JD Vance Snaps at CBS Host as He's Grilled on Lowering Grocery Prices: ‘Going to Take a Little Bit of Time'
The vice-president appeared to struggle before Brennan as she claimed most of the executive orders made by Donald Trump this week did not relate to the economy.
'You campaigned on lowering prices for consumers. We've seen all of these executive orders. Which one lowers prices?' Brennan asked in direct terms.
'We have done a lot, and there have been a number of executive orders that have already caused jobs to start coming back into our country, which is a core part of lowering prices,' Vance said without explaining what exactly the Trump administration had done in its first week.
'More capital investment, more job creation in our economy is one of the things that's going to drive down prices for all consumers, but also raise wages so that people can afford to buy the things that they need,' he continued.
'So future prices aren't going to come down?,' Brennan interrupted.
'Margaret, prices are going to come down, but it's going to take a little bit of time, right?' Vance said. 'The president has been president for all of five days. I think that in those five days, he's accomplished more than Joe Biden did in four years. It's been an incredible breakneck pace of activity. We're going to work with Congress, we're of course going to have more executive orders and we're going to try. The way that your lower prices, is that you encourage more capital investment into our country.'
Brennan snapped back to hold Vance to account on Trump's campaign trail, during which the price of eggs became a key election issue.
'But the price of eggs,' she said. 'Those things- when do consumers actually get to touch and feel a difference in their lives? The flurry of executive orders, most of them weren't about the economy.'
'Many of them were, though, Margaret,' Vance said.
But in direct conflict with Vance's promises – and Brennan's line of questioning – experts and leading economists have historically warned against the effects of grocery price decreases on a national economy.
Deflation was one of the main features of the Great Depression in the 1930s, one of the worst economic disasters in history which saw millions of people lose their jobs.
The chair of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, has repeatedly warned against low inflation rates and deflation, with the government agency setting its inflation rate aim at around 2%.
The latest data for America showed prices rising at a rate of around 2.9%.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 minutes ago
- The Hill
Vought accuses Fed of ‘fiscal mismanagement'
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought accused the Federal Reserve on Sunday of 'fiscal mismanagement' amid tensions between the White House and the Fed. 'The President has been very clear that all he's asking from the Fed is lower interest rates, because he thinks it's important,' Vought said in an interview with CBS News's Margaret Brennan on 'Face the Nation.' 'When you look across the — across the globe, and you have countries lowering rates, and yet we don't see that in this country, given all of the positive economic indicators that we're seeing,' he added. 'And then we have fiscal mismanagement at the Fed with regard to this building renovation.' On Thursday, President Trump visited the Federal Reserve headquarters with Chair Jerome Powell to tour a major renovation at the Fed, a project the president and his administration have criticized as over budget. Powell has frustrated the president over the central bank's decision to keep interest rates steady, citing economic uncertainty. Trump's visit to the Fed headquarters featured a rare public appearance of Trump and Powell together, wearing hard hats as they walked around the construction site. The president has for months teased axing Powell, which could run into multiple legal issues if he does so lacking a cause. He moved away from that notion significantly on Thursday, saying there was 'no pressure' on Powell to step away from his job before his term is up in May. 'No, there's no pressure. We want to have — you know his term comes up soon. I think he's going to do the right thing. Everybody knows what the right thing is,' Trump said, referencing bringing down interest rates.
CBS News
3 minutes ago
- CBS News
Transcript: Russ Vought on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," July 27, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Russ Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on July 27, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin today with the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, welcome to 'Face The Nation.' DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET RUSSELL VOUGHT: Thanks for having me. MARGARET BRENNAN: There's so much to get to with you. Let's start on what's going on with the Federal Reserve. If you take the president at his word, he does not intend to fire the Federal Reserve Chair, Jerome Powell- though he's still criticizing him. What is the President seeking in a successor when his term ends in May 2026? VOUGHT: Well, I think he's looking for a chairman that's not continually too late to the developments in the economic marketplace. And I think what we've seen with Chairman Powell, he was very late in the Biden administration to raise rates, to articulate the concern with regard to the Biden administration's spending. We all knew on the outside- even Larry Summers knew that we were going to have an issue with regard to inflation. And we saw, you know, recent, historical inflationary levels that we hadn't seen before. And now he is too late to lower inflation rates and so that is the kind of thing that we want to see in the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. And one of the reasons why is-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --More of a focus on inflation? VOUGHT: --want an ability to recognize the developments in the economic marketplace. In this case, we want to be able to see lower rates and to have an ability to get the economy going. And one of the things we saw with Powell is that one of the reasons he was so late was because he didn't understand that inflation is largely a monetary phenomenon. He kept saying that inflation was transitory. He didn't tackle the problem, and now he's, again, too late, and you marry that with fiscal mismanagement at the Fed. It's a huge problem that we're trying to raise the country's awareness level with. MARGARET BRENNAN: But as you know, the Fed is structured in a way where he doesn't have unilateral control. There's a governing board. Others weigh in. You did work on Project 2025, and we went back and looked at what they said in there about the Fed. As people may know, that's a Heritage Foundation product that got a lot of scrutiny during the campaign. the chapter on the Fed called for Congress to overhaul the Fed's focus and powers. Is that what you're looking to do in 2026? VOUGHT: I don't even know what that chapter says. All I know, in terms of the President, the President has run on an agenda. He's been very clear about that. All that we're doing is- in this administration is running on- is implementing his agenda. MARGARET BRENNAN: You don't want to overhaul the Fed? VOUGHT: We want an economic system that works for the American people, that includes the Fed. And the President has been very clear that all he's asking from the Fed is lower interest rates, because he thinks it's important. When you look at across the across the globe, and you have countries lowering rates, and yet we don't see that in this country, given all of the positive economic indicators that we're seeing. And then we have fiscal mismanagement at the Fed with regard to this building renovation that I'm sure you will ask me about. Those are the kinds of things that we want to see from the Fed. This is not part of an existential issue with regard to the Federal Reserve. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the Fed is indicating that they are trending towards a rate cut, though probably not as soon as this week. We mentioned those renovations at the top of the program, but I do want to ask about spending, or lack thereof, that the Trump administration is trying to direct. The White House said they will actually release the remaining $5 billion in education, funds that had been withheld from public schools until recently. There were 10 Republican senators very worried about this, and came out and said, your claim that the money goes to radical left wing programs was wrong. What changed your mind? What made you release this money? VOUGHT: Well, we had been going through a programmatic review with these funds. These are programs that, as an administration, we don't support. We've called for the elimination of them in the President's budget for precisely the reasons of which they flow to often left wing organizations. Thankfully, the President came into office, put an executive order that said it can't- these funds can't go to these types of initiatives. I'll just give you one example, English language acquisition was flowing to the New York school public education system to go into illegal immigration advocacy organizations. Preschool development grants doesn't actually go to preschoolers. It goes to the curriculum for putting CRT into the school system for people as young- children as young as four years old. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, these senators said it goes to adult learners working to gain employment skills and after school programs. VOUGHT: And what we-- MARGARET BRENNAN: So you deemed it is necessary? VOUGHT: We believe that it's important to get the money out right now, but we have taken an extended time frame to be able to make sure it doesn't go to the types of things that we saw under the Biden administration. MARGARET BRENNAN: Because, you know, Senator Lindsey Graham told the Washington Post, the administration is looking at considering clawbacks from the Department of Education. This, you know, rescissions process. Is that the plan? Are you seeking to claw back education funds in a rescissions package? And if so, when are you sending that up? VOUGHT: We may be, we're always looking at potential rescission options. This is an- this is a set of funding that we wanted to make sure it got out. We did our programmatic review. We wanted to make sure it got out before the school year, even though it's multi-year funding. This is not funding that would expire at the end of this year. We are looking to do rescissions package. We're always gauging the extent to which the Congress is willing to participate in that process, and we're- be looking at a lot of different options along those lines, but certainly have nothing to announce here today. But we're thrilled that we had the first rescissions package in decades, and we've got the process moving again. MARGARET BRENNAN: So no rescissions package before September? VOUGHT: Not here to say that. We're looking at all of our options, we will look at it and assess where the Hill is, what are the particular funding opportunities that we have, but nothing that we're going to announce today, MARGARET BRENNAN: Because some of the funds that do expire in September have also been held up on the health front. Senator Katie Britt of Alabama, 13 other Republicans, came out with a letter saying that you've been slow in releasing funds for the National Institute of Health for research into cardiovascular disease, cancer. Are those funds going to be released? VOUGHT: Again, we're going through the same process with the NIH that we did with the education. I mean-- MARGARET BRENNAN: But there's a time cost here. VOUGHT: --$2 million for injecting dogs with cocaine that the NIH spent money on, $75,000 for Harvard to study blowing lizards off of trees with leaf blowers. That's the kind of waste that we've seen at the NIH. And that's not even getting to the extent to which the NIH was weaponized against the American people over the last several years, with regard to funding gain of function research that caused the pandemic. We have a- we have an agency that needs dramatic overhaul. Thankfully, we have a great new head of it, but we're going to have to go line by line to make sure the NIH is funded properly. MARGARET BRENNAN: Are you going to release the cancer funding research? And the cardiovascular disease research funding? VOUGHT: We're going to continue- we're going to continue to go to the same process that we have gone through with regard to the Department of Education, that every one of these agencies-- MARGARET BRENNAN: Before September, that money will be released? VOUGHT: --and we will release that funding when we are done with that review. MARGARET BRENNAN: Because, as you know, there's concern that you're withholding the money, hoping it just won't be spent. I mean, if you look at the White House budget, it does call for a 26% cut to HHS, $18 billion cut to NIH. Is this just a backdoor way to make those cuts happen? VOUGHT: Well, I don't want to speak to any specific program with regard to what we might do with regard to rescissions throughout the end of this fiscal year, but we certainly recognize that we have the ability and the executive tools to fund less than what Congress appropriated, and to use the tools that the Impoundment Control Act, a bill we're not- a law that we're not entirely thrilled with, gives us to- to send up rescissions towards the end of the fiscal year. MARGARET BRENNAN: So just for our viewers, the Impoundment Control Act is the legal mechanism for the President to use to delay or avoid spending funds appropriated by Congress. You seem to want to have an argument, or Democrats think you want to have an argument, over the power of the purse and who holds it. Do you want that to go to the Supreme Court? VOUGHT: Well, look, for 200 years, presidents have the ability to spend less than the congressional appropriations. No one would ever dispute, and our founders didn't dispute that Congress has the ability to set the appropriation ceiling. But 200 years of presidents, up until the 1970s had the ability to spend less, if they could find efficiencies, or if they could find waste that an agency was doing. MARGARET BRENNAN: -- That sounds like a yes?-- VOUGHT:-- We lost that ability in the 1970s. The president ran on restoring that funding authority to the presidency, and it's vital. If you look at when we started to lose control fiscally, it was right around the time of the 1970s. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, many senators, Republican senators, are very uncomfortable with the tactics that you are using. Senator Murkowski, Senator Collins, that chair of the appropriations committee that is really running this- this funding process. And Senator Collins said you're pushing the limits of what the executive can do without the consent of the- of the legislative branch. You need to work with her to get your budget through. And in fact, you need to also be able to get Democrats on board to get to that 60-vote threshold to pass any kind of government funding to avoid a government shutdown at the end of September. VOUGHT: I have a great relationship with Senator Collins. I appreciate the work she does. She is the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, so obviously we're going to have differences of opinion as to the extent to which these tools should be used. I mean, she had concerns with the rescissions package. The rescissions package was a vote that Congress had to make these cuts permanent-- MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Under- on a party line vote, she says, you want to go do these clawbacks. You do it through regular order, and you can put- you can put rescissions into an appropriations bill-- VOUGHT: --But that was in fact, under regular order. That's the challenge, is the appropriators want to use all the rescissions, they want to put them in their bills, and then they want to spend higher on other programs. We act- we're $37 trillion in debt, Margaret. We actually need to reduce the deficit and have a dollar of cut go to $1 a deficit reduction. That's not what the appropriators want, and it's not news that the Trump administration is going to bring a paradigm shift to this town in terms of the business of spending. MARGARET BRENNAN: You would acknowledge that you just added to the debt and to the deficit with this-- VOUGHT: -- No, I would not acknowledge that. We reduced-- MARGARET BRENNAN: -- The spending and tax bill that just passed? VOUGHT: Correct. MARGARET BRENNAN: Where you lifted the debt ceiling. VOUGHT: The debt ceiling is an extension of the cap on what's needed to pay your previous bills. In terms of the bill itself, it is $400 billion in deficit reduction, $1.5 trillion in mandatory savings reforms, the biggest we've seen in history. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I want to make sure I get to the rest of this before I let you go here, because we're running out of time. You said, a few weeks ago, that the appropriations process needs to be less bipartisan. You only have 53 Republicans. You do need Democrats to get on board, here. Is saying something like that intended to undermine negotiations? Do you actually want a government shutdown? VOUGHT: No, of course not. We want to extend the funding at the end of this fiscal year. We understand, from a math perspective, we're going to need Democrats to do that-- MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, what does less bipartisan mean? VOUGHT: Well, Margaret, the whole week, the Democrats were making the argument that if you pass the rescission bill, that you were undermining the bipartisan appropriations process. So, if Brian Schatz and every other appropriator is making that argument for a week-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --The chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee is who said that-- VOUGHT: --you have to be able to respond and say, if you're going to call a rescissions package that you told us during the month of January and February that we should use to do less spending, if you're going to say that is undermining the bipartisan appropriations process, then maybe we should have a conversation about that. That is all it was meant to convey. MARGARET BRENNAN: But, the alternative to this process is another continuing resolution, these stop-gap measures. Are you open to that, because that would lock in Biden-era funding? What is your alternative here? If you want a less bipartisan process, how do you solve for this? Because it sounds like you're laying the predicate for a shutdown. VOUGHT: We are not laying the predicate for a shutdown. We are laying the predicate for the fact that the only thing that has worked in this town- the bipartisan appropriations process is broken. It leads to omnibus bills. We want to prevent an omnibus bill, and all options are on the table to be able to do that. MARGARET BRENNAN: All options are on the table? VOUGHT: We need an appropriations process that functions. We're going to go through the process. We're going to work with them, and we're going to do everything we possibly can to use that process to have cheaper results for the American taxpayer. MARGARET BRENNAN: I'm told we're out of time. Russell Vought, thank you for your time today.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
3 Reasons the Bitcoin Surge Isn't Over
Key Points If the Federal Reserve lowers its benchmark interest rate this year, it could result in investors taking on more risk. Based on the past two halvings, Bitcoin's price could reach a fresh all-time high in the next few months. Bitcoin's hard supply cap is what matters most over the long term. 10 stocks we like better than Bitcoin › Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) is having another fantastic year. After the leading digital asset's price soared 154% in 2023 and 119% in 2024, it is so far up 27% in 2025 (as of July 24). Investors who have been critical of Bitcoin can no longer ignore it as being a smart addition to a portfolio. But with the price not too far off the all-time high of $123,091.61, established on July 14, it's understandable if you're worried about a potential dip in the near term. That way of thinking is logical, especially when it seems like bullish fever is taking hold of market participants. My view, however, is to remain optimistic. Here are three reasons I think the Bitcoin surge isn't over. 1. A favorable macro backdrop The last time the Federal Reserve cuts its benchmark federal funds rate was in December. The uncertainty brought about by the dynamic trade situation gave central bankers a reason to see how things will play out before making any further reductions. It also hasn't helped that inflation remains above the Fed's long-run 2% target. The stock market has done remarkably well even though the fed funds rate is still at an 18-year high. However, people are waiting for a more accommodative stance. There are expectations that the central bank will start to cut rates before the end of this year, continuing as the calendar turns. Goldman Sachs sees the fed funds rate getting closer to 3% by July 2026, well below the 4.33% where it currently stands. This backdrop can be bullish for Bitcoin. Investors will take on more risk to compensate for lower yields that they'd earn on savings vehicles. What's more, the market will quickly realize that the Fed is trying to stimulate the economy, which can result in a more positive outlook that influences how capital is allocated. 2. Post-halving cycle About every four years, Bitcoin undergoes what's known as a halving. This critical event cuts in half the amount of new Bitcoin miners are rewarded for processing transactions. It's a predetermined schedule that's set in Bitcoin's software, and it determines the cryptocurrency's supply growth rate. Looking at a historical price chart of Bitcoin reveals that the digital asset experiences similar cycles that center on its halving dates. Halving events happened in July 2016 and May 2020. Bitcoin reached a new all-time high roughly 18 months after these dates. The latest halving occurred in April 2024, which means a new peak could be achieved around October of this year. Although we can look at past cycles to try and figure out what the future holds, there are no guarantees. No two cycles are exactly the same because there are many other variables that can have an impact on the price. For what it's worth, this time around, there are spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), Bitcoin treasury companies, and supportive regulation as reasons to be optimistic. 3. Scarcity matters over the long term It's easy to get caught up in forecasts about Bitcoin's price trajectory during the near term. However, what investors should really focus their attention on is what could happen over the long term, say five or 10 years from now. That perspective will force investors to think about what matters most. In Bitcoin's case, it's the simple fact that there will only ever be 21 million coins in circulation. This is a hard supply cap that separates Bitcoin from virtually any other asset on the planet. After the latest halving, Bitcoin's annual supply growth rate is lower than gold's, making the digital asset scarcer. As more capital over time starts to gravitate toward something that can't be debased, Bitcoin's price is likely to be much higher far into the future. Should you buy stock in Bitcoin right now? Before you buy stock in Bitcoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Bitcoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Neil Patel has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and Goldman Sachs Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 3 Reasons the Bitcoin Surge Isn't Over was originally published by The Motley Fool 登入存取你的投資組合
