Democrats Need Message for Working Class, E. J. Dionne Says

of course on the Bloomberg. We begin with Sebastian Galley. He's a senior currency strategy of Boutsche Bank and he's kindly joined us here on Bloomberg eleven. Three Oh studios, Let's start with Breggsit. We're looking ahead to April five, when the EU Parliament begins to take up what we've seen working its way from London to Brussels. What was your sense of what reason they had to say in her speech and sort of how this is all going

to play out over these next these next two years. Well, what do you have is typical incoherence between one party and the second and when they send you to a training in the Europe in EU for negotiation and actually was one of these officials. The first thing they teach you is that the beginning is a high divergence and one next step is basically too showing what each of the parties wants to show. And this is what the UK has done. It's shown this roadmap. The Europeans have

leaked their own road maps. It's all very helpful and very civilized, and both of the road maps actually are completely incoher and this is absolutely normal. What you show is you show your cards and then you do the exchange. So what is are you willing to exchange? Apparently the British are having a bit of a sense of humor and suggesting that Gibraltar is off the map, and so I don't think that's what the Europeans were looking for.

But the exchange will happen and the right. The problem is that they only have two years to figure out what they can give and on each side, and it looks like it's politically difficult for the British to accept some realities. Um and they'll take them to sometime basically to diffuse the reality through the UK political system. They already have accepted that they will actually contribute monies uh to the European Union, which for conservative is extremely hard

to do UM. And so there's a nice, decent process. Will will it happen within two years? And very few people expected, particularly the European typical negotiations the last five to up to ten years, and so this is probably more what we should look forward to. The UK is doing his job, Europe is doing his job. There's going to be a lot of noise UM, which is typical at the beginning of the process. That noise will eventually start to settle down and converge towards some form of solution.

It will be very painful in detail. It will go into Spanish fishermen going into uh UK territorial waters and the likes and the usual stuff we've been dealing with in Europe for a long time. So very European. Actually, how does this affect your world over these next these next two years. You've got these two disparate maps, as you say, a lot of noise in the fore x space.

How do you approach what's happening? Well, what it does suggest is the for now in the UK is kind of fine from a legal point of view in terms of its access and everything. So that might actually continue

for longer than anyone would would expect. So it's a less of a concern I guess from a short term tactical point of view, from the point of view of somebody investing into the UK as uh, these uh, you know, these different negotiations clarify themselves and that might may take up to a year, and then the in terms of FDI and the like, it is actually going to be

a decent story. The pound by some measures is undervalued. Uh, and so it might be attractor for people investing in commercial real estate real estate into into the United Kingdom. Might be interesting for some sovereign wealth funds and reserve managers to to build up some positions in the in the UK. And so it's it's not such a bad

story for the UK. The market has vastly priced the Brexit story for good reasons and uh, and you know, they does offer some considerable opportunities for for the UK has not necessarily a manufacturing base, but a base of services which is somewhat cheaper. It allows them to keep the city because it has reduced the cost of holding the city, uh in the UK versus you know, moving a lot of their people out into Ireland, UH, France or Germany for that matter, but some of it will happen.

You had the EU commissioned President, you Council president rather talking about how united in front these twenty seven nations we're gonna we're gonna present. Is this an opportunity for more cohesiveness or does the fractiousness of the EU continue to play role that that's going to make it difficult for these negotiations take place. I like to think of it as UH and for some reason why Irish accident

is coming back. But the this probably goes I'm thinking about rugby, but it's it's like a big rugby team and none of the players individually or are quite similar body shape, attitude or the likes, but they do act under crunch as as one unit. And this is typically what you do see. And in the case of the UK, is a pretty clear story. Um and it's not a very divisive one. There are always outliers, are always better places than others, but broadly speaking they actually do behave

as a whole. One of the reasons is it's not necessary to punish the UK is to make it more difficult. You're colleing. Allen Ruskin is the one that I guess has provided leadership on an outlier call of weaker sterling. How do you get to a Deutsche Bank weaker sterling? It is an abrupt I'm sorry. It's a game changing decline for the United Kingdom, isn't it. There are two

components to it. One is a strong dollar view, which of course would push sterling lord a. Number two is a recognition that some of the impulse we've seen in the UK is actually quite temporary from cyclical point of view, and as it fades lower um, the the b o E is de wish and probably will end up being

more do wish than people expect um. And the combination relatively weak growth and to some extend a stronger dollar, as well as some of the improvement that we've seen on the cure and account reversing that generally is not particularly good. So from a cyclical point of view, there there is a claim to be made, which we do that sterling should headlore Having said that the this is

a view which is held by the market. One on Brexit, it has made a lot of money on that number two because there are positions related to France, which are yours sterling positions? People have been basically being short year and long sterling, and that, of course is is not helpful if you if you want to have an outright sterling position, The bet there is on a McCrone win

when you look at it, when you look at euros sterling. Yeah, there are very heavy bets apparently in the market which are done through your sterling, your yen short bounds, as well as on the O A t U there then through equities basically a bet that Mr mccorn will it will actually win. How do you adjust that to what we observed? I forget about September August twenty, August thirty one, September two, September four, and then ten pm September eight?

Is there any humility about poles in France? Given what we witnessed in the United States? You you wouldn't believe the amount of work we actually spend on on poles in general and pulsar spend on poles in general. We do know it's actually very useful. So what do we do is we look at they do what do they call rolling polls, so which basically UH is statistically superior.

Number two they use what we call stratified polling, which is you're going to look at every type of worker, for example, every type of age, and you look in extreme details, um and then there are different companies competing against each other to see basically if we actually get

the same numbers. And then the journalists of course do not believe whatsoever with the polls are and they have decided in France that they would send people across the field to check and see if there are basically trends which are being missed by the polls. We know that

there are bosses the poles. These poles, for example, exclude the people like me, the French outside of the France, as well as their French outside of metropolitan France, and that gives actually bias of roughly plus one percent to MA on the second round because they tend to be a more right way leading. Thank you so much at your bank this morning. Just lots to talk about here and really are re caliber for for April? Are you in tomorrow morning? David girl? This is this is I'm

you know, feeling sick. I'm feeling like if you feel typhoid. Starts at nine. The tip off for this national championship game. Is it really? I did not know? Which does me no favors here have to watch the surveillance replay the following. I'm in the eleventh percentile. I feel pretty good. I'm like walking around, strutting around, seb I do this as like rugby. I do it off the color of the jersey. That's that's how I do it. And Michael Barr, I'm

in the eleventh percentile. And then sat Rachel walked in this morning. Do you realize she is number four out of people in in all of Bloomberg Bloomberg Land. Ya. This is our executive producer Folks, who often sits between me and David and radio to keep us apart. I knew it wasn't me because that when I walked in the door I heard typhoid. Do you know that Rachel even had Purdue going long and she's still like kills

her even though her boiler makers went down flames. It's extraordinary. Yeah, well, I had to look up for Gonzaga. Is this weekend? To be honest, Good morning Eastern Washington. No thrill, that's thrilled. You're listening in Washington State, in Idaho and Spokane or Spokeane, I think I watched a tip off. Don't wake up when the game has finished. What's what the Rangers are doing? Now? Okay, folks had fun with this. I mean, I gotta hate

mail this weekend from Manila. You know nothing about basketball, I said, You're right, David Gern Tom Kane, good morning everyone. I appreciate your attendance in Washington in our FM news bureau. Uh. Ted Alden of the Council on Foreign Relations, This book is Failure to a just can't say enough about it on trade, Jed. All of my reading on China is that they have ever advantage to wait and wait and wait. Do they outweigh this president to the next president? Oh? I,

I think there's no question. You know, they're they're playing the long game. They're very patient. I think if you look at the way they reacted to Trump after the election, during the transition period, he was firing off some provocative tweets. UH call with the president of Taiwan. He did a number of provocative things, and the Chinese responded quite calmly and steadily. So yeah, I think they will wait as

long as they need to wait. Ted. I talked to Wilba Ross, the Secretary of Commerce, on Friday, and I asked him what was going to be on the agenda for these meetings in Florida. He said, trade is gonna be high up there. What is this administration? What what's the outcome they hope for out of this this meet and greet that's this two day meeting at mar Lago. I do not think they have any particular deliverables in mind.

I think they want to try to get some sense that the Chinese are wanting to cooperate on North Korea, which is obviously at something of a crisis point in terms of North Korea's ability to to develop a deliverable nuclear missile. I think on trade, I think all they want is an acknowledgement that it's a big issue between the United States and China, that the trade deficit is a problem, and that they're going to deal with it. I don't expect anything more specific than that out of

this meeting. Secretary Ross was at his most animated when I asked him about this letter, this draft of a letter that was leaked by congressional staffers. UH to to get anaf to talk started again, you have to give ninety days notice. I I gather, what's your sense of the timetable there. This administration seems eager to reopen conversations about what happens to NAFTA. Do we know more about

what provisions in particular they hope to see changed. Well, that that letter is a bit of a laundry letter. Stand there are things in there that have been on the agenda for a long time. There's a bunch of things in there, ironically that we're renegotiated as part of the Transpacific Partnership that President Trump walked away from on

day one. And there are other items that I think would be very controversial, um, you know, taking a look at at tax issues, the dispute settlement process, over trade cases, anti dumping, countervailing duty cases, that US wants a kind of snap back provision where it can reimpost tariffs. So so there are some pretty explosive items in that list. We just don't know what the priority is. It's a bit of a laundry list at this point, a bit

of a laundry list. And I was surprised as well, drawing from that conversation the degree to which Secretary Ross said that the the TPP would provide some starting points for these negotiations. So I suppose the t p P lives on. What do you think will will continue to shape trade policy from that that trade bill that we've stepped out of. I I think that this administration is just in this period where it's trying to figure out

where the openings are. I mean, Donald Trump has made a lot of big promises on trade that he's gonna change direction in some fundamental ways, and and everything that we've seen so far is rather modest. I mean Paul Krugman in his column this morning called the executive actions on Friday a couple of nothing burgers, and I think that was largely correct. Um, I don't think that there there's anything there, so so I I continue to be puzzled what kinds of specifics they're they're gonna go for.

They've got more cautious, which may be a good thing. Well, if we all understand anybody listen to this, whatever their politics. Multilateral is gone. It was from another time and place. And then I guess there's bilateral, and then there's unilateral. And to pick up by nothing burgers, is there no lateral? Is the basic idea here is we have a party or a theology that says, we don't want to do trade, we don't want to argue with anybody. Well, I mean

you you could. I mean you you could have an administration that says, look, we're gonna live with the status quo in terms of the agreements, and we're going to try to do better in terms of exporting using the as we have. There's nothing wrong with that. I mean, there's nothing that says that every agreement has to be superseded by another agreement and another agreement. We've been doing that for fifty or sixty years, but there's no ironclad law that you have to keep doing that. You could

just work in the rules you've got. Right now, what's this document gonna look like that Secretary Ross and his colleagues are going to prepare over these next ninety days? He called it unprecedented degree to which he's gonna look at this on a company by company basis. Helped me with the history. How unprecedented is it? And then what what's a what's that ninety ninety day document gonna look like? Well?

I don't think it is all that unprecedented. I mean, the US Trade Representatives Office every year releases what's called the National Trade Estimates, and it looks into foreign trade bearers. It's a five hundred plus page document of all the places that we think our trading partners aren't living up to their obligations. I presume it's going to repeat a lot of that. The only difference maybe a bit more of a focus specifically on the countries with which the

US runs a large trade deficit. But but of course, I mean, as you know, trade deficits are not all driven by trade policy. A lot of it has to do with savings and balances and big macro economic question. I don't know whether they're gonna get into that. I don't know where they're include currency. That's treasury territory historically, a lot of unknowns. Again, Ted Alton, thank you so much with the consolant Foreign Relations is Important book as

Failure two Adjustment, brought you by Bank of America. Mary Lynch, dedicated to bringing our clients insights and solutions to meet the challenges of a transforming world. That's the power of global connections. Mary Lynch, Pierce feederin Smith Incorporated, Member s I p C. Mr renn is with the Scott Wren when we won't ask about Scott Rens Brackett. Scott help

me with the equity market bracket if you would. Uh, we're just talking with Lindsay Bell of c f r A about the the double digit reality we live in. When does that end? Well, Tom Lee, let's talk about the market, because my best ball bracket was a complete disaster. But you know, our view really hasn't changed in terms of what the market's going to do this year since late September of last year when we set our targets.

You know, we've been looking for the SMP five to hit its annual high for somewhere around the middle of the year. Um. You know, we have an upper end of our target ranges. We thought it would be at our our slightly above that. We've been slightly above that. So for us, um, you know, could the market trade a little bit higher? Sure? Is it going to trade a lot higher? We don't think so. We think we're going to see a fade um you know, end up somewhere somewhere like that at the end of the year.

So you know, our views really have not changed over the last uh, you know, six months or so. I thought your sense of the economy Scott Rent. Well, you know, David, I think it's still you know, you're grinding and out. You're in a modest growth economy. You don't have a lot of inflation, although I think we're gonna see a little bit of wage push here and I think that's going to be the head wind really for the market

in the second half here. Um, But you know, the economy continues to chug along, labor market continues to slowly improve, consumer spending is okay. So I don't think there's really been much of a change in the economy at all, not just versus twenty sixteen, but really thirteen. I mean this has been a you know, this has been a two on a calendar year kind of recovery for the most part. And and I think Throughen that's not going to change. And and really, um, probably as well. We're

talking about healthcare with Lindsay at Bell. How much was was the when investors looked at that healthcare healthcare bill, the potential for a healthcare at how much was that about healthcare versus something else? How much investors actually care that had to do with healthcare. I don't think investors had very much that had to do with health care, and I think that it was just an overall feel for Okay, is this is you know, what does this mean for the rest of the agenda. Are we going

to see anything at all? We're going to see any cooperation with the president from the Republicans. We know we're not going to get much from the Democrats. So I think it was the market took it as a little bit of a broader signal, and I think overall, you know, the market has been more optimistic, or at least some investors have been more optimistic, thinking we would actually see some economic effects from some proposals in which you know,

we just don't see that. I look, Scott Ram where we are and to me, is this miracle of single digit organic revenue growth becoming double digit? Wondered down the income statement. Have you been surprised at that? Have you been surprised at the persistency of leverage, good instructive use of leverage to operating margin expansion? Well, I think that, you know, margins have have really hung in here. We've looked for them to continue to hang in here. We

still think they're going to be rather high. You know, the consensus Earrings estimate we've been at a hundred and twenty seven dollars. Uh, you know, I don't think it was that long ago where the consensus was at a hundred and thirty five or so. You know, now we're down to a hundred and thirty. I think we're probably gonna see estimates come off. There's about a ten percent uh ten percent expectation for the first quarter something like that. I think that's okay, but net net, the consensus I

think for a little too optimistic, David. I I find it remarkable lectures, the panels of speeches I've been added part of where everybody was certain about five or six of the most eight or nine percent return on necrews

just stunning. Scott R. How much of a driver are earnings at this point when you're looking well, you know, David, it's kind of funny because I don't think, you know, earnings were absolutely zero driver all through because people were looking for landeen for you know, at least a year ahead of time. I think this year earnings will be a little bit more important. Um. I don't think that

you know, these modest expectations that's what we're going to see. Um, you know, to three dollars of earnings over the course of the year. You're splitting hairs there. But I think what's going to continue to to drive things and what people are going to be thinking about is what policies might be implemented. Is the magnitude going to be enough to move the needle on an eighteen trillion dollar economy? Um? And what kind of cooperation of course, all that means

for you know, between Congress and new administration. So you know, earnings, you know, when you're growing two, I mean the chance of a big, big beat or a big miss. Overall, it's it's really slim um. So I don't think earnings are going to be a big driver here. But help me here with where I go. I mean bonds. Can you find a coupon that justifies ownership of bonds? Given word Cherry Yellin's heading, Well, I think that's pretty tough.

And I think our you know, our fixed income guys would tell you that you still want to own some bonds. But you know, on the stock market, we're not looking for the end of the cycle. We're just looking for some headwinds, some a little bit of fear of wage inflation in a little bit of a fear that the FED might be behind the curve. Um, we've had a good run here obviously over the course of the last six or seven years, and so I think this is more.

This will be when you look at the market on December thirty one versus where it was on January one, you know, this will be more of a stall year. Maybe you see till the return of low single digit six something like that, which you know, that's fine. I mean, this is like you said, the economy is grinding it out. This is kind of a grinded out kind of market. Um, we want to still lean towards those sectors that are

sensitive to a continuation of the recovery. Now, if we'd see a run up here to something, we may make some adjustment, a little less cyclical that kind of thing. But you know, I think you still have to lean for lean towards those cyclical sectors still out performance. So give me an example that narrow that down. Give me that would be industrials, the consumer discretionary sector. Financials. We

also like healthcare, but obviously is toothpaste discretionary. Two is not discretionary, It's not really Give us an example of the consumer discretion people, it is, I guess, but but yeah, so we want we want things that, um that are going to benefit from, you know, continuation of good consumer cinema, continuation of a decent labor market, better growth internationally, a little bit better, better growth here, a little bit better.

You know, those kinds of things. Cardinals opening day, Oh you know when you know when you when you win in the bottom of the night um on your home opener versus the reigning world champions um. That's a good feeling, I guess. So, Scott Wren, thank you so much, greatly appreciate it. With Wills Fargo, Uh say, those Cardinals for three Yankees I've seen. I've seen like fourteen surveys in a row. Michael bar they have a red Sox taking everything. My radar is so up, I don't even know if

I can get to the problem. I have to count it in my fantasy baseball league, and I'm like, oh no, and he was great in in spring training. He just he lights out and then all of a sudden, Sharon had or Susan Weather Yankees Radio, I think it's the r A three for those of you global, that's not a good number. I want it to be three or

four work would be your earns run average? What are the responsibilities of interns at NPR is on Friday afternoons to pick up Ejdon from the lobby and bring him up to All Things Considered where he regularly appears with David Brooks for a week and review segment was a real highlight that right, It's a real highlight for me when I wasn't interned at NPR well over a decade ago. Eachdon joins us now he's a columnist for the Washington Post, the author of Why the Right Went Wrong? Conservatism from

Goldwater to Trump and beyond. Senior fellow at the Brooklyn Institution, ZJ. Great to speak with you again. Thanks for appearing on the program. And let's start with with what we learned over the course of the last few weeks. Here about Washington from the debate over this healthcare law. Less interested here in what happens with healthcare and more just about the way that Washington is functioning or not under this new president. What's your takeaway? Well, first, thank you for

those very kind words. You'll be pleased to know that Mr doesn't waste intern time atty more picking us up and we go right out. But that was really good. Nice to you to say thank you. Here's what I think you saw. You saw first that Donald Trump really doesn't care that much about what's in a policy. I think one of the best pieces on this was written by a young and actually conservative journalist called Tim Alberta

who used to write for National Works Right Political. And there was a moment where Trump was being asked serious questions about by some members of the Freedom Caucus and he just missed all substantive questions using a barnyard epithet. I don't want to spoil your air time by using the actual word he used. And he didn't care what really what was in the Billy was just looking for

a win. This bill basically contradicted his zone promises. I think on the Paul Ryan's side, what you saw is Paul Ryan is far more interested in tax cuts than he is in UH in healthcare policy. And this bill, you know, according to the CBO, would have led twenty four million people to lose their health insurance over a decade. UH. That didn't seem to matter much to Rhyme, but it

did to a lot of members. And here's here's the third thing that we've been talking a lot about how the Freedom Caucus sank this bill, the right wing members of the House. But the New York Times did a very interesting analysis that showed that by their account, they had thirty three no votes that they had counted, and of those a majority were not Freedom Caucus members. A lot of them came from either they were either somewhat

more moderate or sent a right in their views. Some of them came from districts that voted for Clinton, and they voted against the bill for what you might call liberal reasons, which is they didn't want to throw all these people off healthcare. So you really had an incoherent approach to repealing Obamacare. And I've been quoting my favorite philosopher, Joni Mitchell. Actually she's a folk singer, as you know, and she said, uh, famously, you don't know what she

got till it's gone. And a lot of people looked at Obamacare and said, gee, we didn't like it because we didn't like the label. These were people who didn't like President Obama. Um. But they realized that this law covers a whole lot of people and so it's not perfect. It needs fixing. But this wouldn't have fixed it, This would have gotten rid of it. E J. What do you make of the White House's approach to healthcare? What does it tell us about its approach to tax reform

is what we look to see. How fulsomely this White House would embrace a piece of legislation that was drafted by legislators on the Hill is a lesson to be learned here that the White House should take a greater role in defining what it wants out a tax reform. Absolutely, and what's interesting about tax reform is that it splits, uh, not only Republicans in Congress, uh, it also splits Republicans

in the White House. So it's apparently a real war going on between those who favor Paul Ryan's proposal, which would in effect tax imports by levying the corporate tax in different ways domestically, you know, on exports, which would be free uh from tax, and on imports, which would have a tax. This splits business very much. Importing businesses like Walmart really don't like this way of doing corporate tax reform. Um, so they're gonna have to make hard choices.

I just don't think tax reform is easy. The way a lot of Republicans seem to be saying it is e J. November seven, nineteen seventy two. I believe you were exiting stage right Portsmouth Priory, up in Rhode Island, on your way to journalism, journalism and literature glory. Mr McGovern went down in Flames McGovern Shriver. What does your Democrat party do now? Bill Mayor was really heated about the Clintons this weekend. What should the Clintons do? And

what should the Democrats do to regroup? First of all, you made me younger than I am. I really appreciate it. I worked at college on that election day, but thank you. UM. A couple of things. One is UM is sometimes in politics we forget the power of negative thinking. Ronald Reagan his program was built on three big negatives anti communist, anti government, anti tax uh. And I think in this period to be opposed to Donald Trump is to be in the situation where you can rally the vast majority

of Americans. Right now, Trump's approval rating is running between as low as thirty five percent recently and galloped to forty percent. So I don't think you should underestimate the power of opposing Trump. Second, I think what Democrats should do, and I have a hunt she'll see it is that they need to oppose what Trump is putting forward when it is not in line with what they want, which is in most cases, Uh, it is not in line

with what they want. Um. But they should be putting out proposals on infrastructure, on how they would fix Obamacare to make it work better, on what they would do for working class voters, white and black, who were at the center of the conversation of the last campaign. So they should just say this is what we would do if Trump wants to come to them. If Trump says, g I can support some of this, then you have

a different political situation. Uh. In the meantime, I think they should continue to say, we're not going to repeal the Affordable Care Act. That's one of our great achievements. We're gonna fight repeal of Wall Street Reform, that's another significant achievement. Uh. And we're gonna fight Trump where he seems to be abusing his power, whether it's on conflicts of interest or in seeming not to want this investigation

on the Russian connection to go forward. When you look at how the Democrats performed during the last campaign, What are the biggest deficits as you as you see them, and how's the party learning from them? And further, how deep is their bench when when you look at sort of rising stars in the party, who are you looking at? Um we in l selection. You know, I am one of those who thinks that the Comy intervention tipped it.

Of course, it's easy to say when an election is decided by seventy seven thousand votes in three states, Uh, to say, almost anything you point to could decide. But I think Comey mattered. Clearly the Clinton campaign should have seen the problems uh in Michigan and Wisconsin coming. She lost the primary in Wisconsin by a huge margin to Bernie Sanders. She also, to her surprise, lost Michigan. Uh. And I think they, you know, they just made a

you know, a tactical mistake. But I think the other thing is what the Democrats need to do, and what the Clinton campaign failed to do is to present a sort of a compact message to working class voters who were hurting in this economy. There are a lot of places, including my dear hometown of Fall River, that have been hammered by the industrialization. Clinton had a lot of specific proposals, but she didn't focus on them enough. They counted on

Trump's disabilities to elect them. You know, in my view, that should have been enough in principle, but in fact voters wanted to hear what she was going to do about these lingering problems in the economy. And I think that's a place where the Democrats and everybody really have

to put a lot of attention. There was this study that came out a couple of weeks ago from you know, paper sponsored by Brookings, the Case of Deaton paper that talked about despair, deaths of despair among working class people, white working class and uh, this is a national crisis. And I think similarly, the same forces that are hurting towns like Fall River or Reading, Pennsylvania are hurting um

inner cities as well. And so I think, uh, they need a message that crosses racial lines, but that talks about those parts of the economy that aren't prospering. You know, big cities. Many of our big cities are prospering. Many parts of the country are, but there are parts that have been left badly behind, and they deserve to be Madjon, thank you so much, greatly appreciated with Brookings and of course The Washington Post. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg

Surveillance Podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on iTunes, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm out on Twitter at Tom Keene. David Gura is at David Gura. Before the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio, brought you by Bank of America Mary Lynch. Dedicated to bringing our clients insights and solutions to meet the challenges of a transforming world. That's the power of global connections.

Mary Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated, Member s I p C