Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
So a new member joining the Apple family, which I guess is probably pretty extensive. We think about a lot of things as families in the business and in the political world, including for example, the House Republican conference, where there's famously what five families that all have to try to get their heads together and pursue the same policy.
And therein lies the challenge that is facing House Republicans right now as they try to find a path forward on budget reconciliation to achieve the legislative objectives of President Trump, which includes steep tax cuts making permanent his twenty seventeen tax cuts, specifically energy and border policy, which they're trying in the House to roll all into one bill. We
got the budget outline yesterday's right. It seems things are changing though as they mark things up, with the Budget chair Jody Errington now saying if they can't reach two trillion dollars in tax cuts the maximum allowed or two tucks in spending cuts. Rather, the maximum allowed in tax cuts would be four trillion dollars. The problem is just renewing the twenty seventeen tax cuts is expected to cost a bit more than that, So the math.
Is difficult here. And that's where Congressman Ralph Norman comes in. I'm glad that we have the opportunity to bring in a member of the aforementioned House Budget Committee representing South Carolina's fifth district with his own point of view here. And we're told, Congressman, welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio, that you're one of two potential no's with the numbers
that we're hearing. So let's we'll update that. Let's say it's at least two trillion in spending cuts, four and a half trillion dollar cap on tax cuts, a four trillion dollar extension of the debt limit. Would you vote yes on a bill like that?
Well, first of all, what we started out with was we could not continue to payath of unsustained spending.
Spending is a problem for inflation. Inflation. It's not income, it's it's spending.
Uh, the base budget. I voted to get out of committee. We had the timeline to meet, which is today for the markup, which we're doing. To be honest, I'm confident that we're going to have the amendments in place that will get the job done. And as you mentioned, we've got one point five trillion in baseline number with an aspiration of two the tax cuts four tree in four and a half, and then with three hundred three hundred billion four defense and homeland security, and uh, I think
we're going to get there. I think it's important for us to get our own version out. I know the Senate is working on one, but you know, all the House is responsible for the purse strains.
So I'm confident we'll get it out.
It's going to be a long day, but we expected that a lot of amendments, a lot of Democrat amendments, and uh, we'll have our own that I'm confident.
I add to the value.
Well, obviously, Congressman, getting it out of committee is one hurdle, but getting a package that can actually pass on the House floor with what is assumed to be zero Democratic votes is another thing. Entirely with this structure, are you confident the requisite votes would be there.
Here's what I'm confident of.
When it goes to the floor, there'll be a total explanation of every cut every committee comes up with and where it's coming from.
Is it going to be easy, No, it's not going to be.
But every dollar in Congress that's spent has got an advocate for it, and they're coming out in full force as I speak to you right now, Kayley. But yeah, I'm confident, and I'm confident because of this it will make sense. Everybody agrees that we can't continue the path. But I tell you what's got to happen. President Trump, who's got a sixty five sixty nine percent approval rating,
is going to have to get involved. Anybody that at the end of the day when he goes to the floor that doesn't agree with it or has issues, I think he will directly get involved, as he has, and he's done a brilliant job of doing that and explaining why the tax cuts. We've got to get this out because it's going to be a tax it's going to be a tax increase for over twenty eight to thirty.
Five percent for all Americans.
We can't let that happen. The prosperity that happened under his reign. We've got to continue and I think at the end of the day, I think we'll pass it.
Well, we know, Congressman, that President Trump is not above picking up the phone when it's time to weigh in on things. As I'm sure we all recall from the most recent speakers vote. Are you hungry for the president to weigh in here?
Absolutely, he's got away in because we can't afford to stumble on this. I mean, you know, it's interesting every politician, every four well five hundred and thirty five members of Congress campaign on conservatism, cutting the depths that we know it's not sustainable. Now when it actually comes down to it, that's where he comes into the picture and does it put Does it make sense to put work requirements on Medicaid?
I think it does.
Does it make sense to go down the line and let block grants, let states handle some of that funding. It's not a cut in medicaid as one example. But yeah, I mean, I think he's going to have to get involved and he will to pass what he considers this is a lynch pin for his whole four years in office. Is great to start it now look what he's done on the Doe's Commission, and so I'm anxious and I think he's going to pass and I'm optimistic.
Well, and with this structure, you already mentioned potential cuts to medicate here. But essentially what this structure will mean is that if the cost of Trump's tax cuts go higher, if we're adding on things like no tax on tips or overtime or social Security, lifting the salt cap, perhaps more spending cuts have to come into place. So what else is going to have to go on the chopping block if Donald Trump the president is to get everything he wants here, Well, first of.
All, it's not cut to medicaid. We're not doing that.
Is it a reallocation yes. Is it getting people off the rows of a healthy Yes. And that's what he can sell to anybody who is feeling a lot of pressure, which I understand.
But and you've got to consider the growth rate.
I think we've got a two point five percent growth in the economy of GDP.
I think that'll happen. That'll make some of the difference up. But it's not going to be easy, but it never is.
But I think we'll get there. And the alternative of letting the tax cuts his fire and give Americans that kind of a tax increase is not a pretty picture.
And we're not going to let that happen.
I'm wondering where you are on the timeline here, Congressman, and just how much time there is to work all of this out. We've got a funding deadline twenty nine days out. Would you support a continuing resolution to keep the lights on if negotiations we're moving in the right direction.
Yeah, I don't like crs.
I think it needs to be a kind of a modified CR as example, the ones that get hit the most of the military. I think Pete Hexstath will weigh in on what he needs. I think Tom Holman will weigh in with what he needs. But yeah, I would vote for a CR, depending on what the final conditions are as part of it. But you've got to allow the continuation of what particularly the military is doing in every contract, every lease extension is affected by a CR
in a negative way. We will have to do some carve outs and they will have to tell us what they need. We finally got people in office that they know it. Pete Hextath knows the military, he knows where the money ought to go. The same thing with Tom Holman. He's got this deportation down, but the agency is at the end of the day, the appropriations are going to have to come up with the money. And that's where
Donald Trump comes in to make the case. And I think there's no one better they can do it, that can present the case than he can.
Do.
Democrats come in somewhere, Congressman on this when we're talking about just keeping the government funded beyond March specifically, they don't.
Come into the solution. I mean, we're not gonna have to deal with them, hopefully.
I mean.
Some of the things that we've heard they're going to ask for, like the elimination of Elon Musk, like the end to deportation. It's ludicrous. People are excited about what Elon Musk is doing, and if you have to deal with them, they're so it's just two different universes with them today. And I mean, look at the demonstrations they've done on against what Elon Musk is doing. He's not getting paid, he's an investigator. He's supplying the numbers that we should have had years ago.
So no, I don't think we'll have to deal with them.
And I don't think we'll need their vote at the end of the day, they're not going to vote with us. When you watch watch the here in the budget committee, I don't think any of them going to vote for this budget.
And we've got a good budget and I think we'll pass it.
Realizing you support the spirit of Elon Musk's mission here, Congressman, as a lawmaker in the House of Representatives, do you worry when we talk about xing out entire agencies without the approval of Congress?
Absolutely not let the money flow, which has never been discovered. People are asking, maybe why didn't Congress discover these abuses of where our money goes? The reason is we couldn't get to it. He's the only one that had the brain power and the bandwidth to get to where to follow the checks to where they actually ended up.
The money is one thing, though, but the actual existence of the agency just just if they blow them out. You don't think Congress should have a say in that.
I think when yeah, at the end of the day, we'll have to vote on it. But through his executive powers and through the Constitution, he can cut the funding off, which he's doing. And you know, if let's say an agency that has some good parts in it. President Trump will recognize those that need to be continued. But the money is where it all ends up showing whether an agency should continue.
It shouldn't go overseas.
It shouldn't go for Sesame Street books for the June to twenty million, It shouldn't go on to sixteen million to Vietnam for inclusion.
Things like that.
We the people are going to weigh in on, and they already have. But some agencies will need to be modified. Some agencies will need to be scaled down. Department of Education is one of them. Social Security is another one. When you find out from what I'm hearing, people are getting four and five checks. He's investigating all that and let the American people decide. It's not their money, it's the facts payer's money.
All right.
Congressman, thanks very much for joining us live today from Capitol Hill. That's Republican Congressman Norman of South Carolina, of course, member of the House Budget Committee. As that markup is still underway.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us Live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
It's great to have you with us on the Thursday edition here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite radio, and on YouTube, where you can find us right now by searching Bloomberg Business News Live. We're standing by to hear news at least we're told on reciprocal tariffs today from the White House. A little more than a half an hour from now, President Trump will be back in the Oval. This is like a daily thing, right. I mean, I
don't even need to tell you. They're going to bring the press pool in the Oval office and he's going to start talking when he feels like it. That'll be sometime in the next hour. There's an executive action that's supposed to be on the table that will involve reciprocal tariffs. The President talking about it earlier, promising the big one, right, he said, this is the big day. We'll see what
that involves. There's the tweet for you if you're with us, or the truth right if you're with us on YouTube. Three great weeks perhaps the best ever, but today is the big one. He writes reciprocal tariffs. We'll find out. We don't know. We've heard a lot of tariff threats. Of course, he's already threatened twenty five percent tariffs against Canada, and Mexico backed away from the line. There were some concessions.
As we discussed. You're involving troops on the border. He's promised additional tariffs to go into effects soon on steel and aluminum. And here's the news. Our trading partners are not waiting around to find out. Enter the Premiere of Saskatchewan. I told you he was coming to talk to us here in person. Scott Mowe is one of thirteen premiers down from our neighbor from the North to make the case for ongoing trade partnerships here in North America. It's
great to have you with us at the table. Thank you for making part of us, part of your day here in Washington.
Thank you for making time.
You're meeting with a lot of stakeholders. You had spoken before you left Canada about meeting with law Mamansker, senators, maybe governors, but also and maybe most importantly, cabinet officials, members of the administration was the White House accommodating.
Yeah, no, certainly, And again from Saskatchewan's perspective, these relationships with policymakers, whether they be in Congress, in the Senate
or part of the administration. We've made it a priority for the last decade and a half to be in DC a number of times throughout the year and to foster these relations because they're important to us, and I think they're important really to what our goal is is for Saskatchewan to be part of creating that continental energy, food and manufacturing security system.
I want the whole elevator pitch. I want to hear what you're telling people in these meetings. But first, what does the administration want from you? You put ten thousand troops on the border, You've made an agreement to crack down on fentanel illegal border crossings. What else would remove this threat from hanging over your head?
Well, I think when it comes to priorities that have been raised by the President, when it whether it be fentanyl or securing our border, whether it be our forty ninth parallel or mutually our North American ports, we need to always be looking to do better. And when it comes to fentanyl. That's not a drug at all. It's
a poison. It's killing people north end south of the forty ninth parallel, and we need to do our level best to eradicate it from our communities and eradicate it from the hands and pockets of friends and all too often family members. And so we're committing to do that in Saskatchewan and pushing our federal government and our the
provincial efforts. Were part of the ten thousand folks on the board of the security officials on the border, and so we're working together, not just because it's a priority the president, but it's a priority of all of us that live in North America.
I get that, and I also feel like it wouldn't be that hard of a job for you. What I understand was forty something pounds of fentanyl across the northern border last year versus twenty one thousand through our southern border. You can get your arms.
Around that can Yeah, well, all of those pounds are problem or a problem. And so what I would say is when you look at the you know, the fentanyl deaths in Saskatchewan communities or Canadian communities, it's very similar per capita to what we're seeing in the US, and so we need to work together to get that drug out of the hands of anyone that lives in North America.
Your biggest trading partner as a province is the United States. The most important thing you sell the US is crude oil. If these tariffs take effect, if we get into some kind of a trade work, can you replace that business? Can you sell that oil to someone else?
The crude oil is a little more difficult. We sell crude oil, potash, uranium, agri food products, and our goal is always to create that continental energy and food security. From our province's perspective, it will those products will start to float to other places around the world. But at the end of the day, not only is the United States of America our largest trading partner North and South.
There are most trusted and important ally as Canadians and as fellow North Americans, and so our goal isn't to sell those products somewhere else. Our goal is to continue with the relationship with the United States because quite honestly, that oil is coming to US refineries and it's creating jobs in places like Ohio, Iowa, Illinois, down into Louisiana
and Texas. So the trade relationship is strong. We understand there's some some discussion about you know what that's going to look like moving forward, and that's why we're here.
You can mention potash. Yeah, you put out a tweet that got our attention here with a nice shot of a big mac on it. You must have gotten Donald Trump's attention with this. From growing wheat, you say, for the bun to corn, for the cattle. It turns out the secret ingreding into the big mac is potash. A tariff on Canadian potash is attacks on American's food. Is that part of your argument when you sit down in these meetings?
What's a fact?
You know how much he likes a big mac. You're not going to raise the price on this, are you.
I think there's about nine Well we're not going to. But there's about nine million tons of potash that come down into the corn belt in the US. Ninety that comes from Saskatchewan. Thirty five percent of the world's potash comes from Saskatchewan. There really is no other market for that product unless you want to start purchasing from Russia.
So you know, here in lies the importance of the trading relationship we have we understand, you know that the President has is making some efforts to reset trade relationships, and it starts with Canada and Mexico, but likely going to extend beyond.
So what do you get in the other direction when you sit down on these meetings? Do you feel good? Were you were you guys high fiving leaving the White House?
I don't know for high fiving, but certainly encouraged. And again, this is building on relationships that are not new for us from Saskatchewan. We've been down here for fifteen years.
It's roll of deecks. You're calling the same people you were meeting a couple of months ago.
And more and more, and we've you know, we've we've engaged throughout that decade and a half and so you know, we feel positive on the relationship. Yeah, there's there's going to be some you know, some words and some rhetoric back and forth in the meantime, but at the end of the day, we have a goal on this to get back to that strong trading relationship and we feel we can get there.
The words and the rhetoric of been something the fifty first states. Governor Trudeau, where where are we in our relationship? Culturally, teach me something about this. You hear the jokes right the apartment upstairs above the part America's hat. What do Americans need to understand about our most important trade partner.
Well, I'd say a couple of things. First is Canada isn't going to be the fifty first state. That's some of the rhetoric that we hear back and forth. That being said, Canada and the US are what I think has had and will continue to have post this discussion, the strongest economic trading relationship in the world, one that
keeps our continents secure. From time to time, you know, the President is raising some topics, whether it be fentanyl, whether it be our military commitments, where Canadians have to have a look in the mirror and make sure that we're doing what we say we were going to do and make sure that we certainly are contributing as a full partner into that relationship. And so we're doing that, as you see, with ten thousand troops on the border, We're going to secure that border. We're going to make
every effort to eradicate fentanyl out of our province. So the discussion will go on, but I think our goals are the same.
It's not only a question about what happens at the end of this thirty A review however, that is going to be rolled out right, but also a full renegotiation, it seems of the us mc A. Are these negotiations, these talks happening in tandem.
I wouldn't say they're happening in tandem. You know, we have to you know, make decisions and have discussions as as they come. Today there's no Secretary of Commerce for Canada taxs and negotiate with US, so we have some confirmations that have to happen. That being said, we've been able to engage, you know, with folks that I've known
for years. You know, Secretary Burgham, for example, former governor of North Dakota, our neighbor to the south, and have worked closely with then governor now Secretary Burgham as well as Secretary right the Secretary of Energy, important contact for US. And you know, those are contacts that you know, we've we've had for years and continue to have and and
we'll work closely with them. They represent obviously the administration's interest will represent Saskatchewan and Canada's interests, and we'll find our place to that to strong trading relationship.
Again, does this negotiation of this immediate term twenty five percent tarot sun Canada inform whatever the final product is for USMC.
Gang, Well, I think it informs you know where where our respective positions are. And you know, let me say this and bring us back to the Hamburger tweet or the big back tweet if you will. You know, tariffs of any kind are not helpful for that strong, effective, efficient North American trading economy. They aren't helpful for us in providing that continental energy food security that we aspire to.
Whether there tariffs that are put on by President Trump and his administration, whether they're counter tariffs that might be considered by Canada or even by Mexico for from that perspective, they're not. They're not positive. They're not a positive place for us to be heading. However, they may be used in a short term to enhance a bargaining position or
something of that nature. Where we need to be at the conclusion of the conversation is back to a very robust trading environment providing North Americans, not just Canadians or even just Americans, North Americans with the security of our continent. The economic security that we aspire to, food, energy security, all of those things you hear, you know, words like
energy dominance. Yes, sure, we can be part of that and have been and will be part of that into the future, whether it's electricity generation or oil and gas which we produce in our area.
I am struck by how similar a lot of the language that you use, a lot of the messaging that you're delivering right now, how similar it is to what we hear from the administration when it comes to energy dominance, when it comes to our military partnership. You're very much on the same page on a lot of these things, aren't you sure?
And you know, sometimes in our families and in our friends groups, we have some discussions on you know, where everybody's going to when and where everybody's going to do what probably having one of those discussions right now. In fairness, we'll find our way through it. The goals are the same, and I'm quite positive, in particular after the last few days in Washington, DC, that we will get there, and I just hope it's sooner rather than later.
What are you going to get pipelines for province to province oil and gas?
You know herein lies a very significant discussion for Canada moving forward, and we have always been a proponent that those need to be built. Yeah, and I think in fairness, by the last number of years us not being able to, you know, build an East West pipeline in Canada, we have diminished our economic opportunities as Canadians and thereby diminished
our economic economic opportunities as well as North Americans. Everything that we do really is in the the guys or the under the eye of We're stronger together as nations. We live on the same content. Geographically, we're the same. Culturally we're very similar. There are some differences. But when Canada is doing well, US is doing well. When US is doing well, Canada by extension will do well as well.
Just might not agree on hockey no matter what happens.
Yeah, well, we're always looking for the Edmonton Oilers to come through. But a few Canadians down in New York playing with the Rangers, young Braden Schneider. He's great and I can talk about hockey all day, but I talk a.
Lot about French Canadian names. And Joe Matsiu, by the way, if he ever needs a find me in the phone book. Let us know how this goes in a couple of weeks. Could you talk to us when you find out what happens with this review.
I'll come right back here. We're down here in a couple of weeks. Again, myself will be back in this market a couple weeks. I think there's a few premiers here next week as well.
You're one of thirteen in Washington now.
Is thirteen this week? Two or three coming back next week and I'll be back the week after.
All right, we'll be watching your Twitter feed as well. We need to get some big max for the control room producer, James, I'm sure you can work that out for us. Forty piece nugget. We'll share it wide. Thank you so much, premiere. It's great to meet you and appreciate your messaging today here in Washington, d C. Just
a taste of the conversation that we're talking about. Little context you're not going to hear anywhere else as we talk reciprocal tariffts, the threat of additional tariffs coming from President Trump. That'll be about a half an hour from now. As a matter of fact, we'll bring you into the Oval Office when we learn more. I'm Joe Matthew and Washington will assemble our panel next on the fastest show in politics, This is Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Otto with the Blue Burk Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
We wait to hear from President Trump on reciprocal teriffs. This could be market moving and we will find out at some point after one pm exactly what he has in mind, having promised the big one today reciprocal tariffs
against our trading partners. Just as the Prime Minister of India arrives for a state visit, someone Donald Trump has previously called the King of tariffs, and there is some expectation, some reporting around the idea of maybe mister Mody shows up with a big breaking news gift of lower tariffs against the US. We'll see where this goes here. They're going to, by the way, be doing a bilateral news
conference later on in the day. Are we in a world here where we get three news conferences with Donald Trump? It might actually happen, not all live. I will say they're going to have the press pool join the President in the Oval office next hour, so we'll have some playback on that, but we'll, you know, because we're Bloomberg
have live headlines for you. This is something right this news cycle that we're in here, it's really difficult sometimes to know what to pay attention to, and that is why we have this program for you every day, a beacon in the fog of Washington, where the flashlight in the dark of your doom scroll with real news coming from Capitol Hill. Today, RFK Junior is going to be the nation's new Health Secretary. Once he's sworn in, he's
got the votes. It all happened earlier today, fifty two to forty eight Health and Human Services Secretary, the resistance represented by Mitch McConnell and every Democrat. When did you think you'd ever hear that the lone Republican joining Democrats and opposing the nominee. And that should not be a surprise if you have been following along here. It's where we start our conversation today with our political panel. Rick Davis is with us. Of course, Bloomberg Politics can tribute
to Republican strategist and partner at Stone Court Capital. Janey Wortel is back as well, democratic strategist partner at Art Initiatives. Really great to see both of you. Rick, you saw this coming and you told us a long time ago about this idea of blue Maga having a particular urgency within Donald Trump's sphere. Getting former Democrats like Tulsea Gabbard and now RFK Junior means what for this administration.
Well, it was a huge lift to his campaign strategy of trying to communicate with disaffected Democrats to come over. And I think there's plenty of electoral evidence that that worked. And part of those components, and not an insignificant amount, was recruiting RFK and Tulca Gabbard over to disaffected Democrats who were able to echo, you know, sort of the Trump sentiment that you know, Democrats have been left behind.
And the evidence is overwhelming former Democrats from rural counties, especially white men, coming over and voting for Donald Trump, and not least of which also include sort of urban and suburban African American and Hispanic men under the age of forty. So, I mean, whatever the plan was, it worked, and that has become sort of the rallying cry around Blue Maga and mostly represented within MAGA by RFK and
Tulca Gabber. So this was a big win for Donald Trump because I would say if there was a betting pool around cabinet members this last month, and of course that would never happen in Washington, I would say RFK would be considered probably the single most vulnerable, second only to Tulsa Gaber, both of whom are up. You know, one got confirmed and the other on the glidepath to go.
That's something and true enough. Jenney, what do you make of that idea of Blue Maga playing a special role in this administration? And how worried are you as a Democrat we heard this would be the end of vaccines and healthcare as we know it.
Well, I think that you know, we always knew that these votes were going to be along party lines, right, So these confirmations don't come as a huge surprise. When we look at the previous Cabinet secretary confirmations, the votes in the Senate fell along party lines, And so I think what you see here is kind of this reality planning out that many suspected. Right, And when we talk
about Tilsey Gabbard. When we talk about RFK Junior, we're talking about folks who have dangerous ideas, dangerous policies that they've been very forthcoming and forthright about, especially as they've been interviewed in the media in the weeks leading up to these confirmation hearings. And so this is playing out
much as many Democrats expected, much as many feared. But certainly some of these policies that they're proposing, some of these ideologies that they've been really forthcoming about and that Republicans have rubber stamped, are going to have a really harmful effects on the future of his country.
We just added one to the schedule, Rick, This happens every day two pm. Now. We've got the executive Orders coming up at one pm Eastern, that's about fifteen minutes away. OURFK Junior, who we're talking about right now, is going to join the President in the Oval Office for a swearing in ceremony at two pm Eastern time. These have turned into kind of impromptu news conferences. They put the podium right there next to the resolute desk. Rick, what do you think we hear from Donald Trump as OURFK
Junior is sworn in? He in particular asked OURFK Junior, for instance, to focus on food and not go after pharmaceuticals. Will Washington be able to keep its GLP ones?
Yeah, you know, I think that Donald Trump has used these forums really to go off message. And what I mean by that is he's got other things he.
Wants to talk about.
It's it's not like, uh, these things are finally scripted, and so yeah, I suspect what he's going to talk about is, you know, all the fraud and abuse that that he's been talking about with Elon Musk and the Doge crew. Uh, and that we've got to cut to the bone at HHS and and and that you know, that'll be one of the jobs, because that seems to be a common thread now that's running through all his
press conferences. But it wouldn't surprise me that he goes into Middle East peace, talks a little bit about hostages getting released on time. I mean, like it, I think you can expect the unexpected. But just think about this day Mody, which would normally be a major press day around a meeting like this, but on top of that, he's announcing these trade sanctions, and then on top of that, he's going to have, you know, one of his key cabinet members swearing and all in the Oval Office.
Basically, Juday, what do you think about this? I mean, we're beyond flooding the zone. This is like a Saturday Night Live see every single hour. I'm looking at the schedule. He's got four news conferences scheduled for today, and it's on the day of a state visit. We've got the Prime Minister of India rolling into the White House. Later on, there's going to be a bilateral news conference, are going to meet in the Oval Office, They've got a dinner,
and he continues to add events. Is this pace having the desired effect?
I mean, it's a bit of an avalanche, really, right. It's kind of non stop, it's unrelenting. I mean, the press, I'm sure are exhausted. I'm sure the American people are exhausted watching this play out. But look, I think this has always been the Trump administration's plan, really just to flood the zone, to kind of overwhelm folks with news
alerts and confirmations and state dinners. Oh my, right, And so I think that a lot of this is really to ram and kind of force the agenda, but also to give folks like so many inflection points around what
this administration doing. It's really hard for critics, pundits and folks to really keep up and have singular lines of criticism or pushback because there's just so much happening at once, so kind of exhausting the immediate and exhausting the American people is kind of the approach that this administration is.
Really taken exhausting. It is. Rick, you're a communications expert, You've spent a career helping elected officials hone their messages and deliver them effectively. What do you make of this?
Well, you know, I don't know if you can use the term over exposure because that may be an underestimation. But he's getting plenty of airtime. Frankly, he's much busier than he was during the campaign to try and become president of the United States, And so the question is how sustainable is this. Clearly he's taken the initiative and it's very hard for his opponents, to either Democrats or Republicans who oppose his agenda, to catch up to where
he is. And he's got an entire administration machine working relatively flawlessly. Supporting that. So I think you're going to see this for quite some time, and we'll see whether or not the public tires of it, you know, or whether they feel the pain of some of these cuts that are coming down to Pikes. But right now, I would say it's very hard to keep up with him, and as evidenced by also other world leaders who have yet to be able to really react to some of
his moves on a global stage. And so I would say flooding the zone may be the nicest way to talk about this avalanche. I thought was a very good term.
All right, we're sticking with that, Jenny. And here's the thing, Janet, there's actually real stuff happening today. I already mentioned RFK Junior. I guess he'll get his own news conference. But the purge begins today Elon Musk and the doge initiating sweeping layoffs of federal employees because not enough of them took
the buyout. Is the White House stepping on its own message because that would play well with the base, or intentionally keeping the weave and the swirl going here, So we don't pay attention to stuff like this.
Well, I think I mean this story of doge and kind of this purge has been something that's been kind of foreshadowed and forecasted for quite some time now, right, this idea that folks needed to take this buy out, there's been a lot of chatter about that, so it's been a bit of a protracted narrative conversation that we've
been having around this. But I do think that there is to the point, there is an effort to have all of these other things happening that the media is needed to cover that there needs to be attention drawn to so that people aren't focused on this. But the reality of it is this is affecting thousands and thousands of folks. So this is not going to be something that's going to fade quietly behind other headlines. This is something that is going to resurge as these as these
layoffs are happening. And think that there's a longer conversation that we're going to have given the tremendous impact that it's going to have to the federal workforce.
What do you make of that? Rick, is the point to keep us from focusing on any given story? I mean, what exactly is the strategy they've got the news media? You know, running breathlessly, and I get that part of it, but if you're somebody who's sitting at home trying to follow along here, it's pretty difficult to understand what's important and what's worth paying attention to. Yeah.
Look, I think that is part of the strategy, is just overwhelming force and keep everybody sort of scrambled, and when it's time to have somebody focus, it's the President himself who comes out and says, this is what I want you to think about today. So you'll notice, I mean right, nothing on his schedule that we're aware of that would indicate a discussion on doge leg. They had, you know, with Elon Musk in the Oval office the other day. So he dictates the pace and he dictates
the messaging. I'll notice none of these other cabinet members are doing much publicly. I mean they're sort of hunkered down, you know, getting confirmed and focusing on what they're doing. The only one really making any news this week is Pete Hegsett, the Secretary of Defense, who's out sort of fronting on some of the discussions related to a peace negotiation between Russia and Ukraine, which.
By the way, you would have thought would have been the news.
Of the week talking to both leaders yesterday, and now it's overshadowed by the other six or seven things. So look, I mean, I think that the messages were doing a lot. They know they have a short period of time to get a lot done before you know, the honeymoon is over. And I think that's that's all been part of the construct of his first one hundred days.
Producer James and I started the day just by counting the top stories. Believe it was five five top stories that we're covering in one program here, all of which could have been their own program in any normal world. As I look back here, yeah, four we have four news conferences in one day. Jina, I've only got a minute or so left here. But nobody's going to take the ozempic away from Capitol Hill, right, you take ozempic
away from lawmakers, and this whole deal is off. Pharmaceutical stocks are all rising on the day that RFK Junior is sworn in. What do you think, Well, I.
Think the reality is listened. The pharmaceutical industry is a very powerful run, right, It's a business in and of itself, and so I think you've you've got folks who are leaned into what this is going to mean for business and the potential lack of regulation. I think people are going to lean into that and say, is this a place where we can make a little bit more money? And I think the answer is probably a guess.
Yeah. Well, we'll see if we hear from him a little bit later on. Of course, we'll bring those remarks to you when President Trump speaks, when r FK is sworn in, Jay and Jay's up, Phizer's up, Maderna's up. What do you know, Let's order some big Max. Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. 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 Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.