Politics, Government & Public Policy: September 2006 Archives
It looks like the GOP's fortunes may be turning around. When I first asked "Will Republicans lose the house?" near the end of August, Tradesports gave the party a 46% chance of retaining their House majority in November, and a 79% chance of holding on to the Senate. As of today, people betting on the 2006 election give the GOP a 57% chance of retaining the House and a 83% chance of keeping the Senate. That's a remarkable change in a little less than a month.
Along the same lines, Larry Kudlow writes about "The GOP's Bush-led turnaround".
Oil and gasoline prices have plunged over the past month, taking away a big Democratic issue. The broad stock averages have had a nice run since Labor Day and are closing in on five-year highs. This rally is a measure of the future economy and business profits, and it signals continued growth as far as the eye can see. And while investors are abandoning the energy sector, consumers are spending -- making the retail stock index one of the hottest plays on Wall Street.At the same time, inflation indicators such as gold, commodities and energy have been pummeled. Long-term interest rates have dropped quickly from 5.25 percent to 4.6 percent, another sign of diminishing inflation fears. Consequently, the Federal Reserve hasn't touched interest rates at its last two meetings, while many on Wall Street are now betting the next Fed move will be a rate cut, not a hike.
Meanwhile, the monetary base, which measures the Fed's dollar-creating activities, has been flat-lined, with literally zero growth over the past eight months. As Milton Friedman taught us, excess money is the cause of rising inflation. But the Fed is taking care of that problem, which is why forward-looking market indicators (i.e., gold, energy and long-term bond rates) have all dropped significantly. In fact, if you combine the rising stock market with the falling inflation markets, the clear forecast is for non-inflationary growth.
I sincerely hope that the Democrats don't win a single seat until they wise up and return to sensible economic and foreign policies. It's not great to have both elected branches of government controlled by a single party, but it's better than the alternative when that includes sharing power with the likes of modern leftists.
Argh, I'm going to be old enough to run for President in 2012! You've gotta be kidding me. Well, I guess I'd better get started.
The Social Security Administration spends our plentiful extra tax dollars on a popular baby names site that provides data on the popularity of names for girls and boys. For a lark, I decided to investigate the name "Hillary".
As you can see, the popularity of the name dropped precipitously as Americans became more familiar with President Clinton's wife, and the ranking has not improved despite the mononymous Hillary's efforts to reshape her image. I don't think this bodes well for her political aspirations.
In contrast, "George" and "Albert" have declined moderately (with no sharp movements) and "William" has improved considerably: moving from 19th place in 1991 to 11th place in 2005.
Update 060908:
Thanks to Eugene Volokh's link I see that Matt Evans was on the same trail a few years ago, calling "Hillary" "the most poisoned name in history".
