Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
I hope all the moms had a great Sunday, and welcome back to reality. I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington of the fastest show in Politics, live from Washington here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite and on YouTube. And if we just take a second here to stop and listen and look around, we realize we're in the eye of the hurricane. Lawmakers aren't back till tomorrow. President's making his
way back from rehob Beach. And yes, I know there's a trial underway in New York, and we're going to get to that a little bit later on this hour with June Grosso and our panel. But we have an enormous opportunity here, and we're taking this opportunity for you to bring you a series of important conversations with thought leaders that bring context. That's what we promise here at Bloomberg.
Right this is our chance today before we get into the fray of breaking news and the divisions that surround us, divisions, by the way, that are reinforced by an important series of polls today conducted by Siena College along with The
New York Times and the Philadelphia Inquirer. Will get to some of this later on, because you've certainly heard the story before, split down the middle as the story of America and whether Joe Biden or Donald Trump win the election, it'll probably be by a couple of percentage points and will likely be decided by only a handful of states.
And so we seek context in terms of how we got here and maybe find some solutions about how we get beyond this point with Seth Kaplan, who I've been looking forward to bringing you here on Bloomberg Radio and on YouTube. You can find us right now for this conversation. Go to YouTube and search Bloomberg Global News. You'll find our live stream. Seth is a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University, and he's author of this book, Fragile Neighborhoods. An expert
on fragile states. He brings it down to the zip code level, which apparently is where we find the truth in this conversation. Seth, it's great to see you. Welcome to Bloomberg.
Thank you, Joe, pleasure to be here.
You've done remarkable work here in our sort of off air conversations. At least you've mapped out a very interesting look at things. You're in demand right now as author of this book in both red and blue states, red and blue capitals and towns and neighborhoods. You're all about social contexts. So when we look at this Siena poll
or any of the others. Bloomberg will have its swing state pole out next week, and we see essentially two countries, two Americas, are the answers at the hyperlocal level.
I mean, I would say yes. I think we always need to remember how is the average American experiencing life in this country? And I think there's a huge gap between with somebody in Kentucky and someone in Washington, or someone in Ohio or someone in Michigan some of these key states. And I think people's opinions about what's happening
is we talk about inflation and other material concerns. But I would tell you that to the extent that there's anger, to the extent that there's frustration is because people don't feel the society and the economy is delivering for them at a hyper local level.
Now there are examples of where it is working, and you found in your research that it does not matter on levels of wealth or income. Necessarily, the zip codes that are working seem to have little to do with money.
I think if you look at the level of social connection, the abundance of local institutions, you can tell a lot about how people are experiencing life. When someone lives in a place and they don't know their neighbors, they don't have any local associations or local schools, or local churches, or local shops that they can have relationships with or they can join, I think you're experiencing life completely differently.
And so when I look at my research, you certainly see a problem of what I would call spade deal any place based inequality economically, but there's also this great place based inequality socially. We have economic poverty, and we have a lot of social poverty that we never talk about.
But that's the part that you are talking to us that's different. Yes, So what do we need to learn when you wake up and see the pole of the day. As I keep pointing out here and you see forty nine fifty one. Here we go again, and everybody hates each other in Washington. We're lacking social nourishment on what level.
And what we're again, let's think about zip codes, Let's think lower than that. Let's think about neighborhoods. What are people actually experiencing So I would be looking at I mean, you can map it out what places are doing well economically, which we all talk about, but I would also be
asking what places are doing well socially. And you can look at some simple numbers, and I'm pretty certain you're going to find that people's attitude towards institutions, trust of politicians, feelings towards Washington, attitude towards the political candidates will very much depend upon not only some economic indicators we'll talk about, but very much about how they're experiencing life in their neighborhood.
Let's define that level of social frustration. Is it because we're not going to church, We're not shopping in the same places, I'm not going out to the same restaurants on Saturday?
What is the practical We can look at it. Many likes levels it's churches, it's local businesses. Imagine you're in a place in which all the local businesses have closed and all you can do is go to a Walmart, and so you have no relationships with Walmart. You just have transactions. Imagine that there used to be a whole lots and lots of local institutions, you know, like the Veterans Association and Rotary Club, and now we have we
have nothing. We have large nonprofits doing the delivering services. So I used to be able to participate. We used to have lots of volunteering in this country. We have very little volunteering locally. We used to have a lot of local giving of your time and your resources.
That's way down side effect though, or what's causing that drop and involvement.
I mean, I think there's so many causes. It's the changes in our careers and our ambitions. People seek out national goals, people don't seek out local goals. It's changes and basically people going back a few generations, people would not have cars to you have. You have careers. You have the nationalization of politics, the nationalization of business to some extent, the nationalization of nonprofits. Even government is more centralized and local authorities have less to influence.
That's why your work is so important to us here because I keep hearing every day on this broadcast, and it's true that all politics are national, that we're running national campaigns, even for local office. In this case, right, it's either Maga or Biden or whatever the heck it is that you're going to put your label on that day. Did the shopping mall and the destruction of Main Street start all of this?
Well, I would say if you're asking about the frustration and the alienation and the anger, I would say yes. And that's your only driving a large share of the population. They don't believe our political class and our elites, and our major cities where a lot of decisions are made. They don't think that those people and places are delivering for what used to be Main Street. And I certainly think that plays an enormous role in what people are
experiencing and how they're voting. And if we're thinking about what we could be doing differently, we ought to be asking ourselves, how do we ensure every American lives in a flourishing neighborhood, a flourishing zip code, and the politician who steps up and says, this is my vision to ensure that our country works more horizontally and less vertically, to ensure that every place is gaining socially economically. The politician who can speak to that need is going to win a lot of votes.
Is't that something? It sounds like the social context follows the money in many cases. Though, right when we were done with shopping malls, we decided we'd all go to Amazon. We asked for these problems.
I mean, certainly there's a consumer demand, but I think we've made a lot of choices.
Was that just because it was easier though, or because we didn't want to be around other people?
Again? I believe that we all want to be around other people, do we? Well, what do you do in your free time? You go into your cave.
And I'm lucky enough to talk to people for a living. I'm probably not the best exact.
So you go home and don't talk to anybody. I bet you know, I bet you know your neighbors and things like that. So I would just say, I mean, as a person who I live in a neighborhood, that's joyful. How many people listening or watching today live in a neighbor so It's joyful because I know hundreds of.
Children laughing in the street.
You hear children. I go into the local restaurant and I smile and say lor to the owner. I say hello to a few people. They're not my friends, but I know them. I know their faces. It's enough that I have a relationship. If there's an emergency, my my daughter drops her son. Just happened several years ago, and he's got a bleeding chin. My wife picks up the son and without even telling me, runs down the street. What is she doing? I don't even know where she went.
Does he even call me? Comes back in thirty minutes, he's bandaged up. She went to the nearest nurse. Do you know where the nearest nurse is? To where you imagine a life in which you know your neighbors. You have lots of institutions. I'm on the board of an institution.
I'm very involved with the second institution organizations. The more we feel that we can control our context, the more we feel we can contribute, the more we feel that our surroundings are familiar and I have a stake in it, I will feel agency.
So you just said everything This is about feeling like you're.
A stakeholder, feeling like you're a stake So.
How do you maintain that in an upwardly mobile economy where people are moving for work, they get a better house, whatever. There are so many reasons to disrupt the neighborhood you're describing.
Well, that's true, but a good neighborhood in America will only have about one out of twenty households moving every year. A neighbor that's not doing well will have one in four about that. So if you think about think about we talk about that, and the average American lives within twenty miles from where they're born. So yes, we're upperly mobile. But I think most Americans and I would say it's if you have kids, it's more true. If you're old,
it's more true if you're young. Your neighborhood matters so much to your well being. And so how do we do that? We need policies that will empower neighborhoods. We need government that works more around not just we don't need more housing units, Yes of course we do, but we don't need government to work around housing, education, healthcare. What would happen if government work more on making sure every neighborhood was flourishing. What would happen if for zoning
wasn't single function but was multifunction. Therefore neighborhoods would have places to meet. What would happen if libraries were not just places to fill knowledge gaps? We don't have knowledge gaps today, we have relationship gaps. So what happened if neighbor libraries were broken up and distributed so they became more like neighborhood hubs? So you can think through every rule were thinking libraries?
Our lawmakers or policy makers are not though, because we layer on the internet on top of this world. You're very riving politics here. Yeah, you've got a lot of lonely people out there with a big megaphone. Now yeah, what does that do to distort the neighborhood?
I mean again, if you're in a strong neighborhood and you stakeholder, was great. So I'm a stakeholder my neighborhood. Yes, I'm more likely to not be on the megaphone angry. I'm more likely to engage with people. I might not only be talking to my neighbors. I might be doing something or someone might be doing something with me. I'm with them together, and you would feel that your role
to be influential is local. If people have nothing local they can engage with, of course they feel the only way I can matter is national campaigns, national politics, and that it's all abstract, it's all far away, it all I wouldn't say it's very productive. If you think local and you engage local, you actually can make a really big difference in real people and real places. So, yes, the Internet makes things harder, It's like headwinds. But this
trend goes back to nineteen sixties. It's been going on for decades. The internet is an accelerator, but it's not to start, and we need to rethink institution after institution and policy after policy, and consider what does it mean for relationships even schools. We think of schools how well do kids do on tests? But community schools great incubator of relationships. How often do we think of schools as a way to incubate and nurture the relationships between kids,
the relationships between parents. We don't even think about in our debates about what it is we're doing and how it affects people.
I've got a minute left. I want to end with a dose of hope. Here. Yes, well, I see young people going home, going back to small towns, maybe to open a business, maybe to do something different on main street, that the touchstone means more to them than people in my generation or maybe yes, our generation. Is that how this ends? Is that the solution?
I think, yes, there is a tendent or trend in that direction. We need to.
Encourage the back last year, there's.
Organized I mean the internet, the positive side of the Internet, I mean the negative we talk about. The positive is I can move to Cleveland, as a friend of mine did. Yes, I can move back to eastern Kentucky as I know people do. I can stay in Kansas or southern Minnesota, and I can still be connected, and I can still jump on a plane. I can still do a lot
virtual It's upside. We ought to be encouraging small business development, nonprofit development, encouraging young people to be leaders in their communities, and not all end up in five cities.
About that.
That would be very helpful for the country.
What an absolutely wonderful conversation, Seth Kaplan. Thank you for coming to see us the tonic that we need in a moment like this, and nowhere else will you hear a conversation like this today but on Bloomberg the book again Fragile Neighborhoods, seth Kaplan. Thank you for being with us. I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington. This is Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Ken just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then roun 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.
Here in Washington. A lot of the conversation in recent days show has in fact been focused on geopolitics, the
US relationship with allies as well as with adversaries. Of course, Israel policy front and center, but increasingly, especially in the context of the twenty twenty four campaign, trade and competition with both allies and adversaries has been very much in focus, as we have the Biden administration getting set tomorrow to announce new tariffs or the higher tariffs on things like Chinese evs and solar cells, and of course other countries in addition to the second largest economy in the world,
have to be paying attention to that too.
Well, that's absolutely right. Emmanuel Macron is right in the middle of it. Obviously, as the leader of France, he has unique insights on a number of the issues that you just mentioned in a conversation that we're going to bring you now here on Bloomberg. The tariffs did come up, Kaylee, just one of many topics that arose in this sweeping interview at the Choose France summit, where the President was invited and brought foreign executives from around the world and
has done so for the past seven years. Here sat down with Bloomberg's editor in chief John Mickelthwaite and they began their conversation on investments in France. Let's listen.
We delivered a lot of reform since the very beginning twenty seventeen. Tax cuts fed techs. On capital gains, we decreased from thirty three point three to twenty five percent corporate taxes. We made a lot of reforms on labor law and after COVID. During this the past two years, with inflation war in Ukraine, we passed reform and on pension scheme and unemployment mechanisms. I don't see a lot of countries around us having done so, so you.
Don't just want to be compared to Europe.
To you, no, no, no, My point is. My point is just to say we delivered, We do deliver, and we will deliver. And this is why we will launch this week a new bunch of reform on labor market. We will launch a new bunch of simplification and attractiveness package for finance, and we will prepare for We've already launched new simplification and we will prepare for September a new bunch of reform on label markets. So it's a permanent work. But I see where we come from and
where we want to go. France, who was lagging behind clearly in Europe because of too much bureaucracy, a strong system, a lot of strength, but lack of competitiveness. I think we bridge I don't think. I see that we clearly bridge the gap with the others and now we are in Europe. My concern is not just France, is Europe in comparison with US and China. And this is the point you mentioned. During the three past decades. If you take this three the last three decades, we created half
of the value per capita created by the US. Why lack of innovation, lack of investment. This is the main reason.
This is why now my top priority is to have a European policy saying we have to be much more innovative, we have to create a much more efficient capital MA gets, we have to invest much more from a common budget as Europeans and from the private sector, and we have to deliver in parallel our decabination, because I do believe that climates, digital growth and job creation are the stripillars of what we have to deliver.
And those we will come. Go through all of those.
But just on that point about the European economy, you had a full scale attack on it at the Sorbonne where you said it is sclerotic, it is being left behind. Do you think that from the EU's point of view, that sclerotic economy is a bigger long term challenge and say, I think this is.
One Aladimir, I think this is clearly linked to what's happening as well. But we have to completely reset our model. I think now France clearly is one of the leading economy. We are number one in attractiveness. We've been wandering the past five years, and if you take job creation, growth we are one or second in the Eurozone.
Do you think so?
You might own? So we are here now when I take Europe and especially the EU as a whole, But it's as well for UK. We have this issue in terms of business model. Why because we had low cost energy thanks to Russia, production thanks to santral and Eastern European countries with quite low costs, a market for exports China, and a geopolitical umbrella US. These pillars are being completely
revised totally, yes, and it's no more valid. So we have to reinvent one and how by creating much more value on our own by being much more innovative, by creating much more jobs and jobs with value, good jobs, I would say, on our continent. The key point is deliver much more innovation and productivity policy public and privates.
The second key reforms is to accelerate the cabination and especially our electricity policy, because through renewables and nuclear energy we can deliver low carbon, sovereign and low cost energy, which is much more than important gas and fossil fuels. Third, we need much more investment based on common budget. On my view, I mean based on public reports and figures.
We need one trillion more in terms of budget, in terms of spending, and in parallel, we have to make the capital market union a reality, which is not.
Yet col market union, because you have here an example, you have BNP.
Yeah.
Now probably Europe's definitely the US owns most successful bank, worth eighty billion dollars. But you know you are entertaining these people like JP Morgan and someone JP Morgan is worth five hundred and fifty billion. It's it's nine times as big Bank of America, four times as big. And the reason why is BMP Parry Bar cannot expand throughout the European Union and take over other banks.
This is very cool.
You would like to see BMP take over one of these, take over a German bank or an Italian one.
I want. I mean, we do need a consolidation, but we do need as well an actual domestic market as Europeans, which is not the case. We have to deal with twenty seven regulations. You know, an energy, finance and Delco are the key sig doors were single market doesn't exist. It was a choice at the very beginning. I do agree that we have now to open this box and to deliver a single market approach. With much more efficient.
So our our view is that now we want to elaborate Fanco German consensus on capital marketingion to have a single system of resolution, a single supervision and a much more integrated capital marketingion.
Would you be happy with, say Spain Santandre coming and buying society general, I.
Mean part of that, it's part of the market. But dealing as Europeans means that you need consolidation as Europeans, you're not.
So it could be cross emerges for directions.
But this one is for banking union, it's already on track. Now we have to do it for capital marketingion, which is broader and even more difficult. But we started to do so at a political level during the last Console, and I do believe that we can find aco German agreement. But why I want you to just anderstand the challenge for US. Seventy five percent of our financing as Europeans go through banks and in so we need much more consolidation. But we need a clear circulation of the savings all
around the place. This is the first objective to be much more efficient and to be sure that our savings will be invested in the right sectors and the right geographies. Second, every year three hundred billion savings goes to finance the
US economy because we are not attractive. So in parallel with this capital market union and the simplification having an equal single market, we clearly need the same level playing field as the US in terms of financing, which means when you take solvency in Basel, as long as it's not implemented by the US competitors, it should not be
implemented by the European competitors. Otherwise this is a killer for his taking because these regulations just prevent you, i mean, our banks from investing in equity, which is exactly what we need. And if you take the key driver of this difference between the US and Europe, the key driver is the fact that the US economy innovated and invested much more iniquity and innovation than the European economy. I think we did much better during in POSTCOVIC than what
we did during the financial crisis. But now this is a totally new world and we do need this new business model for the Europeans, more innovation, more investment, single market and capital market onion, and a relevant trade policy. Because I want to at this point known the US and now China are compliant with the WUTO. Today we are the only one in the room to respect just the regulation of the BLUTO, and we are to know if we are to open both of them protect their
players and the economies. Can we have to do the thing?
Can we come back to the issue of China later? But just another French company, Total Energy Totals CEO, has talked about moving its primary listing away from France towards New York. Would you be happy with that?
Not at all? And I would be very surprised. No, I I wait for any confirmation. I understood it was remorse so, but.
It's interesting that it's tied with the idea that he would face extra ESG measures here that he would not face in America.
So thinks that would affect his valuation.
Do you mean that we are more serious than the US in terms of green economy and transition?
Yes, But you.
Also in your speech at the Sorbonne you said, as I paraphrase, you said you cannot let decarbonization and exactly be enemies.
And this would be exactly be an example.
And this is my point. But the point is just we have to be sure when we regulate. We should not have regulate. Yes, and I think now we have to deliver. We need in your op much more investment. We have to cut that TBS have more flexibility. But in parallel everybody has to be seious. I saw a lot of funds, a lot of asset managers seeing we are with you on climate change. Where is a beef? Are you sure you are sufficiently compliant? Are you sure
you are clearly addressing to the same issues. This is my point, and this is why we need the resting cognization between the US and Europe. The restrict cognization is number one. The US regulation in terms of cremachant as should be more serious and realigned on the European once. Second, the Europeans have to invest much more and be more serious and realign themselves on the US.
I let just to ask you for another French company. I've asked you about total and BMP, LVMH. I look, and nobody has done better under the Macron presidency. He is now his wealth has increased by one hundred and seventy billion euros and he is now the richest man in the world, probably the first Frenchman to have that honor since Napoleon, and I think we can both say brother to mister na he's done it in a more
peaceful way. But it's interesting you look at the people who've right at the very top of the wealthiest people in France, mostly either as or in fashion or both, and I wonder whether that is the kind of France you talked about creating. You always talk about technology, but the people who've done really well are these old style businesses.
You're right, all of them. I don't think it's all style of business, but it's a business where we have competitive advantage luxury fashion and so because France is one of the great places, and Bernardo consolidated this market very early. It was one of the front owner in this industry. And I think it is very good and this is a chance for us because first we speak about a lot of jobs which are located in France, because a lot of these jobs are impossible to be relocated elsewhere.
When you speak about alcohol, when you speak about cognac, maniac, champagne, fashion and making a lot of this stuff, it's added value. It's low qualified and very qualified jobs. And in tall it consolidated the market elsewhere, and thanks to the fact that he is listed in France. We Consoli did a lot of value and value creation as well as is why thanks to total themh BNP and so on. But we are the second largest place of the world to least your company.
But there is a there is a tension, isn't there If I look at all those people, or certainly there's LVMH carrying all those ones. They have done spectactically well by exporting to places like China. They've done very well out of globalization and all the prescriptions you were just talking about in terms of Europe having higher top trade walls, being tougher with China. You know what will happen in a couple of months time. The Europeans will say we
want to put tariffs on electric vehicles. And what will happen is mister g despite what he may have told you last week, he will come back and he will he will put tariffs on Cognac and that will help those.
Very successful French business people.
Look, I think this is exactly the mistake we made twenty years ago on solar panels, and we killed them our industry. I'm very simple. I don't like to earn blackmail anybody. I just look at the picture. When you have taries of ten for your electric for Chinese electric vehicles entering into our market, and when you are taxed between fifteen and twenty four when you go to the Chinese market, you have an issue. And on all the
different sectors. What we want is just reciprocity. We want and in fact more than that marges and regarding the relation with China, level playing field. So what we ask for is exactly that we want to be sure that in terms of tariffs, subsidies, rules of production, we have a fair competition. And I mentioned it very openly to prison sheet. So it's not a geopolitical agenda. We don't want to blackmail and push back some of that production.
We want to be sure it is fair. It's fair to launch precisely inquiries and look in details of the situation and revise it. If we are weak, if we are threatened by the fact that you can have retortion measures, you just don't do what you have to do. We had this discussion and this is why they decided not to implement the first measures on Cognac, but to withdraw the first one. So I think it's it's a normal approach. But look at the situation today. The European Union is
the most open place of the world. But you cannot survive if at the same time you have subsidieson of a capacities in China and protection in some part of the market, and inflation reduction acts and buy American acts in the US. It doesn't fly once acond.
So Europe has gone to get tougher now.
But this is a necessary not because we are protecttionsanists, just because we want to protect our.
German The Germans do not agree with you about.
I think it depends whom in Germany and for which perspective. It's certainly true that some German companies, when they are incorporated in China, for instance, benefiting from subsidition, not just German, European American. Their interest is probably to preserve that and to sell themselves their over capacities in China to the
rest of the world and especially the European markets. But the German economies interest is totally aligned with the French economies interests, meaning creating jobs, creating value, but just protecting your business and your people when they are attacked by unfirm measures and it's normal. It's part of the business, so for me, it's just a no brainer.
That was an exclusive conversation between French President Emmanuel Macron and Bloomberg editor in chief John Micklethwaite in Paris, and so interesting their joe to hear them talking about not just China when it comes to trade and competition, but the US as well. We just heard the French president saying, while the EU is one of the most open places in the world, you can't survive if you have subsidies and overcapacity in China and things like the Inflation Reduction
Act in the US. He specifically mentioned electric vehicles.
Well, yeah, and we knew that the EV subsidies in the IRA were a problem for a lot of our allies in Europe. But it's interesting today we just had this fascinating conversation with the President of France that very same issue, and specifically competition with China by way of tariffs that we expect to be announced as early as
tomorrow by the Biden administration came up as well. Our colleague gan Marie Horde Dern caught up with Janet Yellen, who is in Fredericksburg Virginia to talk about something altogether different, the use and implementation of infrastructure money. But of course conversation continues to return to China. Here's what the Treasury Secretary said earlier on Bloomberg.
We do think that the laying field should be fair and trying to engages in unfair practices like massive subsidies of industries they've decided are critical, and those are cases where we will like to protect ourselves.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen earlier Today.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then roun Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Meantime, today, we have to have a lot more not on the policies that would be pursued by a second Trump administration, but the way that the presumptive Republican nominee is spending his time these days, including today in court
in New York. Although his criminal hush money trial is on a lunch break as we speak, we have had hours of testimony from Michael Cohen, his former fixer and attorney the prosecution's star witness in this case, who has been testifying to his relationship with Donald Trump and what exactly went down with the payments made to catch and kill stories in the national acchoir in the days leading up to the twenty sixteen election. High drama in the courtroom once again, So how does it factor into his
political ambitions? Joining us now is our signature political panel, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzay. No, they are Bloomberg Politics contributors and Genie. Obviously, you are up in New York where all of this has been going down for several weeks. So much has already been unveiled in this case so far, we already heard last week's salacious testimony from Stormy Daniels.
But is Michael Cohen the last piece of the puzzle that comes together to create potentially a massive headache for Trump and his campaign?
Yeah, this is what the prosecutors are hoping. This is, you know, the big sort of moment in this trial. He's at the easy part of this at this point, because he's going to have to face I think what's going to be a blistering cross examination and we'll have to see how he holds up under that. You know, Michael Cohen had a really, really difficult time in front of the Senate, so he had a bit of time
to practice with this. By all accounts, this should be a little more tame, but it's going to be tough, and this is the heart of the prosecution's case. And you know, Donald Trump's team is going to go hard on Michael Cohen. And what I think has been, you know, noteworthy today has been Donald Trump and Michael Cohen have both behaved themselves so far, if you will, And that's
what both of their sides wanted them to do. Not get emotional, not have any outbursts, and so far both of them have done that.
I'm reading this fascinating Trump trial blog live blog on the terminal Rick and it is entertaining. It was certainly salacious during Stormy Daniel's testimony, and maybe this will become the same He's describing hearing about the access Hollywood tape while on vacation and all the drama that followed. But does any of this actually change anyone's mind politically? I realize it's important to the legal case that's being made, but this is a political program and if you're a
Trump supporter, you know about Michael Cohen already. If you're a Joe Biden supporter, you probably feel the same way. Right, It's hard to tell.
How much voters are really paying much attention to the details of each of these I mean, we obsess over this a lot of coverage.
Yeah, the media's.
Extravaganza, But so far we haven't seen a lot of movement in any of the surveys that we've seen through the course of this. We've now had about three or four weeks of good sample and nothing really is moving it. And so I think it's really what you were saying, is like, how does this determine the outcome of the trial? Because there is some clear indication that voters who have concerns about Trump say that they're more likely not to vote for him if he's convicted of a crime, and
it is certainly in that case. So clearly this is the probably biggest headline star in the case, next to Stormy Daniels herself. And I think the distinction he's already made today was in his testimony that this wasn't about Milania. Trump didn't seem to care about Milania. Finding this stuff out it was all about making sure he could get elected and getting through the election. And I think that's
because really this is an election finance case. It's got really less to do with the salacious details of having an affair with a porn star or a playboy model, and a lot more to do with hiding the money and keeping it from the public view, which would have become public if they had adhere to strict campaign finance laws.
So I think we're now.
Starting to see the case turn to that issue more than just the sort of salacious details of the relationship.
So we know Rick that Michael Cohen's in the courtroom, as well as the prosecutors, Trump's attorneys, donald Trump himself. But there are a few other members of Congress who decided to show up and show support for the former president today. Congresswoman Nicole Malia Takis of New York was there.
Senator Tommy Tubberville coach as you may know him. Senator jd Vance, who has also been listed on the at least reported shortlist of potential vice presidential candidates who would be on the ticket alongside Donald Trump, but Donald Trump said this weekend at least one person is not on that shortlist, Rick Nikki Hayley, Does that surprise you, Yeah, it.
Didn't surprise me. I mean, they never really made up. She hasn't endorsed him after her withdrawing from the primary campaign, and it's a concert reminder to him that she hasn't done that, because there are still people as much as twenty percent who are voting for her in the primary against him, even as he has already accumulated enough delegates to become the nominee. So she is an irritant to
Donald Trump. Now if it goes beyond irritant to the point where he insults her enough that those voters who are Republican voters don't show up in the general election, could actually cost him. So I was actually surprised he was as negative toward her as he was in his response to questions about whether or not they he would consider her for VP. Doesn't seem to care about that twenty percent, But I sure what if I was running his campaign.
We spent some time talking earlier about the new Sienna pol New Sienna College bullets out today with New York Times Philadelphia Inquirer, and it's not good news for Joe Biden. Genie who's losing to Donald Trump in a majority of swing states covered here. When you consider the weekend that Donald Trump had on the Jersey Shore, big rally, huge turnout.
He referred to Alvin Bragg as fat Alvin. He talked about wan Moreshawan, the judge of course, presiding over the trials quote highly conflicted unquote, talked more about how the cases doing the bidding of President Biden. He'll probably, I'm assuming, face more concerns about violating the gag order in this case.
But when you look at that Siena pole, getting back to what Rick said a little earlier, is any of this moving the needle on the campaign trail because it looks like they're existing in two separate worlds.
It sure doesn't seem to be. I mean, the first takeaway from this pole is consistency. It is consistent with what we have seen over and over again almost since the fall. So you know, the trial at least so far hasn't seemed to move the needle. And I would say, you know, local officials on the Jersey Shore, I don't know if Snooky was there, who was there? They're saying eighty one hundred thousand people turned out, that was our
big numbers for Donald Trump. And I'm going to go out on a limb here and call this VP race for Doug Bergham. I think that was the story of the weekend, you know, speaking of Nicky Yeah, there we go, speaking of Nicky Haley, NICKI Haley. She's a big problem these quote unquote zombie voters who are increasing numbers. It was Indiana to two point twenty two percent. But Doug
Burgham helps to alleviate some of that challenge. So between his money, which is another problem Donald Trump has, the Nicky Haley voters and abortion, I'm I'm saying my bet is on Doug Bergham at this point. A really good showing for Doug Burgham out there on the campaign trail for for Donald Trump. And I know, I know JD. Vances is in the courtroom today, but he hasn't won me over yet on his.
Not that it mess.
Okay, So Genie makes her call.
Yeah, we're marking this down. What do we have your thirteenth of May? Genie Burgham got.
It, yep, noted, putting it on our little checkerboard here, bingo card maybe campaign We're all going to be playing this game probably up until the day before the Republican Convention starts in July. But Genie, just on this New York Times Siena pol when you look at the demographic figures as well, perhaps it spells trouble for the Biden campaign.
They're essentially tied with Trump among eighteen to twenty nine year olds and Hispanic voters, even though Biden got more than sixty percent of the vote of both of those groups in twenty twenty and mister Trump wins support of more than twenty percent of Black voters, which is the highest level of support for any Republican presidential candidate since the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of nineteen sixty four. Genie, when you look at figures like that, what's most concerning?
Uh, that is the most concerning thing about this poll. Exactly what you just said, Kaylee. You know, the idea that double Trump could if the election was held today, double the number of African Americans who support him is just stunning. Its historic. It suggests we are in a period of realignment. And boy does the Biden team know this. If you look at his schedule for this week the NAACP, He's going to Morehouse to do the commencement he's talking
at the African American Museum. I mean, they are going to try desperately to shore up this Black vote, which he really does need. And he's got some work to do on that. Because Donald Trump is doing what no other Republican has been able to do in decades, which is he is attractive to African American, particularly young voters. Joe Biden's best hope is that they don't come out in as much numbers as you know some of the elderly people who support Joe Biden.
Well, I'm fascinated by that answer. Rick, A period of realignment. If that's the case, how a Republican seize on it.
Well, I mean there already has been quite a bit of realignment with Donald Trump. What we saw in twenty sixteen was his ability to get blue collar, white rural males, especially who had been voting Democratic for most of their lives, to switch over and start voting Republican and became really the basis of the MAGA movement. The question now is
is there further movement toward that realignment. It's certainly not your grandfather's Republican Party, But the reality is I think they still fall along the lines of education and income and geography. If you are a black Mail without a college education, You're going to be more likely to vote for Trump, regardless of your skin color. Same with Hispanics. And what we're seeing is, you know, where you live matters. If you live in an urban area or suburb, less
likely to vote for Donald Trump. So you know, these are the realignments that are happening. Whether or not it continues to enforce this election cycle too early to tell. I would say the thing that upsets the Apple card is turnout. In twenty twenty, we saw the largest turnout in one hundred years. Seventy percent of the voters said, Hey, I'm interested in this outcome and I care this time. Every single survey we're seeing says, you know what, I
don't care about the rematch. It is not interesting to me, and I don't want to vote. And so you have almost half the country now saying don't count on me to be an election day voter. So that changes the model completely. And how that, you know changes we may not know until election day.
Really smart analysis today from Rick and Jeanie are signature panel. Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano or Bloomberg Politics contributors. Thank you both for weighing in here. I guess the big question remains, if this is a period of realignment, will it out last Donald Trump.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then roud Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
For much of the last week, conversation really has been dominated by a policy shift. In some instances, the Biden administration has undergone in regard to Israel decision last week to withhold a shipment of large bombs to Israel overconcerned that they may be used in Rafa Gossen City, in which more than a million Palestinians have sought refuge and shelter, and administration officials this weekend Joe standing by the decision.
Yeah, that's for sure. We talked about it a lot in this space as it was happening. Of course, that the White House might bristle at the idea of this being reflected as a change in policy, but it certainly feels like when to a lot of lawmakers and as a result, Kayley, there's an effort a foot on Capitol Hill by the very small Republican majority here the Republican Conference, pushing a resolution to ensure funding for Israel. It might be something we see get some attention this week.
Yeah, certainly something we're going to keep an eye on, just as we were keeping an eye on of the messaging with the Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln, who was asked about this on one of the Sunday shows over the weekend, and this is what he said about the administration's thinking on these weapons for Israel.
We don't have double standards.
We treat Israel one of our closest allies and partners, just as we would treat any other country, including and assessing something like international U Meaniterran law and its compliance.
With that with that law.
Invite people to read the report.
They can see for themselves everything that we've laid out in the report. The report also makes clear that this is an incredibly complex military environment.
Speaking on NBC's Meet the Press, the Secretary of State talking about the report submitted to Congress at the end of last week that raises concerns about Israel's use of US provided weapons in theater. But as we mentioned, there is a resolution that could see the light of day in the US House this week that would ensure funding military support for Israel and joining us to talk about
this and a few other stories. Congressman Chuck Fleischman, the Republican from Tennessee's third district, If you're with us on Bloomberg TV, you can see is literally in the field here doing constituent services. And Congressman, I appreciate your stopping your day for us as you prepare to return to Washington this week, will the House pass that resolution? What do you think needs to happen.
We need to be unequivocal in our support for Israel, absolutely after what happened to Israel on October the seventh, the United States needs to back its ally in the Middle East, Israel and its right to defend its borders, and its right to fix the situation with Hamas in Gaza. And we do not need to pause, We do not need to be vague. We need to be one hundred percent behind Israel so they can wrap this situation up, deter terrorism wherever it exists in the Middle East and move forward.
Well, Congressman. At the end of the day, though, knowing that this is largely a messaging bill, is there any further action that you would like to see your Chamber take that is not just largely symbolic and meant to send a west message to the White House.
Well, we were more than symbolic when we passed a to Israel. We've passed it time and time again, through the appropriations packages, through the supplementals and the like. But our speaker, our leaders, our membership has been on the Republican side overwhelming Even Democrats have joined us. Many Democrats have joined us as they should. Support for Israel needs to be bipartisan, needs to be by cameral, and we needed to start from.
The White House.
We need to tell Joe Biden loud and clear, unequivocally that he's got to support Israel, no pauses, no offens or butts. Support Israel, get them the aid, get them the arms, let them secure their borders. Complete this mission, and then let's work for peace in the Middle East.
Are you concerned about the findings and the State Department report, Congressmen that questions some of Israel's tactics in using US provided weapons in Gaza. Should Congress be concerned about this.
I'm personally not. October the seventh, Hamas was not concerned when they went in, raped, pillaged, plundered, killed, engaged in terroristic acts that are unspeakable, unfathomable. This was an incursion into the sovereign state of Israel, which cannot be ever tolerated, can never be condoned. So no or as heck. War is horrible, but and casualties happen in war that are sometimes unintended. But remember this, in the streets of Gaza they were celebrating on October the eighth, when Israel had
been hit and terrorized. They still have American hostages. They still have Israeli hostages. Hamas is not giving them up until Hamas decides to do the right thing, give up the hostages and agree to stop incursions into Israel. Think about it, They're still wanting to fire rockets into Israel.
They're still calling for the destruction of Israel. So again, the United States needs to be unequivocal in its support for Israel, for funding for arms, for diplomatic aid, anything that it takes to secure ISRAE position in the Middle East with its neighbors.
So we'll look to see further action from the House in regard to Israel this week. Congressman, there's also another issue, perhaps more time pressing, that will need to be taken up, the FAA reauthorization. The House last week passed a one week extension. The Senate passed the full five year bill last week. Will be the House's turn to take it up, and we understand it will be done under suspension of the rules. Do you anticipate any difficulty in getting that passed in time?
I don't.
We need to get the FAA passed. It's a good bill, it's not a perfect bill, but doing an under suspension, for your viewers, means that it will require two thirds as opposed to majority. What that means is when you cannot pass a rule, and we've had some problems passing rules in the majority. I've always voted for the rule
in the majority as a Republican. Some of my colleagues have chosen not to, respectfully, I disagree with that, but since we can't guarantee the passage of a rule, I think our best chance is to do this on suspension. Get two thirds. I think we'll get that done very quickly and with relative ease.
Congressman, I want to ask you a question from your view on the Appropriations Committee. We just went through a painful process to keep the government funded that sucked up the first third to half of this year. Knowing that we've seen at least a markup session on a Republican bill, We've seen the President the White House drop their budget proposal.
Can we get to work where your committee start before the last minute, say this summer or fall, for a regular order appropriations process Fiscal twenty five.
Joe, You're absolutely right. I believe in regular order.
I believe in sub committees, full committees, doing their work, getting to the floor, getting appropriation bills passed, and getting them ready for conferencing with the United States Senate and ultimately to be signed. The reality is we are doing our work. I cheer the Energy and Water Subcommittee of Appropriations, but I can assure you Chairman Cole and all of the other twelve cardinals of which I'm one subcommittee chair people will be working on their bills. Some of the bills, Joe,
are easier to pass than others. My biling Energy and Water bill is a bill that is much easier to pass than some of the others. Legislative branch is an easier one, milkon VA is an easier one, but some will be harder. What I anticipate will happen is we will write our bills, pass our bills out of full committee, get them to the floor in the best position to
be passed. But the reality is, and I hate to predict, but with an election year, the reality I think probably will be a short term cr into the latter part of the year, largely due to some of the complexities between the House and the Senate and Republicans and Democrats. But I'm going to work night and day to make sure that our bill gets done and that my colleagues who have other bills as appropriators will get their work done and get it done in due course. So I
expect a better year. I expect all twelve bills to.
Be done, all right.
Republican Congressman Chuck Fleischman of Tennessee, thank you both. Thank you for joining us on both Bloomberg Television and radio. We appreciate your time and insight into the work of Congress, but we want to focus now on the work of one regulator, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, is taking aim at the grid fork, approving today two rules to speed
the development of new long range electric transmission lines. One is smoothing out the regional process for planning and assigning costs for projects, and the other rule allows FERK to issue federal permits for transmission lines that are blocked by state regulators. Joining us now for more is Willie Phillips. He is the chair of FURK. Joining us here in our Washington, d C studio. Mister chairman, welcome, Thank you
so much for being with us. When we look at this pair of rules, how are they going to support a US power grid that has proven time and again that it is quite strong.
Well, I have to say thank you so much for having me here today. The US electric power grid, it is the backbone for our American economy. But our grid is being stressed. It's being tested today in ways we never seen before, in the face of rising demand, extreme weather, and new technologies that are shaping the resource mix in this country. We took historic, historic action today at FIRK to address these really these urgent matters. It's urgent, it's now.
We have to act now to plan for the future, because if we don't, we doom the reliability of our system. America cannot wait.
You must be getting calls about AI and data centers every day. This is all we're hearing about. When Constellation reported earnings last week, the entire conversation was not about how do they open a new nuclear power plant? It was how do we get data centers tied to nuclear because there's not enough power available here to train all these language models that are going to apparently change our lives in the next couple of years. What is FERK gonna do about the demand alone from AI?
You know, you're absolutely right. I hear from leaders across our industry all the time talking about how the unprecedented demand and load that they're seeing from data centers that really that's empowering this AI revolution that we're seeing around the country. It's in Ohio, it's in Virginia, which is the data center capital that's right of the United States. We see projections that Ohio is going to put as much load on a system that's equal to the total amount of load of Manhattan.
Wow.
In the near term.
This is a problem again for the nation's grid and so our rule it's gonna help bring on more generation. It's gonna help us. There's no one thing that we can do that can address the reliability needs of our system. Then long term and regional planning.
Do you expect that these rules, though, we'll run into any legal issues. Potential litigation is if the federal regulator is coming in to potentially step over state regulators in some cases.
I can tell you this as a former state regulator myself. I look carefully at these rules. We had over fifteen thousand pages of public comments from two hundred individual parties. I am extremely confident that these rules are legally durable and that they will be upheld.
That's a fact.
Texas remains an exception to the national grid, if I can call it that, what happens if Tesla starts cranking up these data centers or if this AI demand starts coming from Texas while they play along.
So Texas, of course you mentioned they proud of the fact that they have their own independent grid. But let's be clear, Texas is also a bell weather You don't have to look any further than some of the extreme weather events that have happened in Texas and other places and how it costs billions of dollars and it costs hundreds of lives. We know that Texas leaders also know that transmission reform is the best way to address these regulatory challenges and the reliability challenges.
That we have on the grid that they call you for help.
We learn from Texas, and I think Texas learns from us. We're all in this together. That's what Congress said when they established the Federal and Interrogatory Commission, that we're going to have a national role in making sure that we protect the reliability of.
Our country, which is much more difficult in terms of reliability when you are seeing those extreme weather events and climate related events that you were just alluding to. Obviously, these rules are intended to make sure there is more investment in transmission. But I would imagine none of this happens overnight when we're seeing these kind of weather events in real time. How fragile is the grid in this mode in terms of exposure to that kind of thing.
Look, we know the grid is on the stress, and we know that things take a long time. They take too long to build a new transmission. That's why these rules are so important. It will speed up the time that it takes to bring these resources that are waiting in the wings to come on. This rule is the best chance that we have to protect the reliability and affordability for our consumers.
Imagine this. Imagine you're a senior.
You're at home, it gets cold, the lights go out, it gets colder, maybe a little confused, you freeze the death in your home. That's what happens. This is our best chance to address that need and to help consumers throughout our country.
These are the people who are obviously in your mind when you go to bed at night. Here are we in a crisis then in a remaining moment? Or are you averting one?
We are absolutely addressing the need for reliability in this country. If we don't address it, we are facing a reliability crisis.
Absolutely. I'm really glad you could come see us at the table today. Don't be a stranger, all right, give us an update on the progress at some point as soon as the Chairman of FIRK, Willie Phillips, and a fascinating conversation Kaylee once again that you will not hear
anywhere else. We started this broadcast with the promise that we would take advantage of this calm here in the storm the eye of the hurricane to bring you some context and some smart conversations, and Kaylee I certainly learned a lot. 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.