Watch Joe and Kailey LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.
Bloomberg Washington Correspondents Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz deliver insight and analysis on the latest headlines from the White House and Capitol Hill, including conversations with influential lawmakers and key figures in politics and policy. On this edition, Joe and Kailey speak with:
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Proud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
The market's finally tuned to react to any piece of economic data, including the Jolt data from this morning, as we await the jobs report on Friday, all of it, Joe, so that it can paint a clear picture of what may happen with the trajectory of monetary policy, what the Federal Reserve will actually do at its meeting later this month. At the same time, though, here in Washington, we have major questions about fiscal policy, and we're getting more details and as to what fiscal policy could look like under both of the potential presidencies of Harris and Trump two point them.
Get ready for a lot of talk about tax cuts and tax policy here, maybe tax hikes in some areas. Kamala Harris looking to hike the corporate tax, which Wall Street has an allergy to inherently.
Donald Trump, though, was talking about making permanent.
Of course, the fairly popular on Wall Street twenty seventeen tax cuts, and the new analysis from Goldman Sachs paints a pretty ugly picture about what that would mean for deficit spending. Try ten and a half trillion dollars over a decade technically, as we understand it now, and we do need more details on both campaigns plans. Donald Trump is outspending Kamala Harris at this.
Stage, although it is worth pointing out she would like to do some tax cutting of her own. She's going to outline today she would like to reduce the number or the amount of taxes that small businesses have to pay by expanding the small business tax credit.
Yeah, we're going to hear from her a round two forty five Eastern time from the seacoast of New Hampshire, and along for the ride is Congressman Gabe Amo, a Democrat from Rhode Island who brought an historic candidacy to the Ocean state, the first black member of Congress in the state of Rhode Island and now on the road for the Harris campaign. Congressman welcome. You have a good sense, I think of the audience listening in to this argument over taxes and the economy, because the guys hanging around Cascerta Pizza in Providence have a lot in common with the guys hanging around the Puritan Backroom in Manchester, all of whom are going to be listening to this today. And it becomes almost a question, Congressman.
Of who do you believe? Who do you trust.
More with the economy, And Kamala Harris says it is her. Despite the track record that Donald Trump has to put on the table, how does she appeal to the folks at the Puritan Backroom and Cacerta Pizza who want to know if their taxes are going up?
Well, first off, thanks for having me, and I am glad that you are displaying your Rhode Island knowledge of Cacerto, which is a great institution on Federal Hill right here in Providence. And I think ultimately this comes down to who do you think has your best interests in mind? Who do you think wants opportunity for the many and not the few? And frankly, the proof is in the pudding. We have seen with the Trump tax cuts, the concentration of wealth at the top. Frankly, the middle class saw higher taxes while with this opportunity agenda that Vice President Harris is putting forward. The announcement today is an example of that, twenty five million new business registrations as the goal working towards that startup expense, those expenses being deductible at a higher rate tenfold, fifty thousand dollars, where we know a cost on average of forty thousand dollars to start a new business. So again the question is who is fighting for you and those in your lives so that everybody can have opportunity.
Well, Congressman, does there have to be a certain degree of honesty here about whether Kamala Harris can fight that fight alone. She's not going to be able to institute this policy or any others regarding the revenue spending of this government without Congress control. Right, even if you and your colleagues can win back the majority, it's not looking as optimistic perhaps in the Senate.
Well, look, I am an optimist, and you know the only poll that matters is that on election day, and so we're going to be working hard. I am cautiously optimistic that Speaker Hakeem Jeffries will be something that comes to fruition. I am also confident that we will be able to hold the Senate. Now, that's going to take a lot of work, and I think Vice President Harris's presence on the ticket has buoyed our potential. And I feel very strongly that the American people when presented with these options of investing in an opportunity agenda we heard previously last month on housing and ensuring that everybody has the opportunity to own a home, today, on growing small businesses and cutting red tape versus a double down on trickle down economics making permanent which has been one of the biggest increases in income disparity and wealth disparity in our country. That's the choice that Americans have, and I believe that most of them will SiGe for everybody having a seat at the table and growing their pie.
Congressman, we'd downed. I believe it's sixty two days to that final pull you refer to in November. How important is it for Kamala Harris? And I'll hear from all the Harris supporters on Twitter about this. We're asking the same about both campaigns. Does she have to explain detail how she's going to pay for all of her proposals?
Well, I think that's part of the process, and we are hearing that. You know, I think over time again, this campaign, as you noted, has sixty two days left, sixty two days to make a case to the American people and explain what we'll do regarding taxes, making sure that there is true tax fairness, that there is an opportunity for those companies who aren't paying their fair share to contribute in a fair, reasonable way to the strength and growth of our economy so that everybody can thrive. So those explanations are underway, and that is in contrast to what the former president has talked about in terms of giveaways to industry for in exchange for support. That is not how this economy is meant to work. And I believe in the fairness that the Vice President will pursue what their opportunity agenda will lay that out very clearly.
Of course, sir, it's not just a question of the kind of economic policy she'll pursue, but foreign policy as well, especially in light of the developments over the last few days in the Middle East, the death of six hostages that were being held by Hamas, ongoing pressure on the net and Yahoo government and Hamas to agree to a cease fire. I ask you this, knowing you sit on the Foreign Affairs Committee, what does Kamala Harris need to say to the American people about the policy she will pursue when it comes to Israel and Gaza.
I think what you'll hear from the Vice President is a clear and focused set of goals around achieving peace, ultimately a two state solution, but in the near term, making sure that we get the negotiated end to hostilities and get hostages back, as well as provide a robust set of humanitarian responses to a situation that has turned into a cycle of violence where there is a deficit of hope. And so we'll continue to hear from the Vice President and in her capacity, as you know, she has traveled around the world that with hundreds of world leaders, executed a diplomatic agenda on behalf of the Biden Harris administration. So she is one of the most experienced people to step into the Oval office when she wins on a foreign policy from a foreign policy perspective, so I expect her to lay out a continued commitment to diplomatic resolutions to tragic situations like one we're seeing in Gaza.
Well, Congressmanamo, we don't need to tell you that the issue surrounding Israel specifically has been a major point of concern for progressive Democrats who have been disappointed with the Biden administration's approach to helping to protect civilian lives, for instance in Gaza. Will progressives be disappointed all over again when they realize that Kamala Harris has the same policy.
Well, I see that Democrats by and large are excited about Vice President Harris, and I think they will see that in her approach, which will be that that she is driving is going to be about finding solutions, bringing people together. You know, there's a lot of divisiveness on this issue. This is not a political football. This is about lives. This is about people who are suffering, the poor, hostage families who are you know, desperately seeking answers, and those who have lost so many in Gaza, so many Palestinians who for no fault of their own other than the birth lottery, are suffering. And so I think you will see a compassion from her that is consistent with our values, and we'll really speak to all of the concerns across the broad and big tent of the Democratic Party.
And finally, Congressman, as you join us today from Rhode Island with Harris spending time in New Hampshire, if you could just speak to the state of play in New England overall.
Is New Hampshire an area in.
Which this campaign needs to devote time and resources, is actually something that's going to be a real contest in this cycle.
Well, look, nothing is a given in politics, and we were going to be working hard in New Hampshire. In fact, I've been there previously this cycle, spend time in Exeter and Manchester and conquered and will go go back to make the case to my New England neighbors that we have to work hard. This is not an election that is going to be a blowout. It's going to be close. We are the underdog. The Vice President is the underdog, make no mistake about it. But with all of the work that we will do, New England will go blue and we will make sure that to send a clear message that we want an agenda focused on protecting our freedoms, expanding economic opportunity, and making sure this is democracy can stand for the betterment of all Americans, especially all of the folks that I share New England with here in Rhode Island.
All right, Democratic Congressman gave Amo of Rhode Island, thank you so much for joining us today, sir.
We appreciate your time.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just Live weekdays neon Eastern on Apple car Play and then royd Oto with the Bloomberg Business at You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
We want to stay now in New England and New Hampshire specifically. We're joined now by the Republican Governor of New Hampshire, Chris Sanunu, Governor. Welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. It's always great to have you, sir. I'd like to ask you the same kind of question I just asked of the Congressman. Polling is now showing that the map is wider in terms of the swing states for Kamala Harris than it was for Joe Biden. The co chair of the RNC, Laura Trump, told me just last week they're looking to spend more money in states like North Carolina and Pennsylvania. Would you be advising the Republican Party the campaign specifically to waste precious time and money in New Hampshire this time?
Well, without a doubt.
I mean, look, if you look at the electoral map, a lot of these swing states are going to be close. New Hampshire is going to be very close. But if if Kamala Harris were to win Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, the victory for Trump is North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, New Hampshire. Right, So when you got to do the electoral math on this, and yeah, we might only have four electoral votes, but there's no doubt it's going to come into play. And this is a state that Trump only lost by two thousand votes. Two thousand votes that's nothing back in twenty sixteen. And I think a lot of us agree that twenty twenty four is going to look a lot more like twenty sixteen in terms of the race.
So I have no doubt that they will be putting resources here.
Obviously, the former vice president thinks she needs to spend I mean, the current Vice president, Kamala Harris needs to think that she needs to spend time here to earn and still have a chance to win the state. She's coming today, and I think you're going to see Trump coming and spending money here as well.
Hey, Governor, it's good to see you. This is the kind of stuff we live for.
We just talked to a Harris surrogate, a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from New England, and it's a great opportunity to ask you, as Kaylee said, some of the same questions, to get a sense of where your head is. We associate you with traditional dare I say, old fashioned Republican conservative values, and I wonder what your thought is when it comes to some of the deficit spending that we're hearing about from both campaigns. The analysis from Goldman Sachs makes it pretty clear that the deficit spending that Bloomberg estimates with top ten trillion dollars over a decade to making permanent the Trump tax cuts without weigh any other benefits of his tax proposal. Kamala Harris, I believe is in the area of two trillion dollars in deficit spending, with at least the amount that we have heard. And I know that you're not about to vote for the Harris campaign. Are you concerned about ballooning deficits. As a conservative sitting in New Hampshire under a Trump two point zero, I'm.
Concerned about a blooming deficits in America, regardless of who's end. There's no question about that. I mean, let's be honest. Republicans in the House and the Senate have not held up the conservative fiscal values that the Ronald Reagan is and the Christanu News really champion.
So it's not just about Trump. It's about Congress.
It's about actually a leadership on the Republican side in the Senate, in the House saying hey, here's a proposal for bounds budget, here's how you do it, here's the tough decisions to get it done now. Under the potential Harris administration, as with Biden, it's been an just an economic disaster on the macro scale, but more importantly, it's been a disaster on the microeconomic scale, being the rent, the cost of living, the fact people can't afford their electricity bills, they panic about how they're gonna put food on the table. I mean that those are real issues. Inflation isn't three point nine percent. That's not how people look at it. Inflation is more like twenty five to thirty five percent compounded since the last administration. And that's what people going to look at. I could afford things four years ago, I can't afford them now. They're gonna go to the ballot box and they're going to vote on those those issues of that financial stress, that anxiety, if you will, that stuff that keeps them up at night. That's what drives a voter. And that ten to twelve percent of swing voters that are still out there, that's far and away the number one issue. Not so much on the macroeconomic scale. I get nervous about that, but day to day, family to family, it's all about how we're going to pay our bills. And who's the agent of change, clearly not the current administration. Right, You're just going to get the same, if not worse in terms of economic policies, price controls, and all that nonsense. But the agent of change to actually make people's lives more affordable, and that's going to be Donald Trump.
Well, governor, is that really true though? If he's talking about blanket tariffs on everything that the US brings in perhaps sixty percent on goods from China, the world's second largest economy. Any economists would tell you that is inflationary policy. If this is really about the cost of goods, that doesn't mean they're going lower under Trump.
Yeah. No, look, I completely agree.
I don't love the tariff policies that he's putting forward, But again that's strategy, right, that's kind of the leverage you want to use from America's position as the world leader and as the economic leader in the world to force better decisions and better results out of China and ultimately even Europe and the rest of Asia. So again that Biden administration has ignored it. Right, they haven't done anything on any of these issues. They're letting China grow more powerful to understand what's going on and these international economies, and to kind of threaten those terrorists, to threaten some sanctions and things of that nature, to gear up better international negotiations on what you know, ultimately what not just the terrorists, but what other regulatory barriers should be there, so they're not stealing our ip and all of that. I'll say this, none of that's going to matter when it comes to the vote.
It's really not.
When it comes to whether people vote for Trump or Harris that's kind of a thirty thousand foot level issue. People are going to vote on their anxieties. It's the border, but not about the eleven million illegals coming in. That's bad enough, I mean, we can't stand that. But it's the drugs they're bringing in. It's the human trafficking issue. Right to take those macro issues and have a candidate and that's what you're going to hopefully see in the debate.
These candidates bring it down to a real.
Level of what parents are struggling about and what parents are driving, you know, their anxieties on if you will, on the on cost of living and drugs.
How it affects their families.
That's what's going to really be the selling point that that I think Trump has to get by and kind of sell to the people if you will, because I do think that Republicans have the right answers.
They have real results. It's not just hey, I'm not Joe Biden.
I mean that's literally all the Kamala Harris campaign has right now. That's not enough to cross the finish line in these swing states come November fifth.
Well, she's proposing some small business tax incentives in your state today, governor, which.
Is why she's gone there.
But the analysis that we got from Alec Phillips at Goldman Sachs does leave us scratching our heads a bit. He estimates if Donald Trump wins the hit to growth from the tariffs we're discussing right now, assuming they're twenty percentage points across the board, and tighter immigration policy, would outweigh the positive fiscal impulse and result in something in the area of a half percentage point of GDP. If the experts on Wall Street are telling us that deficit spending will increase inflation and that this Trump plan will slow economic growth, how does that help anybody with their anxiety about high prices?
Because Kamala Harris is proposing price controls which would absolutely crush the economy, which would absolutely crush any sense of entrepreneurship, would absolutely crush the stock market, reduce.
Any sense of Oh.
And then you add on the that we're going to taxi on unrealized gains, right, that crushes the stock market. Right That basically says anyone who's making major investments to companies that ultimately grow and employ people, that all comes to a screeching hall. Kamala Harris's policies, She had an opportunity to actually go to the middle, but she went even more extreme than Joe Biden. So Joe Biden has in his administration has completely destroyed this economy and people's ability to afford anything. She goes even further left than that, that government is going to can now control prices and destroy any sense of entrepreneurship or innovation in any of these new markets, allowing just basically a couple of giant companies to control things, and it actually ends up in causing a massive reverberation in a negative way throughout this entire economy. So, I mean, the the scary point that you're not bringing up in that article doesn't address is the fact that the Democrats, and they're not even Democrat policies, they're extreme liberal policies, would be devastating to the average American in terms of what they can afford.
Governor, I'd like to ask you about a well read piece today, and it's Jonathan Martin's new column in Politico magazine. The headline reads as follows, If Republicans want to win, they need Trump to lose big. It's this notion that members of your party at least off the record, are suggesting it, Actually, we would be net beneficial in the medium term. Shall we say, for Donald Trump to lose this election, what do you think about that idea?
Would it be better for the party?
No, of course not.
Look so, with all due respect, of course, anytime you have a president on office, the opposite party has an opportunity in the midterm elections.
That's been tried and true for one hundred years.
Doesn't mean it's an automatic win for them, but you know that typically is just how it works. With all due respect to Jonathan, I love the guy, but he's not saying anything that is really news and other than the fact that if he says that party insiders. Look, I hate to tell you, I'm a governor. I'm a pretty popular governor, and I'm kind of on the inside, and I talk to other governors, I talk to other politicians all the time.
Nobody's talking about that.
No, no, not at all, Because what you know, what matters, what's going to get America in a better place down the road.
Results matter, and the.
Trump administration as an administration can start delivering real results, bringing costs to living down, trying to deal with the drug crisis, the border crisis, and if you get those results, that's a huge win for Republicans that want to run in twenty twenty six or even twenty twenty eight. So no, I disagree with the premise completely. I do believe results matter, and I can honestly tell you no one's talking about that on the inside of the political bubble, so to say, everybody is kind of galvanizing around making sure we get a Republican ticket. And look, whether you like Trump or not, what you get with Trump is a Republican administration, a new Republican head of the EPA. The current head of the EPA is an absolute disaster, a new Republican head of dot, a new Republican head of Education, all these departments that make rules and a lot of the processes that all of us have to live by. So that Republican administration is going to be a huge win for America. Even if you don't like the way Trump, you know, acts and what he says. I don't like any of that, but boy, that that change in whole holistic style out of d C is going to be hugely beneficial for this country. I mean, walk in any walk into any building in Washington, DC.
Right now, nobody's there. They all work remotely.
The federal government works at a snail's pace, at a snail's pace, because nobody actually comes to work, right It's it's incredible what the Biden administration has done to d C, bringing the whole process to gridlock. So you're not just voting for Trump, You're voting for a whole change in an approach to government where again, you as the individual come first. States rights matter, local individual control is actually important.
Again, those are the things I live in Washington.
I was in traffic for over an hour this morning. I think nobody is coming to work down here. But you've probably saw your name in this column before we let you go. Consider the governors, Glenn Youngkins, the lobbyists, well maybe the reporters too, Brian Kemp and yes, New Hampshire's Chris sanunuw it says, would all be prime targets for Senate Republicans. I thought you already decided that was a bad idea, that nothing gets done here.
Uh you mean in terms of me right now, I have no interest in running for the the US Senate. Oh no, nothing does get done in DC. It's incredibly frustrating. Governors get stuff done, we get results, we stand accountable, we stand behind the wins and the losses and and that's what that's what good government's all about. So No, I was once ranked, you know, the most of it. We had ranking of the most efficient government in the country here in New Hampshire, which is like being the best surfer in Kansas.
I get it.
But yeah, it is something that we need to take pride in and compared to d C is just a it's a it's been an epic disaster.
So no, thank you. I've done my four terms.
We go off into the private sector and happy to help anybody learn how to win races on the private side of things.
That that I can just think of the conversations we'll be able to have when he's out of office. Keley, Governor, it's great to see you. We invoked the Puritan's back room before you came on the air. Say hi to everybody for us in Manchester. Chris Nunu, of course, the governor of New Hampshire.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apocarplay and Thenroudoto with the Bloomberg Business App, listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
We carry on here the Wednesday edition of Balance of Power Boy. This week is moving quick.
I actually thought, like you, it was Tuesday earlier, coming off the long holiday weekend. Kamala Harris, as you just learned, clearly going to be in New Hampshire talking economy earlier, but then it's onto Pittsburgh. This is interesting, Kayley reports earlier today on debate Prep in the Washington Post. She's going to be holding her final days of prep honkered down in Pittsburgh, not Camp David or at home for instance, and she's going to get there Thursday and stay for the rest of that period of time.
I guess sequestered so there are no distractions.
Yep, staying in Pennsylvania, and then she'll make the journey from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia, where the debate will take place, of course, on ABC on September tenth. We're going to have full coverage of that, of course, alongside our signature political panel, Rick Davis and Genie.
Shop That's right, let's bring him in right now our panel today with debate prep in mind and of course, Rick Davis is someone who knows a lot about that, having prepared multiple candidates through murder boards, as they call them, getting through the prep and trying to simulate the debate that they're going to endure next Tuesday. Rick, we understand Philip Rains again will be playing Donald Trump in full cosplay here. I don't know if he's got the wig on or not, but he's wearing lifts and doing things to make it look like he's Donald Trump.
To what extent do you like this idea?
Because I know that you were concerned about Joe Biden's prep. Some suggested he was over prepared. To go to a different city to hunker down with your advisors and get ready.
Yeah, I think that practice is a good thing. It's been a while since Kamala Harris was on a debate stage in a competitive environment, and this is the big show, so I think she's doing the right thing by hunkering down and bringing her team in and and you know, putting reins into a red tie.
Again.
The more familiarity that you have with the stage and the surroundings and the lighting, the easier it's going to be for you to get into sort of a thinking mode, right. And we've talked about this before about debates, but you know, these debaters get nervous. I mean, this is the biggest thing she's going to have done since her since her convention speech, and maybe the most important moment of her political career. And tell me she's not going to have butterflies. And so getting used to the scenes and sounds and and action on a stage with lights in your face, and knowing that you only have a certain amount of time to respond, I think I think is wise to acclimatize the candidate to this.
Well.
As you talk about the sounds, Rick, it also might be worth noting the sounds that won't be heard, at least to the audience, because, according to the debate rules released by ABC, the mics will be muted when it's not the candidate's turn to talk, as they were in the CNN debate between Trump and Biden back in June. Even despite the Harris campaign's protestation over that they would like the mics to stay hot, Genie, how is that likely to change the actual preparation that is underway. You don't necessarily need to work on something akin to the I'm speaking that we saw in the Harris Pence debate in twenty twenty if he can't speak while you're speaking, right.
That's right. And we all remember she spent a lot of that debate trying to you know, hush up is the best way to put it on Mike Pence. You know, this is a margin of error election. This debate couldn't be more important for both of them. And I keep thinking that if there's one thing that Kamala Harris should do, you guys remember the movies of You Good Men with Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson on the stand. She got to entice Donald Trump to lose his mind. You know, you can't handle the truth style, and that's what she's got to do over and over again. To your point, Kayley, the lack you know, the muting is not going to help.
Her with that.
I'm old enough to remember the Rick Lazio Hillary Clinton debate here in New York, which was a local bait. But she's got to entice him to do that over and over again because people have to be reminded who Donald Trump is and the fact that he can't control himself when he's goaded into saying things. And that's where I would encourage her to go. We know she's methodical and preparing, so I'm hoping that's where she has focused her attention. But she'll be holed up in Pennsylvania doing this for so many days.
You need me on that wall, Genie. The thing is, it may not be fully baked. Rick, I don't know what you guys think of this. The Harris campaign is telling NBC News that they have not agreed to the debate rules involving that muted microphone that Kaylee just mentioned. That they're still in fact hashing out several key issues, including the muting of microphones when it's not their turn to speak, Rick, what do you make of this? Are we going to see this debate continue the debate about the debate until next Tuesday.
Yeah, there's some gaymanship going on here too. You know, as much as Donald Trump doesn't want to show that she's getting under his skin, it was just a couple of days ago he went on this rant about it. Of course he could do it with the microphones on, but they already agreed the microphones are going to be off. And I'm sure they took that statement and said, well, if he's agreed that the microphones can be on in our preference is to do that and just keep them all tangled up. I think tactically there are so many of these beneath the public perception of things that are going on. Just to get under his skin. And by the way, I think that's really going to be her approach in the debate. I don't think she's going to try to define Donald Trump. He's the most defined person maybe on the face of the earth. You're not going to chip into that a lot. But she does want to get under his skin and maybe elicit one of those you know moments that Genie talks about where you can't handle the truth comes out. Now in his case, it's probably more like you can't handle my lives. But that's a totally different situation.
Well, in our final minute here, we've course had a conversation with the two of you yesterday about the idea that the election may be on November fifth, but voting starts at the end of this week, when absentee ballots start getting mailed out in North Carolina on Friday, is it possible that there will be people out there who've already made up their minds Genie before seeing either of these candidates on the stage next week.
Absolutely, And you know, I think in fact, as we look at the data, we only have about ten percent of people who haven't made up their minds and who are still what we would consider persuadable. So it is a small number, but in an election this type, that is a critical number, and so this matters an awful lot. Even though to your point early barthing is starting imminently. It's very exciting, Kaylee. It's our time of year.
Yes, it is.
Geenie Shanzano and Rick Davis of course with us through all of the exciting twists and turns in this election cycle, our signature political panel. Thank you both so much for joining us here in Balance of Power.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
As we carry on with our conversation about politics, who want to stay on the markets for just a moment with some breaking news, Kaylee, coming from the Wall Street Journal. I'm guessing the markets will like this because it appears no matter who wins the presidential election, we could see the top level capital gains tax go down. If you're looking for sunlight between Kamala Harris and Joe Biden when it comes to the economy, we may have just found it, Kaylee. She's going to talk about this in roughly one hour in New Hampshire.
Yeah.
The Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter here that suggests that she is planning to propose a less drastic increase to the capital gains tax rate. It does not specify whether this is on unrealized gains, which of course has been a point of dispute and heavily criticized by Republicans. It's, according to the journals reporting, they've been discussing this move as they believe the Biden proposal put the rate too high, and a more modest rate increase could potentially encourage investment in entrepreneurship and access to capital for small businesses. And of course it's small businesses and a tax credit expansion for them that Harris is planning on.
Focusing on pretty interesting stuff here. They think it'll encourage more investment. As you mentioned, entrepreneurs will key off of this, and that's kind of the theme today. She's talking about small businesses, small business incentives, tax incentives, Kayley. That add to what we've already heard about her plans involving price gouging and housing incentives. We're slowly constructing what this economic proposal will be.
Yeah, and that's of course as we focus not just on economic policy but the domestic policy that these candidates would like to pursue more broadly. But there's foreign policy questions as well, though likely field some of these on the debate stage in Philadelphia next Tuesday as they get ready to prepare for their answers, and of course front and center within the Democratic Party specifically, the area in which there is perhaps the most tension around foreign policy is on the subject of Israel and its ongoing war in Gaza, especially in light of the death of six hostages over this past weekend. The US of course putting increased pressure on the Israeli government to reach a cease fire, and earlier today on surveillance, one of the members of that government, the Israel Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, joined our colleagues and had this to.
Say, in the wake of the horrific execution of six hostages, including an a mayor in hirsch Goldberg, Poland, Israel is not going to make concessions in the wake of that.
We are committed to a deal.
We set people to sit with negotiators to try to get that deal done, and I hope we can do it. We're working with the US administration to try to push that deal forward. Until we have an actual practical solution on the ground for the Philadelphia Corridor, Israel forces cannot leave.
For more on this, We're joined now by Marav Rudmand. She is professor at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia, also director of the Ripples of Hope project focused on democratic solutions. Professor Rudman, welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. It's great to have you. Obviously, we are all trying to figure out how the calculus around a ceasefire agreement has changed in the aftermath of this weekend's events. Thousands of protesters we have seen take to the streets in Israel. Do you think the odds are greater now than they were before this happened that an agreement is reached or lower.
Thanksally, good to be with you again for this important discussion. I think the odds have been hard all along and they continue to be so because both bb Netanyahu, Israel's Prime Minister, and Yaya Sinoar, the head of Hamas and the mastermind of the horrendous Hamas action against Israel starting October seventh book plan well before themselves, do not have an interest in getting to a cease fire. Many pass means in Gaza do, many past means in the West Bank do, as well as certainly Egypt Katar who are working on that, and the same is true within Israel. Of them, many Israelis taken to the street to to push for sea fire, and Prime mister, who's own defense minister, has made very clear that he thinks it's important and critical for Israel's interest to go forward. But two key decision makers are very tough to turn on this, and uh And seems to have doubled down. I think Sinmar has been in a tough for a while now.
Well, we heard from Netanya who earlier this hour Maara, and he made clear, reaching directly for the sticking point here, that Israel must stay along the Egypt Gaza border in a first phase of a ceasefire the Philadelphi Corridor that.
We've been hearing so much about.
As long as that's the case, there's no ceasefire.
Right.
Well, that's Netnaha's position, as articulated by Ron Dermer, who of course was ambassador to the United States, has been a close ally of Natunahu for some time. I know Ron Drmer, I've worked with him when I served in President Obama's administration, and h he's a political guy. The person who is actually got their portfolio and responsibility on Israel's security needs and what's most important for Israel's security is the Defense Minister Jev Golant, who has made it very clear and has been public about it that he believes that Israel is best protected by bringing hostages home and not physically controlling the Philadelphia Corridor. That he believes there are many other routes to also provide for the security that Ron Dharmer talked about on Prime Minister Netanyahu's behalf. So I think if the primary focus is what's in Israel's interest and bringing hostages home in Israel's security, it goes to some compromises that I believe have been on the table or are on the table about the Philadelphia Corridor. Should be clear, it's not at all obvious that even if Netanyahu agrees that ya Ya Sinhoa is prepared to agree.
Well.
And of course it's not just Sinhwar and net Nyahu and their governments or they're in the case of Hamas the organization that's at the table. There's meteorators involved in this too, including the US, but Egypt and cutter as well. Are there more that any of these mediating groups could be doing to force this deal to happen?
Or is everyone out of leverage here?
I think neither of your two statements, KLi Kayler are true. In other words, no, I do not think things are any of the countries involved are out of leverage. You're never done until you're done on this kind of issue, and it is hard for all the reasons we've discussed. But I also believe that the United States, with Israel and in partnership with the Egyptians and Kataris, who I believe are working every point of leverage they have with Hamas, are doing absolutely everything they can and will continue to do everything that they can until there is a breakthrough on this. There is no giving up on this issue. There cannot be.
How long has the window open though, in all reality, Mara. For Benjamin Netanya, who specifically and if he announces a cease fire here, what will it mean for his political career?
Well, listen, this is the reason that Netanyahu and Sinoir and I don't mean to keep comparing them, but the challenges you two key decision makers who don't share the interest of everyone else involved. For Netigna, who when this conflict ends, he is almost certainly done politically, there will be a state investigation that is, by the way, run by the Supreme Court of Israel, with whom he has not exactly had the best relationship since he tried to essentially dismantle their power, and the Court the judiciary, is the one who decides how the State Commission of Inquiry runs, which will be to investigate everything that's happened in Israel that led up to October seventh and the aftermath of how it's been prosecuted as well and politically, if he agrees to a cease fire, it means that he loses the two wildly extreme members of his coalition who have been guaranteeing his pathway to power. So this is part of putting the interests of his country ahead of his own personal interests in central here and thus far not something he's been willing to do, though he and Ron Dermer and others wrap it in a lot of other language.
Well, of course, Mara, before the events of this weekend, we were focusing our conversation on Israel's preemptive strikes into or against Hesbela and others, as they are trying to avoid retaliation or intercept retaliation for both Hesbela and Iran. For events earlier this summer, the assassinations of Hamas's political leader in Tehran and of course a Hesbela commander near Beirut, Does that take the Israeli eye off the ball, if you will, of those potential threats that could be coming in from other Iranian proxies or Iron itself that aren't Hamas. How does especially the domestic pressure at home for Netanyahu influence what kind of other events could transpire on other borders?
Well, Listen, all of these events are in one way or another interrelated. Getting to a cease fire in Gaza will help to reduce the reasons that or what some of what is behind Hesbela's attacks on Israel and the northern border. It will help to dial that down as opposed to dialing it up. And also if you could actually go forward with the types of proposal of the United States has been working, for example, with the Saudis to get to a way forward for the Palestinians, which will absolutely be the next steps from the ceasefire. You need to have some way for the West Bank to restabilize and for Ganza to be built back. You need to have other forces around the region come in. They will not do that without some agreement from Israel to move forward, to begin to discuss the future of a Palestinian state, not to agree to one tomorrow, but to have some pathway forward that can allow for reforms for Palestinians and leaders that will be able to represent them going forward. I bring this up in the context of your question about the regional conflicts because having Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Cuntrison one way or another, all aligned, as well as other countries in the region, will help to push back on the threat that Iran poses as well. There's elements of the deal the Saudis would strike with the United States, that would help Saudi security, help regional security, give the United States more strength visa the Iran, and frankly, put Israel in a more secure position. So all of these elements are interlinked.
Laura, it's always a real pleasure to have you, Maora Rudman, Professor at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia.
We thank you as always.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Rounto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome to the Wednesday edition. I know you think it's Tuesday.
I did that this morning as well on Bloomberg Radio with a special greeting to our listeners in Boston, finding us now on ninety two nine FM. It's great to be part of the conversation, of course in Boston, but also on satellite radio and on YouTube, where you can find us right now search Bloomberg Business News Live with our eyes on the campaign trail as always, and as I refer to our listeners in Boston, a little close to home. Kamala Harris heading to the Great Seacoast of New Hampshire. Yes, there is one Northampton, New Hampshire. God imagine what they'll be doing at the Hampton Beach Casino ballroom when she rolls out the economic plan.
That's not her venue.
She's actually going to do this at a brewery in Northampton, New Hampshire. Small business policy plans the theme today. We already heard some broad strokes in terms of price gouging and the housing market from Kamala Harris. She's going to fill in a few more blanks according to the campaign today. That happens two forty five pm Eastern times, So that'll be in the late edition of Balance of Power when we get some details. Donald Trump holding a town hall, at least as it's being called, it's a Fox show Sean Hannity doing that later on. They're recording it in Harrisonburg, Harrisburg rather Pennsylvania, and it airs later tonight also in Pennsylvania. Tim Walls, he's in Lancaster in Pittsburgh today with campaign events. Not a mystery as these two campaigns carve out travel plans. Having spent Labor Day in the three Swing states and here we are again back in Pennsylvania and in New Hampshire too. A lot of questions about campaign resources in New Hampshire. We're going to talk in our second hour with Governor Chris Sanunu a bit about that. But let's dig into the economy here. The plans by both of these campaigns that are going to drive voters when they hit the polls I'd say in November, but even some by mail as soon as this weekend. The current joints Bloomberg Global Economy Reporter with an awfully important story today on the Trump tax cuts that we're going to get into.
And it's great to see you.
Small business a good talker for Kamala Harris getting in front of people today. She's talking about incentives for small business owners, not necessarily consumer themes that she's been hitting like the price of groceries, etc.
Small business is the backbone of this economy. They're the biggest employer of workers in this economy. Small business creation has been on a boom over the past few years because of the way things have shifted a bit due to the pandemic and everything else. So it's probably pretty smart to identify that part of the economy for maybe offering tax relief and other measures to stoke growth and combination there, I should say. Skeptics say, though that small. A lot of these small businesses register they start ultimately due to turn the profit and how many workers you do to keep in the payroll. But you know, it's been a good news story over the past few years.
A tenfold increase in the small business tax deduction for startup costs. Bloomberg got hands on some of the finer points on the tax proposals here that she'll outline later, increasing that deduction from five to fifty thousand dollars. It's interesting as she's trying to become more business friendly in the face of Donald Trump.
Isn't it more business friendly because of the feeling she might be tougher on bigger businesses for example, higher copper tax rate for instance. But it does feed into the fiscal story again with both candidates in this case talked about Vice President Harris question marks around you know, how will it be fun how much of least add to the deficit. Some estimates of our economic policy so far telling it maybe around two odd trillion mark. That's the pen Morton budget model for example, so when you see this small business tax measure as well, kind of adds the idea that hold on a sect, there's a little bit of a bill out of you up here. There's going to have to be some offsets made clear for that.
As well well.
And that goes for both campaigns. Of course, I talk about this a lot.
Neither campaign is really illustrated how they will pay for things outside of very broad strokes. Trump says we'll grow out of it. Kamala Harris is going to soak the rich. But you need Congress to play along to make both of these happen. Certainly when it comes to allocating dollars, and you're looking at a really important item today when it comes to the Trump tax cuts. One of the most red stories today on the terminal Trump tax cuts would cost more than almost all federal agencies. Ten point five trillion dollars you write, and over a decade would exceed the combined budgets of every domestic federal agency.
How is that conservative?
Yeah, So, along with my colleague Eric Walston, a rough tally of what they're talking about in the Trump campaign. As you mentioned, there is the five odd trillion for extending the tax cuts three odd trillion for child tax credit that is running mayjd Events has talked about. Then there's the rest like the no tax on tips, lower corporate tax, social security exemption. Point is, it's adding up with some pretty big numbers there at a time when people are warning about the fiscal trajectory, saying the deaths that needs to be rained in and it needs to be ruining now. Of course, the Trump campaign that makes it very clear these measures are pro growth, will generate revenue for the government, and it will be offset in that way. But there are plenty of analysts in the middle who are warning both about this policy and the physical trajectory in general, saying, hang on, you're going to have to find some savings here or the very least offsets to get things back on track.
So is this debate next Tuesday night going to be a contest of who can outspend the other.
Well, the gap is still pretty large between both. I mean, as I say, you can there's a couple of trillion adding up on the Harrier side, but the trillions are really adding up in the Trump campaign when it comes to where the ticket stuff are. And that's what the analysts are saying early in this campaign, a lot depends though what shape will Congress be in, what will Congress pass I mean, there's a million in one way somebody whaler will not be passed yet. So but in terms of campaign sort of conjecture on the road, the big ticketself is mostly falling on the Trump side of things right.
Now, by the scale of trillions. Remarkable and a great work. Thank you so much for joining us always. It's one of the smartest we have in the bureau. Into current Bloomberg's Global Economy reporter. Find this story on the terminal now. It's a good read, and there's a lot more information that we didn't have a chance to get to. This is the kind of coverage that we promise here on Bloomberg. Yes, we talk about the horse race, but the policy proposals here that in many cases are leaving voters wanting or something that we're exploring with a very fine point here. We'll have more on this, by the way, Kamala Harris again speaks a few hours from now, Donald Trump, I suspect will be asked about his plans when he talks to Fox and Sean Hannity a little.
Bit later on again much like yesterday.
This is all playing out against the backdrop of what's taking place in Israel right now, and none of this is coming easily as negotiators work toward a cease fire, even as Benjamin Neett Yaho prepares to address the public, He's due to give a speech right now. In fact, I've got my eyes on the headlines here on the terminal to see if he's going to make any news. Clearly not inspired to move forward on a ceasefire with the terms that are being put forth, including a withdrawal from the Philadelphi corridor along the Egyptian border. Now, we can talk about this from a lot of different angles. We've brought on military strategists, we've brought on political experts. Today we want to bring on a peacemaker, and this is an important conversation. Giddy Grinstein is the former secretary and coordinator of the Israeli delegation for the negotiations with the PLO in nineteen ninety nine through two thousand and one. Giddy, it's great to have you here. I appreciate your time today, and as someone who has sat at the negotiating table, I wonder what your advice is for benjaminett Yaho as he prepares to speak.
Wants a deal or not. If he wants a deal, he has to rely on the Katari and the Egyptian intermediaries because they have the leverage on Hamas. Egypt because it controls the border and Kantar because of the financing, and because of the fact that it hosts the Harama's leadership in Doha. Those are the two leverages that Israel has from the diplomatic side. On the ground, I think that Hamas has put Israel in a bind because Israel's maneuvering on the ground to push Hamas is actually led to the death of a number of hostages. So Israel is now extremely cautious in terms of being able to use its military power on the ground. But really it comes down to the politics. Doesnt Ania want a deal or not? A deal like that may compromise his coalition with the far right parties. It may also lead him down a path of additional, very difficult political decisions which may destabilize his coalition and effectively bring his tenure to an end.
That's my next question. Does a cease fire deal represent the end of Benjamin Netnya who is political career.
Not necessarily. I mean, let's speak first about the current tenure and the current government, and then about his political career. Ideally, I believe that natania would have wanted to end this current tenure with some sort of a move where he does what is necessary in order to allow for what is called the Saudi Deal to unfold. He goes he at that moment he says when he says whatever needs to be said about the Palestinians, about the political horizon, that includes some sort of very uncommitting statement about Palestinian statehood. At that point, he loses the far right factions of his coalition. He goes to election as the person that brought the normalization with Saudi, the person that fought hard with the Palestinians, relentless fighting than Hamas and was still nonetheless able to bring a normalization deal with Saudi, which is really a tremendous historical achievement that I think is the ideal scenario in which Nataniao goes to election. Of course, if he ends up being it ends up being when President Trump is elected and is the incoming president already in the White House. That for Nataniao is the ultimate scenario.
Okay, that said, what role should and what role is Egypt playing in this process?
So Egypt has been the anchor of the stability in the region for almost fifty years since the nineteen seventies. Effectively the nineteen seventy three war which led to the nineteen seventy four disengagement agreements, which led to the nineteen seventy eight nineteen seventy nine Camp David, the courts and the Israel Egypt Peace Treaty has turned Egypt into an anchor of stability in the region. Of course, there are a lot of qualifications around that, and not been as stable and quiet as everybody would have wanted. But generally speaking, almost everything that Israel was able to do in Gaza and with the Palestinians in Gaza, including since Hamas took took over Gaza in June two thousand and seven, has been through the Egyptians and with the Egyptians later on also the Katarists came on board. We have to understand that Israel and Hamas and I repeat Hamas, not the Palestinian authority, have a legacy of back channel negotiations, agreement and understandings that included prisoner exchange, including opening the border, including all sorts of security arrangements. So that has been sort of kind of working through the Egyptian channel for many years until now. Obviously everything collapsed on October seven, but until now Egypt has been sort of a cornerstone for all the arrangements in the region, and over and over again, whenever Israel and Amas sort of deteriorated into an exchange of military blows, Hamas shooting rockets or sending terrorists into Israel and Israel attacking and retaliation in Gaza, it was the Egyptians who were able to stabilize the situation and bring back the ceasefire.
You mentioned, Getty.
The hostages six hostages found dead, freshly assassinated as the IDF moved into rescue them over the weekend. Of course, they included one American. There seems to be confusion over what impact this will have on the negotiating process. If you ask the Biden administration, they say it heightens the urgency and need for a ceasefire. Benjamin Etna, who seems to be on the other side of that coin, it proves, he says that Hamas cannot be trusted.
What do you think.
I think obviously those two forces are working in opposite direction. On atanial there are tremendous pressures from the right not to do a hostage deal, or at least to put conditions and terms for a hostage deal that would make such a deal effectively impossible. They don't want a ceasefire, they don't want any kind of a political process. They're very concerned that even if Hamas is defeated and removed out of power, that Gaza and the West Bank will be unified again as a single territorial unit, what we used to call a single territorial unit, which then would open the way for the reinstitution of the Oslock courts. All these are nightmare scenarios for the right, for the right wing parties, and that's why they understand that if the hostage deal doesn't happen, none of the other things can happen. On the other side, you have very powerful factions in Israel, including the military, the defense establishment, and many others that are saying, we have to do the deal now, we deal with the consequences later. Today, the Chief of Staff, the commander of the Israeli military said, every hostage that comes back alive today would have decades of life. Every terrorist that will go back to Gos that will eventually be killed. So basically, this is his way of saying, let's do the deal, let's move on. We have to remember also that the fact that these hostages are in Gaza, it really compromises the ability of the military to maneuver freely in Gaza and to carry out military operations and hamas has been.
Quite a mark.
Sorry, I'm out of time, Giddy Grinstein, Thank you so much, Giddy. I apologize for interrupting. Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already an 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.