Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, car Play, and then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on.
YouTube alongside Joe Matthew. Here in Washington, where we are keeping track of the transition, which seems to be picking up its pace heres. Donald Trump has been announcing more and more people who will either serve in his cabinet or be close to him during his second administration, some of course being tapped for positions that don't require Senate
approval and confirmation. But the cabinet is going to be especially interesting here as we consider who the big players will be around the table with him, and especially as we consider the Treasury secretary potentially knowing that someone actually took themselves out of the running today, Paulson, in a statement said it would be too financially complicated, given his complex financial obligations, for her to serve in this role, which does seem to be shortening the list, and Bloomberg
is reporting today our colleague Seleia mosen and Jenny Leonard that topping the list potentially at least to some Trump advisors who are pushing for this, would be Scott Bessett of Key Square Group, the Macro Hedge Fund. Remember we spoke with him on this program before the election. Take a listen to part of our conversation.
He has a deep understanding of financial markets as opposed to most politicians, so he wants to be involved in the conversation. He has very well formed opinions, have a lot of private sector friends, so he just wants to be a voice.
Sorry to start our conversation with Bloomberg senior Washington correspondent Seleia Mosen, of course, host of the Big Take DC podcast, something we talk about with Seleia pretty often here. She's also spearheading our coverage of the transition in time to name name, Seleia, is great to see you. Thank you for joining us today. Did we just see the next trad free secretary there?
Maybe we did. According to our reporting here at Boomberg, it looks like most of Trump's key advisors are supporting Scott Bessett for the job of tragery Secretary, but Trump himself has not weighed in. He has not made a decision.
Well, but he has heralded best repeatedly on the campaign trail, calling him out at rallies that kind of thing. We understand that these two are actually quite close. So I wonder why this is taking so long, given Trump has already announced many others. If it were obvious that it would be best, and wouldn't we know that already?
I guess, So, I mean, we all want to know desperately. Obviously we are bloomberg. But at the same time, Marco Rubio for Secretary of State that has not been announced, right, so we're still waiting on a couple that have been floated, saft, floated, air tested, who knows, whatever you want to call it,
but they have not been formally announced. And who knows how things are panning out at mar A Lago, whether they want to float names, see what happens, or call people down for interviews, or if advisors are just getting ready for if Donald Trump president elect? Donald Trump says, who do you think I want for this? We have our ducks in a row.
We know what we want to tell you, moving pretty quickly this time. I was recalling in our last hour the Apprentice style walk we saw in twenty sixteen, everybody had to go on the lobby of Trump Tower, awkwardly, wait for the elevator, choose to say something to a reporter if they wanted to, and then go do the audition or the interview. We're rolling them out pretty quickly this time, a much more concerted and deliberate process.
It feels like, well, so far, it's pretty organized, I mean, and that's a reflection of how the campaign itself was much more organized compared to Trump's efforts in twenty sixteen. And in twenty twenty. We have the first female White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, who was overseeing much of his campaign, and she has really kept things organized, including the number of leaks.
Well.
So as we consider the names that have been whether leaked out or actually outright confirmed, they do include and you mentioned Marco Rubio, which hasn't been confirmed by the President elect yet. They include a lot of current members of the House or the Senate Elistaphonic Tap for U n Ambassador Congressman Mike Waltz of Florida for a national
security and then of course Senator Rubio. Should we expect more of the picks that are announced going forward to come from Congress, or is he not going to want to pull too much out of what looks like it could be a very narrow majority in the House at least.
Look just speculation on my part looking at the information that we have in front of us. If there's a narrow majority in the Senate for Republicans, they're only going to want to pull senators from the chamber if they can reliably replace that Senate seat with a Republican. So I think that there is an air of caution of
how many to pull. We don't know what the margin is for the House side, but we did see the National Security Advisor is coming from the House, so maybe there's a little bit more wiggle room.
There is there a hope that this cabinet stays together longer than the original one. It does seem like there is some consistency here in bringing in loyalists, also checking the box es central casting that we know Donald Trump likes to check, but not to have the revolving door that they experienced the first time around.
Yeah, it would be great for all of us. There's not the same revolving door. It'd be great for markets and economic policy. Last time around, we saw the Treasury secretary. Then it was Stephen Mnushan. He stuck by for four years. That gave a lot of stability to economic policy. Let's see if we get the same thing I mean this time around, if we can have a Secretary of State who stays. There was high turnover in that slot in
White House chief of Staff. Now, if we're looking at how things have run so far in twenty twenty four with Susie Wiles, maybe we will see more stability.
Well, and Susie Wiles, as I alluded to you earlier, one of the folks that isn't going to require confirmation from the Senate, just like Steven Miller, who we understand has been tapped for Deputy chief of Staff for policy, but this is really just putting him in a position to help influence policy, especially when it comes to the border and immigration.
Absolutely all of these jobs come with great, big titles. A lot of them do have firm job descriptions, but a lot of it, especially the roles that don't need Senate confirmation, like White House Chief of Staff or Deputy chief of staff, there's a lot of leeway on what kind of job description you want to have. What you go in with and what your boss ultimately gives you.
All right, Bloomberg, salamos, and you can check out all of her reporting on this transition on the Bloomberg terminal
or online. Thank you so much for joining us. And it's remarkable to consider here Joe, as Donald Trump does, has alluded to the fact that he sees himself as coming to this office a second time around with even more of a mandate than he perhaps had before, having one, of course, the popular vote, and also having at least the Senate backing him in addition, potentially to the House once we know whether or not that's called, which just speaks to the fact that while we expected this race
to be close, and in a lot of ways it was, it also brought with it a full red sweep.
Well that's for sure, a red sweep that we can now quantify almost entirely. We're still waiting for the House, and they could be as just as little as one race away. As a matter of fact, with the seven contested seats left Republicans need to turn one, we actually have more like fifteen that have yet to be called. But that's how razor thin things are in the House, and when Donald Trump is up there, to maris, he's going to be talking about the leadership battles that we're
about to endure. The vote set for Wednesday. Mike Johnson probably comfortable where he is. The question is who replaces Mitch McConnell, yep.
Is it going to be a John John Thuner, John Cornyn Are Perhaps could it be the dark Corse candidate Rick Scott that it does seem those close to Trump are now pushing for. We're going to have to wait to find out, but we didn't want to wait. To touch back in with Andre Gillespie of Emory University. She, of course, is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science. We were checking in with her frequently throughout this election cycle and want to check back with her
now as we continue to do the post mortem here. Andre, welcome back to Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. While Joe is right to point out, we don't for sure know that the House is going to be still a Republican majority, and we still got to get a few more race calls, but it is the prevailing wisdom that Republicans will be able to keep a narrow hold
on that chamber. So I wonder what that says to you that it wasn't just the presidency but the entirety of Congress potentially that swept one way here.
Well, I mean, you know, this is clearly still a divided country. So if we're looking at the margins not just by which President Trump won and the margins in the swing states, but we're also looking at what the legislative majorities look like in both the House and the Senate. And I'm certainly anticipating that Republicans are going to retain control of the House. We're still looking at very narrow legislative majorities, which suggests one our country is still polarized.
And what it also suggests is that the governing coalition is going to have to maintain discipline in order to be effective. And if they cannot maintain discipline, there are going to be ways for Congress to still be at a standstill. So, you know, you can't just blame it on having the president of one party and having one chamber in Congress being controlled by the other for there to be a legislative stalemate. There's still the possibility for that.
It's really going to come down to management and It's going to come down to the ideas and the policies that are being presented well.
As Republicans choose their leaders this week, and I don't think we'll have too many surprises, if any, on the House side. And I wonder what the strategy conversation is today between Hakim Jeffreys, Pete Aguilar, and Catherine Clark. The Democratic leadership in the House remains in the minority. What's their plan.
I think what they may be considering is how much to push back and win, to fight their battles. You know, Donald Trump certainly has a mandate. He has a bigger mandate because he won the popular vote and not just the electoral college in this election. But again it's a
narrow mandate. And I think what people, what Democrats may decide to do is to stand back and let Democrats and let Republicans govern, and let's see if the ideas actually hold merit, if they can get through Congress and get signed by the President, and also when implemented, if they actually do work for the American people, if they are perceived as being antagonistic or opposing all things and not just voting against it, which I expect Democrats to do,
but mostiferously coming out and attacking every thing. It might actually take attention away from the merits of the policies themselves. And if these policies prove to not actually be good for the American people, then the Democrats have their talking points. See, we let Republicans reign and govern in an unfettered kind of way, and the policies that they put forward were
disastrous for the American people. So I suspect that they're trying to figure out when is the right time to push back, especially if it involves preserving institutions, But when do they allow bad policies to come forward so that the American people can see that those policies might not actually be advantageous towards all American people, and including some of the people who voted for Donald Trump. I think that that's probably the direction in which they're headed.
Well, so as we consider those people who voted for Donald Trump Andrew Obviously nothing is monolithic, but we've spent a lot of time talking about the swing we saw toward him in specific demographic groups, including Latinos, some portion of black men as well.
Well.
It is the Republican Party that seems like it is attracting more people into a larger tent. One could argue, I wonder what you make of the fact, though, that that kind of wider coalition, more multicultural, multiethnic coalition doesn't necessarily seem to be manifesting itself in the same way.
As Donald Trump selects those who will be closest to him as he actually serves as president other than Marco rubiov that people who have been named so far and those we understand to be on the short list list, we're talking about a lot of white people.
Well, if you go back and you look at what his cabinet and cabinet equivalent appointments look like. In his first term, he had Nikki Haley, and he had Ben Carson. And then if we look at the number of women, we also saw that compared to the Obama Bush Clinton administrations, he had far fewer women in positions of leaderships. So you look at people like Mickey Haley or Kirsten Nielsen, among others, who were able to serve lind of a
command excuse me, in positions of power. He hasn't had time to announce his full cabinet slight wait to see what the diversity looks like Marco Rubio is certainly, if he is in fact the design need to be Secretary of State is certainly a historic choice choice. He would be the first Latino in this position, and you know, I think that it is certainly remarkable in terms of descriptive representation. Suzy Wilde's choice is certainly a descriptively representative choice.
You know, I think we need to give him time to see how much more diverse it looks. I don't think I'm holding my breath to see if it's going to match the diversity of the Biden or the Obama or the Clinton administrations, or even the Bush administrations. But I think that I'm expecting to see a little bit more descriptive diversity amongst the cabinet level picks.
Professor Donald Trump's coming to town tomorrow is going to meet with Joe Biden in the Oval Office. I suspect the optics will be fascinating. Should Joe Biden remind Donald Trump or the reporters in the room that he was not afforded such an invitation four years ago.
You know, I don't know what would be gained by bringing that up. I mean, and certainly as signed of graciousness. I expect that reporters are going to an analyst are
going to make that particular observation. I think this might be an opportunity for President Biden to talk about how important it is for democracies to have smooth transitions, for losers to accept their defeat gracefully, and by just demonstrating and modeling that in some ways, it might be an indictment of how poorly the last transition.
Was well fair enough, and they have pledged to make this transition go more smooth smoothly this time around, Odre. Finally, before we let you go. Of course, the way in which Donald Trump used his mandate here is one that could be potentially much more solid and broader, considering he did claim victory in every single swing state that we were watching, including your state of Georgia, and you know,
Georgia politics incredibly well. And I wonder, as we can cast forward to four more years from now, even two more years from now in the mid terms, if this was decisive, or if Georgia is still going to be swingy in the elections moving forward, knowing that the Blue Wall, for example, didn't look so blue this time around. In fact, it looked very very right.
Well, I think Donald Trump certainly has a mandate, but I think that some of his new supporters are conditional supporters, and they want to see that he makes good on his promises, which probably factored more into the impressions of improving the economy and lowering inflation than it did on some of the other tenants of his platform. We can already see his immigration policy taking shape, and I think voters, supporters and opponents are going to look to see how
efficacious his policies are. He might be able to maintain or broaden that base if he does it, if he does a good job, but if he doesn't, he might lose some of those supporters. And as far as Georgia is concerned, I think it's important to keep in mind that Kamala Harris lost the state by a margin of about two and a half percentage points. That's half the margin by which Hillary Clinton lost in twenty twenty. So while the fundamentals of the state of Georgia still favor Republicans,
they're favoring them by slimmer margins. And I think twenty twenty four was kind of evidence of the fact that Georgia is still much more competitive than it was twenty years ago.
Andred, it's great to have you back. Andre Gillespie, EMRA University Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science with us just one week after the election. We'll assemble our panel next lots to talk about on the transition coming up with Genie Shanzano and Chapin Fay. Right here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enron Oo 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.
Welcome back to Balance of Power here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. I'm Kaylee Lines alongside Joe Matthew with some breaking official news in just the last few minutes. We already knew it based off of people familiar with the matter,
but Donald Trump is now making it official. He's named Florida Congressman Mike Waltz as his national security advisor, releasing a statement in which he says, in part, Mike has been a strong champion of my America First foreign policy agenda and will be a tremendous champion of our pursuit of peace through strength. Then, Joe, this is of course just another selection that broadly is painting a picture not only the doubling down on the America First agenda and
those close to it. You can say the same through the selection of Congressman A lease daphonic to UN ambassador and Marco Rubio. We understand going to be tapped for a Secretary of State, but peace through strength, America First is a common thing. And of course loyal to Trump tops that list of yeah, big time attributes as well.
This is a retired Special Forces officer, been on the House since twenty nineteen, and then a fierce critic of Joe Biden's foreign policy. And so here we are here with one more blank to be filled. We got a bunch of them yesterday as well, several not just Congress while several from the House of Representatives, where we've got a very thin majority. Here once again for Speaker Mike Johnson,
but Leez Elden also came up here. Wasn't just a least staphonic to the UN lee Z Elden to the EPA, raising a lot of questions about what experience he has helping to manage the environment.
Well, the answer to that question is not a ton. But it does seem that this is at least he was trying to frame it as more of an economic appointment. Yeah, anything else. As Donald Trump has talked consistently about helping the economy through lowering energy costs and unleashing oil and gas as well, it makes you wonder what kind of policy and regulatory frameworks we're going to be getting out of the EPA A sure industry.
Yeah, to Kaylee's point, Congressman Zelden spoke to this on Fox News from an economic perspective.
Here's what he said.
One of the biggest issues for so many Americans was the economy, and the President was talking about unleashing economic prosperity through the EPA. We have the ability to pursue energy dominance, to be able to make the United States the artificial intelligence capital of the world, to bring back American jobs to the auto industry, and so much more.
Let's assemble our panel for their take on some of the appointments. The transition is now in full speed and we have Genie Shanzino, of course, Democratic analyst and Bloomberg Politics contributor, Senior Democracy fellow with the Center for the Study of the Presidency in Congress, Jape and Fay Republican strategist and founder of Lighthouse Public Affairs. Great to see
you both. Genie, what's your thought on not only the broad scope of the appointments that we've heard so far, but specifically Congressman Zelden when it comes to the EPA. I realized there's a loyalty test here, but should any of these individuals have areas of expertise that pertain to the agencies they're running.
You know, it's interesting because one of the things we heard from the transition team was they were going to prioritize loyalty and competency, And of course there is no question Lee Zelden is com in a number of ways.
He simply though, does not have a background in this area, but he is appointed, as we understand from what they have said, because he aligns He's not only loyal, but he aligns with Donald Trump on what Donald Trump would like most of all to happen with the EPA, which is moving towards deregulation and also rolling back importantly fossil fuel regulations, and so to your and Cayley's point, in this way, he definitely lines up with where Trump and
the Republican Party are headed on this. He just doesn't come with the expertise we might normally expect in an EPA director. But of course Donald Trump doesn't do anything you'd expect, So from that perspective, it's with his appointments by and large.
Well so cheap. And as we look at the list of names we know to this point, whether they've been confirmed by the Trump campaign or just sources are indicating that's the way things are going. Are there any that concern you with a lack of expertise or compet and see in the required area, or do you think by and large the transition shaping up okay?
So far? I think by and large and shaping up okay. And I would use Congressman Zelden as an example. I would argue that he does have some environmental bona fides. His district, one of the few in the country that you have to take a ferry to get to election districts, has all sorts of environmental issues, from brownfields to New York's governor hocals Wind, whole wind platform is based off the south shore. There's the fishing industry. Again, a lot
of environmental cleanup fights over the Easthampton Airport. That's you know, critics are saying are noise pollution from helicopters and poisoning the ground out there. So I would argue that his district, who goes from rural to beach to farms to urban, gives him a pretty good platform, more so than other congress people from Congress across the country for the EPA.
And again, I think it is a business type type of appointment and he's gonna he's going to strike the right balance between the environment and business.
Well, how does that work, Genie, How do you find or unleash in his words, economic prosperity through the EPA?
Is that the charge of that agency.
It is Donald Trump's charge to the agency. And he, you know, to his credit he has been very very clear about this, is that he feels that this is what has been missing in the United States economically over the last four years. Certainly he felt like he was moving in this direction. So he has charged Lee Zelden, And I would suspect everyone else who he is appointing that he is going to be focused in addition to immigration, number one on energy and the issue of drilling and
fossil fuel rains large for him. You know, whether he can see that through is a whole nother question. But this is what he promised during the campaign very clearly, and now we have an appointment with somebody who has said that they can deliver on that well.
So as we consider the appointments that aren't necessarily confirmed yet, including that of Senator Marco Rubio of Florida being tapped for Secretary of State, I do wonder your feelings as a Democrat on this. Could Donald Trump have made a poor choice? Is that actually one that Democrats might find some comfort in when they're considering the future of foreign policy of the US.
You know, I think so far his appointments have not been particularly unexpected, nor has he made a choice that I think Democrats will line up in droves to object to. You know, it is interesting to see the talk of Marco Rubio we don't know yet. Along with Mike Waltz suggests that Susie Wiles is playing a big role here. These are two people she has worked closely with, and of course Rubio, we don't have confirmed yet.
You know.
Also important to remember, as he continues, at least so far, to take some folks out of the House, is that while Donald Trump won a big victory on Tuesday, he comes with arguably one of the narrow whist House majorities for Republicans in history. So you know, he's got to be very careful there. We heard Mike Johnson say that on the steps today. But by and large, I think these are people who know Washington and the ones that are going to go up for confirmation will likely pass
given the majority in the Senate. And of course Donald Trump has said we need to make appointments during recess if they have a danger of not passing. So he's already, you know, suggesting that if we can't get him through confirmation, we got to do recess appointments. So he is playing those odds already.
Well, we're talking today about the start of the lame duck session, the return of lawmakers to Washington, and there's a loud conversation happening in progressive quarters here Chapin about Trump proofing, as some call it, government and some of the specific examples having to do with legislation passed by Joe Biden and Democratic lawmakers fromle A. Gianpaul, the outgoing chair of the Progressive Caucus, says, a lot of things can be undone, but it can take longer to undo
them and would force a priority from them on what they want to focus on. They're preparing a raft, as we read today in axios of executive orders that President Biden could issue on his way out here to protect quote existing structures such as shielding career civil servants and Justice Department officials. Can this come together in the short amount of time they have.
We'll never say never, But I just don't, you know, I don't think the Progressive Caucus really was wagging the dog with the Biden administration from the get go. So I don't know that at the end Joe Biden's going to have that kind of appetite, particularly since some on the right of the aisle have seen him, we have interpreted him and sort of maybe enjoying this moment a
little bit too much after Harris has lost. So I don't know that there's an appetite for Joe Biden to sort of, you know, do a flurry of executive orders that it's going to make for difficult President Trump, incoming president, to get his agenda done. I do see some compromise there where, maybe there's a few things that he does, but I don't see any sort of major or wholesale operation from Joe Biden to trip up the the incoming administration. I don't think that's gonna happen.
Well, And as we consider what the next administration is going to look like, we've been talking a lot about how Donald Trump is likely cheap and going to have the cooperation of Congress with the Senate at least, and very likely a narrow majority in the House. But we saw how difficult that narrow majority has been over the last two years for the Republican Conference to navigate. Do you have confidence it will be different this time around? And if it's different, what exactly about it will be?
Well, I think there's going to be fewer members who are willing to come up an entire piece of legislation
along parties in our ideological alliance. Right, I think Trump won in a overwhelming or Republicans led by Trump one in an overwhelming way on election Day, and I think Republicans within the Caucus may grumble about getting some more stuff for their district or something like that, or shaping bills and shaping the policy, but I think you're going to see that he's going to be able to do the things that he needs to do even with a small majority in the House.
All right, Shape and Fay, thank you so much for joining US Republican Strategists of course and founder of Lighthouse Public Affairs, together with Jeanie Shansey, no Democratic strategist and senior Democracy Fellow with the Center for the Study of the Presidency in Congress our political panel today. Thank you both so much. And we mentioned Joe that we're still awaiting firm confirmation of some of these picks, including Secretary
of State selection potentially of Senator Marco Rubio. Another one we should mention as well, that's been reported by other outlets, not as here a Bloomberg as Christy No, that's right for the Department of Homeland.
Security, according to CNN. I'd be very curious to see an official statement on this. He was leading a lot of newscasts last evening. But it does remind us that they have a long list of names for a lot lot of jobs and they're not waiting around to start matching names with positions here, even if they're floating balloons. We're going to know pretty quickly who's going to be in a lot of these positions to fill out the cabinet.
Remarkable to think election day was just a week ago.
We could go today today, imagine where we were.
Then has already changed since then. Of course, we've had that covered for you. We will continue to do so with much more still ahead here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and radio.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Proudoto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Breaking news from the Trump camp with another appointment here we did not see coming today. As we keep trained on openings on the cabinet, it's an ambassadorial role that emerges with a statement from the former president now the President elect, please to announce that the former governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee, will be the next US Ambassador to Israel. Donald Trump writes, Mike has been a great public servant, governor,
leader in faith for many years. He loves Israel and the people of Israel, and likewise the people of Israel love him. This just emerging, Kayley, a day after at least Stephonic was tapped to be US ambassador to the UN.
Yeah.
Of course, Congresswoman Stephanic has been a vocal proponent of pro Israel policy. I think many would remember her questioning the presidents of some of the universities that we're dealing with protests over this past year. So you certainly are seeing a very pro Israel batch of people selected to help represent the United States, and frankly Israel's interest in
some of these bodies. Trump in that statement saying that Mike will work tirelessly to bring about peace in the Middle East, which does once again raise the question how the Trump administration will be approaching bringing an end to this war, and not only this war, but others as well, including the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine.
Yeah, it's interesting as well to learn this the same day that Axios reports Ron Dermer was at mar A Lago to meet with Donald Trump. So this is taking shape as we speak, not just domestically, but when it comes to foreign policy and some of the questions that we see around.
The House of Representatives.
You mentioned Congresswoman Staphonic potentially making Mike Johnson's job a little bit more difficult with what appears to be it's not yet official, but a relatively thin Republican majority, much like he's had since he got the gavel.
Yeah, that's what has made policy making and legislating on the Hill so difficult over the course of the one hundred and eighteenth Congress is there just wasn't really much room for error. That certainly could be so we still, have, of course more votes to be counted in a number of states, including California. But Republicans at this point just need to pick one of seven remaining toss ups. If they pick that up, that would get them to the
two hundred and eighteen required to get the majority. The question is how much wiggle room are they going to have. This is something that Speaker Johnson was talking about on Capitol Hill. As lawmakers retire to Washington today.
Every single vote will count because if someone gets ill or has a car accident or a late flight on their plane, that it affects the votes on the floor. So I think he and the administration are well in tuned to that. I don't expect that we will have more members leaving, but I'll leave that up to him.
So we want to go now to Capitol Hill, where we're joined by Bloomberg Government's Jack Fitzpatrick here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Jack, welcome back. I'm sure it feels good to be back after the long election and campaign recess. Certainly there is no time to waste for Republicans on the Hill, especially who have leadership elections tomorrow. Perhaps there's not going to be any drama. Speaker Johnson does seem set to keep his job assuming the majority is retained.
But what's going to happen in that Senate vote?
Yeah, the Senate is going to be a lot more interesting between the three members running for it, John Thune, Cornyn and Rick Scott. You may have seen Rick Scott responding to Trump's demand for recess appointments to rapidly get people confirmed without having to go through the traditional Senate
confirmation process. Scott said he one hundred percent agrees there may be a bit of a debate over the Senate's role to advise and consent on that and as members come back into the capital today, we'll probably get a little more a little more feedback on the direction of that race. But you're right that that Senate Republican leadership race appears to be much closer than anything in the House.
The Speaker looks safe compared to I mean, really, it was kind of considered a given that if they keep the majority, Speaker Johnson is in a pretty good spot. So the intrigue is more on the Senate side at this point.
So what's on the agenda for the lame duck here, Jack? We know that lawmakers have to fund the government beyond December twentieth, and you could probably add some color to that. We're hearing maybe March now they kick the canon of spring to buy some time. There's also the NDAA. There's also the matter of a farm bill, and I wonder if you see that getting any love, or if they kick the can on the farm bill as well.
So the NDAA probably is the top priority for what they want to actually fully accomplish by the end of the calendar year. That tends to be a very high priority. The farm bill has been moving slowly. I know they're trying to get things together on that. There's been some discussion about whether they could, if that gets delayed, if they could take portions of the farm bill and actually put it into a reconciliation package, which would be alongside
a tax bill later next year. So we have a little more a little more work to do to figure out exactly what's going to happen with farm bill. The last I've heard on government funding as of yesterday, according to a House Republican leadership aid, the expectation is they're going to kick the can with a stopgap into March.
That's important, not just because of the prospect of delaying government funding, but if they give the incoming Trump administration a deadline early on to avoid a shutdown, that could very well interfere with that major tax bill. It could interfere with the process of getting cabinet appointees confirmed by the Senate. So it would be a big risk for Republicans to try to set up a shutdown fight that
early in a presidential administration. But that is what we've heard is the expectation, at least on the House side at this point.
Fascinating. As always, it's great to have you back on the Hill. Jack Fitzpatrick, reporting for Bloomberg. Government will be spending a lot more time with Jack as we get into that appropriations process in the stopgap funding bill that he mentions. But since we're talking about the farm bill among other matters, we're pointed directly to an important conversation with Matt Carston's the CEO of landis a farming collaborative that will be impacted by policy here in Washington and Kayley.
It's one of the opportunities that we love to take to leave the bubble here and talk to a stakeholder that will be impacted here beyond politicos in Washington. Matt, welcome, It's great to have you with us on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Donald Trump says the word tariff is his favorite word in the dictionary. He calls it beautiful. How do farmers feel about it?
Well, you know, that's a complicated topic, as we all know. You know, agriculture really relies partially on exports and making sure that the goods are farmers produced, whether it's protein, grains, has an international market. So what I would say is, you know, although there's a lot of complexity to a tariff, what we can always hope is that the farmer has
a seat at that table. The voice of agriculture is being heard because you know, they are the ones that with rural that helped elect him the first time, helped on this reelecttion, and they need to be at that table to make sure that we're finding the right balance to them whatever we're trying to solve with the tariff and what it can mean for agriculture.
So what would you say, if at that table, about what that appropriate balance is and who we perhaps need to be most careful about targeting with terrifts for fear of retaliation on the agriculture industry in the United States.
Well, we've already seen an adjustment right now with what we used to be able to do or we're exporting to countries like China. That's already down quite a bit, and it's really affected our farmers in the Midwest. And this is several administrations all the way through where we're
at and where we might be going. So I think the point that has to be made is we need to make sure the cause and effect has truly been balanced with what agriculture really needs, and the cause and effect of that, we've seen margins come down substantially for our farmers. Now, the good news is some expenses went down for them and the way they controlled their costs, and then we also had some good yields across the
Midwest and across most of the country here. But in the reverse side, we've got to make sure that both sides are being understood, whatever the solve is and whatever the cause and effect is to agriculture, because those international markets are absolutely critical for companies like Lands and Conduit that are trying to move those goods out of our state, out of the Midwest and get them into a position
to go into a global market. And when you lose a volume like we have the China, that has a long term ripple effect and it's hard to recover from.
Well, how much have we lost? How much have farmers lost when it comes to exports to China? Set the baseline for us here, Matt, before we even begin the conversation about additional tariffs.
Yeah, I think you know, those numbers are always moving, and I haven't seen the latest, but I would say it's probably safe to say we're nearing around half of the exports that we used to see. I think there was an announcement today or earlier this week on Monday around a new port that now South America opened up, particularly for Brazil out of Peru. That China is very excited about taking imports from Brazil or Peru, the South American market as a whole, and moving it over to China.
So there continues to be additional pressures that get put on. So it's not even where we're at, but what are other opportunities that some kind of a conflict could create that that now there's another alternative that we just weren't used to, and that port will have an additional effect not just on what maybe happens in South America to China,
but other parts of the world as well. So you know, today we're down quite a bit, and the future, particularly when you look at corn, looks a little more daunting as Brazil, particularly in South America, has a wider path of what they can do with increased yields and more acres that they're farming than ever before.
Well, Matt, as you talk about pressures, I wonder as well about cost pressures and inflation. I'm assuming this industry has been grappling with us over the last several years, as many have, and perhaps that's one of the reasons why this election resulted the way that it did. We of course, have a lot of conversation about the way
in which tariffs could lead to higher inflation. What would it mean for the agriculture industry not only to have the potential retaliatory impact on the way in which the goods are being exported, but also the inflationary impact on if a tariff is placed on everything else, including equipment that they need need to actually to actually get those yields, to farm that land, to do everything they need to do.
Yeah, it all has an effect, right, And for our farmers that are engaged in this every day, they're balancing volume with price, with their expenses. And I thought the farmers really have done a great job in twenty four you know, luckily mother nature cooperated and we got good yields out of out of what we needed in most parts of the US, not all, but most. They did a nice job as farmers really pulling back on equipment needs and trying to reduce the expense on that side.
So when you add the volume and the expense reduction that the farmers were able to capitalize on, they're going to be able to get out of twenty four in a good position, But nobody knows what twenty five really brings. And that's the uncertainty that exists here, is what will twenty five bring from from a cost standpoint, from a mother nature standpoint, And then you look at just interest line.
Some farmers have never even seen this kind of an interest level or cost on their P and L and those are things that they're just adding additional pressure to the mix. So anything right now that adds additional pressure or farmers is going to have a big impact on them, because we've taken a lot of those steps out in twenty three and twenty four, and now we've got to look to the future and continue to try to find
some kind of win here. And that's where when you come back to exports and making sure our farmers have their goods that could go elsewhere, that's an important step.
Well, math this is an incoming administration that has promised mass deportation and has also suggested that workplace raids might come with that. I know that that remains a question at this point, and we may need to learn more about it from Donald Trump's immigration officials. But to the extent to which farmers are relying upon migrant workers. What impact would a mass deportation have on your industry.
Well, it definitely has an impact as I think about the Midwest and just across all of agriculture. Actually, it's still a very human intensity business that we're in, and I don't know if that's different from a lot of industries, but agriculture for sure is no exception of that. And as rural populations continue to fall in the amount that's
out there, it makes it even more challenging. Now in the Midwest, H two A workers have been a big part and a big part of the solution to how we've dealt with that and will continue to be as we go forward there. But there are other parts, you know, particularly in the western part of the United States in Southeast, where it's not just H two A, but others that
they reach into. So again, I think getting that farmer's voice at the table will be essential because as rural continues to slide in its population and the workload is still there for manual or just humans in general, we've got to make sure that there's a balance there and that that AG's voice is heard and with hopefully as soon appointment of USDA, that that person will have the ag background and have the sort of speak dirt on their hands to be able to reflect that and find
the right balance that that agg has that voice at the table and find that that that true balance all right.
Matt Carson, CEO of Landis with a focus on the agricultural industry, thank you so much for being here with us, and he's reminding us show that we still have many cabinet picks yet to learn about, including the Secretary of agric Culture and others as well, even as we had some confirmed just.
In this appear.
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 Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.