SOON THE FED WILL LEARN TO SIT UP AND BEG

 

5/26/22

 

Andy Kessler wrote one of his typically insightful pieces for the Wall Street Journal on 5/16/22 and, again, while I generally agree with his argument, he made a statement regarding the Fed that floored me.   Why the Fed grew so lax in managing monetary policy is crystal clear, to wit, the Fed has become little more than an arm of the administration in power.   Perhaps I should have been kinder to my description of the Bernanke, Yellen, and Powell Feds, but why?    This letter also was not published.

 

 

5/16/22

 

In his 5/16/22 Opinion piece (“When Will the Selling Stop?”), Andy Kessler states “Why the Fed overstayed its welcome at zero is a mystery, but rising interest rates have ended the party.”

 

There is no mystery to the Fed’s having conducted an expansionary monetary policy long after doing so may have been warranted.   Since at least the 2009 “housing” crisis, the Fed has become little more than an arm of the Administration in power.   Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden all demanded an expansionary monetary policy to prop up the economy and/or the market and the Bernanke, Yellen, and Powell Feds responded like the lapdogs they were and are.   Now that inflation is becoming a problem for the Biden administration, the Fed has begun tightening.

 

We should end the charade that monetary policy has been for at least the last thirteen years.   Either Congress should explicitly re-establish the Fed’s independence or the Fed should be made another Cabinet Department.  Heaven help us if we choose the latter.

UNLIKE, SAY, GRISWOLD, ROE WILL NEVER “BE REMOVED” AS A NATIONAL ISSUE

 

5/26/22

 

I wrote the following letter to the Wall Street Journal earlier this month in response to Peggy Noonan’s observation that “the end of Roe will be good for America.”   I am largely sympathetic to her argument, but she made a statement that made no sense, and I felt obligated to respond.   Hey, if you see something, say something, right?  The letter wasn’t published.

 

5/7/22

 

One of the problems with Peggy Noonan’s reasoning (“The End of Roe Will be Good for America,” Opinion, 5/7-5/8/22) is that she assumes that, should Roe be overturned “…as a national matter, the abortion issue (will be) removed…”   Even if Roe is overturned, the abortion issue would not be removed on any level.  The real action will be, as Ms. Noonan implies, at the state level, but we are already seeing efforts to codify Roe on the national level.   The issue is just too rich politically for either party to let fade.  

 

In fact, one could argue that the posturing on abortion would be more vociferous at the national level in a post-Roe world.  The votes taken in state legislatures would have real impact on people’s lives rather than being largely meaningless votes designed to throw red meat to those who can write campaign checks and marshal great numbers of voters.    On the other hand, the posturing at the national level would continue to be the political freebie it has long been in an abortion landscape overshadowed by Roe.

UVALDE: LESS RED MEAT, MORE SERIOUS THOUGHT AND, HOPEFULLY, BUT NOT PROBABLY, ACTION

 

5/26/22

 

Unlike many of my GOP colleagues, I will readily admit that guns are part of the problem; the reflexive statement that "Guns aren't the problem; people are the problem" just ignores the facts and common sense.   So I would go along with some common-sense gun control laws, especially enhanced background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and psychos and prolonged waiting periods for gun purchases to stop the most impulsive of shootings.  I would also consider limits on the firepower of guns sold to civilians beyond what is in place now.  However, I would only do so as part of a comprehensive package of measures because there are so many other things at work, including:

 

·         broken homes with disposable children

·         parents who don't give a damn (I guess this is nearly the same as #1)

·         video games and movies in which victims, though made to look like people, are inanimate objects and killing has no consequences beyond getting rewarded by moving to the next "level."

·         the decline of churches and the belittling of religion in the popular culture

·         mental health services that are either not provided or ignored by those who most need them.

·         a nihilistic, solipsistic culture that leads to nowhere but disenchantment, resentment, and, in some cases, violence.

·         media that insist on giving sick, evil, and deranged people the attention they’ve always craved by publishing their names. Why do we have to know the names of these killers?   Why not deny them the imagined immortality they seek by simply referring to, in this case, an 18-year-old male who lived in the area”?  (I might substitute terms like “misfit,” “thug,” or “soulless, malevolent monster” for “male” in that description, but I’ll take what I can get.)

·         schools being the softest of targets due to a reluctance of some educators to have stepped up, armed security of some sort.  I’m not willing to sacrifice children in service to somebody’s utopian vision of the way the world ought to be.  Admittedly, armed security didn’t help much in Uvalde, but better trained and equipped security may have made all the difference. 

 

No, I don't know what to do in the political realm about the aforementioned items, except for the last one.  These are problems in society that can't be addressed by more federal action, more money, or the like.   These are problems that call for a great awakening of sorts.

 

I would be willing, even eager, to discuss the role of the ready availability of guns to solve this utter insanity, but we would be better served, and have a chance to solve the problem, by engaging in more universal conversation and action.

 

Such an approach will not happen any time soon, though, because the true believers in the GOP won’t discuss guns and the true believers in the Democratic Party will only discuss guns.   Is there anybody in the sensible middle anymore?   Silly question, I know.

 

Finally, two comments, not to infuriate both ends of the debate but, perhaps, to show my good faith and at least relative impartiality and genuine desire to stop this carnage:

 

·         Governor Greg Abbott was right to point out that 18-year-olds have been able to buy long guns in Texas for 60 years, but mass shootings like Uvalde are much more recent phenomena.  Yes, the University of Texas tower rampage took place 56 years ago, and, on the horror barometer, was as bad as just about anything we have seen of late, but that was nearly a one-off event compared to what we have been seeing over the last ten years or so.

·         President Joe Biden’s speech in the immediate wake of the shooting was terrific.   The responses from Fox News, et. al., would be comical if we weren’t dealing with something so tragic, but were utterly predictable.

 

DO A DISTINGUISHED AND HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSMAN AND A BULLDOG OF AN ALDERMAN KNOW THAT THEY ARE “NOBODY”?

 

5/4/22

 

I sent this letter to the Chicago Sun-Times editor two days ago.   Since the Sun-Times published a letter on the very next day responding to the same Laura Washington column, it is highly unlikely that the Sun-Times will publish mine, so, rather than delay, I decided to share my note immediately rather than delay as I did with my last letter to the Sun-Times:

 

5/2/22

 

I agree with Laura Washington that you can’t beat somebody with nobody (“Critics Want Lightfoot gone, but you can’t beat somebody with nobody,” Opinion, 5/2/22), but neither of Mayor Lightfoot’s two declared opponents, Willie Wilson and Ray Lopez, is a nobody.  Mr. Wilson ran an impressive campaign in 2019, carrying thirteen wards in the first round of voting, more than any other candidate, and his appeal is increasing due to his gas giveaways and hard line on crime.  Mr. Lopez is a bulldog of an alderman who has seized on the crime issue by personally confronting gangbangers and thugs in his ward.   Both men, one Black and one Hispanic and gay, have a degree of appeal to those who insist on casting their votes based on such characteristics.

 

It is far too early to declare that Mayor Lightfoot will be a one-term mayor, but it is foolish and insulting to declare either of her two so-far declared opponents to be “nobody.”  

THE LEAKED DRAFT ROE v WADE OPINION: LITTLE CHANGES BUT THE INTENSITY OF THE POSTURING

 

5/3/22

Even if the leaked Alito draft opinion striking down Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey turns out to be the final opinion (highly unlikely) or part of a process of deliberation that will ultimately lead to those two decisions being struck down (more likely but far from certain), those in favor of ready access to abortion should tone down their vituperation and those who are opposed to abortion should moderate their celebration.   Nothing substantive is going to change regarding the availability of abortion if Roe is overturned.

 

If Roe is overturned, decisions regarding the availability, and the legality, of abortion will be in the hands of the states, where they should have been all along.   Once in the hands of the states, it is quite clear that laws regarding abortion will reflect the general consensus this country reached long ago on abortion, i.e., that abortion should be legal but restricted.    Nothing will change in that regard.   Yes, the degree of restrictions will vary from state to state, as it does now and as it should.   Some states will ban abortion outright.   Some of the more hysterical among those who insist on wider availability of abortion are predicting that half the states will outlaw abortion.   Some cooler heads in both camps are predicting that the number of such states will be in the teens.   Yours truly thinks that the number will be more like ten, or even fewer.   Regardless of their number, states’ outlawing abortion will present problems for women who live in such states and wish to terminate their pregnancies.   Even now, though, organizations and people strongly in favor of keeping abortion legal and widely available are making, and, in some states, executing plans to provide transport to women who cannot obtain abortions in their state of residence.   Having to provide such services will provide those in favor of readily available abortion a chance to put their proverbial money where their mouths are, and one should have little doubt that such plans will come to fruition and thus that women anywhere in this country who want abortions in the still hypothetical post-Roe era will be able to terminate their pregnancies with only relatively minor degrees of inconvenience.   Talk of “back-alley abortions” and a “return to the days of the coat-hanger” is so much hyper-ventilation.  

 

What is even sillier, but at least as predictable, is politicians grandstanding on the issue, with the likes of Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker of and Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot piously proclaiming that abortion will remain legal and readily available even if Roe is overturned.    They might as well proclaim that water will remain wet.  Does anybody who is not barren of grey matter and/or overcome by the alarmism of the moment think for even three seconds that, in a post-Roe world, abortion will be outlawed in Illinois?  Or, for that matter, in New York, California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Washington, Oregon, et. multa al.?    But the facts, and/or or reasoned conclusions, don’t matter when emotions overrule intellect, which seems to be happening with increasing frequency in this country on matters far beyond abortion rights, but I digress.  Such emoting rather than thinking is why, by the way, an overturning of Roe will turn out to be a big positive politically for the Democrats in 2022 and 2024.   Whether it will be enough for them to hold onto Congress and the White House is grist for a later mill, but an overturned Roe will be a positive for the Dems.    So look for the crocodile tears in the eyes of Democratic pols wailing and gnashing their teeth in the wake of this SCOTUS leak.

 

One more thing…

 

I have been around long enough to have experienced many “world-changing” developments that don’t change the world much at all.   Overturning of Roe, if it happens, will turn out to be one of them.