tv Bloomberg Markets Americas Bloomberg June 27, 2017 2:00pm-3:31pm EDT
health care reform, those independent voters are really in line to cast their ballot not just for 2020, but for 2018. if you were someone like senator dean heller, i spoke with a republican consultant consults with the white house on communication matters over the weekend and what the source told me was essentially the white house, while they are not crafting policy in the way the majority leader is, they are definitely paying attention to senator dean heller. they are definitely paying attention to the makeup and the mathematics of the senate in particular. they are pushing on to lose seats, but also to hopefully gain seats. they are looking closely at that because someone like senator heller is under intense political pressure in the state of nevada, a purple state in which they are going to have to win over to keep the base unified behind him, but also to win over those independent voters. that is a key central point. he is in the thick of this and
someone that quite frankly is not an enemy of the financial community by any means, but his boat, his voice, that's where all of this is really being tracked very carefully on political operative meetings at the 200 pennsylvania. david: we are waiting for mitch mcconnell to speak and we will bring him as soon as he begins. michael mckee, what do republicans want to do? there's also with the senate has to do. the nonelective stuff, funding, that's looming large as we get closer to let the timber 30 deadline. mike: they have to get a 2018 budget in place. they don't have to, but if they want to tax reform, they need to put that reconciliation vehicle in, the parliamentary way of getting a vote on tax reform without having to go to a 60 vote majority. they really need to get that done in their window is until september 30, when the government has to be funded. they also have to do something about the debt ceiling and they have to do something about
funding the government, whether it's a continuing resolution or not, it looks like it will be. they got a lot on their plate and they want to deal with this, which is why most of the senate leadership has said the real deadline is august 1. once they go on vacation, they aren't revealed a come back and take of health care. it will be dead and they could perhaps revisit in 2019. when they figured out is this is really hard. it's took the obama administration two years, hillary clinton couldn't do it during the clinton administration. it isn't as they thought it would be. anna: even if when you have the control that the trump administration does have. is there an implication on the fed conversation here? in terms of seeing some of this reform get done in washington, i was reading some bloomberg intelligence research it was talking about where the fed goes next and the possibility of shutdown. mike: in terms of health care, it's a second derivative issue. informal health care act from the obama administration, what people call obamacare didn't
make moves to try to hold down health care costs, which is happen. we've seen some recent spikes, but in general, the acceleration health care costs has slowed. and that has application for inflation. it obviously affects what the fed does. what would really move the fed would be something like tax cuts that would then stimulate additional business and consumer spending and i would have implications for inflation and growth that the fed would want to address, depending on exactly how severe they were. david: the waiting comments from the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell at the capital and washington, d.c., republican leadership has decided not to hold a vote on their fees of health care legislation until after the july 4 recess. we are here with michael mckee and kevin cirilli on capitol hill and anna joins us, covering health policy out of washington, d.c. when you look all the sticking points, what led mitch mcconnell to pull this bill or not intend to have a vote on this bill and head of july 4?
been the biggest issue has that once the cbo score came out from the congressional budget office, it was made very clear that the legislation still really doesn't do a lot to help poor americans gain access to health care and doesn't do anything to bring down their health care costs. it might make it harder for them to get insurance, compared to what's going on under obamacare and that just doesn't sit well with a lot of the moderates, as well as the fact that it doesn't bring down premiums for some of the conservatives. anna: this is an issue for moderates and conservatives, but for different reasons. anna: certainly for different reasons. the moderates would like to see more money put into the system, to be able to help certain americans to afford their insurance, to be able to gain access where otherwise they might not be able to, where's
the conservatives want to work on the side of bringing down the cost of it. premiums will come down a little bit under this, overall about 30% lower than current law and they just don't see that as enough right now for people to be able to get their support behind this bill. where's the moderates want to see while the costs are coming down, they want to see more help for people from the government to be able to deal with those costs. cirilli, let me ask you a bit about the lobbying effort that been underway. members of the senate now headed to the white house at four clock this afternoon to speak with the president. what role has the white house been playing in trying to coerce or convince members of the republican caucus to back this bill? we're looking at footage in the capital were the senate majority leader is expected to speak, there's an on campus -- on camera press briefing at a press
secretary sean spicer scheduled to take place at any moment now as well. what is the white house involvement been like so far? not much. vice president mike pence and hezbollah cooperation are working with the more conservative members similar to the way we saw the working the house members, and again, they are primarily focused on the politics of this. they look at the 2018 implications and that is where --y are really having crafting their policy. people like kellyanne conway on fumigation calls with a host of folks who are looking to lay the groundwork's in key battleground states like nevada. you talk to people on capitol hill, tom senators and staffers and they are relying on the majority leader's author. know thisblunt, you from years of covering capitol hill, that's kind of rare, especially when the party in power occupies both congress as well as the white house. people here in the halls of congress are relying on leadership within the senate as opposed to relying on the white house and the president and
their political operation. different, particularly on this issue, we've seen it a little bit more where the white house is more engaged in terms of their ability to do things on tax reform with people like treasury secretary mnuchin and gary cohen very carefully working every step of the way but on health care in particular, as michael mckee said, it's really hard. and they are having to figure that out. finding that is perhaps why you are seeing more influence exerted from here in the halls of congress as opposed to the white house. anna: we're waiting for mitch mcconnell to speak, a certain amount of guesswork goes into what he is going to say when he gets to the podium. we've seen reports that perhaps he is going to try and bring about another bill. this is how my cat would be the way forward for the republicans to trying to craft this? and onene last week this week, is he aiming for
another version to try to get another cbo score? kevin: i've been covering president trump for a long time i'm not going to guess list pfizer is going to say. i do think they are definitely going to be trying to push forward right now with the notion that they are going to try to again get something passed sooner rather than later. it really is like what we saw happen, we all remember how president trump had a political victory ultimately badmouthing the building on of the house. those republican lawmakers to the rose garden, having a very public show of support, saying this is a unified republican party and a couple of weeks later he called the bill mean. he said the senate version was a bit nicer. even if jake a look at the president's, he has suggested he is trying to include all republican senators and get them all on board, not targeting any specifically. at the contradiction from what we saw the house of representatives when on twitter, even a little bit of laughter
the house freedom caucus, trying to get them on board. hisead, he's holding twitter fire from democrats, labeling them obstructionist and keeping instead by trying to needle some of these are public and senators. to be a fly on the wall at the meeting at 4:00 in the white house when just like he had robbed and house members going to the white house, he's now had an republican senator's do it as well. i would imagine that health care is going to be one of the main topics of conversation, but everyone else's point, i think this is also very much an opportunity to needle through some other issues, even including on foreign policy. ask you tome psychoanalyze what house speaker paul ryan might be speaking is all of this is unfolding. you are ever the ceremony in the house passed his bill. how do you think he is watching this unfold? mike: he doesn't have much influence on this debate of the other side of the capital. in public he is very optimistic and have the talking points
down, but he knows how the senate works if you did mention today in his news conference as a reconciliation process is a bit of a pain for people in the house who can just vote up or down. he doesn't have a real problem getting this through. and there's nothing he can do unless the senate actually moves. he is sidelined. david: when he turned to anna who covers health care for us how to washington, d.c. when thee complaints obama administration and democrats were working on their informal care act. it happened a few moments ago, rather quickly by comparison. what is the consensus here about where we are today based on that and how quickly we come to where we are? anna: i think there was definitely is were trying to make the argument for a very long time that obamacare was passed extremely quickly and no one knew what was actually in the bill and that it was a dead of night situation. i did cover obamacare and i do remember the many hours sitting
in the hallway and waiting for bipartisanven a group of senators who were negotiating behind closed doors, but there also hearings and certain things for at least a year. so now, we've seen this move extremely quickly, the house passed their version of the legislation just last month. now the senate was trying to move and what happens is the senators just got uncomfortable with the fact that they could really understand the impact of this bill in such a short time frame, particularly some of the moderates that we talked about, they want to know how this is going to affect their constituents, and they haven't had time to really process it. the cbo score just came out yesterday and they haven't had time to go home and talk to their constituents and hear from them, and that might change their calculus a little bit. i think that is what mitch mcconnell was aiming for a
first, was that they wouldn't maybe have time for that, where they could pass the bill and get it through, but now that there's been enough concern it is something you just going to have to let them do. anna: what about opposition from other groups? the democrats have been firmly against all of this from the start, but other groups that are inputting into the conversation -- those who work in the health care center -- health care sector, what we know about that? democrats have long opposed this and they don't want anything to do with repeal obamacare. we have also heard from the doctors, aarp, and the hospital groups have opposed this effort from the beginning, when the house was taking of health care bill. hospitals particularly have a big concern here. obamacare was a reason they were able to deal with the problem of uncompensated care.
it didn't completely go away, but they got a lot of relief from that. people using the emergency rooms and not being able to pay their bills, that's gone down significantly. if the senate bill becomes law, hospitals will end up back in -- oldwn situation situation with more uncompensated care that he to make up for or closing hospitals. the american hospital association told me it wouldn't just be closing hospitals, it might be losing jobs as well and delaying try to modernize some of these hospitals. you have insurance companies on the other side, and they've taken on a more measured approach. they are not against the bill, but they are trying to get some hopefully fixes into it that -- they like the fact that stabilizes the market in the beginning, at least through the first two years. whether you're looking for down the road is to make sure that more people have access to
health care, because cbo said with the way it is now, people, especially low income people aren't even going to buy insurance plans because it will be useful for them. david: and he covers health care forest. covers health care for us. capitol complex, awaiting comments from mitch mcconnell. news broke a few moments ago he intends to not hold a vote on the republican health care bill they came up with before the job by -- the july 4 recess. sector sean spicer scheduled hold a daily press briefing on kami -- on camera today. it will do in items here on the agenda today. we were watching before this a conversation with the venture janet yellen in london. anna: it seems that wilbur ross is speaking by video link in germany. janet yellen making a few
headlines in her conversation with george nicholas stern regarding a whole host of macro topics. mike mckee still with us on set in new york. anything that's caught your eye? as we gone to the conversation, she does seem to be talking more about inflation and how to doesn't want to avoid making too low inflation ingrained habit is kind of comments. mike: she's finally getting to the good stuff, the things that wall street wanted to hear. she is saying the fed is going to continue its policies, it does not believe the phillips curve is broken. as long as unemployment continues to go down, the odds are inflation will rise and also, that upon implement falls farther below the national rate it --l employment, then the inflation rate will rise faster, and that's not necessarily a bad thing for the time being. she does say the fed is concerned about how the markets are reacting to what they are doing, but she reiterates the idea that they are going to raise rates very slowly and very
gradually, and that they have communicated that well they think to the markets. the nothing think there's been any adverse reaction. the hasn't been, in the markets, to the idea of beginning to taper the balance sheet. she is sending the message that it is steady as she goes and nothing is really going to change in fed policy. they think they are on the right course. anna: it's like watching paint dry. david: no more valuable tool on the bloomberg when tv . even watch the comments we are expecting from the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell and the press secretaries remarks, sean spicer expected to start any moment as well. the officeli is in building a few feet away from mitch mcconnell -- from where mitch mcconnell is scheduled to speak. help us understand what republicans have left to get this help your bill through? someone is going to have
to fall on their political sword. when you crunch the numbers and focusing on moderates, people like senator heller who are up for reelection to but also senator susan collins and lisa murkowski, they are focusing in constituencies of moderate, independent voters who are going to look at this bill and scratch their head and wonder why there's due funding for planned parenthood and wonder why there's only $2 billion allocated for opioid addiction when people like reflectedrtman have summit for $40 billion. when michael mckee talks about the $200 billion figure bank the majority leader has to start feeding some of these programs with custom entitlement programs, these are some of the bargaining chips that are really going to be up for the topic of conversation. makeupe to look at the and the lay of the land. if someone like senator ted cruz wants to come along and make planned parenthood part of this discussion, you have a situation where someone like can and his
buddy senator mike lee, republican from utah are going to have a lot of clout. and have a lot of say. and that's why the dynamics of this are so interesting. we talk a lot about the more mainstream news flow, particularly with these russian investigations. we said this several weeks ago, about how every time there's a rash of headlines, it weakens the political capital of the white house. you are looking right now is situation where no matter what is on the bargaining chip, this is a white house in dire need of a political victory on policy to see the base, but also a white house that doesn't have much ability or clout to get into the negotiating table with someone like senator ted cruz, a for reelection in 2018, and to really try and push him to get on board with this plan. in a way, it almost helps him to do what he is doing. anna: this, on the day when the trump's growth target
unlikely, as much as the white house cares about what the imf exhibit at its growth plan, the fund removed from land fiscal stimulus from its forecast. the advantage financial institution saying they don't believe this is most recent impasses level of fiscal stimulus and perhaps this goes to their point. absolutely. the white house may not care what the imf thinks, but you can bet that janet yellen cares, and you bet that the fed governors care and fomc members care what the imf thinks, especially they are looking at the chatter in washington about linking and juxtaposing infrastructure with tax reform. there are a lot of folks on the fomc were looking at that and say we are not sure we're going to be able to sustain that. in terms of what investors should be watching for, in terms of this health care debate, how this is going to impact the makeup of congress heading into the 2018 midterms is going to be
profound. and that is, was the first initiative president trump try to take a whack at. this was that, the number one policy prescription he wanted to deliver first, and he has run into at every step of the way some type of obstacle. he didn't choose to do immigration, he didn't you to do much with trade or the jobs bill, he showed to try to reform health care. and what he is witnessing right now is the political reality check that really good to find definitely the first year of his presidency and also, the second half of his first or final first four years in office. staffers you talk to and senators, to express any regret with how this bill was drafted? it was drafted in secrecy with only 13 members of the senate involved in writing this legislation. is there would read the more people weren't invited to the table early on? anna: i think that's of interest in question, because when talking to senators about this,
a lot of the republicans will say we are concerned, we don't like the process, we don't think this is the way that legislation should be written, but they don't go any further. i've askedsay senator mcconnell to do this differently or i'm going to get together my own group of republicans and democrats or others to try and get this legislation written a different way. there's been regret expressed, but not exactly with any action behind it, with anyone who has tried to change the process in any way. and certainly, now that the cbo score is out, it doesn't really look great on a lot of levels. you are seeing a little bit more action in the sense that they are saying i won't vote for this , i won't vote for even a vote to consider this bill on the floor.
it started to come forward that way with how this has all been put together. but i think at first, there was sort of the hope that everything would work out and that there would be even with this process, there would be something that we get past and quickly. that do you get the sense the white house needs to rent this up and come back with something entirely different? or do we get another iteration of the process we've already seen? getting those three dissenters back onside, does it require a --l rewind -- we write? rewrite? or the spending. are having that $200 billion, think this will be the next thing we will see, a different iteration of this bill and a new cbo score to try and make the premium numbers and the deductibles look a little better
, as well as the coverage numbers if they are able to get there. they're going to rip this up and start over wholesale, at least, not yet. athink that would take complete failure on the floor, something on the senate floor if they weren't able to get it passed at some point. the right now, this is a lot like what happened in the house. ryan brought their version of this bill to the floor and forgot close to it and then pulled it back and came back a little bit later with a slightly updated version they gave some concessions to some of the members who had concerns. and i think we are basically seeing that pattern repeated itself. david: waiting for comments from senate majority legal which mcconnell -- senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. mike mckee is on set with us in new york, and remarks just concluded by fed chair janet yellen and london. i was struck talking about steve
mnuchin and janet yellen was asked about her relationship with the trump administration. mike: a no-win question for her, there's an issue about whether she would be reappointed next january. she declined to comment on her relationship with the president, except to say we have a good working relationship. she said that everything she has heard from the white house respect the independence of the fed. there's a tradition with the fed working with illustrations and made no promises or personal comments about the president himself. interesting comments from her just before she concluded about asset prices. fact thatlk about the interest rates have been so low for so long that we are starting to see some asset price valuations that might be questionable. the fed is keeping an eye on that and they may be concerned. it's interesting because we heard much the same from stanley fischer and before that, much the same for mario draghi,
talking about the banking system, mark carney. three of the world's central bankers talking about financial stability today and it's all a question that comes about because interest rates have been so low for so long. assetjanet yellen said valuations some of which by traditional metrics, we were just talking about that before she took to the stage. about what she might say. someone in the audience was trying to get her to comment on her relationship with president trump and she is not doing so. early on i thought it was interesting when lord stern asked her about regulation and she talked about how she hoped memories weren't short. she was not referencing the administration, but in a conversation about bank regulations. you wonder if that was a veiled message for the trump administration not to be too reckless, in terms of taking away -- david: it's one area where the fed has pushed back against the administration. i have suggested there are certainly areas of dodd-frank they could be improved.
they need to lighten up a little bit on the regulation of small banks. the real goal has been a problem and there are areas of stress tests that could be adjusted, but they don't want the overall regulatory baby thrown out with the bathwater. you heard almost the same message today from mark carney in terms of what the british regulation is a banks. the yes, there are things that could be adjusted but we really need to remember that things go wrong when things look good. they don't go wrong in the middle of a crisis, you are already in the crisis. you got to be very careful about regulations and i think both would prefer to stay where they are then make major changes. but they admit there are things that can be done, just go too far. anna: she was saying she likes to be contrarian in looking for risk. looking for the future might come from. left, he waslo has charged with a lot of regulatory responsibility. when you suspect we will start to see changes perhaps in the direction of the fed when it
comes to regulation? mike: we don't really know. his nomination, as far as anybody knows, is on track. he's been in a private equity business for quite some time and his wife has essential financial connections. all that has to be worked through and you have to look through conflict of interest. an enormous amount of paperwork to be filled out before they are officially nominated. that could come any time was they get through with that. , butn goodfriend was named he doesn't have a substantial financial holdings. but they may want to package them together and announce them at the same time. a third seat for a community banker and there are reports they have been having trouble finding someone who really wants to take that seat. i'm sure they could find somebody in a pinch, but that's going to least problematic of the seeds. and then becomes a question of when you have nominated them, getting them through the confirmation progress --
confirmation process. we talked about how jammed of the senate isn't doing all these things. you'll be lucky to get somebody by the middle of the fall confirmed, the way it's going. which raises questions about if you want to replace janet yellen and stanley fischer, when do they have to be nominated? when do you start the process? especially when it is someone who has as donald trump has a promotion for, defensive financial dealings. gary cohn has already been mentioned that he would have a smoother, more quick passage confirmation than others. it does raise questions about when we are going to hear something from the administration about janet yellen's future. you were asking steve mnuchin about the search and it's already ongoing. howd: he wouldn't reveal far they've made progress, but said he intends to talk with the president. this is this from, marco rubio, the senator from florida came by and he is surrounded reporters eager to get his reaction to what happened. the leader of the republicans in
the senate decided not to hold a vote on the health care bill until after the july 4 recess. kevin cirilli, the chief washington correspondent, let me ask you as a party is saying. what is the republican national committee saying about mitch mcconnell decision to do this? kevin: a coupler mulligan sources have made the point that just the intense pressure that the senators are going to face when they go back home for july 4 recess. you're having their picnic parties out of the fireworks display, they're going to be meeting with constituents and also some config again folks are going to be wondering what exactly in the health insurance market, what exactly is going on. in terms of peeling back the onion a little bit more about some of the legislative arm of the white house, there are a significant number of folks who have been twisting arms here in the senate, who are going to also have to be answering to the boss about what exactly went
wrong, and what exactly needs to be changed. i spoke with one more conservative person, conservative consultant and from this person's perspective, it's a good thing, because from the far right perspective, it is not a bill that anyone could get on board to begin with but the political reality really speaks volumes. that is that once again, health care reform, the divisions in the republican party here are on full display. >> over in washington, breaking news, lettuce recount that part. collected as republican aides who are familiar has in fact decided there will be no vote this week. morents to give members
time to look through the details, understand it, and bring members. he decided to craft this bill secretively and up for a vote within about a week of releasing it. get an year full from the constituents. another thing republicans want to do, tax reform p are the bill will be delayed and we do not know when it will come up exactly but mcconnell does not want to let this hang. the process here of the health-care bill seems to be following this description. spkr. ryan:'s to hold it at the last minute when he did not have a vote and it eventually later came back to life. it is not what mr. mcconnell wanted. i'm sure he wanted it this past week but it would be a folly to assume that the health-care bill is dead. there are many more cards to play but the idea of passing the bill that is so far-reaching and
impacts so much of the economy within seven days of releasing it, it was probably a bridge too far for members. cbo scoree bit on the we got just yesterday, michael mckee, let me ask you about the that-- the degree to which shifted a lot of the senators opinions of the legislation. >> it did not go over well when you had an announcement there would be 20 2 million people losing insurance, the trump administration a back saying but as pauleliable, ryan said today, they are the best numbers we have and if you will work off any numbers, you need a referee and a scorekeeper. you can imagine the political commercials that will begin running from democrats immediately. your senators throwing people in this it -- in the streets with no insurance. a lot of people looking at that and it did save more money in the long run. that may give mitch mcconnell
some room to work with. what did the governors back home think? bought intornors the obama administration's expansion of medicaid, and the senate wants to cap it and the house wants to basically cut it off and the senate would give it more time to do that. but are they on board question mark they will put more pressure on senators as well because the senate bill as written says you can keep medicaid but you have to fund it your own way. does the governor want to go to his people and say i am throwing you off of health care or raising your taxes to keep people on medicare? medicaid. that will be a tough issue as well for many politicians back home. >> any thoughts on what the government will make of this? nervous, arnors are number of them, about medicaid cuts, particularly states that chose to expand medicaid. ryan is a republican governor in -- in nevada, one of the most popular in the country. and the republican senator from
nevada facing reelection in 2018, the only republican senator facing reelection in a state that hillary clinton one. -- won. what medicaidke cuts p or charlie after he said that, they came out and made a strong statement against this senate will worrying that it would put hundreds of thousands of nevadans out of health care coverage. so governors will not be particularly thrilled to have fewer federal dollars coming in and that is understandable but it is a real obstacle that they have to deal with when deciding how to vote. national clinical correspondent joins us on capitol hill p reduce the and your screen secretary of energy rick perry speaking at the white house daily press briefing. this is energy week and the secretary of energy addressing that now. if you would like to hear what he has to say, you can go to tv on the bloomberg and watch the press briefing.
we're watching the hallway outside the senate chamber where we expect the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell to address his decision to move a vote on a republican health care bill certainly before recess until after the recess. covering health care out of washington dc, look at the criticism of the cbo score. so much is levied at this nonpartisan office that scored this bill and other health care bills. how widely shared is the skepticism among the republicans in the senate question mark >> i think it has been widely shared. it has been part of the talking points for this legislation. it is interesting. the director of the cbo is someone put in place by republicans. you have to wonder about that criticism. but there is some legitimacy given that when the cbo was
looking at obamacare, they did overestimate on the coverage numbers. moving forward, they have said they have learned from that. it was not something -- it is sort of as it has been now, it has been a very wide talking point among the republican party to discredit the office, particularly on coverage numbers, although, the deficit reduction in the latest -- latest cbo score in the senate bill was a high number, 320 $1 billion, if i remember exactly correctly. that is not something you have her disputed so much. you see a pick and choose of which numbers there are -- they are discrediting. >> sean spicer presiding over this briefing, that is what the white house said would happen this morning when they announced there would be a briefing. releasing the
briefing there. with hisg his way producer to the white house. i should mention also on the agenda this afternoon at about 4:00 p.m., republican senators will make their way to the white house for a meeting with president trump. quite sweet were talking about what the cbo has said about the health care plan. the conclusion seems to be from these republican senators who are holding out here, that the numbers the cbo said would loosen sure and's is too high. do we have a sense of what number would he ok with them if the number that would lose coverage would be a lot less? would it get them on board? is it something the administration will work toward? >> i certainly think it is the goal of what they will work towards as a try to move toward a new iteration of the bill. isave not heard them say it
the number we're shooting for, this is what we think might be except the ball. there will certainly always be some coverage losses because they are going to cut medicaid and they want to wind down funding for an x dance in the obamacare created for medicaid that some states implemented. the numbers are never going to be zero but they certainly could bring them down a good bit. in medicaid, there are about 15 million people who would lose coverage under the plan who might have had it before, and so they have some wiggle room to work with on the other side and byt could be boosted possibly finding ways to make coverage more affordable to not just bring down the premiums but try to bring down the deductible . a lot of low income americans might not purchase health canrance because they
afford the premium but might not be able to afford the deductible and it just makes the insurance totally useless for them. going to be working to make that a more palatable number. what exactly the number would look like, i have not heard them give any specifics yet. about the wayyou forward. the vote will not be held before the july 4 recess. as kevin was saying, a lot of these senators will go home to states. there will be picnics and meet and greets and town hall meetings. what should they expect when they get home? what will they face? >> probably a lot of angry constituents who are energized health careof coverage being taken away from them are now that republicans are in power and trying to do this, the electorate is more energized because they fear something they achieved will be taken away. many republican senators will have to face that and deal with it in the july 4 recess. ahead fork, the path
mitch mcconnell, it is unclear. he has an enormously difficult task. the senate majority leader coming to the podium now. here is mitch mcconnell. mcconnell: we will continue the discussions in the conference on the differences that we have that we are continuing to try and litigate. consequently, we will not be on the bill this week. but we are still working toward getting at least 50 people in a comfortable place. we are going down to the white house at 4:00. the president invited us to come down and the white house has been very involved in the discussion. they are anxious to help and we appreciate the invitation and i hope all of our members will head down and i hope that will likely be the case. >> the schedule may have changed
a little bit but one thing has not changed. obamacare is collapsing, it is a failed system that needs to be replaced. we believe the legislation that we are trying to get up on the senate floor and considered their will take america in a better direction. will help bring stability to the marketplace, affordability to people across the country who are suffering under the currents of high premiums and high deductibles and hype -- out-of-pocket costs. since 2013 the individual market remains across the country have literally more than doubled. that has to be addressed. we want to make sure we are preserving the access that people have to coverage for pre-existing conditions. to make sure medicaid is sustainable not just for today but for the future as well. more flexibility to present -- to design programs that make sense for their populations. experiments and examples have worked around the country operating at a much more cost-effective and efficient way, saving taxpayer dollars and
delivering high-quality health care to the people in their individual states. those are our objectives and said, we areas i intent on rescuing americans from a failed system that has driven up their costs and made it more difficult for them to find coverage. >> the pain of obamacare continues to get worse around the country as in wyoming this past weekend visiting a house on talking to doctors and nurses and patients, so many of them impacted in a bad way by the obama health care law. i had a woman in the office this morning from a small community in wyoming, lost her insurance when obamacare came into play because it was good enough for her and her family but apparently not good enough for the democrats. her husband now have an expensive that doubled in cost. 6500 dollarse is for her as well as 6500 for her husband. she says he will not go to a
doctor. someone insured under obamacare but according to them, he does not have usable insurance. therepublican proposal, are a number of key points to it we limit the jetted mandate that people across the country hate that you have to buy a government approved product. we eliminate all the taxes and we turn a lot of authority to individuals and states, getting things out of washington, and i will tell you when i was in the state senate, we'll is felt we could do much better job with the same amount of money helping more people, more patients, more families with health care for just had washington not telling us how to do it because we knew it better at home than people did in washington and that is how we feel, it is very important in terms of putting on a sustainable path for the future, states need the authority to do it in the right way. medicaid was initially set up to help poor women, children, and the disabled and it is taken in a direction way different with
bonus -- bonus patients who are able bodied individuals. finally, we focus on an incredible, high-cost insurance that people face with the doubling rates of obamacare. rates, do looking at the the cbo says it actually lowers the rates for insurance 30%, a couple of years from now. that is what people are screaming about it home, the increasing rates and projections for next year are even higher under obamacare. it isare is a bust and going off a cliff. the democrats are saying to stay on board. we are trying to rescue the american people from this bust that they are on. [inaudible] no, we continue to talk about it. it is a complicated subject. i remember how challenging it was for the democrats back in 2009 and 2010, it's a
complicated subject. we are optimistic. not interested in dissipating. >> the legislative process, we have to go back and recalibrate those. he spent a lot of time writing the bill. isn't that an indictment with what you put forward? >> no. it is an ongoing discussion. we have a number of different discussions going on for six weeks now. it is a big and combo kidded subject. they are hard to pass. >> you have done a great job holding together your caucus.
you learn about the process -- [inaudible] >> the president has been very involved over the last week talking to members individually. he wanted to talk to all of us together today. i think that is helpful. legislation of this complexity almost always take longer than anyone else would hope that we will press on and we think the status quo is unsustainable for the obvious reasons we discussed over and over again. we hope we get to a result that is better than the status oh. >> the president had deferred to
you largely on this legislation, now that you have not will it be the, president that takes it over the finish line? >> rio is pitted the president would be very important in getting us to a conclusion. he is a man with a signature. it wouldrly stages, have been a waste of his time in the early stages. we needed to get this far enough to where there are a few issues that needed to be close and we are delaying the process so we can close the remaining issues. he is fully engaged and being helped every way he can. thanks a lot. >> that was mitch mcconnell saying the health-care bill will be delayed until after the fourth of july recess. several members want more time on the bill.
notentioned democrats interested on the spill as well. >> it is all about republicans -- they are the vocal ones. this andalk about actually talk about doing this and it is embarrassing. from the cbo. >> no time for a fresh bill. tweets from the bill as they try to buy off individual senators. we talked earlier about how the cbo score gave a $1 billion. subsequent rules of the senate to make enticements and try to get them on board, it will be
interesting to see how far he will go with that. clear.ot a member of the public and --dership, you heard premiums are up and coverage is down. will -- bill would raise premiums for moderate to income people. it would raise the deductible. it also gives a lot of the features that obamacare got rid of. how they get through and satisfy different constituencies, that will be the job between now and the end of july. >> mitch mcconnell mission democrats are not interested in
participating. has the gop done anything to make the bill more power -- more palatable? >> democrats will not be participating. democrats are set against repealing the law fear they have a fundamental difference that cannot he reckoned out and mcconnell knew he had to get 50 out of it to two republicans on board. i think it looks something like this. individuals and that sort of thing. these are ted cruz is, mike lee, ron johnson. , $200f those guys billion. treatments like ohio and west virginia that have expanded
republican senators are nonideological and are worried about the impact of the medicaid cuts. she could potentially use the severity. >> families would be heard by trumpcare. republicans were in their lunch with steve, a multimillionaire who would have benefited with a huge cap -- tax cut. we're talking about average working american people. they are talking about multimillionaires. that is why they are in so much trouble. their bill was aimed at helping the very wealthy whereas we are trying to help american families. we know the fight is not over.
we do not feel any sense yet of a couple schmidt. the american people are listening to our out -- our arguments. we're china to get things done. we will watch the bill. all the machinations, closed doors, behind closed doors as they might be, like a hawk. clear, republicans core atxcise the rotten the center of the health care bill. in the next week and a half, no matter how the bill changes around the edges, it is fundamentally flawed. american people do not want medicaid slashed.
they do not want -- to fight opioid addiction, helping parents and opioids, helping those with pre-existing conditions. just to help the average person, .ho needs good health care the american people to not want all that changed and eliminated. the republican bill is run to the core. nor are they for dramatically cutting their health care. bill has about 17% popularity and that will not change of any little tweak that wins over this or that senator. the matter what last-minute amendments are offered, the bill receivece americans to fewer benefits so that americans
receive less in taxes. until republicans abandon that rotten core, they will not succeed. in winning the american people over, and it makes it much less -- ly the ultimate reason the bill failed is the american people did not like it. work with theou republican colleagues, we want to. we of two suggestions area first, abandon tax breaks for the wealthy. abandon cuts for medicaid. down and talk about improving health care. the first to say american needs improvement. we will not be in a position only 15 say, ok,
million people will be uncovered and we will support the bill. billionaires were only get a $40,000 tax rate set of the $50,000 tax rate. it is not the kind of compromise we are talking about. we have a sexy -- second suggestion. abandon closed-door, secret processes and go to regular order. have committee hearings. amendments and go back into the idea that they need 60 votes and a bipartisan majority to pass a bill. can start over again and work together and try and get improvements in the health care system. if our republican colleagues stick to this bill, which hurts working families and benefits families, we will fight the bill
.ooth and nail a week from now, a month of now, and a year from now. >> we really have seen a national debate on health care. i think it was long overdue. -- y, more more americans then in the bid yet -- than the beginning of the debate. the realize how fundamentally positive it was for them and their families. to make sure everybody had access for quality assurance and provide medicaid for those people who had low income jobs and low benefits. and now have medical insurance coverage. all of these things were taken for granted.
appreciate the fundamental values and principles are really important for health care system. if they werehought against obamacare, that's all they had to say but the american people demand more when it comes to leadership. they have a better idea and republicans failed to come up with a better idea. they asked me my reaction to the news. it is not jubilation. it is frankly relief for the 22 million americans who will not lose their health insurance because the republican plan, including a million in my home state of illinois, senior citizens face traumatic increases in the premiums they would have to pay for health insurance. the red section of our state went strongly for donald trump, these were the hospitals that were in danger according to the hospital association.
i feel some relief and i don't think this party is over. we will have to address issue and we should from this point forward. this bill is not some fine wine that gets better with age. turns sour. people come to understand was included in the package. we will cut the guts out of the health insurance in the health system across the country. the congressional budget office, that analysis did more to strike a dagger into the heart of the republican repeal than anything else. i listen to mice -- or pelican collies who came if you miss ago to this microphone preaching
flexibility. that is not the same thing as funding. that is why republican governors in nevada and ohio and even illinois came out against the republican repeal plan. they know better. you cannot use flexibility to make up the difference for basic health care for thousands of people you represent in your state. i want to reiterate what was said in closing. we are ready to work with republicans and make the health care stronger. take discussed for medicaid off the table and make a commitment to make sure americans will have more access to health insurance and i want to pull up a chair to that table. thank you. >> that wraps up the democratic response to the news that mitch mcconnell is delaying the republican efforts on the health care bill. we also has senate minority leader chuck schumer saying this is a fundamentally flawed bill at its core and he talked to the
use of a slush fund, $200 billion to try and cut deals. he said the fight on the health. -- the health bill is not over and this is clearly going to continue the debate. about what this means for the democrats. >> not the political process. chuck schumer's slush fund comments remind me from -- of casablanca. going oned gambling is to democrats would use whatever they could to influence legislators to vote their way. made givingey mcconnell time to win over wavering senators, it brings into it groups were opposed to these plans. it gives them a lot more time to lobby the legislators back in the state level.
trying to get this through. >> we talk about what tweaks were necessary in order to get those republican senators to sign on. what areas will mitch mcconnell need to compromise on and submit to what some of the more conservative and more moderate republicans are demanding? >> it is the moderate republicans that that slush fund we're talking about could be aimed at. they would like more funding for the opioids to fight the overdose crisis happening in the country. they would like more money also just to be able to stabilize some of the insurance markets and make sure the people are not having huge out of pocket costs
to bring those down. there are places they can apply the money to help make the moderates more comfortable on the conservative side. it basically would like to repeal obamacare further. it is probably not something mitch mcconnell will be able to get into the bill but it might be something he will be able to give the states flexibility to do. they are trying to give flexibility already to maybe change essential health and if it's that obamacare requires insurance plans cover. that could bring down the cost of insurance. it is possible to flexibility could further be tweaked enough to make the conservatives comfortable. enoughdo you move far away from obamacare here to please conservatives and also see the improvements in health care particularly where costs are concerned. touess that slush fund quote
order billion dollars, is going to be enough. >> we heard from senator schumer just how far away, he laid it out and said two of his demands were abandoned tax breaks for the wealthy, abandoned medicaid cuts, it is quite literally the heart of the bill. $700 billion in tax cuts and 700 dollars in medicaid cuts. republicans will not part with that but they can move to the edges. the point about what they can do to win over conservatives, one interesting ring is a number of his conservative members want more deregulation to the extent of letting more insurance companies charge more to potential customers on the basis .f health status house republicans leaders initially decided to keep it in their. caved under the pressure of conservative language.
the trade-off here is if you let insurance companies charge sick people more, they can charge healthy people less. a lot of people will see the cost go down. amonga little more clear the moderates because if you provide some money here and there, you can get there and with the conservatives, is dangerous. if you go too far to the right, you risk alienating the moderates. >> and that is the balance he has got to find. it feels like a long time ago. giving us their wisdom there. let's get a check on the market with julie hyman. the latest health care bill delay, and in the background, stocks are falling. and with the nasdaq, one can say tumbling. 1.4% as we have seen a tech selloff intensify as the day has gone on -- gone on.
volume is either at or below the 20 day average. nonetheless, the selling is continuing. take a look or the groups on the move. tech is selling off down about 1%. yields are higher and we will get to that in a moment in the same way that financials are higher as they benefit from higher yields. some of the tech movers we are watching today aside from the large ones we talk about, the facebook's and apples of the world trading lower, we have got western digital down after the company came down about the comments of earnings. in particular on the hard disk drive is this, they are in the negative. seagate is down 6%. other types of tech today, including chipmakers, activision blizzard is also trading lower here today.
again, take a look of the bloomberg. we could see an end to the nasdaq monthly winning streak as we close in here at the end of the month of june. the nasdaq is off one third of 1%. it has been rising seven straight months. quite a winning streak for the nasdaq. as for another event for the day, janet yellen us his comments in london, it did not seem to necessarily push the market around a lot. looking back instead of current policy, even before she spoke, we were seeing a selloff in the u.s.. points, the best we have seen since january. a quick check on the yield curve , going back spread
to december of 2007, continuing to narrow and flattening today's session. >> thank you. let's get a recap of the top headlines right now. crumpton, we start with the latest in washington. >> senate republicans have decided to delay a vote on the health care bill until after the july 4 recess. at least five gop senators, currently mike lee of utah, have said they will not even back a procedural vote on the measure that is supposed to this week. a cyber attack is spreading across europe today and hitting it doesn't companies and some government agencies. more than 80 companies disabled computers and told users to pay $300 to unlock them. russia's largest oil company was affected and so was the danish
shipping company. britain's treasury chief says his company wants to keep the economy anchored in the european mainstream as it leaves the european union. speaking at a conference in berlin, he stressed the need for -- to avoid a destructive and dangerous with edge as it negotiates departure. who hasuestion is not the largest slice of the cake. matters isn that whether we can be smart enough to work out how to continue collaborating together to keep the cake growing for the benefit of all. >> he says the risk of a bad outcome that does not promote jobs growth and prosperity is a real one not just to the u.k. economy but for the eu economy. global news 24 hours a day hard by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120
countries. this is bloomberg. scarlet: we are awaiting the q&a portion of the white house press briefing. white house expected to react to news of gop delaying its health care bill. talkingts of rick perry about energy week. to his right is sarah huckabee sanders expected to give a live event. we will take you there when it begins. this is bloomberg. ♪
it marks the one-year of fully fledged stock exchange. erik schatzker spoke exclusively earlier this hour and after the hearing. >> it expresses a differing amount of you -- of use. you suck clients expect concerns about conflicts of interest. you saw a unanimous consent of selling market data. that is something you saw in the second panel, and i was the only one who represented the same in entrenched are positions. >> i have not watched or participated in every single hearing on equity market structure. i will say this is the first time i heard your rivals, and nowally tom farley
the cboe acknowledging there are these conflicts of interest and they have to be managed. was that something newer if not totally new for you? >> it is definitely a new thing. data that proves that these are threatening and it is important to note that not -- brokers are violating jpmorgan, the size of the payment, the kickback, the rebate, compared to the client franchise, i look at a broker that managed it well, and many brokers fall victim to the short-term payment rebates. when those rebates are not given kickback, a former chief economist calling it an illegal kickback.
this is now being a dressed .hird data >> you pointed out it is important to separate allegations or accusations of conflict of interest. you have the issue which is a payment for order flow. on the other hand, you have the data issue with the exchange and clients ended some cases high-speed trading firms are conflicted when it comes to the sale of market data. let's talk about the maker take her issue a first. the suggestion was if there were a more dynamic approach to the size of rebates relative to the amount of order flow, that might flex -- fix the problem. as opposed to your suggestion, to get rid of the model altogether by eliminating rebates. that argument go half way
to addressing your concerns? >> one of the challenges we have is a lot of the price controls we have in the market are basically trying to manage the conflict, which is the rebate required we going to the heart of it and addressing the rebate and then working on further improvements to the market? i think addressing the conflict head-on is much better than indirectly try to manage it through price controls or other kinds of mechanical regulations. >> if i understand correctly, in your testimony you also suggest exchanges in particular are doing a very poor job of self policing when it comes to conflicts of interests around market data, do i have that right? forn a government committee market data, when it in reality it is the industry supplying the data and the exchanges just a delivery mechanism. it is an interesting example where the person who has the smallest role in market data is
the one who dominates governance and that is in serious conflict i think. >> you have proposed at least three fixes for what you have discerned to be flaws in the market structure. one is eliminating rebates and the second would be the regulation of the cost of access to market data. the third is increasing transparency and potentially introducing regulation of trading systems. would you add anything to that? >> i think those three cover it. people are bringing up a lot of topics. a lot of the regulation, i keep coming back to this, it stems around rebates and trying to manage that through rule. hitting that point i think is really important. on the data point, rebates and data are interlinked. 2.5 billion dollars a year and rebates, they have to find another source of income. that soars on monopoly pricing and market data. you had a new york stock , 700% sinceter 2008.
yes, but the cost to receive market data has increased 300% since 2014, nearly. these are technology costs in the rest of the world plummeting. giving aa conflict monopoly and selling their own products in their own data centers and controlling all of the access, so we side with the industry that that needs to change. >> it seems to me one of the challenges you face and one of the challenges that the clients and institutional investors face in making these arguments is they are trying to prove counter fashion all, promising that the truth will be much different if the conditions we know in the present were not here. do you feel there is a good faith effort am -- on the part of the market subcommittee to understand that and furthermore to act upon it? >> i am a current have had a hearing so quickly and that the chairman and the ranking member care about these problems.
this hearing is a good first step and they are asking good questions. you have to hold the industry accountable. we continue to talk about problems in the equity structure and yet nothing really changes. good opportunity to review whether over the past 10, 20 years -- >> let's bring you to the white house dress briefing where sarah huckabee sanders is answering questions on the health care bill that the republicans have not -- now delayed, mitch mcconnell delaying it until after the fourth of july recess. let's listen in. >> american people see the headlines and wonder if we are furling headlong into -- sanders: he has said repeatedly repealing and placing obamacare, working with the senate and the house, for us, it has never been about the timeline but about getting the best use of legislation that
helps the most americans, and that is what we continue to do day in and day out and it is the reason the president asked the senate to come here today so they can talk through that and figure out the best way to move the ball flow are you that is the goal of meeting this afternoon and that is the goal of the administration. in terms of the cbo score, as we said yesterday, it is a budget office. while it does very well at times predicting things on budget whether it is revenue or spending, i do not think it does a great job and i think the administration has been do not alwayst we agree it does a great job predicting coverage. history, they projected that obamacare, there were between 4 million people that are part of that and there were only 11 and the number was dropping every day. so i do not have a lot of confidence on that part. i do think some of the places they do a good job on again are
the cbo score they pointed out that it would cut deficits by $300 billion and cut taxes by $700 billion. i think those are good things and when they focus on the budget side, it is probably a good thing and i think you had a second part. >> what is your message to the international community and to the american people who may be concerned when they read a headline like that that they are thinking we might be hurtling toward a situation that involves the u.s. and that part of the world. >> i think the message from the statement yesterday was extremely clear. i do not think it is a gray area. it was pretty black-and-white. >> can you explain, because you went on the record this morning, what was a process that led to the statement last night? were members of the state department taken aback by the statement or was it fully involved? can you give us an idea of how , toross is internally works
deliberate the statement and create that statement for public release? >> leadership from the state department, dod, the cia, as well as members of the administration within the building are part of the process from the very beginning and fully aware of it. >> can you give us a timeline of the very beginning? ms. sanders: i will not walk through the detailed process. the cbo numbers on the budget side? they are a budget office. i think on the initial numbers we saw, the cutting of deficit and taxes, i think that is where historically they have in more accurate. it is not just that i decided that. historically, that is where they have been -- >> will this administration of set -- except the budget and revenue numbers published yesterday that generally
speaking are valid and are being taken seriously? ms. sanders: i would think for the most part, in large, yes. jennifer? >> on the economic forecast, , is the whiteials house cool with european regulators hitting a u.s. company when her own and missed ration has been accused of the state of your? ms. sanders: i do not have anything at this point to weigh in on with the regulations of a private company. if anything changes, i will let you know. >> on international monetary fund, they lowered the forecast for economic growth down to 2.1%, lower than what the president looked at. can you share reaction on what you think about the forecast? ms. sanders: i have not had a chance to dig into that but we will circle back. >> i did call her and i will come back to you. >> thank you.
syria is poised to launch another chemical weapon attack. isn't that an acknowledgment that the airstrike in april did not work? daysanders: our goal every is to do what we can to protect life in all forms. and to take steps to move the ball forward in defeating isis and defeating all efforts of terrorism. i think yesterday, they help to do that. i do not know that it did not based on what we know at this point. >> a follow-up really quickly. was there a deputy meeting before the statement was issued by sean spicer last night? ms. sanders: i know there was a routine meeting take -- that took place yesterday. i do not think there was anything beyond that yesterday. >> given the news about cnn --
ms. sanders: be careful about letting them set your standards. and the the news running story, does the white house believe there are other russian related stories from major outlets that have not been retracted and that are just as false, including the february 14 story in the new york times about russia, which james comey called into question, which many believe that story was based upon? ms. sanders: i would have to look back at that specific story. many by the new york times i would probably disagree quite a bit with. it prettyu could take straightforward that the administration disagrees with all of the stories that claim that the president and his campaign colluded with russia in any capacity. i think he has been extremely clear that he believes that is a hoax. and certainly something that is not true and did not take lace.
to that, ielated think you would find frustration from the team here. >> does the weight has now believe the news media have an obligation to buy new stories on the russian trump issues and detract questionably -- ?uestionable stories do you believe the media should go back and look at stories on russia and trump and maybe start a review process and retract where necessary? ms. sanders: i think that would be a great idea. i do not think you would get argument from us if there were retractions from outlets on fake stories. i think there is a moment where we can all do better. i certainly think that is what we strive to do everyday and that is hopefully the goal. i know that is of many and hopefully it will continue to be, of not just the mood -- the news media but everyone involved in the process to continue to do better and strive for excellence and continue to do the best we
can for the american people. ok, so you except the budgetary calculations of the cbo and not the projections about those who are in short. what about protections about what would happen to premiums and deductibles? ms. sanders: i think they said yesterday the premiums would good down roughly 30% by 2020. based on what we have done internally, that seems pretty consistent. [inaudible] ms. sanders: no but i think in general but largely they predicted they would go down 30% by 2020. >> another question, the president promises health care plan would not have cuts to medicaid. does he believe a family of four making $60,000 pays too much money to qualify for medicaid? in other words, is that just too high? do not know about
the specific level breakdown. there is a reason he is bringing in people today to talk. there will be changes and adjustments. the thing the president was committed to his making sure that anybody who currently receives medicare, medicaid, sorry, that is not touched. that is consistent with what is in the bill and will continue to be what he fights for. wase said the house bill too mean. does he believe the senate bill is less mean? as mean? more mean? what does he think? ms. sanders: i honestly have not , i willm whether or not check on that. thank you so much. >> can i ask you a question? >> that was the secretary of the white house, sarah huckabee sanders, speaking not just about the decision by the republican senate to delay this discussion repeal of obamacare
until after the july 4 recess, she set up -- the white house is still optimistic and made the point that obamacare did not predict coverage well for individuals and she does not believe some of the numbers the cbo came out with. 22 million more people expected to be uncovered by health care by 26. what the, they believe senate minority leader called the slush fund they now have to try and buy votes within the senate. so the debate will no doubt continue. stage,stion is at this because mikenext mckee was telling us earlier of course, they don't have time to do some kind of presentation of a separate hill and they don't have time for a cbo score. the question is, how quickly can they pull the votes together? >> not only that come but the more time it pulls by, democrats have time to a of opposition and get people asking questions about what exactly is in the bill.
how is it that the costs will increase and premiums will increase as well? , itweisenthal, our coanchor is fascinating that they pulled the bill once again. joe: it is also very similar. in the beginning, protectable complaints from moderates and predictable complaints from conservatives. the delays of the bill, we will that unfolds.rly here with us to discuss what might happen next in the senate, on capitol hill. so what does the time he now look like? are we talking next week as soon as they get back from july 4 trying to get another vote here? >> if they could do it next week, they will try but i think they are off for the recess week so that is not really an option. i'm sure they will negotiate pretty intensely behind the scenes. in terms of understanding what members want and how to get there. gete is a path for him to
there but this is a major step back. mcconnell did not expect this to play out this way. he hoped to get it passed quickly within really a week of releasing the bill. it has been a swift effort. he is still got room to maneuver and still some cards to play. i think he will pull out all the stops are the name of the game for conservatives is to make sure they remain energized in that the left does not completely swarm them. >> this is a genuine setback and it was not part of mcconnell's roadmap. the story about mcconnell is that he always sees 10 moves ahead on the chessboard versus anyone else and that everything is going to plan. in your sense of this, he really thought he would be able to get a vote this week and the level of opposition from both the moderates and conservatives is not what he was expecting. >> it was oh is a gamble but never a fatal one. he could always say that he hoped to get it done this week.