July 29, 2025 • 9 mins
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) of Massachusetts speaks on the desire for the Fed to lower interest rates, US housing crisis, and crypto. She speaks with Bloomberg's Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Just a few blocks from our studio here in Washington
is another series of meetings that the President is sure
to comment on. The FLMC, kicking off its two day
policy session, expected to hold interest rates steady tomorrow, even
in the face of growing pressure President Trump is putting
onto the Fed, particularly the Fed's chair Jerome Powell. And
joining us live here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg
TV and Radio. On that and much more, is Democratic
(00:30):
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking member of the
Senate Banking Committee. Senator, welcome back. We appreciate you joining
us as we look ahead to the decision tomorrow. Knowing
the next opportunity the Fed would have to cut rates
is in September. What would the economic consequence be if
they wait that long?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Well, look, I.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Want to see interest rates come down, because when interest
rates stay high, families pay more on their credit cards,
they pay more on their car loans, Mortgage rates stay higher,
and that's a problem. Is exactly one person who is
responsible for keeping those interest rates high, and that's Donald Trump.
Jerome Powell said last month that he would have urged
(01:12):
the FED to lower interest rates last February. But for
the chaos that Donald Trump has been causing over tariffs
and the kind of fallout that that's going to create
in the economy. So if Donald Trump really wants to
see interest rates come down, then stop creating so much
(01:32):
chaos around tariffs. And I hope the FED could get
it done.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
That said Senator, realizing you prefer lower interest rates. Does J.
Powell deserve some credit for holding steady in the face
of this pressure from President Trump.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Look now it's like an upside down the world. I
want to see Fed Chair Powell lower interest rates. I
think that's good for families. I think it's the right
thing to do in the economy. But I also want
to see an independent FED. And when Donald Trump simply
tries to persuade, he says, here are the arguments in favor,
here's why I think you should do it. I get that.
(02:09):
But when he threatens to fire Powell, when he blows
up this whole pretext of trying to fire him for cause,
when he does that kind of thing, now he threatens
the independence of the FED. And there's a real cost
of that, not for Jerome Powell personally, but a real
cost for our economy. We have built much of our
(02:32):
economic foundation on the notion that the FED makes its
decisions independent of political pressure, and that they are a
group of people who are economically informed, follow the data,
and they make those decisions on monetary policy based on
what they think the data are telling them about inflation
(02:52):
and jobs. And when Donald Trump blows through all that,
he undermines confidence in the FED and in our entire
financial system. That's a real problem.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Well.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Of course, part of what President Trump and others in
the administration argue is that at the FED lowers interest rates,
it will help to ease the issue we have in
this country with housing in particular, at least on the
interest rates side. But I know you and your colleagues
in the Banking Committee are also trying to do things
about that on the supply side. Is the measure you
co sponsored with Chairman Scott, the Renewing Opportunity in the
American Dream to Housing Act, passed unanimously through a committee,
(03:30):
quite the bipartisan feat in today's political environment. Senator, my
question is when we look at the contents of that bill,
knowing that part of it is asking hud to establish
new things like loan and grant programs for qualified homeowners
or landlords, knowing at the same time the administration is
actually trying to reduce HUD as we speak. Do these
things run into conflict with each other? Can both be
(03:51):
done at the same time?
Speaker 3 (03:53):
So if I can let me back out just a
tiny little bit, we have a housing crisis in America.
Prices are up, and for decades now, officials have just
stood by policymakers and said, wow, prices just keep going up.
That's a real problem. The real problem is we don't
have in US housing. It is a supply problem. So
(04:15):
what we have done with this bill is that we
are pushing toward more supply. We need about seven million
more housing units in America. This bill has twenty nine
different provisions to it that mostly all row in the
same direction. Some involve HUD, and many of them do
(04:36):
not involve HUD. But the whole point here is to
put the federal government in the position of saying it
is a matter of federal policy that we want to
encourage more housing development. We want more of it in Massachusetts,
in South Carolina, we want more of it out west,
down South, up north, we want it in urban areas
(04:56):
in rural areas, and every member of the committee, all
twenty four of us, have provisions in there to help
make that happen. Yes, we need a functional HUD to
help on parts of that, but I do want to
underline here some of the provisions in this bill are
about cutting red tape and slimming down some of the
(05:19):
programs that HUD works on. Other parts are about we're
gonna give some trial runs to some ideas and try
a few things that haven't been tried before. We even
have an innovation fund in this for cities and towns
that are trying to build more housing. There are a
lot of good ideas in this bill because the housing
(05:40):
problem we have right now wasn't caused by one thing
going wrong. It was caused by a lot of things
going wrong. So it's going to take a lot of
things to help fix it. And I'm excited say it again.
It was bipartisan unanimous in the United States Senate. That's
pretty amazing.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Well, it is duly noted unanimously passed out of committee.
That means every Democrat and Republican voted for this, suggesting
there could be some momentum on the floor if we
get that far Senator, there are a lot of questions
about the interference that you could bump into when lawmakers
returned to town following the August recess, assuming you get there.
(06:19):
One of those distractions is the Jeffrey Epstein story. And
I have to ask you about this, not that we're
featuring this in our interviews, but it is apparently impacting
the agenda. House lawmakers went home early because of this.
The President of the United States has been talking about,
or certainly asked about, a pardon repeatedly when it comes
to Gallaine Maxwell, and I'd like for you to hear
(06:40):
what he's said about this most recently and well asked
you about it. Here's President Trump.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
High a pardon for Klain Maxwell, who landed?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Is that something you would ever consider.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
A pardon for who?
Speaker 3 (06:52):
For Kalay Maxwell?
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Well, I'm allowed to give her a pardon, but nobody's
approached me with it, nobody's ask me about it. And
by the way, I never went to the island. I
never had the privilege of going to his island, and
I did turn it down. I don't know what we're
calling a privilege here, Senator, but I'm just wondering your
thoughts on this What do you think is more likely,
(07:15):
Gallainne Maxwell testifying before Congress or getting a pardon from
Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
I don't know what's more likely, and I'm not good
at anticipating this, but I just want to be clear.
The only way that this thing resolves itself is to
be completely transparent. Put out all of the records, all
the testimony, whatever it is that she has told the
lawyers down in Florida just earlier in the week. Get
(07:43):
all that information out there, Let everybody look at it,
and let people evaluate what they think is true, what
they think is not true, what they think is credible.
But this idea of holding back information and kind of
sorting through it a little piece here and a little
piece there, well, I gotta tell you that is keeping
everybody in churn over on the Republican side, sucking up
(08:04):
a lot of oxygen, oxygen that we could be using
to do things like work on a housing bill to
bring down the cost of housing for every family across
this country.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Well, Congress pushed these files out in September, when everybody's.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Back, Well, the House has already moved in that direction.
If we need to. We have raised the issue now
in the Senate. Yeah, Look, this is one of the
things that Congress does. It's part of our oversight, and
that is to say, when it's time to make these
records public, let everybody see what's in the whole file.
(08:40):
Because there have been a lot of contradictory statements here.
Remember it was the Attorney General of the United States
who says at one point is that she has the
Epstein files on her desk. She's talking about backing up
what was it, a truckload of documents and files, and
then turns around and says, nothing to see here. Well,
you know that doesn't have much credibility for anyone. I
(09:03):
think the only way out of this mess is just
to be totally transparent. Just put it all out there,
let the American people sort through it. You know, Americans
are pretty smart and they'll figure out what it is
that's happened if they can see all of the pieces together.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Well, I'm glad we could talk about all of these
issues today. Senator, welcome back. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts,
ranking member, Senate Banking Committee. We thank you, as always
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Just a few blocks from our studio here in Washington
is another series of meetings that the President is sure
to comment on. The FLMC, kicking off its two day
policy session, expected to hold interest rates steady tomorrow, even
in the face of growing pressure President Trump is putting
onto the Fed, particularly the Fed's chair Jerome Powell. And
joining us live here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg
TV and Radio. On that and much more, is Democratic
(00:30):
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking member of the
Senate Banking Committee. Senator, welcome back. We appreciate you joining
us as we look ahead to the decision tomorrow. Knowing
the next opportunity the Fed would have to cut rates
is in September. What would the economic consequence be if
they wait that long?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Well, look, I.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Want to see interest rates come down, because when interest
rates stay high, families pay more on their credit cards,
they pay more on their car loans, Mortgage rates stay higher,
and that's a problem. Is exactly one person who is
responsible for keeping those interest rates high, and that's Donald Trump.
Jerome Powell said last month that he would have urged
(01:12):
the FED to lower interest rates last February. But for
the chaos that Donald Trump has been causing over tariffs
and the kind of fallout that that's going to create
in the economy. So if Donald Trump really wants to
see interest rates come down, then stop creating so much
(01:32):
chaos around tariffs. And I hope the FED could get
it done.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
That said Senator, realizing you prefer lower interest rates. Does J.
Powell deserve some credit for holding steady in the face
of this pressure from President Trump.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Look now it's like an upside down the world. I
want to see Fed Chair Powell lower interest rates. I
think that's good for families. I think it's the right
thing to do in the economy. But I also want
to see an independent FED. And when Donald Trump simply
tries to persuade, he says, here are the arguments in favor,
here's why I think you should do it. I get that.
(02:09):
But when he threatens to fire Powell, when he blows
up this whole pretext of trying to fire him for cause,
when he does that kind of thing, now he threatens
the independence of the FED. And there's a real cost
of that, not for Jerome Powell personally, but a real
cost for our economy. We have built much of our
(02:32):
economic foundation on the notion that the FED makes its
decisions independent of political pressure, and that they are a
group of people who are economically informed, follow the data,
and they make those decisions on monetary policy based on
what they think the data are telling them about inflation
(02:52):
and jobs. And when Donald Trump blows through all that,
he undermines confidence in the FED and in our entire
financial system. That's a real problem.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Well.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Of course, part of what President Trump and others in
the administration argue is that at the FED lowers interest rates,
it will help to ease the issue we have in
this country with housing in particular, at least on the
interest rates side. But I know you and your colleagues
in the Banking Committee are also trying to do things
about that on the supply side. Is the measure you
co sponsored with Chairman Scott, the Renewing Opportunity in the
American Dream to Housing Act, passed unanimously through a committee,
(03:30):
quite the bipartisan feat in today's political environment. Senator, my
question is when we look at the contents of that bill,
knowing that part of it is asking hud to establish
new things like loan and grant programs for qualified homeowners
or landlords, knowing at the same time the administration is
actually trying to reduce HUD as we speak. Do these
things run into conflict with each other? Can both be
(03:51):
done at the same time?
Speaker 3 (03:53):
So if I can let me back out just a
tiny little bit, we have a housing crisis in America.
Prices are up, and for decades now, officials have just
stood by policymakers and said, wow, prices just keep going up.
That's a real problem. The real problem is we don't
have in US housing. It is a supply problem. So
(04:15):
what we have done with this bill is that we
are pushing toward more supply. We need about seven million
more housing units in America. This bill has twenty nine
different provisions to it that mostly all row in the
same direction. Some involve HUD, and many of them do
(04:36):
not involve HUD. But the whole point here is to
put the federal government in the position of saying it
is a matter of federal policy that we want to
encourage more housing development. We want more of it in Massachusetts,
in South Carolina, we want more of it out west,
down South, up north, we want it in urban areas
(04:56):
in rural areas, and every member of the committee, all
twenty four of us, have provisions in there to help
make that happen. Yes, we need a functional HUD to
help on parts of that, but I do want to
underline here some of the provisions in this bill are
about cutting red tape and slimming down some of the
(05:19):
programs that HUD works on. Other parts are about we're
gonna give some trial runs to some ideas and try
a few things that haven't been tried before. We even
have an innovation fund in this for cities and towns
that are trying to build more housing. There are a
lot of good ideas in this bill because the housing
(05:40):
problem we have right now wasn't caused by one thing
going wrong. It was caused by a lot of things
going wrong. So it's going to take a lot of
things to help fix it. And I'm excited say it again.
It was bipartisan unanimous in the United States Senate. That's
pretty amazing.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Well, it is duly noted unanimously passed out of committee.
That means every Democrat and Republican voted for this, suggesting
there could be some momentum on the floor if we
get that far Senator, there are a lot of questions
about the interference that you could bump into when lawmakers
returned to town following the August recess, assuming you get there.
(06:19):
One of those distractions is the Jeffrey Epstein story. And
I have to ask you about this, not that we're
featuring this in our interviews, but it is apparently impacting
the agenda. House lawmakers went home early because of this.
The President of the United States has been talking about,
or certainly asked about, a pardon repeatedly when it comes
to Gallaine Maxwell, and I'd like for you to hear
(06:40):
what he's said about this most recently and well asked
you about it. Here's President Trump.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
High a pardon for Klain Maxwell, who landed?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Is that something you would ever consider.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
A pardon for who?
Speaker 3 (06:52):
For Kalay Maxwell?
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Well, I'm allowed to give her a pardon, but nobody's
approached me with it, nobody's ask me about it. And
by the way, I never went to the island. I
never had the privilege of going to his island, and
I did turn it down. I don't know what we're
calling a privilege here, Senator, but I'm just wondering your
thoughts on this What do you think is more likely,
(07:15):
Gallainne Maxwell testifying before Congress or getting a pardon from
Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
I don't know what's more likely, and I'm not good
at anticipating this, but I just want to be clear.
The only way that this thing resolves itself is to
be completely transparent. Put out all of the records, all
the testimony, whatever it is that she has told the
lawyers down in Florida just earlier in the week. Get
(07:43):
all that information out there, Let everybody look at it,
and let people evaluate what they think is true, what
they think is not true, what they think is credible.
But this idea of holding back information and kind of
sorting through it a little piece here and a little
piece there, well, I gotta tell you that is keeping
everybody in churn over on the Republican side, sucking up
(08:04):
a lot of oxygen, oxygen that we could be using
to do things like work on a housing bill to
bring down the cost of housing for every family across
this country.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Well, Congress pushed these files out in September, when everybody's.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Back, Well, the House has already moved in that direction.
If we need to. We have raised the issue now
in the Senate. Yeah, Look, this is one of the
things that Congress does. It's part of our oversight, and
that is to say, when it's time to make these
records public, let everybody see what's in the whole file.
(08:40):
Because there have been a lot of contradictory statements here.
Remember it was the Attorney General of the United States
who says at one point is that she has the
Epstein files on her desk. She's talking about backing up
what was it, a truckload of documents and files, and
then turns around and says, nothing to see here. Well,
you know that doesn't have much credibility for anyone. I
(09:03):
think the only way out of this mess is just
to be totally transparent. Just put it all out there,
let the American people sort through it. You know, Americans
are pretty smart and they'll figure out what it is
that's happened if they can see all of the pieces together.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Well, I'm glad we could talk about all of these
issues today. Senator, welcome back. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts,
ranking member, Senate Banking Committee. We thank you, as always
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.