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 speaks with:
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
The Ukraine risks losing all of the Russian lands it seized in just a month's time. We're talking about the Kursk region, of course, where Ukrainian troops are facing off with not only Russian forces but North Korean troops, bumping into some twelve thousand North Korean troops in Kersk. Melinda Herring, of course, is an expert on all of this, and since the beginning of the war, has spent quite a bit of time with us here on Bloomberg TV and radio, helping us understand the cross currents in Ukraine and what might come next. Senior fellow with the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, Melinda, it is great to see you. We know that Russia is using cold as a weapon. We saw the Christmas Day attacks, but this story coming out of Kursk is certainly one for concern. If it's Ukraine looking for a strengthened hand at the negotiating table.
What is really going on on the.
Ground, Hey, Joe.
The Russians have decided that they want to push Ukraine out of Kursk before Trump is inaugurated on January twentieth, So we're seeing a big push. I don't think that this is shocking or unexpected, but the Ukrainians have held this territory since August, and Vladimir Putin ignored it for a while and then he decided enough with it, and they brought in the North Korean troops to try to push the Ukrainians out. So that's what we're seeing right now.
Well, there are a lot of challenges here, as I mentioned already.
You've got the weather.
We know about the equipment challenges, but then there's manpower as well, Melinda, and I wonder what the greatest need for Ukraine is as we head into the rest of this cold season.
So I think it's important to back up because a year ago you and I were talking about ammunition shortages, and the ammunition shortages a year ago last Christmas were eight to one, seven to one, five to one, depending where you were on the front line. That was Russian to Ukrainian. The Ukrainians were desperately short of one to fifty five millimeters shells. They didn't have enough. It was a big panic. It was a big sos. Fast forward to where we are now. There is parody Joe with Ammo on the front line today, and there's parody with attack drones. So that's pretty remarkable and I think it's worth acknowledging. But there is a man power shortage on the Ukrainian side, and the Ukrainians sat too long on this problem, and they have a demographic crisis as well. So there's been a lot of pressure from the White House to force Ukraine to drop right now it's at twenty five years and above is when men have to serve in the White House, but in particular wants them to drop that age limit. But there's a big problem. If the Ukrainians drop that age limit, there's not going to be any more Ukrainians. Ukrainians tend to have children early, they get married early, have children early, and if they were to drop that age limit, it would really wreck havoc on the country.
Well, when you consider the need for material, if we can just focus on that for a moment, aside from manpower. At Melinda, Elon Musk thinks that he's got an idea here. He says, America needs a large quantity of long range drones, air, surface, water and submarine and hypersonic missiles. Anything manned will die very fast in a drone war. Is that what we have learned in Ukraine.
Absolutely, So that's one of the stories that definitely deserves more credit. And once the war in Ukraine is over, Ukraine is going to be the leading player around the world with naval drones and with long range drones and JOE. They have huge capacity. That's another story that's not getting enough play. So the Ukrainians in the last year have maxed their drone capacity internally in Ukraine, and they could increase it by a two thirds factor if they had more money. So it's really at this point they don't have a technology problem, they have a money problem. But let's look at drone Let's look at naval drones for a minute. So Ukraine doesn't have a navy JOE, and the Ukrainians with naval drones have managed to push back the Russian navy to the other side.
Of Crimea because their naval.
Drones are so effective, and they're pretty inexpensive. So yes, the world has a lot to learn from what Ukraine has learned with naval and long range drones. And also it's not just the drones, it's the iterative process. Ukraine is able to test new technology in a matter of days, make changes, and then put it on the battlefield, and that's remarkable.
I want to ask you about what comes next, of course I always do, and we're going to be talking in less than a month here about a new administration. Donald Trump says, of course that he can end this war. On day one, we spent some time with the Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln. My colleague David Gora asked him about Vladimir Putin's motivations, his intentions ahead of that moment.
Here's what he said, in his mind is the recreation of a greater Russia. And you don't have to believe.
Me, just read what he said.
He's been very clear about it. He's failed in Ukraine.
That proposition that he could erase Ukraine from the map subsume it into Russia has failed. And that's the result of the incredible courage of the Ukrainian people. But it's also a result of the dozens of countries that we rallied in defense of Ukraine.
So take what he just said, Melinda, and tell me how that meeting is going to go between Donald Trump, President Zelenski, and Vladimir Putin.
So, Joe, I'm not going to be very polite today. I'm going to just ignore everything that Blinkin just said. It's simply Cya. It's him trying to say that they did a fabulous job. They did a B plus job, maybe a B job, but they're over, They're done. I'm sorry. Let's focus on January twentieth. So January twentieth rolls around. Donald Trump is coming in and he says he's going to solve the conflict in twenty four hours. Everyone knows this is a campaign promise. His team has put together three different ideas to bring peace to Ukraine. None of them are very concrete. But the most concrete plan is from Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg. He's going to be the special envoy on Ukraine and Russia. And the Russians have already said, don't even bother coming to Russia if you come to Russia with.
This peace plan.
The answer is no. So it's going to be very hard, Joe. The real question is how do you get Vladimir Putin to come to the negotiating table. No one knows the answer to this question. Zelinsky, the President of Ukraine is willing, he wants to find a way to peace. But the problem is that Putin thinks he's winning. He's making progress in Kursk as we talked about, and he's making progress in the don Boss as well. So my big question for Donald Trump and his team is how do you compel Vladimir Putin to come to the negotiating table.
Well, yes, and I know you don't want to deal with Anthony Blincoln here, but if what he said is correct in Putin's mind is the recreation of a greater Russia, how do you get out of the blocks in any negotiation.
So the way that Kellogg says he's going to compel Putin to the table is that they will freeze NATO membership. That's sort of the sweetener to get the Russians there, and if the Ukrainians don't come, then they will freeze military assistance. But the Russians have already rejected that, so you know it's really we're going to have to have this conversation after January twentieth, and it's going to be a lot. I mean, no one knows Joe, to be really honest, no one knows what's going to compel Putin to agree. I think it's right that that Putin bet the House, he bet his legacy on destroying Ukraine. Blincoln is totally right there, and he can't just step away from what he's done, and his legacy depends on him destroying Ukraine. Absolutely spot on right. But the question is how do we get out of this?
Yeah?
Wow, I've only got a minute left here with Melinda Herring. But there is news today from yes this White House, John Kirby talking with reporters to say that another security package is being prepared for Kiev. Do you have a sense of what would be in it? Would it be anything that could help?
So Joe, the White House has done a very good job of trying to move as much military equipment from our shelves to Kiev as possible as soon as possible. And the fear is that Donald Trump is going to ice all US assistants to Ukraine on January twentieth.
We simply don't know.
Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg, who's going to be the Special Envoy, has been very hawkish and when he comes on TV he sounds like me. But he's not the decision maker. Donald Trump is the decision maker. So this White House is moving as much equipment as possible. The Ukcredians need air defense. That that's the key to getting through the winter.
Well, take it from someone who does this for a living. There's only one Melinda Herring, and it's great to see you, Melinda. Thank you so much for being with us year from the Atlantic Council as always, of course, senior Fellow the Atlanta Council's Eurasia Center.
Melinda Herring on Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then royd Oro 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.
Hatreanna Lowen Crun is posted up in Florida right now, following every move that's coming out of mar A Lago. Joining us live from Palm Beach. Adred it's great to see you. Hope you had a great holiday. How big of a deal is this going to be when everyone gets back to town.
Well, it's interesting.
I mean, not only is this the latest example of political discussion taking place on X which we're seeing, you know, quite a lot of an and truth, social and all of the technology being this platform, but it really does potentially set the stage for what could again be a rocky rollout of Trump's proposed you know, immigration, immigration plans, and keeping in mind that he's spent much of his campaign railing against illegal immigration a lot less clear on specific plans for legal immigration. The folks I've spoken to have maintained there's a big difference that Trump has said that he is for legal uh immigration, but the question is to what extent and how's he dressed and how so far has he addressed it specifically in the tech industry, which he really hasn't done much of. So you know, you have rama Swaman, you have must these are people who you know, have had benefited from something similar. Completely get odds with these far right people who are also supportive of Trump, and.
So maybe we will see a rift.
I mean, this is really, as you said, happening before our very eyes, but much bigger.
Than the rich.
I mean, this is a huge policy thing that we're going to see.
Elon Musk tries to clarify with a sports analogy. He says, this is like bringing the Jokic's or Wemby's of the world to help your whole team, which is mostly American's exclamation point.
Win the NBA.
Who couldn't understand that, Adriana, He says, thinking of America as a pro sports team that's been winning for a long time and wants to keep winning is the right mental construct. I don't know if lawmakers are going to see it that way, or Trump's supporters for that matter, but enter Bill Gates apparently, who has had very strong feelings about this. The founder of Microsoft, has talked a lot about making it easier to get work visas and bring in foreign based talent to Silicon Valley. And there looks like there's news here, Adriana. You can tell me. I don't know if Donald Trump intended to post this on truth Social if you're with us. On Bloomberg TV, he writes, where are you When are you coming to the center of the universe? Mar A Lago Bill Gates has to come tonight, Heydrianna, is that the guest of honor this evening?
I mean, we'll see, I for one, have accidentally sent things to the wrong people.
This could just be an example of that.
Perhaps it was supposed to be an individual message to someone.
He does mention where are you? He mentions x, so perhaps a reference to Elon Musk. But of course the bigger question, you know, as will there be this meeting?
And this of course would be just the latest in a line of tech executives and going back to what we were saying earlier, where there is now this division with regard to the immigration and there has been a similar rift on the same matter during the first administration when Trump had had limited that HEB program drawing, which drew the blowback from these tech people.
Now we're seeing this kind of coming together.
Trump has even said everyone wants to be my friend or something along those lines, pointing to the meetings with the Tim Cooks, you know, with the Zuckerberg's, and so you know, if he is the latest, that could again be the latest example of this coming together. But the immigration stuff doesn't pan out the way that some of these executives like musketc want it.
Maybe we'll see another.
Rift, but as of now, this is you know they're lining up a seaman mar Alago.
Yeah, well, good thing. Nothing's complicated here. See this is why Hedrian has posted up in Palm Beach. We need somebody to be watching this on the daily. It's great to see you get back to Washington safe and sound.
Hedriana Loone crime.
It sounds like Bill Gates and Donald Trump may get together for a little koffefi at mar A Lago.
I wonder what Hailey Stevens makes of this whole story.
I'm glad to say the gentle woman from Michigan is with US Democratic Congresswoman Hailey Stevens. Great to see you, Congressman, and I hope you had a great Christmas, Happy Hanukah and the rest. Welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. I don't have to go through the whole story again for you here, I'm sure, but a conversation has been prompted over the US of work visas. I'm guessing as a Democrat you might see this as a positive development. Will h one Bs and will Dreamers be involved in any debate over border security in this new Congress.
Well, I'll just say that as a science and tech policy evangelist, we welcome the conversation around h one bs and high skilled workers, and in fact, as a member of the Select Committee on China Competition that has been in place for the last two years, this is something that we heard over and over and over again from stakeholders Joe that we need to stable green cards to degrees, that we need a plan to attract and retain global talent in this country. Our laws are based off of last century. They are holding us back, and they are impeding our competitiveness. And look, I'd say that Elon Musk maybe knows a thing or two about it, given his immigration history, and given his employment base, and given frankly you know, the role that his companies are playing not just here in the United States of America, but but across the world, and so we need access to that talent. I think that could be very interesting. It maybe be a smart move of the Republican government majority if they could do something for high skilled workers. And of course, our dreamers who we care so much about, who've only known in an American life, who were born here, who are taxpayers, who are contributing to society, raising families. You know we want that parody as well.
Yeah, congress Woman is correct Elon Musk once held an H one B visa. But it does bring up the bigger picture here. And in the short time that we have to talk today, congress Woman, I'd like to ask you about your hopes or maybe your concerns about working with this Republican majority in the new Congress. Knowing that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswami are going to be on the phone, maybe picture I'm on one shoulder for the speaker and Donald Trump on the other shoulder. Who's actually run on the show here? And how do Democrats find their posture in this Congress.
Well, it's certainly a.
New dynamic and Trump President elect Trump is the ultimate chameleon. This is certainly a different approach to governing that we saw during his first term, which frankly was a lot of governing by Twitter and a lot of chaos and confusion. Now it seemed like the oligarchs have come in some people though with business.
Experience as well.
And look, I'll campaign ferociously, but when it comes to governing, I want to find ways in which we can come together. I'm really hoping that we continue to look at strategic competition, that we look at innovation here in the automotive heartland where I am in Michigan. Our automakers are watching and they are global and they need access to the trade policies, the materials, the work force in order to succeed. We don't need disjointed policy and frankly, we need an outlook here. So I do plan to use the power of the pen and my abilities in the Congress to advocate for the regional economy that I'm so proud to represent the hard working men and women all across Michigan who are contributing to incredible outputs and who are competing against the likes of BYD. There are changes of foot in the auto industry. It is a very aggressive time. We don't need to start unnecessary trade wars at the expense of people's bottom line, and that's something that we're seeing here.
So you know, we got a new.
Dynamic on our hand. Obviously, I'm in a minority party in the House. It's a tight minority. I think they're going to need us on occasion, So I'm going to go for my scraps, and I'm going to make my points.
I believe all of that, and I hope that you'll spend some time with us when you get back to town.
Haley Stevens, it's great to see you. Happy New Year.
In it advance the congresswoman, Democratic congresswoman from Michigan, Haley Stevens.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Rounoro with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
With questions today in Washington, as we've been discussing here on the program about immigration reform. Yes, I said immigration reform, not just border security, with a big debate around H one B visas, the work visas that bring talent from other countries, foreign born talent to places like Silicon Valley to help develop what has become, of course, the greatest technology in the world. This is something Elon Musk knows a lot about, as he had an H one B visa at one point. He in the k Ramaswami of course partners in the DOGE having at it with Maga over the use of these visas. They both see a need for reform and an increase in their event bailability, which apparently is at odds with the MAGA world approach to border security. This is all going to have to be managed in the new Congress, which will be sworn in one week from today, with questions as well about sequencing. Do you do the Trump tax cuts first or do you attack all the border.
No.
One hasn't answer to that yet, at least a real answer that I've heard. Until ipso's got to work on this, Cliff Young has an answer, at least with regard to the American people. He is, of course the head of US Public Affairs at IPSOS and with us here at the table. Cliff, it's great to see you. Happy New Year in advance. I hope you had a great Christmas, thanks of the company. This is interesting priorities for Donald Trump in the first one hundred days. The biggest priority for everybody we've learned is inflation. But after that, it's pretty clear what voters want with regard to sequencing, and it's the border, right.
Yeah, It's immigration.
Immigration, immigration, especially among the Republican base and especially among the megabase that is their critical issue now, based upon history, based upon the empirical record, new administrations had between one hundred days and six months to get.
Their agenda through. So I would expect the Trump.
Administration to push forward as fast as possible policies related to immigration.
Okay, does anything in this debate lead us to believe that it might turn out in policy. We've spent all last year talking about border security. The deal that was hammered out, the Lankford deal in the Senate was about border security. Nobody talked about immigration or dreamers. Now we're talking about all of it on the eve of this Congress opening.
True, and the immigration issue is a fraud issue. It's complex and nuance and public opinions nuance on it. The vast majority of Americans are in favor of immigration, something like seventy to seventy five percent. However, that's legal immigration, yeah, right, And so the border issue becomes very important. Border policies become very important. They suggest a way forward when it comes to illegal immigration, a way to stop it. And I believe the Trump administration will have to have some sort of initiative or a series of initiatives relative to that.
If they're going to speak to their.
Base, talk to me about what else is on this list, because the question that we've been facing is when it comes to sequencing, you do the border first, you do.
Trump tax cuts. Taxes are way down the list here at nine percent. What do you make of that?
They're abstract for people?
Now?
The taxes haven't been part of the debate for a while now. You could think of the eighties and the nineties when we all talk about middle class tax cuts. They haven't been Really it's about cost of living. That's why Trump won. He rode that wave in He has to do something relative to that. And then it's immigration, immigration, immigration. He really needs to throw a bone to the base, and I expect him to do that within the first six months.
Americans want the next president to restore trust and institutions.
You have found, but half are worried, Cliff about what.
Well, the half that didn't vote for Trump, right, and so we have to understands very political in orientation in perspective. This is a typical data point that we find after every election. The vast majority of Americans want to come back together, want to unify. Whatever that happens or not's another question. But that at least is an aspiration at this point.
That's interesting we talk about the other half because we keep hearing that there was a mandate.
When you think.
About the sort of the rhetoric that we've heard around this election, following the polling that you conducted over the course of what two years leading us to that point, how close to the truth is the analysis.
Somewhere in the middle. Isn't the truth always in the middle?
Sure?
So, on the one hand, Trump definitely goes in with a mandate. He controls Congress. He obviously is headed to the White House. That's very important. That allows him to push forward an agenda in the short term. That is, once again in the first half of the year, that's when most things happen.
But his win was minuscule, nothing more than.
A percent or two at the national level, it's one point five now, nothing more than a point to two points in key swing states.
So is closed nothing more than a seat in the House of Representative.
There we go.
It's a very really a mandate.
It well, it depends how you define it.
He has control, yes, a tenuous control of both the Congress, We're true, but both of the of the Senate and the House, and he and he obviously he has the White House.
There's something there, right, he can work with that.
An enormous amount done exactly, But to think if the wind blows they don't have a Republican majority in the House could be a problem.
As we worked are we now.
We're a divided country. We're a fifty to fifty country. That's where we are today. That's what this election showed. And I think that, you know, the point I would want to make is is that even though it's fifty to fifty public.
Opinions nuanced, Americans are nuanced. Even on immigration.
There's a continuum of what Americans think about it. They're not absolutists on everything. They believe immigration, on the one hand, is super important. They can see the importance of visas like H one B one about fifty percent. But obviously it's divided and polarized by whether you're blue or red.
H ONEB is going to be a tough sell though. This is you know, this is jargon for.
A lot right now.
It's a bit of catnipt, negative catnip for the Republican base.
But when it goes to the economic.
Issues, when you frame it as such, Americans agree with it obviously.
I think in the short term it sort of gunks up.
The system a bit because they don't have a lot of time to implement ultimately their agenda.
It's more of a distraction anything else.
How about when it comes to mass deportation. You ran numbers on this, and even Donald Trump himself has indicated, as he did in an interview on NBC following the election, he's kind of worried about the way the optics might look here when the raids begin. Assuming that's how this is going to work. What do Americans think about this before it happens.
It's very abstract right now. We have to understand then.
So when you ask Americans straight up, more than fifty percent about fifty two, fifty three, fifty four depending on how you ask it, are in favor of master spor deportations. But then when you put sort of caveats there, we put conditions there, like splitting families or hurting the economy, hurting job generation, that support falls. In a general sense, it goes into the forties and the thirties. Republicans are stalwarts. They support it no matter what happens. But Trump is very right the optics on this could be very negative. You could imagine crying children being separated from their families. This would not play well, especially if you're trying to push through to gen in the short term. This could once again cause problems in doing that. Actually, ipsos it's one of the ballot questions we're cracking. Do you support or oppose the immigration policies of the Trump administration.
We'll be looking at it.
Very closely because it has I think little upside and a lot of downside.
Inflation is the biggest concern, the biggest priority for Americans. If the Trump tax cuts combined with tariffs, assuming all of this happens, create a reflationary scenario, what's that going to mean for approval ratings for the new president?
I would just add in closing up the border and causing you a problem on the economic side in terms of labor, Yeah, that could really undermine his position. Once again, I think the first one hundred days I'm looking at. Usually in the first six months new administrations have a mandate have pretty strong approval ratings, but any of these things can undermine it.
Boy, we've got a lot to learn of the new year together. Think of the crazy stuff. You're going to be polling in twenty twenty five. You're writing these questions already.
I'm guessing.
Yeah, we're fucking already. It's going to be interesting.
A nice reflection over the course of the holidays with Cliff Young, ipso's great to see you in. Happy new year, come back and see us in twenty twenty five.
Yeah, thanks for having me.
As always, another year of breat analysis with Cliff Young. Here on Bloomberg TV and radio.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then rounoo with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I'm joll Matthew in Washington, where we've also got our eyes here on natural gas prices. Sticking with Ukraine, European natural gas price is specifically up over four percent today after Vladimir Putin expressed doubts about a deal to maintain gas flows to Europe via Ukraine. He says it would be impossible to arrange a new transit contract before a year end, when the current agreement expires. Let's go to school right now with Bob McNally, who we learn from every time we talk with the president of Rapidan Energy Group.
Bob, it's great to see you.
I hope you had a great Christmas and thanks for coming back to talk to us on Bloomberg TV and radio. How important is this development today? Knowing how little natural gas we're talking about.
Hi, it's pretty significant.
The market was hoping to see that those flows resume, and Europe is having a more of a normal winter. It's cold, inventories have been drawn down, they've gotten lucky in the last winter, so you know, it's a return to normalcy and hiccups like this are unwelcome. And you also have the incoming head of the European Commission, the Polish. We'll have it for six months and they're going to prioritize tightening sanctions, including on on guests even further. So, you know, here we have a combination of geopolitics and market forces, which are you know, surprising here with normal weather to deliver a bit of a rude shock in the in the winter time here.
What's your broad view then, Bob, as we head into the new year here and the Trump administration, which has vowed to cut energy prices by half. We've talked about the prospect here before, but there are other influences on prices. It's a global market, as we've already been discussing.
It, sure is, Joe.
You know, the president has control over certain things. He can and he will, with a stroke of a pen, ease the regulatory burden facing US energy and companies. He can impose tariffs that can impact energy. He can tighten sanctions on Iran. He has many powers and he will exercise them starting on day one, and all of them are important. Some of them would cause oil prices to go down, as we've discussed, some go up, But as you mentioned, the price of the oil is priced in a global market, with global supply and demand fundamentals and geopolitics driving that, and many of those forces out of the direct control of the president. So the president's going to rediscover he learned this, I think in his first term. There's certain things he can control, there's certain things he can't. But how much we produce in this country will be a function of the global price, more so, I think than any regulatory changes.
Will see well, you mentioned an important word there, and that's geopolitics. To see the headline yesterday Israel directly striking the capital of Yemen following these repeated attacks by hooty rebels that have caused some pretty major disruptions in shipping in the region. That's a pretty good example of what can go wrong here. And I wonder how concerned you are about this escalating.
We remain pretty concerned about that, Joe. As we've talked about.
You know, Phase one post October seven was Gaza, Phase two was Hesbolat. Neither of those two regions, you know, threatened much oil. Now we're moving to Iran and the Uties in Yemen, and it's important after that latest strike, the UTIs threatened Saudi Arabia. That's very important because the Huties, remember they had lobbed missiles at Saudi Arabia and the UA in the past, but they've had a sort of a deal detent for the last couple of years. They warn it this continues, that deal is off, and as Israel goes after Iran, and as President Trump goes after Iran, now we're starting to involve the most important energy resource for both oil and LNG.
Well, with what you know about the Trump National Security team, at least the names that have been mentioned, and I know we have to go through the confirmation process for several of them. Will this administration be more effective in managing these issues than the Biden White House?
I think it will. It'll have a sharp change in direction. Just about everybody I'm aware of coming in on the NSC and the State Department for that matter, and Treasury are hawks when.
It comes to Iran.
They look back at the first Trump term and they see a success with the Iran sanctions policy. They look at Biden is that they say he threw that away. He allowed them to resume oil exports. Now they've got the money and they're helping Russia in Ukraine of all places. So they are more determined than ever and I think able to go back and get leverage on Iran by going after those exports. And I think China's already gotten the message and is already starting to pull back. They take most of that Iranian oil. They see the writing on the wall, and I think this incoming team will be effected early in imposing these sanctions on Iran.
I'm looking at Triple a's national average for a gallon of unleaded three dollars three cents. That's a national number here on the twenty seventh of December. Bob, I don't mean to get too simple on you here, because I know you're a pretty sophisticated analyst when it comes to this stuff. But Donald Trump has essentially promised to turn that into a dollar fifty a gallon if he cuts prices by half.
Is that possible?
You know it's possible, but as we discussed last time, it would have bad side effects. The only two ways to get the oil price or gasoline price down to a dollar fifty that I'm aware of, would be to crash the economy into a catastrophic procession, and that would not be enjoyable. Or you call up Saudi Arabia and you give this and put every barrel on the market. I don't think they would do that. But as we discussed, even if he could and a dollar fifty a gallon, Joe US shale oil I E. Energy dominance dies. You cannot have a dollar fifty pump prices thriving shall oil sector period.
End of story.
People should know that you worked in the Bush administration, the W. Bush administration, in the first term as part of your very long resume, Bob. But one of the things you were tasked with doing was dealing with utilities, the electric grid. There's been a big conversation in Washington about renewing the grid, about enhancing the grid, about protecting the grid.
Will this new Congress be the one to do it?
You know? I hope.
So in some ways the stars are aligning because certainly the oil and gas folks, the gas folks are very aware of the permitting challenges. They've wrestled with this for decades. In the way the Supreme Court has made life a little easier in undermining some of the bureaucratic crust that has developed.
And the clean.
Energy community, Joe, they realize you can't get solar and wind desployed at scale unless you can connect it to the grid.
And now you have with AI. We want to get Duke's connected to the grid for AI.
So in some ways you could have a coalition of the willing, if you will. However, Joe, we're still somewhat cautious at wrap it in about the odds of getting a bill done just due to partisanship in Washington.
It's too bad. It became close last year.
It's not a zero percent, but it's close to a jump.
Ball bureaucratic crust. What a great term. Would also be a great band name. People should also know Bob is a world class drummer, and I hope you'll consider that right. That'd be a good punk rock bureaucratic crust. I think we're onto something, Bob. It's great to see you as always, Thank you, and happy New Year. In advance, come back and see us in twenty twenty five.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Epocarplay and then roud Oro with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
We start our conversation with our signature panel, Rick Davis, partner at Stone Court Capital, Republican strategist and Bloomberg Politics contributor, joined by Jeanie Shanzo, Senior Democracy Fellow with the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress are Democratic analyst. Great to have you both with us here on Friday as we think big thoughts ahead of next week. Genie, it's going to be an interesting moment for Democrats watching Mike Johnson, I guess be elected all over again or will he what's your thought today?
Yeah, And Hakim Jeffries has been very clear this time around, Democrats are not going to come and save Mike Johnson.
It is all up to the Republicans.
And I think, you know, at this point, I would say more likely than not he gets narrowly re elected. But he already has one person, Tom Massey, who has come out publicly and said he will not vote for Speaker Johnson, and so one more and he may have a fight on his hands. And I think a lot of this at this point depends on Donald Trump. Does he come out publicly on truth, social or otherwise support Mike Johnson or does he let him sort of flap in the wind. And of course there's nobody else there waiting in the wings at this point that we know of who might be a contender, and so that works to Johnson's benefit as well.
A lot of this has to do with posture, what posture the party will take.
Will it be the party of No?
Well, there'd be opportunities to work together, and I think maybe there will be rick with such a thin majority here. We talked yesterday, as I mentioned, with Sean Caston, Democrat from Illinois, had this to say about cooperating with the other party.
I think you'll continue to find that Democrats are willing to work constructively with those Republicans on a bipartisan basis as we have. But we'll have to see what they bring together. There's you know, I like to remind people that there were two fist fights in the House this last term. They all involved Republicans, and trying to figure out how they're going to get along together is going to be is going to be a challenge for this next term, at least in the House.
Well, Rick, there's going to be a fist fight about the border and immigration, it seems in the outset of this Congress, and based on everything we're hearing today that could include actual legal immigration things like work visas and H one b's.
Is that where Democrats come in here?
You know, I think the first real test is going to be that speaker's vote.
You know, the process matters here.
January third, nobody gets sworn in until they have a speaker. Speaker actually swears in all the members of Congress, So you got to get that done, and then two days later, January sixth, guess what you have to approve the election. We remember that very well from the last go round. And so you've got one Republican, as Genie said, who's already said I'm not voting for you. Two more and it's a done deal. Right, you'll need Democrats and the Democratic.
Manoraly, wh has already said we're not going to go.
Bail these guys out again.
And so the question is does Donald Trump understand this process? Does he want a rocky road to confirmation from his own election, because that's what's happening on the sixth. Donald Trump won, and so you know there's going to be a lot of work done to make sure that we don't have a fiasco on a third I think only then will we decide, or can decide whether or not there's going to be sort of a attitude toward cooperation, bipartisanship in the House Representative. Certain you'll see it in the Senate and specifically around immigration, where you already had a bill that was bipartisan that got knocked down by Donald Trump.
He'll probably want to resurrect that.
So yeah, I think I think there's a lot of wood to chop between now and when all these members are comfortably seated in their chairs.
Wow.
You imagine a world and I think the answer is yes, Genie, in which there is no speaker elected in time for the sixth we can't certify the vote. I mean, we're talking real chaos in that world. But let's just pull it back from the ledge for a moment. We talked recently with Tim Burchett, the Republican from Tennessee, and we know how he feels about some of these things. He was at CNN last week and said Johnson quote has some tough decisions to me. But ultimately, Jeannie, it's going to be decided who President Trump likes.
Is that the real contest?
I think it is.
I think if Trump comes out publicly in support of Johnson in the short term, he will become speaker. Who knows how long that will last. But you know, there is a lot of push from the MAGA conservative base. We heard Steve Bannon repeatedly the latest out at Turning Point in Arizona over the weekend dump Johnson. We saw the Hill article where you have a lot of unnamed sources saying three whoever Republicans going down to mar A Lago telling Trump to dump Johnson. I think a few things again working for Johnson. Number one is what Rick was just talking about, which is the chaos for Donald Trump if they do indeed dump Johnson. There is a scenario in which, if they don't have a speaker, you see Joe Biden, Kamala Harris step aside, and President pro Tem of the Senate Chuck Grassley, he actually becomes the president in a short term. Now, many constitutional experts say that won't happen. It's a gray area. There can be an agreement in the House between the Dems and the Republicans to count those votes, but I'm not sure that's how Donald Trump wants to start out his second term. And so that I think is gonna work for Johnson. But Joe, for us, it's gonna be a whole lot of fun sort of.
We'll see about that.
I just love Jeanie has played this whole thing out in her head already.
Rick, My god, this could be fascinating. But you're right.
Steve Bannon says he's got to go with regard to Mike Johnson.
But Rick, we keep hearing that.
Nobody else wants the job, which is by definition job security for Mike Johnson.
Is that right?
Well, I think every member walking around the floor, both Democrat and Republican, want to be speaker. Don't believe what they tell you. It's a powerful job. You get to make a lot of decisions. Sure, you know it's a tough thing to corral at caucus, but you know, Steven Scale and others are going to be ready to step into the breed or there's a.
Vote of no confidence.
You wonder about a Jim Jordan or a Steve Scalise as speaker, Genie, But didn't we already try that just this year?
We did, We.
Did in the one hundred and eighteenth and again this year.
And you know what, how about we look outside the house?
What about Donald Trump Junior? Or well Elon Musk.
Is falling out of favor a bit with the MAGA, right, But who knows who it could be at this point? Maybe Laura Trump she doesn't want to be Senator of Florida, Maybe she wants to be speaker.
I don't even know where to go with this, you know, I show up with things to ask Rick and Jeanie.
We go down another path.
So if I have this straight here, Donald Trump is the Speaker of the House and the senator from Iowa is the president.
Genie, is that what we get in the new year?
Well?
Maybe yeah, Donald Trump Junior and then Grassley you know, so, I mean, who knows. Let's hope it doesn't happen, but it is going to be crazy to watch because being Speaker of the House is really a short term job at this point, and it has been for you know, several cycles going back. Now it is a job that even Mike Jordan is saying nobody want or Mike Johnson, sorry, is saying nobody wants to have.
So he'll just sit and slip on that one.
Rick, Can we settle one question right now when it comes to the order the sequencing, when it comes to legislation on Capitol Hill? Do you do the border first, do you do tax cuts first?
Or do you do them together?
It seems to me with this argument that's underway today over H one B Visa's we have our answer.
What do you think?
Yeah?
I think you go with what is the easiest thing?
Right and we know how complicated and difficult immigration is going to be, but it's easier than the tax code right now, and so you're going to need some time to prep that, and they're going to want to bill on the floor in the first sixty days. And the one that can get there is immigration. And it sounds like, based on all the rhetoric that's coming out of mar A Lago, could be more comprehensive than we would have initially thought. So, you know, cross your fingers, hope to die, stick a needle in your eye. You may actually have comprehensive immigration reform at the hands of Donald Trump. You know, Nixon was the only one who could go to China. Maybe Donald Trump's the only one who can actually solve immigration reform.
Unbelievable yet entirely believable. And this is what we're going to be talking about with Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano in the new year, our signature panel Bloomberg Politics contributors.
Thank you both. Great to have you for a great conversation today.
As always, they'll be back in the mix of course next week as we walk up on that new Congress.
And the new year. 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.