Surveillance Special: A Divided Congress

On our millennials, I know we don't know the micro detail of the election yet, but that the millennials show up and what do they mean to the results? Well, yes, I mean evidence suggests early on that millennials were more energized to vote, but I think they're more reflecting did overall of how many Democratic constituents felt going into this election, that they viewed this as a referendum very specifically on

President Trump. But is it enough? I mean, Dan Balls just published in the Washington Post talking about that red wall that hit the blue wave. I mean, do the millennials have enough up to with the marginal help liberals in two years? I think that it could during the presidential year, but as we know, you know, mid terms

are a little bit tougher because of turnout. However, what we have seen is that it looks like we're still counting votes, but more people have voted, or as about as many people voted in this election as in a presidential election, which is quite astounding. So we still have to wait to see how that shakes out in terms of millennials, but their turnout was higher, um than what

would be expecting in typical midterm elections. Many just in terms of the key issues that really attracted votes as to vote for a specific party, was pretty clear for lot of people in the last twenty four hours that immigration meant a lot to those that voted Republican and health care ment a lot to those that voted Democrat. What mattered to the independence So for independence, obviously both mattered,

but perhaps two different reasons for independence. Health Care matter quite a bit, but it had a lot to do with costs and premiums going up, and so it kind of depended on how the candidates framed the issue in

their in their specific districts. I think on immigration, though, I think a lot of independence feel like the Trump administration went too far, especially what we saw with the family separations of supporter would you explain, and this is from the Cato till I understand that if we have a vector of growing debt a vector of growing deficit to GDP, when does the growthiness certitude drift away from the Trump administration? Sorry, I couldn't understand. Well, they believe

in a growth. Mr Cudlow believes in growth at our costs and if we grow, fix our deficits or you know, the deficits will grow. Kato pushes against that to be polite. When does that dialogue end? Well, just to be clear, I'm a polster at the Cato Institute, so I'm not taking positions one way or another, but I can tell you what the data does. And then, Um, Republicans really are the only ones that are caring about the budget deficit, as evidenced by what we see, um, what people tell

us in the polls. Obviously Democrats are talking about it at the national elite level, but it's really only rank and file Republicans that seem to care about it. But even they have elevated other concerns above that. UM. And so I think that's only really when Democrats are in office that we hear a lot of Republicans complaining about the budget deficits um and yes, I think that the kind of the reason or the justification they will give if they'll say, well, economic growth will get it out

of it. And it is we we are saying, um, a pretty good economy of during Trump's tenure. But that doesn't necessarily mean that's enough to get us out of

the budget. Emily, thank you so much, Emily Egans with his Cato Institute where she just pulling and thinks about broader issues right now from the shores of the Mummie River, Fort Wayne, Indiana, Mark lauder h joins us right now his service to Mike Pence over the years and with lauder communications right now in Indiana, Mark lauder an incumbent Democrat, went down in flames. Does that signal a different Republican Party, a new nuanced Republican Party. I wouldn't view it as

much of that. I think this is really a correction from a very flaw to cannidate that was nominated in two thou and twelve that really just imploded there in the last months before the election inve which opened the door for a for a Democrat to take that seat. And I think this was Indiana basically showing a traditional deep red state status uh and restoring them with a with a Republican senator. And yet Democrats across the contentious what I'm gonna call it for our global audience, the

eastern Midwest, the Great Lake States. Uh, there seemed to be a Democrat tinge there. What does that signal moving forward to two thousand twenty, Well, it's it's always going to be a challenge. And while there were a lot of great victories for Republicans on on Tuesday, UH, the governor's races in uh in in Wisconsin, the one in Michigan was really never really close. So that was you know,

that was something obviously we would hope for. But you know, we also got a very good, strong Republican governor elected in Ohio, which was a very close thing and uh and close a number of positives. I'm one of the ball state guy. Let me rip up the script here. What did you learn from the state of Ohio? Florida and Ohio really matter? What did Mark Lauder take away from Ohio first and foremost that candidates matter? Uh. So we had very strong candidates in both Florida and Ohio

in the governor's races. In the Senate race, obviously, with Governor Scott uh defeating Senator Brown in Ohio was never really a possibility. It would have taken a red wave to to capture to capture that seat. So I'm not sure we learned a lot more we had. You know, there were some very good house pick or a households in Uh in Ohio. So it's all gonna come down

a lot of times local issues. And these these elections, especially at the House of Representatives level, are still hyperlocal, and so you need to have great candidates who are raising money, knocking on doors, doing those basic things. And in this case, we saw that many Democrats outrage is the Republican at the house district level, raw Republicans on a state level and on the national level, Uh completely swamps Democrat fundraising organization. But that's kind of translate translate

down to those those house districts. Not let's talk about have you identified what a Republican president is running against the ideas that is coming out of this Democratic Party that the Republican President Donald Trump will be running against. In I've struggled to get a coherent sort of idea of what the Democratic Party stands for right now and through the campaigning of the last few months, have you

got a good idea? I don't think so, other than the other than resistance, which is really the only message they have put forward is is resistant. It will be interesting to see and this is and this is a very important moment because campaigning is one thing. Governing is something completely else. And do the Democrats with their new majority in the House of our Presentatives know how to govern?

Which means you're going to have to produce budgets, You're going to have to produce the basic legislation and come into an agreement. With an expanding majority in the United States Senate and a Republican in the White House. Will they be able to to do those things? If they won't, this could be quickly reversed in two years in a presidential election here because there majority is not that great.

This has been great, Thank you so much. Mark Lauder with us from a lot of communications, has work for Republicans in Indiana. There now joining us, and we've heard from discourse from Republicans someone certainly affiliated with the Democratic Party. Democratic Party Laurence Somers joins us, the former Secretary of Treasury, and also, of course the former president Harvard University, Larry Somers. I guess we're all going to go back to our

general economics as we dash through grid luck. I think of your uncle Paul Samison, the Nobel Laureate, and his classic text of what does Lauren Summers think of gridlock? What actually gets done in Washington? Look, we just saw a frustration election. People can't agree on it everything, but for some things they can't agree on it. We need to focus on combating the people be so frustrated. That starts for raising the minimum wage, for adjusting for inflation

that it's been in a very long time. That means putting back to protections in Obamacare so you can get health concerned when you need it, which is when uh you're sick. That means confronting the kind of excesses of business power. Frankly, that we see, why should it cost three times as much to get it in haler from your kids in the United States as it does in uh can Okay, let's look, Larry, this is critical. Let's go These are issues everybody could be able to agree on.

And what we need to do is stop having wars and move forward. Okay, but Larry, this goes right to the point Charles Meyers mentioned this earlier this morning, was signum, which is one of the two things we can do in this gridlock as infrastructure and also pharmaceutical pricing. Do you actually believe in then the gridlock, that we can get a reduction in drug prices? As you allude to the inhalers. Look, I'm not sure what what Congress will

succeed in passing. I'm sure what the country needs to do, and I'm sure what the vast majority of its uh UH would support that. I'm sure what responsible officials would find constructive ways to UH to compromise on prognosticated prognosticating Washington UH politics. I'll leave to somebody else the economy part enough, Larry, do you really think that the Democratic Party can become the party of fiscal responsibility? I think the priority. Look, we've in the long run, their issues

around the budget deficits that we've got to confront. But if we're gonna move our economy forward, if we're gonna move our country forward, if we're gonna come together again, fiscal responsibility for the long run is not the priority right now. Serving the interests of a frustrated, angry electorate that whose interests have not been followed for the last

two years. Is what the priority has has got has got to be When I hear people come on these financials those and talk about how their agenda is to have the FED raised interest rates faster because they think somehow too many people are being employed um and to cut and to do what they think is courageous, which is to cut the Social Security benefits that people earn forty dollars a year. And they don't talk about the

price of inhailers. They don't talk about what it's like to live on seven dollars and thirty five cent UH minimum ways, because they don't talk about the fact that every corporation can contribute as much money as it wants, but no employer will. But thousands of employers won't give their workers the day off to go and vote, and states across the country go out of their way to make it as hard as possible for people in minority

groups to register, and they're not complaining about that. I have to say that it's hard to focus on their abstract long run financial UH concerns when they are oblivious to the concrete UH concerns that are hurting the lives of UH tens of things and people who work for their companies. So larry a couple of points you've made down.

I want to pick up on the point on the Federal Reserve to some degree, do you agree with the President of the United States then that the Federal Reserve needs to stop hiking into US writes I think the FED needs to be careful and needs to be careful and prudent as uh the day as the data comes in, and very much aware that monetary polishing operates with a lag, and so there's a riff that you're tightening, you're tighten, you don't remember the lag, and you uh tip the

economy into recession. I think that I think that the kind of FED bashing in which the President has engaged is really unfitting of his office, and he's likely to be counterproductive because it means that if the third word of decide wanted to slow down our tightening, they have to reckon with the possibility that they look like they've been We may see that at eleven thirty today with

a press conference. Lawrence Summers of Harvard, of course, the former Secretary of Treasure at the United States with US this morning, Larry, you are identified with secular stagnation. We got X number of quarters of growth. Every single guest John Farren Ice speak with believes we will see a vector south in g d P in economic growth. Are we gonna enjoy summer's secular stagnation here with a lesser growth and a high inflation Off of those deficits, I

think growth is likely to slow. I'm not worried about inflation reaching UH dangerous levels in placient has been below the two percent target for a decade down. It may creep a little bit above the two percent PLACER target. I don't think that's a serious problem. I think the serious problems are around the things i've been UH talking about the lives of citizens who are so obviously frustrated with what's happening in our country at averaging UH to

be frustrated. And I think we've got to focus on maintaining the momentum of growth. But if we can address some of the issues I've talked about, like UH the minimum ways, like making necessary investments in our country's infrastructure which enables us UH to compete, we can raise the country's long run growth, right, But I don't think sugar high, sugar high approach, who's based on corporate tax cuts, the companies that have plenty of cash is gonna do a

lot to push the economy forwards. Secretary Summers, thank you so much. Laurence Summers with the course from Harvard University joining us. Now we we we've been really trying to get guests with a different twist and particularly operational guests of how you get elected. We've done that on the red side and the blue side. Now Robbie Mook joins us. Of course you CINO and CNN, but far more Robbie Mook working with Secretary Clinton in her two thousand sixteen campaign.

What was the campaign tactical execution, Robbie that you saw last night? What paid off? That's a great question and and thanks for having me um. I think, well, I think Democrats stuff except in unexpected places in South Carolina, Oklahoma. And what the candidates did there was run local races. Uh. They spoke to their constituents as someone from the community.

They didn't allow interest groups in d C to push them or shove them in some cases into particular policy positions, and they ran advertising on kitchen table issues like healthcare and job creation and education. Um, I think there were there were. There were kind of two different campaigns going on. One was on cable television and the other was in these districts and and it was much more kitchen table.

One of the management things you have with the egos you have to deal with is once they get elected, you've got to calm them down and hold their hand, or maybe they jison you out the door. How do the Democrats move forward? Do you counsel grace or should they move forward in the House with a certain fire. That's a great question. Democrats need to focus on delivering results for the people who elected them. And if you look at the kind of candidates we elected, people out

of law enforcement, out of the military. Um. Their their pragmatic, practical people. And so I think there's actually going to be in a really good way internal in the caucus to get things. Okay, let me cut to the chase. That's very nice of you to say, what is Maxine Water is going to do as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee? I mean, are we in for endless committees?

In the back and forth? You know, it's almost like Brexit, just the back and forth every day of the president and his infirmities, or are we actually going to get government done that advances your Democratic party? Well, I think Democrats want to get things done. There's h if you if you was into Nancy Pelosi last night, Um, she didn't talk about investigation. She talked about, you know, improving healthcare and infrastructure bill, which I think there's there's broad

based support for across the country. Um. And so I think there's all the chance in the world that that stuff can happen. That the real question is as the president going to be an honest broker and and for example on immigration, you know, he cut a deal with Democrats last year and then walked away from them at the last minute. He's just not a reliable, trustworthy broker.

That's that's been his reputation all of his life. And so I think a lot of this falls on him to decide if he's gonna if he's going to be an honest negotiator and follow through on his promises and frankly put political capital behind something other than himself. I mean, he just hasn't shown the ability to to expend political capital to move something through he just wants to win the news cycle every day. Rob Let's ask a question that falls on the Democratic Party. I want to ask

you who President Donald Trump will run against. That would be ridiculous. I want to ask you what President Donald Trump he's going to be running against. What is the idea that the Democratic Party wants to communicate to the electorate the President Donald Trump will be running against. Yeah, it is incumbent on our nominee to prove two things. First of all, that Donald Trump has not been honest, that he gave people a raw deal. He said he'd do one thing and he's done another, and he's hurt

everyday people in their lives. Um, their wages haven't gone up. The tax code got rigged against them. Uh, you know, he was it was really good for himself, but not good for them. And then secondly, we need to prove the case that we can do a better job. We can create more jobs through you know, through something I can infrastructure, we can we can improve Obamacare so that

healthcare markets stabilize and it's more affordable for families. Those are the things we have to prove, and I think the President is going to do everything in his power to try to make the debate in our primary about identity, politics and a whole bunch of other issues we can't fall from. On the economy, I find it very difficult to see how the Democrats are going to come up with an idea that really goes against what he's done.

Wage growth is up, g d P is up, confidence levels just look at the soft data from the business community sky high. What is the argument that comes from the Democratic Party. Wages are distinctly not up. People are taking home less pay every single year that goes by, and the latest payrolls report, right, but that's not growing us. It's not growing at the same pace as inflation. And the President the president right for this year, but if you look at the past thirty years, it has not

been growing fast enough. And the president past attacks bill that gave away billions of dollars um to corporations and to the richest individuals. We have not seen that invested back into companies. It's being used for buy backs. And our children are being saddled with mountains of debts. So I think there's a lot at stake here. Very differently. We gotta each your backer, Robbie, thank you so much.

Greatly appreciated uh with his perspective on the mechanics, working with Terry mccaull if for a few years ago, and the governor at Race in Virginia of course of Secretary Clinton two years ago. It is good within all of our political views today, our economics, finance, investment, David Wilson's good stock report. To talk to somebody that actually lived, he is forever. The Senator from Mississippi, Trent Lott joins us this morning, a senator, A lot wonderful to have

you with us. And within that is where one side of the House has to get used to the other side of the House as well. How well senators in the how are Republicans in the Senate adapt and adjust to a Democrat House. Well, first, Tom and Tim is good to be with you again. And this is quite an interesting morning. I was invested in the business report.

But you know, there's been two similar situations that I lived through in the eighties when Reagan was president, he always had a Democratic House and only part of the time of Republican Senate. And yet working with Tip O'Neill, working across the with people like Bob Michael and Bob Dole or the Senate, but they got things done. And in the nineties when Clinton was president, we had both the House and the Senate. New Gingrich and I were

leading the two bodies and we worked together. Clinton talked to us. We we did welfare reform, we balanced a budget, we passed safe drinking water, and we passed telecommunication form. A lot of things can be done in a divided government, but it takes communication, It takes chemistry, takes a vision, but most of all, it takes leadership. Does your Ablican

president have the communication and chemistry to do that? Beginning with the press conference at eleven thirty this morning, Well, uh, he's gonna have to adjust to the circumstances that he faces. He does have, thank goodness of the Republican Senate, but he's gonna have to deal with Anti Pelosi in a Democratic House, um, you know, and try to figure out how we can get things done. There's some things the

Senate can do on their own. But if he would reach out to uh, Chuck Schumer in the Senate and Anti Pelosi and Mitch McConnell, say, can we get together on infrastructure? This is something I think he cares about. Uh, does anybody deny that in America we need to invest more in Lane's planes, trains, ports, harbor, water and sewer. Well, absolutely not. It's not partisan. So they need to think a little bit about can we get something done for our country in the lame duck session and next year?

Now after that, all bets are all pim Trent What it sounds like he was running for office there, Well, you never thought about it, but I couldn't afford to give up my livelihood and I didn't want to divorce after fifty four years. At the same way, some retired, Well you got to know when to retire. By the way, some of our colleagues need to think about that. Let me bring in pen Fox p. Well, let's follow up on that. What who are the key relationship builders in

the Senate? And you just mentioned retirement. Should there be an age limit? Owner? Oh no, no, no, you know look American people, uh can end the term and leadership. Well, you know in the Senate, for instance, they do have term limits on everybody, but the Republican leader, the whip really good Man Corning from Texas is having to step aside his whip after six years, and the other leaders I presume Will will move up Thune and Barasso and

Roy Blunt. He's a very interesting personality. He served in the House, he's a whipping house and now he's a leadership in the Senate. So if some of those folks will try to think about how do we reach across the aisle and see if there's something we maybe can for instance, uh, the Congress Democrat House and Republicans, and they're gonna have to deal with the trade issue, you know, the U. S m c A uh follow up to NAPTA has to come to Congress. Are they going to

be able to get that done? And by the way, if they don't, you know, what is the situation with regard to trade in Canada and Mexico are two most important trading partners. What are the relationships that you believe currently exists or that have been built over time that still exists in the Senate between Democrats and Republicans. I have to tell you I don't see much. Um. You know, it's the kind of thing you have to work on every day. I had a unique personality to work with

in Tom Dashel from South Dakota. He was a Democratic leader when I was a Republican leader. We had a good chemistry. We talked all the time, and we were able to get a lot of things done. Uh, even though we you know, had the president, you know it was Clinton, but it uh, you know, they're just gonna have to try to think about, Okay, what do we do. The fact is we do have a Republican Senate at gain seats, and we do have a Democrat House. It's a fact. Now, how are you gonna deal with that?

The part of the bridge that could be built, Well, first of all, I think they should stay in Washington and work more. Uh. This deal where they come into town Monday night or Tuesday morning and they want to leave. Third, you can't govern like that. Uh. You know, the American people work five days a week. Yeah, the last time I checked. And this idea that could sleep in our offices that ought to be illegal in my opinion. But you know, they're gonna have to spend more time here. Uh,

and they're gonna have to find a way. One of the issues, one of the things that caused me to decide to leave Congress when I did was the embarrassed I was about the inability of Congress to do immigration reform. Uh. It needs to be done both for those that are here, uh and for those that we might want to come that are legal. Uh. And to control, um, the flow of illegal immigrants into this country that hasn't been dealt with since nine six effectively. Uh, everybody knows it's an issue.

We need to find a way to come together. Senator, Please don't be a stranger. A senator a lot of Mississippi with his work with John Brow of course afterwards your partner as well, Senator, thank you so much, greatly appreciated. Stephen Moore joins us now writing with Dr Lafler trump Anomics, which got wide played, particularly in Republican areas. To the gentleman from New Trier and Whinette, Illinois, Stephen Moore, the deficit grows? At what point does a deficit get in

the way of trump andomics? Well, good morning, thank you for the nice introduction. And uh, that's first time people have mentioned my high school but didn't go to Newture Edge outside of Chicago. And uh, look, I think you're right. We've got a we've got a booming economy right now. You know, we had these big elections last night, and I think that the people say, well, the economy wasn't really on the ballot, Well, it sure was. And I think if it hadn't been for this booming economy, Republicans

would have maken a huge bud. I think, you know, it's the economy is what saved so many of these Senate teams for the Republicans and some of the governorship. So look, I'm very bullish on the US economy. I actually think that this outcome for investors because this is boom investors. So I just okay, that's I think that the outcome last night where the Democrats took the House, Republicans took the Senate is absolutely the best possible outcome

for financial a markets. That's actually did outcome for Donald Trump. I think it gives them two years to run against Nanti Pelosi and the and the the Democrats. So you know, I think, you know, you saw one of the futures were up on something my communters points this morning. I think this is a good Outkay, Stephen, you sound like Lawrence Cudlo Deaconomic Club in New York. I asked the question, you didn't answer it. Tell me about the dynamics of

debt and deficit given this economic growth. Everybody knows the vector of deficit to GDP, when does it turnaround? Yeah, so that's a great question. In fact, in the book. In the book, we talk a lot about that. You know, we are from our first meeting with Donald Trump, uh, you know, to some two and a half years ago, we basically told them, look, Donald and that we call

them Donald, that we call him Mr. President. We said, you're never gonna make any progress in reducing this massive tidal wave of debt that is coming because of the aging of the baby boomers unless we get economic growth rate up. You know, under Obama, the average growth rate you know, with something like one point nine five percent per year, which was you know, just not high enough, not nearly high enough. We need to double that growth rate.

And so we always said, look, get the economy moving, get people in the workforce, get people off welfare and into jobs, and during factories back in the United States spring corporate profits and business profits up, and you'll get a surge of revenue. Since you know that Trump has done that, we've gotten the growth rate up to you know, close to fourth porcent now over the last I just want I know, but Stephen, I haven't answered my question. I know I'm answering it. So the solution to the

debt is economic growth. We've got to get the if we keep up this economic growth rate, just as in the late ninety nineties under Bill Clinton when we actually ran budget surpluses at the end of his presidency, if we get to if we keep this high rate of growth up, the debt is a sure of GDP will

continue to fall. Stephen Moore, is there any evidence, practical evidence to suggest that tax cuts are able to generate enough growth to replace the revenue that is lost from those tax cuts, And if so, can you point me hang on? Hang on, because I've looked at a variety of economic studies and at the most they say that maybe a third of the money of the revenue that is lost from tax cuts is made up, under the

best of circumstances, from economic growth. Just a third. Yea. So, uh, Look, our objective with the tax cut was to grow the economy and create jobs. That was the number one issue for the American people in two thousand, Uh, you know, fourteen, fifteen and sixteen, Every year, what were Americans concerned about the economy and jobs? And we put that first, and

we've done that. We've created the best labor market ever for American workers, at least in fifty years, and we've got a booming economy with three and a half four percent ROW. Now is the depth going up? Yes? Why is it an upset going up? Because spending is out of control. Spending is out of control, and I'm not

going to depend the Republicans on the spending. You know that they have done nothing and neither party wants to control spending up last year, even with the tax cut, even with the tax cut in two thousand eighteen to score two thousand eighteen, which ended in October, we had more federal revenues into the treasury than any time in American history. It's not a revenue problem. It's a spending problem. Okay, we're gonna leave it. There's Stephen Wore, thank you so much.

Not enough time today. We'll have you back on as soon. Is an important book with Art Laughler, Stephen Moore, Arthur B. Laughler, Trump Adomics, of course, with a theory and actual policy that we've seen from the president, and again we may get clarity on it. We're squeezing some time here with Frank Keating of Oklahoma, Governor Keating, if I can jump to your tangible expertise and law enforcement, including being an

FBI agent. If the president that advances forward the rhetoric in discourse on immigration, how will that be played out with our military at the border? Is a is a police guy? Do you want the army at the border? Well, Thomas, you well know the Post Commatatus Act UH prohibits the military involving itself in law enforcement activities and surely grabbing people and pushing them back. Committing a misdemeanor. Illegal enter

in the United States is a law enforcement act. The Immigration Service at one time Lake Reagan reported him as did the Border Patrol. And in a situation like this, the only thing you can do is to have Mexico help you to keep people from coming across and putting barriers that are significant along the border so people can't crawl over it and effect a wall by some other name. So I'm not really happy about what's going on. I

think we have to protect our borders. If you let these people in, you're gonna have ten times at number, particularly with over doors. The new president of Mexico, you don't know, he's very, very left wing his rhetoric. So far it's been reasonably positive, but you just don't know. So you certainly don't want everybody in Central South America Mexico coming across the border. That's just not sustainable. Governor Keating, during your second term, one of the major accomplishments was

your increase in spending on education. This was for a common education, vocational technical, higher education that was throughout the state. You also introduced charter schools to Oklahoma for the first time. Based on what you know about the disposition of the way money is spent right now, For example, Arizona voted down school vouchers during the mid terms. What is the

likelihood that we're going to get a coherent education policy. Well, the good news him is that fellaalism work and in the education arena and across the board, you have to work together Democrats and Republicans, And in my case, I was the first Republican governor since the sixties. Overwhelmingly Democrat House and Senatives. But I told them, Okay, I'm for vouchers, but we'll do public school vouchers, and I'm for choice, public school choice, and we ought to have charter school

as well. They went along with that, and the ethnic charter school, for example in Oklahoma City, has nine thousand students and they have very high A C. T scores, whereas many public schools throughout the state burdened by huge levels of democracy that's across the country. The money doesn't go to the class room to get people like the

three of us to teach. It goes to bureaucrats average salaries in six figures, and I think that's crazy for any state to overinvest in bureaucracy and under invest in the classroom. The governor. One final question, it's a hundred and seventy five miles from Tulsa to Wichita. I feel like I'm writing a song for the Lake, Glenn Campbell. You're moving from Tulsa to Wichita, and you're moving to a state with a Democrat governor. Uh. The brown Back

experiment north of Oklahoma in Kansas, how did that work out? Well? I think Sam Brownback is a very bright guy, but as a former senator, I can't figure this out. He was not effective with the legislature didn't work with him. Republican or Democrat, you have to do that, and if the Democrats say no, it's hell no, then you say, okay, then where can we go? I mean, if you want to be a dictator, and I can say this is a Catholic. If you want to be a solo person

in charge them, run for pope. But if you're a leged latory definition, you're to compromise. And I don't think Sam Brownback compromised. And I think the public decided they want to have administered the whole system of dioretic Frank Katy, thank you so much, and uh I hope to see you at your next travels to New York to advance for the next volume of Next Magical Children. Thanks for

listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keene before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio.