Reconciliation Hits A Speed Bump

Watch Joe and Kailey LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.

House Republicans’ reconciliation package hit a wall in the Budget Committee, where conservatives may block the measure today over complaints that it front-loads tax cuts and delays spending reductions.

There are at least three conservative members on the panel who oppose the bill, barring changes. GOP members can only afford to lose one vote, partly because Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) has been out of Washington on paternity leave.

Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Chip Roy (R-Texas), and Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) all plan to oppose the measure, unless their problems are resolved. There are a handful of other fiscal hawks on the panel who could jeopardize the vote including Reps. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) and Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.)

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, Kailey speaks with:

• Republican Congressman Nick LaLota of New York.
• Bloomberg Washington Deputy Bureau Chief Laura Davison.
• Former RNC Communications Director Lisa Camooso Miller and Democratic Strategist Roger Fisk.
• Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget President Maya MacGuineas.
• Former Republican Congressman Denver Riggleman.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android
Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
The bill couldn't even clear committee. Welcome to the Friday
edition as President Trump's big beautiful bill fails to pass
the Budget Committee in the House, and now the entire
timeline is being thrown into question. I'm Joe Matthew alongside
Kaylee Lines in Washington. Thanks for being with us on
the Friday edition of Balance of Power. Kaylee, A big
point of disagreement remains lifting the cap on salt, So

(00:47):
not a lot has changed since this time yesterday.

Speaker 3 (00:49):
Yeah, there's still many who want the salt cap lifted
even higher than thirty thousand dollars. But then there's also
fiscal conservatives who want to see the cost saving measures
kick in earlier when it comes to Medicaid work requirements,
rolling back measures in the inflation reduction acts. And it's
those fiscal conservatives that actually took things down in the
Budget Committee today. And what was supposed to just be procedure.
This committee doesn't have power to change the legislation, and

(01:12):
yet it tanked anyway.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
A procedural vote, essentially assembling the pieces of this bill.
We saw a number of Republicans to your point, from
the Freedom Caucus, A Lah chip Roy, Ralph Norman, and
so on, voting with Democrats. And I suspect that their
phones will be ringing today as President Trump makes his
way back from the Middle East.

Speaker 3 (01:29):
Yeah, keeping in mind that the President took to true
social today talking about how he wants Republicans to unite
behind this one big, beautiful bill. But certainly you're seeing
a degree of lack of unity, shall we say, on
Capitol Hill right now, and that is actually where we
go now live here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Is
joining us is Republican Congressman Nicolota, who represents New York's

(01:49):
first congressional district. Tea, of course, is in the Salt
Caucus and is one of the members who has been
advocating for a higher cap. Congressman, welcome back to balance
of power. Obviously, there are you and your colleagues who
are pushing for our higher salt cap up against them
of these fiscal conservatives who worry what that does to
the ultimate price tag. Is there a world here in
which those who shot things down in the Budget Committee

(02:11):
can get what they want and you get what you
want too, or does someone have to lose in this equation.

Speaker 4 (02:17):
Yeah, I'm comfortable we're going to land this plane ultimately.
You know, we all support the concepts behind the One
Big Beautiful Bill. We all want a stronger border security
when we want to put the nation on a better
fiscal track. And there's some other priorities in there as
well that are really important. Energy dominance, really important to
the House Republican Conference. We've been other deadlines in the
past about you know, responsibly raising debt ceilings, ensuring the

(02:40):
government was funded, doing things responsibly like that under a deadline.
I hope that we could do that again this time.
You know, this One Big Beautiful Bill has a couple
of wards on it, but I think that we can
work through that in order to get it passed ultimately.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, Congressman, it's good to have you back. I know
you weren't happy with the level that was coming out
of the Ways and Means Committee when it came to
lifting the cap on salt. So are you actually encouraged
by what happened to the Budget Committee today or are
you concerned about the way forward?

Speaker 5 (03:08):
Well, it just recognizes the obvious.

Speaker 4 (03:09):
There are numerous factions within the Conference who are displeased
with different aspects of the bill. Salt, of course has
gotten a lot of coverage, but there are folks in
the Conference who are concerned about snap, about Medicaid, and
of course the deficit. Hawks has their concerns. So there
are a couple of things holding this bill up. I
hope that we get t yes. But with respect to salt,

(03:33):
salt is a pay for the bill has written right
now from twenty seventeen, has the salt cap expiring at
the end of the year and going back to unlimited
and unlimited salt over the next ten years. Is valued
at one point three trillion dollars, and that's what's going
to happen if no bill passes and folks like me
vote no and others vote know, and ultimately we don't extend.

Speaker 5 (03:53):
Those tax cuts.

Speaker 4 (03:55):
So I think the onus is on others to meet
us a little bit in the middle. The three trillion
is a lot to incentivize some other great provisions in
the one big, beautiful bill, the president's priorities on no
tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on
solid security, the AMT fix, the lower individual rates, the
lower business rates. My constituents want all of that, but
we don't want to have to pay for the bill

(04:16):
again like we paid in twenty seventeen.

Speaker 5 (04:18):
We wanted a little more fairness this time around.

Speaker 3 (04:21):
Well, in Congressman, when you joined us a few days ago,
you told us that this idea of a forty thousand
dollars salt cap for individuals and eighty thousand for married
couples hadn't been explicitly put on the table. That was
something that was obviously in this discussion. Have you gotten
an explicit offer for a higher salt cap or is
that something you're expecting this weekend? Where do things stand?

Speaker 4 (04:42):
Yeah, that forty eighty a dynamic unfortunately, had a poisoned
pill in it in that there was forty eighty for
four or five years and a drop way down to
ten again for the next five or six years. That, unfortunately,
is a gimmick, it's a scam. It just perpetuates the
very thing my constituents and I are opposed to right now,
that's absurd, really low ten k cap. That was really

(05:02):
just a used car salesman trick that we didn't fall for.
We're going to continue to negotiate in good faith to
make sure that New Yorkers, New Jerseyans, and Californians get
their fair share because each of us are donor states.
Each of our states taxpayers send way more to Washington
then we get back. New York gets about ninety one
cents for every dollar it sends to Washington, while Missouri,

(05:24):
home state to the Tax Committee chairman, gets a dollar
sixty in Louisiana, home state to the Speaker, gets a
dollar seventy eight.

Speaker 5 (05:31):
So we're not looking for a handout.

Speaker 4 (05:32):
We're just looking for a fair share and an honest
negotiation on how we can move this ball forward.

Speaker 2 (05:38):
Well, I know this is a big issue for you.
It's something you're passionate about. Congressman and members of the
New York delegation have been strident in their rhetoric in
some cases. Would you be willing to vote no on
this whole thing if it meant just eliminating the cap altogether,
if you can't come to terms on the rest.

Speaker 5 (05:52):
If it eliminates the cap altogether. He count me in.
Let's book it as a yes, and let's move on.
If that's your question.

Speaker 2 (05:59):
No, I mean, would you have quote no if it
meant allowing that to reset to zero?

Speaker 4 (06:04):
Oh, to have a ze, to have no deductibility on
the state and local taxes, whatsoever.

Speaker 5 (06:09):
I'm going to.

Speaker 2 (06:10):
Eliminate the cap to go back to where we were
before twenty seventeen.

Speaker 5 (06:16):
That would do it for me. Count me in if
we eliminate the cap.

Speaker 2 (06:20):
But would you vote no to get there?

Speaker 5 (06:24):
Sorry? I don't understand your question.

Speaker 4 (06:26):
No, I would vote yes on a bill that eliminates
the cap. Right now, the cap is ten thousand dollars.
They're offering thirty thousand dollars if they offer unlimited.

Speaker 5 (06:35):
Count me in. Let's go, let's make America great again.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
Does a chance this bill might not pass though according
to some congressmen, you may not see it that way.
If this whole thing falls apart, does that help you
enough in New York to eliminate this cap to put
up with not having the Trump tax cuts.

Speaker 4 (06:51):
So here's how the negotiations is going to go. If
it falls apart, the bill falls apart in the next
couple of days, weeks, or months, everybody's gonna rush back
to the negotiating team, will say how can we salvage this?
And at that point in time, the reality will be
apparent to everybody else that what is on the table
at that point in time is unlimited salt, and then
we can negotiate down from unlimited rather than up from

(07:13):
ten thousand dollars. Now, I don't want to get there,
but that's the negotiating reality. As the President would say,
we have a lot of the cards in this negotiation,
but we.

Speaker 5 (07:21):
Want to be professionals.

Speaker 4 (07:22):
We want to be gentlemen about this, and we want
to do what's right for the nation. But at the
end of the day, you can't stick the blue states
with the bill for everybody else's tax incentives like what
happened in twenty seventeen. The political dynamic is much different
this time around. These blue state Republicans like Lawler and
Kim and others and Tom Kaine made our majority, and
we can't sell them out to pay for and fund

(07:44):
the rest of the tax cuts. We have to ensure
there's some equity in this bill, and we acknowledge those realities.
We'll get to Yes, we need to get to President's
agenda through. We need to have those overall great tax
incentives for America. The negotiations will continue through both in person,
over the phone, on text this weekend and we'll ultimately
get there.

Speaker 5 (08:05):
Well.

Speaker 3 (08:05):
Of course, even if you can get there in the House,
it then goes to the Senate. Congressman, and what you're
describing the fact that there are Republican members from blue
states in the House is not an issue in the
US Senate. Are you concerned that the Senate might actually
reduce back at a higher salt cap you fought for,
or look at some of the pay fors that have
been suggested, whether it's Medicaid or rollbacks to the Inflation

(08:27):
Reduction Act. Make them go away, and then you have
a new problem in the House again when it comes
to the total tally.

Speaker 4 (08:33):
Yeah, so maybe we should invite you to our negotiating
team because those are the things that we're talking about
right now. We want to ensure that if we do
a deal here in the House, it's a deal that
will be ratified by both the Senate and the President.
So while we're having these discussions on the House side
right here, contemporaneous. We want to have some assurances from
others who are participating in this one big, beautiful bill,

(08:55):
they too will ratify exactly the deal that we come
to in the House.

Speaker 5 (08:58):
That's an important measure.

Speaker 4 (08:59):
We don't want to just take a vote for the
sake of taking a vote here in the House and
have our provisions die in the Senate. So what we
negotiate here before we get to a yes here has
to be assured that it will pass the Senate be
signed by the President.

Speaker 2 (09:13):
So how's it going to work this weekend? Congressman? Bring
us behind the scenes if you would. Are there are
a series of meetings planned. You mentioned phone calls and texts.
Maybe you're going to get a phone call from President Trump.
But will will you be on Capitol Hill? Will you
be working in committee rooms? Or how does it come
together on a Saturday and a Sunday with a deadline
that you're facing.

Speaker 5 (09:32):
So the House is not in session.

Speaker 4 (09:34):
Many of my colleagues went home yesterday, but as you
can see from behind me, I'm still here on Capitol Hole,
eager to make this deal work. I will continue to collaborate,
not just members of the Salt Caucus, but those who
see this issue differently than me happy to work together
and as a conference, as a House Republican conference, we've
gotten through and over hurdles like this in the past.

(09:55):
I expect my colleagues from the Upper Chamber to work
in good faith as well, and certainly the cousin wants
to get this across the finish line. It is worthy
of the nation's attention, is worthy to that that we
work over the weekend and through the night, talk text,
in person, whatever it takes. ZOOM will continue to keep
the door open and keep the dialogue going to get
this one big, beautiful bill passed.

Speaker 3 (10:17):
And are these negotiations going to be bilateral if you will,
between the Speaker's Office and the Salt Caucus or are
you going to have to include members of the Freedom
Caucus like Chip Roy and Ralph Norman, who obviously are
the ones that helped take this thing in the budget
in the first place. Are these trilateral negotiations?

Speaker 5 (10:34):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (10:35):
I think this is going to be an all hands
on deck effort, as it's been in the last couple
of days especially. We had a meeting yesterday in the
Speaker's office with members of the Republican conference whose politics
are much different. We had folks in there whose districts
Trump one by fifty and those who Harris one by three,
four or five, people with different constituencies, different priorities, different

(10:57):
views of the world. I think it's important that we
continue to talk with each other. I've been talking in
Texas with some of those folks here who come from
some of those.

Speaker 5 (11:05):
Deep red districts.

Speaker 4 (11:06):
You know, we all have to come together at the
end of the day to put this nation on a
better track. You know, we're a nation thirty six trillion
dollars in debt, two trillion dollar deficit. A lot of
folks who live in paycheck to paycheck. They're eager to
see Washington Republicans come together to ensure that we have
a tax bill and overall spending bill that's best for
our country. And we'll work with each other in regardless

(11:28):
of political persuasion to ensure that gets done.

Speaker 2 (11:32):
Really important conversation, Congressman, really appreciate your being with us
shortly after the Budget Committee vote. That's Nicko lo Loto
with a working weekend ahead. As you just heard the
Republican from New York. We thank you as always for
joining here. On Bloomberg TV and Radio. We want to
add the voice of Laura Davison, our deputy bureau chief
here in Washington, d C. And one of our political
team leaders. Laura, it's great to see you. What you

(11:54):
just heard from the gentleman from New York. We're going
to stay the weekend. We're going to keep working on this.
Sounds just like Roy. I'm staying in Washington this weekend
to deliver. How about we get these two together to
figure it out.

Speaker 6 (12:05):
It certainly seems like this bill is not advancing at
the rate that a House Speaker Mike.

Speaker 2 (12:10):
Johnson want this.

Speaker 6 (12:11):
You know, this sort of stunning defeat in the Budget
committee that doesn't happen. This is really a procedural rubber
stamp effort, and the fact that the bill was went
to committee knowing that it didn't have the votes and
then failed indicates that there are serious issues that, you know,
could really threaten the chances of this bill passing the
House next week as Mike Johnson has wanted. The House
then is at least scheduled to recess for two weeks,

(12:31):
means that they wouldn't be until mid June that they
picked this back up. I think we could see a
lot of schedule changing in the House if it looks
like things are falling back, as Loda, a representative of
Latoda just said, if things, you know, fallow apart in
the next couple of days, you expect to see people
rushing back to the negotiating table to figure out how
to salvage the medicaid issue, the salt issue, the spending issue.
All of this is of deep concern.

Speaker 3 (12:51):
Well, and of course it's not just a deep concern
for Speaker Johnson, who wants to get this done, but
for President Trump too. When you have the President taking
to true social saying that we don't need grant standards
in the Republican Party, stop talking and get it done,
saying Republicans must unite behind the one big, beautiful bill,
and then hours later, five Republicans, although one was just
for procedural reasons, for Republicans really in the Budget Committee

(13:12):
decide to specifically not advance the President's bill. What does
that signal about his power in all of this.

Speaker 6 (13:18):
It signals that he doesn't have the ability to keep
this party together. That's been his superpower through all of this,
is that he has been able to put out a
tweet saying people, hey, fall in line, and they have
right now, that is not the case that's happening. It's
clear the President is very frustrated with this process. That
a true social posts you just read that was in
a series of a long list of angry posts from
the president this morning about Taylor Swift. There was clearly

(13:41):
angry about a lot of things, from pop culture to
budget reconciliation.

Speaker 2 (13:44):
I think that.

Speaker 6 (13:44):
Covers the full gamut. But this is clear that he
has kind of from the top of this negotiation said, look,
get it done. I don't really care how you do it,
but just make sure these tax cut bills pass. As
you know, tariffs continue to percolate, you have people like
Walmart coming out saying price are going to rise. That's
even more mounting pressure on the White House to get
a tax bill done and quickly.

Speaker 2 (14:05):
I want to go back to where you started here, Laura.
And first of all, the rarity of a bill failing
and committee like this in this a little bit of
egg on face, I'm assuming for the cheer unless Jody
Arrington was trying to make a point, but also what
this means potentially for the long term status of this bill.
Are we making too much of this to suggest that
this whole thing could fall apart? Or it's simply about
getting everyone back in a room and coming up with

(14:26):
a plan B.

Speaker 6 (14:28):
Those are sort of the two options here. One, this
may be a small blip and in a couple of
days they've they've ironed out these details, they had that
little bit of a public embarrassing moment and decide, okay,
let's move forward with unity. It could also mean that
this is just you know, sort of the signs of
deeper troubles to come. I'll also note that you have
senators already coming out a Republican senator saying that they
won't support this bill. They can't support this bill. There's

(14:49):
going to be need to be big changes, you know,
scaling back some of these Medicaid cuts. That's a real
that's something that House members are thinking about, particularly moderates.
They don't want to have to take a tough vote
on a bill that really scales back something may be
unpopular in their district and then have that totally rewritten
by the Senate. So you're seeing a lot of political
considerations not just between you know, House Republicans, but also
between House and Senate Republicans of where what is a

(15:11):
bill that can get fifty you know the fifty one
fifty in the Senate and two eighteen in the House.
That's not an easy feat.

Speaker 3 (15:17):
Well, and when you talk about Medicaid cuts in particular,
obviously for chip Royan Code, that is part of their
problem is these new rules around work requirements for example,
aren't supposed to kick in for several more years. They
would like to see it kicking in sooner. Was there
a reason that this wasn't supposed to happen until twenty
twenty nine? Are they trying to get around issues potentially
in the mid terms until changes are made. Why wouldn't

(15:39):
they have just done it from the jump?

Speaker 6 (15:41):
The reason is is why you know, the these tax
cuts are set to expire, you to put all the
juicy stuff, the stuff that people like, at the beginning,
and you put the tough stuff at the end of
the budget window. So twenty twenty nine, I'll note that's
when after the twenty twenty eight president election, after the midterms,
the stuff that people aren't going to like and are
going to feel the impacts of. That's a future Congress
is problem, and they give and It also gives this

(16:02):
Congress a lot of time to potentially repeal that if
you want to. There's a lot of things we've seen
Congress do this time and time again. If they have
to do something unpopular, they have to make a decision
to raise some revenue, we'll put that in the future
and then you know, that's that's a problem for another day.

Speaker 2 (16:14):
We've seen Donald Trump flip votes before. One of these
no votes came from Ralph Norman. He got a phone
call from Donald Trump last time the speaker's a job
was at risk. In about ten minutes later, he got
off the cell phone and changed his vote. Could we
see something along those lines, We very much could.

Speaker 6 (16:28):
You know, Trump is clearly whipping this bill himself though,
both in public as well as in private, making calls
to members he wants to get this done. It's interesting
to see, though, how many people are willing to buck
him on what is this is supposed to be Republican's
signature legislative achievement, and it's not clear right now that
they can do that well.

Speaker 3 (16:45):
And when we consider that, and to come back to
the idea that the midterms are next year, is this
House conservative saying Okay, we're probably going to lose the
House in twenty twenty six. Therefore, we need to make
this exactly what we want now. This is our last
chance to actually do something more dramatic when it comes
to debt and deficits and basically saying the majority is
going to be lost anyway, or that they still think

(17:07):
they can rock this hard line and retain the majority
in twenty twenty.

Speaker 6 (17:11):
That's what they're publicly saying, but privately House Republicans know
that there's a very strong chance that they could lose
the chamber. That's just kind of the tradition. History suggests
that's a very much a possibility. But this is where
the tension is. You have the hardline are saying let's
get everything that we can get done right now, and
you have the moderates, you know, people who want sold
and others saying, don't cut Medicaid for my district. I
need to expand salt. Those are the things I need

(17:32):
to get reelected. And the only way you House Republicans
have a majority is if we have these districts around
New York in southern California. So you have two sort
of very much competing visions at.

Speaker 2 (17:42):
Odds here he's a President Trump on his way back
from Abu Dhabi today saw quite a number of posts
on social media. As you guys suggested, we'd only have
this one, the Taylor Swift post the President of the
United States. Has anyone noticed that since I said I
hate Taylor Swift, she's no longer hot. What's going on
on that airplane?

Speaker 6 (18:02):
It's uh Trump coming down from the high that he
had in the Middle East. He was showered with praise.
He had horses, there were dancers, there were you know,
the whole spectacle. And you know, he also didn't get
a lot of sleep. He went very late every single night.
One colleague mentioned, it's like when your child has a sleepover,
comes home. Had this also the fun doesn't get any sleep,
and then suddenly they're cranky and in a bad mood
the next day.

Speaker 3 (18:22):
I just want to know what he saw.

Speaker 2 (18:24):
Who was he talking to?

Speaker 3 (18:25):
Did someone start playing Taylor Swift on Air Force oneiday?

Speaker 2 (18:30):
Taylor was in the air.

Speaker 3 (18:30):
We'll have to wait for answers for another day.

Speaker 2 (18:32):
Perhaps.

Speaker 3 (18:33):
Laura Davison, Washington, Deputy Beer chief for US here at
Bloomberg with US on Balance of Power. So I guess
she's no longer hot.

Speaker 2 (18:41):
That's what he says.

Speaker 3 (18:42):
I didn't news to me.

Speaker 2 (18:43):
You'd know this more than I guess, So maybe we'll
play that to the panel. Next. We've got a good
one today, Roger Fisk, Lisa Camuso Miller their take on
a breaking news day here in Washington. We'll have a
lot more straight ahead on Bloomberg TV and radio alongside
Kaylee Lines. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Balance of Power
only on Bloomberg.

Speaker 1 (19:03):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power Podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Apple Cocklay and Android Auto 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.

Speaker 2 (19:22):
News tends to break every day around twelve noon. When
we come on the air, We're ready for it. That's
why we meet here every day. Happen again today, as
we're going to discuss with our panel in just a moment,
the one big beautiful bill the President's talk so much
about couldn't even get through with the Budget Committee, and
so it is back to the drawing board on Capitol

(19:43):
Hill with a bit of a protest by the Freedom
Caucus slowing things down. We've also got a breaker on
the terminal right now, and it's coming from the Federal Reserve.
Don't confuse this with a Doge story, because they may
not be related. We're just learning this now at Bloomberg
as the FED announced as plans, or we're reporting, plans

(20:03):
to shrink the Fed's workforce by about ten percent. Job
cuts are coming to the Fed. It'll happen over the
next several years, mainly through attrition. According to people familiar
speaking with Bloomberg. The Fed's going to be offering deferred
resignations to some workers, according to sources we're talking about.
And so the shrinkage continues here in Washington, whether Elon

(20:24):
Musk is in town or not. And we assemble our
panel here on the Friday edition, and we've got a
good one for you. Roger Fisk is back, former special
advisor to President Obama, our Democratic strategist, and of course
the great Republican strategist. Lisa Camuso Miller, former RNC Comm's director,
host of the Friday Reporter podcast, who spent a good
chunk of her career working for a Republican Speaker of

(20:46):
the House, not this one, but she's seen this movie before.
And Lisa, I'll start with you on what just took
place here could even clear committee. What does that tell
us about the long term forecast for this legislation?

Speaker 7 (21:03):
Well, Joe, I think it means that there is a
long way to go and we're not going to get
to the rules committee on money then that is for certain.

Speaker 2 (21:11):
That allows time for recovery. Though for Speaker Johnson, is
this a bump on the road? Chip? Roy just needs
to feel better. How do you get around this roadblock?

Speaker 7 (21:23):
I'm not certain how they can, And in fact, I think,
if anything, this is going to be a weekend where
they're going to work really hard to try to get
this through. But once again, I mean this goes back
to this whole strategy that comes from the White House
at about a big, beautiful bill, right, And the House
said that they didn't think they could get it done,
and the Speaker said they didn't think they could get
it done, and the Senate didn't think they could get
it done, and they were right. And so I think

(21:45):
a lot of what's happening here is you know, you
have an up and down vote in the budget there's
no opportunity in Budget Committee, so there's no opportunity for amendments.
You've got four members of the Freedom Caucus that are
in the Budget Committee, and those guys are absolutely They
were hard lined no before they even went to the
committee this morning. So this isn't terribly surprising. But what
was supposed to happen is they were supposed to come
to agreement. The bill was supposed to get out of committee,

(22:07):
was supposed to come from all the relevant committees. They
were supposed to get it all together and get it
off to Rules Committee for a Monday vote.

Speaker 8 (22:14):
Just feels like it's not going to happen.

Speaker 7 (22:15):
And so that to me tells me exactly what I
expected to see happen. It's what people have been saying
all along. This is a much much longer road to go.
The Speaker is really eager to get this done by
Memorial Day.

Speaker 8 (22:26):
It just doesn't seem like it's going to happen to me.

Speaker 2 (22:28):
How many people have come on the air to say, yeah,
give them to the end of the year. Meet me
in September. Roger the Freedom Caucus sent to tweet they
know the phone's going to be ringing soon.

Speaker 9 (22:41):
Here.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
Ralph Norman's in for it, right, Remember Donald Trump rolled
Ralph Norman and the most recent speaker vote took one
phone call. It was say, ten minutes later, it went
back and voted again. They together sent out a tweet
here these are the objecting representatives led by Chip Roy.
We were making progress, it says, before the vote and

(23:02):
the Budget Committee, and will continue negotiations to further improve
the reconciliation package. We're not going anywhere, and we will
continue to work for the weekend. Roger Fisk, what will
happen this weekend?

Speaker 10 (23:15):
A lot of long, detailed, frustrating conversations that, to Lisa's point,
probably go nowhere.

Speaker 5 (23:20):
And thank you for having me.

Speaker 10 (23:22):
And it's wonderful to be here with Lisa.

Speaker 5 (23:25):
You know.

Speaker 10 (23:25):
It's kind of the curse of the three bes, right,
it's the Biden administration tried to do build back better.
Now this is the big, beautiful bill, and I think
every administration would be well served by looking at their predecessor,
be a friend or foe, and learning from the mistakes
and the successes. And one of the mistakes of the
Biden administration was going with the Build Back Better bill

(23:48):
that was just too big and too broad and too vague.

Speaker 5 (23:53):
And the more you.

Speaker 10 (23:54):
The bigger a bill is, the bigger there are kind
of definitions of what beautiful are within that. And then
you have hardliners like Congressman Roy like you mentioned, Congressman
Norman Andrew Clyde, who Ralph Norman says is against this,
but I guess by now is probably on record as
definitely being against it, and that gives license to some
of the other members of the Gop House to create

(24:18):
some separation. Normally, this should have happened in the first
one hundred days when the incoming administration has momentum and
a lot of goodwill.

Speaker 8 (24:28):
But this is post Signal Gay, post.

Speaker 10 (24:30):
Katari plane post a couple stumbles where some of those
frontline Republicans, when you throw in the salt issue and
some of the other things that we've talked about earlier
this week, that they realize maybe there's more value in
having a little distance from the president than voting to
kick a couple hundred thousand people off healthcare in their district.
And that's the dynamic that's they're going to try to

(24:52):
align this weekend, and it'll be a steep climb for.

Speaker 2 (24:55):
The speaker noted, this is we're now living in the
post Katari plane era of the Trump administration. The plane
after the plane. That's right, we're in now ap territory.
Did you hear what Roger just said? Did you come
up with that build back better, big beautiful bill? Are

(25:20):
there parallels here?

Speaker 5 (25:23):
Roger?

Speaker 7 (25:23):
You're a messaging genius And I love that you said that.
I've been laughing since you did. I mean, really, it
just does seem like it's politically tone deaf, and it's
it's you know, a little more of the same. It's
it's just to me, like, here we go again. And
you're absolutely right, show that plane. Really, I think took
a lot of the political out of this, out of
this trip. So not only you know, look, this Bill

(25:46):
may have had.

Speaker 8 (25:47):
You know, Trump is going to come back.

Speaker 7 (25:48):
He's going to celebrate, He's going to be pleased with
how all the deals that he made while he was
there and all the things that have happened, and the
only thing that overshadowed all of that was this silly
plane that he wanted to take back.

Speaker 9 (25:57):
Right.

Speaker 7 (25:58):
But it's the difficulty here, too, is that he had
built up a lot of really good momentum, momentum that
was going into this big, beautiful bill, and then the
tear of discussion started to happen. And that I think
the timing up all of that is really going to
make it even harder, right because I have heard other
folks smarter than me talk about how the carriages are coming.
All of the containers are coming from China and they've arrived,

(26:21):
and so the shit, the excuse me, It's about to
be very difficult for people to be happy with the
way the economy is running.

Speaker 2 (26:29):
You guys are on a roll. Roger chip Roy tweeting himself,
this is not the caucus now, this is the individual
We're making progress. He says, what the vote was called
and the problems were not resolved, so I voted no.
He says, I'm staying in Washington this weekend to deliver
Medicaid work requirements must start now, not twenty twenty nine.

(26:50):
And the green new scam, he says, must be fully repealed,
as President Trump called for. You would think that this
is a message to Democrats having an argument from the
other side of the eye. Are Republicans arguing with Republicans
about the Green new scam.

Speaker 10 (27:05):
It's amazing to me that people still refer to the
Green New Deal as if it became law at some
point and when in fact it's still essentially kind of
like a philosophical construct on behalf of the squad and.

Speaker 5 (27:19):
Things like that.

Speaker 10 (27:20):
The climate and the clean energy elements of what Biden
actually did were much more focused on infrastructure jobs and
retrofitting buildings and things like that than they were about
some fundamental paradigm shift about how the country fuels itself.
But you see ads and attacks all the time that
refer to the Green New Deal as if it's part
of the law of the land, when in fact it's not,

(27:42):
And that to me plays into the performative nature that
we're seeing on all sides. So you have your Thomas
Massey's and these other people that are more than happy
to slow these things down. And I used to say
this with Speaker McCarthy. You know, I would imagine Speaker
Johnson gets up a couple days, you know, why can't
I just move back to Louisiana and have a normal life.

(28:04):
This has to be incredibly frustrating because they have full
control of the government, just as in the first two
years of the first Trump administration. They couldn't even get
their votes aligned to fund the wall. We're seeing that
same kind of dysfunction play out now.

Speaker 2 (28:18):
You know what, Roger doesn't think, God, life was even
better in the radio business. Lisa, please go ahead. What's
your response because I want to hear your take on
what's going to happen this weekend.

Speaker 7 (28:28):
Well, what I was going to say was that that's
the traditional playbook, and that would be that the President
is in the White House and the Republicans in their
House and the Senate. But it's the president himself that
makes this so much more difficult. I mean, he continues
to make news. It used to be that there was
sort of this cadence between the White House and the Congress,
and that's no longer the case. The President continues to
push forward with this slash and burn and all of

(28:50):
the things that are happening, and it's making it more
and more difficult for people to really enact change. So
what would ordinarily be like a trifecta of great things
that could happen. Because Republicans are in power, they're working
against each other really, and that's I think what makes
it even hard.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
Well, bring us behind the scenes this weekend, Lisa, how
does this work? Are they going to be in a
committee room in the House. Are they going to be
in an office building somewhere. They're going to be bringing
in takeout? Are they wearing shorts and sandals? What happens
over Saturday and Sunday that could change the picture by Monday.

Speaker 7 (29:21):
I think it's a lot of all of that, Joe.
I think everybody has a lot of stick and they
really want to see it happen, and so they're going
to bring in every free source that they can. They're
going to be having meetings late today into tomorrow. They're
going to be having calls, They're going to be working
the phones. They're going to be doing everything they can
to try to find levers that they can pull in
order to get this to the Rules Committee. Because also too,
the Republican House really does want to deliver for the President.

(29:42):
They really do want this bill to get done. So
I do think that they're going to call out all
the stops. The difficulty here is that you've got this
Salt group, the group from the Northeast primarily, that are
going to fight like heck to make sure that sal
gets done. Right, and then you've got the Freedom Caucus
that are working in the opposite direction. So if you're
Mike Johnson, the point that maybe running home to Louisiana,
it sounds pretty sweet. It does seem like this is

(30:04):
a really, really hard job. But I think he's the
right guy for the job. It seems to me like
he has the right tone and tenor, and he has
got the right people around him that are helping him
make good choices, and that that is this. Look, we've
seen two speakers walk away from this job, two Republican
speakers walk away from this job, and there's a reason.
It's because it's really hard to govern with so many
different factions in the party right now. And that's exactly

(30:25):
what we're seeing play out in real time.

Speaker 2 (30:28):
You wonder if they make another run at him depending
on how this goes here. What's Hokkeem Jeffery's doing this
weekend Rogers? He's watching TV having a chuckle chop the
speaker do his work, Yeah.

Speaker 10 (30:40):
Popping popcorn, letting it, you know, play out. The president
has been the greatest unifying force for the Democrats, but
this additional fratricidal tension just makes it that much easier
for the Democrats to a avoid news cycles and let

(31:02):
this play out with as much coverage as possible, because
this really forces some of those frontline Republicans at least
it was just mentioning to potentially take some difficult votes.
And so for the Democrats, they largely just want to
make sure that they don't stop the Republicans from digging
their hole.

Speaker 2 (31:23):
Wow, time to order the takeout and the wine, boys
and girls, because we're hunkering down for a working weekend.
What a great panel.

Speaker 1 (31:33):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Alma Coarclay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
us live on YouTube.

Speaker 2 (31:49):
Thanks for being with us on the Friday edition. You
made it to the threshold of the weekend Ballots of
Power every day on Bloomberg Radio on satellite radio channel
one twenty one and on YouTube. Find us right now
by searching Bloomberg Business News Live. Because we've got news
high noon in Washington and it didn't even get out
of committee. That's where we stand now with the one

(32:11):
big beautiful bill, as Donald Trump calls it, that we
have talked so much about. It failed to pass the
Budget Committee. This was supposed to be a key moment
after all the wrangling, the eleven bills come together, assembled
into one big beautiful bill by the Budget Committee, so
rules could then accept it next week and it would

(32:32):
go to the floor for one big beautiful vote. Apparently
this is not happening. The line coming out of the
Budget Committee chair for members, I do not anticipate us
coming back today. Jody Errington speaking there the final tally
twenty one sixteen. So who's getting a phone call from

(32:52):
Donald Trump tonight? He's on his way back from Abu Dhabi.
He's got time. He's sitting on the jet with the phone.
A lot of people in the other ear Here's the list.
You don't have to look further than the terminal Republican representatives.
You can recite it for me, Chip Roy, Ralph Norman,
Josh Britsheen, Lloyd Smucker, and Andrew Clyde voting with Democrats.

(33:17):
If you're not too familiar with the process, it is
incredibly rare for something like this to not even get
out of committee. What is the speaker going to do now,
It's where we start our conversation with Maya McGinnis watching
this all happen from her perch as President of the
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Maya, it's great to
see you. We've got breaking news here and I've got
a lot of questions for you, as always, But based

(33:39):
on what we just saw and heard on Capitol Hill,
is there a chance that one big, beautiful bill never
passes at all?

Speaker 9 (33:49):
Uh?

Speaker 11 (33:49):
Well, first off, what timing is this?

Speaker 5 (33:51):
Right?

Speaker 9 (33:52):
This?

Speaker 12 (33:52):
I'm just still processing everything just happened after watching the
whole hearing.

Speaker 11 (33:56):
I don't think that's the way the story ends. I
think that this proceeds.

Speaker 12 (34:01):
After there are some negotiations and some changes to accommodate
the fiscal hawks who voted against it.

Speaker 11 (34:07):
I think it goes out of the House.

Speaker 12 (34:08):
I think then you have another massive, massive showdown with
the Senate, which is unwilling to even do some of
the reforms that the House have included. Ultimately, and I've
been saying this for a while, I think it could pass.

Speaker 11 (34:20):
As a massive budget buster as.

Speaker 12 (34:22):
It is currently, or it could be just temporary extensions
and limping along to continue to figure it out. But
those fiscal hawks are not comfortable with the borrowing debt
is in the bill, and I sympathize with them.

Speaker 8 (34:34):
It's huge.

Speaker 2 (34:37):
Well, let's talk about busting the budget here, Maya, because
as always, the Committee has done quite a bit of
work looking at at least what we believe what we
have now in terms of legislation, and what it might
mean for the deficit and debt moving forward. The developing
House Reconciliation Bill, is you right, is shaping up to
add roughly three point three trillion dollars to the debt

(34:58):
through fiscal year thirty four, set up the stage for
more than five point two trillion dollars of additional debt
if policymakers ultimately extend temporary provisions. And that might be
right where we are, Maya, because Speaker Johnson needs to
sweeten the pot for salt Republicans and he needs to
cut even more to make the Freedom Caucus happy. So

(35:18):
are these numbers going to be even worse?

Speaker 11 (35:21):
Yeah, there's a couple of points.

Speaker 12 (35:23):
One part of a big part of this bill is
just temporary tax cuts. Remember we're in this situation right
now because there are a bunch of temporary tax cuts expiring,
and you've got the Senate saying, oh, we shouldn't have
to pay for them, because we always meant for them
to be permanent. They made them temporary so the bill
would be smaller when they first passed them in twenty seventeen,

(35:44):
and now they're saying they shouldn't have to pay for them.

Speaker 11 (35:46):
And yet in the very same breath, they're also so far.

Speaker 12 (35:49):
In the House and the Senate, and I assume we'll
do the same thing putting in new tax cuts on
a temporary basis. So it's really arguing I mean, baselines.
People are sick of basins, I'm sure, but multiple lines
at one time. Don't charge us for extending things, don't
charge us for the full cost if they're temporary. So
there is a very strong chance that these tax cuts,

(36:09):
if they're put in place, will be extended, because it
always plays out that way. So the price seg will
be much larger there. And then two, to your point,
they're not done negotiating the salt. Folks don't think that
a thirty thousand dollars gap is enough. They want to
up it. This is a very intensive bill and the
fiscal hawks would not be comfortable doing that in a
way where it's just definite finance, they'd want more off sets.

Speaker 2 (36:33):
We talked to Nicole malliet takus about that around this
time yesterday. The Republican from New York has this incredible
scenario in which she has to straddle her sitting on
the Ways and Means Committee with her membership in the
Salt Caucus. So they got to thirty thousand dollars, raise
the cap to thirty up from ten. Here's what she
told us yesterday about what that means for her districts.

Speaker 13 (36:53):
Salt right now is roughly it's about two hundred and
fifteen billion. We want to stay within that piece. Now
that may mean we need me to adjust the dials.
A tripling of the deduction to thirty thousand dollars covers
ninety eight percent of my district. Now what I've liked
to hire number Sure, you know, but it's not what
you want, it's what you need.

Speaker 2 (37:15):
Here's the problem, Maya. She wasn't even allowed in a
meeting with Salt Republicans because or the other day, because
of her role on the Ways and Means Committee. This
is how chippy it's gotten on Capitol Hill. Does the
issue of Salt as a singular issue here threaten this
bill the most.

Speaker 12 (37:32):
It's interesting I saw that interview and I thought, oh,
I wonder how people will respond to that. Because the
Salt group is die hard on this issue. Is it
the biggest threat. I don't think it's the biggest threat.
I think the biggest threat is the fiscal conservatives.

Speaker 11 (37:48):
I think it's the debt levels.

Speaker 12 (37:49):
I think it is the more that that bill hangs
out there and people understand that you are talking about
adding three to five trillion from this version, and like
I said, I think it gets worse, not better. I
think the real threat is that they're just enough Republicans
who've been talking about the need for fiscal responsibility and
spending cuts. They cannot stomach, no matter what the talking
points are, they cannot stomach a bill that would add

(38:11):
to deficits and debt. That's where I see it could
break down. The Salt folks should be very happy with thirty.
They're still negotiating. They'll negotiate to the last minute. It's
incredibly expensive.

Speaker 2 (38:22):
And there's that from Miami, Guinnis to us right now,
May You're going to get the emails just like I am.

Speaker 11 (38:29):
Yeah, I sure am, and I know this is the
only group that's scarier is the seniors when you say
something about not adding new benefit.

Speaker 12 (38:37):
But you know, there's a strong and interesting case, and
people don't appreciate this. But why would states that are
low tax states be subsidizing high tax states when those
high tax states are getting something in return.

Speaker 11 (38:50):
They are getting benefits, they are getting programs. These are
the decisions the states make.

Speaker 12 (38:54):
So it's difficult to say, well, you you have fewer benefits,
so you should subsidize ours, which is really what it is.

Speaker 11 (39:01):
I'm getting it.

Speaker 2 (39:02):
We're getting to the part of the matter. Yeah, I'm
in big trouble. I'm going to go home after this.

Speaker 11 (39:06):
Sorry to bring you down.

Speaker 2 (39:09):
Spending time with Maya McGuinness here as if you're just
joining us. The bill failed in the Budget Committee, the
leadoff to the big beautiful week that was going to
end with a floor vote next week. Maya, you've been
through this a couple of times. What do you think
happens next? Looks like they're not coming back today. Could
Speaker Johnson still pull off a floor vote next week?

Speaker 11 (39:29):
I think it could.

Speaker 12 (39:30):
I'm not saying that it's certain at all, but I
certainly think it could. First, I've been amazed because every
time I look at where they are, I'm like, I
don't see how you get to the next step, And
they have, and I think cherr Rington has done a
great job kind of making everybody feel heard through this.
I think there are some trades that could happen. It
seems to me that some of the holdouts might say,

(39:50):
in return for or we want you to have, we're very,
very uncomfortable with how these tax cuts expire. And then
the savers don't phase in until after President Trump leave's office.
They wait four or five years, right, so it's all
backloaded the savings that never happened to instructure that way.
I could see them insisting that the savings is moved
up and that becomes something that would entice them to

(40:13):
vote this out of committee, and then there might be
some space for salt there. Again, I don't think there
should be, and it's so expensive hard to do it,
but I think that's what it is. It's moving up
some of the savers that might get some folks to
buy in.

Speaker 2 (40:26):
So you're saying there's a chance.

Speaker 11 (40:30):
Boy, I think it depends on what the President has
to say. As well. I'm sure they will be hearing
from him, and well.

Speaker 2 (40:36):
That's exactly right. We've seen him turn Ralph Norman around before.
I don't know if Chip broy is taking that phone
call today, Maya, this is going to be a really
interesting twelve hour period to track. Maya mcguinnis in the clutch.
How about that at high noon here on Bloomberg. Where
else are you going to hear that? With the President
of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. I see you,
Matt Miller. If you want to email me, you can.

(40:58):
I'm trying to ask the right questions here as we
find our way to a deal on salt. It'll happen eventually,
according to Maya mcguinnis, and maybe we will see a
vote next week. Of course, if it happens, we'll experience
it all together. Here on Bloomberg, we're gonna have a
special conversation coming up next with the former Congressman from Virginia,
Denver Riggleman. He's in Dubai, investing in Ai his view

(41:20):
on the President's trip. Next right here on Bloomberg.

Speaker 1 (41:24):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Apple Cockley and Android Auto 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.

Speaker 2 (41:43):
You know when to tune in. This is a routine now, right.
You start at twelve eastern high noon because you know
there's going to be breaking news in Washington, whether the
president's in town, which he's not right now, on the
way back from the Middle East, and we're going to
talk about his trip in a moment with Rigglemann or
the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue where we had a

(42:04):
breaker high noon, the Budget Committee fails to pass what
the President calls one big beautiful bill. Yeah, if you're
just joining us, we need to catch up on this.
Chaired Jody Errington, delivering the news a short time ago. Listen, Well,
the nos have it.

Speaker 14 (42:20):
The committee stands in recess, says, subject to the call
of the Chair, I want to thank everybody for their
time and patience and godspeed and safe travels.

Speaker 2 (42:32):
God speed and safe travels, saying later dryly for members,
I do not anticipate us coming back today. The final
tally twenty one to sixteen. As you heard it, Jip Roy,
Ralph Norman, and company voting with Democrats to sink the bill.

(42:52):
This coming just an hour or two after President Trump
went on social media truth social calling on Republicans to
unite behind one big beautiful Billy said stop talking and
do it. Well, guess what, Chip Roy is still talking
and at the moment, there is no way forward here.
It was supposed to clear budget today rules on Monday

(43:15):
to the floor in time for a big, full smash
vote ahead of Memorial Day. That was supposed to be
the plan. Now we're picking up the pieces, or back
to the drawing board, or whatever cliche you suggest. Somebody
who's been through the throes of debates like this, staring
down the barrel of a deadline, in this case, to

(43:37):
a looming debt limit expiration, is Denver Riggleman. Now we're
going to talk to Denver. I thought we were going
to be talking about a couple different things here, and
we are because Denver spent the week. Our former Republican
congressman from Virginia, who you know from this program, has
spent the week overseas, just as President Trump did Denver

(43:58):
now helps to run and has founded an AI company,
which is what brought him over there. We're going to
get into some of the investments and the important turn
toward innovation in the Middle East with Denver, who's joining
us right now live from Dubai. I've got to ask you, though, Denver,
I guess this is why partly you're not in Congress anymore.
What just happened in budget. These are members of the

(44:18):
Freedom Caucus who sank the bill that President Trump says
needs to pass. Is this thing dead? Can the Speaker
find a plan? B?

Speaker 9 (44:27):
It's not dead, but it's on life support. You know,
I know all of them, right, Joe, and you know.
I've known Chip, I know Ralph, I know Jody, I
know him very well, and you know Jody can sometimes
be pretty practical. But Ralph and Ship, once they dig in,
they're going to dig in. So I think what we're
looking at right now is you're going to ask for
concessions in order to get that out of committee.

Speaker 8 (44:46):
And I don't know if everybody's going to be willing
to do those concessions.

Speaker 9 (44:49):
So I think you're going to see a couple of
days of crazy up there on the Hill and with
Jody coming up and saying, oh, we're not coming back today. Yeah,
there's going to be a lot of discussions and screaming
and yelling tonight, you know, I know.

Speaker 8 (44:59):
So that's what's happening. And right now, like bred, that's what.

Speaker 2 (45:02):
Okay, the phone calls are going out too, right President
Trump is on air Force one with nothing to do
but talk.

Speaker 9 (45:11):
Yeah, I mean, who knows, you know what he's saying
right now? I mean, but I got a feeling that
the phones are lightened up all over DC.

Speaker 2 (45:20):
Incredible. Whether or not we see a floor vote next week,
I don't know if that's important with regard to timing
for this speaker Denver. But is is Donald Trump still
the facto speaker or does Mike Johnson have any levers
to pull?

Speaker 9 (45:34):
Mike Johnson has no lovers now, I absolutely none. It's
gonna be what Donald Trump says to do. And we've
known that since the beginning when Mike was elected speaker,
and as you know, I know Mike also. But I
think what you're seeing right now is Donald Trump tried
to push this train at this.

Speaker 8 (45:47):
Big, beautiful bill.

Speaker 9 (45:49):
But there are still certain realities that happen especially in
the Freedom Caucus and how districts vote. And you might say, well,
they have to be completely behind Donald Trump. They have
to completely do these type of things, but there are
still some things they just can't go against. And when
you're looking at this massive deficit push and what's happening
with our debt and deficit, what happens is they're looking

(46:09):
at a midterms that's a crash and burn. And I think, Joe,
that's what you're looking at. You're so worried about crash
and burn midterms and right now they're more worried about
winning their election and supporting Donald Trump.

Speaker 8 (46:19):
I'm telling you right now, that's what's going on.

Speaker 2 (46:22):
Amazing. It's not often I get to talk to you
when you're in Dubai and I want to hear about
your week. I want to I want you to help
us frame what we just saw on the president's journey.
Because you're there with the first hand experience. We should
let everyone know that not only does former Congressman Denver
Riggleman run a distillery in beautiful northern Virginia, well, I

(46:43):
guess central Virginia, but he also runs an important security firm,
the rig Security firm and now hoodle Ai, a health
tech and security firm that has made Denver Wriggleman one
of the only people I've ever met who knows what
it's like to buy a Blackwell chip. Speak to me,
Denver about the tens of billions of dollars that we
saw unlocked in the Middle East this week. What this

(47:06):
means for countries like the UAE, but also entrepreneurs like yourself.

Speaker 9 (47:11):
Well, you know, sometimes you have to separate, you know,
how you feel politically when you're doing business.

Speaker 8 (47:16):
But it's very difficult to here.

Speaker 9 (47:17):
And some of the things that we saw were disturbing
over here, the way that you know, Trump wanted to
make his interest in things like that. But I will
say this for us, this started over.

Speaker 8 (47:27):
A year ago.

Speaker 9 (47:27):
This was such a dynamic place to do business anyway,
well before Donald Trump came over here. But there is
an unlocking of technical and financial transfers going on. And
you know what Bloomberg reported this six days ago. You
guys did on siphius, right, the Committee for Foreign Investments
in the United States, and how they're going to have
dreamline those actual regulatory issues and what does that mean

(47:49):
for the UAE and for other places here in the
Middle East, like Saladi or Qatar. What that means is
that you're going to have much more, much quicker, more
efficient technology transfer outside of the SIFI. This type of
regulatory structure that you have to use, and that was
something that I did not know was going to happen.
I actually read it when you all reported it, and
I was on the Financial Services Committee, Joe, so I

(48:10):
actually know how sciphius works. So for me, the unlocking
of the potential here, I believe we already had American
companies coming here. I think that American companies, specifically by
the UA, have been invited to come in here and
do business. And what we've seen is incredible a reception,
courtesy and respect. As we're here with our AI company,
I've never seen anything like it, Joe, to be.

Speaker 2 (48:32):
Honest, Huh, that's incredible. So this is a new frontier
obviously for high tech. Is it an answer to our
decoupling with China?

Speaker 8 (48:42):
You know, I think a lot of people talked about
that here.

Speaker 9 (48:44):
You know, I don't like to there's so much pride
and respect that the immortis have when they're having discussions
with you, especially when they find out you're a former congressman.
They actually sometimes push away from politics because they don't
want to get that way of business. It is such
a respectful culture, and that's something that I've tried to
respect as we're going on here. But what you're looking at,

(49:04):
I think the UAE what I was told by somebody
very high up in one of the emirates.

Speaker 8 (49:09):
You know, I've been listened to you. I've been from.

Speaker 9 (49:11):
Abu Dhabi to Dubai, all the way up to rassof Kema.
I've met with the highest you know, some of the
highest I would say positions in some of these areas.
And what they're saying is like there, listen, hey, you know,
nobody's ever going to be the United States, but we
do believe that we can be the answer right for
technology and for growing other companies from the United States,

(49:33):
but really being that answer to other countries that might
be looked at as threat countries. But you have to
remember too, UAE does business everywhere. It's a dynamic, diverse,
accepting environment. As long as you follow the rules, right,
you have respect, right, you go forward in a way
that's very very legal. We've even had discussions with individuals
asking us about can our AI help with compliance. So

(49:54):
there's so much going on here. But again I think
the UAE looks at themselves and also I would say
Saudi and culture. As we're going forward here, I think
they look as the lynch pin in the global world
for a dynamic building of companies and tech services and
manufacturing and what we've seen here.

Speaker 8 (50:12):
I had some stories jobh me and you have a
Bourbon sometime. The stories here.

Speaker 9 (50:16):
About the growth of American companies is pretty extraordinary.

Speaker 2 (50:20):
Well, but this is extraordinary. We saw Jensen Wong there
with Donald Trump in the Middle East talking about selling
millions of chips in the UAE. When we consider the
diversion rule from the Biden administration that came in at
the last minute, it made this impossible for some of
the countries that you're visiting this week, Denver. Do we
look back at the Biden administration as a misstep on

(50:43):
the march to innovation and AI? Are they righting the wrong?

Speaker 9 (50:48):
It's actually a really great question, I think though, when
you're looking at China specifically. You know, also when I
was on the Financial Services Committee, I had to go
to South America and talk about the Belton Road initiatives
from China, which is really a bread to us economically,
and we can go on that. I was on the
China Task Force, so I would say that that Joe
Biden had a very difficult decision on how you protect
actually against Chinese practices and what we do with our

(51:10):
chip makers and our.

Speaker 8 (51:11):
Dominant technology, like with Navidia.

Speaker 9 (51:14):
I think what you're seeing now as we're seeing where
this change in the worldscape is, you're looking at security
structures that are being actually talked about over here right now.
And I think what you're seeing with the UAE, they're
actually pledging that they're going to have those security structures
in place right to guard against any type of I
would say, illegal IP transfer between China, right and US
companies that are coming over here.

Speaker 8 (51:33):
You know, last year when I was here, you know,
this is my second time.

Speaker 9 (51:36):
Last year, we were actually talking about Navidia chips and
working through attestations for the State Department to see if
we can do it, and it was really a no go.
So it's very interesting to me that Navidia now has
a play over here. But I do think there could
be some security serns. But looking at the UAE, they
have been trying to address that down the line, and
it's something I've been very blunt about. And again they're

(51:56):
very respectful when I talk about things, but you know, Joe,
I still got to be me right and I still
got to actually outline the things that I think.

Speaker 8 (52:03):
That's just the way I'm wired. But these are again
I do believe, and.

Speaker 9 (52:08):
I'm going to say this cautiously, I do believe that
you see a new security posture here in the UAE
that's saying, listen, you come here in American companies will
be protected, and that is some of the assurances we've
been getting over here.

Speaker 8 (52:21):
Now is that true, we'll see. But right now, from
what I've seen with.

Speaker 9 (52:24):
The UAE, with Dubai, with Abu Dhabi, all the way
up to the northern province of russ came up, I
think that we're having I think we're having a resurgence
and looking at security and them as being allies to
us in this region. But again it's trust would verify.
But they also think the same about us in some
ways too.

Speaker 8 (52:40):
So it's very interesting.

Speaker 2 (52:42):
Wow, this sounds like a fascinating trip for you, Denver.
You've got to come see us, and let's distill everything
that you experienced. I want to hear more about the
investments you secured and the rest of it when you
get back to town. So come see us here in Washington,
of course, and travel safe when you get home. The
former congressman from Virginia, Denver Riggleman, with his AI company,
his secure already firm, and life in politics, not to

(53:02):
mention his experience in the Air Force in the national
security space behind him really interesting and we'll have more
to discuss with Denver, maybe over that Bourbon Can we
do that here, may think maybe on the Friday edition
if producer Change lets us. Thanks for listening to the
Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you

(53:24):
haven't already, at 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.