Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then broud Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
A lot of news pertaining to one subject in particular, and that is the looming ban of TikTok in the United States. It's of course supposed to go into effect on January nineteenth if they don't divest their US operations. This is actually happening because a bipartisan legislation that passed through both chambers of Congress and was signed into law
by President Biden last year. But of course a new president is coming in and we learned yesterday that the CEO of TikTok, Show Chew, met with Donald Trump, the President elect, at mar A Lago. This is after TikTok asked the Supreme Court to intervene to stop the ban at least for now, and after we heard Trump earlier in the day in a news conference at mar A Lago talking about his feelings about the platform.
We'll take a look at TikTok. You know, I have a warm spot in my heartfit TikTok because I won youth by thirty four points. And there are those that say that TikTok has something to do with a TikTok had an impact, and so we'll take you to look at it now.
Emerson College is out with some new polling around TikTok and that maybe does support the idea of youth wanting it to stick. Around half of voters under thirty, according to Emerson's data, oppose this ban. So joining me now for more is Spencer Kimball. He is the director of the Emerson College Polling Center. Thanks for being here on Balance of Power, Spencer, I would imagine that there is a pretty large student population at Emerson that is on TikTok.
So what do we need to.
Know about that the correlation between support of this looming ban and age.
Here, and I think, Kaylee, that's the most important is that there is a generational divide that we're seeing on this issue in other issues, but particularly when it comes to TikTok. That eighteen to twenty nine, and even though they're not in our survey, those under eighteen are also using TikTok, and they would prefer to keep it. What we also find is that the minority population, particularly black voters two to one, want to keep TikTok about fifty
four percent. So it's interesting to see the political wins in the dynamics in play here on this issue.
Yeah.
Well, and this isn't the only issue centered around kind of technology adoption and feeling around technology that does have these kind of distinctions, not just in terms of age, but also the other demographics you were pointing to, like minorities. You find kind of similar patterns when it comes to crypto for example.
Yeah, exactly in this survey, as we were looking at the data, I was thinking of my students and I'm like, wow, the student population here, it's a lot different than the rest of us are in our thirties or forties or fifties, and then us in our sixties and seventies. We really have different attitudes about cryptocurrency. We have different attitudes about TikTok. So these eighteen to twenty nine year olds, they're finding
themselves as in a minority. So even on cryptocurrency, that's something that's really popular with about eighteen to forty nine year olds eighteen to thirty nine is the sweet spot. But up to those forty nine year olds, they're still involved in it, but it's the minorities. They're two to one more likely to be involved in cryptocurrency than the white voter. And so we see here an opportunity in the economy for these younger voters that they see crypto
as kind of their key to success. And that's also changing the political realignment of these voters where they were really strong Democratic voters, and now fifty seven percent of those invested in crypto have a favorable opinion of Donald Trump. So what you're seeing is that swing of the vote. And we saw that play out in the election as well.
Yeah, we certainly did, and not just the presidential one, but the ballot as well when we look at some of the congressional and Senate races in which there was a lot of crypto money at play. You alluded to those spencer this notion that for at least some group of the population, this is an economic issue, but there are also wider economic issues that would affect American consumers pretty much across the board at play now in this second Trump administration, including that of tariffs, I know you
did some pulling on that as well. Donald Trump had made no secret of his feelings around this and his support of more protectionist ideas on the campaign trail, and he won. But does the data suggest that really voters are feeling that protectionist, that supportive of tariffs.
Yeah, the voters are leaning on the side that the tariffs are going to hurt. About fifty percent think it's going to hurt, a little under forty percent think it's going to be helpful. It's driven mostly on this by political ideology. So Republicans think that the tariffs are going
to be helpful about fifty five percent. Democrats seventy one percent say no, they're going to hurt the economy, and the Independents align with the Democrats on this issue, about fifty seven percent think it'll also hurt the economy, So that one's really being driven by political ideology, while we're seeing more of that age and generational divide on those other issues of crypto and TikTok.
Well, as we consider political ideology here and the president that is coming into the White House being many very different in terms of ideology than the president who is outgoing Joe Biden there's just what thirty four days left of Biden's presidency. Here, he's trying very hard to shape his legacy in part on the economy, but everything else as well. How are people feeling about him knowing that he's about to vacate the office.
They're kind of at the lowest point and they're feeling for Joe Biden. And our polling over the last four years, his approval ratings around thirty six percent, disapproval about fifty four percent, which are kind of the low and the high that we've seen in over this administration. So it's right now kind of of a down note. On top of it, you know that core constituency of younger voters, they're going to be upset with TikTok because he's kind
of holding the bag. As you mentioned, it's on the nineteenth that this goes into effect, but Trump comes in on the twentieth, so this could also impact his legacy with these younger voters who don't think you know, who want to keep TikTok and might blame the president if it gets taken away.
Is part of the reason Spencer, before we let you go, that his approval is so low right now because of his pardon of his son Hunter.
Yeah, the pardon was not popular either. Fifty two percent said they you shouldn't have done that. About thirty percent we're okay with it, So that's not a policy. Some of the pardons have kind of piled up on him in a more negative way. Also, I think, you know, it's the end of the term and what is going to be his lasting legacy and we're going to have to wait to see, but right now he's in a bit of turmoil in this administration. As he's leaving office.
He certainly is all right. Spencer Kimball of Emerson College bringing us the new data from Emerson's Polling Center, where he is the director. Thanks for being here.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then roud Oto 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.
And I want to go now live too. Capital Hill.
We're joining us from her office is Republican Congressman Nicole Mallia Takis of New York thanks for your patients. Congressman, welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. If we could just begin with this continuing resolution that we haven't got eyes on it yet. Should the seventy two hour rule be waived in this instance with the midnight Friday deadline.
Would you be supportive of that?
I mean, it depends how much time is going to be cut from that seventy two hours. I think there's a lot of members that, rightfully, so including myself, would actually like to have the time to read the text. Right this is you know, we said we were done with the days of passing legislation to find out what's in it, right and obviously, if these bills are hundreds if not you know, fifteen hundred pages, that takes time to know exactly what we're voting on. Because we do
need to respond to our constituents. We do need to be held accountable by our constituents, and we should be We can't do that if we're voting on legislation without knowing all the details. And so I think there's a lot of questions and a lot of frustration among the membership right now because we feel like these negotiations have been taking place, and we're sort of left in the dark. It has not been a member driven process. It's been
a process driven by leadership. And unfortunately, you know, we're kind of just waiting to see what happens. We shouldn't be able, We shouldn't have to find out what's going on by searching Twitter. That's the bottom line. We are the lawmakers. We all have aspirations here of what we'd like to achieve for our constitution wins with this final package.
I think it's frustrating to a lot of members that we're also seeing this negotiation with the Democrats when we're in the majority and we should be talking among ourselves and figuring.
This out.
Well.
And you will be in the majority still in the next Congress when the next deadline looms March fourteenth. We understand we're going to be doing this whole song and dance over again. And given the narrowness of the majority you will be part of. It is likely that Democratic votes are going to be needed to carry funding over the finish line. Congressman, so how would you like to see Speaker Johnson handle it differently than the situation is currently being handled.
But I think next year, hopefully we'll be in a much better situation given that we will have a Republican trifecta.
And I also think that with President Trump at the helm, with his leadership, that he will play a huge role in keeping us united and keeping us focused on the agenda, which is obviously starts with securing our border, the energy policies, the addressing some of the regulatory issues that have stymied investment and development and manufacturing in this country, as well as what is to me, as a Ways and Means member in the House most important in our tax legislation,
which is, if this expires, it detrimental to our economy, to American families, because that single handedly has helped create millions of jobs, lifted American wages, brought unemployment employment down to record lows, doubled the standard deduction, it lowered the corporate rate, the income tax rate, it eliminated the alternative minimum facts, and so all that's at stake next year, and so we have to focus and prioritize these things early on.
Well.
And your Chairman on the Ways and Means Committee, Jason Smith, has not been shy about saying he thinks if he want to get tax reform pack passed. It should be included in one big reconciliation package with the border and energy and other issues that are high on the incoming presidents agenda. Where do you stand on that? How hard will it be to get tax reform passed if it is a separate package that comes later.
I agree with the Chairman that we need to prioritize tax up front. There's just too much at stake. As I just laid out, if these provisions expire, some have already begun to sunset or have expired. And I get concerned that if we do energy and border security without the tax piece, that there will not be cooperation from some of the members to focus on the tax piece.
I think it needs to be done altogether. So you have members from border states getting something, you have folks that are from energy producing states getting something, and you have you know, the fiscal hawks and the ways it means, tax experts and tax writing committee members getting something as well. So we can help President Trump deliver some of these campaign promises with parameters right within reason, but deliver those
campaign promises. And so we've done a lot of work in our committee, laying the groundwork, doing our tax team work, round tables, hearings. We have an idea of our options that are on the table in terms of different parameters that would obviously adjust the costs and the impact, and so we need to work now build consensus with our colleagues throughout the House.
Well, what about the salt cap specifically, Bloomberg has reported Trump's economic team is looking at doubling it from ten thousand to twenty thousand.
Is that enough for you?
Well, I think I'm certainly happy that there's something on the table because we've been advocating for quite some time the New York members to get some sort of tax relief in terms of salt. Increasing the standard deduction, doubling it for I'm sorry, increasing the salt deduction, doubling it for married couples, I think is a great starting point. We can work on what figures would be the right one may seem a little low for particularly some of
the New York members. I'm willing to entertain that if we are also going to increase the standard deduction, as I have had legislation to do. And another important piece for me is the Social security, the tax on Social Security. I have too many seniors in my district that are struggling paycheck to paycheck on Social Security. They have not adjusted those thresholds protectable income in forty years, my entire lifetime. We need to help protect seniors so they can keep
more of their hard earned money. So maybe a bonus deduction for seniors. We can't adjust the thresholds. And so I think there's a lot of things on the table. There's a lot of moving parts, and obviously every time you move a piece of the puzzle, something happens, right, and so it's a matter of figuring what is doable, what is reasonable, what is doable, and what could satisfy a majority of members to get this thing passed.
I want to ask you, Congress, about something else I'm sure is capturing a lot of attention in your district and other districts in New York, New Jersey all throughout the Northeast, and that is drones that are high in number and pertholating around the sky. It's really unclear exactly what is going on and where these things are coming from. And I wonder what you have heard, as a lawmaker and a member of Congress from authorities about this.
Well, unfortunately, we haven't heard much and that is part of the frustration, and it seems that the federal agencies stories seem to change. First they were trying to convince us that these were just small manned aircrafts and that we were misidentifying them as drones. Then they try to convince us, well, yes, now they're commercial drones and recreational drones. And now they're even trying to tell us that these are stars in some cases that we're seeing and we're
misidentifying for drones. It is ridiculous that the American people, and particularly members of Congress, who have a responsibility not just protect our constituency but have a say in matters of national security, cannot get this information, cannot get a
classified briefing. We're going to be offered a briefing today by the White House and Department of Homeland Security at two thirty today, but it's not a classified briefing, and so I'm sure the information we're going to be receiving is the same stuff we've been seeing on Twitter, which is ludicrous, and so I'm very frustrated by this process. Personally,
I believe that these are government operated drones. I don't know whether they're doing some type of counter terrorism activity or exercises, or maybe testing some new equipment or our law enforcement or military. But the bottom line is they should be honest with the American people. If it's classified, they don't need to give us the details to the public.
They should give it to the members of Congress, but at least say what it is in terms of that it is military exercises that I think would be satisfactory to most people to not think that we're somehow being invaded by another country or another planet.
Of course, Limberg can't confirm whether that is the cases. We don't have that information either. Just quickly, though, Congresswomen in the interim while everyone's trying to figure out what's going on, do you believe police in New York other authorities should have the authority to shoot these things down? Or does that present its own kind of danger?
Well, I think in a densely populated area like New York, where we've seen these drones flying over military installations, residential communities, over buildings, over you know, critical infrastructure like the Arizonto Bridge, obviously shooting them down is a concern. But where they're coming over the water shoreline, as we've heard happening in New Jersey, then they should be they should be shot down. And if you know, there needs to be better communication
between these agencies. Like if it is, indeed, we find out that it is a federal agency that's operating these drones, wouldn't it be if our local law enforcement actually knew about it, if our local military installation knew about it. As far as I'm concerned in that my conversations with them, they know nothing. They have no idea wear these drones, who's operating these drones and for what purpose. So there definitely is a lack of communication between the federal agencies
and also with the different levels of government. Federal government doesn't seem to be keeping the state or the city informed, and that is I think very problematic.
All Right, Republican Congressman Nicole mally Takis of New York, thanks for joining us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Happy holidays.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, CarPlay and then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
We of course are wrapping up the one hundred and eighteenth Congress this week and looking ahead to the one hundred and nineteenth, which of course will bring with it Republican control of both the Senate and the House, leaving Democrats once again in the House minority. But that minority, as it begins to take shape, who will be having key roles in it is starting to look generationally a
little bit different. This is something we've talked about for weeks now, this notion that older members of the Democratic Caucus are kind of being pushed aside for younger members
of it. At least, this is a pattern we had been seeing when you look to Judiciary, for example, and Jerry Nadler having to bow out in favor of Jamie Raskin, and that led a question over who would be the ranking member on the Oversight Committee, And we saw this battle taking place between a very young member of Congress, Congressman Alexandria Acossio Cortes, who's thirty five, and Jerry Connolly,
who's seventy four. And it turns out in both the Steering Committee last night and in the general Caucus today, Democrats opted for Connolly over AOC.
We want to have more on.
What exactly this might be mean for this general shift generational shift we've been talking so much about, and turn to our political panel. Genie Schanzeno is with me, democratic analyst and senior Democracy Fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency in Congress, alongside John Seaton, Republican strategist and founder and CEO of Echo Canyon Consulting. Genie is the Democrat. I will come to you on this first. What does this say that Connolly triumphed over AOC.
I think it says that this is going to be a struggle for the Democrats to fully realize this generational shift. We saw some of it, as you just mentioned. Nadler was a perfect example to Raskin, but it didn't go so well for AOC, and I have to tell you, Kayley, I think it is a big mistake on the part of the Democrats. The most important committee for the Democrats in the House this year is going to be Oversight.
They have completely lost Washington d C in the last election, and we constantly hear talk about the fact that the Democrats weren't on message in the campaign, and there's truth to that, but the reality is it wasn't only that they weren't on message. They are not adept at using the new media that they need to use to reach these voters that they're losing. And nobody is better at that in the House than AOC. And of course we need her there to make these cases. She is so
adept at it. I'm sure you know you saw this, Kelly. After the election, she took to Instagram and asked people in our district why did you vote for me? And Donald Trump? And she got back fascinating responses about authenticity and posted all of those. This is the kind of conversation Democrats need, and you know, God loved Jerry. Now commonly it's not going to happen in that way, and so Democrats, I think, have made a mistake by going in that direction and heeding this notion of seniority.
So, John, is this good news for Republicans that it won't be AOC providing the direct counter to Jim Comer.
You know, I'm not so sure. I think it's an interesting question.
And she obviously does represent a much you know, younger version of the Democratic Party. She also represents a much more extreme version of the Democratic Party. And you only need to look to last month when she made some extremely inflammatory comments about Apak the American Israel relationship. She has definitely been on the left fringe of the party.
There's a reason that, reportedly, anyway, former Speaker Pelosi was making phone calls and working hard against her ascension because she would really put a lot of Democrats I think in very, very uncomfortable positions. So Democrats did go with the safer option. It remains to be seen whether that was the wisest choice.
I want to ask you as well about something happening in the Republican Conference, John, because separately, yesterday we learned Republican Congresswoman in Victoria's Sparts announced that she's going to opt out of serving on any committees next year and will no longer be taking place in Republican Conference meetings. She says, though she will be staying a registered Republican.
But given that we know Republicans will be working with an incredibly tight majority, potentially only affording to lose one vote in the early days of the one hundred and nineteenth Congress, is this going to be potentially a big problem, certainly an any threat to getting to two hundred and eighteen votes could be a concern.
I think Speaker Johnson has done.
A remarkably good job and keeping the caucus together as bestie can. It's a caucus with a lot of you know, of strong personalities, and so this will this will be one more challenge for him to make sure that he can count to two eighteen when he brings legislation to the floor. I was a little surprised when I saw that, and I'm interested to see what it looks like in terms of fundraising. A lot of fundraising can be determined by which committees you sit on. And we'll see if
she does remain a loyal Republican vote. Otherwise it will be that much more difficult to pass legislation, especially with so many vacancies due to appointment into the Trump cabinet.
Well, she said the reason that she was opting out of all of this was because she quote doesn't need to be involved in circuses. Genie, what do you make of this?
Yeah, I think it is a precursor of what is to come in the in the two hundred and nineteenth Congress, you know, or one hundred and nineteenth. Sorry, that would be a long way one hundred nineteenth, given how tight it is. And you know, just one member who feels put out on the Republican side, who feels frustrated for any reason to stand up and say they are going to step away in this way from committees. That's one thing. But imagine if they say they aren't going to vote
with the Republicans. What does that mean for Mike Johnson. It means for everything from funding the government to immigration to crypto. I mean, the list just goes on and on. He has to deal with Democrats and there's nothing that's going to frustrate Republicans more than that. And so this is the space that Mike Johnson finds himself in. I mean,
he is just walking a tightrope. And you know when I heard this, I said, Wow, if she can do this, and we haven't even got into the one hundred and nineteen, imagine what's in store for us just in a few weeks from now when they take government.
Yeah, we all have so much to look forward to in the early days, including, of course, what we understand will be pretty quick quick action that they're at least going to try to take on reconciliation. John We know that the Senate incoming majority leader John Thune is advocating for two budget reconciliation package is the first one dealing with border and energy, then dealing.
With a tax package later on.
Members of the House, including Nicole Maley Takis, who I just talked to, is on the Ways and Means Committee would rather see it all done at once.
Where do you come down on this?
If they have success in getting one package through, does that make it that much harder to get the second one through or pave an easier path?
Yeah.
So my only experience with this comes in two thousand and five after President Bush's reelection, and even he said that he probably should have done immigration before social Security. You want to do the easier thing first, is when you have the most political capital, as we have the most people who want to see those first hundred days be a success.
So I thought that was a fascinating interview.
I thought it was really really interesting to kind of hear what the internal machinations are within the conference. I would expect they might want to do taxes first, but yeah, it remains to be seen.
It.
It will be a very interesting time.
And again informed by what I saw after President Bush's reelection, I know that they need to be very careful and deliberate in what they do first, because it's not going to be easier.
It's not going to get any easier after those first hundred days.
Well sure, and when we consider some of the thorny issues like the salt cap Genie, which you know very well being a New York resident, I would imagine that that's going to be tricky because there are a lot of Republican members who have expressed the fact that they will not be interested in voting for a tax package that doesn't materially lift that cap or do away with it all together.
God bless him, Kaylee. That's what I say. You know, it has been an issue that is just you know, frustrated so many of us here in New York and elsewhere and this East coast. But you know that said, I think that the president incoming president is going to be frustrated unless in that first hundred days Congress moves with the speed in which he has been trying to move in this transition. I mean, he has talked, you know, down to the minute almost what he plans to do
day one. And you know, now we know or we think that if they do get a cr that's March fourteenth. That is a huge, huge challenge for the president in that first hundred days, because you're going to have a government funding fight on last year's funding. You're gonna have immigration, You're gonna have taxes, You're gonna have crypto. I mean, the list just goes on and on, and all of these you mentioned, you know, this issue that so many
of us care about here and soul. All of these issues with such a narrow margin in the House make it very easy for one or two members to make Johnson and Trump's life difficult. So I think it makes the most sense to get a win. I agree completely. It makes most sense to got a win where you can get it. And since there is a lot of energy now behind immigration, that looks like a good place
to start. That said, historically immigration reform has been a bear, so I can't believe I'm saying optimistically that they should try to move fast on that. I don't know if historically it's going to be able to be realized.
Well, Genie, you're always good at keeping the historical perspective, including what you've been reminding us throughout the questions we have around the confirmation of Trump's nominees that historically, if they get through the hearing, almost always they end up
getting confirmed by the Senate. But John, as we see some of the more controversial nominees on the Hill this week, including HHS Designate Secretary Designate RFK Junior, what is your degree of confidence that he Pete, Hegseth and Tulci Gabbard, the three we've really been watching, are all going to make it through.
As we said here now, I think all three are likely to be confirmed. I do think that their hearings will be important. I think that Democrats will have will be exercising their advice and consent responsibilities under the Constitution. But as of right now, despite some pretty tough press on all three of them, they still have the votes.
As we said here now, at least there's not four Republicans who have indicated that they're going to vote no. So while I do think it will be a there's still a long way to go and it will be an arduous process from here to there.
I expect all three to ultimately be confirmed.
And Genie, just quickly, we have a minute left here, But could any of these three not only get confirmed at all, but do so with Democratic votes getting them over the finish line.
We may see a few because of course Tulsi Gabbard RFK Junior were formerly Democrats and they do, particularly Tulsei Gabbert, have relationships with members of the Senate. That said, I think it's going to depend an awful lot on what happens with these FBI checks. And then, of course, as John mentioned, the hearings, they're going to be fascinating. With RK, We're going to get some of the really, really difficult questions. We're also going to get questions about bears in Central Park,
questions about worms on the brain. I mean, the list just goes on and on, So it's going to be nothing else.
Indeed, just like Balance of Power is Chenie Schanzano and John Seaton here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Thank you for joining us our political panel.
Today.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroud Oro with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa, playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
As we discuss what President Trump was saying yesterday in mar A Lago. Yes, in part his remarks did pertain to the conflict in Ukraine, but he touched a lot of other different subjects as well, including having to mount a defense for his Health and Human Services Secretary nominee RFK Junior, who, of course is making the rounds in the Senate this week trying to plead his own case to senators. But Donald Trump was making the case for
him as well. When I asked a question by a journalist about RFK yesterday, this was his response.
I think he's going to be much less radical than you would think. I think he's got a very open mind, or I wouldn't have put him there. He's going to be very much less radical.
But there are problems.
I mean, we don't do as well as a lot of other nations, and those nations use nothing.
So we want to get more on RFK Junior now as we consider the idea that he could lead the Health and Human Services Department. In turn to doctor Leslie Canter, she is chair of the Department of Urban Global Public Health at Rutgers University and is joining us now here on Bloomberg TV and radio. Doctor Canter, thank you for your time. When we consider RFK Junior and the many ideas around public health around vaccines he has put forward, what gives you greatest pause.
Well, let's start with the fact that we know that vaccines are safe and effective, and that over the past fifty years, more than one hundred and fifty million lives have been saved around the world because of vaccines. Our biggest problem right now is that there is too much misinformation about vaccines and that is making some parents unnecessarily frightened about vaccinating their children.
We have a tremendous amount.
Of data that shows that the vaccines that are recommended by the American Academy Pediatrics in this country are going to keep your kids from getting what could be very serious diseases.
Well, something else we heard from the President elect yesterday was that he does not like vaccine mandates, which obviously we think about a lot when it comes to the required vaccines for children to attend school. What would happen if those were to go away.
Well, we can already see in many states that we are getting below what we would consider community immunity. We used to call it herd immunity, but we're trying to call it community immunity, for example, which is extremely contagious, extremely deadly. You need ninety five percent of people in a community to be vaccinated to make sure that no spread can get going, and we already see in many states that we are a little bit below that ninety
five percent mark. We're at more like ninety percent nationwide. So school mandates are one way to have a place where we make sure that children are vaccinated and that other children are not put at risk because they're unvaccinated kids going to school with them well.
And one vaccine we've heard a lot about in particular is the polio vaccine. RFK Junior on the Hill yesterday seemed to suggest that he is supportive of it. Donald Trump says, we're not going to lose it. How important is it that that is true that people continue to be vaccinated against polio?
You know, I think for anybody who was alive and terrified when polio was around, my father is among those people, and he can't believe, and I don't think most of people that age can believe that we would ever for a second let up on the polio vaccine. One reason that you don't see any of the terrible outcomes of polio is because we are all vaccinated these days.
Well, of course, when we consider what could fall under RFK Junior's remit if he were to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, it's not just about vaccinations. There's obviously a number of other issues that pertain to public health, and Donald Trump has talked about some of the good ideas he sees RFK having in other arenas, including, for example, thoughts around food and nutrition.
And additives in our food.
Can you weigh in on some of these other ideas that RFK has put forward and whether any of them, in your mind, do have a merit in terms of thinking about better public health.
Sure?
Well, to be clear, I am not a net trihist, but I am familiar with some of the concerns about ultraprocessed foods. I think that an examination of our food supply trying to make people educated about what is important for nutrition. I mean, it is kind of stunning that's seventy percent of our food supply now is considered having at least some ingredients associated with ultraprocessed food. So I think that is something that I think many public health
and health professionals could get behind. But there's certainly a lot of concern about any misinformation spreading about things like vaccines or things like fluoride. I mean, if you look at any list of what the big public health accomplishments were between nineteen hundred and nineteen ninety nine, when life expectancy went up so much in this country, you're going to see vaccines at the top, and then you're also
going to see fluoride. And by the way, you also see family planning, which is something I've spent a lot of my career working on.
Well, and in our final two minutes here, I do want to talk to you about that because OURFK Junior has actually faced backlash in some conservative circles for his more reproductive.
Rights views that he has held in the past.
Just quickly here, what is the relationship between reproductive health access and public health more widely?
Well, we know that when women can make decisions about their methods of birth control, that's absolutely essential to health, and of course access to abortion is important for wanted pregnancies as well. The only way we can have maternal health in this country is to have access to the full range of reproductive health care.
And do you believe that the pivot we have seen from RFK Junior after he has become the nominee talking less about abortion rights might translate into actual more restrictions on reproductive health.
I hope not, but I know that we do have an administration where a lot of people have very concerning attitudes towards abortion and also towards contraception.
All right, Doctor Leslie Canter, chair of the Department of Urban Global Public Health at Rutgers University, Thanks for being here on Balance of Power and stay close. I'm sure we're going to have much more reason to discuss many of these issues as we see the actual confirmation hearings and more of the process getting underway.
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.