Latest / Balance of Power / Weekly Washington Policy Pulse: Europe and Trump, Key Sectors to Watch

Transcript

Weekly Washington Policy Pulse: Europe and Trump, Key Sectors to Watch · Balance of Power

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts. Radio. News.
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: This is your weekly Washington Policy Pulse on the Balance
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: of Power podcast. I'm Joe Matthew. Every Monday, Bloomberg Intelligence
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: Senior Policy Analyst and friend of the show Nathan Dean
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: shares his weekly call on upcoming catalysts in the nation's capital.
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: Listen for the most recent and relevant policy research from
• 0:27
  Speaker 2: our team at Bloomberg Intelligence. Now with today's installment, here's
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: Nathan Dean.
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: Good morning and good afternoon, everybody. My name is Nathan Dean.
• 0:35
  Speaker 3: I'm a senior policy analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence here in
• 0:38
  Speaker 3: the Washington, D.C.
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Bureau.
• 0:39
  Speaker 3: I want to say thank you for joining us. Sorry,
• 0:41
  Speaker 3: I'm a little jet-lagged at the moment. I have had
• 0:43
  Speaker 3: my coffee. Thank you for joining us at the BI
• 0:46
  Speaker 3: Washington Policy Pulse. And also, thank you to those of
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: you who are coming in and listening to us via
• 0:52
  Speaker 3: the Balance of Power podcast.
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: We always appreciate your listening.
• 0:56
  Speaker 3: Today is October 19th at 10.02 a.m. The election is
• 1:01
  Speaker 3: almost two weeks away. And that's where I want to
• 1:03
  Speaker 3: start at the moment. I'm going to pull up WSL
• 1:06
  Speaker 3: Election Go. I'm going to share my screen in a second.
• 1:09
  Speaker 3: And we're going to show you what the latest are
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: in terms of. the prediction markets. So what we have
• 1:16
  Speaker 3: right here is we have all of the CalSheet data
• 1:20
  Speaker 3: that is coming in, and you can see that the
• 1:22
  Speaker 3: number really hasn't changed all that much. Will the Democrats
• 1:26
  Speaker 3: sweep both the House and the Senate at 62%? That
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: actually should tie up with what the Senate is seeing
• 1:31
  Speaker 3: at 62%.
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: The House is at 90%.
• 1:33
  Speaker 3: Now, we've seen this number high, this 62% number on
• 1:37
  Speaker 3: the Democratic side as high as 64%. We've seen it
• 1:39
  Speaker 3: as low as 61%. But we have not seen this
• 1:42
  Speaker 3: number tighten be after the U.S. Labor Day holiday. And
• 1:46
  Speaker 3: that's generally where a lot of folks, including myself, would
• 1:49
  Speaker 3: actually anticipate this number to tie up and get a
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: little bit better for the Republican Party. Now, if we
• 1:54
  Speaker 3: look at what's happening here in the Senate races, you
• 1:56
  Speaker 3: can see here in Alaska, former Representative Mary Palo Alto
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: has got a 74 percent chance. We can go down
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: to Georgia where Senator Ossoff is at a 95 percent chance.
• 2:07
  Speaker 3: But then some of the interesting races that are really
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: looking at it, and as a reminder, if the Democrats
• 2:11
  Speaker 3: are going to take the Senate, they have to net
• 2:12
  Speaker 3: four seats. It really comes down to Iowa, the Republicans leading, Kansas,
• 2:17
  Speaker 3: where the Republican is leading, Maine, where Susan Collins is
• 2:20
  Speaker 3: actually behind, and Michigan, where Abdulaziz Saeed is up at 69%.
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: Now, for the Democrats to have any chance, it's this
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: race right here.
• 2:28
  Speaker 3: Now, is Susan Collins at 40% compared to Troy Jackson
• 2:33
  Speaker 3: at 60%?
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: I think this is actually fairly tighter.
• 2:35
  Speaker 3: In fact, I spoke with a couple of individuals from
• 2:38
  Speaker 3: Maine over the weekend, and they think.
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: Back home, this is just anecdotal.
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: There's no scientific reasoning behind this, but they think anecdotally
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: this is actually closer to a 50-50. I know a
• 2:48
  Speaker 3: lot of folks are interested in what's going on in Texas.
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: Representative James Tallarico has a 62 percent chance. So if
• 2:54
  Speaker 3: you look at the prediction markets, it suggests that the
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: Democrats are going to have a decent shot of taking
• 2:58
  Speaker 3: the Senate. So what is President Trump going to do
• 3:01
  Speaker 3: in regards to that this week? Well, he's going to
• 3:04
  Speaker 3: go on the road. As a reminder, Congress doesn't come
• 3:06
  Speaker 3: back until after the election on November 9th. So President
• 3:09
  Speaker 3: Trump is going to go to Kansas today to actually
• 3:12
  Speaker 3: stump for Senator Marshall. And then he's going to go
• 3:15
  Speaker 3: to North Carolina on Tuesday, which is really interesting because
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: Democrats and Republicans have both pulled money out of the
• 3:21
  Speaker 3: North Carolina race, where former Governor Roy Cooper has a
• 3:24
  Speaker 3: tremendous lead in the Senate. And also I would just
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: note is that President Trump, before he gets on the
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: campaign trail, does have an executive order signing today at
• 3:33
  Speaker 3: 11 a.m. I don't know what that executive order is about.
• 3:37
  Speaker 3: Most likely than not, it's going to announce a study.
• 3:39
  Speaker 3: Or just as a reminder, most executive orders are symbolic
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: in nature. We aren't really seeing a lot of stuff
• 3:46
  Speaker 3: coming out from the White House.
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: One of the biggest.
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: Questions we got from Europe last week is that, is
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: President Trump, can he do anything to address affordability ahead
• 3:54
  Speaker 3: of the U.S.
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: Midterms?
• 3:56
  Speaker 3: And our response to that was, it's probably too late.
• 4:00
  Speaker 3: because we even saw an executive order just last week
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: in the energy sector essentially waiving limits for certain types
• 4:05
  Speaker 3: of diesel to be used on the road. Our energy
• 4:08
  Speaker 3: analysts looked at it, didn't really think it was all
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: that big of a deal. And regardless, what the price
• 4:12
  Speaker 3: of diesel is around $ 6. 50, sorry, $ 6.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: 50, even if.
• 4:18
  Speaker 3: You were to get a dollar decrease off of diesel,
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: let's just say President Trump can waive a metric one,
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: get that buck off, the American consumer is not going
• 4:25
  Speaker 3: to really feel it all that much. So, you know,
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: one of the things is I just got this question
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: this morning from a client. Do I think the Democrats
• 4:32
  Speaker 3: are going to take the House of Representatives?
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: Absolutely, yes.
• 4:35
  Speaker 3: Do I think the Democrats are going to take the Senate?
• 4:37
  Speaker 3: It's probably closer to a 50-50 than it is at
• 4:38
  Speaker 3: the 60% that the calcium market has. And then that
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: begs the question from the client was, well, if the
• 4:45
  Speaker 3: Democrats do take the House, are they going to impeach
• 4:47
  Speaker 3: the president? It should be noted that not this past Sunday,
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: but a couple Sundays ago, the would-be Speaker of the House,
• 4:53
  Speaker 3: Hakeem Jeffries, had a call with Representatives Raskin and Garcia.
• 4:57
  Speaker 3: They are the ranking members of the House Judiciary and
• 4:59
  Speaker 3: Oversight Committees. And I'm paraphrasing here. The idea is, are
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: they going to impeach the president? They came up with
• 5:04
  Speaker 3: the answer, no. They came up with the answer of,
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: we'd rather go after cabinet officials. I'm thinking the Secretary
• 5:08
  Speaker 3: of Defense, Pete Hegseth, is probably somebody that they're looking at,
• 5:12
  Speaker 3: and they're also looking at this idea of corporate corruption.
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: So the next thing I want to share is I'm
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: going to share.
• 5:17
  Speaker 3: My screen again, and I'm going to bring you just
• 5:19
  Speaker 3: our presentation that we used in Europe. And I apologize
• 5:24
  Speaker 3: that I don't know how to get the screen viewer
• 5:28
  Speaker 3: to actually operate with Zoom off the top of my head,
• 5:31
  Speaker 3: so I'm not even going to try. But this is
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: a presentation that we gave last week in London, Zurich,
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: and Milan, and just want to give you a couple
• 5:38
  Speaker 3: of highlights. So on the congressional side, we just talked
• 5:41
  Speaker 3: about Democrats. There was a significant number of questions coming
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: about the government funding shutdown versus a debt ceiling. And
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: strangely enough, a lot of the questions that we got
• 5:51
  Speaker 3: were actually more geared towards the government shutdown as opposed
• 5:56
  Speaker 3: to the debt ceiling. Now, the government shutdown, obviously, if
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: you don't appropriate the money for the U.S. government, the
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: government shuts down or you have what's called a partial
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: shutdown where only certain aspects of the government shuts down.
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: From an equity perspective, it's not that big of a deal.
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: What our message to clients was is that it's the
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: debt ceiling that is a big deal. And that's a
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: great segue for me to tell you about a plan
• 6:20
  Speaker 3: that the Republicans are putting together for the lame duck period.
• 6:23
  Speaker 3: The idea here is that the Republicans pass a reconciliation bill.
• 6:27
  Speaker 3: So let's just presume that the Democrats take the House
• 6:30
  Speaker 3: on November 3rd. The Democrats take the House. When they
• 6:35
  Speaker 3: come back on November 9th, the Republicans immediately get into
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: a reconciliation bill. Now, as a reminder, reconciliation bills are
• 6:41
  Speaker 3: ways that you can avoid the filibuster. So this is
• 6:43
  Speaker 3: how the one big, beautiful bill passed. President Trump's tax cuts,
• 6:46
  Speaker 3: the Inflation Reduction Act, Obamacare, it was all via reconciliation.
• 6:50
  Speaker 3: So the Republicans would come back here and they would say, OK,
• 6:53
  Speaker 3: we've lost the House. So what are we going to do?
• 6:55
  Speaker 3: We are now going to go into session and we're
• 6:58
  Speaker 3: going to try and get a bill done to protect
• 7:01
  Speaker 3: President Trump from this debt ceiling drama. Our chief rates
• 7:04
  Speaker 3: strategist thinks that the X date for this will be
• 7:06
  Speaker 3: July through September of next year. But we need to
• 7:09
  Speaker 3: protect President Trump because the last thing President Trump needs
• 7:12
  Speaker 3: is a debt ceiling drama in the last two years
• 7:15
  Speaker 3: of his presidency. So you will have a reconciliation bill
• 7:18
  Speaker 3: that will extend the debt limit by, I think it's
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: about $ 4 to $ 6 trillion. You would have about $ 75
• 7:23
  Speaker 3: billion worth of defense aid for the conflict in Iran.
• 7:26
  Speaker 3: And you have about $ 20 billion worth of farm aid.
• 7:28
  Speaker 3: All that being said, I'm at a 30% chance that
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: this bill would pass. I've seen statements from Senator Lummis
• 7:33
  Speaker 3: and Senator Tillis, who are both retiring on the Republican side,
• 7:37
  Speaker 3: saying that they're not going to vote for any bill
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: to increase the debt ceiling. And as I've said on
• 7:40
  Speaker 3: this call before, lame ducks are lame, and there's usually
• 7:43
  Speaker 3: high expectations for lame ducks, but in reality, not that
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: much actually gets done. I mean, it's kind of bad
• 7:50
  Speaker 3: to be an individual who's lost your seat. I mean—
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: One of the things is that they kick you out
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: of your office almost instantly. I mean, they kick you
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: out of your office. Your staffers have to work out
• 7:59
  Speaker 3: of temp housing. And you come back. You've lost your seat.
• 8:03
  Speaker 3: You're no longer in a job. You don't want to
• 8:05
  Speaker 3: be here. You want to go home. And so that's
• 8:07
  Speaker 3: usually what happens in a lame duck period. We talked
• 8:09
  Speaker 3: on the Senate side, nothing really there. But this was
• 8:13
  Speaker 3: one of the big questions we got was from Europe was,
• 8:15
  Speaker 3: is President Trump a lame duck? And the thing here is,
• 8:17
  Speaker 3: is that I have four different ways over here on
• 8:20
  Speaker 3: the left-hand side for you to be able to see
• 8:22
  Speaker 3: how President Trump implements policy. And our message to clients
• 8:25
  Speaker 3: was two things. One, when it looks at the first two,
• 8:28
  Speaker 3: the executive orders and the bully pulpits, President Trump still
• 8:32
  Speaker 3: has a significant amount of power when it comes to
• 8:34
  Speaker 3: geopolitics and also to tariffs. And those are the two
• 8:37
  Speaker 3: things that President Trump is going to rely upon in
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: the second half of his presidency, in his second term,
• 8:43
  Speaker 3: when the folks on Capitol Hill begin to say, look,
• 8:46
  Speaker 3: I'm not interested in working with you. I'm not going
• 8:48
  Speaker 3: to stick my neck out if you're not going to be.
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: Here in two years.
• 8:51
  Speaker 3: And we are already beginning to see signs that the
• 8:53
  Speaker 3: Republican Party are beginning to a little bit of a
• 8:56
  Speaker 3: of fractions out there. I mean, it goes a little
• 8:58
  Speaker 3: bit beyond President Trump's, them saying to the president, Mr. President,
• 9:03
  Speaker 3: we don't want you to campaign for us right now.
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: But President Trump just last week signed a waiver that
• 9:10
  Speaker 3: would essentially allow him to avoid putting tariffs on Russia
• 9:13
  Speaker 3: related to the Ukraine conflict, which is what Congress passed.
• 9:18
  Speaker 3: We know we've talked about this Russia sanctions bill before.
• 9:21
  Speaker 3: President Trump put out a waiver and we saw statements
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: from like Senator Wicker, you know, very conservative Republicans saying
• 9:26
  Speaker 3: that this is not the right thing to do. And
• 9:29
  Speaker 3: there may be there's going to be legislation that actually
• 9:32
  Speaker 3: forces President Trump to actually put those waivers or to
• 9:35
  Speaker 3: get rid of that waiver now. that legislation is not
• 9:38
  Speaker 3: going to pass. But again, when you see Republicans pushing
• 9:41
  Speaker 3: against the presidency here, there's a little bit more to
• 9:44
  Speaker 3: it that could pop up over the next two years,
• 9:46
  Speaker 3: especially as those Republicans begin to think about what their
• 9:49
  Speaker 3: chances are in 2028 are. So President Trump's going to
• 9:52
  Speaker 3: rely more on geopolitics. He's going to rely more on tariffs.
• 9:55
  Speaker 3: And that was one of our biggest messages is that
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: 2027 is going to be the year of tariffs. Just
• 10:00
  Speaker 3: because President Trump has a lot of different tools that
• 10:04
  Speaker 3: he can use in terms of Section 301, Section 232,
• 10:06
  Speaker 3: Section 338. He doesn't have to go back to IEPA,
• 10:09
  Speaker 3: so we are going to see a lot of tariffs.
• 10:12
  Speaker 3: On the third thing here on regulation, so one of
• 10:15
  Speaker 3: the things is that In our discussions with clients, there
• 10:19
  Speaker 3: wasn't a great, I'm trying to, how should I phrase this?
• 10:24
  Speaker 3: This was a little bit of a surprise to them
• 10:25
  Speaker 3: when I said that deregulation is going to really kick
• 10:28
  Speaker 3: off the first half of next year.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: And there was some excitement. If you were exposed to U.S.
• 10:33
  Speaker 3: Financial services, or if you're exposed to crypto, or if
• 10:35
  Speaker 3: you're exposed to the TMT sector, there was a little
• 10:38
  Speaker 3: bit of excitement because deregulation is something that's been at
• 10:41
  Speaker 3: the more of a second or third term tier priority
• 10:46
  Speaker 3: for the White House.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: All the news cycle looks to focus on geopolitics.
• 10:50
  Speaker 3: But deregulation, there's some interesting work that's going on over there,
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: especially in those sectors that clients were certainly interested in.
• 10:58
  Speaker 3: And then we just have our six sectors to watch,
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: and then I'll let everybody get back to their day job.
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: The six sectors that we're looking at in terms of
• 11:05
  Speaker 3: post-midterm elections was energy, Because it's driven by geopolitics, you
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: are going to see President Trump to continue to try
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: and bring down the price of oil and the price
• 11:15
  Speaker 3: of diesel in the United States. There's not a ton
• 11:17
  Speaker 3: that he can do. He's certainly going to keep trying.
• 11:20
  Speaker 3: But you are going to see some of the bully
• 11:22
  Speaker 3: pulpit aspect of the White House, specifically calling out energy
• 11:25
  Speaker 3: companies to try and do more in Venezuela. But again,
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: it's a product of supply. There's not enough refineries. If
• 11:30
  Speaker 3: you were to get all the oil from Venezuela and
• 11:33
  Speaker 3: bring it to the United States, there's still going to
• 11:35
  Speaker 3: be supply issues. I mean, it's unfortunate for President Trump,
• 11:37
  Speaker 3: but it's really tied to Ukraine and the Iranian conflict here. Now,
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: over at AI and data centers, you may have heard
• 11:44
  Speaker 3: this story before, but again, until January 20th, 2029, at
• 11:48
  Speaker 3: 12.01 p.m., AI at a federal level is all President Trump.
• 11:53
  Speaker 3: In fact, last week I wrote a column, or the
• 11:55
  Speaker 3: week before I wrote a column for Bloomberg News, And
• 11:58
  Speaker 3: I said, artificial intelligence from an investment standpoint, from a
• 12:01
  Speaker 3: policy standpoint, is pretty easy.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: It's just one guy. It's all you got to pay
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: attention to. And so there is.
• 12:07
  Speaker 3: Legislation going around right now that would potentially, Anthropic is
• 12:12
  Speaker 3: putting forth a bill. And we'll see this debate play
• 12:15
  Speaker 3: out a little bit in Lame Duck. But the reason
• 12:16
  Speaker 3: why I'm not talking about it more is that this
• 12:18
  Speaker 3: is going to really come up in 2027. But this
• 12:21
  Speaker 3: idea would be essentially to allow the industry to sort
• 12:24
  Speaker 3: of police itself and.
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: Sort of modeled over a California bill.
• 12:29
  Speaker 3: So, you know, Anthropic is certainly trying to get both
• 12:32
  Speaker 3: sides of the aisle to support this.
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: But again, this is going to come up in 2027.
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: It's not going to come up in 2028. So the
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: consumer auto side exposed more tariffs. Tariffs, tariffs, tariffs.
• 12:44
  Speaker 3: You're going to have both tariff threats, and you're also
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: going to have tariff implementation. And as a reminder, and
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: this is one of the things we told our clients
• 12:51
  Speaker 3: over in Europe, was that even though Americans don't like
• 12:54
  Speaker 3: tariffs from the standpoint that they recognize tariffs are a
• 12:57
  Speaker 3: tax increase and that prices rise as a result, I mean,
• 12:59
  Speaker 3: I'm generally saying this, but also tariffs are sticky. Once
• 13:04
  Speaker 3: you put a tariff in play, once you put the
• 13:07
  Speaker 3: tariff on, it's sort of difficult to take those tariffs off.
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: And so just something that we'll have to keep in
• 13:13
  Speaker 3: mind going forward is that any new tariff that comes
• 13:16
  Speaker 3: up in 2027, depending on the tariff, it may stick
• 13:19
  Speaker 3: around even if the Democrats win. Defense funding was an
• 13:22
  Speaker 3: interesting concept. We had several great discussions with defense contractors
• 13:26
  Speaker 3: last week. For all the talk about gridlock on capital L,
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: this is the one exception because appropriations still has to
• 13:34
  Speaker 3: go to the government and appropriations still has to go
• 13:36
  Speaker 3: out there and actually reach to the defense contractors. And
• 13:40
  Speaker 3: just to give you our 10, 15-minute view in 30 seconds,
• 13:43
  Speaker 3: the way I would describe this is that Democrats are
• 13:47
  Speaker 3: not going to change the funding levels all that much
• 13:49
  Speaker 3: compared to the Republicans.
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: Yes, you are not going to get a $ 1. 5 trillion
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: budget request.
• 13:54
  Speaker 3: You're not going to get $ 350 billion in reconciliation like
• 13:56
  Speaker 3: the White House wants. But Democrats or Republicans largely, and again,
• 14:00
  Speaker 3: this is high-level generalization here, largely agree on what the
• 14:03
  Speaker 3: overall numbers are. It's just that the Democrats usually make
• 14:06
  Speaker 3: the Department of Defense go through and put its homework
• 14:09
  Speaker 3: forth to justify which programs in which anti-missile and counter-drone
• 14:14
  Speaker 3: technologies this would go towards. But from an investment point
• 14:17
  Speaker 3: of view, and if you ever need to talk to
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: Will Lee or Wayne Sanders about this, it gives us
• 14:23
  Speaker 3: additional headways to identify which programs it's going to go.
• 14:27
  Speaker 3: So it actually gives you more clarity from the investment
• 14:29
  Speaker 3: point of view, which contractors are going to.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: Go for it.
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: And then finally, the last two things, financial services. This
• 14:36
  Speaker 3: is talking about the deregulation and the crypto and the
• 14:38
  Speaker 3: prediction markets. Senator Cruz actually just announced this morning that
• 14:42
  Speaker 3: he is going to put out a bill on prediction
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: markets to essentially really distinguish what it is between gambling
• 14:48
  Speaker 3: and prediction markets. Senator Cruz comes from the camp that
• 14:51
  Speaker 3: he views most of the prediction markets as gambling, so
• 14:54
  Speaker 3: he would be more in the pro-gambling side. The thought here,
• 15:01
  Speaker 3: I'm trying to think of how to phrase this. I
• 15:04
  Speaker 3: had a great question come in from a client this
• 15:06
  Speaker 3: morning from Europe. And it was, how should I think
• 15:08
  Speaker 3: about prediction markets in 2027? And the way I phrased
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: it was that you have different pockets of support and opposition.
• 15:16
  Speaker 3: And each one of those pockets has their own little justification.
• 15:21
  Speaker 3: For example, you have a very pro-gambling pocket coming out
• 15:24
  Speaker 3: of Texas.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: Why?
• 15:25
  Speaker 3: Because the casinos are trying to really do some work
• 15:28
  Speaker 3: in Dallas to add some more casinos to the city
• 15:30
  Speaker 3: of Dallas. You have the pro-gambling contingent out of Nevada.
• 15:34
  Speaker 3: You have the anti-gambling contingent of or the anti-prediction markets
• 15:39
  Speaker 3: contingent coming out of Utah. The Utah delegation is very
• 15:42
  Speaker 3: much anti-prediction markets. You have consumer protection advocates in the
• 15:47
  Speaker 3: progressive side of the Democratic Party on prediction markets. And
• 15:51
  Speaker 3: so you have all these random pockets on prediction markets.
• 15:54
  Speaker 3: And that suggests that you're not going to get any
• 15:56
  Speaker 3: legislation through, or at least any type of serious legislation.
• 15:58
  Speaker 3: We'll see what happens next year. But the thing I
• 16:02
  Speaker 3: would just say is that we really don't know what's
• 16:05
  Speaker 3: going to happen because of the election. There was a
• 16:07
  Speaker 3: report that came out of Politico over the weekend that
• 16:11
  Speaker 3: Representative French Hill, who is the chairman of the House
• 16:13
  Speaker 3: Financial Services Committee from Arkansas.
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: A very safe seat, but that report suggests that his
• 16:19
  Speaker 3: seat could be under threat. I mean, if you see
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: the Democrats come in and you see individuals like French
• 16:24
  Speaker 3: Hill losing their seat, everything that I just told you
• 16:27
  Speaker 3: in terms of congressional plans for 2027 is going to
• 16:31
  Speaker 3: be flipped on its head.
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: Uh.
• 16:33
  Speaker 3: just because you love your leadership you'll have new mandates
• 16:35
  Speaker 3: you'll have et cetera new ideas et cetera so again uh.
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: i wouldn't say that they keep this in the.
• 16:41
  Speaker 3: In the back of your pocket and finally farming infrastructure
• 16:45
  Speaker 3: thing to notice far made its trade not aid uh...
• 16:48
  Speaker 3: this reconciliation bill that i was talking about has about
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: twenty billion dollars with far made in there i don't
• 16:53
  Speaker 3: think it's gonna pass it's gonna have to come back
• 16:54
  Speaker 3: next year uh... but then the question is where's this
• 16:57
  Speaker 3: for me to get a really go most of it
• 16:59
  Speaker 3: goes to serve fertilizer and putting down debt But, you know,
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: I was just had a call this morning with our
• 17:05
  Speaker 3: machines analyst or the guy who covers John Deere. You know,
• 17:08
  Speaker 3: he's really interested in this because, look, you know, if
• 17:10
  Speaker 3: you get some money out to those farmers, they're going
• 17:12
  Speaker 3: to buy equipment. But right now it looks like that
• 17:15
  Speaker 3: that's going to be a victim to politics and ultimately
• 17:18
  Speaker 3: is going to have to be decided next year.
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: So. I'll say thank you for sticking with me. I
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: really appreciate it.
• 17:24
  Speaker 3: Next week, we are going to get a little bit
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: more granular into certain races on the election side. I'm
• 17:31
  Speaker 3: going to try and bring in one of our speakers,
• 17:33
  Speaker 3: our election experts, to really come in and talk about
• 17:36
  Speaker 3: which races. Ideally, the question is, When you go to
• 17:39
  Speaker 3: bed on election night, I'll probably be up for most
• 17:43
  Speaker 3: of the night, but when you go to bed on
• 17:44
  Speaker 3: election night, what are the races that you should be
• 17:47
  Speaker 3: looking for on the East Coast timeframe to determine whether
• 17:50
  Speaker 3: or not the House is going to flip or whether
• 17:52
  Speaker 3: or not the Senate is going to flip? So that's
• 17:54
  Speaker 3: going to be our plan for next week. I want
• 17:55
  Speaker 3: to say thank you very much for attending. We really
• 17:57
  Speaker 3: appreciate it. Please don't hesitate to reach out and have
• 17:59
  Speaker 3: a wonderful week.
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: Our thanks to Nathan Dean, Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Policy Analyst,
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: bringing you the latest installment of his weekly Washington Policy Pulse.
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: For more from BI or to join this call live
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: each week, you can email Nathan at ndean at Bloomberg.net.
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: That's N-D-E-A-N at Bloomberg.net. Come back to the podcast later
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: today for the latest edition of Balance of Power.