Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple Coarclay, and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Thanks for being with us here on the Tuesday edition of Balance of Power. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite radio, and on YouTube. Where you can find us right now search Bloomberg Business News Live. We're standing by for our first briefing. We'll see what comes at one pm Eastern time, the White House Press Briefing with the new Press Secretary, Caroline Levitt.
We'll bring you live into the briefing room to hear what the conversation is like, remembering, of course, Sean Spicer's famous first briefing in the first Trump administration. Folks are still licking their wounds. It goes on in Miami at Doral, the House Republican Retreat. As we told you yesterday, they were going down the slide into the swimming pool, dinner
on the lawn last night and lunch. I guess right now, after some morning golf in the Donald J. Trump Grand Ballroom, they're holed up from nine to five to plot the future. We're told of President Trump's agenda and how to turn this all into legislation. We're going to talk about that in a moment with Jack Fitzpatrick, who's on Capitol Hill watching the appropriations process slowly unfold. But we add another
layer here, and Jack has the story. As Donald Trump directs broad pausing in federal spending on loans and grants.
He's stopping the money. This is tens of billions of dollars we're talking about, and it happens at five pm Eastern time, the administration directing all federal agencies to pause a broadswath of federal funding in what is seen as an opening shot here in the words of Jack Fitzpatrick, upcoming constitutional fight over his unilateral ability to stop funding here and just like that, the headline crosses the terminal.
It's a good thing we've got Jack coming in Trump administration sued over halts of federal grant payments and it hasn't even happened yet. Jack, of course, is a specialist in appropriations covers Congress from Bloomberg Government and joins us right now from Capitol Hill. It's shifting under our feet, Jack, But I suspect you're not surprised to hear a headline like this.
No, we expected lawsuits. The question I think is how many lawsuits or maybe how many plaintiffs in one lawsuit? And how likely is it that this move is the move that could go to the Supreme Court and really hash out a fundamental disagreement that President Trump has with certainly Democrats in Congress and realistically probably a lot of Republicans, because Trump believes he can unilaterally halt the flow of federal funds at least much more than what's dictated under
current law. The law that they're fighting over is called
the Impoundment Control Act. It was written during the Nixon administration because they had fights over him holding up congressionally approved spending, and Trump and his pick for Budget Director, Russell Vote, believe that the current understanding of restrictions on the president's power are, in their words, unconstitutional, and that he should get to pump the brakes on federal spending for his own reasons, not for programmatic delays, and because
he's interpreting the law, but because of what he believes he should do as president. So it's a major legal battle, and the breadth of this order one will have a significant amount of a significant effect on a lot of money, but two raises a lot of legal questions and maybe the point that they debate in a lawsuit to settle that disagreement.
Well, so we've got a lot here. Agencies, assuming this stands Jack have until the tenth of February to submit their plans on programs, projects, activities that will be subject to the Here you mentioned russ vote that is the same day feb ten that it's likely he'll be in the chair as director of OMB. This is one of the authors of Project twenty twenty five. Are there any
breadcrumbs in that document? And I'll get all kinds of hate mail for bringing it up that might lead us to an understanding of what Vote wants to do.
Well, when it comes to this, I don't even think you necessarily have to look at Project twenty twenty five because he has said in a number of formats that he thinks the president has greater power to stop spending than the status quo would dictate. So I think Project
twenty twenty five gets into it. We also had a little bit of a preview in twenty nineteen the events that led to the first impeachment by the House of President Trump when he delayed Ukraine aid and of course later the Government Accountability Office said that was illegal, that was a violation of the Impounment Control Act. So there's
a lot leading up to this. There's a lot of history that Russell Vote has indicating he wants to significantly change Washington's understanding of what the president can do without Congress. And part of that you can link to Project twenty twenty five. Part of that you can link to the first Trump administration and the first impeachment. And also he's said it on the record. He's told members in his hearings, his confirmation hearings in the Senate that he believes that
the current restrictions are unconstitutional. So there's a lot to look at there, and it's clear that Vote is really the engine that drives the train that is this constitutional fight.
So there you have it. This is why we talk to Jack now. Chuck Schumer calls this memo blatantly disobeying the law, and I want to just get to the Chewy Center here, if we can jack what it is the administration is actually trying to weed out, it's not just stopping spending. It's to align with what they're calling presidential priorities on immigration. On DEI, we already saw DEI offices closed. What is it actually that will create the criteria for whether these programs live or die?
Well, this memo ordering the halt in funding is very, very broad. I think it's fair to say it's vague. It says that agencies need to pause funding and review if it comports or conflicts with all the other executive orders that have come out on issues like ending DEI practices. It does not spell out here's the kind of spending you should pause. When it says the kind of funding you should not pause, it just mentions a couple things.
It says, don't pause Social Security funding, don't pause Medicare funding, and it broadly says some other funding that goes directly to recipients. But this could this could block funding that would not appear to be in conflict with other executive orders, but isn't exempt from this. So there's a concern that money for hospitals, money for heating, for low income people for firefighter grants, etc. Could be caught up in this because it's very, very broadly worded.
Fascinating. How'd you like to be Jack Fitzpatrick trying to cover all of this? There are so many questions, there are not answers to all of them. Jack is Republican House members gather in Miami here. This is a two day retreat that we've been talking about at Doral. These are the guys you cover, specifically, the appropriation's minds who
are together. They're trying to figure out how to manage reconciliation, what to do with the debt limit, how to make everybody happy, get Donald Trump's tax cuts and then tips over time and all the rest of it in there. What are you hearing? What are they talking about on the patio at Doral that they haven't been able to figure out already? We've been waiting for weeks and weeks for direction on this.
Yeah. I don't know if they're going to come out of this with a specific plan that's chiseled into concrete, but they are getting a little more clear their ambitions.
My colleagues Ken Tran and mave she here down there and have reported one the Speaker of the House says they want to mark up the directions, basically the top line outline for a major reconciliation bill next week, so if they can get it together by next week, to at least say, here are the broad numbers, here's an assignment for each committee to work under, and say, here's how much you can add to the deficit. We want
you to subtract this much from the deficit. It's not the bill itself, but it's a fairly heavy lift, and they want to get that done next week. They're still leaving a lot to the imagination with the specifics. It sounds like they're still going for one big, beautiful bill. As Republicans say, they still think they can get an almost unanimous vote on the debt limit through this reconciliation process. If that's politically realistic, you can have a whole debate
about that. But they are kind of hitting the accelerator and saying we're going to get the first stages done by next week, which is ambitious to say the least.
Boy I should say so, and we're going to be reading about it. With the help of Jack Fitzpatrick, reporting for Bloomberg Government, he's live on Capitol Hill right now, just waiting for the members to return.
Jack.
Great to see you and thank you so much. Find his story by the way on the pausing if we can use that word in federal funding and grants on the terminal and online. Great work from Jack Fitzpatrick as we turn our attention abroad. Coming up next the administration's approach to trade, the mini trade war, if we can call it that, that we had on Sunday, and the impact of tariff's. Donald Trump just updated his stance on this. Rob Waters is up next on Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say Alexa, play Bloomberg.
Great to have you with us on the Tuesday edition of Balance of Power. Yes, I'm Joe Matthew and Washington, where the headlines are flying not just here but Durral and we're connecting the dots between the two is Republican House members gather with Donald Trump and Florida. Donald Trump of course, making news on everything from tariffs to spending here in Washington as we try to get our arms around this. We just talked about it with Jack Fitzpatrick,
our appropriations expert on Capitol Hill. Trump directing a broad pause in federal spending on loans and grants. We're talking about potentially here tens of billions of dollars, maybe hundreds of billions of dollars. There are so many questions about what happens after five o'clock tonight. These agencies will have till the tenth of February to put forth plans to see if spending comports with some of the executive actions that we've seen on everything from DEI to immigration and
so forth, just in the last week and change. By the way, it's only been a week and a day if you're still playing along on your home game, so the fire hose is still spewing, and we wanted to spend time not only on this, but as I mentioned, the news on tariffs last evening getting buried a bit by the rest of this story today. With a true expert here, someone who brings insights to this program you won't hear anywhere else from the Madison Group. He's the founder.
Rob Waters. Welcome back to Bloomberg. It's great to see you, Jo. Thank you for having me always. Your phone's been ringing on this. Who's upset about it? Who's worried? And who could stand to benefit well?
When it comes to tariffs and we're looking at American exceptionalism, I think a lot of the corporations will benefit. China in itself has violated the Monroe doctrine and we are just seeing it step by step, both in the Panama Canal. We're seeing it in Latin and South America. We're seeing it, you know, with AI, we are seeing where they are head to head competing with us. And how do we control that other than you know, export control and tariffs?
Sure?
Right, I want to dig into what Donald Trump is saying because you're kind of moving into into a slightly incremental fashion here. Nothing has really been implemented yet on terms of tariffs. But this review I mentioned, yeah is important. Will it actually change government spending? There are a lot of stakeholders here who could be impacted in so many different industries. You can't quantify it in one conversation.
I mean, the United States is the largest giver of humanitarian aid. It's less than one percent of our budget. Is there waste, fraud and abuse in it? Absolutely? Can we tighten things?
Absolutely?
Is a review appropriated, appreciated appropriate? Yes, it is ninety days, maybe a little long, maybe a little short. But money, once it's spent, once it's program it's hard to unprogram it.
So explain that to us, because you spent enough time on Capitol Hill and in Washington to get how this works. If money is authorized and appropriated, what if the president just decides not to spend it, he runs.
Up against the will of Congress, And you know, having worked for two appropriators, I'm well familiar with this.
Look.
You could zero it out in a budget of the next year, but once it's gone, once it's from a different fiscal year, it's awfully hard.
So lawsuits have already been filed. Someone's always making money rob the lawyers. Yeah, well, so does this hold up in court?
I think a review is legal?
Okay, I think you back after the deadline. Yeah, check back after the deadline. Listen, you can always hold funding to make sure it's being spent appropriately or programmed appropriately. You can't zero it out. So I think what the president is doing is actually legal. The time frame might be under question.
Is the media getting over its skis by framing this as an attempt to expand the unilateral authority of the executive or is that actually what's happening.
I mean, what president doesn't try and expand the executive authority. I think the media is always getting over its skis. I mean, there's not a president in the world that doesn't want to power grab and say this, and there's not a Congress in the world that doesn't push back. Has been going since time and time again.
If this understood on your point, if this actually goes through though, and Donald Trump is kind of picking which agency is going to get the funding or the grant money or whatever, that that he he finally got what every president ever wanted the line item veto true. Is that about right?
Yeah, that's actually right. But let's see if that goes through. We have to go through reconciliation and all.
You know, Oh, I want to get into that with you. Now, let's move to tariffs. Donald Trump has been keeping us guessing. We thought there'd be this massive across the board tariff implemented on day one, as he had threatened he's been kind of I think he's been incredibly strict. Well, you could certainly make that point. On Sunday, I will make He did update things last evening the speaking with reporters. Here's what Donald Trump said last night about tariffs, and remember again the word tariff.
We're going to protect our people and our businesses, and we're going to protect our country with tariffs, tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper and things that we need for our military thing.
We have to bring.
Production back to our country. The incentive is going to be there because they have no tariff whatsoever. Can We're going to look at pharmaceuticals, drugs, We're going to look at chips, semiconductors, and we're going to look at steel.
That's a lot of stuff. Now, he went on to say that he wants to enact across the board terrace much bigger than the two and a half percent that's been suggested. Is the whole point here, the gambit, the chip on the table. What we saw in Columbia, the short lived trade battle, it was hours long on Sunday or will.
We say it was absolutely fantastic. I'll come.
We have a plane in air, we have a president of a smaller country, you know, negating what we consider a jurisdictional act. He says no, and Donald Trump says, big stick, okay, twenty five percent. Twenty five percent to a country that is reliant on its banana and flower exports to the United States would have decimated.
Yeah, or cup of coffee would have got pretty expensive, right, but they backed off. Yes, no tariff. So is that the model though? Or are we going to see.
Across the board tariffs you guys can I don't think so. I think the President is using his bully pulpit and well done him to show if you treat the United States with respect and uphold our commerce, then you will get a fair deal.
You mentioned Panama, Panama Canal. Marco Rubio's first trip will apparently include a stop in Panama. Needs to be okay, smart business? What does it lead to?
So?
Look, I was in Panama last year and the moment you get off the plane, Joe, the largest building you see, says.
Huawei on it.
I mean we have an issue.
And I go back to this and you know, talking about the Monroe Doctrine. Our hemisphere of commerce and influence has been violated by China. And they continue to encroach in an area of commerce for US, I don't think it's unfair that we review what our process is and that you know we put America first.
Is it about pushing China out of these ports on each side of the canal or is it about actually regaining control? Because again it's the do you believe the spirit of the statement or do you take him literally when he says to.
I think we need parody because of so much shipping and coms that look like that means that as you use our currency as your currency in your bank machine, that you understand who you're trading partner and your partner in your hemisphere is.
If it's the Monroe doctrine. Yes, you just touched Panama. What about Cuba?
I mean, I think we need to take a good look at you know, where the good actors and bad actors are.
If you don't want Russia or China to be in the neighborhood. Those are the two spots.
I think.
Where else are you looking?
I think we're we're looking at Guatemala and Doris. You have to look at Latin and all of Latin and South America.
As mass deportations begin and that brings us back to Colombia. These plans.
So, I mean, let's talk about these mass deportations, right, these are people who were criminals, who some of all the way from back under Obama that are just being put out.
I see.
We might not like the messenger the people in America and whoever's crying on TikTok, which I don't watch, but it's the same policy that has been you know, enacted under Bush and Obama. I don't see a difference.
Tell me more about that, because we're seeing the first optics today of deportations in Manhattan, right, the cumulative effect. You're not you don't understand politics, I do it. The optics of this, Yes, where's the line of or isn't there one of diminishis?
But who is being taken out? Drug dealers, criminals, you know, people who should not be here and they've been on a warrant list for ten years?
Understand. So I mean then it becomes where you fly them to, and that gets us back to price situation.
We repatriate them to their country of origin.
That's the way it's got to be. That's the way it's got to be. In the region. Who might take refugees or migrants.
I mean, I honestly don't believe other countries want to take one country's criminals.
So fair enough, as.
We spend time with Rob Waters from Madison Group, I want to get back to the money. Let's go back to the money appropriations. As you mentioned, you worked for two appropriators.
I did.
They never had to go down to Dorral and deal with the factions of this Republican conference. Can they craft a plan this week? How's this going to work with reconciliation?
I think I think from what everyone's hearing, it's going to be one bill, which it should be. You know, there were thoughts that it were going to be too. I think that you know, we're going to see R and D tax credits, we're going to see mortgage deductions, we're going to see assault increase, we're going to see things that help commerce that are good, and we're going to have a few things that might be zeroed out.
To pay for it. Yes, not nearly enough to cover though to what extent are you.
Well, I don't know how much. How much was the green IRA program? Was the one point seven trill one point yeah, zero one seven and.
Joe Biden would tell you they helped to chip away at the deficit at it whether you want to believe that or not. Is is this a president who will find religion on debt and deficit in this White House? I have?
I think he'll his eyes on commerce and you know growth.
We'll see.
If you're writing a reconciliation bill for this president and you need to get all of these promises in no taxes, on tips, over time, social security, salt? Right, do you have to make all of these work? Or is there a bargain to be had with Donald Trump?
I think there's a bargain to be had. It just depends on what it is.
Okay, yeah, well you're the appropriations expert. Well, which of these can you leave on the floor and still say that you made good on your promises?
Probably? You know you could. You could play with some of the mortgage deductions.
Okay, fine, you got to get salt though, because you need New York Republicans and Washington.
That's stay one too. By the way, there you go, Yeah.
Come back and talk to us again soon. He's at the Madison Group. He's the managing partner but also the founder and of you that we don't always get here on the broadcast from those who bring governments together, bring companies together, and lobby both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington. That's what makes the world go around. Here, stay with us. Our panel is coming up next. Genie Shanzano is with us today, our Democratic analyst of course, Bloomberg Politics contributor
alongside Mac Gorman targeted victory are Republican strategists. We have a lot more to talk about with confirmations. We haven't even touched that yet, So stay with us on the fastest show in politics on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite and on YouTube search Bloomberg Business News Live. We'll welcome our global television audience with much more to talk about. Right here on Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Thank you so much. As we prepare for another first in the new Trump White House about twenty minutes from now, in a world in which things happen on time as scheduled, will be the first White House press briefing in the second Trump administration. Caroline Levitt not necessarily a household name or face. Yet, we'll be holding forth in the briefing room coming up at the top of the hour. If you're with us on YouTube right now, you get a live view. See we park your right in the briefing room.
You can't get a seat like that unless you're a signed one or you're with a sun ballance of power. A lot of questions about even some of the things we've talked about today that have immerged just since last evening, when it comes to tariffs, when it comes to the pause in federal funding and grants that these reporters will have, as well as the immigration raids. We do have news
on this. We've been kind of waiting for something of a larger scale based on a couple of following a couple of raids that we've seen, and we might be getting there as this now moves to New York. There is, in fact a new Secretary of Homeland Security, Christy nom is going to be talking to the troops today and was tweeting earlier today this morning about new raids in New York City of course overseeing the federal agency that
runs the nation's immigration system. She posted a video on x Since she showed an enforcement operation underway in New York led to the arrest of an unauthorized immigrant with kidnapping, assault, and burglary charges. Again, you're seeing video of this if you're with us on YouTube, where you can find us right now by searching Bloomberg Business News Live. Same radio show with the visuals. Caroline Levitt will be talking about this coming up, and our political panel gets into it
right now. Jeanie Shanzano is here, of course, Bloomberg Politics contributor, our democratic analyst and political science professor at Iona University, alongside Matt Gorman, the Republican strategist and executive VP at Target Victory. It's great to see you both. Welcome Matt. This is it and we have a headline, says Ice. Made close to twelve hundred arrests in one day. Now it's onto Manhattan. How are these optics going to play
politically for this new president? Will he be criticized for some of the brutal nature of some of these videos or applauded for making good on campaign promises?
I mean, I think the fact that they're touting it, they're not shying away from it. And I think when it comes to a lot of these folks child molusters, rapists, criminals, gang bangers, they don't mind being brutal. And the fact that you have Christi Nomo out there on the front line, Tom Homan and others they're willing to get cameras out there show that they're not afraid of the optics because they believe and I think rightly public opinions on their side.
This was something he felt empowered to do from the campaign, and they're not shying away from it anytime soon.
We saw a multi agency crackdown in Chicago on Sunday. The administration's been promoting to Matt's point as well, arrests in Colorado, Atlanta, Hawaii, Puerto Rico. Jeanie, now it's in your backyard. In New York, we've talked a lot about democratic outrage over the migrants who have been flown to New York City, who have taken over many hotels. Eric Adams was blaming the Biden administration for things spinning out of control. Will this play well in Manhattan?
I think it depends. This is a precarious business. And nobody knows this better than Donald Trump. You know. I just went back Joe and looked at his comments on Meet the Press in early December and what he told Kristen Welker there was he said, it's gonna be horrible when we take a young woman, a wonderful young woman who's with the criminal, and she's taken out and the cameras are focused on her, and she's crying and she's beat crying and she's taken out of the country. That
is what Donald Trump knows and he is absolutely right. So, yes, there is widespread support for deporting criminals, particularly violent criminals, and that even the New York Times poll the other day showed that the problem is is that when you see those pictures of the kind donald Trump himself was talking about, and that is going to be problematic because the reality is is people support the ends, but the
means can be something that they turn on. And that's why these raids that are happening, they you know, they are supported. Right now, New York City has been hit by a strain, as you mentioned, financially, as it pertains to people coming here on document just like so many places in the country. But we also have friends and neighbors and family members, children, the elderly, and when they're caught up in this, that's when you start to see
political problems. So they have to be very, very careful not to overread this mandate.
We like data journalism. Of course. Here at Bloomberg, ICE is reporting, and we've heard some different numbers, by the way, from Tom Homan, who Genie just mentioned as opposed to the agency itself, ICE reporting it's made one hundred and seventy nine arrests, bringing the total since January twenty third to three thousand, five hundred and fifty two. Chicago, Baltimore, Buffalo, Atlanta,
San Francisco. Now today it's the Bronx Matt. When you look at numbers like that and consider what Genie just said, is this something that the administration should be approaching with a sledgehammer or a scalpel?
I mean, when again, when it comes to criminals, people who not should should not be here and whose own countries are reluctant to take them back, go sledgehammer. I think you're seeing a lot. Certainly the left in some of the mainstream media are are frankly begging for the optics of crying children and mothers because they know that
it is far, far more lucrative on camera. Get then you have these repatriatian flights of murderers and folks who should not be in any country frankly should be behind bars. And look again this is a symptom here. This is a large part due to sanctuary cities, where you could arrest these guys in jail where they should be already.
But if, for example, Chicago's a great example, Illinois is a great example, they won't cooperate with federal law enforcement, so ice and federal law enforcement are forced to go in their firsthand. But again that's I mean, the Trump mistrits are gonna have to reckon with the media especially, are gonna die metaphorically for those you know, crying separated families and those optics around that.
You could also argue that those difficult optics, Matt are a deterrent. Is that not part of the plan.
I mean, look, I think the Homan always uses this example right where you know, if say God forbids someoneh's rest for drunk driving or in the committing of a crime, right that person gets taken away no matter where they are. They could be in a family of four in a sedan, or again in an ice rate, and so that sort of thing. The crime itself causes these sorts of scenarios,
not the law enforcement agency that's enforcing the law. Whether you're coming in this illegally or it's a drunk driving arrest in the side of the highway, the same thing happens. There's no differentiation here.
Matt mentions sanctuary cities. Jim Comer is calling the chair of the House Oversight Committee launching an investigation here into sanctuary cities, and has sent out invitations to the mayors of Chicago, Boston, Denver, and New York. I don't know if anyone's going to show up for this, if they'll need to be subpoenaed. I wonder what your thought is, If you're Michelle wu sitting up there in Boston, do you take that invitation to come down to make your case.
I think you absolutely do, And I think you go there and you tell them the reality the history of these cities, when these sanctuary cities were put in the place, why, and the economic impact of the people who have come undocumented in the last several years. I would take advantage of that to have a real conversation about this challenge. And the reality is is, by some estimates, we are talking about eleven million people. A deportation of one million
each year is going to cost eighty eight billion. And at some point, as you know, Donald Trump sits down in Durrell and jd Vance with the Republicans who want to slash this budget by trillions, how is this going to be paid for? Those are very real concerns, and they can say, oh, there's no cost, that's too high,
and that theoretically may sound right. But what we're seeing in the last few days is responding to an election which he said he was going to do this and people want it, is an aggressive ramp up of interior enforcement that is going to, unfortunately include people who have been living here peacefully. And when that happens, that's when the rubber is going to hit the road. This is
very early in this. We need to see what happens as we go down the road and they get beyond those convicted felons and the violent criminals, and how this plays out and the impact economically and on our employers is dramatic. This is not an easy problem. That's why it's been a problem for decades. It requires a legislative solution. These eos are a step, but they are only a small step, and very little can be accomplished unless Congress
addresses it. He's going to try to do that, but we have to wait and see how they do that.
Mac gorman described some of the difficulty that ICE has had cooperating with authorities in these cities. Matt, you know, you can't go into a courthouse in Massachusetts or in Boston and arrest someone for crimes like this. There's a church in Evanston, the suburb outside of Chicago, the Lake Street Church, opening its doors to anyone worried they may its target for ICE deportation. Should these mayors be subpoenas if they don't show up, I.
Mean you think, because all last year you had Eric Adams more heally the governor mass US We're essentially crying, say we don't have enough funds, state funds to take care of these migrants coming over the border. We're at capacity. You saw, you know, Eric Adams kind of saw religion on this a little bit after dealing with this for about a year. So when we talk about the cost of this stuff, the cost of housing, so many of these people come across the border. I mean, I saw
this firsthand in New Arizona. We saw there the hospital systems, school systems, the city services were stretched to the guilds already in twenty twenty three when I was down there, you know. So that's number one, and I think number two, you're exactly right. These mayors, you know, depending on who's an office, they want more federal funding to take care of these migrants. But when somebody else comes into power and wants to take it off their hands, so to speak,
suddenly they don't like that very much. So you can't have it both ways. That's number one. And again number two, I think you're going to start seeing some of these mayors possibly come down to Washington and try to audition for resistance hero right, if you're Mayor WU of Boston, this we'll see, you know, I think if it's a good platform for her too, as well as obviously for Republicans who want to use these policies as a political weapon too.
Yeah, watch Michelle Woo in Boston, watch Brandon Johnson in Denver, Genie, They're going to try to make their own political benefit here. I don't know if they're practitioners on that level or not, but this is a potential opportunity for them. I think you would agree.
It absolutely is, and you know, more than just a political opportunity. It's an opportunity to address a very real crisis that is impacting their cities. And they would tell you that firsthand. This is something that we have seen. And this is where the governor of Texas and the governor of Florida, as they or flew these people up, they did reinforce in people in other parts of the country the challenges that they've been facing for some time.
And so this is an important moment. These issues need to be addressed, but addressing them is expensive and difficult, and so that's where it is going to be a challenge. You have to arrest, you have to detain, you have to adjudicate, and you have to deport. Each step along the way costs money. Somebody has to pay for it, and that will be the American public. And at eleven million plus, that is a big number. And of course the impact again on the flip side of the loss
of people working in this country is dramatic. That's why we've in the past entertained the issue of dreamers beyond humanitarian reasons. So there is a smart way to handle this, but that is to secure the border and then allow a halfway for people to be here legally.
I like this panel Genie Shanzano and Matt Gorman. Did Genie say Dreamers? Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.