Sound On: Stagflation Risk, Democrats Defend Abortion Rights

our economic future and cut the deficit. It is incredibly important for them to point out the hypocrisy on the other side. Republicans care about the death that don't couch yourself out. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Wall Street tumbles on worries over Washington. Welcome to the fastest hour in politics, as economic policy and the FEDS fight against inflation spook the financial markets and leave the

White House reeling today. Coming up a special conversation with Barry Riddles of Widolt's Wealth Management The Hole to Bloomberg's Masters of Business. I'm the complicated relationship between Wall Street and Washington will be here in just a moment later. Megan Green, Global Chief Economist at Kroll Senior Fellow at

Harvard Kennedy School. On this conversation with a lot to unwind today are paneled Bloomberg Politics contributor Jeanie Chanzano, joined by Amy Tarkanian, Republican strategist, former chair of the Nevada State GOP way to set the table for Barry Riddolts, who's with us right now. Barry, thank you for being here. We're typically talking with members of Congress or folks from the White House on this program, but we needed something

a little bit different today. And I'm not going to ask you to say things are going to be all right, but okay, you can say that this level of fear though from Washington to where you are on Wall Street, calls calls for something a little bit different today. Somebody with a little bit of distance from our capital is our thoughts. So Barry welcome. Is this fear deserved? So it's a wonderful question, and it really depends on how

your portfolio is allocated. When we look at the average draw down of the SMP five hundred in any given year over the past near century, it's been about four thirteen point six percent, which is pretty much where we were in the beginning of this week. It was a pretty average drawdown, but fear levels, sentiment levels are very,

very negative. Fear levels are high. In fact, the American Association of Individual Investors not its highest fear levels as of Friday last week since the Great Financial Crisis since UH two thousand and nine. And the reason for that. It's not because the Dow was off ten percent, or the SMP five was off four or even the NASDACK was off right. These are all pretty run of the

mill correction type numbers. When you look at the high flyers, when you look at the tech growth stocks, when you look at the pandemic related work from homestocks, everything from tele doc to Peloton to Netflix do and a bunch of other high flyers like tesla Um, they're down sixties sevent They've gotten really really shell act. And the folks who are relatively new to the market, who had nothing to do when sports were canceled and opened up robin

hood accounts, they never seen anything like this. Well, you know, all that cash rushing into the market helped send prices higher and lo and behold. As things start to reopen and the world begins to return to normal. I certainly can't say everything is remotely normal across whether you're looking at the economy or the stock market. Things aren't quite

back to pre pandemic levels. But you know, people are going out to movies, so they're not and they're going out to restaurants, and and they're going on vacation, and they're traveling. Uh, they're going to the gym. So so a lot of the darlings from UM they've all gotten really sure. That doesn't sound like uh, an economy headed for a recession when you talk about everybody breaking out and and getting back to life and spending and traveling.

But even Janet Yellen sounded unsure about a soft landing this week. Where are you on that? UM? You know? To me, trying to predict how successful the FED will be is sort of a fool's Errand I will make two points that I think are useful for listeners. The first is that as much as everybody is wringing their hands over inflation, this kind of inflation that we've been experienced for the past year has not been caused by

very low federal reserve rates. What have they been caused by? Well, first, you had a multi trillion dollar stimulus and the Cares Act one, then a second care Is Act Do, then a third Cares Act. We haven't even begun to really feel the impact of the infrastructure bill, so massive monetary stimulus. Compare that to the financial crisis. Almost none. It was. It was modest um. And and in both instances, the

FED was very accommodating on the monetary side. So they stayed at zero way too long after O eight O nine, And they probably stayed at zero too long after the pandemic. And so what we've been seeing with this increase in rates is the FED saying, Okay, we're gonna get off zero. We're gonna remove all this excess accommodation. But I think deep down inside Jerome pal thinks, well, this isn't gonna

do did Lee squad about inflation. It's not gonna get chips to cars any faster, it's not going to clear up the backlog of ships in Long Beach, and it's certainly not gonna do anything about energy prices so long as there's a shooting war in Ukraine. But let's let's get off zero and see if we can start moving things back to normal, back to neutral you're really driving in the direction I wanted to go here because you know,

we're all about seeking blame here in Washington. Barry, and how much of this inflation was an unavoidable result of a pandemic is a matter of great debate here. It's something that I talked about with Republican Congressman French Hill. I want you to listen to what he said, and

I would love for you to respond I do. I do, because when you combine that kind of fiscal stimulus concentrated in with the thipartisan COVID release money plus what he added in, you combine that with zero interest rates in a billion dollars upon buying monthly by the fit you don't have, you can't invent a more stimulative demand focused And this is while Larry Summers and others economists were warning,

warning the Biden administration as they were playing with fire. Okay, So Barry with that in mind, so he says the COVID spending had a lot to do with creating this problem. How About if there was no relief spending, we just let people get COVID and go on with their lives, we still would have had a major shift in demand for goods, right, everybody clicking that, absolutely, we still would have had supply chain problems, so there still would have

been inflation. Right, So so he's half right. I'll give him partial correctness. Um, so we're we're essentially a service driven economy. Services goods. During the pandemic, that practically inverted because you know, you're not traveling, you're not going to restaurants, you're not going to theater, you're staying home, you're just in the family room, you're buying TVs, blah blah blah. So so there's some of that, and and there's been

a giant demand surge that took place. How much of that you want to blame on the fiscal stimulus UM is subject to debate some of it for sure, for sure. But where that line in the sand is is really challenging because remember we had suddenly we went from almost full employment to unemployment, and those folks are can't go to work, they're not getting a paycheck for for many of them, and weren't even getting unemployment. So if there wasn't UM a trillion dollars in in UM relief issued,

what would have happened? You would have literally had a massive problem of people not paying the rent, not being able to buy right well, so so so was what was the final So the first Cares Act was March, and the second Cares Act was September, both under President Trump, and the third Cares Act was I think April or March under President Biden. And we're really just at the leading edge of this, the infrastructure bill that's was just starting to find its way out. So I can't really

blame that, um. But you know, when you look at so it's a lot more complicated than just pointing at the White House. Obviously here this one or the last right, right, people have been blaming Biden and Romp and you really have to stop and say the alternative would have been a depression, right, And I'll take a little bit of inflation, which you know, I don't have to forecast inflation, but

gun to the head, we're probably past peek inflation. By the fourth quarter, we should see a four handle, maybe even a three handle on different right. And you know the other side of this inflation question, by the way, is what happens to the consumer berry somehow still spending despite the prices, And I talked about that yesterday with Head Bouche at the White House. Uh and and here's what she said. I'd love for you to to listen.

In response, Well, you know, household balance sheets are in relatively good shape because families were kept hold during the crisis, and because we brought the unemployment rate down. So you know, those seven point nine million folks that have a job now that didn't win Joe Biden took office, those folks are all out there earning a living, and they're spending that money. They're doing what Americans do. We're going to get a job's report tomorrow, Berry, We're gonna be looking

for wage inflation. I can only assume. But how long can this continue in our remaining couple of minutes here before people start thinking twice about spending and travel and the so called demand destruction actually begins. So so let's let's address two issues there. The first is I'm not all upset about wage inflation, especially at the low end, because we've had thirty years of lagging wages in the

bottom quartile. This is what the president the economy, and in fact, we've enjoyed deflation because the bottom quarter really just they lagged inflation, they lagged productivity, They left lagged corporate profits. They lagged certainly lagged executives weet camp. So this was a big catchup. And I look at that more as a reset than an ongoing pushed to inflation. So we we've sort of stair stepped our way up here. However, belated like I've just got a minute to warn you,

by the way, soon finish your thoughts. So that said, you know, I am never gonna bet against the American consumer. The countryside is littered with the bodies of economists who made that forecast and lived to rue the day. And now when I look at the state of American households is as good as it's ever been. Corporates balance sheets are fine. The cost of carrying the federal debt has ticked up a bit, but it's still historically low. It would have to take higher and more sustained inflation to

set to to derail that. Now that said, who knows what happens with random things, the war in Ukraine, Yeah, and so many more layers. Berry Riddles, thank you so much. I haven't talked to Barry Riddles since I was down the dial at Potus on satellite radio. I'm Joe Matthew this is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg. You sound on with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Thanks for being with

us on the fastest hour in politics. With the headline on the terminal stagflation, fear fuels big stock reversal as post Fed cheer ends. How do you like that we're talking stagflation now on top of it? And after our conversation with Barry Riddles, we continue with Megan Green, Global

chief economist at Kroll, Senior Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School. Megan, this was quite a day, and as we normally spend time here rounding up voices inside the Beltway, we're taking a slightly different view on things and really looking at the policies in Washington impacting the action that we're seeing on Wall Street. And one of the biggest concerns right now is falling into a world of stagflation, which is probably not a great trade for the inflation we're feeling

right now. Megan, what's your prognosis on this economy? Is the fear deserved? Yeah? So the risk is obviously risen um, particularly as as the Fed has gotten more hawkish. I think the risk of stagflation is much lower in the US than it is in Europe, for example, UM, where growth is fundamentally much lower and inflation is rising UM.

In the US, you know, we had a negative GDP print for the first quarter UM, but that headline figure really masked a lot of underlying strength, particularly among consumers and business investment UM. So you know, final purchases UM domestically actually accelerated in the first quarter from the last quarter of last year. UM consumption was fairly strong, given omicron was was spreading in January and February of this year. Business investment was pretty strong, and so I'm actually not

worried about going into a downturn anytime soon. I feel like this, this obsession with a recession really kicked off in the yield curve inverted for twenty three seconds, and I just don't give that much. Well, but historically, if the FED does not have a great record, U when when they're ending as tightening cycle here, I mean, do you have faith in the FED pulling off a soft landing? It sounds like you do. You know. Look, I think the FED is stuck with an impossible task. They're trying

to thread and needle while wearing of amits blindfolded effectively. UM, So I don't think that the FED will manage to engineer a soft landing, mainly because the last three times the FED actually did pull off a soft landing, unemployment was much higher at the start of the rate hiking cycle. Now unemployment is incredibly low, and the best indicator of a recession that there is is an uptick in unemployment, and so I don't see the FED being able to

hike aggressively without unemployment ticking up. That being said, there are eleven and a half open a million openings in the US economy. That's a lot. We're a long way off from seeing unemployment takeoff. I think, yeah, okay, what's your expectation for the jobs report tomorrow? Is it going to be a big number? And everyone freaks out because it also shows wages rising. So I think it will be a big number by historical um context, but but smaller number than used to seeing. So the consensus I

think it's three and eighty thousand new jobs. That's a lot historically speaking, but it's less than we've become accustomed to seeing. I think, you know, more importantly, unemployment is probably going to take down even further, and crucially, I think the participation rate will take up as workers jump back into the labor force as the pandemic becomes more endemic and people burn through the financial cushions that they

got some stimulus measures. Well, look, if the White House is getting blame and Democrats at large blame for policies that have brought us here to this inflationary cycle, would those policies also deserve credit for keeping the job market intact and getting those jobs back after COVID. Absolutely that, you know. I think it was those policies that have helped the labor market heel so quickly. Um. And you can see that if you compare the US labor market

with Europe's labor market for example. UM. But also I think you know, we've closed our output gap. Growth is already back on a pre pandemic trend. That's not the case and the rest of the developed world, and that's partly thanks to the stimulus measures, um that we had after the pandemic hits. So it may be driving inflation higher, but it also has caused our economy to heal a whole lot faster. Well, So this is the problem we're

in right. I mean, you can't win this argument. You either let the thing go off a cliff I guess after COVID, or let the job market do what it was going to do. There clearly would have been a downturn at that point and we would have not had inflation. Or you could have spent what appears to have been a lot of money. And the question is was it too much to keep consumers going, to keep people afloat

until the pandemic receded. Uh, my goodness, I'm not sure most Americans would be able to choose between one or the other. Yeah, And I actually don't think it's that simple. I think there's been a lot of bad luck involved. So I don't actually think our inflation is entirely demand driven. I think a huge piece of it is supply side effects. And that includes, you know, China locking down because of their there's zero COVID policy, which we can do nothing about.

It includes Russian invading Ukraine and causing supply chain disruptions which we could do nothing about. I really think the FED almost pulled this off at the end of last year, as we saw global supply chains starting to improve, we saw the labor market, the labor supply issues we have in the US also starting to abate. Um. But then at the beginning of this year we had omicron spread in China, we had Russian invade Ukraine, and that's just

more supplied sid side shocks. I actually think inflation is still transitory, but transitory is gonna last a really long time given these consistent supply side shocks that we keep having that are that are elevating prices and driving inflation. Yeah, whereas inflation by the the end of this year, as we're walking into the midterms in November, quickly, Megan, do you see us back to four percent or or is that a dream right now? No? I do see us

back at four percent. I don't see us lower than that, though, and four percent is still pretty high by the FED standards. Right there looking for average inflation of two percent, so above the Fed's target, but certainly lower than where we are now. Well sounding lately like four percent is the new two percent. I'm not sure about that, Megan, but thank you for the insights and good to speak Megan Green, global chief economist at Kroll, also a senior fellow at

Harvard's Kennedy School. As we connect the dots between policy politics, and of course Wall Street Today will assemble the panel. Next, Genie is with us along with Amy Tarkanian coming up on Sound On. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg traders spooked by labor costs, productivity decline. As I read on the terminal, Wall Street staggers with vicious one point three trillion dollar stock sell off. How about that for a headline?

And as we were discussing with Barry Riddolts and again with Megan, this is an interesting conversation that doesn't always go the same in Washington as it does on Wall Street. As Megan Green said the causes of inflation, and Barry echoed, this would have been in place with or without the stimulus spending, the Cares Act, and all the rest that follow COVID. The question is how much? And that's where we start with Genie Chanzano with us joint today by

Amy Tarkanian. As I told you, Republican strategist and former chair of the Nevada State g o P. Of course Genie with us as part of the sound On family here as our democratic analysts. Is great to have you both here. Genie, I don't know if you have a real take on this, but this is we're really getting down to the matter here is the Biden administration is blamed and in some cases the Trump administration for fanning the flames of inflation because of the stimulus spending that

helped us recover from COVID. I guess the question just comes down very simply to we spend too much. Yeah, And it was fascinating listening to Barry and Megan and your discussion with both of them, because I felt almost like maybe the sell off today would have been a little bit less dramatic had people listened to these conversations, because in both cases they kept saying the sky is not falling. You know, Barry was talking about normality as normal as you can talk about it in the context

of recovering from a pandemic. Megan was talking about the underlying strength and not being terribly worried about about a recession in this obsession with the recession, which is a great phrase. So you know that all that said, though, that message is not enough to get out obviously onto Wall Street or in the minds of the American public.

You look at the latest polls, something like in the latest CNN poll, almost of Americans say the news they're hearing about the economy is bad, and that pretty much explains why everybody is concerned and spoops essentially, what's your take on this? Amy, We do a lot of blame game here in Washington, d C. But it's starting to become a lot more complicated than pointing a finger at

a single source, isn't it? Sure? Yes? And I think you know, for for years now, you know, both sides are are pretty guilty at overspending, um, and we need to be able to rein that in. And I know I hear Republicans, at least on on my side, um, you know, time and time again saying that we need to rein in the spending. But yeah, us we have

been guilty as well. Um. Now for what we're dealing with currently, I think that this administration has only exacerbated the problem, and that dealing with such things such as stimulus such as the American Recovery uh you know Act, that the Cares Act, because we had all of this money that was just being pumped into the economy, um, all at once, it's it's not sustainable and so now we're all paying the price, and people are not going back to work like we had anticipated, or else are

going back to the same jobs. Um, And we're not seeing the growth like we had anticipated. And I agree though with with the other with the other panelists that, UM, I think we need to maybe not given to the doom and gloom and into so much of the fear tactics. We spend too much, too much stimulus aemy. Yes, definitely too much stimulus. And that was a problem of this current administration. So it's a problem there and the Fed not starting fast enough? Is that? Is that your field? Oh?

And then and then with Jerome Pale coming out the Federal chair UM the other day and then saying, okay, now we're going to be you know, a raising interest rates bye by half percent, and then we're going to be increasing again here in the near future. Yes, that's why the panic is setting in because he waited too late. It took seventy five off the table. Though, Jeanie, what

what do people want? If you want to have an economy that's growing enough to get interest rates off a zero, they've got to do some kind of a move, right he I thought he eliminated our worst fears. Yeah, they do have to do a move um And I I also am sensitive to the fact that there is an argument to be made that both the administration and the Fed weren't listening to the discussion about or the calls about regarding inflation um and so you know, could they

have moved faster? You know, we can look back and say yes, you know, in all likelihood, given where we are now, that would have assisted. But I think on this question of you know, whether Donald Trump or Joe Biden both are one is to blame. I do think we have to be cognizant that, you know, it had been a hundred years since the country had been in the pandemic, and we had a shutdown of the economy

that was unprecedented in the modern era. The United States has recovered from that in much stronger shape than any of us predicted one or two years ago, and much better than many other parts of the world. So if there is some you know, some bright light here, it is those kinds. It is those kinds of comparisons. Can we do better, absolutely, but those are that That's the reality. So, Jamie, how important is this jobs are working to be tomorrow? For Joe Biden he's gonna come out and say something

about this. There's forty five numbers in one of these reports, and some of them are going to be good, probably job growth, right payrolls. There's a lot of worry about some of the underlying data. Though. How does this play for the White House tomorrow? You know, I think he's got to come out and and it's gonna be tough for for Joe Biden because he keeps talking about these good job numbers and hopefully tomorrow is is fairly positive.

But he's also got to talk about the fact that every time we go and spend money, we are seeing inflation, and he's got to keep on that message that the White House is doing all it can to address that pain. You know, we're looking at polling out from all kinds of areas that the economic numbers the American public are feeling are the worst that we've seen in more than a decade or two in terms of how they feel.

And it's the feeling that impacts the politics. Jennie Chanzano and Amy Tarkanian our panel today on Bloomberg Sound On. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington as we head for another big story here I'm assuming it's going to be an interesting morning from Marty Walsh tomorrow. But on Capitol Hill today it was Roe v. Way. They were talking about there's going to be a vote next week in the Senate and some passionate remarks today from Senator kirston Jilabrand.

We're gonna talk about this in the Strategy from the White House. Next, this is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg. You sound on with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Another day with protesters out in front of the Supreme Court following the leak, the big leak this week of the draft opinion and what appears to be alluding decision by the Court to invalidate Roe v. Wade, Dueling protesters. As you can hear, this has been going on all day every day since this dropped on Monday. They have put

the fence back up around the Capitol. The security is intense around the Supreme Court itself. As you might suspect, Democrats latch onto roll roll back with Senate control in balance. I read a great column from Laura Advent on the terminal with the prospects of this Supreme Court ruling resetting many election election messages, and of course it's got Democrats at work, certainly in the Senate. Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, says it will happen next week. This is about to change.

Next week, the U. S. Senator is going to vote on legislation to codify a woman's right to seek an abortion into federal law. I intend to file culture on this vital legislation Monday, which would set up a vote for Wednesday. Republicans will have two choices. They can own the destruction of women's rights, where they can reverse course

and work to prevent the damage. He was joined by several other Democrats, including Senator at Kirston Childebrand of New York, who got to the podium and spoke passionately about not just this impending ruling, but the lying, as she calls it, and Schumer called it that as well. The Leader called it that on the floor, the lying that the justices when they were nominees conducted in front of their confirmation hearings.

Listen to Kyrsten Gillibrand, and we never had fraudulent testimony, and the Supreme Court standing behind the justices commit fraud during hearings. So if you want to talk about process. I would focus on that process. She got to the podium and really got into this. Everybody else backed off as Senator Gillibrand made the point, it is an outrage that we have five justices on the Supreme Court who lied, lied in their confirmation hearings in order to be confirmed.

It is an outrage that in America today that our judicial system is so corrupted and so politicized and no longer representative the will of the people. Five justice is said they respect President precedents. Five said that Roe v. Wade was established precedents. Five said they would never undermine established precedent. It is unconscionable what this decision will do to the American people. But does it matter? First of all, did they lie? And does it matter if they did?

I think the conversations we've had over the last few days suggest that, well it doesn't. They're not going to be held in contempt of Congress. This is what we have here now, And so we reassembled the panel. Genie, of course, back with us our democratic analysts and Bloomberg Politics contributor Genie Chanzano along side Amy Tarkanian. Today, Republican strategist and former chair of the Nevada State GOP Genie.

That gives you a sense of what the debates are going to sound like when we get into the general election, doesn't it. It does, And we are already seeing this on the ground, as you mentioned, particularly at the level of the state gubernatorial races, at the attorney generals, because of course, if this decision and this draft becomes a decision, that is where the decision will lie at the state level. So we see gubernatorial candidates, a g candidates addressing it.

We also see congressional candidates addressing it. We saw a candidate for the for the Wisconsin state who Senate who you know Wisconsin of course has trigger laws. We already saw her come out and attack Ron Johnson on abortion. Ads are starting to come out and so many Democrats saying that this is going to be the big issue of the mid term. But of course the flip side of that is others who say, nope, it is always the economy, always inflation that remains number one. And that's

what I think. We're going to have to wait and see where voters land on this. Well, that's absolutely right. Uh, it's certainly going to be a motivator, Amy, I think that we can agree. I don't know if it motivates Democrats more than Republicans, but that's the conventional wisdom. Uh. Right now, I wonder what you think of of the the the different ways that the parties have responded to this, though Republicans really have not been weighing in on the

substance of what this ruling appears to be. They've been talking about the leaks, right, this is we're going to get to the bottom of this, an attack on the independence of the court. Chuck Schumer was asked about that today. Listen to his response, the Supreme Courts, the Supreme Courts looking into that. But to compare a leak to taking away the rights of over a hundred million women and saying the league is more important, give me a break.

Forget it. They mean, it's the league more important? Well, you know, I just I don't mean this to sound callous, but but it is slightly more important. And because this sets the precedent than for any anything else in the future that you know, other Supreme Court justices may want to overturn or make some other decisions on UM. And I think that it is incredibly UM concerning that there

as a leak. Now, whether if the leak was on this topic or any other topic, I I do believe that this is not only ethically and morally wrong, but it is it done intentionally and it will do uh forever damage in our faith in the system. Unfortunately in the fact that this was leaked, Yes, but then I think it's even worse now if you want to go ahead and get into the actual topic of abortion and dealing with the unborn and dealing with women having to

make these excruciating choices. Uh, you know this, This is this is an area where I think we need to be incredibly sensitive, whether if you're pro life or pro choice, And the fact that this leaked out the way that it did is just so wrong. And I hope that they find the person that did this, and I think everyone agrees on that. What what about the looming debate here and the way this is going to influence the

messaging on the campaign trail going into the midterms? Amy, is this going to be the single shoe that brings people to the polls or Republicans going to have an argument? Um? I think their argument is going to rally their base to some extent. However, in the end, your pocketbook is

not Democrat or Republican. If you can't pay your bills, if you can't put gas in your tank, if you can't feed your children and clothe your children, then you have a lot of other problems than what what another female may or may not decide to do with their body at this moment. And I know that sounds callous, but it is true. Well, I have to be honest.

I think if if anyone suggesting the leak is is worse than the ruling, and I realized that you're a Republican strategist and you have convictions on this, amy may also sound callous to some of our listeners. Well, you know, if if you really want to, you know, I mean, you could probably pick a poll, any poll at this point.

I've seen a half dozen of them where no matter your party affiliation, I would say that anywhere from the low fifties to the high sixty percentile of folks who actually believe that there should be abortion available up until fifteen weeks now. The argument is, you know, should we have that just across the board all fifty states or just take it back to the states. And that's exactly what they're doing. Because this ruling UM in ninete A lot of people will tell you that it was vague

and that this was legislation from the bench. So that's why we're dealing with it the way that we are today. Well, that's true. But when when Gorsuch UH and Kavanaugh in particular, we're in their own testimony and their confirmation hearings, they also made clear that this was the settled law of the land, that this was precedent. Does it bother you that that this is uh, that this is sounding a lot different now than it did when they were speaking

to lawmakers about getting confirmed. Well, you know, I don't recall exactly what what the term if they did, well, if they did say those exact words and they were going to stick to it, then yes, of course that's concerning UM. If UH, if they were following like what I just um I told you about others insinuating that this from the get go, this ruling from the get go was legislating from the bench rather than interpreting UH,

then yes we have a problem. And maybe and maybe that's why they're making the choice they are now to this day. But I think we also need to be careful because it's not misinformation which is accidental. This is disinformation where the left is actually pushing by trying to damage the right and saying that they're taking away their rights and their freedoms and that abortion will be gone completely,

which is not the case. It's just going back to the people of the state, understood, But it will be gone for for for women who aren't don't have the money or resource to travel, which is which is an

issue here, Genie. We've seen actually some companies start to step up now, some major Wall Street firms are considering this idea of giving travel allowances uh to workers for this and Senator Marco Rubio is putting fourth legislation that would prevent them from deducting that, making that a tax deduction. This is really coming down uh to splitting hairs here

into some sort of micro legislation. Genie, it is and you know, Gutmacher said, you know about twenty two to twenty six states, Well, likely when if this decision comes through, have a ban on abortion, um many of those in those trigger laws, and of course that does raise questions about are we going to be seeing you know, women uh restricted from traveling for instance, or people restricted from helping women to travel to another state to seek an abortion.

So you know, those are all things that we're going to be dealing with, and you know, we also just want to be clear when we're talking about this issue that you know, we this has been over fifty years, as we all know, so we don't really know what the impact of this is going to in a political sense as we look at the mid term. That bill is going to pass next week without Susan Collins Jenny, No, the bill likely won't pass. But what it does do importantly is it does tell us who stands where and

allows the American people to hold people accountable. Senators will be counted next week. We'll talk about it here. You know that on the fastest hour in politics, this is Bloomberg