Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg Surveillance  Bloomberg  September 21, 2020 8:00am-9:00am EDT

8:00 am
yup, the best really did get better. magnificent. xfinity x1 just got even better, with peacock premium included at no additional cost. no strings attached. >> i'm not going to say there is a bubble forming. i'm going to say there is potential for one to form. >> i think there is a lot of risk in the bond market right now for investors, a lot of complacency. >> we've really moved into a new era. monetary policy the way we grew up with it doesn't work anymore. >> we are going to have to live with the impact of this virus perhaps for longer than we thought in may. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz. tom: good morning, everyone. "bloomberg surveillance" on bloomberg radio, bloomberg television.
8:01 am
the quality of our guests there, including rebecca patterson of bridgewater, saying complacency into october, ramp it up ritika: . right now -- ramp it up. right now, we welcome all of you. it is simply a monday friend from what we knew friday. jonathan: it is not a quiet start to this monday morning. equity futures down hard. a bid into the bond market. stronger japanese yen. everything you would expect to happen on a risk off monday is happening. when you look to europe and the prospect of tighter restrictions around some of these economies, look no further than travel stocks. break it down sector dissector. travel stocks down 5%. tom: what i find just extraordinary here is it is not just about the future of the supreme court after the death of ruth bader ginsburg. there's many stories. to me, learning over the weekend about this new heightened
8:02 am
pandemic is front and center. jonathan: lay it on the three dimensional political risk playing out in washington. the three di mentions are as follows. the path -- the three dimensions are as follows. fiscal agreement, froth in the senate, and we heard worries about the day after the election, not having a result. what will policy look like in a lame-duck session for the next three months? those worries intensify this monday morning. tom: futures -51, dow futures -20. on the vix earlier, 29.22. lisa: we've been having this narrative all year that low yields lead to higher asset prices. this has been the narrative consistently, and yet as yields go lower, that narrative seems to be dissipating. are we seeing a true shift, or a
8:03 am
pause before that narrative reasserts itself? tom: we will have to see. we will do more data checks for you throughout the hour. we have been most for jeanette -- most fortunate this morning on ir coverage of the death of ruth bader ginsburg. but if you are in economics, this is without question our interview of the day. our michael mckee is with robert kaplan. michael: good morning to you, president kaplan. dallas fed president kaplan one of two dissenters last week. you endorsed the old forward guidance and dissented on the new because, according to this statement, you preferred greater flexibility. what does that mean? robert: what it means is i believe strongly we should keep you current setting of the fed funds rate at zero, zero to 25 basis points, until we have
8:04 am
weathered the pandemic and we are well on track to achieve full employment and price stability. that, by the way, is probably going to take at least 2, 3 years. point,ue is, beyond that i think it is probably appropriate to remain accommodative. i am not sure it is appropriate to decide at that point that we would leave rates at zero. i would rather leave those judgments to future committees. i think the world is going to look very different post pandemic than it does now, and i would rather leave the judgment to future committees who can assess all of the factors that are relevant in order to make that decision. michael: does that suggest you think we could come out of this with faster growth than most people are anticipating? robert: i will put it a different way. in my own forecast, i think we
8:05 am
are going to have solid growth in the third quarter, 30% annualized, a strong fourth-quarter, above trend growth in 2021. in my own forecasts, by the year 2023, and i know that is going out a long ways, we could start to approach an unemployment rate certainly below 4%, so i believe that is possible. obviously we will have to see, and a lot of that is going to depend on how well we manage this virus, fiscal policy, and a whole range of other decisions. but when we get to that point, the question before the house is do you want to still be accommodative, and light of our new framework, an order to meet our inflation goal? does that mean we need to leave rates at zero? i'm not sure, but that is the point. i think it is hard to know that far in advance, and i want to make those judgments at the
8:06 am
time. michael: is that enough to dissent on? robert: for me it was. the reason it is is by making this commitment now, first of all, there are a few reasons why i dissented. my own view is i would rather use forward guidance before we got more positive benefit. going into the meeting, the world already thought rates were going to stay extremely low for the next two or three years. so my concern was by making this commitment now, i wasn't sure how much additional benefit there was going to be. but if you are in the asset markets, if you are a saver, if you are a pension fund, if you are an insurance company, if you are a market for it is but, it basically gives you a signal that you're going to need to take more risk. my concern is about building up excess risk-taking, which can create fragility's and other
8:07 am
excesses in the system which are hard to see in real-time and easier to see in hindsight that could create issues for us to meet our goals. that was the reason. i felt that the costs were not worth the benefits. michael: chairman powell was at pains to say over and over again the new guidance is strong and powerful, but there seems to be a lot of skepticism on wall street about that. robert: and i wouldn't over read the market reaction. it's been a few days, and i think these decisions usually -- the reaction is not measured in three or four trading days. i think making a statement that people should expect even beyond , i think as the months and years go by, i think people will increasingly realize the power of that commitment. so i think it is more
8:08 am
significant than the markets may be initially realizing. michael: washington is consumed now by a fight over the supreme court, which many analysts say pretty much and chances of getting any additional stimulus before the election, and possibly afterwards. what does that mean for the economy? robert: i think in my forecast for this year, some additional fiscal stimulus is part of that. one of the unusual features of consumerturn has been -- duringas been very a downturn. it is happening because of strong fiscal support. i think some extension of unemployment benefits is critical, and i also would mention eight to state and local governments is also important. .hey have big fiscal holes they are needing to cut back because of that right now, at a time where we are asking to
8:09 am
shoulder more responsibilities in fighting the pandemic and getting kids back to school, and a number of other responsibilities. i think some fiscal support, i am still hopeful for it, and i think it is important to this recovery. michael: the markets are at this point not just discounting what you did last week, but concerns the the supreme court and round of pandemics, we were asking last week whether markets were too high and might drag down the economy. what is your read on what is going on now? robert: i won't go too far commenting on the markets, other gdp is say market cap to currently at a historic high. there's some understandable reasons for that, but normally when you've had this kind of run , some kind of correction could actually be healthy. the thing i watch when i see a market selloff is our credit
8:10 am
spreads widening, and i don't see them widening, which tells me this is more of a correction, maybe not a fundamental change. if i saw credit spreads widening along with the selloff, that would tell me something different, but i am not seeing that. michael: tight credit spreads and low interest rates suggest the fed policy is working at the moment, but if we do have a need for additional stimulus and we don't get it, is there anything the fed can do, or are you sort of out of the game? robert: i think monetary policy has done a lot. we still have more things we could do. certainly with either asset purchases, i think we could do more to help small and midsize businesses. but i think the path of the pandemic, the incidence of the virus is still going to be the number one determinant of how fast we recover. i think some amount of fiscal policy secondarily is important. but i think on a tear he policy -- i think part
8:11 am
secondary policy will do its part. i think it is still how will we manage the virus. mentioned theust main street lending program, and also talked about the municipal lending facility. chairman powell goes up to capitol hill, and they are going to be asking, why aren't those working? there's been almost no take up. only 0.2% of the money for lane street has been lent. what is wrong with the fed programs -- for main street has been lent. what is wrong with the fed programs? robert: i think it is a mistake judge the effectiveness of these programs by the take-up. the main street program, that is different. but municipal finance programs is a good example. we have backstopped issuance in the municipal finance market with a capacity of $600 billion. as soon as we announce that program, mute the municipal finance market rallied, money flowed into that market. that is true with the corporate
8:12 am
bond market, with other markets we have done this for. i think the measure of how effective those programs are is are people able to issue in the private market. the fact that there hasn't been much take-up, we were intended to be backstopped pricing, so i think those programs have been very successful. the one program we have scrutinized more is the main street program. on that program, take-up is a good measure of how effective it has been, and there's been a lot of discussion. there are still stringent credit requirements for that program. the banks have to agree to lend as part of that program. so we are looking at ways, and there has been discussion, can be done to make that more attractive. but again, the fed is a lender, not a spender. in order to ease the requirements of main street, you would have to be willing to tolerate more credit losses. that is not a fed decision. that is a decision for congress
8:13 am
and the treasury. michael: robert kaplan, thank you for joining us this morning on bloomberg radio and television worldwide. we will send it back to jon ferro in london. jonathan: thank you. a wonderful interview. absolutely brilliant. something we heard there that is , it is notrtant equities. it is credit. it is high-yield spreads. it is investment grade spreads. that is what tested the fed in 2018. that is what tested the fed in 2020. right now, even with equities doing what they are doing, spreads have been really stable in and around 500 basis points on high-yield. tom: even with the difficulties of the market, it is true, we have been incredibly range bound. you see that with the moving averages that come down. on radio, it looks great. right, jon? jonathan: it is just fantastic.
8:14 am
i will do it as well. tom: you can do it at financial, or you can do it linear. just great. jonathan: brilliant. you nailed it. in new york and london, this is bloomberg. ♪
8:15 am
8:16 am
8:17 am
pres. trump: it will continue to be named tiktok, as it was all
8:18 am
along, and that's it. that's it. i can say that i have given the deal my blessing. if they get it done, that's great. if they don't, that's ok, too. but is a great deal for america. very interesting. presidentthe celebrating a deal between oracle and tiktok, a deal we will talk about in just a moment. good morning to you all. alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. your price action shaping up as follows this monday morning. equity features still near session lows, down 53 at -1.6%. it is worse in europe, coming in 0.4%. stronger dollar through the bulk of g10. 0.66%.coming tom: it is off of friday and the death of ruth bader ginsburg, but still very much front and center.
8:19 am
we spoke to michael wolff about wechat. jon ferro and i have been waiting to get back on the tiktok analysis bandwagon. we do that right now with lisa abramowicz. geoffreyertz -- gertz joins us now with brookings, their global economy and develop and fellow. what is the next step here? i've yet to have a single person tell me this is anything but contrived. for an the next step invented transaction? geoffrey: happy to be here. i think one next step we are still unclear on, one question is whether the chinese government will need to approve this deal or not. a big sticking point up to date has been the chinese government was treating the tiktok as potential
8:20 am
technology with national security implications. they were having export controls governing a license of the tiktok algorithm. one question we are still waiting on is how the chinese government oversaw this. lisa: what can we take away from the way this deal went down? there was a carnegie mellon professor saying the government should be in the business of setting national security concerns, but not brokering a backroom deal with a u.s. company. is that how it is being perceived? geoffrey: i think this has been a really interesting case to watch.
8:21 am
the committee on foreign investment in the united states, the u.s. government does often play a role in regulating foreign acquisitions that have national security up occasions. i think it was entirely reasonable to get involved in the tiktok deal. but having the president be personally involved in all of these front room negotiations and all over the newspaper pages we have seen is very different from how this normally goes. we normally don't see the president weighing in on different potential acquirers or anything like that. that aspect has been strange to watch, for those of us used to a very secretive national security process. lisa: is there any precedent in the u.s. for this type of interaction we have seen here? geoffrey: we have seen similar interactions and similar government interventions on other national security threats, and increasingly on other technology and data related acquisitions. grindr, the dating apps that had been acquired by a chinese company, that required investment. we saw a company that handled the hotel bookings data for major hotel chains, that was also ordered for investment by chinese companies.
8:22 am
askedere's the question i michael were for -- michael wolff earlier. is there any evidence of a national security threat by either of these entities? geoffrey: i think it is a different hope question to answer for -- a difficult question to answer for a few reasons. the u.s. government is always very secret even -- very secretive in telling us what a national security threat is. i will say there are real concerns around data privacy, around technology, potentially around the chinese government having say over which videos detected algorithm is choosing to show -- the tiktok algorithm is choosing to show. having certain political voices, censoring other political his. that does raise concern for the u.s. government. these are sort of potential
8:23 am
problems that could arise. tom: you just said it eloquently. is there any indication here of anything other than a potential risk? geoffrey: this is all potential risk, but it makes sense to take those potential risks seriously. jonathan: thank you. in many ways, i think we are talking about uncoupling. we talked about the united states take on the characteristics of china. telling the chinese and the chinese communist party that your companies, if they want access to our economy we could send them national security threats, or perhaps the u.s. company needs to buy them. let's talk about wechat. it is very difficult to act like china if you are not china. they can't ban wechat this morning. n wechatt they ba this morning? because there is a court injunction granted for first of them and writes -- for first
8:24 am
amendment rights, freedom of speech. harder to replicate them given the united states. tom: the game theory here to me is just wacko. that is a very sophisticated phrase, and i know i nailed. jonathan: absolutely -- i nailed it. jonathan: absolutely. tom: we are doing all of this on potentialities. how does beijing respond to that? jonathan: let's talk about the potential for the u.s. government when you know that the chinese communist party, you have some evidence of where the chinese communist party has been hostile before, do you want them to have the data of u.s. citizens in a way that could access the data through an app but tiktok? the answer on both sides of the political aisle right now is probably not. headline crossing the bloomberg, the president of the united states with a final vote on the super important before the
8:25 am
elections -- the president of the united states wants a final supreme court pick before the elections. tom: i would say we need a potential data check. why don't you do it? jonathan: i will do that for you right now, one hour in five minutes away from the cash open. here's the actual data check. there's the move in tech stocks this morning, with oracle getting a bit after that deal potentially closing. in the equity market, -1.75%. there is a way to this tape. go lowerto again. the bid picks up in the treasury market. 0.65% onwn to almost the u.s. ten-year. for the u.s. 30 year, the bit at the long end is strong. comes in almost six basis points to 1.397%. risk aversion this monday.
8:26 am
alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. this is "bloomberg surveillance, " heard on bloomberg radio, seen on bloomberg tv. live in london and new york, this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ you can go your own way
8:27 am
8:28 am
8:29 am
♪ go your own way your wireless. your rules. only xfinity mobile lets you choose shared data, unlimited or a mix of each. and switch anytime so you only pay for the data you need. switch and save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. with the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. call, click, or visit your local xfinity store today.
8:30 am
jonathan: risk aversion this monday morning. good morning to you alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. here is your price action one hour out from the opening bow. equity futures down almost 1.9%. losses, down 60 on the s&p 500. euro-dollar down to 1.18. yields headed lower. two stories. the political division in washington. the other story the potential for restrictions across various economies in europe, with the united kingdom front and center. boris johnson will be addressing the house of commons on the covid response tomorrow. the most responsible thing i can say is i do not know what the restrictions are, what many
8:31 am
people expect them to be after hearing from the advisors to the thingsinister, are focused on various sectors of the economy and various restrictions. something i've been guilty of doing myself but i want to make clear i do not want to go clear going forward, i do not think we should call this a lockdown until it looks like march. right now what i'm hearing are further restrictions and not a lockdown. tom: francine lacqua said the same thing this morning because i guess schools will still be active even with the so-called lockdown. serious also point out in france as well. -63,arkets deteriorate possibly off of the headline we saw from the president speaking with fox, he is still speaking on fox talking about he wants a vote on the next supreme court justice before the election. we turn to the economy with futures that -62. megan greene joins us from the harvard kennedy school.
8:32 am
i want to go to the great thrust i see right now, which is the inflation dynamic and when a central bank acts. inflation is rising. do you get out in front and act, do you get in front along the path of rising inflation, or do you wait for the end? which is the for doing right now? megan: it is the third of the three. that is embedded in the fed new monetary policy strategy. the debate is whether we get inflation or not, and that only matters because if we get yourtion than the idea central bank has to hike into it , and the fed has said no we do not. they have undershot for so long they will have to allow inflation to overshoot 2% were average out at 2%. i think not you just see the white of inflation eyes or to see the back end.
8:33 am
in the not want to know face of inflation or what to do in deflation. stanford, think about the conservative x philadelphia fed, the rochester school, the -- what is your definition of overshoot? you have a definition of overshoot? megan: i think the fed would tolerate inflation 2.5% to 3%. tom: that high? megan: i think so. inflation has been persistently below the -- below the target because it was adopted in 2012 and there are structural reasons i think inflation will continue to be difficult to generate. if they could get inflation to 2.5% to 3%, the fed would celebrate and not hike immediately. jonathan: let's think about what they can celebrate right now. out of a summer were many thought things would start
8:34 am
rollover a little bit. there are some people who have change their minds after the data over the last month. you have not changed your mind. can you walk us through what you are seeing and what you expect to see in the coming months? megan: if you look at a lot of the high-frequency data, it does suggest economic activity is rolling over a little bit. the most important piece is policy. whatever happens with the virus, we have had a bunch of support for unemployed people with small businesses expire. -upped, andnot re outlooks less likely will happen, that is taking out a lot of support the economy, i think we could go into the recession. three months ago i would've said of course we will have more fiscal support, but now the democrats and republicans are so divided it is actually unlikely before the election. jonathan: we talked about a
8:35 am
couple of times. you think the double-dip is on the cards. i do not mean to get cute, but when you expect to see that? megan: i think it is possible. it is dependent on policy. we are getting a little bit more support for unemployed people with the $300 a week checks. it all depends on how much more support we will get and when we get it. the longer we wait, the higher the likelihood will go into recession. it is impossible to give you specific timing, but i think unless we build a safety net under the economy, i think the coyotes will fall into the chasm. that is how it works. lisa: we have talked about the bifurcated nature of the recession, the idea that the haves are doing just fine and the have-nots are doing terribly. how bad will a scarring be on the have-nots in which groups are in the have-nots that you see as being the most affected? megan: that depends on what you
8:36 am
think the economy will look like on the other cited of this. it is probably a bit too early to say what it will look like when the dust settles. i think we know certain things will probably not happen anytime soon. short of a vaccine or treatment, a lot of us will be working from home. gyms will suffer. travel industries will suffer. , theyees of those sectors hourly service workers who were hardly getting back on their feet before the crisis and have now been knocked off. service sectors will struggle for a long time until we get a vaccine. even after we get a vaccine, we will continue to work from home a lot. i will watch more netflix and i used to because i'm used to it rather than going to the cinema. i will travel within the u.s. more than i used to because i am more used to it. if activity only returns 90% of what we used to have in every
8:37 am
industry, scaled up across the economy, and that is a huge drop in activity, and i think it is the hourly service workers who will suffer. lisa: to john's point, which is a good point, how long we have. in other words when will we see this double-dip? at what point? how long we have to wait before you start seeing a material decline in the possible recovery or the near-term growth of the u.s. economy? megan: we are starting to see some of the high-frequency data rollover. it has not tanked yet because the programs we are implemented work and a lot of people stored up and were saving. people and businesses cannot live off of their savings forever. when those cash buffers are used up, that is when the economy will tank. it could just be a couple of months. tom: we have an economy which atlanta is telling us is up 25%,
8:38 am
even 30%. a big q3 bounce. then there is the then what. what do we dampen down to? on an academic level, how do you for in where potential gdp is and how that equation dampens down? forget about morning america. we are nowhere near 4% gdp. are we even your 2% gdp? wasn: potential growth already below 2% in the u.s. anyhow. it is hard to know what this does to productivity. on the one hand you have to believe a lot of productivity has been destroyed and a lot of innovation is not happening. at the same time, for those of us lucky enough to be able to work from home, we are getting by with fewer resources and that could boost productivity. , it willally, net-net probably be down a bit. i would also highlight we have a
8:39 am
v-shaped recovery in the short term, but if you look at the high-frequency data, where people are spending money now is not where we lost all of the activity in the aftermath of the immediate pandemic. it suggests from here on out it will be a harder slog. tom: we have to do a data check in the middle of this conversation. the tape is deteriorating in all sorts of ways. i would look at the bond reset we are seeing, down four basis points on the 10 year yield and it goes into what dr. greene is talking about. jonathan: equity market down 61 on the s&p. tom: look at the dow. jonathan: we caught up with president kaplan and talked about the importance of the credit market. how important is that in terms of broader financial conditions for this federal reserve? megan: it is important. it is also hard to get a signal. credit spreads are not blowing out precisely because the fed
8:40 am
has stepped into backstop the credit market. that suggest what the fed has done is working. looking further ahead, one day when the tide of fed liquidity receipts, what will happen. none of us know. inhink kaplan was right highlighting financial security is a concern. we could be sowing the seeds of the next bubble. in the face of market meltdowns, that made sense. going forward we need to worry about that. jonathan: great to catch up. megan greene of the harvard kennedy school. this is called good hearts law. a measure ceases to be a good one when it becomes a target. the credit market is a target for the central banks. lisa: well said. this is the conundrum for a lot of credit investors. corporate debt used to be the canary in the coal mine. we saw spreads blowout.
8:41 am
it seems to have lost that. what does that mean for all of these models that use credit as a leading indicator? it has lost that just because of what you said. it is being targeted by the federal reserve. that is a huge shift in markets and models. jonathan: we have a leading indicator now? we touched on this a couple of weeks ago. -- maybedity market the cleanest trade supply versus demand was crude a couple months ago. i do not know what it is anymore. tom: i would have to do a lot of chart work. chris verrone writing a brilliant note for strategic us, pointing out some of the audit resiliency's in the way we are going down and enthusiasm. he knows copper is one indicator. i look at my bloomberg screen. what you pin on here right now. i have a great respect for what yen does in moments like this. lisa: bitcoin.
8:42 am
stronger, dollar stronger. i did not hear what lisa yelled out. she nails it every morning. tom: can i go home? jonathan: you can whenever you like. stay home all week. from london and new york, this is bloomberg. ritika: president trump says he plans to announce his picture a place supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg by friday or saturday of this week. trump also told fox news he wants to see a senate confirmation vote for his nominee before november's election. trump has said he will likely pick a woman. ginsburg died friday at the age of 87. president trump heads to ohio today. he will address supporters in dayton at an event for the american worker. won ohio by 8% in 2016.
8:43 am
his chances for second term depend heavily on the margins he was able to win by in 2016, particularly in suburban areas. health officials say the u.k. is on course for 50,000 new coronavirus cases a day by october if urgent matters are not taken to prevent the spread of the disease. boris johnson is widely expected to set up for the restrictions tuesday, although health secretary matt hancock says the government wants to avoid a second national lockdown. the health secretary also said johnson is fully recovered from the virus that put him in intensive care in april. a slow-moving tropical storm will bring drenching rains to texas and louisiana. forecasters say tropical storm beta could dump up to 20 inches of rain on some parts of the region over the next few days. it is no longer expected to stretch into a hurricane. beta is the 23rd storm of 2020.
8:44 am
the second most active season and record, going back to 1851. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. . am ritika gupta this is bloomberg. ♪
8:45 am
8:46 am
8:47 am
>> i believe we will. i think it is particularly important the senate take it up
8:48 am
and confirm this nomination before the election. that was senator ted cruz on the supreme court vacancy left behind by the passing of the late great supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. that was him speaking this weekend. on the connection of wall street and washington, one of the best, libby cantrill coming up on bloomberg tv. that conversation starting in 10 or 15 minutes as we work away to the opening valve with futures doubt -- the opening bell with futures down hard. tom: a real deterioration in the markets. i believe the president has finished his comments to fox and friends, where he did say he wants a vote before the election. withwe have tried to do work from david westin's get you people with tangible experience in this uproar. one of those is russell wheeler out of the university of chicago
8:49 am
, former deputy director of the federal judicial center in brookings. we are thrilled dr. wheeler could join us. i want to go back to 1956. dwight david eisenhower, who needed the catholic vote badly, cardinal spellman was giving it to him, you need to hire a catholic. they got a guy they thought was somewhat conservative and mr. brennan. that changed over the years. , back to thetimes middle supreme court of the 1880's, we have many times gone through this, haven't we? russell: many times gone through what? if it is gone through election-year vacancies, not really. there been eight by my count. one of them was the brennan vacancy created by sherman mitton. eisenhower recessed appointed justice brennan and the senate handily confirmed him in 1957.
8:50 am
that was not controversial. we have come along way since those days. 1920's justices were confirmed on the day they were nominated. it is a different world. tom: is a different world today and what world would you expect to see as the president says he is taking the line of conservative republicans, let's go and let's get this done by the election. can they accomplish that? russell: they have enough time. they would have to rush it through. the democrats have a few monkey wrenches, but not much. if they get their 50 votes plus pence they will be able to confirm a justice any time before the election or after the election. not --es on whether or how many republican senators hypocritical to vote to confirm a trump appointee at this point given
8:51 am
what happened to mayor garland in 2016. lisa: there has been some discussion by some democrats that if republicans push a confirmation through, they would possibly talk about packing the court if joe biden wins the presidency. how realistic is that brett? -- is that threat? russell: it is a lot more realistic than it was a couple of days ago. i was skeptical of that, figuring you do not tamper with institutions that lightly. i think there'll be a lot of pressure to counteract a midnight appointment is what this would be late in the election season by a president who looks like he will not get reelected. it is not a pretty picture. i think the democrats will come back, if they have the senate and the house in the white house, they will consider doing something to offset it. lisa: what would that look like?
8:52 am
this was tried by fdr back in the day? what would proceed is likely? russell: roosevelts was more duplicitous. theevelt said he -- i want authority to appoint any judge over the age of 70. this is quite direct. it says the court has been at , we will raise the size to 11. that gives work to the supreme court carpentry shop but that is all this entails. tom: this is critical. the supreme court act of 1869 got us to nine members. is that sacrosanct? is that untouchable? russell: the reason it is nine is because at that point there were nine circuits in the justices job was largely to serve as trial judge on what used to be called the circuit court. nine circuits, nine justices.
8:53 am
that is the reason it went up and down. there is nothing magic about that number. it has come to be regarded that way, and most state supreme court's are nine or less. most world courts are nine or less. an 11 member court could function. tom: one final question. you are not uncomfortable forgetting about conservative/liberal, with the idea of an 11 member court? russell: i am uncomfortable with it but i think there is a lot of justification if the republicans ram through this late in election by president who has no popular mandate whatsoever to impose a conservative federal judiciary on the contrary. he ran on that and he lost the popular vote massively. i think the courts legitimacy will already be in tatters if he gets another appointment. it is just one more ratcheting
8:54 am
down of the institution. tom: this has been hugely beneficial. russell wheeler, thank you so much. former deputy director of the federal judiciary center. i cannot say enough about our team. they have been working nonstop since friday evening trying to get thoughtful voices and i think we accomplished that today. lisa: i agree. michael purves put it really well and a note over the weekend where he said normally the supreme court justice vacancy would not make geopolitical noise. this would not have an effect on markets. this time is fundamentally different and this is important. the oxygen will suck out of the room in washington, d.c. and take the conversation away from the economy is a huge deal and torpedoes a lot of the chance of a fiscal deal before the election. tom: futures -60. you see that headline. i do not know want to make of it. lisa: bytedance will have no ownership of tiktok, this is coming from oracle.
8:55 am
the head scratcher of a deal is even more of a head scratcher because bytedance will not be transferring their algorithm to tiktok global. we will dig into it to find out. oracle shares are significant higher in premarket trading, bucking the trend of the nasdaq. tom: it is a trend up on the headline. a lift, -63 on futures. we are looking for every little lift we can get. in the yield space, and four basis points, lisa loves what i say the yield space, jon ferro hates it. lisa loves it. at 1.39, webond was now enjoy 1.40. these are little moves but it is that kind of day. off, 104. can you top this? mckie with kaplan coming up from
8:56 am
st. louis. mr. bullard later as well. stay with us through the day, particularly news from washington and the tumult of these markets. this is bloomberg radio. this is bloomberg television. ♪
8:57 am
8:58 am
8:59 am
♪ jonathan: from new york and
9:00 am
london for audience worldwide, good morning. the countdown to the open starts right now. already minutes until the opening bell. monday morning price action messy. equity futures down 57. political tensions in d.c. intensifying. >> risk rising. >> the supreme court pick. >> the if and when question on fiscal stimulus. >> mixed messages out of capitol hill. >> unless we get more support. >> there is a requirement for additional fiscal stimulus. >> i think the u.s. will go back into recession. >> the election risk. >> whether this will be a clean election. >> we may have a contested election. >> a lot depends on policy. >> this is all about fiscal policy. >> policy is front and center. >> things are likely to become less clear rather than more cl


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on