tv Bloomberg Markets Balance of Power Bloomberg May 29, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm EDT
david westin. welcome to "balance of power." greg farrell on bob mueller's final broadcast as special counsel. the latest china back and forth. on the latest court summons. let us play a little bit about what mr. mueller had to say. mueller: under lands -- long-standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office, that is unconstitutional. charging a president with a crime was not an option we could consider. david: there you had it. it was not an option. it was not an option because the policy forbade it. greg: that is significant, because it seems to contradict what the attorney general said a month ago. this will be the story going forward. david: the question in my mind, is there an implication that, if
we had not had that policy, it would have come out desperate -- differently? greg: it is an inference that is fair to make, especially after last month where everything was fine. david: at the same time, he said he would not testify. he said that president trump was out quickly and said that a person is innocent and the case is closed. do you think it is? incitementmost an from mueller to congress that this is in your hands, this is the way the constitution is organized. if they will be a prosecution of the president it does not come through the executive branch. the case is by no means close. david: the ball is back in congress' lap. , because to mike mckee we have further back and forth between the u.s. and china between rare earth. mike: on saturday the president
is set to raise tariffs to 25%, and the question is how china would respond. the question -- the answer seems to be that they may go the nontariff route by blocking shipments of where -- rare earth spirit these are common as copper and lead. they are not exactly rare. to get them out of the ground because they oxidize quickly is extensive and polluting. the rest of the world let china run away with that business. deposits,40% of the but 80% of the process supplies. that is a problem. they go into things like magnets that are used in motors from everything to microwaves, refrigerators, and automobiles. if we do not get them, it will be a major economic problem in the short run. over the longer run, they can produce them elsewhere. there is a mine in california
that has been reopened. they are hoping by next year to restart the processing facility. david: china is sending a strong message. sending ated states message back? department issury hamstrung by the fact that congress set out the law for that. surplus, andount persistent one-way currency intervention. china has a large bilateral surplus but it does not meet the other criteria. even if they wanted to they could not name them a manipulator. they have germany, italy, and manipulatorsrrency on their watch list, but they use the euro, so they cannot tabulate the currency. david: they have really -- they have a really big trade deficit. thank you for being with us. let us go over to london. there is a remarkable story.
boris johnson may be getting hauled into a criminal court over there? >> johnson is a front runner and candidate of 12 different tory mp's to become the next leader and prime minister. it is remarkably interesting in timing, but he is being summoned to court to defend against a case that dates back from the 2016 brexit campaign in which johnson is accused of public misconduct, particularly in regards to the claims lasted across a campaign bus that said e.u. would result in 350 million pounds a week of savings that could be used for the nhs. this is a crowd funded case and isunprecedented which seeking to attribute criminal responsibility to what many would consider an irresponsible and political campaign claim. noid: there has been
irresponsible claim made to a candidate. is there any pattern in the past and the u.k.? terese: not really in the u.k.. this will be an interesting test case. it will be interesting to see how it impacts his campaign and it may help him. there are a lot of people who supports him and he does not have a great deal of support among tory party members who say that if you can go after boris johnson the campaign, nine -- why not michael gove, or some of the other leaders? why not officials for the iraq war, which many thought was sold on false grounds. slippery slope of scrutiny for public officials that i am sure a lot of politicians are not going to want to see pursued. i think it will be an interesting test case, and it will take a while before this
hits a jury trial. by then boris johnson may be prime minister. david: thank you so much. and now we will go back to robert mueller's statement. joining us is a former u.s. attorney. thank you for joining us michael. we have a statement from the president's spokesperson. she says that the special thesel is resigned and cases close. she says that he has nothing to add and that the report was clear that there was no collusion or conspiracy. the department of justice confirmed that there was no obstruction. what struck you about that statement because i did not hear mr. mueller said that there was no obstruction. michael: i think missus sanders and the president are in an alternate universe. it sounded like mueller was held not charging af
president for a crime. he said that if the president had not committed a crime, we would have said it. had not come sun up than i would've said it. the white house will try to spin it. notler was clear, he could move forward because of the policy. this was a handoff to the congress and telling congressional democrats, do not look to me to carry your water. i have given your report and it is time to move forward and to do so through the process that the constitution sets out. it is impeachment if you think the president is guilty. david: that is what the constitution anticipates. if there is a high crime and misdemeanor, it comes to congress and they decide to proceed. mean that the ball is in nancy pelosi's court? michael: i think that is exactly
what it means. i think all this talk about testifying, he said i have given a public statement and that is in this long report. i told you what i thought and i said we would not clear the president of the obstruction charge. i told you why i could not state he was guilty. here it is, i have laid it out and gave you these things. it looks like obstructive conduct. you can use that going forward if you have the will to do it. there is a confusion somewhere with the congressional democrats, if they have to dot all of their i's and cross all of their t's. you are starting to see splintering in the democratic party over they will -- if they will do that. it has become a political calculation rather than a constitutional understanding. david: mr. mueller seemed emphatic, he said that everything will say -- will stay. what are the chances that the
democrats could subpoena him and force them to appear and testify? michael: they could subpoena him, and he would say i have said as much as i can say and i have given you my report and that is as far as you can go. there are certain limitations on what i can and cannot say. the policy of indicting the president and the regulations about the report, especially the special counsel's office comes with a time with how kim starr's investigations rolled out. we are caught by those regulations. they are living with the beast they created, much like they are doing on the senate side. there having to look at the judges moving off of the bench. the democrats will have to make a decision. mueller is saying do not call your hand, if you call me, i will read you this report. this is about as far as i will go, but i will give you the ammunition you need. it is a question or not if you
want to go on the hunt. david: a really good analysis. now, let us get a check on the markets. risk offer u.s. markets looking at declines across the screen for all of the major averages. we are coming off the lows of the session, but pretty far down. the s&p 500 off 1%. the dow jones off by 1.3%. 12 week500 looking at a low and falling below 2800. we are eyeing the technical levels that are key to providing support to the s&p 500. if things continue we are headed toward the first down month since december. this is as the trade war intensifies. you pilled -- the dow jones utilities averaged down by .4%. not seeing the kind of losses
that we are seeing elsewhere. this is a little more bullish -- less bearish when it comes to the defensive stock. let us look at this chart. utilities make up 25 percent of the low volatility etf. this is its low performance versus the s&p 500. over the last five weeks it has outperformed the s&p 500 with investors looking to these low volatility stocks with a haven to catch safety. 3.8%t to mention oil, earlier in the session and still down around about 3%. it is the lowest in three months, and we are seeing chevron falling as the price of oil falls. one last thing, i have to mention boeing we talked about this on the balance of power. this seems that there will be a longer delay in returning to the 737 max 8 to the side.
the ceo of the international air transport association saying he does not accept to see it return for 10 to 12 weeks, and this as the ceo of boeing is having meetings with airlines to talk about how they bring the jet back into service. a number of airlines are keen to find out about that. not least, southwest. david: it appears it is not the last time we will talk about boeing. coming up, the you are paying parliamentary elections are over and it is time to speak about the ramifications.
word news. mark: special counsel robert mueller broke his silence about the russia investigation. mueller said that there was not enough evidence to charge a broader conspiracy on election interference. he stopped short of delivering a full exoneration of president trump. forth in the report after the investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. not make a determination as to whether the president commit -- did commit a crime. mark: mueller did not take questions and said he would not be making further comments. he announced his resignation from the justice department so that he can "return to private life." in london the man who could be the next prime minister has been ordered to appear in court. boris johnson faces an attempt private to -- to privately prosecute him over misconduct.
the case centers on his brexit campaign claim that the u.k. sent $442 million a week to the european union. john bolton is warning iran's proxies not to attack american interests. bolton was there to meet with officials from the emirates. he said he is concerned that iran might use militia groups to attack targets such as the u.s. embassy. the european union says that turkey continues to distance itself from the block and its values, and sees no reason to unblock the country's e.u. membership talks. they say that turkey has been backsliding in the area of law and human rights. turkey has been involved in membership talks since october 2005, but progress has been slow. global news 24 hours a day, on air and at "tictoc" on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am mark crumpton, this is
bloomberg. david: thank you. man -- then public european parliamentary elections has not done much to clarify the best approach to select a new president of the commission. >> we did not discuss names tonight. just process. please, do not ask me about names. >> i am not like those who only want someone who would not overshadow the heads of states or governments. we need strong leaders with strong experience and legitimacy. isit is clear that the epp the strongest group in the parliament, but they do not have a majority on their own. everyone will have to reconsider his position on what matters. david: to help us sort all of this out, we work with nicholas duggan. he comes to us from paris. we have what appears to be a tussle from mr. macron and
missus merkel. we have the president of the council and the epp. have the parliamentary elections help to sort any of that out? ,icholas: to some extent because there were elections in more than 50% of europeans voted. it is clear that these elections were important to the european population as a whole. the parliament that results, even though there is a no -- there is no single party, and the right being -- the way -- the right wing party that angela merkel is head of lost a few seats. it is my understanding that there will be have to -- that they will have to be a coalition of centrists. the populists did not get a blocking minority. what is clarified is that this is a parliament that is representative of a european people. it does not clarify this
candidate or that candidate in particular. is looked at as out of the running. david: that is bad news to angela merkel. , whatis not about people about policies? let us pick one out that seems to be pressing, the italian budget. someone saying that we have -- that he might ignore what europe has to say. nicholas: i do not think that europe wants to punish italy. and he has come out of the elections well. that is not really a parliamentary decision, it is a matter for the commission, which is the administration of the e.u.. --is true that cell vini that the italian has a more persuasive case. i do not see the mission slapping big fines on italy. nicholas: take a step back and
give us the broader perspective. there is a lot of talk about the need for better cohesion within the european community and basic reforms. the populists seem to be pushing in a different election. do these elections give you any sense that we will have those reforms and better integration, or will it push the other way? nicholas: some things are easier, and some are not. this was a victory for the centrists, and the liberal party, which is a little bit the left of center is the one where the seats that micron -- mac ron won. from the social democrats on the left and from the people's party on the right. it depends on if they get together and being easy to adopt. one of those will be infrastructure spending. one of the other phenomenon we
have seen is the emergence of the greens. they do not have the same policies as everyone on the other centrists, but they have a very strong feeling of the need toaddress climate change and get the carbon footprint down. all of those things are likely to succeed. european security and defense, definitely. the strengthening of the external frontiers, immigration controls, these are things that will benefit from a large consensus across the middle. mayer structural reforms run up against opposition. the populists, neither the far left or right is in a position to impose its will. they do not have a blocking minority. it is fairly much study on. david: is brexit easier or harder? -- this is anit
interesting question. i do not think of the ability of the parliament to ratify brexit would be any problem at all, but the issue is called to level games. we have a two level game because nigel faraj, looking at written in particular. he is the clear winner among the british voters. 7%, and conservatives. yet -- the conservatives. 7%. -- got 7%. and yet white older members are the ones who will vote on the new leader and head of government. farage will have to say that you have to listen to me but he does not have a single seat in the house of commons. it will add to the confusion. david: all of that means that we
david: you are watching "balance of power," and i am david westin. dicks sporting guards shares -- goods shares tumbling. some of these results, these were not so bad. >> if you take a look at the bloomberg, i brought up the function that shows how they perform the premarket and into the market open. it seemed that investors really liked these results, they were better than expected. they boosted full-year guidance. and then they will off. just after 10:00. -- then they fell off, just after 10:00.
the analysts are saying that the results are quite -- not quite as good as the headlines suggested. they pointed to higher inventory levels. they say if you exclude share buybacks, it is lower so they poured cold water on that. other retailers sit badly in the first quarter. david: digging into it and getting us the good luck. up next, the united states threatens european allies with sanctions if they do not support u.s. action against iran. general mark kenneth about what appears to be the heightens tensions. ♪
robert mueller broke his silence today about the russia investigation. mueller told reporters there was not enough evidence to charge a broader conspiracy on election interference in 2016, though he did stop short of delivering a full exoneration of president trump. departments justice policy. those were the principles under which we operated. from them we concluded we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. that that is the office -- is the offices final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals. announced hisler resignation from the justice department so that he can "return to private life." senate majority leader mitch mcconnell says if a vacancy occurs on the supreme court during next year's election cycle, the chamber would likely confirm a gop nominee selected by president trump.
three years ago during president obama's term, mcconnell orchestrated a blockade of the then president's choice of merit garland to fill a vacant seat. mcconnell said then the choice should be left to voters in an election year. the trump administration is escalating its battlewith europe over iran's's nuclear accord. the u.s. is threatening penalties against the financial bardi -- body. when treasury department warns anyone associated with the institution could be barred from the u.s. financial system. nigerian president began a second term as head of africa's most populous nation today. he is facing heightened pressure to defeat islamic extremism and boost the oil dependent economy. nigeria has a 25% unemployment rate and widespread poverty. president bihari won the election despite questions about his health, having spent more
than 150 days outside the country for unspecified medical treatment. global news, 24 hours a day, on air and @tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. david: thank you so much. the federal reserve is in the news today as bond yields fall and the markets anticipate not one but two possible rate cuts. we welcome judy shelton, a u.s. director of the european bank, and the director of the atlas sound monti project. she joins us from washington. it is good to have you with us. >> thank you. thank you very much. david: let me ask about the elephant in the room. your name has come up in conversation about the possibility that you may take one of the seats that is open on the federal reserve board. you are a well-known economic analyst an expert in washington. are you in conversation with a white house about that possibility?
>> i appreciate your asking. and honored toed have my name out there. i believe i am being considered. i appreciate that opportunity. but i do not to comment in detail on the process or speculate further on that. david: just what i would say if i was in your position. you would be open to it? i am very enthusiastic about the strong growth, the genuine economic growth agenda that we are seeing take place in the united states. i think the results speak for themselves. we are seeing at 3.2% growth the first quarter. we have had an important reduction in the regulatory burden, tax reform which i think is a pro-business, pro-entrepreneurship. i think we are dealing with the trade issues in a way that we have to.
i think it was neglected for a long time. for me, the fourth pillar of that program would involve stable money. i would like to see our monetary policy support the other major pillars of a progrowth economic agenda. david: let's talk about those two things. what is going on with the trade issues and let's call it a conflict now between the united states and china, and stable money on what the fed does. how do those things fit together? the president has been direct on how he would like the support of the fed as he goes into negotiations with president xi. judy: it would have been easy. the easy path would have been to declare victory, and say we have been triumphant and we have a new trade relationship. president wase stalwart in saying no, there were changes at the end, and it will have all been a waste of time if we do not get some
genuine changes that actually the rest of the world has been calling for for a long time in terms of china's position in providing access to its markets and protecting intellectual property rights, and not forcing joint ventures. for me, the currency manipulation issue has been a strong point. i think it puts us on the moral high road in saying we believe in free trade. that means a level monetary playing field. with itsable state-controlled apparatus to bring everything to bear. they can intervene in the currency markets a daily, they do so as a matter of policy. they can engage in fiscal stimulus at the drop of a hat. i think it is tempting. the united states wants to fight fire with fire. but we do not do it that way here. we believe in the private sector. i would not want the fed to be a burden and to do the wrong thing at this time. and undermined some of the good
growth prospects that we have ahead of us. david: did they do the wrong thing in december when they raised rates? judy: i think by its own admission, we have seen almost a complete turnaround. i think the fed itself went from being quite inclined to raise as quickly as possible, to now rethinking and sitting tight. and now even hinting that it could go the other way. i welcome this new found humility on the part of the fed, a watchful waiting. i think it is an admission that central banks are not always on whereand in knowing interest rates should be. i think it would be healthier if we had a more organically determined interest rate that reflected market thinking. david: the progrowth agenda as you described it, do you think beyond not being a hindrance, do you think the fed should take into account what is going on to
be in a pro of health, should they get in front of it and say let's loosen up the monetary policy to reinforce it? the pboc is doing some version of that for president xi. judy: that's right. i think it would be a little dangerous to want a more activist fed. i just don't want them to mess things up. and i say that respectfully. but the point is you do not want to undermine our position or the progress we are making. that does not mean that we want the fed to start anticipating what it can do as an instrument of government policy. i think the fed is too interventionist. i think it is the distortions that occur as a result of trying to artificially move the interest rate that can end up being more problematic. for instance, our practice of paying interest on excess reserves.
we actually have at a time when ordinary americans on passbook savings get a zero percent interest. the federal reserve is paying banks on their checkbook accounts held at the federal reserve 2.35%. that is an interest rate they are getting for doing nothing, that they are not passing through to their own depositors. i do not think the fed should be helping one segment of the economy at the expense of another segment. i would want to start to have a glide path toward -- you do not do anything abruptly. but toward moving the fed away from the distortions but i think hurt private sector entrepreneurialism. and to give banks the wrong incentive, and make them feel like why go through the hard work of financial intermediation and making consumer loans or helping would be entrepreneurs when i can just let my money sit at the fed and earn a nice interest rate for literally doing nothing.
david: you talked about the importance of sound money and the fed ensuring we have sound money. explain of how you would do that? for example, we have had some people who have been nominated for the fed who suggested we look at a basket of commodities prices in determining where we are in inflation, and not use the traditional indicators. what would you look to? judy: i would start by saying it is a different mindset when you talk about sound money. at are now looking at money it -- as a moral contract of sorts between the government and its citizens. money is meant to be a reliable meaningful unit of account. it is supposed to be asus -- a disk -- a dependable source of value. there should be no monetary favoritism that helps wealthy investors or big corporations who want to do buybacks. money should work for everyone. and it should not be causing further wealth inequality.
that is where i would start. i think the fed is going through a period of introspective. its own approach is not achieving the results at five after the models are not working the way central bankers would have anticipated. they are targeting inflation, missing the target, they are even defining stable prices in a way that i'm not sure everyone would agree. i am sometimes called a gold bug, i guess you were alluding to commodities. there is athat virtue and some kind of a -- some monetary integrity that is not just dependent on a dozen people meeting eight times a year to decide what should be the price of capital. i think the fed should be open and i think it is increasingly working, neways of mechanisms, and maybe even taking a look at its own record and deciding how it could do better. david: do you have a specific mechanism in mind? it sounds like you do not favor
inflation targeting, even at a different number than the 2% which is used in now. i was talking about somebody else who was nominated for the fed who said it should be a basket of commodities, not just gold. is there a different standard that you think would ensure sound money better than what we are doing now? and: i don't want to go specifically recommend a commodities basket. i think we have to really think about what the rule would be. i think the beginning of re-examining the role of central banking and whether it is helping or hurting genuine economic growth is again, for me, to start with a mechanism. remember that paying interest on excess reserves was adopted in october 2008 as an emergency measure. here we are more than a decade later, still indulging in this kind of dis-incentivizing banks from doing what they should be doing, which is the hard work of
examining a loan application, and trying to gauge someone's character and their work plan and their commitment to paying it back. i think when we look around the world and see negative interest rates, largely engineered by central banks, we have to ask if we have not even undermined the whole idea of having faith in a better future? i think that is more human nature. i think we need a more organically determined market rate of interest. rather than try to put the rule on it at this point or say what in the slight change federal open market committee approach might be, let's just start by saying let's try to get rid of the things, slowly phase them out, of getting rid of the harmful practices and reassess what the proper role of central banking is in a free market economy. david: clearly appreciate you spending time with us -- really appreciate you spending time
david: you are watching "balance of power." i'm david westin. iran remains at the center of a growing conflict as the president's national security advisor john bolton warns of a strong response if iran attacks u.s. targets the treasury department says that it risks losing access to u.s. financial system unless it cuts iran off. we welcome mark kimmitt, former decade -- deputy general, and a retired u.s. general.
he is coming to us from washington. it is great to have you with us. gen. kimmitt: thanks. david: what do you make of john bolton statements and what do you make more generally of what seems to be an increasing war of words between iran and the united states? gen. kimmitt: it is clear that the united states has concerns with iran. it is clear we are using "all the elements of national power" to bring iran to the negotiating table, everything short of war. while it would appear that there is increasing tensions, i think everybody on the ground -- i returned from the region last monday. i think everyone on the ground is taking a sober minded approach to this and being very careful. david: what are our options? as a practical matter, there was talk about sending troops, you know this far better than i do, it would be a nightmare to have a ground war over there. gen. kimmitt: i think if we are talking exclusively on the military side, our options would probably be a naval and air
campaign that would look more --e sarajevo in 1999 or excuse me, belgrade in 1999 or libya. the options seem to be nonmilitary. using all of those elements financial, economic, political, cyber -- cybernetics, looking at uses of other tools to bring iran to the negotiating table short of war. david: talking about financial possibilities, there was a report that the treasury department had written to our european allies, essentially saying if you guys trade with iran, we will cut you off from the u.s. payment methods. is there a risk of having a rift between us and our european allies? gen. kimmitt: i don't think so. look at what happens when we told the nations the same thing about buying iranian oil. i think our allies understand that we are continuing to do what john bolton calls maximum pressure campaign. candidly, they do not want to be part of that, given the choice
between trading with iran in trading with the united states. it is a no-brainer. david: let's turn to north korea. you and i have talked about this before. we had president trump go to japan, and he tweeted out something that suggested that he was not really relying upon his advisors with respect to north korea. this is after japan complained about the missiles that had been fired. disparate -- in which it said it disturbs some of my people but not me. i have confidence that chairman ken will keep his promise to me. why do we think chairman kim will keep his promises? gen. kimmitt: i think what president trump is doing is recognizing that in a one party, one person state like north korea, he is the only one that matters. he is making direct appeal to kim where everyone else in the past has tried to use this based ramp up in terms of negotiations but has not worked. with the president rightly or wrongly is doing, he is taking a
different tack, appealing directly to the leader, seeing if he can persuade the leader himself to throttle back on his nuclear program and his threat to south korea. david: a lot of people say there is no progress made. we have not had a nuclear test recently. gen. kimmitt: no, but it is clear president kim is starting to ratchet things up. the latest rocket test he did signal to the united states that his patience is not forever. he wants to see a deal on the table. the deal is not what the americans want to put, it is not even what president trump wants to put on the table. signal to the united states that his patience is not forever. he wants to see a deal on the table. we can expect until there is a breakthrough between those two leaders, we will see a continued ramp-up from north korea. to thefinally, turn national security applications of huawei. we have national security being thrown around in washington. is there a danger of overplaying our hand? calling things national security risks that are not. gen. kimmitt: i think all we
have to do is look at what mr. mueller said a few hours ago with regards to the danger of the russians encroaching into our presidential system. that was done through social media. you can understand if huawei and some of the other companies have an electronic capability to get into our financial systems, to our economic systems, or critical energy infrastructure, i do not think we can understate the danger. the most important thing we can do is set up defensive measures to prevent companies that are trying to encroach in our systems from ever, ever being able to penetrate them. david: thank you so much for your time. that is retired general mark kimmitt. coming to us from washington. coming up, the dnc raises the threshold for getting into its later debate. who is in danger of missing out and some of the surprising names that are already safely on the debate stage. that story is next. this is bloomberg. ♪ at story is next. this is bloomberg. ♪
david: this is "balance of power." i'm david westin. it is a month away from the first democratic presidential debate in the 2020 season with 24 candidates running, the democratic national committee is looking to whittle the field and announced it will raise the bar on what it takes to qualify. fromill kapoor names -- is washington with the story they are trying to narrow it down by september. sahil: they are trying to narrow it down here they will double the two key thresholds after the first debate for qualifying for the third and fourth the debate. in other words, for the first two debates, candidates need a minimum of 65,000 unique donors or 1% in three separate polls. for the third and fourth the debate, it will be 130 individual -- 130,000 individual donors. fromast 2% support
democratic voters and at least three poles per the point of this is for one, they dnc did not want to be seen as putting its thumb on the scale. they wanted to say anyone who wants can qualify for the first debate. at some point, they will have to look at the field of two dozen people and say we will narrow it down and give voters a point. -- a choice. david: what is the risk with these standards eliminate the people who would like to have in? sahil: there are a number of candidates who are not registering in the polls. there are members of congress like a seth moulton, eric swalwell who have not been registering in surveys. i would add tim ryan to that category. these are individuals who may have done better in a smaller field and may have been formidable or serious candidates. if they do not get 1% after the first two debates when they have a chance, i think the dnc will say let's widow -- whittle the field. david: at the same time, the leaders will not have to worry about any of this, right? sahil: correct. people like joe biden, bernie
sanders, kamala harris, elizabeth warren, easily will qualify. they are far in excess of the current threshold and in no danger of missing out on the debates are the dnc is planning to have a dozen debates all told between now and the primaries. david: thank you so much. public policy with lawmakers and other leaders, the discussion comes back to education. and particularly quality education for those less fortunate. i had the opportunity to sit down with dan porterfield who was spent his career making sure the best education -- education is just repeated -- is distributed according to talent and wit. seeking to make sure students without means have the opportunity to show all they can do. dan: that kind of person that long -- that wants hard work, that student, that type exists by the millions. in lower income and middle income communities. they are not recruited enough by
top schools. but they are there with the intellectual ability and the great, the spine, the heart, the stamina to make it count. bodyyou fill your student with that, everyone benefits. my fullou can catch interview tonight at 9:30 eastern time on bloomberg television. sign up for the balance of power newsletter on bloombergpolitics .com. get the latest on global politics in your inbox every day. bloomberg users can interact with the charts shown using gtv go, browse recent charts, to catch up on key analysis and save charts for future reference. live from new york, this is bloomberg. ♪
scarlet: i'm scarlet fu. this is "etf iq." where we focus on the asset, risks, and rewards from exchange to traded funds. exchanged traded funds. searching for protection. gold may be the safest of havens in these volatile markets but it is not getting the love that bonds are. the boston fed it jumps into the debate from the shift of after -- from passive to active. we speak with one of the lead authors. milking it. cash is king when it comes to cash cow etf's.