Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: And joining us now on Bloomberg TV and Radio is
Speaker 2: Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who is joining
Speaker 2: us live from the Solana Accelerate Event, Silana's flagship US
Speaker 2: event in Miami, where, of course, the Coin Desk Consensus
Speaker 2: Conference is also being held this week's Senator, thank you
Speaker 2: so much for joining us. You are, of course at
Speaker 2: this week's conferences in Florida, having been long standing one
Speaker 2: of the congressional leaders in the crypto regulatory space, obviously
Speaker 2: with a successful push around stable coins with the passage
Speaker 2: of the Genius Act in the Senate last year. Now
Speaker 2: we have questions as to whether or not that success
Speaker 2: can be replicated with the Clarity Act. Now that a
Speaker 2: compromise has been reached on the language around stable cooin
Speaker 2: yield and rewards, I wonder if you think this thing
Speaker 2: is on track to passage, knowing that it does seem
Speaker 2: bank industry groups still might have some issue with that language.
Speaker 3: I do.
Speaker 1: I think it's on track, and I'm optimistic. We're still
Speaker 1: uh putting to bed a few items. We're trying to
Speaker 1: make sure there's ways to crack down on illicit finance
Speaker 1: and terrorism financing, and we're still working on an ethics
Speaker 1: provision to make sure no members of Congress, the President,
Speaker 1: vice President, any senior administration official can't be an issuer
Speaker 1: of a cryptocurrency or mean coin, or promote it uh
Speaker 1: or advocate for it in any way. So that one
Speaker 1: provision is key to getting the democratic support that we
Speaker 1: have been building, and I'm optimistic that we will reach
Speaker 1: an agreement on that in advance of the markup for
Speaker 1: the Banking Committee, which should happen in the next two weeks.
Speaker 2: So what could the timeline be realistically for ultimate passage
Speaker 2: do you think, assuming it can advance out of committee.
Speaker 1: So my hope is that we have a successful Banking
Speaker 1: Committee markup and these last few provisions are included in
Speaker 1: the agreement, and once that is completed, we will work
Speaker 1: with the Agriculture Committee and try to merge the Banking
Speaker 1: and Agriculture draft.
Speaker 3: The Agriculture Committee markup, however, was.
Speaker 1: Partisan, and so there were a lot of agreed upon
Speaker 1: bipartisan ideas before that in an earlier draft that we're going
Speaker 1: to try to reintegrate back into the final version.
Speaker 3: So those negotiations are going to be very important.
Speaker 1: They may take several weeks to do, but my hope
Speaker 1: is we can do those negotiations as soon as banking's finish,
Speaker 1: spend two or three weeks maybe before if needed, on
Speaker 1: those negotiations, merge the bill, and hopefully get that bill
Speaker 1: to the floor.
Speaker 2: Well, and I want to go back to the ethics
Speaker 2: concerns you were mentioning. Senator is at consensus in Miami
Speaker 2: this week. The president's sons, Eric Trump Don Junior, they
Speaker 2: are both featured speakers, And I wonder to what extent
Speaker 2: is still the involvement directly of the president's family in
Speaker 2: this space that is acting as kind of an impediment
Speaker 2: to bipartisan progress.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, those are those serve business interests of
Speaker 1: Trump family members. Our legislation will just prohibit prohibit the
Speaker 1: Principles from being an issuer or a promoter of these
Speaker 1: cryptocurrencies or mean coins or stable coins. We just don't
Speaker 1: want people who are in positions of authority to be
Speaker 1: able to make money on the side off the backs
Speaker 1: of the American people based on non public information.
Speaker 3: So it's very important that.
Speaker 1: These basic ethic rules ethics rules apply to people in
Speaker 1: positions of power, and I think this is something that
Speaker 1: we can get the White House to agree to. I
Speaker 1: think they should not ultimately be an impediment on this,
Speaker 1: and I'm hoping that we can get those negotiations done
Speaker 1: in the next couple of weeks, and I'd really like
Speaker 1: them to be done in advance of the Banking Committee markup.
Speaker 2: Well, we'll be continuing to watch that closely. Another narrative
Speaker 2: we're tracking closely here at Bloomberg is artificial intelligence and
Speaker 2: how it's impacting the labor market. Coinbase, which is a
Speaker 2: sponsor of the Consensus conference, obviously announced today that it's
Speaker 2: going to be reducing its workforce by fourteen percent, and
Speaker 2: Brian Armstrong, the CEO, says, in large part that is
Speaker 2: due to artificial intelligence. And I wonder from a policy
Speaker 2: making perspective, if you think a response is going to
Speaker 2: be required from a policy standpoint to kind of ensure
Speaker 2: the labor market against what could be a material softening
Speaker 2: because of AI. As we see other tech companies because
Speaker 2: they're going to spend so much capex developing that technology,
Speaker 2: also looking to reduce their headcount, be it Meta or
Speaker 2: other companies.
Speaker 1: Yes, So when we complete our work on market structure
Speaker 1: for cryptocurrency and blockchain. I am going to start working
Speaker 1: on a framework for AI, and the largest question that
Speaker 1: is going to inform that framework is how do you
Speaker 1: guarantee the future of work? How do you make sure
Speaker 1: you have a vision for this country where people who
Speaker 1: need to be trained, need to be have access new markets,
Speaker 1: can do jobs that they are excited about. Make sure
Speaker 1: that if there is job loss related to AI, that
Speaker 1: we reform our education system, build upon our education system
Speaker 1: so that people, young people and even mid career people
Speaker 1: can get employed in areas they want to be employed
Speaker 1: and have the training to do so. And that's going
Speaker 1: to have to be a conversation that is part of
Speaker 1: when you regulate AI. Then hopefully they can be a
Speaker 1: cornerstone investor into this vision of education and an economy
Speaker 1: where people can have that guarantee of a job that
Speaker 1: allows them to not only have just the human dignity
Speaker 1: of making an impact on.
Speaker 3: Society, but also to build to provide for their families.
Speaker 1: And I think that's part of the American dream and
Speaker 1: that will be part of any regulation we do in
Speaker 1: the AI space. How we look at the future of
Speaker 1: work and how you make that work with a framework
Speaker 1: for AI regulation.
Speaker 2: And Senator, if we could switch gears a bit, As
Speaker 2: you obviously also sit on the Armed Services Committee, I'd
Speaker 2: like to ask you about Iran as there is now
Speaker 2: this Project Freedom trying to ensure once again and free
Speaker 2: transit through the straight of hor moves that the Defense
Speaker 2: Secretary Pete Hegseth said today is separate and distinct from
Speaker 2: the combat operations. The Secretary of State Mark or Rubio said,
Speaker 2: this is fundamentally a rescue mission for more than twenty
Speaker 2: thousand sailors and workers on commercial vessels who are stranded.
Speaker 2: Right now, do you see this as separate from activity
Speaker 2: that would require congressional authorization.
Speaker 3: No, it's not separate at all.
Speaker 1: And right now the American people are asking a very
Speaker 1: direct question. This is an illegal, unauthorized war, and the
Speaker 1: American people want to know why President Trump is spending
Speaker 1: a billion dollars a day on a war they don't want,
Speaker 1: instead of getting their grocery costs down, getting their housing
Speaker 1: costs down, and getting their fuel costs down, and the
Speaker 1: straight of horror moves issue is one of the main
Speaker 1: drivers of high costs of gasoline to fill our tanks,
Speaker 1: to take our kids to school, diesel to fill truckers
Speaker 1: tanks so they can bring goods across the main America,
Speaker 1: and fuel costs for heating and for air conditioning across
Speaker 1: the country. These costs are fundamental to the American economy
Speaker 1: and fundamental to American families.
Speaker 3: And so they're just asking, at.
Speaker 1: What cost is this war, this illegal, unauthorized war go
Speaker 1: and to continue to be waged without the.
Speaker 3: Support of the American people.
Speaker 1: They would rather President Trump spend that billions of dollars
Speaker 1: a day guaranteeing health care for their families and their neighbors,
Speaker 1: or getting the cost of groceries or housing down.
Speaker 2: Are you hearing behind closed doors, Senator, from your Republican
Speaker 2: colleagues that something may change in the near future in
Speaker 2: terms of their willingness to support something like a war
Speaker 2: powers voter and authorization of use in military force. Are
Speaker 2: we approaching a turning point?
Speaker 1: I certainly hope so, because when I'm in New York State,
Speaker 1: New Yorkers are furious at the President right now. They
Speaker 1: are so frustrated that he's not come to the American
Speaker 1: people that he is spending twenty five billion dollars so far,
Speaker 1: is set to ask for another two hundred billion dollars,
Speaker 1: all why their gas prices are going up. And so
Speaker 1: I know Republicans are hearing the same things from their
Speaker 1: constituents and their states. So because of that, I believe
Speaker 1: they will come to the table and try to hold
Speaker 1: this administration at some point accountable for a very unpopular
Speaker 1: war that isn't authorized and the American people don't support.
Speaker 1: Three and five Americans are against this war today, and
Speaker 1: that's because they're paying for it at the pump, and
Speaker 1: they've been shown no reason why we had to engage
Speaker 1: in this war, and that there was no risk to
Speaker 1: the American people that President Trump had to protect them from.
Speaker 2: Well, and it's those higher prices at the pump that
Speaker 2: now seem to be fueling a building narrative that Democrats
Speaker 2: may have a better chance of flipping the Senate blue
Speaker 2: once again in the midterms. That, of course, is what
Speaker 2: you're charged with chairing the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. I
Speaker 2: just wonder as you look across this widening map, take Iowa,
Speaker 2: where the Vice president is today, and where there's talk
Speaker 2: that Democrats may actually stand a chance something we have
Speaker 2: seen in eighteen years, or Texas or Alaska or Maine.
Speaker 2: It takes money to you have to pay to play
Speaker 2: in all those different places. So I'm wondering how you're
Speaker 2: approaching it strategically and financially this wider map.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So right now we have a map of eleven states.
Speaker 1: And the reason why we have so many states that
Speaker 1: could go from red to blue is because of the
Speaker 1: climate that President Trump has created with his toxic policies.
Speaker 1: He promised that he wasn't gonna get involved in Worris.
Speaker 1: He promised to get grocery and housing costs down, and
Speaker 1: he's done everything, but we now are engaged in at
Speaker 1: least two wars, one with Venezuela and one with Iran,
Speaker 1: both illegal, both unauthorized. He's done nothing to bring cost
Speaker 1: of groceries and housing down. The cost of the pump
Speaker 1: continues to rise because of the war in Iran. And
Speaker 1: so President Trump is very unpopular right now. And the
Speaker 1: Republicans that are aiding and abetting him, not standing up
Speaker 1: to him, not demanding groceries and housing costs come down,
Speaker 1: They're going to be held accountable at the ballot box.
Speaker 1: And so we have talented candidates running and red of
Speaker 1: purple states all across the country. Right now, And so
Speaker 1: we have a few states we are defending, and then
Speaker 1: we have eight states that are now in play because
Speaker 1: of President Trump's toxic policies.
Speaker 2: And speaking of the President's policies, finally, Senator he obviously
Speaker 2: is a big push toward building this new ballroom at
Speaker 2: the White House. And according to the reconciliation text so
Speaker 2: that we saw release last night from Senator Grassley, there's
Speaker 2: a billion dollars allotted in there for secret service specifically
Speaker 2: as it relates to the ballroom. Does that make this
Speaker 2: ultimately a done deal? Is there anything Democrats can do
Speaker 2: to stop that construction? Knowing reconciliation is by nature of
Speaker 2: partisan process.
Speaker 1: So what Democrats are doing is talking to their constituents
Speaker 1: about what matters to them. And I can tell you
Speaker 1: in New York State, they do not want President Trump
Speaker 1: spending their tax dollars on a ballroom that we don't need.
Speaker 1: They want President Trump to be focused on the small businesses,
Speaker 1: the family arms, getting these chaotic tariffs down, making sure
Speaker 1: that we get the cost of gasoline and fueled down,
Speaker 1: making sure he's actually focused on their grocery bills, and
Speaker 1: their heating bills, and their medical bills. The fact that
Speaker 1: he's spending twenty five billion dollars on a war instead
Speaker 1: of restoring medicaid to millions of people is frankly an outrage.
Speaker 1: And so I do think we're going to flip the
Speaker 1: Senate and the House in November, and people are going
Speaker 1: to express their concerns with President Trump by voting differently
Speaker 1: and voting for Democrats in a lot of red and
Speaker 1: purple places.