedy without Trump? Or that's the point you go in
Speaker 1: the general election? Have Donald Trump stay at Marlou Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think I think the best methodology Donald Trump has
Speaker 1: is make your picks in the primary, and then uh
Speaker 1: help whenever the base gets unruly, but otherwise stay out
Speaker 1: of it because you've got to go beyond your base
Speaker 1: in order to win out of state like Pennsylvania. And
Speaker 1: as Genie was saying, it is likely to be a
Speaker 1: close race, um um, you know, your Republicans usually only
Speaker 1: win by a couple of points there, and so it
Speaker 1: will be competitive. I would say that the early indications
Speaker 1: by the large turnout in the Pennsylvania Republican primary is
Speaker 1: indicative of a lot of good intensity by Republicans, and
Speaker 1: so it's Oz's job to keep that moving. Rick, you
Speaker 1: have actually managed a candidate's health status publicly before. What
Speaker 1: would be your advice to the Fetterman camp. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think it's very similar to what Genie was saying, you know,
Speaker 1: be very transparent. I mean, when we had this come
Speaker 1: up with John McCain in the two thousand presidential campaign,
Speaker 1: Oh my god, how did he survive the prison camp?
Speaker 1: He must be crazy. We release all of his is
Speaker 1: uh military medical records. I mean there were probably eight
Speaker 1: thousand pages, and we let people come in and read
Speaker 1: through them, and reporters and and and and physicians alike
Speaker 1: and so uh and and and Frankly, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of good news in there, even if there's some bad news,
Speaker 1: and you have to put it all out and be
Speaker 1: transparent about it. Otherwise the issue isn't their health. It's
Speaker 1: like you're not being cleared American you know, voters, and
Speaker 1: and that is worse. We're spending time with Rick and
Speaker 1: Jeanie our signature panel on Bloomberg sound On. I'm Joe
Speaker 1: Matthew at World Headquarters in New York as we prepare
Speaker 1: not only for primaries tomorrow, but a very important hearing
Speaker 1: on Thursday. And I haven't had a chance to ask
Speaker 1: you guys about this. This is the January six Committee,
Speaker 1: and there's a lot of news about this. Over the weekend.
Speaker 1: Members of the committee are really starting to get out
Speaker 1: there a little bit, do a little bit of previewing here.
Speaker 1: This is, of course, the committee investigating the capital attack,
Speaker 1: and they're planning their first televised hearing. Not just that
Speaker 1: you could you know, you could have a televised hearing
Speaker 1: that nobody would ever see at ten o'clock in the morning.
Speaker 1: This is truly prime time at eight pm. Uh. Among
Speaker 1: those getting out ahead of this. Liz Cheney, of course,
Speaker 1: one of only two Republicans on the panel. She sat
Speaker 1: down with Robert Costa at CBS to talk about what
Speaker 1: is an inflection point as she sees it here for
Speaker 1: the Republican Party. Is this moment a moral test for
Speaker 1: the Republican Party? Absolutely, no, no question, and and right
Speaker 1: now we're failing. You know, in my state, the state
Speaker 1: party chairman is a member of the oath Keepers. He
Speaker 1: was he was here on January six. He was here
Speaker 1: with a walkie talkie in his hand on January six.
Speaker 1: That is a mortal threat, and it is a moral test.
Speaker 1: We can't fail that moral test. But there are too
Speaker 1: many right now and my party m who are failing.
Speaker 1: In great curious as a Republican your response to that,
Speaker 1: and if you do expect to see something meaningfully new
Speaker 1: on Thursday, Well, I think a lot of it has
Speaker 1: been that out already. The committee has actually built some
Speaker 1: momentum around these hearings by selectively releasing uh, different kinds
Speaker 1: of information that that frankly is pretty interesting. Uh. And
Speaker 1: I think they're aided by some of the Justice Department
Speaker 1: prosecutions like today announcing charges against the Proud Boys members,
Speaker 1: you know, with sedition charges. So there's a there's a
Speaker 1: building of a crescendo. And of course for Liz Cheney,
Speaker 1: it's not only just about the moral uh turpitude of
Speaker 1: her own party, the GOP, but it's also like her
Speaker 1: entire reelection is going to be banked on whether or
Speaker 1: not these hearings are seen in her state, and and
Speaker 1: and that people frankly change their minds when they see them.
Speaker 1: At least six of these hearings are planned Genie, two
Speaker 1: of them in prime time. There are professional video producers
Speaker 1: apparently helping to create portions of this presentation. Most people
Speaker 1: think they already know everything about January six, right, that's
Speaker 1: why we're not talking about it every day. How important
Speaker 1: will these hearings be to bring something new to light?
Speaker 1: They're critically important, and you know, the committee has been
Speaker 1: promising that, you know, this is going to be astonishing,
Speaker 1: it's going to blow people's minds, all of those things.
Speaker 1: And so a big question is going to be can
Speaker 1: they meet their own test and can they capture the
Speaker 1: nation's attention with this or or people so as you mentioned,
Speaker 1: committed to where what to what they know they lived
Speaker 1: through it, they don't need to know anything more about
Speaker 1: it that they're just going to sort of ignore it.
Speaker 1: And you know, you juxtapose this with say the Watergate
Speaker 1: hearings or even around contract. The media has changed an
Speaker 1: awful lot. And we've already seen that President Trump, former
Speaker 1: President Trump, is talking about counter programming. He's already reaching
Speaker 1: out to allies McCarthy, Stefanik, who he's got a fundraiser
Speaker 1: for tonight to lead the charge on that. And so
Speaker 1: as much as Republicans may not want to talk about it,
Speaker 1: there's some allies there who are going to talk about it.
Speaker 1: So it's going to be fascinating to see if they
Speaker 1: can live up to the hype that they've set on
Speaker 1: this and truly given narrative that people captures people really hard,
Speaker 1: as we all know to do in this environment. So
Speaker 1: what are we talking about here, Rick? I mean, is
Speaker 1: it going to be the Capital riot from a different
Speaker 1: angle we haven't seen before. You know that there's gonna
Speaker 1: be a video camera you didn't know, or will there
Speaker 1: be actually new information, new names or or at least
Speaker 1: better connections to the names that we've been hearing about. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think part of it is There's gonna be evidence, right,
Speaker 1: There's gonna be email exchanges that will come to light,
Speaker 1: There'll be you know, interviews with the committee that they'll
Speaker 1: talk about. This will all get make its way into
Speaker 1: the public domain, and so a lot of it will
Speaker 1: be proof. Right, it won't be just speculation as to
Speaker 1: what happened, but a lot of it will also focus
Speaker 1: on the run up to September six or to January six?
Speaker 1: What what was the intent? Was this really a soft coup? Uh?
Speaker 1: And and I think that's part of what the conclusion
Speaker 1: We don't know yet, but what what people are saying,
Speaker 1: you know what, what it's going to be Ultimately the
Speaker 1: inclusion was there an attempt by the President United States
Speaker 1: and his allies and government and in a in a
Speaker 1: private sector to thwart the outcome of an election, And
Speaker 1: and that could be a huge impact in a country
Speaker 1: that's already divided. You just wonder who's going to be
Speaker 1: paying attention, Jennie. I don't know if the networks are
Speaker 1: carrying this, If this is just the cables, it could
Speaker 1: stand to just galvanize a lot of existing beliefs. That's right,
Speaker 1: And a lot of this, of course, is going to
Speaker 1: be you know what do people break out of it
Speaker 1: and put on Twitter or put on Instagram. You know,
Speaker 1: these young people don't tend to watch these kinds of
Speaker 1: live They stream everything. Yeah, and so they're going to
Speaker 1: have to have people cutting this out and and and
Speaker 1: moving it forward as you will. So you know, I
Speaker 1: I am very curious to see how this plays, because
Speaker 1: again we are a long ways away from the Watergate hearings,
Speaker 1: and of course we can't forget what a serious situation
Speaker 1: this was and what a test the committee has in
Speaker 1: front of them. To meet eight o'clock Washington time Thursday.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have a lot to talk about on Friday.
Speaker 1: Then again, we have a lot to talk about every day.
Speaker 1: We've got a primary day tomorrow. We'll be talking about
Speaker 1: it with Rick and Jeannie right here on the fastest
Speaker 1: hour in politics. I'll meet you back in d C.
Speaker 1: I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg