Connect with us

News

Biden and McCarthy to meet on Monday as debt ceiling talks resume

Published

on

Biden and McCarthy to meet on Monday as debt ceiling talks resume

HIROSHIMA, Japan, May 21 (Reuters) – U.S. President Joe Biden and House Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy will meet to discuss the debt ceiling on Monday, after the two leaders held a phone call on Sunday as the president flew back to Washington that both sides described as positive.

McCarthy, speaking to reporters at the U.S. Capitol following the call, said there were positive discussions on solving the crisis and that staff-level talks were set to resume later on Sunday.

Asked if he was more hopeful after talking to the president, McCarthy said: “Our teams are talking today and we’re setting (sic) to have a meeting tomorrow. That’s better than it was earlier. So, yes.”

A White House official confirmed Monday’s meeting but offered no specific time.

Biden, who arrived back at the White House late on Sunday evening after his trip to Japan, said the call with McCarthy had gone well. “It went well,” Biden said. “We’ll talk tomorrow.”

Advertisement

Staff members from both sides reconvened at McCarthy’s office in the Capitol on Sunday evening for talks that lasted about two-and-a-half hours.

Senior White House advisor Steve Ricchetti told reporters as he left the meeting, “We’ll keep working tonight.”

Biden, before leaving Japan following the G7 summit earlier on Sunday, said he would be willing to cut spending together with tax adjustments to reach a deal but the latest offer from Republicans was “unacceptable.”

Less than two weeks remain until June 1, when the Treasury Department has warned that the federal government could be unable to pay all its debts, a deadline U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen reaffirmed on Sunday. A failure to lift the debt ceiling would trigger a default that would cause chaos in financial markets and spike interest rates.

McCarthy’s comments on Sunday appeared more positive than the increasingly heated rhetoric in recent days, as both sides reverted to calling the other’s position extremist and talks stalled.

Advertisement

“Much of what they’ve already proposed is simply, quite frankly, unacceptable,” Biden told a news conference in Hiroshima. “It’s time for Republicans to accept that there is no bipartisan deal to be made solely, solely on their partisan terms. They have to move as well.”

The president later tweeted that he would not agree to a deal that protected “Big Oil” subsidies and “wealthy tax cheats” while putting healthcare and food assistance at risk for millions of Americans.

He also suggested some Republican lawmakers were willing to see the U.S. default on its debt so that the disastrous results would prevent Biden, a Democrat, from winning re-election in 2024.

After Sunday’s call, McCarthy said while there was still no final deal, there was an understanding to get negotiators on both sides back together before the two leaders met: “There’s no agreement. We’re still apart.”

Advertisement

“What I’m looking at are where our differences are and how could we solve those, and I felt that part was productive,” he told reporters.

Meanwhile, concerns about default are weighing on markets as an increase in the government’s self-imposed borrowing limit is needed regularly to cover costs of spending and tax cuts previously approved by lawmakers.

On Friday, the United States was forced to pay record-high interest rates in a recent debt offer.

Democratic President Biden’s proposed 2024 budget and Republicans’ ‘Limit, Save, Grow’ Act will both generate budget savings over a decade, but how they will do so is starkly different.

SPENDING CUTS

McCarthy said Republicans backed an increase in the defense budget while cutting overall spending, and that debt ceiling talks have not included discussions about tax cuts passed under former President Donald Trump.

A source familiar with the negotiations said the Biden administration had proposed keeping non-defense discretionary spending flat for the next year.

Biden ahead of the call stressed that he was open to making spending cuts and said he was not concerned they would lead to a recession, but he could not agree to Republicans’ current demands.

Advertisement

The Republican-led House last month passed legislation that would cut a wide swath of government spending by 8% next year. Democrats say that would force average cuts of at least 22% on programs like education and law enforcement, a figure top Republicans have not disputed.

Republicans hold a slim majority in the House and Biden’s fellow Democrats have narrow control of the Senate, so no deal can pass without bipartisan support. But time is running short as Monday’s meeting will take place with just 10 days left to hammer out a deal before hitting Treasury’s deadline.

McCarthy has said he will give House lawmakers 72 hours to review an agreement before bringing it up for a vote.

The last time the nation has come this close to default was in 2011, also with a Democratic president and Senate with a Republican-led House.

Congress eventually averted default, but the economy endured heavy shocks, including the first-ever downgrade of the United States’ top-tier credit rating and a major stock sell-off.

Advertisement

Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Jeff Mason

Thomson Reuters

Jeff Mason is a White House Correspondent for Reuters. He has covered the presidencies of Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden and the presidential campaigns of Biden, Trump, Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain. He served as president of the White House Correspondents’ Association in 2016-2017, leading the press corps in advocating for press freedom in the early days of the Trump administration. His and the WHCA’s work was recognized with Deutsche Welle’s “Freedom of Speech Award.” Jeff has asked pointed questions of domestic and foreign leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. He is a winner of the WHCA’s “Excellence in Presidential News Coverage Under Deadline Pressure” award and co-winner of the Association for Business Journalists’ “Breaking News” award. Jeff began his career in Frankfurt, Germany as a business reporter before being posted to Brussels, Belgium, where he covered the European Union. Jeff appears regularly on television and radio and teaches political journalism at Georgetown University. He is a graduate of Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism and a former Fulbright scholar.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

How long will Trump’s honeymoon with the stock market last?

Published

on

How long will Trump’s honeymoon with the stock market last?

Few were surprised when US stocks jumped after Donald Trump’s decisive victory in the presidential election. Amid widespread assumptions of weeks of uncertainty, a clear result was always likely to prompt an initial relief rally. More unexpected was what has happened since.

The president-elect has nominated a string of hardliners to senior positions, signalling his intent to push ahead with a radical agenda to enact sweeping tariffs and deport millions of illegal immigrants that many economists warn would cause inflation and deficits to spiral upward.

Yet the stock market — the economic barometer most closely watched by the general public, and one often referenced by Trump himself — seems to have shown little sign of concern.

The S&P 500, Wall Street’s benchmark index for large stocks, is still up about 3 per cent since the vote, even after a slight pullback. The main index of small cap stocks is up almost 5 per cent.

The relative cost of borrowing for large companies has also plummeted to multi-decade lows, and speculative assets such as bitcoin have surged.

Advertisement

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Under the surface, not every part of the stock market has been so calm. A Citi-created index of stocks that may be vulnerable to government spending cuts, for example, has tumbled 8 per cent since the election, while healthcare stocks have been hit by the nomination of vaccine sceptic Robert Kennedy Jr to head the health department.

The prospect of inflation arising from tariffs and a tighter labour market has also spooked many in the $27tn Treasury market, with some high-profile groups warning about over-exuberance.

But the contrasting signals raise some key questions for traders and policymakers alike: are equity investors setting themselves up for a fall by ignoring high valuations and potential downsides of Trumponomics, or will they be proved right as gloomy economists once again have to walk back their dire prognoses?

“Any time . . . you get to the point where markets are beyond priced to perfection, you have to be concerned about complacency”, says Sonal Desai, chief investment officer at Franklin Templeton Fixed Income.

Advertisement

But, she adds, “the reality is you also need to very actively look for triggers for sell-offs, and right now . . . I think the underlying economy is strong and the policies of the incoming administration are unlikely to move that significantly.”


The bull case was on full display at the Wynn resort in Las Vegas this week, where more than 800 investors, bankers and executives were gathered for Goldman Sachs’ annual conference for “innovative private companies”.

With interest rates now trending downward, capital markets specialists had already been preparing for a recovery in stock market listings and mergers and acquisitions activity, but the election result has poured fuel on the fire.

Walter Lundon, a trader, shows off his pro-Trump T-shirt on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange
Walter Lundon, a trader, shows off his pro-Trump T-shirt on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Investors believe Trump will follow through on pledges to cut taxes and regulation © Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images

With Republicans controlling both houses of Congress in addition to the White House, investors are assuming that it will be easy for the Trump administration to fulfil promises to slash corporate taxes and scale back regulation. At the same time, more contentious proposals such as the introduction of tariffs were frequently dismissed by attendees as a “negotiating tactic”.

David Solomon, Goldman chief executive, said at the conference: “The market is basically saying they think the new administration will bring [regulation] back to a place where it’s more sensible.”

One hedge fund manager in attendance sums up the atmosphere more bluntly. “There are lots of giddy investors here getting excited about takeout targets,” he says. “M&A is now a real possibility because of the new administration. That’s been the most exciting [element of Trump’s proposals] . . . I think the mood is better than it’s been in the past four years.”

Advertisement

The emphasis on tax and deregulation is clear when looking at which sectors have been the biggest winners in the recent market rally: financial services and energy.

The S&P 500 financials sub-index has jumped almost 8 per cent since the vote, while the energy sub-index is up almost 7 per cent. Energy executives have celebrated the president-elect’s pledges to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement and open up federal lands for fracking in pursuit of US “energy dominance”.

The Russell 2000 index, which measures small cap companies, has also risen faster than the S&P thanks to its heavy weighting towards financial stocks, and a belief that smaller domestically focused companies have more to gain from corporate tax cuts.

Chris Shipley, co-chief investment officer at Fort Washington Investment Advisors, which manages about $86bn, says that “we believe the market has acted rationally since the election”, citing the concentration of gains in areas that could benefit from trends such as deregulation and M&A.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Advertisement

Even policies that most mainstream economists think would have a negative effect overall — like a sharp increase in tariffs — could ironically boost the relative appeal of US stocks by hitting other countries even harder.

The Europe-wide Stoxx 600 index, for example, has slipped since the election as investors bet the export-dependent region will be heavily hit by any increase in trade tensions. At the same time, the euro has dipped to a two-year low against the dollar.

“The ‘America First’ policy, not surprisingly, will be good for the US versus the rest of the world,” says Kay Herr, US chief investment officer for JPMorgan Asset Management’s global fixed income, currency and commodities team.


The worry among economists and many bond investors, however, is that Trump’s policies could create broader economic problems that would eventually be hard for the stock market to ignore.

Some of Trump’s policies, such as corporate tax cuts, could boost domestic growth. But with the economy already in a surprisingly robust state despite years of worries about a potential recession, some like former IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard fear an “overheating” that would lead to a resurgence in inflation and a subsequent slowdown.

A shale gas well drilling site in Pennsylvania
A shale gas well drilling site in Pennsylvania. The incoming Trump administration is expected to open up federal lands for fracking in pursuit of US ‘energy dominance’ © Keith Srakocic/AP

Demand-driven inflation could be exacerbated by supply-side pressures if Trump follows through with some of his more sweeping policy pledges.

On the campaign trail, Trump proposed a baseline 10 per cent import tariff on all goods made outside the US, and 60 per cent if they are made in China. Economists generally agree that the cost of tariffs falls substantially on the shoulders of consumers in the country enacting them. Walmart, the largest retailer in the US, warned this week it might have to raise prices if tariffs are introduced.

Advertisement

Deporting millions of undocumented immigrants, meanwhile, would remove a huge source of labour from the US workforce, driving up wages and reducing the capacity of US companies to supply goods and services.

Economists at Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank both predicted this week that Trump’s policies would drag on GDP growth by 2026, and make it harder for the Federal Reserve to bring inflation back to its 2 per cent target.

Tom Barkin, president of the Richmond Fed and a voting member on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee, says he understands concerns among the business community about tariffs reigniting inflation, and says the US was “somewhat more vulnerable to cost shocks” than in the past.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

But some investors believe the risks to be minimal. “In our view, the inflationary concerns . . . regarding tariffs are overblown,” says Shipley of Fort Washington.

Fed policymakers have been quick to stress that they will not prejudge any potential policies before they have been officially announced, but bond investors have already scaled back their forecasts for how much the central bank will be able to cut interest rates over the next year.

Advertisement

Interest rate futures are now pricing in a fall in Fed rates to roughly 4 per cent by the end of 2025, from the current level of 4.5-4.75 per cent. In September, investors were betting they would fall below 3 per cent by then.

Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note, which rises when prices fall, is up about 0.8 percentage points since mid-September to 4.4 per cent. As a consequence, the average rate on a 30-year mortgage is also ticking upward, to near 7 per cent.

“The bond market has been very focused on deficits and fiscal expansion, and the equity market has been focused, it seems, on deregulation and the growth aspect,” says JPMorgan’s Herr. But “at some point, a higher [Treasury yield] is problematic to equities”.

In part, that is because higher bond yields represent an alternative source of attractive returns at much lower risk than stocks. But the more important impact could come from the warning signal a further increase in yields would represent.

The rise in yields is being driven by concerns both about inflation and also higher government debt levels, says Kristina Hooper, chief global market strategist at Invesco. “2024 marks the first year in which the US spends more to service its debt than it spends on its entire defence budget. And that’s not sustainable in my opinion over the longer term, and so we have to worry about the potential for a mini Liz Truss moment.”

Advertisement

Former UK prime minister Truss’s attempt to introduce billions of pounds of unfunded tax cuts and increased borrowing in 2022 caused a massive sell-off in British government debt that spilled into currency and equity markets.

Demonstrators in New York protests against Trump’s immigration proposals
Demonstrators in New York protest against Trump’s immigration proposals. His plans to deport millions of undocumented immigrants would remove a large chunk from the US workforce © Michael Nigro/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect

The structure and scale of the US Treasury market makes this sort of “bond vigilantism” less likely, strategists and investors stress, but many institutions have begun paying more attention to the possibility.

“Over the next two to four years, do I think that there’s a very serious risk of bond vigilantes coming back? Absolutely. And that’s entirely based on what the multiyear plan will be, and the impact which comes out of it,” says Franklin Templeton’s Desai.


Trump and his advisers have dismissed concerns about their economic agenda, arguing that policies such as encouraging the domestic energy sector will help keep inflation low and growth high.

Even if they do not, several investors in Las Vegas this week suggested that the president-elect’s personal preoccupation with the stock market would help restrain him from the most potentially damaging policies.

“I think Trump and all his donors measure their success and happiness around where the US stock market is,” says the hedge fund manager. “It’s one reason why I’m pretty bullish despite the market being where it is.”

Advertisement

Economists have also consistently underestimated the resilience of the US economy in recent years. The combination of Trump’s attentiveness and economists’ poor past forecasting means even sceptical investors are wary of betting against the US market.

“There are risks out there,” says Colin Graham, head of multi-asset strategies at Robeco. “If some of the more extreme policies that were talked about during the campaign get implemented, our core view for next year is going to be wrong.

“But what is our biggest risk here? Missing out on the upside. The momentum is very strong.”

Data visualisation by Keith Fray and Chris Giles

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Can Matt Gaetz return to Congress? He says he won’t.

Published

on

Can Matt Gaetz return to Congress? He says he won’t.

Gaetz not returning to Congress

Advertisement


Gaetz on not returning to Congress after dropping out of Trump attorney general consideration

02:05

Former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida says he doesn’t intend to return to Congress in January, after resigning from his seat and withdrawing from consideration as U.S. attorney general. 

Advertisement

Gaetz announced his withdrawal Thursday, citing the distraction his impending nomination was causing, and President-elect Donald Trump soon afterward said former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi would be his new pick for the job. But Gaetz won reelection to his U.S. House seat earlier this month, so there were some questions about whether he was considering a return to Congress in January. 

But Gaetz told conservative personality Charlie Kirk on Friday that he doesn’t intend to go back to Congress, though he vowed to continue to fight for Trump and do “whatever he asks of me.”

“I’m still going to be in the fight, but it’s going to be from a new perch,” Gaetz told Kirk. “I do not intend to join the 119th Congress. … Charlie, I’ve been in an elected office for 14 years. I first got elected to the state house when I was 26 years old, and I’m 42 now, and I’ve got some other goals in life that I’m eager to pursue with my wife and my family, and so I’m going to be fighting for President Trump. I’m going to be doing whatever he asks of me, as I always have. But I think that eight years is probably enough time in the United States Congress.”

But it may not be the end of his political career. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, first elected in 2018, will not be running again in 2026, since he’s limited by law to two terms as the state’s chief executive. 

Gaetz stepped down from Congress as the House Ethics Committee was weighing whether to release the report from its yearslong investigation into sexual misconduct and illegal drug use allegations. The committee lacked sufficient votes to release the report earlier this week but will, according to Democratic Rep. Susan Wild of Pennsylvania, reconvene on Dec. 5 to “further consider” the matter. 

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

Where Trump Gained and Harris Lost in New York

Published

on

Where Trump Gained and Harris Lost in New York

Where each candidate gained
or lost votes compared with the party’s 2020 candidate, by
borough

Donald J. Trump won 30 percent of the votes cast in New York City this month. It was a seven-point jump from his performance in 2020, and a higher share of the vote than any Republican nominee has won in the city since George H.W. Bush in 1988.

But his improved vote share was driven more by the votes Democrats lost than by the votes he gained.

How votes changed since 2020

In every neighborhood in New York City, from Red Hook in Brooklyn to Riverdale in the Bronx, Vice President Kamala Harris received markedly fewer votes than Joseph R. Biden, Jr. did in 2020, while in most neighborhoods, Mr. Trump notched modest increases compared with his last run.

The votes cast in New York City have not yet been certified, but more than 97 percent of them have been counted. That includes all ballots that were cast in person, both on Election Day and before, and a majority of absentee ballots, according to Vincent M. Ignizio, the deputy executive director of the city’s election board.

As it stands, the downturn in votes for the Democratic candidate was six times the size of Mr. Trump’s gains when compared with 2020. In some boroughs, the ratio was even larger.

Change in vote by borough, compared with 2020

Advertisement
All of New York City

−573,600

+94,600

Queens

−164,900

+35,400

Brooklyn

−151,700

Advertisement

+16,600

Manhattan

−120,900

+17,900

Bronx

−111,000

+23,800

Advertisement
Staten Island

−25,100

+900

Many New Yorkers moved out of the city during the pandemic, and by the 2022 midterms, the total number of registered voters here had already started to drop. As of this month, there were about 230,000 fewer active registered Democrats in the city than there were in 2020, and about 12,000 more registered Republicans.

It is not clear how much that contributed to the outcome of the election, but the pattern of Democratic losses and Republican gains was clear across all income levels and ethnic groups in the city. The drop-off was most pronounced among working-class immigrant groups who live outside Manhattan, many of them in the neighborhoods that were hit the hardest by the pandemic and the economic disruption that followed.

The neighborhood where Democratic turnout dropped the most in terms of percentage change was Borough Park, an Orthodox Jewish enclave in Brooklyn that voted overwhelmingly for Mr. Trump. While support for Mr. Trump increased only slightly, from about 22,200 votes in 2020 to 22,700 in 2024, turnout for the Democratic candidate dropped 46 percent, from about 7,600 votes in 2020 to about 4,100 in 2024.

Advertisement

Where Democratic support declined the most

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

Borough Park, Brooklyn

−46%

+2%

Woodhaven, Queens

−42%

Advertisement

+46%

Bensonhurst, Brooklyn

−40%

+12%

Corona, Queens

−40%

+57%

Advertisement
Richmond Hill, Queens

−39%

+35%

Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn

−39%

+1%

Elmhurst, Queens

−38%

Advertisement

+30%

Gravesend, Brooklyn

−37%

+13%

Flushing, Queens

−36%

+11%

Advertisement
Dyker Heights, Brooklyn

−36%

+9%

Morrisania, Bronx

−36%

+62%

East Tremont, Bronx

−36%

Advertisement

+57%

East Harlem, Manhattan

−36%

+26%

South Richmond Hill, Queens

−36%

+49%

Advertisement
Concourse, Bronx

−35%

+58%

Note: Data includes neighborhoods that had 10,000 votes or more in 2024.

Among income groups in the city, the precincts with the lowest median incomes saw a the largest drop in support for the Democratic candidate, and the largest increase in support for Mr. Trump.

Advertisement

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

Lowest income

−32%

+24%

Middle income

−26%

+12%

Advertisement
Highest income

−17%

+7%

Note: The lowest income areas have a median income in the bottom 25 percent of all precincts; middle income areas have a median income in the middle 50 percent of all precincts; and highest income areas have a median income in the top 25 percent of all precincts.

Ms. Harris lost substantial support in precincts with larger populations of Latino and Asian voters. Asian voters have been shifting rightward in recent years because of a mix of concerns about crime, city education policies and the economy.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump made significant gains in precincts where a majority of residents were Latino or Black.

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

45% Asian

−37%

+19%

70% Hispanic

−37%

Advertisement

+55%

70% Black

−21%

+46%

90% white

−18%

−2%

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending