Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound On podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: Or listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 3: Welcome to the Monday edition of Bloomberg Sound On.
Speaker 2: I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. Glad you're with us.
Speaker 3: We have a lot to cover, and I guess we
Speaker 3: can begin with some pretty simple questions like will the
Speaker 3: government shut down at the end of this week. It's
Speaker 3: unclear if anybody really knows the answer to that, but
Speaker 3: we're coming off a busy weekend with a lot of
Speaker 3: talk and in fact a piece of legislation that was
Speaker 3: dropped on Saturday from the new Speaker of the House.
Speaker 2: There's your laddered CR.
Speaker 3: Everybody, I don't have canned applause, And we talked about
Speaker 3: the laddered CR. It would have some agencies going out
Speaker 3: of business or running out of money at different times
Speaker 3: than others. Turns out it's not that complicated. As a
Speaker 3: matter of fact, there'd be two dates on this, one
Speaker 3: in January, the other in February, and it's looking like
Speaker 3: without the steep cuts without some of the so called
Speaker 3: poison pills, the asylum law changes that were in original
Speaker 3: proposals that some conservatives were pushing for, that this might
Speaker 3: actually get enough votes to pass. And we know there's
Speaker 3: a continuing resolution coming in from the Senate, so dare
Speaker 3: to dream maybe the government doesn't shut down this weekend,
Speaker 3: maybe it doesn't shut down at all this year. That's
Speaker 3: where we start our conversation with Congresswoman Chrissy hulihand the
Speaker 3: Democrat from Pennsylvania is back with us, just back in Washington.
Speaker 3: I understand moments ago, Congresswoman, welcome back to the party.
Speaker 3: It's great to see you and thank you for joining us.
Speaker 3: What do you think about this piece of legislation? Is
Speaker 3: this something that Democrats would consider voting for?
Speaker 4: So let's back all the way up to what we're
Speaker 4: trying to all collectively accomplish it, at least I hope
Speaker 4: we are. We're trying to get all of the regular
Speaker 4: order appropriations packages through. That has been a very unseerious
Speaker 4: process on behalf of both.
Speaker 5: The last Speaker and this Speaker.
Speaker 4: But because we can't get those appropriations packages through, we're
Speaker 4: in a condition where we will possibly shut down the
Speaker 4: government and what the Democrats have been asking for all
Speaker 4: along is to work together, to work bipartisanally and across
Speaker 4: the aisle on first the appropriations package, because that's what
Speaker 4: it's really all about. And second, if we can't get
Speaker 4: there on the CR. So what we're looking for is
Speaker 4: what's called a clean CR. To your point, I think
Speaker 4: in the an introductory remarks, something that doesn't have a
Speaker 4: lot of the poison pills in it that we've seen
Speaker 4: in every single appropriations bill to date, and so it
Speaker 4: looks like a relatively reasonable request. Your question about the
Speaker 4: lattering is something that does concern me to some degree
Speaker 4: because I think it sets a precedent that we're going
Speaker 4: to sort of piecemeal parts of the appropriation or the
Speaker 4: budgetary process. This could splinter into a CR for every
Speaker 4: one of the different appropriations bills, perceivably or in the future,
Speaker 4: and that's really concerning because that basically derails what should
Speaker 4: be the regular process to begin with, and it becomes
Speaker 4: a constant CR, which is really concerning.
Speaker 3: Nice I had a nightmare at congressman. I was watching
Speaker 3: CNN and there were twelve countdown clocks all staring.
Speaker 2: At me at once.
Speaker 3: But it turns out it's not actually what we're talking about.
Speaker 3: In this we got details for the sake of our
Speaker 3: listeners and viewers. You would see expirations for agriculture, Energy
Speaker 3: and Water, Military Construction, VA, and Transportation HUD. Those are
Speaker 3: your four bills on the nineteenth of January. The eight
Speaker 3: remaining bills spending bills would expire at the beginning of February.
Speaker 3: Thirty two page bill taken up by Rules Committee this afternoon.
Speaker 3: It looks like there will be a vote tomorrow, Congresswoman,
Speaker 3: Is that what you're hearing, because from what we see here,
Speaker 3: the Speaker will need Democrats to pass this.
Speaker 5: So I haven't yet heard.
Speaker 4: Are you saying that it did pass the Rules committee,
Speaker 4: because that would be news to me.
Speaker 5: Is that news?
Speaker 2: No, not at all.
Speaker 3: I understand that Rules will be taking it up this afternoon,
Speaker 3: But if are you hearing that it will be on
Speaker 3: the floor tomorrow and that it will require Democrats.
Speaker 4: That's part of the magic, right, First and foremost, it
Speaker 4: has to pass rules, and then when it gets to
Speaker 4: the floor, it has to pass another request to pass
Speaker 4: the rule on the floor for the whole body, and
Speaker 4: that requires that a majority of us say that we're
Speaker 4: ready to vote on this, so two things have to
Speaker 4: happen before we even have the possibility of voting on
Speaker 4: this cr together as.
Speaker 5: A whole body.
Speaker 4: And Congress is sort of a wild ride lately, and
Speaker 4: that's not always a given. And in fact, we've seen rules
Speaker 4: go down at least once or twice that I can
Speaker 4: remember in the last six or seven months, so nothing
Speaker 4: is a given.
Speaker 2: Would you vote against it if it hit the floor?
Speaker 4: So I don't know yet is the answer to that.
Speaker 4: I feel as though it's a relatively speaking, earnest effort.
Speaker 4: I do worry about the precedent that it sets in
Speaker 4: terms of the splintering of to your point, the twelve
Speaker 4: different or fourteen different countdown clocks. I am frustrated that
Speaker 4: we're at this place, and really frustrated that we don't
Speaker 4: seem to be able to get along with one another
Speaker 4: of off the aisle, but also within the Republican Party itself.
Speaker 4: And so it's just high weirdness, as my father used
Speaker 4: to say in hig dysfunction right now, and I'm hoping
Speaker 4: we do the right thing for the American people as
Speaker 4: quickly as possible.
Speaker 2: High weirdness.
Speaker 3: Congresswoman, can I tell you how refreshing it is to
Speaker 3: hear that I don't know? Is that not my favorite answer? Look,
Speaker 3: we all really appreciate your honesty, because I know that
Speaker 3: this hasn't been fully baked. Has the Democratic leadership? Is
Speaker 3: Hakeem Jeffrey's wait in on this or is that the
Speaker 3: next step for you?
Speaker 4: No, to my knowledge, right now, he has not weighed
Speaker 4: on it. They have not weighed in on it. I'll
Speaker 4: be interested to see what they say. That being said,
Speaker 4: I think each one of us has to kind of
Speaker 4: make our own choices, you know, in this Congress, and
Speaker 4: I think it remains to be seeing what this particular
Speaker 4: effort will look like once it comes out of rules
Speaker 4: or once it goes through you know, it's initial votes,
Speaker 4: or any of those other processes.
Speaker 5: And so I do have to say, I don't know.
Speaker 5: I think it's the appropriate answer right now.
Speaker 4: But Congress has this pot this ability to sort of
Speaker 4: move at lightning speed or at glacial speed, and I
Speaker 4: hope that lightning speed effective lightning speed will be that
Speaker 4: choice this time.
Speaker 3: Well, let's say we pass a cr By the grace
Speaker 3: of God, the government doesn't shut down, then it's the
Speaker 3: matter of dealing with the supplemental budget request that came
Speaker 3: from the White House many weeks ago. Now Congress so
Speaker 3: many you don't need me to tell you. Money for Israel,
Speaker 3: money for Ukraine. They were packaged with Taiwan and border security.
Speaker 3: The first thing the new Speaker did was strip apart
Speaker 3: or bifer Kate, to use his word, the funding for Israel.
Speaker 2: How many weeks can this go on for? Because this is.
Speaker 3: Clearly delaying things, whether it's the right way to go
Speaker 3: or not. How many weeks do we have before this
Speaker 3: becomes an urgent matter in both Israel and Ukraine.
Speaker 4: Not many, is the answer to that question. You know,
Speaker 4: several is I think probably the best estimate. And I
Speaker 4: agree that it is disappointing that the cr did not
Speaker 4: include any supplemental funding, and I very much believe that
Speaker 4: the supplemental funding should be all inclusive all of the
Speaker 4: things that President Biden has asked for Ukraine, the border,
Speaker 4: making sure Israel is protected, a lot of the emergency
Speaker 4: funding as well, and I feel as though that's something
Speaker 4: that really is pressing right now. But to answer your question,
Speaker 4: my impression is within the next several weeks we really
Speaker 4: need to move forward on that. And if you look
Speaker 4: at where the votes are. We have the votes on
Speaker 4: the House side. Certainly somewhere on the order of three
Speaker 4: hundred or so of US I believe would vote for
Speaker 4: that sort of a package. What we don't have is
Speaker 4: necessarily getting through rules and then getting it for a
Speaker 4: final vote on the floor.
Speaker 3: Well, you, I'm sure have a unique view, being on
Speaker 3: the Armed Services and Intelligence committees. I know these are
Speaker 3: two very different scenarios here, and maybe we should strip
Speaker 3: them apart or remove them for the sake of this conversation.
Speaker 3: When it comes to Israel, do you have a sense
Speaker 3: of how important US funding is for this war effort?
Speaker 3: A lot of folks thought there'd be a pronounced ground
Speaker 3: invasion underway, maybe two or three fronts opening, and that
Speaker 3: has not happened. So how much does Israel need and
Speaker 3: when does it need it?
Speaker 4: So I think that they actually are relatively speaking connected,
Speaker 4: both Israel and Ukraine, and frankly, what would possibly happen
Speaker 4: in Taiwan and in the Indo Pacific region.
Speaker 5: These are all threats.
Speaker 4: To democracies, These are all threats to our national security
Speaker 4: and to global security and peace. I believe that Israel,
Speaker 4: as well as Ukraine and Frankly, Taiwan as well need support,
Speaker 4: American support, and I believe that they are being used
Speaker 4: effectively whatever it is that they're asking for. I hope
Speaker 4: that we have the opportunity to send them. And I
Speaker 4: don't think that we necessarily would see the urgent or
Speaker 4: chronic need immediately, but rather over, as I mentioned, over
Speaker 4: weeks and months, and so it's very important that we
Speaker 4: get the pipeline primed and can keep the pipeline crime
Speaker 4: for Ukraine in the next weeks.
Speaker 3: It seems like Ukraine might be bumping up against a
Speaker 3: need more urgently than Israel when it comes to actual hardware,
Speaker 3: when it comes to money. I know you want to
Speaker 3: address these in the same breath, Congresswoman, and I appreciate
Speaker 3: the effort behind that, But when it comes to the
Speaker 3: actual money and hardware, do you worry more about Ukraine
Speaker 3: being forgotten here?
Speaker 5: Yeah? I have to be very blunt, I do.
Speaker 4: And that's part of the reason why when I was
Speaker 4: approached by Israel and the embassy, they're asking if I
Speaker 4: would support the supplemental for Israel, I responded that certainly
Speaker 4: I was in favor of doing that, but that I
Speaker 4: hadn't ask as well for them to ask of us,
Speaker 4: which was these things are connected. I need to make
Speaker 4: sure that we're connecting those two ideas. And as I
Speaker 4: mentioned Taiwan as well as our own security at our
Speaker 4: own borders as well, I believe them to be fundamentally
Speaker 4: and integral to one another. And so I feel like
Speaker 4: it's probably more acute right now in Ukraine in terms
Speaker 4: of the compare and contrast with Israel and Ukraine. But
Speaker 4: that doesn't mean that we don't need to be moving
Speaker 4: forward with expedients. I mean, look, how long it takes
Speaker 4: us to get things done. We can't afford a whole
Speaker 4: lot more time on any of these issues.
Speaker 3: We're spending time with Congresswoman Christy who the hand of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3: We're talking about funding for two hot wars underway, but
Speaker 3: of course government funding with regard to the continuing resolution
Speaker 3: that we started our conversation about Congresswoman impacts money for
Speaker 3: veterans as well. And it's not lost on me how
Speaker 3: you spent your weekend as the nation observed Veterans Day.
Speaker 3: You helped to award a purple heart to a Vietnam
Speaker 3: veteran who was shot in the head, not once, but twice.
Speaker 3: And has quite a remarkable American story to tell, and
Speaker 3: I wonder if you could talk to us about that
Speaker 3: before you sure.
Speaker 4: I mean, this is sort of the cyclicality and the
Speaker 4: wonder and tragedy of the world. My dad was born
Speaker 4: in nineteen forty two in Leviv, so in Ukraine what
Speaker 4: was Poland now Ukraine. He survived because of the grace
Speaker 4: and goodness of American soldiers, amongst others. He served in
Speaker 4: Vietnam in the late sixties early seventies. This gentleman also
Speaker 4: served in the sixty seven and timeframe, which interestingly enough,
Speaker 4: is the year I was born.
Speaker 5: So we're in this sort.
Speaker 4: Of timeline of the American contribution to world order and
Speaker 4: stability and world peace and the sacrifice that individual people
Speaker 4: such as he have given for their nation. He got
Speaker 4: shot not once but twice in two separate instances in
Speaker 4: the head, and this is just something that went for
Speaker 4: fifty six years without him being acknowledged and honored. It
Speaker 4: was my privilege to be able to give the Purple
Speaker 4: Heart to him, and frankly to his family as well,
Speaker 4: who are just as instrumental as making sure he was
Speaker 4: getting recognized for this.
Speaker 3: We were of course talking about Air Force veteran Andrew Lipper,
Speaker 3: who helped to secure the award my staff. Yes, I'm
Speaker 3: looking at a photograph here Congressman as he's watching you
Speaker 3: pin the medal on Army veteran Robert Fields. It's a
Speaker 3: pretty remarkable story and it's one I'm glad.
Speaker 2: That you could share. Thank you for a Congresswoman.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Congresswoman Christy Houlihan, the Democrat from Pennsylvania with
Speaker 3: us representing the sixth districts Here on Bloomberg Sound On,
Speaker 3: I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington as we assemble our panel
Speaker 3: with Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno.
Speaker 2: Happy Monday, guys.
Speaker 3: Great to see both of you, hear Jeanie, what's your
Speaker 3: thought from the Democratic view here? Christy Julihan isn't sure
Speaker 3: what she wants to do. What should Democrats do when
Speaker 3: that CR hits the floor, because it looks like they
Speaker 3: will be needed to pass it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, I.
Speaker 7: Was so impressed by what she had to say. The
Speaker 7: reality is she's right, it is a clean CR. There
Speaker 7: is there are no poison pills in there. It is
Speaker 7: something that Democrats should take seriously. There is of course
Speaker 7: always going to be reason that you feel a bit concerned,
Speaker 7: and she is every right the latter component of this,
Speaker 7: and of course the lack of the supplemental but beyond that,
Speaker 7: I think it is something Democrats should take seriously. You know,
Speaker 7: I agree with her that the lattered approach is a
Speaker 7: bit problematic perhaps going forward, but in a negotiation you're
Speaker 7: not going to get everything you want. And the fact
Speaker 7: that they put forward a clean cr this is a
Speaker 7: serious proposal that Democrats need to take seriously. And I
Speaker 7: think the question is if Democrats go along with Mike Johnson,
Speaker 7: is he going to have even more trouble on his
Speaker 7: right going forward? I think as we look at what
Speaker 7: Moodies did on Friday or set on Friday, rather, it
Speaker 7: is critically important we avoid a shutdown. That is what
Speaker 7: everybody wants, and we have absolutely a bill here that
Speaker 7: can be worked on with both sides to ensure that
Speaker 7: for all of our economic security.
Speaker 3: Well, I want to get into the Moody stuff a
Speaker 3: little bit later on with both of you. Rick, in
Speaker 3: our moment that we have left, you believe the conventional
Speaker 3: wisdom that odds are looking better that we will avoid
Speaker 3: a shutdown.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 8: Why Representative Hulahan isn't doing handsprings over this deal. First
Speaker 8: of all, the most important thing the Democrats has been
Speaker 8: that the second tranch of this layered cr is the
Speaker 8: defense side, and normally defense has always done first taken
Speaker 8: away their domestic spending.
Speaker 3: Well, let's get into the fine print with Rick and Jeanie.
Speaker 3: Straight Ahead. Our signature panel is with us on the
Speaker 3: fastest show in politics, and we've got campaign news to
Speaker 3: talk about. As the Republican fields loses another it's all
Speaker 3: straight ahead on sound Off.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound On podcast. Catch the
Speaker 1: program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the
Speaker 1: tune in alf Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 3: And if you were listening to our conversation with Congresswoman
Speaker 3: Chrissy Hoolihan, she said just a moment ago that she
Speaker 3: does not know what to do when it comes to
Speaker 3: voting on this, and we'll see what happens in rules later,
Speaker 3: but we are definitely realizing the uncertainty here. At the
Speaker 3: same time, odds seemed to be improving as the Senate
Speaker 3: does its work with these two crs could come together
Speaker 3: into something real by the end of the week.
Speaker 2: Let's see what Mick thinks.
Speaker 3: We do this conversation every week around this time, every Monday,
Speaker 3: certainly with Mick mulvaney, the former OMB Director. I just
Speaker 3: like putting that first co founder of the Freedom Caucus,
Speaker 3: former acting chief of staff in the Trump White House.
Speaker 2: Mick, it's great to have you. Do you think we
Speaker 2: avoid the shutdown?
Speaker 6: Joe Happy Monday?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's you.
Speaker 6: You know. Listen Washington, Yeah, exactly, you can hear my voice.
Speaker 6: Washington is sort of it's a subjective kind of place, right,
Speaker 6: and there's a lot of good news. There's a lot
Speaker 6: of good chatter. I was in the I was in
Speaker 6: the Capitol Hill Club last week, hung out at dinner.
Speaker 6: There were a couple of folks and the tension in
Speaker 6: the building. For those of you who don't know, except
Speaker 6: that you listens who don't, Republican dining club. The Democrats
Speaker 6: have a club that Republicans have a club. So I
Speaker 6: go there, have dinner, and attention was was the likes
Speaker 6: of which I've not seen before. Joe. It was just
Speaker 6: that the building felt tense and well, I hear a
Speaker 6: lot of good things come atter Washington. I also get
Speaker 6: the feeling there's not a lot of good will built
Speaker 6: up amongst the members right now. It's not an every
Speaker 6: person for himself type of situation, but it's close. So
Speaker 6: when you hear people say I don't know how I'm
Speaker 6: going to vote on this, which is what you just
Speaker 6: mentioned with the congresswoman, Yes, I get that sense. A
Speaker 6: lot of people are in that vote that they don't
Speaker 6: know how they're going to vote. They're going to vote
Speaker 6: whatever they think is best for their particular seat. And
Speaker 6: if that means the government shutdown, shut down, and then
Speaker 6: that's what happens. If it means they vote to keep
Speaker 6: the government open, that's what happened. No, there's no team
Speaker 6: mentality right now amongst the Republicans, if that makes any sense.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's incredible.
Speaker 3: What do you make of the products that Speaker Johnson
Speaker 3: decided to go with here, no so called poison pills.
Speaker 2: You don't have the steep cuts.
Speaker 3: I guess Chip roy already doesn't like this, and there
Speaker 3: are several members who say that they will vote against
Speaker 3: this Republican members, so Democrats will be required. Was that
Speaker 3: the most effective path for the speaker to take?
Speaker 6: Yeah, which is the most effective path for Kevin McCarthy. No,
Speaker 6: And that's talked about this a couple of times, which is,
Speaker 6: you know, the real precedent that got set with McCarthy.
Speaker 6: One of several precedents was that if a speaker brings
Speaker 6: a bipartisan spending bill to the floor to keep the
Speaker 6: government open, is that mean the speaker's term is over?
Speaker 6: Certainly McCarthy had a lot of a lot of animosity
Speaker 6: directed towards him by some members, but he also had
Speaker 6: a lot of good will built up. I don't know
Speaker 6: where Mike Johnson is on that, And I don't know
Speaker 6: if bringing a bill that Democrats like automatically make him
Speaker 6: look bad in the eyes of a bunch of Republicans,
Speaker 6: And I just I don't get a sense that will
Speaker 6: making this up as we go along as analysis. I
Speaker 6: heard the other day a sports analogy which I don't like,
Speaker 6: but it's sort of like putting in your four string
Speaker 6: quarterback in the middle of late in the game. And
Speaker 6: not only is it not the person who's practiced with
Speaker 6: the first team, it's something that not a lot of
Speaker 6: people know, they're not familiar with. And that's where we
Speaker 6: are with the Republicans in the House. Again, I hate
Speaker 6: sports analogies, but that one seemed to strike home.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I kind of like that one too.
Speaker 3: But boy, I guess I'm curious your thoughts on a
Speaker 3: on an individual who is framed as an extremist, someone
Speaker 3: who is going to side with the right flank, would
Speaker 3: would read the Bible before he made a decision, And
Speaker 3: this sounds like a like a pretty mild approach for
Speaker 3: someone who you would describe that way.
Speaker 2: What do you make of this? What does it tell
Speaker 2: us about Mike Johnson?
Speaker 6: Well, I mean, I don't and I know you don't
Speaker 6: intend that, but I don't. I don't equate reading the
Speaker 6: Bible before you go do stuff as being you know, extreme,
Speaker 6: or or be a hardcore conservative and so forth. But
Speaker 6: that's not your question. The question is this maybe what
Speaker 6: we expected from this this this you know, this more
Speaker 6: conservative speaker, I don't know. And maybe he got there
Speaker 6: and realized that the only way you can fund the
Speaker 6: government is on a bipartisan basis. Again, you and I've
Speaker 6: talked about that for months. Any spending bill, any spending
Speaker 6: bill that is going to pass the Congress, has to
Speaker 6: be by parts is because of the nature of the Senate.
Speaker 6: And I can't get over the number of Republicans in
Speaker 6: the House who just don't get that. And maybe Mike
Speaker 6: is just now figuring it out that he cannot pass
Speaker 6: a bill by himself, and that's a tough tough spot
Speaker 6: to be. But listen, I give him. I'll give him
Speaker 6: credit for creativity that you know, the two step the
Speaker 6: ladder approach. I thought, very creative. Never heard of that before.
Speaker 6: It sounds like it's getting at least some attention from
Speaker 6: all sorts of folks, So I give I give him
Speaker 6: credit for them.
Speaker 3: Last question, the supplemental requests for Israel for Ukraine?
Speaker 2: Do those both wait until next year?
Speaker 6: I can't imagine the Israel thing waiting until next year.
Speaker 6: There's just too much support for it. I agree with
Speaker 6: what the Republicans in the House trying to do in
Speaker 6: terms of splitting off Ukraine and Israel, because there is
Speaker 6: no reason for them to go together. There's nothing nothing
Speaker 6: about the since of the matter. There's nothing about the
Speaker 6: politics of the matter that there's no reason for them
Speaker 6: to go together other than I think the administration feels
Speaker 6: like it's the last time they will get any money
Speaker 6: from Ukraine, so they're trying to marry it to Israel.
Speaker 6: They're trying to ask for a bunch I mean, sixty
Speaker 6: billion dollars, so they can't spend that in a year
Speaker 6: or two. We spent sixty billion on super soilm sandy,
Speaker 6: and I don't think all that money is even spent yet. Anyway,
Speaker 6: I do think Israel will pass, but I don't think
Speaker 6: it'll be married in the Ukraine. Ukraine is gonna be tough,
Speaker 6: but it will pass as well. Ukraine money might have
Speaker 6: to wait till next year.
Speaker 3: Nick Malvany, great to have you back. Happy Monday. To
Speaker 3: your point, Mick, we'll see where we are next Monday.
Speaker 3: Are we open or are we closed? Mick Malvaney joins
Speaker 3: us every Monday here Unsound on and we'll find out
Speaker 3: as we reassemble the panel for their take on what
Speaker 3: we just heard. Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano. Rick, what
Speaker 3: do you think about Israel and Ukraine. There is a
Speaker 3: thought that this is the last train leaving the station
Speaker 3: before the end of the year in this continuing resolution?
Speaker 2: What do you see not here in Rick?
Speaker 3: If that's me or not sure, I think there'll be
Speaker 3: enormous pressure or Israel to fund this week, you know,
Speaker 3: or right after the CR You're gonna have one hundred
Speaker 3: thousand supporters of Israel come to Washington, DC tomorrow, shut
Speaker 3: the town down.
Speaker 8: They're all going to be seeing their members and talking
Speaker 8: about this. So I think that the pressure campaign is
Speaker 8: just starting. And I can't imagine these these Republicans and
Speaker 8: Democrats getting out of town without showing some support for Israel.
Speaker 2: Okay, I gotta tell you, Genie.
Speaker 3: We showed this map last week of the potential windfall
Speaker 3: for states that are home to companies like artsy X,
Speaker 3: like Raytheon, like Lockheed Martin, like Northrop Grumming. We're a
Speaker 3: lot of this. If not the bulk of this sixty
Speaker 3: bill for Ukraine would be going. Are more lawmakers going
Speaker 3: to warm up to that? We're showing it now for
Speaker 3: our viewers on YouTube. Does this become something that Republicans
Speaker 3: can warm up to when that is the pitch?
Speaker 7: I think so. And in your conversation with the representative,
Speaker 7: she just said, and we know this that there is
Speaker 7: widespread bipartisan support for this. Yes, there are people on
Speaker 7: both sides, on the right and the left, particularly in
Speaker 7: the House, who will not support it, but a number
Speaker 7: over three hundred these days in the House is pretty
Speaker 7: darn good. So I think you know your point about
Speaker 7: the economics of this is critical. We're going to see
Speaker 7: the meeting with Biden and jijin Ping. I mean, all
Speaker 7: of these things go together, and this is a case
Speaker 7: that's got to be made and I made, and I
Speaker 7: think it will pass. But I do think they have
Speaker 7: to do it sooner rather than later, which is a
Speaker 7: concern about the fact that it's not included in this
Speaker 7: build of right the Speaker has put forward. But of course,
Speaker 7: you know you can't get everything in one bill, and
Speaker 7: so they're going to have to do it as a
Speaker 7: supplemental Rick, you know.
Speaker 2: The power of branding and politics.
Speaker 3: Why not come back around with a supplemental request for
Speaker 3: America's defense industrial base about sixty billion dollars.
Speaker 8: Well, I would have thought even more compelling was the
Speaker 8: pitch that the Biden administration did do, which is, let's
Speaker 8: support the democracies around the world, including our own I
Speaker 8: do think what unlocked how much Ukraine money. What unlocks
Speaker 8: the Ukraine money is is border security money. And nobody
Speaker 8: needs that border security plan funded more.
Speaker 2: Than Joe Biden.
Speaker 8: If he has any chance of winning reelection, He's got
Speaker 8: to do something proactive about border security. It can't just be,
Speaker 8: you know, to pay people who are processing immigrants coming
Speaker 8: into the country. It's got to be about security. And
Speaker 8: I think if the Senate can give him something like that,
Speaker 8: there could be a grand bargain over the end of
Speaker 8: the year.
Speaker 3: Jennie, if only got thirty seconds to news, is that
Speaker 3: the way this sends border security unlocks Ukraine funding.
Speaker 7: I think so. And you heard the rhetoric when we
Speaker 7: may talk about it Donald Trump over the weekend. They
Speaker 7: are playing hard and Trump's team on the issue of
Speaker 7: immigration and security. Biden has a perfect, perfect run here
Speaker 7: to try to get the upper hand on that, or
Speaker 7: at least a hand, and he desperately needs that as
Speaker 7: he goes into this election. So it is almost a
Speaker 7: gift to Joe Biden if they can couple this and
Speaker 7: get all four of those things at once in a supplemental.
Speaker 3: Great great conversation. Thanks to Rick, Thanks to Jeanie. Thanks
Speaker 3: to Mick Mulvaney and Congresswoman hul Hand, we covered some ground.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listening on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcast.
Speaker 2: You made it the Monday, so did Kaylee Lynes. Nice
Speaker 2: to see you.
Speaker 3: Likewise, we're counting down to a government shut down. We've
Speaker 3: got what five days to make this work.
Speaker 1: Yep.
Speaker 2: We've got another candidate out of.
Speaker 3: The race in the Republican field, the race for president,
Speaker 3: and we're talking about neither right now because we have breaking.
Speaker 2: News the other branch of government. Amazing to me, Yes, absolutely,
Speaker 2: we do have three.
Speaker 9: I might forget Legislative, Executive, and it's the judicial branch
Speaker 9: making news.
Speaker 2: That well, yes it is, Kayle Lyins.
Speaker 3: I wonder sometimes when you hear us talk about the
Speaker 3: White House, Senate House, how many people think those are
Speaker 3: the three? And I hope I never hear the answer
Speaker 3: to that, because we're talking about the Code of Conduct ethics,
Speaker 3: and you think about the work that Pro Publica has
Speaker 3: done that has led to an extreme level of doubt,
Speaker 3: lack of confidence in the institution here based on these
Speaker 3: yachting trips and the fishing trips and everything that certain
Speaker 3: justices were taking.
Speaker 2: Apparently the Court has its own answer.
Speaker 9: Yeah, the Supreme Court today adopting a code of conduct,
Speaker 9: a binding code of conduct for the first time, Joe,
Speaker 9: we mad all of these ethics controversies the Court has
Speaker 9: been facing. Of course, what you were referring to a
Speaker 9: series of ProPublica of reports, specifically around Justice Clarence Thomas
Speaker 9: and his relationship with billionaire Harlan Crowe, raised a lot
Speaker 9: of concerns on Capitol Hill. Of course, the Senate Judiciary
Speaker 9: Committee had been trying to get many of these individuals
Speaker 9: to testify before them, but even some of the Court
Speaker 9: justices themselves had been suggesting that a code of ethics
Speaker 9: was needed, and that seems to be what the Court
Speaker 9: has adopted today.
Speaker 3: Well, as a matter of fact, I'll sneak up on
Speaker 3: you with that. Alena Kagan was talking about this in August.
Speaker 3: She was one of a couple of justices, to your point,
Speaker 3: who had opened the door to this to at least
Speaker 3: give us a sense that they were talking amongst themselves
Speaker 3: not just waiting, for instance, for the Judiciary Committee to
Speaker 3: do something, because they've been talking about it too.
Speaker 2: Here's Justice Kagan.
Speaker 10: You know, we could decide to adopt a code of
Speaker 10: conduct of our own that either follows or decides in
Speaker 10: certain instances not to follow the standard code of conduct.
Speaker 10: That would remove this question of what can Congress do,
Speaker 10: or at least, you know, it would put it in
Speaker 10: a different light if Congress continued to act. And you know, look,
Speaker 10: it's not a secret for me to say. You know,
Speaker 10: there's been that you know, we have been discussing this issue.
Speaker 3: And that was in August. Fast forward a few months.
Speaker 3: This is real, yeah, Kaylie. The headlines that are crossing
Speaker 3: the terminal also indicating that the code largely codifies existing principles.
Speaker 2: So we need to learn more here.
Speaker 9: Yeah, and of course we'll bring more details to our
Speaker 9: listeners and viewers as we get it. But it seems
Speaker 9: what the argument had been jo was that there were
Speaker 9: certain practices that justices were supposed to follow, even if
Speaker 9: it wasn't necessarily codified in a binding format or may
Speaker 9: be binding anything.
Speaker 3: Right that was taking So now there'll be repercussions for
Speaker 3: following these rules.
Speaker 2: Maybe some enforcement here.
Speaker 3: You could call it pretty remarkable breaking news. Find more
Speaker 3: on the terminal and at Bloomberg dot com. Right now,
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court announcing its own code of conduct that
Speaker 3: it apparently has already adopted.
Speaker 2: We'll see how this works out.
Speaker 3: Greg's store is the best Supreme Court reporter in the country.
Speaker 3: He's with us here at Bloomberg, and I'm sure is
Speaker 3: chasing this down right now. We'll have a lot more
Speaker 3: free as we make our way through it. I wonder
Speaker 3: what Kyle thinks about this, because I think she just
Speaker 3: made the point too. Congress off the hook again. He
Speaker 3: joins us from Sabato's Crystal Ball, where he's managing editor
Speaker 3: at the University of Virginia Center for Politics. Kyle, good
Speaker 3: to see if thanks for joining Kaylee and myself here.
Speaker 3: This is just one last thing that the Congress has
Speaker 3: to worry about, now, isn't it.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 11: I think also it's kind of hard for I mean,
Speaker 11: I'm no expert in this, but I'm just shooting shooting
Speaker 11: from the hip here. But you know, there are some
Speaker 11: question as to how how well Congress could sort of
Speaker 11: regulate the conduct of Supreme Court justices, and like with
Speaker 11: anything else, like, what what would the penalties be for
Speaker 11: actually breaking this code, because sort of impeachment, you really
Speaker 11: can't get rid of someone on the court. So I'd
Speaker 11: be curious to see, like what what this actually says
Speaker 11: and whether there's some sort of like internal enforcement metric
Speaker 11: for it. But you know, I think part of what
Speaker 11: probably has happened here is that, you know, these these
Speaker 11: Court justices are you know, that there's not a whole
Speaker 11: lot of accountability once they actually be you know, are
Speaker 11: sworn into office and they have got lifetime appointments, and
Speaker 11: so it could be hard even if there are you know,
Speaker 11: stricter or more codified rules, it can be harder to
Speaker 11: actually to actually figure out where to enforce those against
Speaker 11: the against the justices.
Speaker 9: Yeah, and Kyle Joe mentioned it at the top that
Speaker 9: the trust in the Court as an institution is really
Speaker 9: low right now, in part because of these ethics concerns,
Speaker 9: which clearly they're trying to address, but also in part
Speaker 9: because of the way that this Supreme Court in particular
Speaker 9: has ruled. We've seen the ramifications of specifically the Dobbs decision,
Speaker 9: the overturning of Roe v. Waight in election after election,
Speaker 9: including most recently last week, and I just wonder how
Speaker 9: much you really do expect that to continue to be
Speaker 9: a driving force going into twenty twenty four.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 11: Look, I think that the Court has been kind of partisanized,
Speaker 11: just like a lot of other things in American life.
Speaker 11: And of course, these Supreme Court vacancies are these these
Speaker 11: prizes for the party to parties to cash in on.
Speaker 11: You know, just so happened that that trumpack got three vacancies.
Speaker 11: You know, Biden's only had one so far. And you know,
Speaker 11: it's it's sort of like a lot of it can
Speaker 11: just be random, you know, depending on if someone someone
Speaker 11: lives or dies or decides to retire at a specific time.
Speaker 11: But clearly the the Dobb's decision was unpopular.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 11: And when abortion has been on the ballot in various states,
Speaker 11: be it red states, purple states, and blue states, it's
Speaker 11: done well since the Dobbs decision, and at least on
Speaker 11: that issue, you expect Democrats to have an advantage going forward.
Speaker 11: It's just a question of, you know, how important overall
Speaker 11: it is. But of course it's going to be a
Speaker 11: topic of the presidential election and a whole lot of
Speaker 11: races for all starts offices.
Speaker 2: Next year, I'm.
Speaker 3: Spending time with Kyle Condicatet Sabato's Crystal Ball at the
Speaker 3: University of Virginia Center for Politics. Been looking forward to
Speaker 3: talking to you about this stack data research out today.
Speaker 2: Kyle.
Speaker 3: I don't know if you've had a chance to look
Speaker 3: at it, but it's taking the view of the Electoral
Speaker 3: College in projecting winners and losers in the presidential race.
Speaker 3: It's making state by state projections using national data. So
Speaker 3: I realized some folks have a little bit of trouble
Speaker 3: with this, and we're a year out. All of that said,
Speaker 3: you put this together, it's the same states we've been
Speaker 3: talking about for some time here in the same states
Speaker 3: that we were looking at in our own polling here
Speaker 3: at Bloomberg, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. This says Trump
Speaker 3: flips them all, might even pick up Nevada thanks to
Speaker 3: third party candidates and beats Joe Biden in the Electoral
Speaker 3: College by two ninety two to two forty six. Are
Speaker 3: you rolling your eyes as I'm talking to you a
Speaker 3: year out here, or are you looking closely at this
Speaker 3: as an important marker with a year to voting.
Speaker 11: Mega projections and doing polls. You know, I think it's
Speaker 11: I think it's too early for that. I will say
Speaker 11: the numbers have been pretty bad for Joe Biden and
Speaker 11: all sorts of different metrics of this this fall. You know,
Speaker 11: there have been a number of polls from from Bloomberg,
Speaker 11: from the New York Times, from other places that show
Speaker 11: Biden in a fairly weak position and a potential rematch
Speaker 11: with Donald Trump. I do think part of what's going
Speaker 11: on here is that while both Biden and Trump clearly
Speaker 11: have warts and clearly have favorability problems, I think Biden's
Speaker 11: problems are sort of more front of mind, in part
Speaker 11: because he's the incumbent, in part because he's in the
Speaker 11: news more that Donald Trump. There are probably a time
Speaker 11: when Donald Trump's warts become clear, but you know, obviously
Speaker 11: if he's if he's renominated, My only expectation is I'm
Speaker 11: thinking that we should have another closeer competitive presidential election,
Speaker 11: just like we've had really for the most part since
Speaker 11: two thousand.
Speaker 2: Sounds like a big grain of.
Speaker 4: Salt on that one.
Speaker 9: Huh, Yeah, that would be my take as well, Joe.
Speaker 9: As we think about what the contours of the twenty
Speaker 9: twenty four primary race, though, ar Kyle, because of course
Speaker 9: we have to get through that verse before we can
Speaker 9: get to a general and we do have news on
Speaker 9: that front in that the Republican field has gotten smaller.
Speaker 9: Tim Scott, the Senator from South Carolina, has dropped out.
Speaker 9: Where do those would be Scott voters vote go Does
Speaker 9: all of that go to former President Trump? Or could
Speaker 9: that be a boon to another South Carolinian?
Speaker 11: You know, look, I mean Scott was not polling particularly high,
Speaker 11: particularly in national surveys. He did have some kind of
Speaker 11: mid single digit support in Iowa high to minted single
Speaker 11: digit support in South Carolina. You might expect that that.
Speaker 11: You know, Nikki Haley is the only South Carolinian left
Speaker 11: in the race. Maybe she benefits more in that specific
Speaker 11: state from Tim Scott getting out. But you know, we're
Speaker 11: still at a point where where Donald Trump is over
Speaker 11: fifty percent nationally in polls, and he's close to fifty percent,
Speaker 11: if not surpassing fifty percent in some of the.
Speaker 5: Key early states.
Speaker 11: So even if you add up all the opposition and
Speaker 11: everyone who wasn't voting for Trump was voting for a
Speaker 11: single alternative, Trump might still be in these states. So
Speaker 11: you know, Trump's got to fall off some more. I
Speaker 11: will say that, you know, for people who don't want
Speaker 11: Trump to be the no nominee, they should want more
Speaker 11: winnowing of the field. And so Scott getting out I
Speaker 11: think is probably good if you're a non Trump Republican
Speaker 11: because at least that frees up some portion of the vote.
Speaker 11: Although it's also not clear that all of those Tim
Speaker 11: Scott voters would go somewhere out or we'd go, you know,
Speaker 11: we go to someone else as opposed to vote to Trump.
Speaker 11: You know, maybe it ends up being splintered a little bit,
Speaker 11: but you know, you've still got you know, a number
Speaker 11: of other candidates in the race, although you know, even
Speaker 11: at the debate last week there were only five people
Speaker 11: on stage. Of course one of them is gone. Of course,
Speaker 11: you know Donald Trump was not on that stage. So
Speaker 11: long way to go still from the non Trump Republicans,
Speaker 11: but at least some of these other candidates are dropping out,
Speaker 11: which I think should be good from their perspective.
Speaker 3: Speaking of dropping out, Rick Davis was just suggesting last hour,
Speaker 3: Kyle on this program that run de Santis may not
Speaker 3: make it to Iowa or New Hampshire. And when you
Speaker 3: look in I don't mean to dwell on the stack
Speaker 3: data here. He's the one guy Joe Biden can beat,
Speaker 3: and it's overwhelming. Biden beats DeSantis three fifty nine to
Speaker 3: one seventy nine in the electoral College. You know, Kaylee
Speaker 3: just framed her question around Nicki Haley. I don't hear
Speaker 3: anybody talking about the next surge or a path to
Speaker 3: anything for Ron DeSantis.
Speaker 2: How about you.
Speaker 11: Well, look, I still think if Trump were to collapse,
Speaker 11: and I don't know what exactly would make that happen
Speaker 11: at this point, if we haven't seen it already, I
Speaker 11: kind of still think DeSantis is better equipped to pick
Speaker 11: up more of Trump's support than Haley is, mostly because DeSantis,
Speaker 11: I think his positioned to the right of Nicki Haley,
Speaker 11: he still shows up as sort of a more popular
Speaker 11: second choice vote amongst you know, amongst people who say they'
Speaker 11: supporting Trump in the primary. But I will say, you know,
Speaker 11: I mean, DeSantis has had some money problems, you know that,
Speaker 11: you know, hypothetically could be something to drove him from
Speaker 11: the race, although you know, again he is bolstered a
Speaker 11: little bit by by the field getting a little bit
Speaker 11: a little bit smaller. Here, I also don't really believe
Speaker 11: that the Santists would ultimately be a dramatically weaker presidential
Speaker 11: nominee than Donald Trump. I think it's possible that that
Speaker 11: there are people who say they support Trump now who
Speaker 11: maybe say they don't support the Santists, but that they
Speaker 11: would come come around in the end. You know, my
Speaker 11: guess is maybe there won't be that big of a difference,
Speaker 11: you know, between the two, you know, when it's all
Speaker 11: said and done. So that that I that I questioned
Speaker 11: a little bit. Polls have been kind of back and
Speaker 11: forth on that, but you know, you got to you
Speaker 11: got to remember, there's a whole campaign to go after
Speaker 11: you get general election nominees. There's a consolidation period, there
Speaker 11: are conventions, there's a campaign to run. You know, there
Speaker 11: probably wouldn't be as dramatic a differences among these candidates
Speaker 11: when it all, when it's all said and done, as
Speaker 11: opposed to what things may suggest right now.
Speaker 9: Well, and again, the way things are looking right now,
Speaker 9: we do have two presumptive nominees on both the Republican
Speaker 9: and Democratic side. Into the point Show was making for
Speaker 9: all the talk before really just more recent history. It
Speaker 9: was the idea that Trump was the only Republican that
Speaker 9: Biden could beat. It seems like that narrative is kind
Speaker 9: of shifting in a material way. If you're the Biden campaign,
Speaker 9: what are you looking at here? Where are you trying
Speaker 9: to focus and what what do you think is within
Speaker 9: their power to change?
Speaker 11: And I think they need to, you know, continue to
Speaker 11: try to address people's conservatives with Joe Biden. Be it
Speaker 11: his age, and again it's not like he's going to
Speaker 11: get any younger, but maybe there are things that they
Speaker 11: can they can do in that regard and try to
Speaker 11: highlight what they think are some of the positive things
Speaker 11: they're doing. You know, there is a real disconnect. People
Speaker 11: think the economy is terrible, and you could point to
Speaker 11: some numbers and say that it's not. But you know,
Speaker 11: I do wonder this sort of focus on quote unquote
Speaker 11: Bidenomics and trying to paint a rosy picture of that.
Speaker 11: There's been some kind of anecdotal evidence that that maybe
Speaker 11: is turning people off, that people just don't feel that way.
Speaker 11: So you know, there's and you know, in the midst
Speaker 11: of a campaign, there there's only so much that the
Speaker 11: campaigns themselves can control. And I think one thing that
Speaker 11: is really important for Biden is he needs to have
Speaker 11: a weak opponent, and Trump may or may not end
Speaker 11: up being that. You know, I have the time if
Speaker 11: he gets nominated and what not. Work there's some other Republican.
Speaker 3: He's the managing editor at Savageo's Crystal Ball at the
Speaker 3: University of Virginia Center for Politics.
Speaker 2: Kyle Condick, Kyle, thanks.
Speaker 3: For always being a reliable voice for us here at Bloomberg.
Speaker 3: We look forward to the next conversation here.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to the Sound On podcast.
Speaker 3: Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 3: and anywhere else you get your podcasts, and you can
Speaker 3: find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at one
Speaker 3: pm Eastern Time at Bloomberg dot com.