Trump Says He’ll Meet Putin Again to Discuss War in Ukraine | Balance of Power
Summary
Government Shutdown: The podcast discusses the ongoing government shutdown, now in its 16th day, with no immediate resolution in sight. Key issues include the potential extension of Obamacare subsidies and the impact on federal employees' paychecks.
Political Negotiations: Senate Majority Leader John Thun has offered a potential vote on Obamacare subsidies, but Democrats demand a guaranteed outcome. This reflects the ongoing political standoff between Republicans and Democrats.
Military and Federal Funding: The Trump administration has found $8 billion to cover military paychecks temporarily, highlighting the administration's efforts to mitigate the shutdown's impact on essential services.
International Relations: Former President Trump has engaged in a lengthy phone call with President Putin, discussing the war in Ukraine and potential future meetings to address the conflict, indicating ongoing diplomatic efforts.
European Investment Bank (EIB): The EIB is actively involved in financing projects to enhance Europe's defense capabilities, including drone manufacturing and infrastructure, as part of a broader EU strategy to counter Russian aggression.
Ukraine Reconstruction: The EIB is also focused on supporting Ukraine's infrastructure and daily life amidst the conflict, with plans for significant post-war reconstruction efforts.
Market Impact: The podcast notes the potential market implications of the prolonged government shutdown and international diplomatic developments, emphasizing the intersection of policy and market dynamics.
Transcript
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p.m. Eastern >> on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube. >> Live in Washington as always on Bloomberg TV and radio. and good to have you along as we consider now day 16 of a government shutdown that does not show signs of stopping. And of course, that's been the headline since this all started. But, God forbid there be a glimmer of hope. It does seem like we could have fast forwarded to this moment as the Senate Majority Leader goes on, of all networks, MSNBC, to make a guarantee that Democrats will get a vote on Obamacare subsidies. We had spoken repeatedly with Democratic lawmakers to see if that promise of an up or down vote would be enough to get them to sign on to a continuing resolution that would reopen the government. Some said yes, maybe depends what form. What are we hearing? And of course, John Thun says, "Well, that has been the offer at least quietly all along." He said it out loud this morning on MSNBC. Listen, >> I've told him I said and I said, "We are willing to have a conversation." I've said, "If you need a vote, we can we can guarantee you get a vote by a date certain." Um, at some point Democrats have to take yes for an answer, but I'm I agree totally. We are all about getting health insurance down, making it affordable to more people. >> So, I hear you saying about the program that needs reforms. It sounds like you're guaranteeing that there will be a negotiation on this. >> Well, what I'm saying is there is a there's a path forward, I believe. >> Yes. >> But it has to but it has to include it has to include reforms and um you know, can I guarantee an outcome? No. >> Cannot guarantee an outcome. but can apparently guarantee a vote. Does this start to grease the skids, turn the gears? Maybe not. But we do check in with Jack Fitzpatrick. He's talking to lawmakers firsthand and brings us the latest now from Capitol Hill. Bloomberg Government Congress reporter. Jack, I know you've probably heard this before, but for some folks, it's new and it might be reassuring to Democrats. Does John Thoon's posture help the standoff? >> Well, that's the right question. And it's a matter of John Thoon's posture and the specific wording he's using. We had not heard from the majority leader out loud on TV saying yes, he he can guarantee a vote in the future. That is not enough for a lot of Democrats. It doesn't meet the standards set by Hakee Jeff even. Uh generally it doesn't sound like that's enough to move us towards an end to the shutdown. But it does represent a bit of a change at least in rhetoric, at least in what Republicans feel they need to make sure they're saying clearly. It it looks like there's a big gap still between what Republicans want and what Democrats are trying to get out of them. Uh but if you're looking for some tea leaves, if you're looking for a little bit of movement to see if I if one side has the momentum over the other, it certainly is notable to see the Republican majority leader say he's comfortable saying there absolutely could be a vote on this policy demand that Democrats are making even though he wants it to be separate from a vote to end the shutdown. Got it. And in the meantime, we're going to do daily voting on the Republican CR. Jack, I presume that's been the strategy essentially each day uh working day that John Thun has had the membership here. And I ask you that knowing that the president has covered a number of paychecks for active duty military, for federal law enforcement, and they've also helped to reinforce funding for the Wick program, causing a lot of people to say, "Hey, then there's clearly no inflection point that's going to get everyone to the table, and we could have a record setter here." But the president has only covered one pay cycle for military paychecks. Do you know for starters that that money will be delivered and is there a plan for what happens in 2 weeks? >> The wording from the White House in the immediate term is so clear that regardless of whatever legal uh questions about it, it does seem that this pay paycheck is being covered. But you're very right to ask about the next paycheck because both sides have been digging in in preparation for a long shutdown and two weeks from now it may not be over. and the announcements from the White House and what we've seen from the Trump administration broadly on making sure troops are being paid uh does not necessarily cover that. So there may be a whole new round of logistical and legal questions about how they can move money around. I I'm not sure there's going to be somebody filing a lawsuit saying don't pay the troops. I'm not sure this is going to go to the courts. So there there are layer upon layer of abstraction here that makes it difficult to predict. But you're right that this shutdown could go for another two weeks. And that raises the question of troop pay all over again. >> Yeah. Now, do you say two weeks because of open enrollment on the 1st of November? Is that the next sort of stop on the calendar that might force a conversation? >> The fact that it aligns roughly with another round of questions about troop pay is kind of convenient or inconvenient depending on your perspective. But yes, Democrats are really focused on November 1st and the leadup to November 1st. Open enrollment uh is November 1st. The expectation of letters from health insurance companies that could warn of increased premiums next year is another political uh pressure point. So as we at least get closer to November 1st, that really is the key to the Democratic strategy. And when you hear members talk this much about November 1st, it it is clear they are preparing for a a shutdown that could go in excess of a month. >> Yeah, it sure sounds like it. Batten down the hatches was the word from Russ Vote. So, you know, give us a taste of the culture. Jack, you're up there. What's going on? Are lawmakers hanging around their offices? Are they all at bull feathers drinking beers? Like, what do you what do you do? It's weeks on end of a shutdown with with no off-ramp in sight. >> You know, it's very different in the House and Senate. Obviously, in the Senate, they're voting over and over again. It's Groundhog Day. They do have to make it to votes. They have to make it through scrums of reporters who are asking if there's any change in their position. It is quite repetitive because this is 10 votes now that are failed on the Republican CR. I think we're at seven that failed on the Democratic uh measure. It's very repetitive. Not a lot of progress. And then in the House, you have Democrats making a point to be here saying we're ready to work, but very very quiet, almost eerily quiet in in the House. Overall, compared to past shutdowns, this is a strangely repetitive but quiet one in which there really are not significant negotiations and backroom uh horse trading going on. Does Speaker Johnson keep everybody out then till further notice? Will they be back next week? >> He seems determined to keep them out until the shutdown is over. That's what he said over and over again. Clearly, Democrats think that is a pressure point when you see the focus on Representative Elect Adelita Graalva who has still not been sworn in. the accusations that Johnson is doing this to hold up uh progress on the measure to require the release of Jeffrey Epstein documents. I it it may get more and more uncomfortable for him to maintain that position as time goes on, but he has not wavered. He has said there's no negotiating, no work to be done unless the shutdown ends. Uh and I don't see any signs of him changing his mind at this point. >> There you have it from Jack Fitzpatrick. Take it to the bank for now. I have a feeling we're going to be talking to Jack a little more uh before they have this settled. He's a Bloomberg government congressional reporter and has been kneedeep in this conversation for more than 16 days. It's 16 days of the shutdown now, but we've been talking about this going back weeks before it happened. When the votes take place, we'll of course let you know. The other major story that we're following today brings us to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Donald Trump on Truth Social. Just before we came to air, this is now almost 2 hours ago. I am speaking to President Putin now, he wrote. We did give a headline a bit earlier that they were expected to speak today. The conversation, he says, is ongoing, a lengthy one, and I will report the contents as will President Putin at its conclusion. Thank you for your attention to this matter. This call could still be underway. It may have ended, and we haven't seen another post yet. We don't know. But of course, there was a a question about Tomahawks along with other defensive weaponry that came from President Zalinski. He's going to be meeting with President Trump tomorrow. This 48 hour period could be critical in determining the next phase of the war in Ukraine and it's coming against the backdrop of course of calls for additional defense investments across the continent. Which is why it's a pleasure to be able to spend some time with Nadia Calvino, the president of the European Investment Bank, which I want you to think of as the financial arm, if you will, of the European Union. President, it's great to have you with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. Thank you for being here. Welcome to Washington on this IMF week. I hope your meetings have been going well. >> Yes, they they're going really well. Very interesting. It's always a pleasure to be back here in Bloomberg. >> Well, I appreciate that very much here. According to our reporting, the European Union is laying out a five-year plan when we consider investment across the continent to help rearm and restrain Russia. To what extent is the EIB involved in that broad investment that will clearly take years to realize? Indeed, the European Investment Bank as the financing arm of the of the Eur of the European Union has a has an important role to play in stepping up Europe's capabilities in the area of security and defense. There are many different needs and we're very well placed to to uh finance some key large infrastructures, critical infrastructures, military facilities, also research, uh production capacity, for example, drone manufacturing >> uh and also support, financial support to small and medium-sized companies in the supply chain of large European contractors. It is unfortunate. I I think that we are leaving this situation, but Europe has a very clear vision of where to go and the European Investment Bank is is helping get there. >> Yeah, it's interesting that we're seeing a lot of these uh smaller defense companies in some cases startups that are reinventing the way that we look at this and in some cases challenging the old line big defense contractors when it comes to to different contracts. You mentioned uh drones, which is something that is a big deal here in the conversation about defense technology, that the EIB is ready to invest millions of euros in Europe's drone defenses. How would that be doled out and how are you looking at that as a continent as opposed to a collection of countries? Well, right now we have a very robust pipeline of more than 30 flagship projects in the different areas I mentioned, but we're following very attentively the upcoming meeting of leaders of prime ministers and presidents that will take place next week, the European Council meeting >> to see what is their vision precisely when it comes to reinforcing the eastern uh border of the EU also drone manufacturing and and protection against enemy drones etc. And we will be ready to help and support uh in those areas where we have uh most value added. >> I can tell you that the president's phone call with Vladimir Putin has just ended. >> Okay, >> President, I just want to take a look at what he's writing here. He says, "We've just concluded the telephone call uh and it was a very productive one," says Donald Trump. President Putin congratulated me and the United States on the great accomplishment of peace in the Middle East, something that he said had been dreamed of for centuries. Uh he goes on to try to connect the Middle East to the war in Ukraine. Here uh even mentions the first lady says they spent a lot of time talking about trade between Russia and the US when the war with Ukraine is over and said that at the conclusion of the call we agreed that there will be a meeting of our high level advisers next week. The United States initial meetings will be led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio together with various other people to be designated a meeting location to be determined. And then he says he and Putin will meet in an agreed upon location, Budapest, Hungary, to see if we can bring this inglorious war to an end. He refers to the Zalinski meeting tomorrow in which he will discuss his conversation with President Putin. So, we have another meeting. Does this kind of talk sound productive to you or more of the same? >> Oh, well, I think it's very good to call this an anorious war. This is Putin's war, a war of aggression, a war of choice. From the European Union's perspective, we we want this war to finish as soon as possible. >> So, whatever, you know, can get us to a fair and stable peace, of course, it has to be fair and stable if we want it to be permanent, should be welcomed. Of course, >> when we consider the need for energy and the war over Russian oil, which I think is its own story alto together, would the EIB help cover Ukrainian purchases of US LNG if that helped >> to end the war sooner? >> We are we are actually we have just signed a 300 million deal with with Ukraine. I was I had a meeting with the prime minister yesterday >> and we we're looking into options to step it up even so that they can replenish their gas reserves for the winter. >> We are also supporting Ukraine when it comes to rebuilding critical infrastructures including transport and energy. And we are supporting Ukraine when it comes to rebuilding the daily supporting the daily lives of Ukrainians so that they can need live lives that are as normal as possible. You know in this totally extraordinary and terrible circumstance rebuilding hospitals, schools, kindergartens, protecting the infrastructure so that children can go to school. >> I think this is essential if we want to protect a strong basis for the recovery once the war is over. There's so much that we can talk about uh that is depressing. The idea of rebuilding is uh is the definition of optimism. And I'd love to hear how how far you allow yourself to not only think about it, but to plan for it because obviously this is a war that could end soon >> and an an enormous amount of work will be done and money required from governments and private industry. How far have you planned this out? I I am I am very grateful for your question and I'm going to also smile, you know, when I say absolutely I I actually think I am very confident that Ukraine will bounce back very strongly once the war is over >> because I have seen the determination, the resilience, the commitment of Ukrainians. I've also seen the very strong infrastructures of the country and we have been supporting them for more than two years to make sure that the that the country has a strong basis on which to build this reconstruction and also to pave the way for a successful accession to the European Union. So I am I am confident you know we just need Putin to stop the war and then we can move on to a new phase which can be more constructive. >> Is rebuilding Ukraine years or decades? >> I I tend to think it's years. Mhm. >> Actually, because we are talking about a country that continues to live a a quite normal life, you know, in in these circumstances, the government has managed to keep a a financial management which responds to a normal budget, to a normal administration, uh despite of course the the immense needs that are related to the war. And so I think that the sooner we can move to the next phase, the better. >> Mhm. That is uh obviously a best case scenario I guess at this point when it comes to European commitments like the one that we mentioned uh for buying US LNG. Do you want to see a matching commitment from the United States or do you think the administration has done what it can at least financially speaking? >> Well, right now I think we all have to focus in supporting Ukraine. Uh and obviously military support is of the essence. uh European countries are clearly stepping up their support not only to protect ourselves to protect the European Union but also to support Ukraine. Uh countries are taking quite uh quite a novel quite innovative uh measures to to provide this support and I think this is the essential thing so that we can see an end to the war and then we will have to see how everybody contributes to supporting the recovery of the country. >> Fascinating to spend some time with you President Calino. Thank you so much for being with us today in Washington here on Bloomberg. I hope the rest of your IMF week is productive. >> Thank you. >> Stay in touch with us and come see us again because this is a story that's very important to us and one that's not likely going away anytime soon. President Trump's call with Vladimir Putin has just ended. We'll have much more on this ahead, remembering that at this time tomorrow. We'll be talking about his meeting in the Oval Office with President Zilinski. Stay with us on Balance of Power. We'll have much more coming up after this. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p.m. Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube. >> The phone call has ended. If you're just joining us, Donald Trump spent some time today with Vladimir Putin talking about the war in Ukraine. It wasn't in person this time. They were on the phone and it appears at least based on the truth social posts that that call was approaching 2 hours in length. The president back on social media to announce the conclusion uh of the phone call. And there is some news here. It does not involve tomahawks or even a potential end of the war. But another round of meetings. Highlevel adviserss he says will meet next week. Location and attendance other than the secretary of state to be determined. But he says, "President Putin and I will then meet in an agreed upon location, Budapest, Hungary, to see if we can bring this inglorious war between Russia and Ukraine to an end, remembering, of course, that he meets with Vladimir Zalinski tomorrow in the Oval Office." And the president refers to that, saying he will discuss his conversation with Putin and much more. I believe great progress was made with today's telephone conversation. Helping us quantify that progress, if it's possible, is Lauren Dazinski, Bloomberg's White House correspondent on the case today. and with us here in our Washington bureau. Lauren, it's great to see you. Um, this meeting tomorrow was already high stakes. If you're President Zalinski, reading this probably doesn't give you a lot of hope that tomahawks are on the way. >> Yeah, considering that this is the war that Trump wants to resolve. Perhaps maybe there could be an opening for Zilinsky to push. Um, Trump has really talked about how this inglorious war, as he put it today, is the last remaining one that he really wants to solve. And so maybe something will be different. Maybe conditions have changed. That was one of the big questions. Caroline Levit, the White House press secretary, was on Fox News right before Trump post on social and she basically said that, you know, Trump and Putin talked about trade like some something may be happening essentially and to what extent Trump can use this call with Putin as leverage with Zalinski to ultimately bring everyone to the table. Clearly something has had to change. something has shifted. >> Um, Trump obviously doesn't also want a replay of what happened in Alaska where he brought Putin out, there was a flyover, >> cameras, etc., and then not a whole lot came from it. Are we just going to get another round of two week extensions for this thing that never actually happened? Probably not. So, whether or not Tomahawks are on the menu tomorrow, uh, TBD, but if if I were Zilinsky, in the very least, I'd be pushing for that cuz there could be an opening there. Well, they're going to have the opportunity in the Oval, remembering uh that the their first meeting in the Oval Office didn't go so well. There was a follow-on visit to the White House that Zilinsky thought was quite productive. In fact, the whole narrative though that Donald Trump had sort of shifted allegiances to sort of empathize with Ukraine based on his frustration with Vladimir Putin doesn't seem to be echoed in this post. You wonder what kind of a phone call this was and what Putin had to tell him. Yes, the the the words being used are very productive and that's really all we know. We also know that Trump kind of goes back and forth on things like this. Look at how he reacts to China. We have very good phone calls and then tariff threats and things following through with tariffs. It it it changes moment to moment based off of these discussions. And I think for what it's worth, Putin's breakthrough with the first lady with returning the Ukrainian children that Russia took during the war, I think that that possibly created some goodwill with Trump toward Putin that paved this phone call and then pushed forward. So, I think that that might be something there. Um, but again, I think we'll just have to see. >> Yeah, you mentioned the summit in Alaska. Rick Davis referred to that, I think, as the least successful summit in presidential history or one of them. But there was really there was no framework to take away. And remember they decided spontaneously at the beginning of a uh global news conference to take no question. So we really don't know what came from the ride in the limousine or the brief meeting that they had. >> But there was a flyover, Joe. >> Well, there was a big flyover. That's true. Uh and I suspect maybe there will be in Budapest. But the question that we're asking is will there be anything hammered out in advance as you might have seen in a traditional presidential summit where the terms have been already laid out and the meeting is really a formality. >> You would think that. So next week we know at least that there is a highlevel meeting of advisers between Trump and Putin. Their advisers are meeting next week. Location unknown. And while we know that Trump and Putin will meet in Budapest, that timing is unknown. One would assume that the traditional diplomatic process of the high level advisers hashing things out ahead of time would then lay the groundwork for some sort of agreement going forward. But of course, this is a three-legged stool and Ukraine needs to be involved. Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine, at least was the Biden administration's phrasing there. So to what extent the US and Russia can hash something out without Ukraine stands to be seen. And I think also like that that makes the timing of Zalinsk's visit to the White House tomorrow quite good and quite advantageous. And Trump for you know whatever people want to say about the deals that are made and the types of deals that they are he does have a way of kind of pushing through and creating conditions to yield results that would not have existed otherwise. I mean, look at the hostage release in in Israel and Gaza and Hamas. That's there's to be clear the subsequent situation that has occurred is, you know, very much >> kind of up in the air and and what that deal looks like is a little tenuous, but something did happen there. And so with when it comes to any sort of substantive deal between the US and Russia and Ukraine, I think the next 48 hours are going to be really instructive. >> Yeah, it's great to have you with us here covering the White House for us at Bloomberg. Lauren Denski with the truth socials flying and of course a meeting that we were waiting for. Uh it has now concluded. Lauren, it's great to have you back as always. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. Speaking of, by the way, uh the war in Gaza and the tenuous ceasefire that Lauren refers to. The president just posting again on Truth Social about uh Hamas. He's been busy on a number of fronts here. If Hamas continues to kill people in Gaza, he writes, which was not the deal, we will have no choice but to go in and kill them. Thank you for your attention to this matter. The president's been asked repeatedly recently if that would involve American boots on the ground and so far the answer has been no, but it's unclear how he might pursue these goals in the meantime. It's day 16 of the government shutdown. We've been reminding you of this and Jack Fitzpatrick gave us a pretty good readout at the top of the hour. There is some hope about backroom conversations. That's been the case for days now. But there's also hope that John Thun is now essentially guaranteeing a vote to extend Obamacare subsidies. This is something that is not new according to Thun or the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson. He spoke to reporters earlier today. Let's listen. >> He offered to Chuck Schumer uh a vote uh on Obamacare subsidies and Schumer said no. That that happened. Ask Leader Thoon about it because they wanted a guaranteed outcome. Here's why we can't do that. Let me say this very clearly and and for everyone again, okay? The Obamacare subsidy issue is not the issue of today. It is in a subsidy that expires December 31. We were always planning to continue the debate and discussion about that issue in October and November. Ironically, Democrats are taking the time off the clock for us to do that. Okay. So, John Thun got everybody's hopes up on MSNBC this morning of all networks. Now, Speaker Johnson is there to maybe put a little cold water on this. Maybe nothing has changed. That's why we want to talk to Mark Short, former chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence. He was also the liaison to Congress, congressional director in the original Trump administration. Mark Short, welcome back. It's great to see you. Thanks for having closer to this being resolved or >> I think you're closer just because of a timeline. >> No, not really. >> Well, not so much because of the policies. I I look, I think this has always been the out. you and I have talked about this is that eventually I think Republicans will cave on the Obamacare subsidies and that's that was always the the the way that this is going to resolve itself because of the timeline of those. Um but I think that Speaker Johnson's right. I think this has always been on the table as far as a vote. It's interesting the Democrats didn't jump on that and I think Joe the reason is because I think they're feeling more and more confident in their own position here which is a surprise because I think traditionally when Republicans have forced shutdowns eventually you know the American people look at and say well who forced this and they don't get rewarded for it. I think in this case Democrats forced the shutdown but I think they're feeling that they're going to win on the Obamacare subsidies issue. So a vote being given a vote now is no longer sufficient for them. They want a desired outcome >> deal. Sure. um when you were legislative director in in the first Trump term, you would have been making phone calls this week saying, "Hey, you know what? We got the troops paid. We've got federal law enforcement. We got money for Wick." These are really interesting moves that the administration has been making to say, well, in the words of Russ vote, "We're hunkering down for a long one." >> I think they are because I also think that the administration actually is is sort of, you know, engaged a level above Congress. The president is in Israel striking historic deals. The president's looking for the next negotiation in in Ukraine. He's looking to his trade deal with Xi coming up in November. And so I think that that they're at a whole different level and they sort of like Congress is beneath them. So why get mired in that right now? So I think there isn't as much interest in the White House to engage which I think also slows down a negotiation to resolve the shutdown. >> It does, right? I mean you've got Mike Johnson saying this could be the longest ever. Is that where your head is? I'm not sure it's the longest ever because I still think that the next the next sort of back stop on this Joe is November one when the announcements of the new insurance premiums go out and so I think that's going to be a pressure point. >> Do Republican governors start crying at that point? >> Yes, I I think probably so. I mean I think what's was to go back when we failed in our effort to repeal Obamacare, one of the most untold stories of that is it was really Republican governors because so many of the Obamacare subsidies they were getting Medicaid funding. They did not want that to stop. and they were calling legislators asking them not to vote to >> repe Yeah. I think there'll be a lot of pressure from Republican governors. I think there's enough Republican members who represent districts. Look at Marjorie Taylor Green for instance who's been out there saying that we need to extend the subsidies. I I personally think it's terrible policy. I think that the Democrats were really shrewd in basically winning over insurance companies by promising subsidies that, you know, it started at 400% of the poverty level, Joe, and now we're above that to be providing subsidies. But I think politically there's enough Republicans will go along with it that that's going to still be the outcome of this >> with conditions, right? Republicans obviously have something on paper that's going to say an income cap of what, $200,000, a point of expiration. I mean, the idea was that at some point these would not be made permanent. Although I know what dem a lot of Democrats want it to be. >> There'll be a point of expiration, but that's what we have right now. Shut down. >> That's what we have right now. There's a point of expiration during the the co since that this was legislated to extend them for two years. And so I think that you know the hardest thing to do is to end the government program, Joe. And so so I think that even though you might have a temporary end date, it'll be hard to see that there'll be the political muscle to end it at that point, too. >> Democrats say Donald Trump made the 2017 tax cuts permanent. Why can't we make this permanent? Well, again, I think that the Democrats created a government-run health care system that has been a total disaster that continues to create more and more and more government funding. I don't think people are happy with it, but they've created the system where it's, hey, it's too expensive if we don't extend the subsidies. Yeah. >> And that's just the ongoing problem that we're in now. >> You know, John Thun's doing more than promising uh Obamacare votes. And we've got just about a minute left here. He's going to have a vote on the NDAA potentially by the end of the day. What do you make of that strategy to see if we can get Democrats to come to the floor to vote for something? >> I think it's really smart because either you're saying, "Hey, we want to continue with government funding or continue the business of the Senate or we're in a shutdown, right?" >> And so I think it's smart for them to keep putting forward votes of that nature whether or not it's funding DoD or now NDAA. I think those are smart moves. >> Does that shake a couple Democrats loose? Maybe vote for a CR. >> I I think Well, I think it could shake them one or two loose on these individual bills. I think that the CR is not going to be solved until you get around November 1st and you have again a push on the subsidies. >> We're going to be eating turkey still talking about this, right? I don't know. Don't answer that. Mark Short with us in the flash. Great to see you as always. Republican strategist Mark Short on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and radio. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. We'll have the latest on the shutdown. Yes, day 16. Stay with us here on Bloomberg. Stay with us on Balance of Power. We'll have much more coming up after this. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p. p.m. Eastern on Apple CarPlay 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 11:30." >> We keep the markets in the fold and frequently they collide with policy in Washington driving stocks. And we'll see if that ends up being the case today with a government shutdown that's got the market's attention maybe a little bit more with lawmakers suggesting that this could be a record. When I say lawmakers, the speaker of the house now allowing for this as the White House says it is battening down the hatches. That was the word from Russ vote. Day 16. Mario Parker is along for the ride again today. Mario, they're going uh to keep doing this. Another round of votes today. Same bill, same result. No, absolutely. But you did see, I guess what's different here is that you did see John Thun this morning uh suggest that he'd be open to having some type of vote on ACA subsidies. I don't know if that's tea leaf reading to say that things have gotten warmer, but it's something. >> Well, I think it is something. And and let's also consider the fact that he said it on MSNBC, so I don't know what kind of an olive branch this might be, but let's let everyone hear what the Republican leader in the Senate said earlier on MS. I've told him I said and I've said we are willing to have a conversation. I've said if you need a vote we can we can guarantee you get a vote by a date certain. Um at some point Democrats have to take yes for an answer. But I'm I agree totally. We are all about getting health insurance down making it affordable to more people. >> So I hear you saying about the program that needs reforms. It sounds like you're guaranteeing that there will be a negotiation on this. >> Well, what I'm saying is there is a there's a path forward. I believe, >> but yes, >> but it has to but it has to include it has to include reforms and um you know, can I guarantee an outcome? No. >> Well, this is interesting because the week that we shut down and now it's a few weeks ago, we had Democrats on this program saying that a guarantee of a floor vote would be enough to get us to a yes. At least enough senators, you only need a half dozen to make this thing work. Then the talk started to really revolve around a deal on extending Obamacare subsidies. Then it became the deal had to come before voting for the CR. So we're trying to keep the lines straight on this and it does seem significant what John Thun said earlier today, which is why we wanted to talk to Ashley Davis about this Republican strategist partner at S3 Group who spent a lot of time uh in the Senate recently trying to gauge what's going to happen next. It's great to see you Ashley. Welcome back. Is John Thoon going to be the one to solve this? >> Listen, I don't really think what he said was much different than what he has been saying is that there we will have some sort of negotiation on the subsidies. It's just not going to be before we vote for the government to reopen with the clean CR. I mean, listen, I am not a big fan of how this is going down. I think that this is a bad way to legislate on both sides of the aisle. I still think we're a couple weeks away. I think there's two tipping points. One being October 28th when the government loses their first full paycheck. This past week was a a partial paycheck. So, the the real pain will happen on October 28th, especially when you look at like TSA and FAA, things like that that will be impacted. But also, November 1st is when open enrollment happens on the ACA subsidies. And there's many that think that that's going to be a tipping point as well. But listen, we're just in a this is all politics and on both sides and it's not helpful to the American people. But one more thing, Joe, something I thought was very interesting today. I don't know if you saw the economist poll that only 21% of people in the country feel that the federal government is impacting them at all. That's a pretty low number, which is why there's not much of a tipping point here for people to negotiate. And when you have DoD being paid from, you know, the president finding money under the cushions this week and then, you know, does the same thing happen uh say with FAA and TSA on the 28th? I mean, that takes the pressure off opening up uh quickly. And Ashley, to Joe's point, the fact that uh that Thun uh made those comments this morning on MSNBC uh known to uh have more of a progressive or Democratic base or viewership. What does that mean? Are we looking too deeply into that or is there some type of strategy there? Is he trying to message to uh Schumer and Jeff constituencies? >> Maybe. I just don't think Listen, I don't think First of all, let's take a step back. These subsidies will get dealt with one way or the other. In my mind, they will not stay as is as they are right now. Obviously, they they came into effect at the levels that they are during CO. There needs to be some sort of reform. You're not going to get very many Republicans in the House or Senate that will vote for just complete extension. So, but that doesn't expire till the end of the year. And so, we've got time. And I think you have the speaker continuing to say that they did their job. They're doing a CR. We're not negotiating until the government opens back up. I kind of feel maybe that's what Mthun was saying today. Listen, I'll give a guarantee on a vote. I'll give a guarantee on negotiations, but we're not going to do that until we open the government back up. And again, I just go back to if you're in Kentucky right now watching our Congress debate over a CR when it's going to open up. I mean, the only thing you care about is getting paid. And so, I think that this is a really inside the beltway conversation. And uh but listen, people aren't feeling that they have a lot of pressure right now. >> Well, it's interesting the the issue of uh paying the troops you refer to, Ashley. The president found $8 billion uh from I think it was they they said it was from unspent funds from the last fiscal year unobligated monies. They may have tapped into some research and development cash. We'll see how that plays out. But that gets us through one pay cycle. So you're two weeks until the next potential inflection point. Does Donald Trump keep finding cash in the cushions as you say here to keep the military paid because we can keep this going on for a long time if he wants. >> Yeah. I mean, when you think 8 billion's cash in the cushions, that's like, you know, I'm jaded obviously in regards to federal the federal government in general. But, uh, maybe I do think though when when the open enrollment does happen, and I'm sure you've been talking about this a lot on the show over the last couple weeks, >> that is going to show people what they're because that's going to be the private sector kind of um pushing what the rates are going to be. I think that's going that's like re that's when people are going to not pull at 21%. That's going to be you know and I think that the military getting paid so two weeks from now that would be about the same time of that week of the 28th and the 1st. Um maybe that all coincides because listen I I guess he's not allowed to use the tariff money the tariff revenue to pay for um you know people getting paid. I think there's a legal issue there. So you can't use that but you can reappropriate money. Yes. It happens all the time. It's just going to be more and more difficult. >> And Ashley, we're starting to hear some Republicans even mention the prospect of this lasting through uh Thanksgiving. I mean, at what point do we think that there'll start to be some political consequences? One has to imagine that this shutdown overtaking many of the Thanksgiving uh Thanksgiving headlines has to at some point exert some political pressure on one of these sides, right? I I mean, God forbid this happens through then. Again, I think that people are going to get tired of the daily press conferences from both sides saying the other one's to blame. Like, I'm tired of it. I'm sure you're tired of it. I'm sure the American people are tired of it. So, I think that uh there is there does have to be a tipping point of when people um have pain and so financial pain. And if the president continues to bail out kind of the DoD or FAA or TSA, whatever it's going to be, that takes off less pressure. So, I I just don't think people can lose their paychecks for maybe one cycle is the the max you can do. But listen, there's a lot of people that are living paycheck to paycheck that this is just not something they're able to do. And we're messing with people's lives at this point. It's ridiculous on both sides. Well, at at what point, Ashley, do Republicans need to to get more involved in the issue of Obamacare subsidies, realizing, you know, this has been a big sticking point. They don't want to be forced to the table on this, and you don't want to conflate the issue with government funding. I get that. But as open enrollment does approach and the notices are out and some people are saying, if premiums go up this much, I'm just not even going to enroll and they'll end up without health insurance. There's potential political backlash for Republicans at some point. Does time force everyone to the table? >> Well, yeah. I mean, look, look how many weeks we have left of the CR that we were, you know, that the Republicans were that passed the House. There's like four weeks left, I think, is what we are at the time. >> But I I I I and by the way, I don't think the House comes back again next week. I don't think there's anything to negotiate right now. If if people are um I if the subsidies if the premiums the open enrollment happens on November 1st and those premiums are shown to go up that would be a tipping point. However, if it doesn't happen that way, I don't think they have to start negotiating till November. I mean, we Joe, you've been around this town as long as I have. I mean, it's just like you when you have something expiring December 31st, you start and you go out of recess to say December 15th. You don't start negotiating till December 1st. I mean, >> Christmas Eve. >> Ex. Yeah. Wow. >> Why do I keep doing this? Maybe we need to go like in the arts or something. >> Now we're getting more. And of course, another component here uh is just the prospect the the the White House continues to dangle the prospect of just mass firings. There was a legal setback obviously on that plan uh over the last 24 hours or so. But I mean, how does that at at some point increase some of the political pressure on Republicans at that point and make them have more ownership with the White House threatening these mass layoffs, especially in places as you mentioned like Kentucky or Florida or Virginia, >> right? Well, you said, you know, they he they had 4,000 that obviously were paused yesterday. I'm assuming the administration will continue to litigate this um as you know they have in the past on various issues that go to the courts. But when uh OM said they'll go up to 10,000, there's a part of me that has been saying we shouldn't be surprised because the federal government being scaled back at the kind of inflated government that it is, which I do agree with. um that this is something that that the president and OM have been saying from the beginning that they were going to do. I just don't know if that's going to be blowback on Republicans or Democrats. Right now, the administration feels it's going to be a blowback on Democrats. >> Great. Great. Well, Ashley Davis, thanks so much. >> Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And you can find us live every weekday from Washington DC at noon time Eastern at bloomberg.com.
Trump Says He’ll Meet Putin Again to Discuss War in Ukraine | Balance of Power
Summary
Transcript
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p.m. Eastern >> on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube. >> Live in Washington as always on Bloomberg TV and radio. and good to have you along as we consider now day 16 of a government shutdown that does not show signs of stopping. And of course, that's been the headline since this all started. But, God forbid there be a glimmer of hope. It does seem like we could have fast forwarded to this moment as the Senate Majority Leader goes on, of all networks, MSNBC, to make a guarantee that Democrats will get a vote on Obamacare subsidies. We had spoken repeatedly with Democratic lawmakers to see if that promise of an up or down vote would be enough to get them to sign on to a continuing resolution that would reopen the government. Some said yes, maybe depends what form. What are we hearing? And of course, John Thun says, "Well, that has been the offer at least quietly all along." He said it out loud this morning on MSNBC. Listen, >> I've told him I said and I said, "We are willing to have a conversation." I've said, "If you need a vote, we can we can guarantee you get a vote by a date certain." Um, at some point Democrats have to take yes for an answer, but I'm I agree totally. We are all about getting health insurance down, making it affordable to more people. >> So, I hear you saying about the program that needs reforms. It sounds like you're guaranteeing that there will be a negotiation on this. >> Well, what I'm saying is there is a there's a path forward, I believe. >> Yes. >> But it has to but it has to include it has to include reforms and um you know, can I guarantee an outcome? No. >> Cannot guarantee an outcome. but can apparently guarantee a vote. Does this start to grease the skids, turn the gears? Maybe not. But we do check in with Jack Fitzpatrick. He's talking to lawmakers firsthand and brings us the latest now from Capitol Hill. Bloomberg Government Congress reporter. Jack, I know you've probably heard this before, but for some folks, it's new and it might be reassuring to Democrats. Does John Thoon's posture help the standoff? >> Well, that's the right question. And it's a matter of John Thoon's posture and the specific wording he's using. We had not heard from the majority leader out loud on TV saying yes, he he can guarantee a vote in the future. That is not enough for a lot of Democrats. It doesn't meet the standards set by Hakee Jeff even. Uh generally it doesn't sound like that's enough to move us towards an end to the shutdown. But it does represent a bit of a change at least in rhetoric, at least in what Republicans feel they need to make sure they're saying clearly. It it looks like there's a big gap still between what Republicans want and what Democrats are trying to get out of them. Uh but if you're looking for some tea leaves, if you're looking for a little bit of movement to see if I if one side has the momentum over the other, it certainly is notable to see the Republican majority leader say he's comfortable saying there absolutely could be a vote on this policy demand that Democrats are making even though he wants it to be separate from a vote to end the shutdown. Got it. And in the meantime, we're going to do daily voting on the Republican CR. Jack, I presume that's been the strategy essentially each day uh working day that John Thun has had the membership here. And I ask you that knowing that the president has covered a number of paychecks for active duty military, for federal law enforcement, and they've also helped to reinforce funding for the Wick program, causing a lot of people to say, "Hey, then there's clearly no inflection point that's going to get everyone to the table, and we could have a record setter here." But the president has only covered one pay cycle for military paychecks. Do you know for starters that that money will be delivered and is there a plan for what happens in 2 weeks? >> The wording from the White House in the immediate term is so clear that regardless of whatever legal uh questions about it, it does seem that this pay paycheck is being covered. But you're very right to ask about the next paycheck because both sides have been digging in in preparation for a long shutdown and two weeks from now it may not be over. and the announcements from the White House and what we've seen from the Trump administration broadly on making sure troops are being paid uh does not necessarily cover that. So there may be a whole new round of logistical and legal questions about how they can move money around. I I'm not sure there's going to be somebody filing a lawsuit saying don't pay the troops. I'm not sure this is going to go to the courts. So there there are layer upon layer of abstraction here that makes it difficult to predict. But you're right that this shutdown could go for another two weeks. And that raises the question of troop pay all over again. >> Yeah. Now, do you say two weeks because of open enrollment on the 1st of November? Is that the next sort of stop on the calendar that might force a conversation? >> The fact that it aligns roughly with another round of questions about troop pay is kind of convenient or inconvenient depending on your perspective. But yes, Democrats are really focused on November 1st and the leadup to November 1st. Open enrollment uh is November 1st. The expectation of letters from health insurance companies that could warn of increased premiums next year is another political uh pressure point. So as we at least get closer to November 1st, that really is the key to the Democratic strategy. And when you hear members talk this much about November 1st, it it is clear they are preparing for a a shutdown that could go in excess of a month. >> Yeah, it sure sounds like it. Batten down the hatches was the word from Russ Vote. So, you know, give us a taste of the culture. Jack, you're up there. What's going on? Are lawmakers hanging around their offices? Are they all at bull feathers drinking beers? Like, what do you what do you do? It's weeks on end of a shutdown with with no off-ramp in sight. >> You know, it's very different in the House and Senate. Obviously, in the Senate, they're voting over and over again. It's Groundhog Day. They do have to make it to votes. They have to make it through scrums of reporters who are asking if there's any change in their position. It is quite repetitive because this is 10 votes now that are failed on the Republican CR. I think we're at seven that failed on the Democratic uh measure. It's very repetitive. Not a lot of progress. And then in the House, you have Democrats making a point to be here saying we're ready to work, but very very quiet, almost eerily quiet in in the House. Overall, compared to past shutdowns, this is a strangely repetitive but quiet one in which there really are not significant negotiations and backroom uh horse trading going on. Does Speaker Johnson keep everybody out then till further notice? Will they be back next week? >> He seems determined to keep them out until the shutdown is over. That's what he said over and over again. Clearly, Democrats think that is a pressure point when you see the focus on Representative Elect Adelita Graalva who has still not been sworn in. the accusations that Johnson is doing this to hold up uh progress on the measure to require the release of Jeffrey Epstein documents. I it it may get more and more uncomfortable for him to maintain that position as time goes on, but he has not wavered. He has said there's no negotiating, no work to be done unless the shutdown ends. Uh and I don't see any signs of him changing his mind at this point. >> There you have it from Jack Fitzpatrick. Take it to the bank for now. I have a feeling we're going to be talking to Jack a little more uh before they have this settled. He's a Bloomberg government congressional reporter and has been kneedeep in this conversation for more than 16 days. It's 16 days of the shutdown now, but we've been talking about this going back weeks before it happened. When the votes take place, we'll of course let you know. The other major story that we're following today brings us to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Donald Trump on Truth Social. Just before we came to air, this is now almost 2 hours ago. I am speaking to President Putin now, he wrote. We did give a headline a bit earlier that they were expected to speak today. The conversation, he says, is ongoing, a lengthy one, and I will report the contents as will President Putin at its conclusion. Thank you for your attention to this matter. This call could still be underway. It may have ended, and we haven't seen another post yet. We don't know. But of course, there was a a question about Tomahawks along with other defensive weaponry that came from President Zalinski. He's going to be meeting with President Trump tomorrow. This 48 hour period could be critical in determining the next phase of the war in Ukraine and it's coming against the backdrop of course of calls for additional defense investments across the continent. Which is why it's a pleasure to be able to spend some time with Nadia Calvino, the president of the European Investment Bank, which I want you to think of as the financial arm, if you will, of the European Union. President, it's great to have you with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. Thank you for being here. Welcome to Washington on this IMF week. I hope your meetings have been going well. >> Yes, they they're going really well. Very interesting. It's always a pleasure to be back here in Bloomberg. >> Well, I appreciate that very much here. According to our reporting, the European Union is laying out a five-year plan when we consider investment across the continent to help rearm and restrain Russia. To what extent is the EIB involved in that broad investment that will clearly take years to realize? Indeed, the European Investment Bank as the financing arm of the of the Eur of the European Union has a has an important role to play in stepping up Europe's capabilities in the area of security and defense. There are many different needs and we're very well placed to to uh finance some key large infrastructures, critical infrastructures, military facilities, also research, uh production capacity, for example, drone manufacturing >> uh and also support, financial support to small and medium-sized companies in the supply chain of large European contractors. It is unfortunate. I I think that we are leaving this situation, but Europe has a very clear vision of where to go and the European Investment Bank is is helping get there. >> Yeah, it's interesting that we're seeing a lot of these uh smaller defense companies in some cases startups that are reinventing the way that we look at this and in some cases challenging the old line big defense contractors when it comes to to different contracts. You mentioned uh drones, which is something that is a big deal here in the conversation about defense technology, that the EIB is ready to invest millions of euros in Europe's drone defenses. How would that be doled out and how are you looking at that as a continent as opposed to a collection of countries? Well, right now we have a very robust pipeline of more than 30 flagship projects in the different areas I mentioned, but we're following very attentively the upcoming meeting of leaders of prime ministers and presidents that will take place next week, the European Council meeting >> to see what is their vision precisely when it comes to reinforcing the eastern uh border of the EU also drone manufacturing and and protection against enemy drones etc. And we will be ready to help and support uh in those areas where we have uh most value added. >> I can tell you that the president's phone call with Vladimir Putin has just ended. >> Okay, >> President, I just want to take a look at what he's writing here. He says, "We've just concluded the telephone call uh and it was a very productive one," says Donald Trump. President Putin congratulated me and the United States on the great accomplishment of peace in the Middle East, something that he said had been dreamed of for centuries. Uh he goes on to try to connect the Middle East to the war in Ukraine. Here uh even mentions the first lady says they spent a lot of time talking about trade between Russia and the US when the war with Ukraine is over and said that at the conclusion of the call we agreed that there will be a meeting of our high level advisers next week. The United States initial meetings will be led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio together with various other people to be designated a meeting location to be determined. And then he says he and Putin will meet in an agreed upon location, Budapest, Hungary, to see if we can bring this inglorious war to an end. He refers to the Zalinski meeting tomorrow in which he will discuss his conversation with President Putin. So, we have another meeting. Does this kind of talk sound productive to you or more of the same? >> Oh, well, I think it's very good to call this an anorious war. This is Putin's war, a war of aggression, a war of choice. From the European Union's perspective, we we want this war to finish as soon as possible. >> So, whatever, you know, can get us to a fair and stable peace, of course, it has to be fair and stable if we want it to be permanent, should be welcomed. Of course, >> when we consider the need for energy and the war over Russian oil, which I think is its own story alto together, would the EIB help cover Ukrainian purchases of US LNG if that helped >> to end the war sooner? >> We are we are actually we have just signed a 300 million deal with with Ukraine. I was I had a meeting with the prime minister yesterday >> and we we're looking into options to step it up even so that they can replenish their gas reserves for the winter. >> We are also supporting Ukraine when it comes to rebuilding critical infrastructures including transport and energy. And we are supporting Ukraine when it comes to rebuilding the daily supporting the daily lives of Ukrainians so that they can need live lives that are as normal as possible. You know in this totally extraordinary and terrible circumstance rebuilding hospitals, schools, kindergartens, protecting the infrastructure so that children can go to school. >> I think this is essential if we want to protect a strong basis for the recovery once the war is over. There's so much that we can talk about uh that is depressing. The idea of rebuilding is uh is the definition of optimism. And I'd love to hear how how far you allow yourself to not only think about it, but to plan for it because obviously this is a war that could end soon >> and an an enormous amount of work will be done and money required from governments and private industry. How far have you planned this out? I I am I am very grateful for your question and I'm going to also smile, you know, when I say absolutely I I actually think I am very confident that Ukraine will bounce back very strongly once the war is over >> because I have seen the determination, the resilience, the commitment of Ukrainians. I've also seen the very strong infrastructures of the country and we have been supporting them for more than two years to make sure that the that the country has a strong basis on which to build this reconstruction and also to pave the way for a successful accession to the European Union. So I am I am confident you know we just need Putin to stop the war and then we can move on to a new phase which can be more constructive. >> Is rebuilding Ukraine years or decades? >> I I tend to think it's years. Mhm. >> Actually, because we are talking about a country that continues to live a a quite normal life, you know, in in these circumstances, the government has managed to keep a a financial management which responds to a normal budget, to a normal administration, uh despite of course the the immense needs that are related to the war. And so I think that the sooner we can move to the next phase, the better. >> Mhm. That is uh obviously a best case scenario I guess at this point when it comes to European commitments like the one that we mentioned uh for buying US LNG. Do you want to see a matching commitment from the United States or do you think the administration has done what it can at least financially speaking? >> Well, right now I think we all have to focus in supporting Ukraine. Uh and obviously military support is of the essence. uh European countries are clearly stepping up their support not only to protect ourselves to protect the European Union but also to support Ukraine. Uh countries are taking quite uh quite a novel quite innovative uh measures to to provide this support and I think this is the essential thing so that we can see an end to the war and then we will have to see how everybody contributes to supporting the recovery of the country. >> Fascinating to spend some time with you President Calino. Thank you so much for being with us today in Washington here on Bloomberg. I hope the rest of your IMF week is productive. >> Thank you. >> Stay in touch with us and come see us again because this is a story that's very important to us and one that's not likely going away anytime soon. President Trump's call with Vladimir Putin has just ended. We'll have much more on this ahead, remembering that at this time tomorrow. We'll be talking about his meeting in the Oval Office with President Zilinski. Stay with us on Balance of Power. We'll have much more coming up after this. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p.m. Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube. >> The phone call has ended. If you're just joining us, Donald Trump spent some time today with Vladimir Putin talking about the war in Ukraine. It wasn't in person this time. They were on the phone and it appears at least based on the truth social posts that that call was approaching 2 hours in length. The president back on social media to announce the conclusion uh of the phone call. And there is some news here. It does not involve tomahawks or even a potential end of the war. But another round of meetings. Highlevel adviserss he says will meet next week. Location and attendance other than the secretary of state to be determined. But he says, "President Putin and I will then meet in an agreed upon location, Budapest, Hungary, to see if we can bring this inglorious war between Russia and Ukraine to an end, remembering, of course, that he meets with Vladimir Zalinski tomorrow in the Oval Office." And the president refers to that, saying he will discuss his conversation with Putin and much more. I believe great progress was made with today's telephone conversation. Helping us quantify that progress, if it's possible, is Lauren Dazinski, Bloomberg's White House correspondent on the case today. and with us here in our Washington bureau. Lauren, it's great to see you. Um, this meeting tomorrow was already high stakes. If you're President Zalinski, reading this probably doesn't give you a lot of hope that tomahawks are on the way. >> Yeah, considering that this is the war that Trump wants to resolve. Perhaps maybe there could be an opening for Zilinsky to push. Um, Trump has really talked about how this inglorious war, as he put it today, is the last remaining one that he really wants to solve. And so maybe something will be different. Maybe conditions have changed. That was one of the big questions. Caroline Levit, the White House press secretary, was on Fox News right before Trump post on social and she basically said that, you know, Trump and Putin talked about trade like some something may be happening essentially and to what extent Trump can use this call with Putin as leverage with Zalinski to ultimately bring everyone to the table. Clearly something has had to change. something has shifted. >> Um, Trump obviously doesn't also want a replay of what happened in Alaska where he brought Putin out, there was a flyover, >> cameras, etc., and then not a whole lot came from it. Are we just going to get another round of two week extensions for this thing that never actually happened? Probably not. So, whether or not Tomahawks are on the menu tomorrow, uh, TBD, but if if I were Zilinsky, in the very least, I'd be pushing for that cuz there could be an opening there. Well, they're going to have the opportunity in the Oval, remembering uh that the their first meeting in the Oval Office didn't go so well. There was a follow-on visit to the White House that Zilinsky thought was quite productive. In fact, the whole narrative though that Donald Trump had sort of shifted allegiances to sort of empathize with Ukraine based on his frustration with Vladimir Putin doesn't seem to be echoed in this post. You wonder what kind of a phone call this was and what Putin had to tell him. Yes, the the the words being used are very productive and that's really all we know. We also know that Trump kind of goes back and forth on things like this. Look at how he reacts to China. We have very good phone calls and then tariff threats and things following through with tariffs. It it it changes moment to moment based off of these discussions. And I think for what it's worth, Putin's breakthrough with the first lady with returning the Ukrainian children that Russia took during the war, I think that that possibly created some goodwill with Trump toward Putin that paved this phone call and then pushed forward. So, I think that that might be something there. Um, but again, I think we'll just have to see. >> Yeah, you mentioned the summit in Alaska. Rick Davis referred to that, I think, as the least successful summit in presidential history or one of them. But there was really there was no framework to take away. And remember they decided spontaneously at the beginning of a uh global news conference to take no question. So we really don't know what came from the ride in the limousine or the brief meeting that they had. >> But there was a flyover, Joe. >> Well, there was a big flyover. That's true. Uh and I suspect maybe there will be in Budapest. But the question that we're asking is will there be anything hammered out in advance as you might have seen in a traditional presidential summit where the terms have been already laid out and the meeting is really a formality. >> You would think that. So next week we know at least that there is a highlevel meeting of advisers between Trump and Putin. Their advisers are meeting next week. Location unknown. And while we know that Trump and Putin will meet in Budapest, that timing is unknown. One would assume that the traditional diplomatic process of the high level advisers hashing things out ahead of time would then lay the groundwork for some sort of agreement going forward. But of course, this is a three-legged stool and Ukraine needs to be involved. Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine, at least was the Biden administration's phrasing there. So to what extent the US and Russia can hash something out without Ukraine stands to be seen. And I think also like that that makes the timing of Zalinsk's visit to the White House tomorrow quite good and quite advantageous. And Trump for you know whatever people want to say about the deals that are made and the types of deals that they are he does have a way of kind of pushing through and creating conditions to yield results that would not have existed otherwise. I mean, look at the hostage release in in Israel and Gaza and Hamas. That's there's to be clear the subsequent situation that has occurred is, you know, very much >> kind of up in the air and and what that deal looks like is a little tenuous, but something did happen there. And so with when it comes to any sort of substantive deal between the US and Russia and Ukraine, I think the next 48 hours are going to be really instructive. >> Yeah, it's great to have you with us here covering the White House for us at Bloomberg. Lauren Denski with the truth socials flying and of course a meeting that we were waiting for. Uh it has now concluded. Lauren, it's great to have you back as always. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. Speaking of, by the way, uh the war in Gaza and the tenuous ceasefire that Lauren refers to. The president just posting again on Truth Social about uh Hamas. He's been busy on a number of fronts here. If Hamas continues to kill people in Gaza, he writes, which was not the deal, we will have no choice but to go in and kill them. Thank you for your attention to this matter. The president's been asked repeatedly recently if that would involve American boots on the ground and so far the answer has been no, but it's unclear how he might pursue these goals in the meantime. It's day 16 of the government shutdown. We've been reminding you of this and Jack Fitzpatrick gave us a pretty good readout at the top of the hour. There is some hope about backroom conversations. That's been the case for days now. But there's also hope that John Thun is now essentially guaranteeing a vote to extend Obamacare subsidies. This is something that is not new according to Thun or the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson. He spoke to reporters earlier today. Let's listen. >> He offered to Chuck Schumer uh a vote uh on Obamacare subsidies and Schumer said no. That that happened. Ask Leader Thoon about it because they wanted a guaranteed outcome. Here's why we can't do that. Let me say this very clearly and and for everyone again, okay? The Obamacare subsidy issue is not the issue of today. It is in a subsidy that expires December 31. We were always planning to continue the debate and discussion about that issue in October and November. Ironically, Democrats are taking the time off the clock for us to do that. Okay. So, John Thun got everybody's hopes up on MSNBC this morning of all networks. Now, Speaker Johnson is there to maybe put a little cold water on this. Maybe nothing has changed. That's why we want to talk to Mark Short, former chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence. He was also the liaison to Congress, congressional director in the original Trump administration. Mark Short, welcome back. It's great to see you. Thanks for having closer to this being resolved or >> I think you're closer just because of a timeline. >> No, not really. >> Well, not so much because of the policies. I I look, I think this has always been the out. you and I have talked about this is that eventually I think Republicans will cave on the Obamacare subsidies and that's that was always the the the way that this is going to resolve itself because of the timeline of those. Um but I think that Speaker Johnson's right. I think this has always been on the table as far as a vote. It's interesting the Democrats didn't jump on that and I think Joe the reason is because I think they're feeling more and more confident in their own position here which is a surprise because I think traditionally when Republicans have forced shutdowns eventually you know the American people look at and say well who forced this and they don't get rewarded for it. I think in this case Democrats forced the shutdown but I think they're feeling that they're going to win on the Obamacare subsidies issue. So a vote being given a vote now is no longer sufficient for them. They want a desired outcome >> deal. Sure. um when you were legislative director in in the first Trump term, you would have been making phone calls this week saying, "Hey, you know what? We got the troops paid. We've got federal law enforcement. We got money for Wick." These are really interesting moves that the administration has been making to say, well, in the words of Russ vote, "We're hunkering down for a long one." >> I think they are because I also think that the administration actually is is sort of, you know, engaged a level above Congress. The president is in Israel striking historic deals. The president's looking for the next negotiation in in Ukraine. He's looking to his trade deal with Xi coming up in November. And so I think that that they're at a whole different level and they sort of like Congress is beneath them. So why get mired in that right now? So I think there isn't as much interest in the White House to engage which I think also slows down a negotiation to resolve the shutdown. >> It does, right? I mean you've got Mike Johnson saying this could be the longest ever. Is that where your head is? I'm not sure it's the longest ever because I still think that the next the next sort of back stop on this Joe is November one when the announcements of the new insurance premiums go out and so I think that's going to be a pressure point. >> Do Republican governors start crying at that point? >> Yes, I I think probably so. I mean I think what's was to go back when we failed in our effort to repeal Obamacare, one of the most untold stories of that is it was really Republican governors because so many of the Obamacare subsidies they were getting Medicaid funding. They did not want that to stop. and they were calling legislators asking them not to vote to >> repe Yeah. I think there'll be a lot of pressure from Republican governors. I think there's enough Republican members who represent districts. Look at Marjorie Taylor Green for instance who's been out there saying that we need to extend the subsidies. I I personally think it's terrible policy. I think that the Democrats were really shrewd in basically winning over insurance companies by promising subsidies that, you know, it started at 400% of the poverty level, Joe, and now we're above that to be providing subsidies. But I think politically there's enough Republicans will go along with it that that's going to still be the outcome of this >> with conditions, right? Republicans obviously have something on paper that's going to say an income cap of what, $200,000, a point of expiration. I mean, the idea was that at some point these would not be made permanent. Although I know what dem a lot of Democrats want it to be. >> There'll be a point of expiration, but that's what we have right now. Shut down. >> That's what we have right now. There's a point of expiration during the the co since that this was legislated to extend them for two years. And so I think that you know the hardest thing to do is to end the government program, Joe. And so so I think that even though you might have a temporary end date, it'll be hard to see that there'll be the political muscle to end it at that point, too. >> Democrats say Donald Trump made the 2017 tax cuts permanent. Why can't we make this permanent? Well, again, I think that the Democrats created a government-run health care system that has been a total disaster that continues to create more and more and more government funding. I don't think people are happy with it, but they've created the system where it's, hey, it's too expensive if we don't extend the subsidies. Yeah. >> And that's just the ongoing problem that we're in now. >> You know, John Thun's doing more than promising uh Obamacare votes. And we've got just about a minute left here. He's going to have a vote on the NDAA potentially by the end of the day. What do you make of that strategy to see if we can get Democrats to come to the floor to vote for something? >> I think it's really smart because either you're saying, "Hey, we want to continue with government funding or continue the business of the Senate or we're in a shutdown, right?" >> And so I think it's smart for them to keep putting forward votes of that nature whether or not it's funding DoD or now NDAA. I think those are smart moves. >> Does that shake a couple Democrats loose? Maybe vote for a CR. >> I I think Well, I think it could shake them one or two loose on these individual bills. I think that the CR is not going to be solved until you get around November 1st and you have again a push on the subsidies. >> We're going to be eating turkey still talking about this, right? I don't know. Don't answer that. Mark Short with us in the flash. Great to see you as always. Republican strategist Mark Short on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and radio. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. We'll have the latest on the shutdown. Yes, day 16. Stay with us here on Bloomberg. Stay with us on Balance of Power. We'll have much more coming up after this. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5:00 p. p.m. Eastern on Apple CarPlay 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 11:30." >> We keep the markets in the fold and frequently they collide with policy in Washington driving stocks. And we'll see if that ends up being the case today with a government shutdown that's got the market's attention maybe a little bit more with lawmakers suggesting that this could be a record. When I say lawmakers, the speaker of the house now allowing for this as the White House says it is battening down the hatches. That was the word from Russ vote. Day 16. Mario Parker is along for the ride again today. Mario, they're going uh to keep doing this. Another round of votes today. Same bill, same result. No, absolutely. But you did see, I guess what's different here is that you did see John Thun this morning uh suggest that he'd be open to having some type of vote on ACA subsidies. I don't know if that's tea leaf reading to say that things have gotten warmer, but it's something. >> Well, I think it is something. And and let's also consider the fact that he said it on MSNBC, so I don't know what kind of an olive branch this might be, but let's let everyone hear what the Republican leader in the Senate said earlier on MS. I've told him I said and I've said we are willing to have a conversation. I've said if you need a vote we can we can guarantee you get a vote by a date certain. Um at some point Democrats have to take yes for an answer. But I'm I agree totally. We are all about getting health insurance down making it affordable to more people. >> So I hear you saying about the program that needs reforms. It sounds like you're guaranteeing that there will be a negotiation on this. >> Well, what I'm saying is there is a there's a path forward. I believe, >> but yes, >> but it has to but it has to include it has to include reforms and um you know, can I guarantee an outcome? No. >> Well, this is interesting because the week that we shut down and now it's a few weeks ago, we had Democrats on this program saying that a guarantee of a floor vote would be enough to get us to a yes. At least enough senators, you only need a half dozen to make this thing work. Then the talk started to really revolve around a deal on extending Obamacare subsidies. Then it became the deal had to come before voting for the CR. So we're trying to keep the lines straight on this and it does seem significant what John Thun said earlier today, which is why we wanted to talk to Ashley Davis about this Republican strategist partner at S3 Group who spent a lot of time uh in the Senate recently trying to gauge what's going to happen next. It's great to see you Ashley. Welcome back. Is John Thoon going to be the one to solve this? >> Listen, I don't really think what he said was much different than what he has been saying is that there we will have some sort of negotiation on the subsidies. It's just not going to be before we vote for the government to reopen with the clean CR. I mean, listen, I am not a big fan of how this is going down. I think that this is a bad way to legislate on both sides of the aisle. I still think we're a couple weeks away. I think there's two tipping points. One being October 28th when the government loses their first full paycheck. This past week was a a partial paycheck. So, the the real pain will happen on October 28th, especially when you look at like TSA and FAA, things like that that will be impacted. But also, November 1st is when open enrollment happens on the ACA subsidies. And there's many that think that that's going to be a tipping point as well. But listen, we're just in a this is all politics and on both sides and it's not helpful to the American people. But one more thing, Joe, something I thought was very interesting today. I don't know if you saw the economist poll that only 21% of people in the country feel that the federal government is impacting them at all. That's a pretty low number, which is why there's not much of a tipping point here for people to negotiate. And when you have DoD being paid from, you know, the president finding money under the cushions this week and then, you know, does the same thing happen uh say with FAA and TSA on the 28th? I mean, that takes the pressure off opening up uh quickly. And Ashley, to Joe's point, the fact that uh that Thun uh made those comments this morning on MSNBC uh known to uh have more of a progressive or Democratic base or viewership. What does that mean? Are we looking too deeply into that or is there some type of strategy there? Is he trying to message to uh Schumer and Jeff constituencies? >> Maybe. I just don't think Listen, I don't think First of all, let's take a step back. These subsidies will get dealt with one way or the other. In my mind, they will not stay as is as they are right now. Obviously, they they came into effect at the levels that they are during CO. There needs to be some sort of reform. You're not going to get very many Republicans in the House or Senate that will vote for just complete extension. So, but that doesn't expire till the end of the year. And so, we've got time. And I think you have the speaker continuing to say that they did their job. They're doing a CR. We're not negotiating until the government opens back up. I kind of feel maybe that's what Mthun was saying today. Listen, I'll give a guarantee on a vote. I'll give a guarantee on negotiations, but we're not going to do that until we open the government back up. And again, I just go back to if you're in Kentucky right now watching our Congress debate over a CR when it's going to open up. I mean, the only thing you care about is getting paid. And so, I think that this is a really inside the beltway conversation. And uh but listen, people aren't feeling that they have a lot of pressure right now. >> Well, it's interesting the the issue of uh paying the troops you refer to, Ashley. The president found $8 billion uh from I think it was they they said it was from unspent funds from the last fiscal year unobligated monies. They may have tapped into some research and development cash. We'll see how that plays out. But that gets us through one pay cycle. So you're two weeks until the next potential inflection point. Does Donald Trump keep finding cash in the cushions as you say here to keep the military paid because we can keep this going on for a long time if he wants. >> Yeah. I mean, when you think 8 billion's cash in the cushions, that's like, you know, I'm jaded obviously in regards to federal the federal government in general. But, uh, maybe I do think though when when the open enrollment does happen, and I'm sure you've been talking about this a lot on the show over the last couple weeks, >> that is going to show people what they're because that's going to be the private sector kind of um pushing what the rates are going to be. I think that's going that's like re that's when people are going to not pull at 21%. That's going to be you know and I think that the military getting paid so two weeks from now that would be about the same time of that week of the 28th and the 1st. Um maybe that all coincides because listen I I guess he's not allowed to use the tariff money the tariff revenue to pay for um you know people getting paid. I think there's a legal issue there. So you can't use that but you can reappropriate money. Yes. It happens all the time. It's just going to be more and more difficult. >> And Ashley, we're starting to hear some Republicans even mention the prospect of this lasting through uh Thanksgiving. I mean, at what point do we think that there'll start to be some political consequences? One has to imagine that this shutdown overtaking many of the Thanksgiving uh Thanksgiving headlines has to at some point exert some political pressure on one of these sides, right? I I mean, God forbid this happens through then. Again, I think that people are going to get tired of the daily press conferences from both sides saying the other one's to blame. Like, I'm tired of it. I'm sure you're tired of it. I'm sure the American people are tired of it. So, I think that uh there is there does have to be a tipping point of when people um have pain and so financial pain. And if the president continues to bail out kind of the DoD or FAA or TSA, whatever it's going to be, that takes off less pressure. So, I I just don't think people can lose their paychecks for maybe one cycle is the the max you can do. But listen, there's a lot of people that are living paycheck to paycheck that this is just not something they're able to do. And we're messing with people's lives at this point. It's ridiculous on both sides. Well, at at what point, Ashley, do Republicans need to to get more involved in the issue of Obamacare subsidies, realizing, you know, this has been a big sticking point. They don't want to be forced to the table on this, and you don't want to conflate the issue with government funding. I get that. But as open enrollment does approach and the notices are out and some people are saying, if premiums go up this much, I'm just not even going to enroll and they'll end up without health insurance. There's potential political backlash for Republicans at some point. Does time force everyone to the table? >> Well, yeah. I mean, look, look how many weeks we have left of the CR that we were, you know, that the Republicans were that passed the House. There's like four weeks left, I think, is what we are at the time. >> But I I I I and by the way, I don't think the House comes back again next week. I don't think there's anything to negotiate right now. If if people are um I if the subsidies if the premiums the open enrollment happens on November 1st and those premiums are shown to go up that would be a tipping point. However, if it doesn't happen that way, I don't think they have to start negotiating till November. I mean, we Joe, you've been around this town as long as I have. I mean, it's just like you when you have something expiring December 31st, you start and you go out of recess to say December 15th. You don't start negotiating till December 1st. I mean, >> Christmas Eve. >> Ex. Yeah. Wow. >> Why do I keep doing this? Maybe we need to go like in the arts or something. >> Now we're getting more. And of course, another component here uh is just the prospect the the the White House continues to dangle the prospect of just mass firings. There was a legal setback obviously on that plan uh over the last 24 hours or so. But I mean, how does that at at some point increase some of the political pressure on Republicans at that point and make them have more ownership with the White House threatening these mass layoffs, especially in places as you mentioned like Kentucky or Florida or Virginia, >> right? Well, you said, you know, they he they had 4,000 that obviously were paused yesterday. I'm assuming the administration will continue to litigate this um as you know they have in the past on various issues that go to the courts. But when uh OM said they'll go up to 10,000, there's a part of me that has been saying we shouldn't be surprised because the federal government being scaled back at the kind of inflated government that it is, which I do agree with. um that this is something that that the president and OM have been saying from the beginning that they were going to do. I just don't know if that's going to be blowback on Republicans or Democrats. Right now, the administration feels it's going to be a blowback on Democrats. >> Great. Great. Well, Ashley Davis, thanks so much. >> Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And you can find us live every weekday from Washington DC at noon time Eastern at bloomberg.com.