Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, Radio News Center.
Speaker 2: Republicans working on changes to the House GOP tax plan,
Speaker 2: looking to require fewer cuts in Medicaid benefits for the
Speaker 2: poor and disabled, the move aiming to appease members of
Speaker 2: the party worried about public backlash. I'm pleased to say
Speaker 2: the good friend of this program, a good friend of ours.
Speaker 2: The Congressman from Arkansas french Hill joins us now for more. Congressman,
Speaker 2: good to see you, sir Johnathing.
Speaker 1: Great to be with you and Lisa and Anne Marie
Speaker 1: always good to be back in New York.
Speaker 2: Is it turning out to be as much fun as
Speaker 2: you thought it would be? Dani Washington, every day is
Speaker 2: a joy. April second, how much of a joy is
Speaker 2: that going to be?
Speaker 1: I'm just glad it's not April first, because that would even.
Speaker 3: Increase even more.
Speaker 2: What are your constituents telling you about what's hammle ganakud
Speaker 2: saw on the ground.
Speaker 1: Yeah, look on the relations to tariffs. About thirty percent
Speaker 1: of our output in Arkansas goes to Mexico or Canada,
Speaker 1: and that's food and manufacture goods and back and forth.
Speaker 1: And then you have the North American Free Trader now
Speaker 1: under USMCA that was crafted to make North America the
Speaker 1: destination for manufacturing. So for thirty years it's been knitted together.
Speaker 1: And so I think the first thing that I'm hearing
Speaker 1: is certainty and just lay out the plan on how
Speaker 1: you want to use tariffs to open up more markets
Speaker 1: for Americans, have reciprocity on fairness and certain markets that
Speaker 1: are highly disportionate disportionate treatment like India for example.
Speaker 3: But when it.
Speaker 1: Comes to North America, let's renegotiate USMCA. If you want
Speaker 1: to limit certain inputs from China into Canada, Mexico or
Speaker 1: the United States, you can do that in the agreement.
Speaker 1: Those countries can do that on an input basis. If
Speaker 1: you want to have the American manufactured content higher, you
Speaker 1: could negotiate to do that, as President Trump successfully did
Speaker 1: last time he was president on the North American auto content.
Speaker 3: He got more American content. So I think it's.
Speaker 1: Best to tackle this Canadian and Mexican issue inside a
Speaker 1: new and revised USMCA.
Speaker 4: But USMCA was done under Trump. It replaced NAFTA, So
Speaker 4: you want new SMCA. Part two is do you think
Speaker 4: that's what he's getting at Donald Trump? Here the president
Speaker 4: he's getting at the start bringing those twenty twenty six
Speaker 4: talks up into the mid twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: Yeah, potentially, And I think that's not wrong wrong thinking
Speaker 1: on his part. If you're concerned about Chinese dumping through
Speaker 1: transshipment of steel, for example, into Canada or Mexico, let's
Speaker 1: deal with that inside the agreement. Let's have Mexico deal
Speaker 1: with that in their own trade policy on inputs coming
Speaker 1: into the country. Because at the same that's how I
Speaker 1: think you have a more robust, competitive international system where
Speaker 1: manufacturing is at the heart of America. I think President
Speaker 1: Trump strategically in trade diplomacy, I'd like to see more
Speaker 1: things made in America that takes time to do.
Speaker 3: It's not overnight.
Speaker 1: We had steel an aluminum Terrafce, you know, for the
Speaker 1: past five or six years, and they haven't you been
Speaker 1: overnight changes across the across the board.
Speaker 4: Walmart is headquartered in your state. They went to China
Speaker 4: and said, look, we're dealing with tariffs. You're going to
Speaker 4: have to eat some of this costs. And the Chinese
Speaker 4: are saying, no, are you concerned about the cost being
Speaker 4: passed on to consumers?
Speaker 1: I am when I don't know what the strategy is.
Speaker 1: This is the whole point. You have trade diplomacy on
Speaker 1: using trade as a sanctioned potential, like you saw the
Speaker 1: President do on Columbia on repatriation of immigrants. You had
Speaker 1: trade used for reciprocity to bring down actual barriers benefit
Speaker 1: actually both countries potentially over time. And we did that
Speaker 1: successfully for forty years. We did it targeted when I
Speaker 1: was in the White House working during the Bush administration.
Speaker 1: We use Section three oh one to target bad activities
Speaker 1: by principally then Japan to open those markets doing this
Speaker 1: kind of terriff activity and limitation on imports to the US.
Speaker 1: So you can do that in a classic trade diplomacy situation.
Speaker 1: But when you have across the board and not clear
Speaker 1: on what the timeframe is for the increased production of
Speaker 1: the US, I think that's.
Speaker 3: The challenging part.
Speaker 4: But is it your sense when you speak to the
Speaker 4: White House that April second is the start of negotiations
Speaker 4: that at the end of the day, the President is
Speaker 4: a deal maker and wants to get deals done.
Speaker 1: Well, I hear from my colleagues on the House they
Speaker 1: want clarity like the American business once, So you tell US,
Speaker 1: what components and what timeframes you want to do trade diplomacy,
Speaker 1: you want to use reciprocity, you want to protect certain
Speaker 1: industries in the US where you want to have achievable
Speaker 1: gains in production here. But when it comes to autos,
Speaker 1: which is the most important topic of the day, I
Speaker 1: think I think that's best done through advancing changes to
Speaker 1: the USMCA that President Trump led successfully with the Mexicans
Speaker 1: and the Canadians in his first term.
Speaker 4: The Market's also looking for clarity on all of Trump's proposals,
Speaker 4: especially tax cuts. The Senate, the Republicans Eric Wawson are
Speaker 4: reporter Washington, DC, is talking about how they want fewer
Speaker 4: cuts to medicate health benefits for the poor disabled, which
Speaker 4: would be different what the House is talking about. Do
Speaker 4: you think how Republican Senate Republicans can come to an
Speaker 4: agreement on how much can be cut?
Speaker 3: I do. I think we'll come to an agreement. I
Speaker 3: think we can come to an agreement.
Speaker 1: Rather quickly on a joint House and Senate resolution for
Speaker 1: reconciliation so the committees can get to work. And I
Speaker 1: just referred to the Wall Street Journal story today talking
Speaker 1: about duplicate payments in Medicaid across the states and.
Speaker 3: How large that number is.
Speaker 1: House Republicans are looking ways to improve medicaid, focus medicaid
Speaker 1: on the most vulnerable, the young, the poor, the disabled,
Speaker 1: and tried to ring costs out of the systems. Democrats,
Speaker 1: I think, in a political charge, are, well, you're going
Speaker 1: to cut.
Speaker 3: Benefits for medicaid.
Speaker 1: That's an assumption by Democrats politically, well, because the.
Speaker 4: Math doesn't work when you're talking about eight hundred and
Speaker 4: eighty And also that's.
Speaker 3: The charge for the whole committee.
Speaker 4: Right, but most of that money goes to medicare right.
Speaker 1: But look at the numbers, and I think that's what
Speaker 1: the House and Senate want to do. Let's get to
Speaker 1: a Senate resolution and let's let these committees work to
Speaker 1: mark those bills up to fire the savings that we
Speaker 1: can produce.
Speaker 4: Besides the extension of TCJ, what other tax cuts do
Speaker 4: you think are actually feasible. The President has talked about
Speaker 4: no tax on social Security, no tax on tips, just
Speaker 4: this week, no tax on auto loans apparently is being
Speaker 4: thrown out there, and he's flirting with what actually can
Speaker 4: get past.
Speaker 1: Well, this is the beauty of the reconciliation process because
Speaker 1: the President puts his plan out there, his best idea
Speaker 1: is what he wants to try to accomplish, and then
Speaker 1: the House and Senate have to come together and figure
Speaker 1: out what we can do in the context of that
Speaker 1: budget resolution. Can we find the cuts, can we find
Speaker 1: the offset? Do we agree in the House and Senate
Speaker 1: on the economic forecasts? And so I won't pre judge
Speaker 1: what the possibilities are. I just know how hard the
Speaker 1: work is going to be. I want to put an
Speaker 1: emphasis on things that grow the economy. So if we
Speaker 1: have to narrow the focus on of what amount of
Speaker 1: tax cuts we're going to have, what's focus on ones
Speaker 1: that preserve that produce production, more jobs, faster economic growth.
Speaker 3: Do tariffs increase revenues and turbo charge growth? Again, this
Speaker 3: depends on the strategy. Lisa.
Speaker 1: You know you can have an across the board modest
Speaker 1: tariff that might raise revenue and not impact growth economically,
Speaker 1: But what is your goal? Is it reciprocity, is it
Speaker 1: market opening in new countries, is it level of the
Speaker 1: playing field, or is it increasing production in the US?
Speaker 1: Those things are sometimes in conflict.
Speaker 3: What number are you penciling in for the tariff revenue
Speaker 3: to offset some of the cuts.
Speaker 1: Right, So in Congress, we're actually not penciling in tariff
Speaker 1: revenue because it's not accounted by this Congressional Budget Office
Speaker 1: as an offset, which doesn't mean we can't count it.
Speaker 1: Like if there was a strategy and it laid out,
Speaker 1: the two budget committees could agree, we will accept some
Speaker 1: revenue from projected tariffs in the revenue estimates in the
Speaker 1: reconciliation package, but we're not as of now counting that,
Speaker 1: where that's a hypothetical that we're actually not counting on.
Speaker 2: Right, been in touch, I imagine they must have reached
Speaker 2: out to you and other representatives of Arkansas. How upset
Speaker 2: are they about this?
Speaker 1: Well, they want I think so many businesses and they
Speaker 1: report on your broadcast on a regular basis. They can
Speaker 1: live with certain things that they know what the plan is.
Speaker 3: And so Walmart's concerned.
Speaker 1: About the number one thing they think about every single day,
Speaker 1: which is the American family they serve, and they want
Speaker 1: to make sure that that can be done in an
Speaker 1: affordable way.
Speaker 3: That's their goal in life. So this could.
Speaker 1: Interfere with that, but that's we need to wait and
Speaker 1: see what the ultimate goal is.
Speaker 2: Do you think the White House appreciates that because we
Speaker 2: hear this every single day, and we've said on this
Speaker 2: program confidence coming into twenty five with sky high we
Speaker 2: wanted to see that sky high confidence translate into hiring,
Speaker 2: into investment, and the lack of currency. The lack of
Speaker 2: certainty is really how things back, and you see that
Speaker 2: in the sentiment surveys. Now just the White House, in
Speaker 2: your opinion, sort of understand that the lack of certainty,
Speaker 2: the lack of clarity, is holding this economy back.
Speaker 3: That's sorry.
Speaker 1: I think Treasure Secretary percent in a National Economic Council
Speaker 1: leader has to know that they're very experienced in economic
Speaker 1: policy making. And my view is you've got a I
Speaker 1: think clarity about right sizing regulatory costs in the economy.
Speaker 1: You've got clarity about trying to reduce the bureaucracy in
Speaker 1: the government. You've got clarity on where we want to go.
Speaker 3: On tax policy.
Speaker 1: We need an equal amount of clarity on the strategy
Speaker 1: in and around tariffs and increasing manufacturing.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 1: President Trump's big picture point is a good one, but
Speaker 1: you've got to.
Speaker 3: Develop a workable strategy to do that.
Speaker 1: And I think that's what the role of the Treasure
Speaker 1: Secretary of the Commerce Secretary and the National Economic Advisor.
Speaker 3: That's their principal mission.
Speaker 4: Congressman, at least Tophonic is going to be staying put
Speaker 4: in Washington, d C. Not coming to New York to
Speaker 4: work at the UN. And do you think that's an
Speaker 4: admission by the White House that they're nervous about getting
Speaker 4: this tax bill done through Congress they have the votes.
Speaker 3: Well, it surprised me. I'll be candidate.
Speaker 1: I think Elise is an outstanding member of our leadership team.
Speaker 1: We welcome her back to the Congress. But I also
Speaker 1: thought she was going to be an exceptionally well trained,
Speaker 1: qualified ambassador for the President at the United Nations.
Speaker 3: It could signal that.
Speaker 1: I think President Trump's own quote says, we need to
Speaker 1: make sure we have the votes in the House. So
Speaker 1: if you consider that an admission we welcome her back.
Speaker 1: I think it says that maybe replacing her with a
Speaker 1: Republican they think might be tough in New York as
Speaker 1: a political strategy, which is that's been a red district.
Speaker 1: But you know that maybe indicate that and we need
Speaker 1: every vote we have. We have the most narrow margin,
Speaker 1: Mike Johnson has the most narrow margin since World War one,
Speaker 1: and so we don't want to have a gap there.
Speaker 1: And when we pass tax cuts and jobs back in
Speaker 1: President Trump's first term, I think some twenty Republicans voted no,
Speaker 1: so we don't have the luxury of that this time.
Speaker 2: Congressman, we always appreciate your time. It's going to see
Speaker 2: it say with all of you, thank you, sir. Congressman
Speaker 2: front show and also the chair of the House Financial
Speaker 2: Services Committee,