In washington is with the political fallout of the Supreme Courts decision on campaign contributions. Jeff, who is this expert . He is a former Clinton Administration member. , he is the kind of guy you bring in when you have a crisis. His twitter feed says that he feels best in a war room. They are kind of in a war room situation and they are putting together an interesting team. Him, steinberg, lucas. People who are respected by others. Trying to get at this crisis, what is this telling the folks on capitol hill that this 18 is assembled. Ateamhat they have this assembled . The kingeinberg said solomon of these things. You dont want to push people away. Lets talk about mary ibarras appearance on capitol hill. Kind of a mixed bag. We received word today that they are there will probably be another round of hearings because the people on capitol hill say im a minute, why not let gm finish their internal probe and then we can bring her back and ask for more questions. That was sort of the litany of questions again and again. She had to keep having to answer we will have to wait for the investigation. Finally someone said, when we are done with the investigation, will you come back and she said sure. We really want to have her back when she can answer the questions. From everyone we talk to, that is exactly what she should do. She should completely talk about this, get it out there and dont hold anything back. Talk to me about the city of detroit and what gm has meant to that city and what gm has meant as it has been going through some of the problems it has had. It is a strange situation. You have this disconnect for the last several years where gm has been doing better for the city went bankrupt and now you have the city coming out of this or trying to come out of this bankruptcy, strongly, and struggling, and gm taking a big hit. Michigan going out of the ncaa, michigan in trouble it is a rough time around here and one of the longest winters ever. No doubt. Jeff green joining us from detroit, thank you so much. There is another vacancy on the u. S. Federal reserve. Governor jeremy stein has announced his resignation. Michael mckee joins me here. You say that the move may leave the worlds most important centralbank externalities shorthanded. In part because of his intellectual. He is going back to harvard because he only had a twoyear leave. If he doesnt go back, he loses his tenure there. Or prestige to be a harvard professor than to be on the federal reserve. He was the point man on financial stability, the first to talk about the idea that low rates for a very long time might lead to instability and asset bubbles. In his resignation letter, he pointed that out. A number of important steps have been taken to make the Financial System stronger and more resilient. There is undoubtedly more work to be done. The other aspect of it is there are only going to be, when he leaves the fed, two confirmed members on the sevenmember board of governors. Jay powell is still on the board but his term is up. He can serve until he is reconfirmed or until he departs. So there are three votes but there it sets up an interesting situation because they have not confirmed the others and they have not nominated someone for the other empty seat and now they have another one to go. As the fed deals with the issues of the yellen term, they dont have the bodies to really talk about it. Talk to me a little bit about mr. Stein. He was in favor of the asset purchase program. But the feds Balance Sheet now is going to over 4. 2 trillion dollars. And he felt that might be pushing up prices in some areas. He was the first voice to really bring it up. But it has become a major topic of conversation. In the minutes of the last meeting, a lot of people were looking at that. You dont see real bubble problems yet, but it started an intellectual debate. Was his resignation expected . Exit was not unforeseen. The hardware deadline had been out there. People knew that was the case. So it is not really a surprise that that really happened here before you go, i have to ask about the fed coming back into the news tomorrow. We will get the march jobs report. What are we looking at . We are looking at a weatherrelated rebound. The question is what is the message to the market . Did we make up the loss run or is the economy starts springing economy going to start springing ahead . The preview as numbers, they have not moved that very much. At this point, people are expecting us to be right about where we were before winter started. Michael mckee we will have full details on the jobs number tomorrow. Michael will be telling us about it along with tom keene on the radio on surveillance tomorrow morning. Defense secretary chuck hagel is in hawaii today. He is on his way to asia to meet with some of his asian counterparts in honolulu before heading to japan, china, and mongolia. But the shooting tragedy last night in fort hood in texas and the crisis in ukraine are following secretary hagel on his journey. Steve washington chief washington correspondent peter cook is traveling with the secretary and he joins me now by phone. Is this triple about the socalled pivot to asia . Aloha, mark. For sure, that is what this trip is supposed to be about. Kerry hagel is making his fourth trip to asia with this trip. As you said, his meeting with his asian counterparts, showing off some u. S. Military hardware and talking about areas where the u. S. And these countries can partner up. Military assistance, Disaster Assistance come even in malaysia with the search for the malaysian plane. The administration is refocusing resourcesefforts and and the military towards the Pacific Region given its importance, its economic importance. But as you said, the shooting last night in fort hood, texas has hung like a cloud. Aboard the ussas anchorage yesterday when he got the phone calls updating him on what had happened. Troubling. Cularly it is a challenge for secretary hagel and the department. Violence in these installations have become a real problem. Any idea how the secretary will respond to it . He stated yesterday he needed to get more facts before deciding. But something is not working here that we have this kind of violence at a place like fort hood and there will be changes. But he says that he really was to see where the investigation goes. He will sit down with secretary hagel later today. I imagine the ukraine crisis is also going to be a part of that discussion. Or sure, mark. We have a lot to talk to secretary hagel about. Budget, the whole ukraine crisis, these are all topics we will talk about with secretary hagel, including what happened in fort hood and this trip to asia and what it means for u. S. At u. S. Military policy going forward. Traveling with secretary of state chuck hagel, peter, thank you. Fromll have excerpts peters exclusive interview with defense secretary chuck hagel throughout the day tomorrow on bloomberg. And we will air the interview in its entirety right here on bottom line close quote friday at 2 00 p. M. New york time. We do have breaking news. Anadarko has agreed to settle. Federal bankruptcy judge ellen gruber considered anadarkos arguments on how much it should pay as well as the plaintiffs request for attorneys fees. Anadarko is set to pay 5 billion to 6 billion in the u. S. Settlement. Coming up, financing politics, the head of the center for responsible politics says that the Campaign Finance ruling yesterday will make it more difficult to track political donations. We will have more on that story when bottomline on Bloomberg Television continues in just a moment. Theow to washington with second day of fallout to the u. S. Supreme courts latest that to loosen campaignfinance laws, Phil Mattingly joins me now. Walk us through exactly what this is going to me for this year and beyond. Phones of bigmoney political donors ringing off the folk off the hook . Donors in both parties have actually received phone calls from fundraisers, especially those who were walking right up to the line of how much they could donate. Practical applications are this. Donors went to bed on tuesday night capped at how much they could donate over a twoyear period, a little over one to 3000 a year. Over 123,000 year. Now they can donate the max. Two candidates, to Party Committees, as much as they want as they work through this election cycle. 435,000 house candidates. 5,200 max per person, they can all donate for that. Party committees in the same boat. They can now donate the max to all of the Party Committees they want to. This doesnt change the game in terms of individual contributions. But for big money donors and political groups, this is a big game change. Are there clear winners and losers here . I think so. What we have seen since the Citizens United decision, what we have seen from the dark many groups and the 501c 4, money has moved away from the Political Party campaign donations. Parties part of the reason you have seen the rnc excited is that the money should start heading back towards them. Maybe not an enormous amount that they should see an uptick. So the parties are winners. They select number to the aggregate line every single two years. Those guys will have a those guys will now have a direct line to lawmakers. Who loses . The small money donors. That is the only way you can look at this. Their donations will no longer mean as much to lawmakers because they are getting macs at donations from other people. The limits on individual contributions, those remain. Is there a chances will be struck down next . You heard from democrats on capitol hill yesterday and you heard from Justice Stephen breyers dissent. Court, anytimes a campaignfinance decision is coming in front of them, there is a decent chance that they will roll rule in a way that democrats are not happy with. I dont think you are seeing thing in the immediate that will strike down those limitations in terms of single donations. Campaignany time a finance decision has come up through the Roberts Court, the court has gone away from the more restrictive regulations. You saw in Citizens United and again yesterday. Democrats are very worried. Anything negative front of them could be very problematic going forward. Thank you. The u. S. Uest says Supreme Court finance ruling will have an affect on this years midterm elections. Sheila krumholz is the executive director of the center for responsive politics and she joins me now from our washington bureau. Thank you. Before we get into political the new the midterms, york times Editorial Board wrote the following today. Is grassroots politics dying on the vine . That is a huge concern. The really turbochargers value of those megadonors that were maxing out already. There were only about 650 of them by our count last cycle. There is only a couple of dozen so far this cycle but this really puts a lot more clout and influence into the hands of those who already had the greatest influence with congress and government. So i think sorry i think it does diminish the clout of the smallest donors. As you alluded to, money does mean access. Access means influence. Is it the contention of the critics of mccutchen that the influence of money in politics is so crept in and so corrosive that average americans, the ones who already dont have a lyrical axis will now have no influence either . Its not that they will have no influence, but it is diminished in relation to the extraordinary clout that the wealthiest the donors already have in the system. I think it is true that people across the political spectrum are concerned about the ability of money to shape electoral outcomes and shape political policy outcomes after the elections. So we have to be concerned not just about which megadonors now will have doors opening even wider to them or have greater access and influence with the parties, with the Party Leadership and with members of congress and even regulators in government. But also what kind of ious will be extended to them for their largess. Where do you think we will see the most dramatic effects on the court ruling . Will it be on the midterms . I think we will see much more money and that will translate into far more tv ads and other kinds of advocacy. The adsocacy, unlike in and money spent by outside interest groups, will be conducted by the candidates and the parties themselves. Perhaps that will mean these will be more relevant, less misleading ads. Perhaps more accountable, maybe not. But the bottom line is that the folks at home will be barraged by even more ads than before. Is it possible, there is an upside to the courts ruling . Campaignsters of giving now more transparent and shining a light on who is giving what to whom . It is true that the money that this Court Decision will expand is disclosed. At least we do have that. We will see where the money is coming from and they have to reported to the federal election commission. However, there will be far more committees arey liberating, and particularly joint fundraising committees which are distribution hugs able to assess milliondollar checks and then doling them out to candidates and parties. The whole process of tracking the money flows becomes more complicated. As you know, it seems that the Roberts Court disagreed because Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts made clear that, in his opinion and the opinion of the majority, this is a First Amendment argument. This is a freespeech argument, that folks have a role to play. And if they want to speak up or give for a particular candidate, they ought to be able to do so with little or no restrictions. Thats right. That is the view of this court that favors the freedom of speech side of the argument and discounts the concerns about corruption or the appearance of corruption in a systemic way. They are limiting the government here to only pursuing quid pro quo bribery corruption. However, i think most people do recognize that money talks in washington and that talk is not it just in what kind of policies get past or do not get past as well as influencing the regulatory process, radio watering down regulations or stopping them. The conversation will continue undoubtedly. What about congress . Does it have a role to play . Is Public Financing a topic that now needs to be on the table . Not goingfinancing is to see quick progress in congress. I think that is really a National Conversation that needs will getlace before it to the point where that could have legs in congress. It is a solution that is being offered by Many Organizations and is popular with many individuals. But it is not going to see quick resolution in congress. Executivekrumholz, director of the center for responsive politics joining us now from washington. Always a pleasure to have you on the broadcast. Up next, an on the markets update from julie hyman. Stay with us. Welcome back. Minutesoming up on 26 asked the hour. That means Bloomberg Television is on the markets. Here is julie hyman. Islets take a look at what going on in todays session. We have a pullback from the record yesterday on the s p 500. A couple of hundred routers to this, one is the less than average jobless numbers and the Services Report we got earlier today. Just as the nasdaq was the leading gaming index yesterday, it is the leading decliner today. Off the s p 500 off by about. 2 . Us look at anadarko petroleum. It is said to have settled with the u. S. For 20. 8 billion claimed by editors of bankrupt chronos. The debt owned by the company, a it filedcquired when for bankruptcy five years ago. We are also looking at gm. Off eller was director affairs at the white house and has been called to guide the islamic the automakers response to the recall. We will have more on the markets in 30 minutes. The secondback to halfhour of bottom line on Bloomberg Television. Lets check some of the top stories we are following at this hour. An investigation is underway into last nights deadly shooting at fort hood in texas. Killed threean soldiers and wounded 16 others before fatally shooting himself. The soldier, according to officials, served four months in iraq in 111 and was being evaluated for posttraumatic stress disorder. Military Officials Say this appeared to be a personal dispute unrelated to terrorism. Fort hood, the scene of a similar shooting back in 2009. s farl residents of chile north spent a second sleepless night outside their homes. A major aftershock rattled the area, a day after an earlier age point to magnitude earthquake 8. 2 magnitude earthquake left seven people dead. s Emergency Office and navy issued a tsunami alert and ordered a precautionary evacuation of lowlying areas. The first footage on board the International Space station, the imagery was captured on march 28 and centered on an area in jamaica. Ecast is a urth private endeavor. Facebook cost 18 billion inuisition of whats app february. Israel reflects the market as a whole and the ipo market in is u. S. And in europe continuing to show a lot of signs of vibrancy. Deals are getting done and very well. When deals start getting done in the market as a whole, that is when i will see it as a sign that things are starting to slow. The folks it the focus is not just the initial public offering. Almost every day, we see an Israeli Company coming out. How do you see things going . On theggestion may be whats app deal, that maybe that is a High Water Mark in some evaluations. Fiber was very interesting. Ways in the end of last year for over a billion dollars. There are companies that are looking at what we called will ,rack called dual track which is going public or going the and and a group going the a route. Has ave some kid who start up and can sell it for 10 million. And haveng to do that 1