Elizabeth Warren grills Jay Powell & Scott Gottlieb on Vaccine Future 6/26/25

0:00Bring in show music please. Today on Squawk Pod. Senator Elizabeth Warren. You don't have to push me. I believe in markets. I love markets. I think markets are fabulous when they're honest markets. We need markets with rules. Markets without rules are just theft. Her perspective on President Trump's critique of Fed Chair Jay Powell and on President Trump's economic policy. I still want to see the interest rates come down. I think they should lower. It is harder than it would be if Donald Trump were not out there creating this kind of economic chaos. And as RFK Jr.'s new vaccine advisory panel to the CDC continues its first meeting, former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb explains the weight on their shoulders and what's at stake for the country.

0:55Look, these are individuals who've been unabashed about their anti-vaccine views. for the most part, the members who've been appointed. So most of them. Plus, could crypto mortgages be in our future? And negotiations on the table for President Trump's 60 Minutes lawsuit against Paramount. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has said that the third-party complaint about the interviews edit could factor into that agency's review of the Paramount Skydance merger. I'm CNBC producer Zach Valisi. It's Thursday, June 26th. Squawk Pod begins right now. Stand Becky by in 3, 2, 1, cue, please. Good morning, everybody.

1:40Welcome to Squawk Box here on CNBC. We're live from the NASDAQ market site in Times Square. I'm Becky Quick along with Joe Kernan. Andrew is out today. Yesterday was a mixed day for the market. You saw the Dow down slightly, the S &P basically flat. The NASDAQ was higher. The Nasdaq 100 climbed to another record high yesterday. It's now up more than 4 % for the month of June. And if you're wondering what's powering all that, take a look at the companies closing at record highs in yesterday's session. NVIDIA back at a record high. And by the way, it is now the most valuable company once again, reclaiming that spot after January.

2:16Remember, in January, the stock dipped pretty deeply after those reports of DeepSeek and China. No wonder what was when people wondering what was going to happen with that. Well, now it's back on top. Cisco, IBM, Netflix, Broadcom, Microsoft, Oracle and Palantir all closing at record highs yesterday.

2:37You got elected by one person. He doesn't want you to be in that job. And you are costing this government 400 billion dollars a year by refusing to lower interest rates. Nobody in this chamber has that kind of power to have a 400 billion dollar impact on this economy. We will balance our maximum employment and price stability mandates, keeping in mind that without price stability, we cannot achieve the long periods of strong labor market conditions that benefit all Americans. For the time being, we are well positioned to wait to learn more about the likely course of the economy before considering any adjustments to our policy rate.

3:13And a new report from The Wall Street Journal says President Trump considering naming the next Fed chair as soon as this summer. It is this summer. The report says that the Trump today, Trump's ire with Jay Powell is stepping up the timeline. Naming a new chair would allow Powell's successor to influence investor expectations about the likely path for rates and attempt to steer monetary policy before his term ends in May. The report says Trump is considering these people, former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, NEC Director Kevin Hassett. Other contenders include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, economist David Malpass, friend of the show, and Fed Governor Christopher Waller.

4:00Most of them are friends of the show. Yeah, most of them. If you look through that list, in fact, all of them. That's right. Waller, have we? I think Waller. Yeah, we had him on Friday. Friday, yeah. So everybody's been on. I wanted to talk to him. We just talked to Steve. Maybe he'll be on. Pass it, certainly. And Treasury Secretary Besson. Here's what the president said at the NATO summit yesterday about the next Fed chair. I know within three or four people who are going to pick. I mean, he goes out pretty soon, fortunately, because I think he's terrible. The dollar continuing to slide. It's at about 10 percent this year.

4:36By the way, watching Powell's testimony over the last couple of sessions, I mean, he comports himself with grace, with dignity. I have to say, you know, he may not be doing what the president wants, but he's doing what he thinks is best right now. And I don't, you know, to have the president saying this stuff about Joe and Lloyd. I think he's gotten more, I think it's getting to him. I think he's gotten more dovish. I think he's at least thrown it. Not really. What he said the last two days before Congress is. Rightfully so, he's gotten more dovish, I think. Oh, right. Just the idea that he's more open to the idea of cutting.

5:08Right. That's certainly what he's done over the last couple of days. You know, it happened the other time where I don't know whether Trump was right based on anything other than he likes low interest rates and he's a real estate guy. But eventually, you know, if you wait long enough, obviously, the rates go up, rates come down. But Trump could have said I was right last time and he probably is going to be in a position to say it again this time. Maybe not. Probably the frustration point is that J-PAL said pretty publicly at these hearings over the last couple of days that he would cut rates right now if it weren't for the questions about what's going to happen from potential inflation from the tariffs.

5:45That's the whole key. But we've been waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting. And oil's back down to 64. Right, but it's like last week. It's just you understand. It's like for three days. I know, but you understand why they want to wait and see what happens. Only because he got so butthurt by staying easy for too long. They're so worried about and they're so phobic about. You watch him and I've been impressed with the grace that he has made. I look at it. I don't really look at it as great. I kind of look as sort of he could end up being right. But if he's not, it looks like at this point he's hearing the criticism and maybe even resisting people like Waller, Austin Goldsby, when maybe he shouldn't be.

6:25He just, you know, that's where political pressure can work in an encounter in a counter. Where he can't possibly just because. Right. But when he said last time, hey, look, OK, I admit that inflation numbers have been lower than we thought in the tariff effects. We haven't really seen what many people thought we would have seen by now. We still expect them to come. So I'm still hesitant to cut. But I do acknowledge that if we look through those cuts could be appropriate. If you talk to retailers, and again, maybe they're talking their book, too. But if you talk to retailers, they will say that prices are going to have to go up at some point, that they're doing everything they can behind the scenes to keep them down.

7:03But does that point? It's got to. Is it inflation? If it's a one time move, Waller said it's one time. And yeah, who knows? But, you know, the 90 day pauses and stuff that if if he comes, if we don't do deals and he and the president does say, OK, we're back on. and start bringing some of these high tariff numbers back or threatening, that could happen. People thought that they were going to have a much bigger impact if they were as bad as he is. On inflation and on growth. And on trade, right. Mediator is proposing that President Trump and Paramount Global settle a pending lawsuit. Settle it for$20 million.

7:43This is the Wall Street Journal reporting this. President Trump sued the company over a 60 Minutes interview on CBS with former Vice President Kamala Harris, accusing the network of editing the footage to make her sound better. Trump's team has said at once an apology and has been pushing for twenty five million dollars. The Journal reports that Paramount doesn't want to apologize and is offering 15 million dollars to settle the suit. But FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has said that the third-party complaint about the interview's edit could factor into that agency's review of the Paramount Skydance merger.

8:27Five million, a little difference and a little, I'm sorry, if you get the deal done. I don't know. Andrew would be having a heart attack about the lawyers. It's weird for the FCC Chairman to say that this is going to factor into it. Right. But it's, you know, we suspected that before. But to actually say that, it was like. You can make a case for it, though, on normal grounds. But you shouldn't be allowed to complete a merger because we don't like something you did on six months. You should clean up your act if you want to. I mean, that wasn't the only one. Playing it out. You remember Leslie Stahl when she said, we know the laptop.

9:06Letting that play out, the president sued them. And that case can go forward in the courts and figure out what you want to do with that. But to say you can't have a merger because I don't like something to work for? So you say it out loud versus knowing that it's probably de facto what's going on. Yeah. To make it normal and say that this is the way things work, that's not great. To normalize the idea of if I don't like this, we're not going to do it. Same goes with Harvard and Columbia and everything else. Just to imply that it's one thing, but when, in fact, it's after years and years and years of what I think is inexcusable behavior and hiring and admittance and everything else.

9:41Yeah, I know. It's just that we like to think that these agencies are, and I guess we know they aren't, if you look at some of the agencies and how they've been, they're political appointees that lead these agencies. But you watch what the swings have been with the FTC. I don't think it's about just free speech, though. I think it's about unfair. That's what I mean. It's not about free speech. It's about, I don't like the way you're reporting it. What I'm saying is I don't think that the 60 minutes is that they're arguing that they should have had free speech. I think they were doing behavior that shouldn't be allowed in terms of the way you present, especially during an election, the way you're presenting information.

10:20But 60 Minutes, that's their... Yeah, it's their... I mean, that's their... In their DNA. I could say there's a lot of different organizations that have DNA that goes one way or the other. All mainstream media. Yeah, all mainstream media. One way or another. The Federal Housing Finance Agency taking a landmark step to recognize cryptocurrency. It's directing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to formally consider crypto assets and single family mortgage loan risk assessments. Those home finance giants have to now develop proposals, including on digital assets, without requiring borrowers to liquidate them into U.S.

10:57dollars before they'll have that loan close. Crypto has historically been excluded from underwriting frameworks because of the volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and the inability to easily verify holdings. But as we heard yesterday from Philippe Lafont, the volatility is basically in line with the NASDAQ at this point, at least as of April of this year. Regulatory structures are coming into play, and hopefully you can make it easier to prove your holdings as well. Yeah. Speaking of Philippe Lafont, I saw some people on Twitter, Who is it? You're acting like this guy is a second coming. Who is this guy?

11:35I've never heard of it. Started in 1999 with like, I don't know, millions. Yeah. Now it's at fifty five billion with and across the board with private investment, all kinds of sort of uniquely structured. It is a Tiger Cup and uniquely structured investments. Twelve and a half percent per year if you go to the main fund all this time. But in recent years, more like 35, 40, 45 percent in some of these tech stocks and up to up to. So he's he's too young to be a legend. That's why when we said that yesterday. But he's too. But for people that don't know him, you know, I mean, I thought it was kind of fascinating where he was talking about how he owns.

12:19You know, he's invested in some of Elon Musk's companies and some of Sam Altman's companies and some of Microsoft. And you have all of those titans that are kind of like fighting it out right now about different things and who's going to be on top of it. Cheese will be next. Next on Squawk Pod, Senator Elizabeth Warren weighs in on the critiques of Fed Chair Jay Powell and on America's economic future. I want to see those interest rates come down, but it's Donald Trump who's standing in the way of getting them down by creating more economic chaos. Because Chairman Powell said that they would have lowered interest rates back in February, but for the chaos caused by Donald Trump's tariff announcements.

13:07We'll be right back.

13:13This is Squawk Pod. Stand by Joe. His mic here. You're watching Squawk Pods on CNBC. I'm Joe Kernan along with Becky Quick. Andrew is off today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. So, Chair Powell, if certain policies would materially drive up the national debt and increase the debt to GDP ratio over time, could that make it more likely that we would see inflation all else being equal? I mean, theoretically, sure, fiscal policy can can add to inflation. But that's again, that's really not something we comment on. We try to stay away from fiscal policy. I understand you don't comment on it, but I do appreciate your acknowledgement of the math here.

13:58Fed Chair Jay Powell faced two days of grilling on Capitol Hill. Yesterday, Senator Elizabeth Warren asked why the Fed's inflation forecast is now higher than it was just six months ago. Senator Warren joins us this morning. She's the lead Democrat on the Banking Committee. And Senator, thank you for being with us this morning. Happy to be with you. Why don't we get at your line of questioning from yesterday? You were really getting at this idea of where inflation targets for the Fed are headed. What's your thought behind that? What did you think of the answer you got? So I just want to make sure everyone knows what the numbers were that the Fed put out.

14:33The Fed changed its prediction from inflation this year at 2.5 % to 3.1%. It changed its prediction on unemployment, not a lot, but from 4.3 % to 4.5%, and most significantly changed its prediction on GDP growth from 2.1 to 1.4. Pretty significant downgrade. So I asked Chairman Powell, what happened? And the answer from Chairman Powell was the Trump tariffs. And I read that as it's the Trump tariffs, it's the Trump chaos. And that's the problem we've got right now. I want to see those interest rates come down. But it's Donald Trump who's standing in the way of getting them down by creating more economic chaos.

15:26And how do we know that? Because Chairman Powell said that they would have lowered interest rates back in February, but for the chaos caused by Donald Trump's tariff announcements. You know, Senator Worm, I understand your concerns around this. And certainly there are a lot of economists who look at this and worry about what happens, the impacts that we have yet to see from the tariffs. They haven't materialized yet. But I don't think you always think that Jay Powell is the expert on these things. I mean, I think back to 2022, when you were very concerned about what Powell was doing at that point, the Federal Reserve raising rates, thinking that, hey, it's an ineffective cure, I think, were your words, in terms of higher rates being able to end inflation.

16:13Yep. And that's where I've been all along. I want to see the interest rates come down. And think about why. Because those interest rates come down. If they don't, that means families are paying more on their mortgages. They're paying more on their car loans. They're paying more on their credit cards. Those high interest rates are keeping costs up for families. For three years Now, I've been pushing to try to get those interest rates now. And Powell now says I would have lowered them, he said, in February. But the Trump chaos has now changed the economic outlook. And the Fed's data do show that the economic outlook has shifted.

16:58I guess my point is, though, you you agree with Chairman Powell on these issues or you think he should go ahead and cut rates anyway? Because that's what the president thinks. Look, I still want to see the interest rates come down. I think they should lower. I want to see those interest rates come down. I do understand that conditions have changed and that Chair Powell says it is now harder to lower the interest rates than it would have been earlier. It is harder than it would be if Donald Trump were not out there creating this kind of economic chaos. And, you know, I just want to push back when you say there haven't been any effects from Donald Trump's announcements about the tariffs.

17:45Of course there have been. I'm sorry, the inflationary. We haven't seen the inflationary effects that people have been predicting pretty widely. We just haven't seen them show up yet. But what we are seeing is that all across the country, people are saying, whoa, I'm not going to start breaking ground on a new factory. I'm not going to buy a whole lot of expensive new equipment. I'm not going to bring in new workers to train up a workforce for new product lines. I'm not going to start a new business because I can't figure out in the most fundamental way whether or not materials that I have to import are going to be kind of at one price or going to have a big, big tariff put on them.

18:30And I can't figure out on things I want to export whether or not there's going to be a reciprocal tariff on them. And as a result, what we get is an enormous amount of holding back. And I think that's why you see the shift in the GDP projections. That's a shrinking of the economy that we're experiencing now, because independently across this country, big companies and small companies are saying, man, I'm not taking a risk. I'm not making a big investment into that kind of an uncertainty. And who is causing all that? One person, Donald Trump. We're going to get a GDP number, I think, today. And when you say shrinking, you don't mean the economy shrinking.

19:16You mean the rate of growth. I'm sorry. You said it the right way. I know that you, Senator, and a lot of Democrats really don't like this bill, the big, beautiful bill. And in fact, there's schisms even in the Republican Party that you hear. A lot of it has to do with spending by the federal government. And here's where I want to ask you just a philosophical question. And I'm going to, it won't take me that long. I'm going to stop and then I'm going to let you answer. But back in, prior to the pandemic, I guess we were spending 25 % less than we're spending now. And in 2024, I think it was$7 trillion.

19:56So as a percentage of GDP, it's now 24 percent of GDP federal spending versus 20 percent in 2019. You would like to increase revenues through taxes on the wealthy, maybe not extending the Bush. I'm sorry, the Trump tax cuts. We had Bush tax cuts, too, that I used to say. Would you if you did get a lot of growth in revenue that you would like to do with all these different ways, would you use that for just more government spending at 24 percent of GDP? Or would you say, you know what, let's at least freeze federal spending or or even cut federal spending to get it back down to 20 percent of GDP?

20:41Would that ever be possible? So let me start with where we should make cuts. You may remember back in January when Elon Musk was going to head up Doge. I sent him a letter and I said, here's here's two billion dollars that you can do, two trillion dollars that you can do in cuts right now. It's make the right cuts. And what were those cuts? How about we stop the fraud around Medicare Advantage? That would be about eight hundred and fifty billion dollars that we could save. How about if we change how Defense Department does a lot of its spending and its acquisition? We can save hundreds of billions of dollars there.

21:26And I went through a list. The list had about 30 items on it and said, here are places that we could cut spending by$2 trillion. I'm totally in favor of that. But let me do the other half as well. There are places where we spend money that actually help grow this economy. Right now, the United States is 35th out of the 37 richest nations in the world, 35th on what we spend on child care. And the consequence of our underspending and not making child care available is that a lot of mamas and daddies either struggle to find that child care and get to work or don't work at all. If we spent more money on child care, we would increase productivity in this country.

22:12We'd have more mamas and daddies at work. We'd have our babies well taken care of. And we could pay a living wage to the child care workers who do this critical work and who could really turn that into a sustainable business model. There's an investment that you can use to grow GDP. So for me, it's about budgets. Sure, they're about numbers, but they're about values. Do you really think that we ought to be continuing to spend money on defense acquisition that is just incredibly wasteful? Or do you think, as the Republicans do, we should stop spending money on health care for 16 million Americans?

22:58That's what the Republicans want to do. Do you think, as the Republicans do, we should do trillions of dollars in tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires? Or do you think that we should make those investments in our families here in the United States? And I think child care is a perfect example of a place where we should be spending more. We've got places we should spend less. But no matter what, the billionaires ought to be paying their fair share. I have another good one for you, and we'll do it the same way. I'll finish and then I'll let you completely answer. So you've heard about soul searching in the Democratic Party, a lot of hand wringing with what we've seen since the election in the Democratic circles as well.

23:45the term lost in the wilderness comes to mind. I don't know whether we had a primary election for the mayor in New York yesterday, two days ago. Candidate Mamdami is a self-proclaimed socialist advocated for defunding the police, globalizing the intifada. We have Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leading the field for 2028. I'm just wondering whether, well, A, did you speak out for or against the mayoral candidate? Did you congratulate him? And do you think this is the best strategy for your party right now to lurch even further to the far left after what happened in the last election? You know, I think you're wrong on the whole defund the police and all, But look, I know that this is something that conservatives want to keep raising over and over.

24:42But but I want to make a different point here. I think you misunderstand what his campaign was all about. His campaign was saying, I want to invest in New York City. I want to invest in people being able to have good jobs here, to put their kids in school and to build housing. And he built a grassroots campaign. He didn't have a billionaire. who came in and funded him. He didn't say, I'm going to make this a great place for billionaires to live. He said, I'm going to try as hard as I can to make New York City a place that works better for your family. And you know what? New Yorkers heard him. They believed him.

25:27They were inspired by him. And I think that's exactly what we should be doing. We should be, as the Democratic Party, the party that makes it clear that we are here for working families. We want to reduce the cost of housing. We want child care. We want our kids to be able to get a good education. The Republicans right now with this tax bill that they're trying to push through are really showing the contrast. They think they should be able to pay for tax giveaways to billionaires by taking away health care from 16 million Americans. They don't want to make investments in child care. They don't want to make investments in housing.

26:10They want to take away clean energy credits, which will drive up the cost of utilities for families all across this country. There is nothing in this Republican proposal that's about centering families and trying to make this economy work for them instead of for a handful of billionaires. And I think that's a pretty good place for the Democratic Party to go. Senator, just back to Mom Donnie. He has some pretty argumentative views that a lot of people have disagreed with. There is some old footage of him saying that if Benjamin Netanyahu were to arrive in New York City, he'd have him arrested. Do you agree with that?

26:48Look, I can't speak for him. I can only speak for myself. Yeah. And what I'm saying is the key that we talk about and need to keep talking about is the economy for American families. And that, in my view, is exactly what this race was about. What are your thoughts on Netanyahu? Because these are some of the feelings that... Netanyahu has been here. Nobody arrested him. What happens, though, what is happening, though, is that families across this country are struggling. And the response of the Republicans right now in Congress, we will be voting today. Today, the response of the Republicans is let's take health care away from 16 million Americans so they can do tax giveaways to billionaires.