Title: Friday Morning Economic Politics

Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer show on WNYC. Happy Friday, everybody. So we learned since yesterday's show, you've probably seen it, that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer will not try to force a government shutdown, which would begin at midnight tonight if Senate Democrats vote against a budget bill for the next six months that's being voted on today. And because the Democrats don't have enough internal debates going on right now, the decision not to force a shutdown is dividing the party over how to best stop the Trump and Musk plundering of government services and the rule of law, as the Democrats see it. Why not by refusing to vote for this Republican budget, known as a CR or continuing resolution? Here's Schumer yesterday on the Senate floor.

Chuck Schumer: For sure, the Republican bill is a terrible option. It is not a clean CR. It is deeply partisan. It doesn't address far too many of this country's needs. But I believe allowing Donald Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option.

Brian Lehrer: So that's Schumer's basic argument. Things will get even worse for the American people, in his view, because a shutdown would give Trump and Musk even more power with even less of a requirement for due process. Right. But here's AOC Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of Queens in the Bronx reacting yesterday on CNN.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: I believe that's a tremendous mistake.

Jake Tapper: Why?

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Well, first and foremost, the American people, if anyone has held a town hall or has seen what has been happening in town halls, American people, whether they are Republicans, Independents, Democrats, are up in arms about Elon Musk and the actual gutting of federal agencies across the board. This continuing resolution codifies much of this chaos that Elon Musk is wreaking havoc on the federal government. It codifies many of those changes. It sacrifices and completely eliminates congressional authority in order to review these impulsive Trump tariffs that he's switching on and off.

And on top of that, for folks who are concerned about effectiveness in government, this Republican extreme spending bill removes all of the guardrails and all of the accountability measures to ensure that money is being spent in the way that Congress has directed for it to be spent. This turns the federal government into a slush fund for Donald Trump and Elon Musk. It sacrifices congressional authority and it is deeply partisan. And so, to me, it is almost unthinkable why Senate Democrats would vote to hand the few pieces of leverage that we have away for free when we've been sent here to protect Social Security, protect Medicaid and protect Medicare.

Brian Lehrer: That's AOC on CNN with Jake Tapper. And here's a response to critiques like that from Schumer, who went on Chris Hayes' show on MSNBC last night to explain himself further.

Chuck Schumer: Under a shutdown, it is the executive branch, in this case Trump, Musk, Doge and Vogt, who's head of the OMB, who we all know are authoritarians, vicious, nasty, who would have sole control over what is funded and what isn't. They get to determine what is a, "essential service." And they will just cut to smithereens far greater than in the CR bill, which is a lousy bill, far greater than that what could be funded and what couldn't. And there's no recourse. You can't go to court. This is a decision totally in the executive branch. And so it would be devastating.

Why is it that Elon Musk and Donald Trump want a government shutdown? So they can take control of the government and do their vicious, horrible things. They could cut half the government. They could tell employees you're not essential and never bring them back permanently, firing them. It's a disaster. And in a few weeks, if there was a shutdown, everyone would be complaining and howling, why did they eliminate SNAP? Why did they cut so much of Medicaid? But they could do all that on their own. That's the problem. There is no check on them with a shutdown.

That's not to say this CR bill is a good bill. It isn't. It didn't have any safeguards in it. But it would be much, much worse to have a shutdown. And my job, Chris, as leader is to see things a little bit ahead down the road and see how horrible this would be and alert people to it.

Brian Lehrer: Schumer on MSNBC, we have another Schumer clip and another AOC clip still to play. Of course, this is all happening amid tariffs, chaos being fostered by Trump to the detriment of people's 401k values, predictability for small businesses that don't know whether to invest or lay low, and more, and Trump and his appointees acknowledging that a recession may even be coming. So let's see where we are with Nancy Cook, senior national political correspondent at Bloomberg News, focusing mostly on economy issues. Thanks for coming on, Nancy, in the middle of all of this. Welcome back to WNYC.

Nancy Cook: Thanks for having me, Brian. I love the show. I'm always honored to be on.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you very much. Can we clarify one thing about this budget resolution? To start out, just for listeners who aren't in the weeds of budget resolutions and all of that, this is not the big government and tax cutting bill that's also been in the news that's threatening hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid cuts and the new and extended tax cuts. This is more of a temporary patch that does have changes that Schumer and Ocasio-Cortez were debating there. But this is not the big one, right?

Nancy Cook: Right, Exactly. This is just sort of a short term band aid to keep the government funded. It's still a political football for Republicans and Democrats in Washington, but it's more of a short term agreement. I think one of the most relevant things that we heard AOC talk about, which I just want to point out, is that one of the key things that it does is it basically turns a lot-- it increases Trump's power in terms of trade. There's language in there that basically gives the executive branch, AKA the White House, much more oversight over trade and tariffs than Congress. And so that's a pretty key, like in the weeds change, but will also have really big effects.

Brian Lehrer: Interesting. And what about Schumer's argument that they would have even more power to do things with even fewer checks and balances if they were to shut the government down? Is there a reportable yes or no fact checking answer to that?

Nancy Cook: I don't think there's a reportable yes or no, but I think it's just evidence of sort of the philosophical wilderness the Democrats are in right now about how to handle Trump. And I think Schumer's argument is, you know, this is not really a fight to pick. We don't want to be the ones blamed for the shutdown, even though the Republicans do control everything. And I think AOC is saying sort of, why help Republicans pass this bill that she views as toxic? You know, Democrats have just had such a hard time since Trump's inauguration just broadly figuring out how to counter what he does and how to effectively attack him.

And it's an ongoing conversation for them. I think that, you know, the one bright spot for Democrats is that the Doge cuts and what Elon Musk has been doing at the federal agencies is gaining a lot of traction among voters of something they don't like. And I think that that is one area where Democrats, we're starting to see them make a lot of noise over that.

Brian Lehrer: Right. I know that there are some pretty bad poll numbers coming out for Trump and Musk, big picture and certainly a lot of the cuts and the way they're being done and some of the chaos they're creating as well as the effects on certain services. But to Schumer's point, and again, you're not a legal analyst, you're a political correspondent who focuses on the economy. But one point Schumer was making, or one argument that he was making was that the courts would even have less ability to review things that they could do in an autocratic way during a shutdown in particular. Anything on that?

Nancy Cook: Yeah, I mean, I think that that is a good point that he is making that if, you know, the government empties it out and people aren't going to work, that would include judges and that they would not be able to stop that. We have seen the one area where Trump has been stopped is through the court system. And you know, that's even less likely this time than it was his first term because he stacked the courts with many more sort of Republican or conservative judges. But that is kind of has been the one check on his power so far, the court system. So Schumer is right in that regard.

Brian Lehrer: So, listeners, our first call in question today. Anyone among the Democrats listening have an opinion on this? 212-433 WNYC. Is Schumer doing the right thing or the wrong thing for the moment to slow the Trump and Musk wrecking ball in the way that he sees it being a wrecking ball and he sees it as most effective, but AOC and others don't. 212-433-WNYC 212-433-9692. Call or text. Who has an opinion or who has a question for Nancy Cook reporting for Bloomberg News on the economy and politics?

212-433-9692. And here's one more back and forth between Schumer and AOC on two different cable channels on which of these imperfect choices would be worse for people who think Musk and Trump are terrible for the country. This time they disagree on the amount of conflict to be generating over the CR or continuing budget resolution. First AOC on CNN.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: I think that what we need right now is a united Senate Democratic caucus that can stand up for this country and not vote for cloture and not vote for this bill. And I think that the strength that we have is in this moment. Reconciliation and all of these-- Republicans do not need Democratic votes for that. They need it for this. And so the strength of our leadership in this moment is going to demonstrate the strength of our caucus. And I cannot urge enough how bad of an idea it is to empower and enable Donald Trump and Elon Musk in this moment. It is dangerous and it is reckless.

Brian Lehrer: And back to Schumer on MSNBC, asked about using conflict as perhaps the best strategy. And you'll hear Schumer call Trump and Musk a curse word that is allowed to be said on the radio. But as for conflict, he says this.

Chuck Schumer: We are going to conflict with them on everything. On the tax cuts for the billionaires. They become a plutocracy and oligarchy on Medicaid. We have plans to conflict them with all of that. If the shutdown occurred, we wouldn't be able to do that because they would fill up both the Senate and the discussion on whether we should cut this and not cut that of things that they want to cut. So to have the conflict on the best ground, we have summed up in a sentence that they're making the middle class pay for tax cuts for billionaires.

It's much, much better not to be in the middle of a shutdown, which, to divert people from, from the number one issue we have against these bastards, sorry, these people, which is not only all these cuts, but they're ruining democracy. And one other thing, on a shutdown, on a shutdown, the courts could close or at least be totally, totally disabled. And the courts are one of the best ways we've had to go after these guys.

Brian Lehrer: So maybe the difference between when Schumer and when Trump curse out the other side is Schumer apologizes for it afterwards. But Chuck Schumer and AOC representing wings of the Democratic Party. You know, Nancy, a day ago, just a day ago, I thought the Democrats were unified in not allowing the CR to come to a vote, meaning the bill would fail in the Senate and there would be a partial government shutdown beginning at midnight tonight. So is Schumer's announcement yesterday a surprise to you and maybe even to members of his own party?

Nancy Cook: Schumer is, you know, longtime creature of Washington and a real tactician on the Hill. And I think that he, you know, sort of quietly lined up other Democrats who would support the bill. You know, it seemed like as of Wednesday that they were headed for a government shutdown. I know that, you know, people in our newsroom were kind of expecting it or sort of making coverage plans for that. It seemed like that was what was happening. But I think that, you know, he decided this wasn't the right strategy. And, you know, lined up these votes and basically announced it so that there wasn't a lot of time for people to, you know, hem and haw about when they would be doing it.

Brian Lehrer: Rich in Freehold, you're on WNYC. Hi, Rich.

Rich: Good morning. I love your show. My first time on. I love the fact that you give both sides of the story. However, as a conservative Democrat, I believe that Schumer and the Democrat Senate should not vote for a CR. Allow Trump to close the government or allow the Republicans to close it by not putting the bill forth. And then let America see what the true colors of this person are. He said he was going to do all these things before the election. Lower gas price-- eggs are $12 a dozen. You know, all these things that he said he was going to do are backfiring on him.

They're setting fire to Tesla dealerships around the world. They're burning the Tesla chargers. I think the momentum is with the Democrats. If they can let this thing fail, it'll show how good of a leader Trump is. Even Republicans are saying he's a terrible leader. You know, that's not how you fix government. You don't just fire everybody and then try and rehire them. Rehire the ones that you like.

Brian Lehrer: Wouldn't you say other people might argue that Trump and Musk are completely showing the world and the country who they are already. And so the only issue left for the Democrats who want to stop them is how to stop them. Don't give them more of a lane, people know?

Rich: I think what I think what's going on is people are starting to see, but they won't really see. Like in New Jersey, there was a call in to the governor the other day, a Republican woman who voted for a Republican Congressman, Smith in South Jersey. Her sister is in a group home. All Trump's cuts are going to close that group home. They have nowhere to put her. And the governor of New Jersey told all the Republicans that are calling him, you need to call the Republican senators, or congressmen that represent you and tell them you can't do this because it's hurting me. I'm the one who voted for you.

Brian Lehrer: Rich, thank you very much. Glad you're a first time caller. Call us again. And yeah, we actually played that clip of that woman calling Governor Murphy on Nancy Solomon's Ask Governor Murphy call in show the other night. Exactly. That clip of that woman from Toms River. So, Rich, thank you for making those points. But Tara in Queens, I think is going to side with AOC. Tara, you're on WNYC. Thank you for calling in.

Tara: Yes, good morning, Brian. I agree with what the first caller just said. I don't think any of the Democrats should cooperate with Trump and Elon Musk at all. Just leave them alone. Let them do whatever they have to do so that people can see who votes for them. I want the people to see who votes for them without listening. So when Vice President Harris was saying that everything they plan to do is on Project 2025, nobody listens to her.

Brian Lehrer: Tara, thank you very much. One more in this set. Isaac in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hi, Isaac.

Isaac: Yeah, hi. I mean, my thought on this is that-- I'm very much with AOC on this. And the problem as I see it is that this is about long term versus short term damage. Like, we saw the plan. We know the Project 2025 plan. We were given this well in advance. The plan here is to reduce Congress to nothing but a bunch of muppets who tweet like-- that have no power. And the last vestige of power here that Congress has had, for better or for worse, has been the power of the purse. And I know that this has been very frustrating for most Americans because it hasn't worked fast and it hasn't worked effectively.

But I don't think Democrats have taken an idea that this is actually a legitimate crisis and threat to our democracy. We're just kind of letting go of this in the kind of blaring noise, the chiron that's been blasting at us for years now. And this is a crisis moment where we are about to lose the balance of power in our American democracy.

Brian Lehrer: Isaac, thank you very much. Thank you. And one text message coming in. This is a classic head versus heart, head Schumer versus heart AOC argument. Conflict just for the sake of conflict just illustrates Democrats flailing for some effect. So we have a few sort of on each side. Plenty of callers, plenty of texters on each side of this, Nancy, so this is the state of the Democratic Party right now, huh?

Nancy Cook: It is. And it's just, you know, a microcosm-- all these wonderful comments are just a microcosm of the conversations that Democratic politicians are having and strategists as they try to figure out, you know, how to counter Trump, what is the most effective way, what should they focus on and what should they should go after. I will say that, you know, I am seeing a little bit of softness in his power this week. There was a new CNN poll that came out. The majority of Americans, 56%, now disapprove of his handling of the economy, which I think is very interesting and something I'll be watching.

You know, he ran as someone who could combat inflation, and that was something that Americans were so frustrated by during the 2024 presidential election. And we actually haven't seen him do that much on the economy so far apart from the tariffs. So I think that there's softness there. And then, of course, you know, we haven't talked yet about the, the last week of tariffs and all the fluctuations that's created in the stock market. But I think that that is also sort of potentially a huge problem for him. And I will be curious to see, you know, if Democrats sort of latch onto that as the message that they can fight him on.

Brian Lehrer: And we're going to get more into the tariffs and your reporting on that in a minute. And also into this no tax up to $150,000 of income thing that the commerce secretary floated. I'm not sure that it's real, but it's the kind of thing that might be dividing the MAGA base just as we're talking here about how the Democrats are divided. But before we do all that, last thing on this, Schumer does need, I think it's six Senate Democrats to vote yes today, not just him. Does he have enough willing to go along with his strategy?

Nancy Cook: So far it does seem like he does have the votes. You know, he's pretty savvy. And so he, you know, usually doesn't announce things until they're already a done deal. And so it seems like he has the votes. But again, you know, with AOC coming out, that could change throughout the day. Do you know what I mean? These people may end up getting a lot of pressure and, you know, we'll have to see.

Brian Lehrer: Story not over. All right, we'll continue with Nancy Cook from Bloomberg and you right after this, Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we continue with Nancy Cook, senior national political reporter from Bloomberg, who focuses on the economy. And folks, no more calls on shutdown or no shutdown votes for the Democrats. The Schumer vs. AOC positions we were laying out, we're done with that part of the segment. Call in on tariffs, call in on tax cuts, call in on Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid, call in on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And a new controversy there that we're going to talk about with Nancy Cook based on her reporting. 212-433 WNYC 212-433-9692

So, Nancy, you have an article called Banks Want US Consumer Regulator Back to Undo Rules They Loathe. So can you explain the status of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau right now and why the banks that it regulates that hate it, want to bring it back from the Trump and Musk graveyard?

Nancy Cook: Sure. Well, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is for folks who don't know, a brainchild of Elizabeth Warren. It was after the Great Recession in 2008, 2009, that she advocated for a new federal agency that took consumer complaints on, you know, everything from predatory mortgages, which we saw in that recession, to, you know, bad student loans, just to, you know, digital payment systems or banks that do sketchy things to get people to open accounts. And so this is an agency that handles all of those things. Like most federal agencies in Washington, D.C. it has been a victim of the Doge cuts.

It has been taken over by a Trump ally, and basically a bunch of people have been laid off, but then a bunch of people have also been able to stay home. And interestingly, some of the constituencies here who are fighting for it to come back to life a little bit are the banks that it actually regulates, which is an interesting contradiction. You know, the banks, a lot of banks have different things. You know, they're small banks, big banks. They're sort of different things they all want. But the overarching argument is that, you know, they don't want bad actors out there sort of doing sketchy things that make them all look bad.

But also, if you are going to make changes to regulations, as Republicans want or, you know, sort of make less laws, you actually need people at the CFPB to help unwind things. And so it's been an interesting thing to sort of see just broadly reporting on the Doge things, which, you know, it not just causes chaos necessarily in the federal government or with federal workers, but also in a lot of industries that sort of touch on the federal government. They don't necessarily know who to go to for questions or complaints or who's going to be regulating them. And so I would just say there's a big sense of chaos in Washington in general right now.

Brian Lehrer: Is this an example of a place perhaps where the various wings on the right are divided, a more populous Bannon wing that doesn't support deep tax cuts for billionaires and did support Lina Khan, that banking regulator who is now out under Trump and the Musk wing that does support those things? Does this extend to banking power over credit card holders and other consumers, as you know, was controlled to some degree by the CFPB?

Nancy Cook: I wouldn't say the CFPB specifically, but there is an interesting divide with what to do with the CFPB. Whereas Russ Vogt, who was one of the writers of Project 2025 and is a staunch conservative and is running the Office of Management and Budget for Trump this time, as he was last time, he, for instance, does not like what Elon Musk is doing at Doge. You know, he has wanted to sort of change the CFPB for a long time, but he wants to do it in a way that's legally defensible and that actually, you know, changes it. And I think that there's a concern among him and some Republicans that the way Doge is doing it is so slash and burn and also subject to court challenge that it's actually not going to withstand scrutiny. And so that is sort of the debate in the MAGA wing about how to actually do it.

Brian Lehrer: Also on the Republican side, Trump's commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, was on CBS this week arguing for the expansion of the Trump tax cuts, which, as we discussed earlier, will be voted on later this year, and floating the idea besides what we already know is out there that hasn't been enacted into law, these are proposals we'll see if they get passed. No tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, no federal tax for anyone who makes under $150,000 per year. Here he is, it's just seven seconds.

Howard Lutnick: I know what his goal is. No tax for anybody who makes less than $150,000 a year. That's his goal. Lutnick talking about Trump. Is this a real thing?

Nancy Cook: I think that Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, annoys Trump allies and advisors sometimes because he gets out of the head of the president on things. You know, he is in competition with Elon Musk I would say to, you know, who can be the president's first buddy? They both want to be-- Howard Lutnick is constantly in the Oval Office, constantly around Trump. And so this is not an idea that we've heard from the president. This is not something we've heard from the president's team. And so it's interesting that he floated it.

Trump on the campaign trail did talk about the idea of getting rid of the income tax entirely and replacing it with tariffs. But this has not, you know, sort of this benchmark of 150,000 is not something that he has talked about. And so this is Lutnick sort of getting out ahead of the President, much to the chagrin, I'm sure, of many White House aides who view him with some skepticism.

Brian Lehrer: And Lutnick is getting a reputation as kind of a loose cannon from what I've read. You were just describing him that way to some degree. And, you know, I read-- there's an article on Politico right now that describes him as not that knowledgeable about economic policy and too much of an attention hog within Trump's cabinet. It says Lutnick might become the fall guy for the tariffs chaos that's sinking the stock market and hurting small businesses and maybe big businesses. So is that consistent with your reporting? Do you think Lutnick may have been speaking out of school there when he floated this $150,000 idea? Or that as tariffs chaos continues, that we're going to see him forced to resign and Trump course correct on the back of Howard Lutnick?

Nancy Cook: I do think that I could see Lutnick becoming a fall guy at some point. You know, he made a lot of people mad during the transition because he said that he was helping to run the transition and running the personnel side of it. And then he put himself up for Treasury Secretary, which surprised President Trump and a bunch of his aides. And so he has a reputation of having very sharp elbows, of getting out ahead of the president, sort of saying things that doesn't necessarily jive with the president's policy. And so I could see people getting sick of him at some point.

That said, though, Trump is not sick of the tariff chaos yet. And, and it always comes back to him. Right? I mean, you know, said that there may be a recession, but Americans will just have to move through it. He very much believes in this tariff policy. And despite, you know, some angst among his economic aides about what is happening, he is doubling down on it. And we saw him speak to a group of CEOs in Washington this week. Earlier this week, he doubled down on the tariffs. He's doubled down on them in multiple TV appearances. You know, the White House is fielding panicked calls from business executives about what is happening, and they're still sticking with it. So, you know, it always comes back to actually, I think what Trump wants.

Brian Lehrer: Listener texts. The CFPB is small but mighty. It is the clearest indicator that the administration is against working people. Clearly doesn't have citizens' well being in minds. Everybody should be outraged. Someone else asks, and listeners don't Take this as an actual suggestion, but a rhetorical question because I don't want you to get in trouble. But this says, given the fact that Doge is messing with the treasury, FDIC, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, should Americans submit their taxes this April 15th or not? So there's an idea, Nancy, of the lengths to which people are thinking of going, considering what's going on.

Nancy Cook: Yeah, I mean, I'm not a tax lawyer, but I still think it's a good idea to probably submit your taxes like always. But yeah, I just think that the federal government could look so radically different in a year based on what Doge and Elon Musk are doing. You know, the CFPB, for instance, just in one example, they have a consumer complaint hotline. So let's say you, you know, opened up a savings account at a bank and they said that you would get, you know, this interest rate, but it turns out they were lying, you can go to the CFPB and complain.

And so by having it down, it's just like one less place that kind of monitors Americans financial lives and the little, you know, issues that come up. But that can mean a lot to people with their everyday pocketbook expenses. And that's just one example that we're seeing, you know, across the federal government. There's just a lot of things, you know, NOAA, for instance, regulates weather. We've seen Doge go in there. We've seen Doge go into, you know, the health care agencies. There were some problems at one point recently with states getting funding for Medicaid because of that.

And so there's just been a lot of disruption over Elon Musk's tech people going into these federal agencies and not always understanding what they're seeing, but still making cuts.

Brian Lehrer: Your article on CFPB did give some specifics as to why small banks, for example, feel overregulated by them. Maybe you can give our listeners one of those. But beyond that, why would Trump and his cabinet and his unofficial co-president Elon Musk, want to, after winning on the basis of being supposedly for the working class, want to dismantle an agency that seems to be regulating the banks who would be nobody's idea of sort of consumer friendly institutions?

Nancy Cook: Yeah. Well, I think that Elon Musk just broadly views the federal government as bloated and not efficient and not efficient in terms of its tech systems. And he views himself as a visionary who can come in and change that.

Brian Lehrer: But it's more ideological than that, isn't it? Not just efficiency?

Nancy Cook: Sure. I mean, I think Republicans have long wanted to shrink the size of the federal government and slash regulation and have very little regulation. And Elon Musk is conveniently doing that for them. You know, I ran into a Republican this week who said, you know, Elon Musk is the great distraction, too. He is doing all these things that are unpopular. I mean, the courts have stopped him in a bunch of different instances. But he's also distracting from what Trump is doing. I mean, people are paying so much attention to Doge and what is happening there that, you know, they are really not always paying attention to the things Trump is doing every day.

You know, most days he's like, you know, speaking three times a day. You know, today he's going to the Justice Department to give a speech. I'll be curious to see what he says there. You know, he is meeting with world leaders. There is so much happening. He's signing executive orders that I think that it's easy to miss kind of the radical changes that happening as Trump expands the power of the executive branch and the White House, but also the way he is radically reshaping foreign policy and our alliances around the globe because everyone's so focused on whatever Elon Musk is doing that day.

Brian Lehrer: Right. But one more question on the CFPB, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, why this? Did the banks or people in the banking industry, the finance sector, make a lot of contributions to the Republicans? And this is just a special interest move? If you can say.

Nancy Cook: Well, the small banks want the CFPB leaders to undo a regulation that requires them to share sort of large amounts of data with the public on their small business lending. So that's why they want the CFPB to be stood up. I don't want to, like, get too in the weeds of CFPB because I am a political reporter, not a CFPB reporter. But, you know, that is just one instance where actually the things that they regulate, you know, the institutions that they regulate, actually don't want everything totally smashed and burned because then they won't be able to actually undo what they want.

Brian Lehrer: Last thing, your article, Tariff Worry on Wall street pressures Trump to speed up tax cuts. What's changing?

Nancy Cook: Well, I think that what's happening is that, you know, so much of-- there is such stress among Wall street people about the fluctuations in the stock market. There's so much uncertainty about what's happening with the tariffs. You know, they're just really back and forth. You know, every day is sort of a new change. The tariffs change hour by hour and I think it's putting a lot more pressure on Republicans to try to pass sort of a sweeping tax bill at the end of the year because, you know, that is really going to be the signature economic policy for this year for Republicans.

And if they don't do it then you could, you know, Democrats could say look, Trump ran on the economy but he sort of did nothing on the economy. And I think that that's going to be a key thing for them this year. Trump's going to need to show that he did something on the economy rather than just sort of wreck people's financial wealth in the stock market with these tariffs. And that's sort of what's happening now.

Brian Lehrer: Nancy Cook, senior national political correspondent for Bloomberg News with a focus on the economy. Thanks for joining us, Nancy. We really appreciate it.

Nancy Cook: Thanks so much for having me.

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC More in a minute.

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.