Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. We don't want to waste time. We want to get right to the Congressman. Mike Lawler is with us now, of course, the Republican from New York seventeenth. We spent a lot of time talking about everything from salt to yes government funding, and here we are again, Congressman, thank you for joining us on Bloomberg TV and radio. The conventional wisdom is we shut down after midnight, and I'm assuming you don't see
a way around it. What comes after the shutdown?
Well, unfortunately, it looks like we are barreling towards a shutdown because Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer have changed their position entirely on keeping the government funded and passing clean crs. Whether it was Joe Biden or Donald Trump, I have voted for every single CR to keep the government open and funded while we negotiate a final appropriations package. I think it is foolish to shut down. The government
is going to create chaos in the markets. It will create chaos for the American people, especially those who rely on the social safety net, border security, our military veterans, benefits, etc. This is entirely unnecessary and does nothing to actually further the work of the American people. It is pure political posturing by my Democratic colleagues because they are not in the majority, and from my vantage point, that is not
what you do. I was against it when Republicans wanted to shut down the government, and I'm against it here when Democrats want to do it. So we will see what happens over these twelve hours. As you pointed out, Republicans passed a clean cr through the House. The bill
is sitting in the Senate at the desk. It can easily be taken back up right now and passed, and Chuck Schumer refuses to do that, despite his many pronouncements in years past about the need to pass clean crs and not pound your fists and stomp your feet when you don't get your way.
So, Congressman, I hear you on the future of a potential clean CR. But do you see any room for negotiations here when it does come to those expiring Obamacare tax credits. We did hear from how Speaker Mike Johnson in an interview this morning saying that there might be some negotiating room, but that would have to happen after a funding bill is passed, since the tax credits are going to expire by the end of the year.
Correct, and I am one of several Republican members who have signed on to legislation to extend the ACA subsidies for a year. Remember these were put in place during COVID to try and help those who were losing their jobs or unemployed because the government was forcing businesses to shut down. We don't want people to be unduly hurt, obviously by healthcare premium increases, but to try and shut the government down while negotiating some of these issues is foolish.
We can easily keep the government funded through November twenty first, finalize all appropriations for fiscal year twenty six, and come to an agreement on these ACA subsidies for the next year or two. There's no reason to shut the government down in the middle of those negotiations.
You wonder what would happen if if Mike Johnson said exactly what you just said. Although maybe there's sole little trust it doesn't matter right now, Congressman, But what should come of these after we've been talking about these extensions for some time now, everybody's become an expert on this or so they think if this was a COVID era a policy, should it be extended forever as Democrats suggest, you just pointed out a year, should they come down?
Should be there be a gradual phasing out. What's the long term on this?
Well, I think again this is a negotiation and a discussion to be had. I think many Republicans would like to see an income limit on these subsidies. Again, these were put in place during COVID. I think there's a larger point though, which is if the Affordable Care Act was supposed to reduce healthcare premiums, was supposed to increase access, why is it not working as intended fifteen years later,
so much so that you need these subsidies to help people. Obviously, there's a broader issue with health insurance costs in this country, and I think that is something that Republicans and Democrats should work on together to focus on how we reduce overall costs. You saw the President today with the announcement with respect to Pfizer and certain prescription drugs and being able to purchase them at a much lower rate. That's important when you look at the challenges facing the US
and Europe. Part of the problem with prescription drug costs in America is that Americans are subsidizing Europeans with the price controls that have long been put in place on prescription drugs in Europe. So that is something that we should all embrace reducing overall cost, but that's not something that you shut the government down over and really harm the very people that you're trying to help.
Well, sticking with this idea that higher drug costs are a point of a political point on both sides of the aisle, I also want to ask you about some of the economic impacts here of a potential shutdown. You said, of course on house finn services. Are analysts at Bloomberg Economics estimate that the unemployment rate could reach four point seven percent in a shutdown. I'm wondering are the optics going to be difficult to navigate here, considering there's already
concerns about the labor market. How are Republicans going to message around this when we know that economic impacts could really be one of those top top concerns and.
Priorities we've seen in shutdowns prior. For instance, the stock market has generally grown the biggest concern has been on GDP. We saw for Q two revision a three point eight percent growth in GDP, which far exceeded what many prognosticators we're claiming was going to happen in Q two. So you know, certainly the economy is moving in the right direction. We got the tax package across the finish line that
was critical for tax certainty. We don't need a government shutdown to create unnecessary chaos as we are working to enact critical policies that move the economy in the right direction, that create jobs, that create wealth and opportunity, and so look, unemployment obviously is a critical issue. We don't want to see layoffs, We don't want to see uncertainty in the market. Democrats have said for years, Chuck Schumer, Jeffrey's long on record about the impacts of a government shutdown and the
need for a clean CR. They should look in the mirror, listen to their words of years past, including just last year with Joe Biden at the Helm, and vote the right way, which is to pass a clean CR and keep the government funded while we work through all these other issues of concern.
What's your view on the Fed Congressman, as you sit on the Financial Services Committee. To Tyler's point, if this affects the release of the jobs report, for instance, on Friday, if BLS can't kick out the jobs data, at what point does that become a problem for the FED to make an accurate decision, say by the next meeting, when it doesn't have a complete picture of the data. Is this something you're worried about it you think government will be back open at time?
Well, again, these are all the concerns and considerations that go into a government shutdown and why I fundamentally believe, regardless of which party is in power, cutting the government down is stupid. It doesn't serve a purpose but for a political one. And in this instance, Democrats are trying to use this for a political purpose, and that is wrong. It was wrong when Republicans wanted to do it in years past, it is wrong now when you talk about
the FED. Look fundamentally, I believe the FED has been late to the game both when they needed to raise interest rates in the past and now in terms of reducing interest rates. I think they need to cut interest rates far greater than they have. Obviously, having all of the data and information is important, but I think all of us recognize the need for them to cut rates. So whether or not they have that data, they need
to act on the reality of the situation. Jerome pal needs to advance rate cuts in a serious way so that we can continue to move this economy in the right direction.
We heard from President Trump this morning saying that there could be quote a lot in his words of firings amid this shut down. We know the OMB was circulating this memo threatening permanent layoffs. Do you agree with this as what seems to be emerging as a negotiating tactic between the White House and Democrats on the Hill.
Look, I said earlier in the week when that memo came out that I don't agree with permanent layoffs, but this is the challenge. When you have a shutdown. The executive will make determinations as to who's essential who is not, restructuring of departments and agencies based on a lack of funding.
And I think if Democrats are so concerned about what they see as excessive executive overreach, then they shouldn't be playing games here past the clean cr and keep the government funded and then we don't even have to have that discussion. But unfortunately they are playing games here and changing their previous position. Every single House Democrat but for one Jared Golden of Maine, every single House Democrat either didn't vote or voted no on keeping the government funded almost two weeks ago.
Do you take the White House quickly Congressman at their word when it comes to the layoffs.
Look, I don't think they're kidding around. If they intend to do that, They've made that clear. And again, why play with fire here. There's a very easy way to solve all this. Pass a clean cr and let's keep doing the work of the American people. Negotiate a final appropriations deal. What they should be asking for is a top line number from OMB so that we can finalize
the appropriations for fiscal year twenty six. That's what they should be asking for instead of trying to play political games here.
All right, Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York, thank you so much for joining us here on Bloomberg Television and Radio Today.