Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Roudoo with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome to the Monday edition of Balance of Power here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Indeed, I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines in Washington with something to show for their work. Kayleie, the bills pass the House and they're headed for the Senate tomorrow, and that includes TikTok. We've spent a lot of time talking about Ukraine in Israel. The divestor band TikTok bill is part of the so called sidecar that will all.
Be stitched together here and sent to the Senate.
I told my sixteen year old over the weekend that it was entirely possible now they're going to ban TikTok if they couldn't find a buyer, and he did not believe me.
He's tired of hearing that.
Well, we've heard it repeatedly for some time now, and to this point, Bite Dance's lobbying efforts against any kind of bill that was divested or band We're working until I guess maybe they stopped working, because we now have a piece of legislation that is very likely to pass the Senate and get the signature from President Biden. Although there is a longer window here for that divestiture. Initially the bill that first passed the House was six months.
Now they're going to have up to a year, that's right. The question is does Bite Dance use that year to actually try to find a buyer for its US TikTok arm or is it just going to use that year fighting this thing out in court.
Well, we know that the court's coming. This is a question of whether I guess they try both, because also the Chinese government has to sign off on this as well. Right, And we've got a lot of big questions to.
Ask about this, yes, and we have some of them now for Mike Shepherd, who is a senior editor for Technology and Strategic Industries here in Washington and is joining us in studios. So, Mike, if we could first just look at the way that TikTok or Byte Dance specifically is likely to respond. Already, there's signaling nope, we're taking this to court. We are not going to go down without a fight.
Essentially, you're right, Key, And in fact, they made clear in their statement overnight while we were preparing to get a good night's rest for today in this big week of news, that they were going to fight this in court pretty much as soon as President Joe Biden signs it, as soon as the ink is dry on his signature. And they are making clear that this fight will be waged on First Amendment grounds too. They see this as an infringement of people's freedom of expression and also the
impact on businesses. There are a lot of small businesses that use TikTok to reach niche audiences of consumers, and so their argument is going to be on the speech grounds and then also in the business grounds as well.
So a year is the timeline, Could the legal effort last longer than that, or maybe a better way of asking it, could the legal effort last longer than November? Because a lot of this is going to key off of who wins the select in terms of the long game.
Well, as we've seen in previous court battles involving companies and politicians and the government of course, lawyers have a superpower in being able to drag things out. In fact, if you look at Donald Trump we've been talking about his legal proceedings, the cases, each of those cases has been kicked down the road to some degree or another.
And with so much at stake here, and especially given not only the national security grounds that the US government is alleging are at stake in this case, but also the geopolitical and diplomatic stakes with China, this is a very sensitive case and so it will be handled carefully by whatever court picks it up, and the lawyers from both sides are going to be looking to the government may want to move faster, but certainly bye dance, as lawyers will want to take their time.
Okay, so it may take a great deal of time for this to actually play out in court. But in the hypothetical scenario that the US government comes out on top that bye dance challenge, wh does not work and it really is faced with this option of divest or get banned in the US, what is that divestiture actually
likely to look like? Who is a realistic buyer for a company that could be worth tens of billions of dollars and also could raise antitrust concerns if another tech company were to try to absorb something of that.
And these are great questions that you're asking here, Kayley, because the mechanism of the divestiture is going to be incredibly complex. Not only are the anti trust grounds. I think though, we have to back up a little bit because there are a couple of steps that we need to clear before we even get to the point of an actual sale. A. The company would have to agree to it. B the Chinese government would have to sign off, and that they are already making clear that that's a
no go. And then even if they do agree to a sale, would that come with the very thing that any sensible buyer would want, And those are the algorithms, the crown jewels of TikTok, the thing that makes it so good and that makes it work. Now, assuming that's all in there, and I'm highly skeptical that each of these hurdles would be cleared, then you would have to find deep enough pockets to buy this to fend off the anti trust questions, and then somebody'd be willing to
take on the risk. This is a lot of user data and you have this lingering concern that there might be some still existent connection to China.
So it sounds to me like you just outlined the case for a ban. It may be impossible, if I'm reading you correctly, to find a buyer who could check all of those boxes.
Well, if not a band, then an outright ban. In other words, you talked about your your son and the interest in keeping TikTok alive and the inability to suspend disbelief that wait a minute, this app that I've come to know and love will go away. It could exist, but just not on the app stores. The bill would require the app stores to delist it. But you know, kids and users have a way around it.
Well, it's like VPNs. I mean, as someone who had visited China several years ago and I wanted to be able to use Facebook on my phone, I already had it on my phone. I probably couldn't have downloaded it while in China, got a VPN, could use it fine fun. Basically, this could just make the US with this particular app look a lot like what people have to do in China and using other apps that are a banned in China.
Kaylie also brought up another good point and that is the election A year from now is a long time. Now, think about it. If we have a change in administration or changes in Congress, we could perhaps see another move to maybe defuse or defang this in some fashion. Not saying it's going to happen, but I wouldn't rule out maybe some attempt by that if it becomes a Trump administration that's incoming, they may seek to try to stop
this from actually taking effect. Remember Trump was the one who would sign the order initially seeking to ban TikTok, but now a month ago he changed this tune. He said he thought the legislation was a bad idea because it would give in effect too much to meta.
Right.
Of course, he has an axagrind with Facebook over him being banned there after January sixth.
Yes, not dealing with TikTok on its own right, but just don't want to strengthen the other guy in this case.
You said something.
Important though about the Crown Jewels. That's the algorithm. Let's say Steve Manuchin or somebody stands up. Let's say it's a patriotic move. They buy this thing from more than it's worth. God knows what's going to happen. But without the special sauce there, this could become a really different product. It could be one that my sixteen year old doesn't care about it anymore. Right, because the algorithm is the essence of the business.
Well, that's what makes it work, that's what makes it distinctive. Now, somebody like Steve Manuchin could find a group of investors and technologists to maybe get it pretty close. You know, is it closer? Is it close enough to Coca Cola?
Right? Exactly?
But you know, people have you know, there are coke people and they're pepsi people. And if the TikTok person finds the new flavor just a little bit off or maybe not serving the purpose that they have in mind. Because as I said, there are also businesses who have been using this to target their audiences. People with very
niche businesses. If they make something and knitting or crochet or makeup or whatever, something maybe related to sports, they have a way, a pathway to that audience of consumers that they have built up over this time.
Well, of course we've all seen the advertisements. I'm sure part of TikTok's lobbying effort against getting banned with highlighting businesses. I think I saw a beekeeper that made like honey products or soaper or.
Something like that.
There's veterans involved really trying to take their case to the public just as much as to Capitol Hill.
Totally agree with it or not?
Yeah, fair enough. Final question, just because you raise the election, regardless of what happens in court or whatever, we're talking a year window in which TikTok will assumably be fully operational, nothing will change. How concerned should we be about the information misinformation, disinformation that could be propagated on that platform in the run up to November in the interim.
Well, Kelly, when you talk to the proponents of the legislation, that is one of the very reasons that they argue for a ban. They are saying that there's already so much misinformation out there that's skewed and distorted, and in a way, the social media platforms in general have stepped away from any kind of role in being moderators of content. They don't want to have to take ownership of a responsibility for specific material that could be disinformation. They really
just want to say, hey, this is town square. It's up to you to figure out who you want to trust and who you decide to believe in, and this is the case here with TikTok. But the trouble is since it does have this foreign tie. You know, you talked to national security experts here in this town. Many of them will say, be careful.
Great to have you in studio with this.
Michael, congratulations on the new title as well, Senior Editor for Technology and Strategic Industries, which means you're going to be spending a lot of time on stories like this one, and we'd love to continue tapping your expertise here on Bloomberg. Great to have Michael Shepard with us as we add the voice of former Ambassador Mark Ginsberg. He spent time as US Ambassador to Morocco, bringing us his geopolitical view.
Is also now president of the Coalition for a Safer Web and has a good sense of what we're talking about. Mister ambassador, Welcome back to Bloomberg. It's good to see you here. We've talked about so many variables. I wonder what your thought is. Assuming this is passed tomorrow and is signed by the President, we then enter a protracted legal battle.
How will that end?
It's hard to tell. With the negotiations in Caracas, and I worked up on the hill for seven years when this bill originally came to the Senate. The Senate it because there was fear that TikTok would actually be able
to prevail in a constitutional challenge. It's been timed up considerably in order to prevail in any TikTok induced constitutional challenge, which because they're surely going to go to court at the same time, it's probably not going to take effect for at least a year under the current legislative framework. There's also an opportunity that this could be subject to a filibuster by Senator Ran Paul, So you have it's not a sure bet that it's going to breeze its way out of the Senate.
Shortly, Okay, So there still could be fights ahead, whether it's in the Senate or whether it's in the courts moving forward. It does raise the question, though, Mark of and we were just speaking with Mike about this. I'm not sure if you heard him the master, but essentially around the idea of the misinformation or disinformation that could be making their way to to TikTok users as they continue to use the platform in the run up to
the election. How concerned. Are you about what's happening in real time, not what could happen a year from now when it's time to either divestor or get banned.
I read the National Director for Intelligence twenty twenty two report on the midterm elections. That report was probably one of the most important triggers to get a ban on TikTok. Why because the Director of National Intelligence report assessed that byte Dance, the parent of TikTok, was conveying privacy information back up to the Chinese government, and that the Chinese government was tailoring the Byte Dance TikTok algorithms to interfere
in the twenty twenty two midterm election. They got away with it, and if they got away with it in twenty twenty two, they're going to try to get away with it in twenty twenty four. Its longest TikTok is tied to by Dance, and the Director of National Intelligence assesses that that continuation of Chinese government interference in our election is going to remain unimpeded. I'm all in favor of worrying every hour of every day until twenty the
twenty twenty four is election is over. With what by Dance and TikTok are up to.
Well, we've got a lot to learn here. Obviously, there are questions, Ambassador about the algorithm. Is it possible to have a TikTok two point zero if Byte Dance is removed, if the Chinese government is in fact removed, and there's an American operator here, could it be the same product?
Yeah, Listen, algorithms are not necessarily limited by national boundaries. I mean surely. Of course, the particular TikTok algorithm that was developed by Bye Dance is proprietary. I don't know whether the Chinese government and by Dance will permit at
the sale of those algorithms. They's insisted in any statement that is made on this legislation that they will not permit those algorithms to be conveyed to a private equity firm that Steve Minuchin, the former Secretary of the Treasury, has claimed that he wants to gather in order to purchase TikTok. Can an alternative algorithm be produced in order to substitute for the existing algorithm. Well, there may be
a TikTok disruption as a result. I do believe that it's not going to be easy to replicate the proprietary algorithm as quickly as some people may think.
All right, Ambassador, it's always great to have you here on Balance of Power. Too short, but we hope you'll be back soon. That's Ambassador, former US Ambassador to Morocco, Mark Ginsberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on apocarp Rono 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, Joe, it does seem like there is somewhat of an upbeat mood because something actually got done, at least in one chamber of Congers. As we await the second chamber of a second believe it to pass it. But it took months and months and months for foreign need to actually pass the House of Representatives.
But it has now done so well.
That's right.
We were told by the administration at the end of last year that the window was closing in Ukraine. How they have managed to get by to this extent is frankly a mystery to a lot of folks. They've been dug in in some cases waiting for artillery for weeks on end. There was a unit we read about last week in Politico have been waiting for a month for shells to arrive, and now they are going to be sent that way. The question is how quickly that can
be done. And again we'll be talking to Kelly Grico about that coming up from the Stimpson Center, who was with us recently Kaylee talking about the run up now and be curious to hear her take now that it's actually happened, as I am also curious to hear from Jack Fitzpatrick, our appropriations expert, had a working weekend following the ball here on four bills that are going to be now stitched together into one and sent to the Senate. All the while we're wondering what happens to the Speaker
of the House. He's at Bloomberg Government, Jack Fitzpatrick, Great to see you. Probably feels like Wednesday or something to you at this point. Mike Johnson has a couple of days. I guess to breathe. When lawmakers return next week, is there in fact going to be a motion to vacate the lawmakers who have signed on to one seem to think that they're going to force him to resign.
Why in the world would he do that.
I don't think he would. It does seem that Marjorie Taylor Green is not backing down. She says that she's going ahead with forcing a vote on this motion to vacate. She's been tweeting about it. Yeah, it doesn't seem like a major danger for Johnson. It's been a while now that we've heard that there are Democrats who don't want to see him ousted over allowing a vote on Ukraine Aid. So there are a few hardline members who, certainly, unless
they back down, are going to force a vote. But it's not as tough a situation for Johnson as it was for McCarthy. I think there's some fatigue with the palace intrigue and the politicking on the House floor that dominated people's attention for so long, and Democrats don't want to punish the speaker for allowing a vote on a bill that they liked.
Well, we certainly have heard from Democrats on this very program, Congressman Amibarrev California at Smith of Washington, who also expressed that essentially that they think the speakers the right ada, so why would they not protect him? So I guess maybe that is why it will turn out differently for Mike Johnson than Kevin McCarthy. I want to ask you, though, just around this idea in the Senate, because we're all kind of operating under this could happen quickly. It's going
to pass. Yeah, we know it's the US Senate, and if you don't have unanimous consent, things can move slowly. Any One one senator could be disruptive. Are we going to face that potentially around amendment votes and the.
Like less than we normally would because congressional leadership was on board and put things in the rule in the House and package this in a way that kind of expedites it. Usually it takes if you don't have unanimous consent, and the Senate can take about a week to pass something that's probably cut in half or even less. Because they packaged this into a bill that had previously been taken up in the Senate, there's no work to do
on the motion to proceed. I could talk for an hour about the procedural aspect of this long story short. If a lot of people want to slow this down. It could be a thirty hour delay between voting to limit debate and then passing it, but that's not nearly as bad as if it could take a week, which is usually what can happen. So they don't really need unanimous congressional leadership worked together. So that this is going
to get the initial procedural vote tomorrow. It might be late tomorrow, or it might take until Wednesday to actually pass it. It's not entirely clear, but this is not going to drag on throughout the week like Rand Paul at one point had been threatened.
Safe to say, the majority of senators want to get out of town and get their recess started. So what's most likely at some point on Wednesday we wrap this up.
If not late Tuesday, it could be late Tuesday, it could stretch into Wednesday. One person can still slow it down, but if the if a lot of members don't want to take up their time to debate, we're probably talking much less than the thirty hour period, So either Tuesday or Wednesday, and this does seem to clearly have the
votes they voted previously on a foreign aid package. Already, This all fastest out seventy if I remember seventy for that, so all of their's got more than three hundred votes in the House, so it looks good in the Senate.
Could it lose some votes though, because the TikTok divest sure dunvest or ban has been included.
That is one of the most interesting parts of this, because the packaging of this was more about the political question of do the hawks stand together, do the neo conservatives stand together, and do some do what they want? And this was sort of a hawkish packaging of things. The TikTok band doesn't really have anything to do with Ukraine Aid, but this came together as essentially a show of political willpower by the Republican Hawks, the governing wing.
It all fit together politically, so I don't think that would necessarily lose a lot of support in the Senate.
All right, Jack Fitzpatrick, who covers Congress for Bloomberg Government, thank you so much. As always, certainly we're all going to keep an eye on the Senate over the course of the next day or two to see when this thing actually can head to the President for a signature. And we know the President of Ukraine certainly is waiting for it. He talked this weekend on NBC's Meet the Press.
Here he is this eight will strength think we did.
Lose the initition, now have all the chance to stabilize the situation and to.
Or take the initiative.
And we want to get more on how exactly this will help Ukraine and how quickly with Kelly Gricos, she a senior fellow with the Reimagining US Grand Strategy program at the Stimson Center. Kelly, it's always great to have you here on balance of power. What is your assessment of just how fast this aid could change the situation on the ground for Ukraine.
Well, thank you for having me.
I think, you know, I think there's two parts of that answer, which is one, I think within a few days, once it passes the Senate, certain critical things like artillery can probably be delivered to Ukraine, though it might take longer for Ukraine to distribute that within the country, and then other systems that are state side will take longer to be able to deliver again to Ukraine. But it will, you know, it will be weeks to months probably before it has a very significant effect.
That sounds like a painfully long wait if you're an under resourced Ukrainian soldier in the field, Kelly, how much of this will go to weapons or equipment that has yet.
To be made.
We've all been learning about the defense industrial base over the course of this debate, and I know that much of the weaponry still needs to be actually manufactured. So will this be rolled out over the course of the rest of this year, Yes.
I mean, this is exactly the challenge, right is that there's funding, but you need to be able to buy something, and a lot of these things have, as you said, not been made. And many of these high valued systems that are in low quantity, like patriot missiles, have also
been promised to other countries. So one of the issues that needs to be addressed is where the priority is going to be in terms of Ukraine, perhaps sending more of those miss that were intended for others to Ukraine, and that still needs to be worked out, so that's certainly going to take time.
Well, and as we consider time, Kelly, it also raises the question of how far sixty billion dollars in aid goes into conflict like this before more aid might be needed if there's no real end in sight, Is this money going to bring us closer to the end of this war or just prolong it further because it gives Ukraine longer to have a fighting chance.
Yeah.
So this is really where I'm the most concerned because I supported, you know, providing Ukraine with more aid, particularly for artillery that it desperately needs in the United States
is able to provide. But I think you're asking the right question, which is we need to start thinking really seriously about long term strategy here and pivoting from a talk about liberating all Ukrainian territory and militarily defeating Russia to how do we create a credible, sustainable defense for Ukraine because this is a war of attrition and it's stillmated,
and bringing it to the negotiating table. It goes back to what Mark Milly, General Mark Milly said about a year ago when he was still chairman and the chiefs of the Joint Chief Staff, which is that this is a war that's going to end in negotiations, and so we really need to start be thinking about what is the strategy to get there.
Well, that's offully important. Then a little more on that, Kelly, what would that look like? You just got sixty billion dollars here, You've got a finite amount of time to work with it. How does Ukraine deploy that money in a way that would in fact strengthen its hand at the negotiating table. I'm guessing that's a strategy of its own. Does it need to start punching through Russian lines? Does it take down the bridge to Crimea? Is there something specific that would help?
Yeah, I think actually it really needs to focus on defensive systems and defensive mortifications. So if you think about when it Ukraine went it on its own conor offensive, you know, which failed, it was partly because Russia had devised really dense, thick defensive fortifications, so anti tank obstacles, well defended trenches, and so Ukraine is starting to do that,
but it's months behind in its preparation. And I think that's actually one of the areas where we could really help is sending some of those some of that capability, some of the you know, concrete, the construction equipment, not just advance you know, missiles and artillery. And I think though it really is about a long change, change shift
in perspective. You know, already as soon as it passed this bill passed, you started hearing, you know, talk about twenty twenty five, Ukraine returning to the Conor offensive, and you know, we don't want to repeat Groundhog Day here and waste sort of this capability going on a very costly Conor offensive that's unlikely to succeed. So I think it's coming to terms with the reality that Ukraine should focus first and foremost on holding the territory that it has.
Well, Kelly, when we think about potential future counter offensive, it really just brings us back to the idea of the force that Ukraine is trying to counter, which is Russia. How is Russia likely to respond knowing more assistance is coming Ukraine's way, does it change what they will do in real time in the interim and potentially make this a more dangerous moment for Ukraine while they wait for everything to arrive to them.
Yeah, I mean it's clear that Kremlin's not happy. They've issued their usual kind of statements indicating indicating that it does create a window for Moscow in terms of how it's thinking about launching an offensive which is expected a spring and summer, and that it might be thinking now that it has a window of a few weeks to a few months to try to do that when Ukraine is that it's maximum vulnerability, and that's possible. I don't know though, if the Russians are really capable of being
that agile to speed things up. They haven't really shown that during the course of the war. But I think the real issue here is that Russia thought its strategy was that it could outlast Western support, including US support work for Ukraine, and this is certainly sending a signal that that strategy is not working. And so the hope I have is that there will be more pressure on both sides of this conflict to head to a negotiating table.
And there's supposed to be some kind of diploma diplomatic effort in June in Switzerland, and I'd like to see both parties actually attending that and really working towards some kind of settlement.
Spending time with Kelly Grico from the Stimpson Center. Following the passage of Ukraine funding in the House and the expected passage of Ukraine funding in the Senate, should Joe Biden go back and I ask you that because morale has been as much of an issue as equipment and materiel so of troops.
By the way, Kelly, in our remaining moment.
I'd love for you to focus on that, whether or not the President should be there. Again, this does not buy more manpower for Ukraine. What does it do about the issue of bodies on the battlefields?
Yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, this is Ukraine's war and that includes manpower, as you suggest, and Ukrainon took months trying to pass a bill to lower the recruitment age. I don't think that Biden is actually all that important a visit from him in terms of morale. I think, you know, Ukraine has to do that itself, and they have been very determined and that's something I think for their leadership to work out.
It's great to have you back.
Kelly Stimpson Center, Senior fellow with the re Imagining US Grand Strategy Program. Kelly Grico, thanks for joining as always here on Balance of Power. It's going to be pretty quick from here. It sure seems like after what we just heard in the last ten minutes here, Kaylee, there's going to be an agreement, likely on debate in the Senate. This could be done tomorrow. We could be talking about a law by Wednesday morning.
Yeah. I guess if all the timing works out, and President Biden would very likely give its signature to that bill almost immediately after. We know that the President did speak with Vladimir's Lenski today underscore or the US's lasting commitment to supporting Ukraine. But just because this past, Joe, there is still the question of how much more lasting that commitment will be as this conflict potentially goes on well into the future.
That's for sure, and it sounds like the narrative is going to be very quickly coalescing around an endgame. Here the negotiating table and how this money can help them get there. With Kaylee Lines, I'm Joe Matthew the Panels, Next, I'm Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, CarPlay, and then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Kaylee Lines and Joe Matthew are here in Washington checking on whether Marjorie Taylor Green seems to have changed her mind yet about whether she thinks Mike Johnson should keep his job as House speaker well as of an hour ago, Joe, it does not seem so. Her latest post on X Mike Johnson still hasn't shown Congress or the American people the proof that Russian tends to invade the rest of
Europe after finishing its campaign in Ukraine. It goes on for a few more sentences and ends with we need a new speaker to exclamation points.
Okay.
The refrain though over the weekend from Marjorie Tayler Green Tom Massey is that they wanted him to resign, that they would ratchet up the pressure until Mike Johnson had no other option but to leave on his own. And of course, Kaylee, he already articulated last week the words I will not resign, leading us to doubt that as a viable option. But they could pull the trigger on this. He could still lose his job, and so we may as well dive in there with the panel.
Right sounds good.
Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us Bloomberg Politics contributors. I have to apologize to both of you in advance. I really don't want to do this to you every day, but it's hanging out there. Genie, what are we going to do about the motion to vacate or should Mike Johnson resign? That does seem to be with the three Republicans who have their name on this believe. All the while, some are arguing he's more powerful now that he got these bill passed.
What do you think?
Yeah, he seems to have found the secret sauce, which is, you know, one hundred percent Democrats, fifty percent or so Republicans, and he can pretty much pass anything there. You know, I think it's probably not what the Marjorie Taylor Greens of the world want to hear, but you know, I think as it pertains to his job number one, who wants it? Number two? You know, I think he's probably safe until November. It depends obviously on what happens in the election, and I've never thought he had a real
shot at keeping the job next year. I in fact think that's more likely now than I did before. But I think for the moment he's probably safe. That doesn't mean she can't move forward on the motion to vacate, but I think we're hearing enough Democrats who would be there to support him, and that would keep him safe at least until probably November.
Rick.
When we think about Mike Johnson staying safe, especially if the cost of staying safe is having Democrats step in to help you, Is he safe with no real power. You keep the gavel, but your ability to wield it for your own purposes is kind of not really there because you need Democrats to do anything. In your own party has members that really would not like you to be in the job. I just wonder how we think about what's safe is for Mike Johnson, Well, there's.
Really nothing safe about ever being a speaker. So the whole concept of safety is not really relevant to politics in general because you never know what shifting alliances are going to occur. And in the course, you know, in this day and age, when you have such a divided country that's extremely well represented in almost a completely divided House of Representatives, you know, there's no place to hide, there's no safe place.
And so I think that the band aid has been ripped off.
I mean, you know, we now have a coalition government in the House of Representatives, and that coalition government will probably stick together between now and the election because there's nothing new to happen, right, they can just band together
and pass whatever they want. Frankly, the things that would get past probably fine ready acceptance with the President and with the Senate, so they could actually be a more productive House of Representatives between now and election day, even when usually that's when people shut down and they go home into a campaign. So it's an odd, upside down world we live in, and it's currently being well represented by the House. So my guess is there's no fear
at all of Marjorie Taylor Green. This motion to vacate will be tabled almost immediately, and so the idea that they have any leverage over Mike Johnson is a fantasy. So I think we're going to see the rest of this Congress be a bipartisan year in the House of Representatives. Certainly not where we thought when we started this year.
Well, god knows it's not. Then, Genie, is there a way for Joe Biden to leverage a so called coalition government here on Capitol Hill to maybe sneak something through in a campaign year that could make a difference beyond what's just happened.
Yeah, you know, I don't know that I would believe that in a Congress which has passed what sixty nine or so bills, what are the lowest in history that in you know, months before an election, the president of the opposition party could pass through much. I mean, it's possible.
But I think Joe Biden has got to be very happy with what happened over the weekend and quite frankly, what he has been able to accomplish in this Congress, because it has been you know, I think against all odds that he has gotten through what he's gotten through. So he's got to be happy. He's moving on the campaign trail. You know. I do think we may see a little, you know, a little dust up in the Senate with some of this, you know, as they move forward.
I think they're going to move quickly on this. But I think it's fascinating people like Mike Lee trying to force an amendment that ensures that Ukraine pays back this money. I mean, the of parts of this that we're hearing, there's not just you know, inter party fighting in the House. It's also in the Senate. You know, you look at
jd Vance and Lindsey Graham. So I think there may be a little conversation there in the next twenty four hours or so, but they want to get out this weekend, so I think they're going to I mean this week rather so I think they're going to pass this pretty quickly if they can.
Yeah.
I guess the difference, maybe Rick, would be that in the Senate, the Republican infighting is in the minority, where you didn't have the much power anyway, versus in the House it's in the majority, which has rendered the majority a little less useful perhaps than a typical majority would be.
I just wonder, given everything we've seen and what you were just speaking to, the idea that something did pass it was in a bipartisan way, which probably is what the majority of the American people would like to see. Have the Republicans improved their odds of being able to retain the House in November, especially if we don't see another chaotic go around for a new speaker because Mike Johnson gets kicked out.
Yeah, last first, Yes, I think this last week has been a step in the right direction for members, especially in the more swing districts, who can go back and say, hey, I got Ukraine funding, I got funding for our allies in Asia and the Middle East, and there'll be some explaining to do about the TikTok ban, But other than that, I think that The reality is this is this is actually going to be helpful to Republican members going home.
And it's not that it's not helpful to Democrats, but I think it's a good incumbency racket to have passed this bill. I think that's why you saw so many members of Congress being for this, because it's good politics and it's good for the country. That being said, I mean, I think we have to get away from this whole
idea that anybody in the House has leverage. It's going to be you know, sort of like you know, whatever coalition you can bring to bear, and with one vote margin of majority, the concept of a majority is kind of thrown out the window. So getting things unlike the Farm Bill and the Faay author these are big things, right, I mean, that have been steimy. You couldn't even get a rule for any of this stuff in the past. Now you're going to have Democrats in the Rules Committee
voting regularly to get things out. Now that they've gotten done once, why not do it more often? So I think it's completely changes a dynamic in the House of Representations. It's like a different chamber now than it was a week ago. And maybe for the positives for American taxpayers.
It's a different chamber. I'm gonna have to start watching these Rules Committee hearings to see what Chip Royd does in the face of this coalition government.
Genie.
Lastly, Joe Biden is talking about Earth day to day, is going to be campaigning again this week while Donald Trump is in.
And out of court.
I presume it helps him from the making good on promises file here to say that we are standing by our allies. I got this across the finish line. Is that enough to make up for all the young people who are going to be angry with him and with Democrats about TikTok?
You know, I don't know if it's enough to make up for it. And I think the anger amongst young people room we see it just in you know, the NBC poll out, I think it was yesterday. It's a big problem for him, and the biggest challenge there has to do with what's going on in Israel. So, you know, I'm not sure the passage of this bill helps him
with that constituency. And it's something he really needs to work on because the numbers are really problematic as it pertains to enthusiasm amongst that group, and so you know, he can talk about this success, but I'm not sure it's a message he would want to take to college campuses. Quite frankly at this.
Point, all right, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno, our Bloomberg Politics contributors, thank you very much. And of course, Joe college campuses is where we see kind of an overlap in this Van diagram in many ways. On the one hand, you have a lot of people who are getting news and information from TikTok. There has been a lot of conversation as to whether or not there is a pro palace to me and bent in some of that content
they will see. And of course you're seeing what we're seeing at Columbia, where they've had to move classes online because of the goings on of the last several days.
And again the White House stepping in to get them what's happening on a college campus. It's pretty remarkable what's happening there. Whether TikTok ends up being banned, though you know, this may not be answered even during this campaign cycle, if we enter this protracted legal challenge that we're hearing about. By the way, Bloomberg Intelligence, we love talking to the analysts of b I about they're running odds on this, Kayley, Yeah,
and they say seventy percent odds. The government wins a legal challenge by TikTok that it will in fact go through the legislature.
And the courts well, and then it becomes a question what does TikTok do then, or specifically, what does byte Edance do. Do they agree then to the divestiture or do they hold onto the algorithm though, which would make maybe the whole thing worth a lot less than it would be otherwise. There are so many remaining questions and we're going to be digging a lot more into this.
Listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroun Oo with the Bloomberg Business Ad. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
As we get ourselves back to business on a Monday, Welcome to Balance of Power on the radio, on the satellite and on YouTube. Amazing what can happen if we put our minds to it. A busy weekend in the House of Representatives.
It was so busy.
It might be in the end of the speakership, depending on who you ask. But they're pretty happy in Ukraine because the money is coming. We still have to go through the Senate and the President's got to sign it, but all of that appears to be a kind of the easy part here. Getting through the House was the tough one. Aid for Ukraine while you were enjoying your weekend passes three eleven to one twelve, Aid for Israel three sixty six to fifty eight. Tomorrow is when they
get to it in the Senate. The President's waiting to intercept this. By the way, they're going to fast track this thing in the Senate because they're already over time on starting their recess.
And that's gonna work, of course for everybody.
And then they'll come back for the White House Correspondences dinner, presumably, or at least those who get invited. Tom Massey, who signed onto the motion to vacate along with Marjorie Taylor Green, these were the original two. Like Marjorie Taylor Green, he is now calling for the resignation of Mike Johnson. But if it comes to it, he says, a vote will be called referring to the MTV, and it is unclear today.
Of course, they're all gone now on recess. What's going to happen when they come back, or if maybe Mike Johnson is suddenly a made man because he's got Democrats on his side at least at the moment. Kate Accley will help us with all of this. She was covering it over the weekend. Spoke with her on Friday going into the votes, and she's with us now from Bloomberg Government. Kate,
it's great to see you. Does Mike Johnson have to worry this morning or does he know that the other party will be there for him?
I don't know if he can know that the other party is going to be there for him. He has shored up a lot of support even among his own you know, Republicans. He has, you know, gotten this Ukraine Aid, Israel Aid. Also that TikTok bill all that they cleared that all on Saturday and sent it as a you know, sort of bundled it up in a package, sent it over to the Senate and the Senate is poised to
move on it this week. It looks like that's going to get to the President's desk, you know, this week, so you know, definitely he has done the things that people like Marjorie Taylor Green said, you know, if you do this, we're it's going to trigger this this motion to vacate, you know. I mean there are a lot of people who were acting like you know, last Thursday Friday that Mike Johnson was, you know, essentially kind of a dead speaker walking, if you will. Who now think
he has more support, including from Democrats. You know, it's really hard to predict how this will all shake out. I mean, how long is he going to be speaker? Who knows? Because you know, after the November elections, Republicans could lose the House anyway and then there's no Republican speaker at all. So it's not maybe like he has real long term job security, if you will. It's that kind of job. But he's going to laugh through this week because they're in recess.
That's right, He's at least got a week to think about things. Kate, we should talk about what was actually accomplished here. It's not just funding for Ukraine and Israel, both of which were controversial in their respective quarters, but TikTok passed.
Divest or ban, and it's going to the Senate.
Now, that was something that we thought would fail in the Senate if it ever got a vote. Now senators are faced with a choice. If you don't like TikTok, that means you have to vot against Israel in Ukraine. So this is seen as a done deal here. Correct, all of this in one piece should pass the Senate, assuming they can have a deal to end debate.
Yes, I exactly. I mean this. We thought that the TikTok measure was going to at least be very slowed down in the Senate, if not completely stopped. This has a little bit of a change. It gives a longer time, you know, the I think the initial bill was like six months where TikTok would have to divest from Byte Dance. It's uh, you know, for an owned parent company. This
gives a little bit more time potentially. TikTok has been saying and you know, as Bloomberg has been reporting that it will you know, TikTok Byte Dance will fight this if this is enacted, we'll fit it in the courts saying that it, you know, is not legal constitutional. So it's maybe not the end here, but this is a huge setback for TikTok.
Kind of amazing. You specialize in covering lobbyist money, Kate. Is this going to be another free for all? Is there anything lobbyists can do at this point? Or is it all in the courts?
I mean people, usually companies usually will have a strategy in tandem courts, you know, litigation, lobbying, you know, anything you can signal, even if you get just a bill introduced on something or or you know, get members of Congress to talk about something that can certainly help help with a court case. So these are often things that go in tandem. I don't think that TikTok would abandon a congressional strategy, a legislative strategy and just only pursue,
you know, a litigation strategy. But it certainly looks like unless something and I don't think it's going to happen, I mean, something really changed dramatically that this TikTok ban or divest bill does look like it's on the fast track this week.
There you have, Kate Accley. It's great to see you, Kate.
I hope you didn't work the entire weekend, but good to have you with us. Here on balance of power reporting for Bloomberg government passing the House, we're now waiting on the Senate, and then of course the President probably won't be able to sign this fast enough when that
likely happens. But I want to get back to the matter of the Speaker, Mike Johnson, who's got, as we have already indicated, some time to think about things, and so do the three Republican lawmakers who have filed this motion to vacate that, by the way, is still not privileged. This is still just a threat hanging over his head, and it's an important thing to remember here knowing that this could in fact be a.
Problem for Mike Johnson when he returns.
Lisa Camuso Miller knows what it's like to work in the Speaker's office and the many complexities that come with this, particularly in this case for someone with no experience in the higher echelons of leadership. She was, also, of course, here's communications director for the RNC, and she's host of the Friday Reporter podcast. Now, Lisa Kamusa Miller, great to see you. You have a sense of what Mike Johnson
is facing. Do you believe the threat? Because I feel like I could ask you today fairly, is he weaker or more strengthened by what happened over the weekend.
So I am really amazed at how much he has come to accomplish. I feel like I'm in the camp that he is stronger today than he has ever been. I know that there are these outside threats that have been offered, but can you imagine how politically unpopular it would be for the Republicans in the House to now go back through try to remove the Speaker again and have another fight for another leader just six months before election day. I can think of nothing less popular to do.
And this package of legislation that will now go to the Senate is in support of our allies and a vote against our enemies, which is China, which ultimately is the fight that we're having over TikTok. And the Speaker did it in a way where he did it over with coalition, like a coalition of bipartisanship, in a way that has not happened. It to me is one of those things where he is showing signs of leadership in the absence of leadership in a place that is very
difficult to govern right now, and so to me. It just feels like everything he has promised to do has been delivered and delivered in a way that while it's been slower, everybody knows that the House Republican Conference has been incredibly difficult to govern, and he's done it in a way that I think a lot to be lauded and people ought to be proud of.
The Thing is that very coalition you talk about is why Marjorie Taylor Green wants him to be gone. They don't want a Republican speaker who's working with Democrats. I think it was Andy Biggs, forgive me if I'm getting the wrong Freedom Caucus member here, who referred to essentially a coalition government last week. If Democrats protect him in emotion to vacate, could that in fact be as undoing when it comes to perception within his own conference.
Perhaps, But there's also a risk that this small faction of unhappy all the time Republican members of the Conference could also find themselves with Congressman Jeffries leader Jeffries as their speaker, which would really be unpopular for them to So there's all kinds of factions that are in place here, Joe, all kinds of small things that are happening. It surprises me how much power this small coalition of Freedom Conference
folks have over the overall Republican Conference. So to me, it feels as if if governing is the priority of the House of Representatives, then it's in the best interest of the Republicans and the Democrats to keep things as they are so that we can keep proceeding and go home in November and celebrate the wins that we've had.
Republicans and Democrats will obviously celebrate those wins, but if Republicans continue to meddle with progress in government, it will be detrimental to their success in November.
I want you to bring us inside the Speaker's office here, Lisa. You worked for Speaker Dennis Hastard, and I recall a tweet by Tom Massey last week in which he said the Speaker now shares procedural power with the Democrats. How do you take that line, because you know what it's like to sit in the Speaker's office and strategize and talk about whipping votes and moving an agenda here. Does Hakim Jeffries actually play a role in that starting now?
I'm not so sure about that. I do think though, that we are governing with one seat majority. That is very different from the time when I was in the majority. We had a wide berth. We had an opportunity where folks could make a little bit more of a personal to their own district decisions while also voting almost always
with the leadership. Nowadays, we're in a place where if we expect to keep our allies close and support folks like Israel and Ukraine and make decisions about how not to do business with China, we are very much going to have to work with others on the other side of the aisle, regardless of our differences in policies, because some of these policies, as much as we want to play politics all the time, are more about country than
they are about party. And that to me, even though it's making some of these hardliners very unhappy, it is definitely still to me a way to govern and lead. And that's when I was in leadership, that's what we were looking to do show leadership. In fact, Speaker Aster used to say he is a speaker for the entire House of Representatives. He was elected by his peers, but he was elected to lead, and that to me is something that I'm seeing in this speaker in an unconventional way. Sure, yeah,
he's got to work with Democrats. Does he want to do it? Probably no? But does he want to govern? Does he want to be perceived as someone who can work and make change? I think that's absolutely his priority.
Well, so what does he do with this moment, then, Lisa, or what can he do? Because every time he walks around a corner, Donald Trump is going to be standing there. And I think we can argue that Donald Trump helped him survive last week, giving him cover after he went to mar A Lago, and he's trying to keep things together here to avoid a speaker battle, knowing that that could be a problem for Republicans up and down the ticket, all the way up to the top of the ticket
in his case. Is Mike Johnson capable of doing anything to coalesce around a certain group and actually activate an agenda here or is he just waiting for the phone to ring from mar A Lago?
Well, I think it's hard to say. I think Donald Trump, regardless of where you stand on Donald Trump, I think he does. He really wants to win in November, and I think that the people around him know how to win. Elections, and they know that having success and having opportunities to point to supporting smart policies that people back home are activated about is the right way to go and having these petty discussions and arguments about who should be in
charge is not the path to success in November. And Donald Trump has seen that, and he has said that, and I've heard from friends of mine that are closer into that circle that he is unhappy with this constant back and forth. He wants to see leadership. He wants to see something that he can stand on to say Republicans know how to govern in spite of the fact that there's a Democrat in the White House and the Democrats are controlling the Senate. So that to me seems like if it's that's the.
End of the story, then it doesn't matter what Marjorie Taylor Green thinks. As long as Donald Trump does not want his campaign to be interrupted, Mike Johnson is a safe man. He's got the speaker's gavel.
I really think so, Joe.
That says a lot to us as we work our way through the next six months. Can he get anything passed in that environment?
Well, I don't know. This is kind of an amazing weekend for him. I think that it all remains to be seen. I think there's a lot of work that's still yet to be done, but also to keeping those factions as close as they can, keeping them working together. I mean, there was so much that was set in a pathway starting in January, from the one vote to motion to vacate the Senate or the Speaker to putting
two hardliners on the Rules Committee. It has made the Speaker's office so much less powerful that if nothing else, he can point to these as wins and point to these as ways that perhaps they can work together as a conference to get more done.
But glad you could talk to us today about it, Lisa Camussa Miller. It's great to have you back, Lisa. Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already an Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, d C. At noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.