Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast.
Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on appocarplay and enroun Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
It's just Tuesday.
We packed it a lot yesterday.
I thought maybe you just have to check sometimes before you sign the check. I'm Joe Matthew in the Nation's capital. Good to see you Tuesday, yes edition of Balance of Power, the fastest show in politics here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite radio, and on YouTube. Find us now on YouTube by searching Bloomberg Business News Live. We'll be off to the races again for another couple of hours here with news. Well kind of on this funding deadline that's approaching.
So here we are ten days out right. The government runs out of money on the twentieth of December. I've been talking about this every day for weeks. Nothing's changed really in terms of a deal to avoid this. Yet no one's talking about a shutdown. We're just going to drag this thing, I guess right to the last minute. But we do have a sense of what the next Congress is going to be doing when it comes to the sequence of dealing with the border, dealing with the
Trump era tax cuts. And that's where we start our conversation today with Mike Dorning. Bloomberg Deputy Congressional Editor, has been covering this for some time. Mike, it's good to see. Welcome to be here always. So I want to pick through a couple of these. Let's just start with the funding deadline cr till mid March is what everyone's talking about. Why don't we just get to it.
Well, there's a couple of things that are outstanding, but most importantly.
Is the size of the disaster AID.
Okay, and here you have several problems cross cutting and it makes it hard to work out something within the House.
Republicans, this is agency funding to respond to the two big hurricanes.
Yes, and also some of it going back to the Maui disaster.
On the one.
Hand, you don't really want to risk that people aren't going to have the money to keep working on the disaster AID in North Carolina and South Carolina and Hawaii and California, lots of other places there have been disasters. On the other hand, you have number one, a conservative group within the House, Republicans that always wants to pay for this by cutting other things. That says, hey, you know, we always have disasters, so you should be cutting something else,
not just adding to the BOT. And then you also have people fighting over how much money there should be in disaster aid.
So that's the main thing.
That's the sticking point attention over how much money to give to disasters aid and whether you should pay for it or not.
They're not going to.
Pay for it in the end. That's just like something you have to get passed. Where that goes, but the size of it will be the main hold up. You can also use that as a carrot later on by not funding it enough so that when you need to get the next thing through the North Carolina, South Carolina, California, Hawaii, people are like, I got to vote for this.
Because I can't cut off my constituents.
So you have done this.
Before, yeh ndaa.
I'll ask you about funding the government in the new year and so forth. And by the way, are we going with March, is that the cr will fund this till March.
We can We'll see it'll be some kind of somewhere soon.
The Annual Defense Authorization here every year it's must pass. Looks like this will pass. We got top lines over the weekend. But really interesting that there's a fourteen percent pay raise for junior enlisted troops.
Nobody can vote against that, right, Yeah. The problem is it is getting caught up in other things.
You would think that it would get through, but they've got on the one hand, they want to do some things that with transgender troops that make progressives unhappy. There's some things that some of the conservatives feel like they want more things they want like restrictions on abortion and travel for abortion and things like that. So you can
lose those things. My guess is, one way or another, whether you do the NDAA or you do some other stripped down thing, those troops will get that raise reasonably soon because like everyone like believes the junior enlisted troops need a raise. I mean, some of them are on food staffs. It's like these are people who are defending the gun trap. Maybe they should make a decent living.
That's quite a sweetener there. If you're on the fence about all of this. So the transition, then the two words that seem to change the world for Pete Hegseth were good conversations Jony Ernst with a fairly benign statement, but many folks thought she might sink his nomination, her concerns over sexual assault in the military, her experience as a woman serving in combat. But boy, things have changed
a lot this week. But he woke up on Monday, following the ernest statement and knowing that to be a meeting and hearing Donald Trump on Meet the Press. Wait a minute, maybe this guy, yea, he makes the.
Great and she kind of revived that nomination a little yesterday He was definitely gasping for breath. There Two things happened over the weekend or late last week.
And over the weekend.
Number one, she had kind of been completely noncommittal, given him a very polite cold shoulder, and clearly was hoping that he would just die and Trump would withdraw it. But Trump moved in supported him some. And then the Conservatives came in hard on her and said, you know you don't you don't do more to support him, we'll challenge you in your primary in two years now. She hasn't said she'll support him, but she said some kind words,
positive vibes and in Washington. That can be crucial because he just needs to make it to the next week, and without some sort of kind vibes, it was looking like you might not and you live to fight another day.
You could win.
Huge pressure campaign for Joni Ernst in this case, so you start to pull out the lens a little bit. Tulsi Gabbard being pretty well received yesterday on Capitol Hill, starting to answer questions about Syria and so forth, reminding people she has a top secret security clearance and her.
Top secret is not that high a security cleer, but.
Had that since her visit to Syria in twenty seventeen. I don't have one of those. And then there's RFK Junior, who's going to be holding meetings next week we're reading now on the Hill, will start his meetings. Is there a world at which all three of these controversial nominees initially seen as controversial are in fact confirmed.
Yeah, there's definitely a world where all three are confirmed. It's it's it's quite possible. I still think Hegsith is probably in the most danger of those three because the disagreements with Tulsei Gabbard and RFK Junior are kind of policy ordered they may be very basic policy. You know, she was sort of seemed to be supportive of the
Assad regime in Russia. Not the personal chant, but like hegxith, the personal challenges are of easy to understand for everyday Americans and salacious, you know, allegations of rape, you know, drunkenness, financial mismanagement. That's something that like tends to be more of a wildfire and the press and people talk about it.
You might agree or disagree with.
RFK june your sort of unorthodox views about vaccines or Tulsey's views about intervention abroad and foreign governments, but they're not like the thing that excites people as much.
Well, it's really interesting. At the same time, maybe ask this slightly differently. Let's say they all get to their confirmation hearings. What kind of a show are Democrats going to put on here? Even if they are confirmed? These could be some very difficult and personal questions posted to Pete hegseeth could be for RFK Junior as well, his history with drugs, his past comments, allegations again of sexual
advances that might not play too well publicly. What are democrats prepared to do in terms of making a stink about any of these people.
I would imagine they are going to make a huge stink about all three of these people. And the important thing is each of these people are now being introduced to the American people. These impressions where our parents told us first impressions matter. Look someone in the eyes, shake them in the hand, shake their hand. These will set
the public impressions of these high profile people. And in those confirmation hearings, I would be very surprised if you don't see Democrats pushing the allegations against Pete Hegseth, the sexual misconduct ones. I would be very surprised if you don't see a strong effort to characterize Tulsea Gabbard as a potential national security risk and RFK Junior his unorthodox views about health and vaccines and frame them for the American people. Whether they get approved or not a different question.
And Democrats essentially can be outvoted. The question is some of them there might be some Republicans who also don't want to go along with them.
Yeah, exactly, And of course it'll all be aired out in public. Even if they do make the grade. Some damage could be done here.
Just the confirmation here, right, it's all the debate going.
Absolutely. We have weeks until we're at the point of getting a vote. Mike, thank you so much. Mike Dorning covering the transition for US and the funding deadline in Washington. We're ten days out. We'll get this figured out at some point, and of course you'll hear about it right here on Balance of Power.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then roid Oro with the Bloomberg Business Ad.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I'm Kaylee Lines alongside Joe Matthew in Washington. This is Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and radio, where we're continuing to keep track of the Trump transition and his nominees who have been frequenting Washington and more specifically Capitol Hill in recent days. Is is they try to make
their cases for Senate confirmation. This includes some of the more controversial picks that are out there, including Tulsei Gabbert for Director of National Intelligence, Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, and next week, as Joe mentioned just moments ago, RFK Junior, the nominee to lead to the Health and Human Services Department, will be making his rounds as well, all of them trying to make the case, Joe, to get to the requisite number of votes required to actually take these cabinet
level positions. And it does seem that the calculation around the difficulty some of these may actually have in getting to confirmation has shifted within the last week. For Pete Hegseth.
Especially, well, that's right, and he as Joni Ernst to thank largely for that good conversations. I believe the statement suggesting that they had another meeting, it went well and she would like to help him get to the hearing. The question was would he even get that far to take questions from senators publicly? Here Hegseth meeting today with Senators John Cornyn, Cydy Hyde Smith and Steve Danes were also following. As you mentioned, Tulci Gabbard with more meetings
today as well. Yesterday was day one. She's just getting rolling. Hegseeth has been up there for some time now. Tom Cotton and Jim Rish, the two Republican senators meeting today with Tulci Gabbart incoming Senate Intelligence Chair, and then of course foreign relations. That's where we want to start our conversation with Megan Scully, who drives our congressional coverage here
as our editor in Washington, DC. Megan, let's start with Pete Hegseth because Kaylee points out wisely that it's just the vibes have shifted quite a bit over the past couple of days. People were on a watch for him to withdraw a lah Matt Gates until Jony Ernst put out her statement allowed for another meeting, will he get to a hearing.
So let's just.
Step back for a second and explain why Joni Ernst is so pivotal here, and that is because she is a combat veteran, she sits on the Armed Services Committee, and she's a survivor of sexual assault, and the allegations which heg Seth has denied, of sexual sis out have been looming over this whole confirmation process. So she has been considered the key vote here, the lynch pin. There are several others who you know, such as Senator Collins
Senator Murkowski who could still vote against him. Should note that Ernest has not said she'd support him, that she would just support him through the process get him to that confirmation hearing. So more work needs to be done, but certainly it seems more likely after her statement last night than at any other point of this confirmation process.
Well, so then the question becomes to what extent we can attribute her tone here or her lack of willingness to this point to give a firm yes or firm no to the pressure she is getting from the magabase of the Republican Party and the threats to potentially primary her in her next election fight.
Absolutely, a lot of this is about self preservation. She could face a primary from the right if she does not support Hegseth, and so she's feeling that pressure at home. It is certainly, you know, putting some of her legacy is indeed on the issue of military sexual assault, and sort of putting that at odds with her own, you know, instincts to survive in her next re election campaign.
Interesting to hear, not only to your point from Jonie Ernst, but we're watching Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski asked about why they were even having meetings with Pete hegseth to begin with. Colin said, how else am I going to get a sense of him and ask questions? Murkowski said, don't you want to know who your accusers are? What do you make of these replies in the pressure campaign that they might be feeling.
So this is bringing back a lot of memories for I think many of us to the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process, where Susan Collins and Murkowski were, you know, sort of the key votes and Collins ended up voting after a vote, after a speech on the floor, voting to support his nomination. And of course he'll to got confirmed despite the allegations of sexual assault, which he also denied. So but it is very standard. I think it would be malpractice for
them not to sit down and talk to him. You know, he is a nominee, and you know, I think that the meetings are par for the course here. This is you know, they can ask him pressing questions and uh and and go back and forth in terms of his
priorities should he be. In terms at the head of the Defense Department, Susan Collins will be the chairperson of the Appropriations Committee and half of all federal discretionary spending is defense spending, so she's certainly that is certainly something else she needs to talk to him about.
I want to talk about Tolsey Gabbard as well, because the spotlight on her nomination has perhaps intensified given the events of the last several days and the downfall of the now oustra sized Syrian dictator Boscher Alasad, who of
course she met with in Damascus years ago. Is that net helpful for her confirmation prospects because the question was about her relationship with the SOD who is no longer leading Syria and therefore isn't necessarily as much of a live question for an incoming administration as he would have been before.
I think that is still very much to be determined
as we sort out what is next in Syria. But the bigger question and concerns about Gabbard really have to do less with a SAD and more about her freelancing on a matter of very sensitive national security and foreign policy when she was a sitting member of the House and she went and met with Asad in Syria, So it's there will be I assume still questions about what she would do as the Director of National Intelligence when it comes to some of these other regimes in the world.
Well, so we move on. If I can throw another log on the fire to RFK Junior, who will reportedly be on the Hill next week, Bloomberg reporting that he's got a meeting with Senator Tommy Tuberville. What are these hearings, assuming they get to hearings, going to be like for Democrats? Are they coming in off the top rope here hot with tough questions and the easels are going to be set up in the hearing rooms or is it happening now in advance of the hearings.
So right now we're seeing most of the nominees just meeting with Republicans they need They know that most of these nominations are only going to get passed on a party line vote, at least the controversial ones, and that's if they're lucky they can get that party line vote.
Going into the hearings, Democrats are certainly, you know, this will be their moment to grill these nominees and to go back to the Kavanaugh confirmation once again, you know, we saw Democrats who were in the minority really grilling.
You know, there were famous moments of Kamala Harris and Amy Klobash are all people who went on to run for the presidency, really you know, hitting the spotlight and making national news, and we will certainly see that, particularly with the most controversial of these nominees.
So we have a lot to look forward to come January, obviously, but this Congress, before the next one can hold these hearings and do all of their business in twenty twenty five, they still have business to figure out this year, including ten days from now a funding deadline, yes to continue the government funding and to not shut it down. With just ten days out, we still have no clarity on what kind of continuing resolution or other solution will be
put forward. How much longer is this going to take?
Although you know, you're a veteran of these negotiations, you know that nothing actually comes together until the last few hours before a shutdown. You know, I feel like there is a very little appetite for any kind of disruption in government spending, you know, particularly as the Congress is coming to a close, and as is the Biden administration. We're going to see most of that funding kicked to the spring and where they can a Republican Congress and
a Republican administration can hash out the details. Where we might see some movement or we expect to see some movement in the coming weeks, is on the issue of emergency aid, and we could see a package coming together pretty quickly on that, and.
It probably will be close or not close to the one hundred billion dollars requested by the White House.
I think that there are there is talk even among Republicans of getting close to that, but just a few votes could swing anything either way, so I know that to be true.
All right. Bloomberg's Megan Scully, who leads our Capital Influence team here in Washington, thank you for joining us here
on Balance of Power. And we of course have much more coming up on the program as well as we consider not just what's happening in the transition, but the incredible circumstances this transition is happening in is there's been really incredible developments in geopolitics, with what has happened in Syria, still an issue for the Biden administration to deal with, but one that the Trump administration will inherit.
Yeah, that's for sure. We'll have more on that coming up later, and certainly the timing with Tulsea Gabbard arriving in the Senate is quite remarkable. They wouldn't believe the stuff if you wrote.
It that way.
I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lions. We'll have a lot more ahead right here on Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast.
Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
There is a very pronounced conversation underway right now with a lame duck session in Congress, the wind down of the Biden administration and the uptake here of the transition to the next Trump administration about what to do with Syria.
Following this incredibly fast moving series of events over the weekend, Kaylee, we saw Damascus fall, Bishar Ala, Sad move to Moscow, and everyone is moving to their own benefit here, including Israel into that buffer zone along the Syrian border and deploying troops beyond that buffer zone for the first time since nineteen seventy four, with a lot of questions about their motivations as well.
Well, and the Israeli Defense Force is saying today that they have been targeting strategic weapons stockpiles in Syria, and in fact, according to the IDF, within the last forty eight hours, have struck most of those stockpiles. We're talking here about things like C two sea missiles, anti aircraft batteries and the like. The intention here, of course, to make sure that while there is this power vacuum in
Syria right now. A lack of clarity about what exactly happens now that Asad is gone a dictator deposed, the rebels that overtook him and ultimately pushed him out of the country are designated terrorist organization by the US HTS. Is not clear yet when you talk to experts on the Middle East, as we have done over the last several days, as to whether or not they are an entity that can be entrusted entirely at this.
Time, Yeap, this is something that we wanted to talk to Wadham's about, who runs our national security coverage out of Washington, d C. And has been rather busy the last couple of days. Nick, It's great to see you. When will we have answers to these questions because we're looking at obviously a power vacuum. We have seen one of these individuals reach to become a formal prime minister. How long will that hold?
What's happening well, I mean this is the question that the US is really grappling with, and obviously Israel as well. I mean, the challenge here is everybody was very happy to see Bashar al Asad go, but really there are just so many questions about HTS, as you mentioned, a designated terrorist group. So far, the administration line is they're saying the right things. They're saying they want to empower Syrians,
maybe potentially do some sort of transitional government. But you know, there are so many different factions who seem to have control of various parts of Syrian Some of them are I mean the Islamic State. I mean, these are the guys that the US spent untold hundreds of millions of dollars to eradicate a few years ago, and they are in some way on the rise again. So there's a real question. I think that's why you see some of
these moves by Israel hitting, hitting these military targets. They do not want this material to fall into the wrong hand. So I mean a ton of unknowns right now.
Well, and it's not just Israel. We should point out the US has targeted dozens of ISIS sites, specifically in parts of Syria. And yet at the same time we're hearing from both the Biden administration and we've heard from Donald Trump that they are still trying to keep a distance to a certain degree here with what's going to happen next. If there is that concern about a potential resurgence of ISIS, why won't the US get more intimately involved in this?
I mean, so, this is what they have said for a long time, this is not our fight. We do not want to get involved, and then they it could become our fight, rightly, because it has been our fight. I mean, Donald Trump, people forget this. Donald Trump, in his first administration, his first overseas sort of formal military
action was strikes against Syria in twenty seventeen. During this was during his summit with xijin Ping and mar Laga where he slipped out and ordered these Tomahawk missile strikes on Syria. Then he did so again after Syria used chemical after the Asad regime used chemical weapons against its own people. So you have this pattern where the administration says they don't want to have anything to do with Syria,
and then they have a lot to do with Syria. Obviously, the Islamic State and as you mentioned, I mean they pronounced the Islamic State eradicated, but clearly it keeps sort of cropping back up and they have to do these strikes. The big question is going to be what happens if the Islamic State affiliates itself in some way with HTS and you start to see not just a situation where the Islamic State is sort of poking its head above the parapet as it were, but in a situation where
they are actually helping run the government. Then does the US want to go to war with the of self proclaimed new government of Syria. That is something they really do not want to have to answer.
Considering the small number of American troops in Syria at the moment, to what extent can the US or should the US leverage allied Kurdish forces still in the country.
Well, the Kurdish forces question is also hugely complicated because Turkey another country that is trying to seize some sort of advantage here amid the chaos in Syria. Sees the Kurdish fighters as a sworn enemy. This has been a huge point of tension with the United States. And obviously when you have a situation where there's so many other priorities for the US where they want Turkey's help on squeezing Iran, on squeezing Russia NATO membership. Who knows what's
going to happen with Ukraine. I mean, there's just so many How big of a priority are these Kurdish fighters going to be for this administration, given Turkey feels so strongly about it. So it's a real question of also prioritization, which incidentally is what you saw with Russia why they are not supporting Syria. They'reorities were Ukraine. And now we have what exactly the situation we've seen unfolded.
Well, and now Russia has potentially lost a critical port in the Mediterranean as a result. On Iran though, which you just mentioned. Obviously, Syria and Lebanon border each other. Iran has used Syria as a conduit to get weapons to Hesblow, which already has been seriously diminished by the Israeli offensive over the last several months. Now that potential
line of replenishment has been broken. So what does that do to not just Aron's ability to operate with its most powerful proxy, but also do for Israel as it still has conflict ongoing.
With these proxies.
Right well, I mean they are now in a putative ceasefire with Hesbolah, so they've sort of declared at least for the time being, a cessation of hostilities. I mean, look, in some ways, Israel is going to proclaim this as a major victory. They went after has Belah, they put the squeeze on Iran, and you have essentially seen Iran and has Belah retreating from Syria's created this situation we have now, so you know it is it's an extraordinary moment.
I mean, the chess pieces are just moving all over and who has control and who doesn't are just very very difficult to figure out. But you know what we are starting to see, which is worrisome is after the initial almost jubilation about the fact that Asad has left,
it's like, okay, well who comes now? And this is going to be very very complicated Israel, as you mentioned, I mean, yes, you can say, okay, they are defending themselves outside of this buffer zone, but a lot of people will see this as a land grab and you know, changing the facts on the ground right as they jockey for position.
Well, interesting comments from Benjamin Netnyahu yesterday, effectively taking credit for what happened. In his remarks to the nation, he said his country had reshaped the Middle East as we promised we would do. We've heard so much about the errors made by Russia and leading to this. To what extent is he correct?
Well, I mean, certainly going after Hesbo Lah and essentially decimating them, putting that pressure on Iran. I mean, you know, the US there was a call a senior administration official did with reporters over the weekend as this happened. There was a little bit of credit taking there as well by the US. Listen, we are we created the conditions for a very brittle regime with sanctions both on Iran
and Syria. So a lot of folks taking credit. Will be very interesting to see how many are taking credit six months from now if they don't like this new government that takes control and Surrey and what the situation is on the ground there and whether it's a force for stability or further instability in the region.
Well, almost like he's seen this before. Nick Wadham's great to see you. Thanks for the insights and the reporting. Our national security team is doing great work Kayley on the terminal and online on the story. If you're looking for the latest in the Middle East, look no further. We've got a big day tomorrow, CPI Day. Yeah, on the road here when it comes to kind of gauging the next move by the FED, but also getting the political backdrop to this incoming administration.
Yeah, although I think for our audience here on Bloomberg TV and Radio, the FED is going to be the most important question that is addressed first next Wednesday. Of course, the decision, and it's a kind of live one. It's not clear if we're going to get another twenty five basis point cut, and tomorrow's data could help the market decide one way or another.
What it thinks is going to happen, for sure. Michael McKee is watching this for us, of course, and always a pleasure to spend a couple of minutes with our economics editor at Bloomberg TV in radio. Michael, what are you looking for tomorrow dighty thirty?
Well, we're actually looking for something we haven't seen in a while, which is a bit of a rise in inflation CPI on a month over a month basis, the headline expected to go up a tenth of a percentage point faster than it has over the last four months,
three tenths gain. But that would push the year over year number up to two point seven percent from two point six And while it may be energy related, while maybe housing related, in things the FED can effect, just the fact that it goes up is not going to make people happy.
Well, so if it goes up slightly, why would rates go down slightly? Mike, what's the justification?
Well, the betting at the FED is this is just temporary. It's kind of a one off thing. And if you deconstruct what we see in the CPI, almost all of the rise that we're getting these days is in housing, and the Fed's been waiting for that to drop, and there isn't much they can do. They can lower interest rates to try to bring down housing costs, but there's just not enough housing supply available to make a major difference, so they're kind of looking through that right now. The
other question is what's happened to food. We know that with the October hurricanes, there may have been some problems with fruits and vegetables and things like that. So there may be things that the Fed can't do a lot about, and they think the economy is in good enough shape that they can lower rates, and that they should because they don't want to see unemployment start to rise.
Joe Biden speaking a little bit earlier at Brookings about his own economic record and a bit of a warning of what might come with the next administration. Let's listen to what he said.
You seem determined both steep universal tarffs on all important goods brought to this country on the mistaken the league as foreign countries will bear the cost of those tars rather than the American consumer, who think pays for this. I believe this approach is a major mistake.
We know Michael McKee how he feels I think about Donald Trump's economic plans. How will his own economic record be remembered here in the early stages as we look back on the term of Joe Biden.
Well, I suspect it's going to be remembered reasonably well. When you look at the overall macroeconomic statistics, and unemployment was really low, Inflation went up because of the pandemic and has come down significantly, still could before he leaves office even farther. And growth has been very strong, stronger than anticipated each quarter this year. So overall, in that sense,
his record is good. The issue is going to be how historians square that with the fact that Americans felt things were not good and voted basically the Democrats out of office.
Yeah, and not just at the executive branch level. With his success or, Mike just quickly on what he was speaking about, this notion that tariffs are a bad idea. A lot of economists obviously do think that will be inflationary. How quickly could that translate into an end of the cutting cycle for the Federal Reserve? Potentially it would.
Probably take a little while, Kley. Now Trump Trump comes into office with some already with some executive orders, some authorizations from the USTR to impose some tariffs, so he could start right away. But then we have supply chains that are fairly long. It takes a while for the
prices to get through. We do pay them in one way or another, or companies in the US will pay them, but it probably wouldn't show up at inflation until later next year or in twenty twenty six, so the president can do it for a while, and you know that people are gonna be watching closely though, for any sign of price increases.
Well we know Michael McKee will as always, who of course covers international economics and policy for us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Mike, thank you very much. We'll be looking for Mike's analysis when that CPI data drops.
Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.