A Not So Special Election, More Inequality, and the Retail Meltdown
Here’s What You Need To Know
This past Tuesday’s special election in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District to replace recently appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services Tom Price was touted as a definitive mandate for the country’s feelings on the Trump Administration thus far, and a major bellwether for how the 2018 midterms are going to go. The truth is, it is likely neither of those things.
- Past Is Prologue: Special elections are often highlighted as major litmus tests for the pending political fortunes or misfortunes for one party or another, but historic trends would beg to differ. Democrats secured victories in highly contested special elections in New York and Pennsylvania leading up to the 2010 midterm elections, only to lose 63 seats in the House in a historic Republican sweep. Likewise, Republicans ballyhooed successful special elections in Ohio and California leading up to the 2006 midterms, only to lose control of the House and Senate on Election Day.
- Ossoff Has A Very Unique Set Of Circumstances: In the Georgia special election, the Democrat, Jon Ossoff, finished with the highest vote count, but was still 1.9 percentage points shy of the 50 percent mark that would have secured him victory without having to hold a head-to-head runoff with the second place candidate. Much of the coverage seems ready to read the tea leaves of how close Ossoff got to the 50 percent mark and suggest this might track for similar districts across the country in 2018. This analysis fails to recognize the incredibly unique circumstances of this election – it was an open seat, so there was no battling the power of incumbency, and it was a jungle primary in which one Democrat had the support of his party’s entire national infrastructure to face off against eleven Republicans. It is safe to say most 2018 midterm races will not operate under these conditions.
- “All Politics Is Local”: Those seeking to suggest any results from the Georgia special election represent a mandate or lack thereof for President Trump’s agenda also forget Speaker Tip O’Neill’s golden political rule that “all politics is local.” Discussing the Georgia special election, Princeton history and public affairs professor Julian Zelizer writes, “Usually, special elections just tell us what’s going on in a specific district or what the dynamics are between the candidates in the individual contest.” Special elections are still just a relatively small number of voters in a single Congressional district voting for their next Congressman outside of the atmosphere of a national election cycle. Even with all the media attention and outside expenditures, local matters still inform most voters’ views.
The bottom line is that the Georgia special election results indicate who will enter the runoff for the seat and track the sentiments of the citizens of that Congressional district regarding the candidates presented to them – nothing more, nothing less. Neither Republicans nor Democrats should be discouraged or heartened by the results because, despite all the hype, special elections are not all that special.
News You Can Use
UK ELECTIONS ARE ON!
This past Tuesday, British Prime Minister Theresa May called for a snap general election on June 8th, much earlier than had been expected. May will need two-thirds of Parliament to support her call for elections, and Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has already said he “welcomes the PM’s decision.” Highly favorable opinion polling of the Conservative government suggest they will remain in power, retaining control of Downing Street in the long term. More importantly, the move is widely seen as an effort to secure a definitive electoral mandate for May’s ongoing Brexit process. By shoring up her domestic political standing, May can strengthen her hand in negotiations with the EU.
Subscribe to Receive Insights
"*" indicates required fields
ANOTHER HELPING OF INEQUALITY PLEASE
A recent study published in the Nature Human Behaviour journal found that people may have a psychological preference for unequal societies when asked to describe their ideal distribution of wealth, despite widespread concern over economic inequality. The study concludes that these seemingly contradictory feelings can be reconciled by recognizing that it is economic unfairness, not inequality per se, that bothers people. The researchers’ subtle distinction makes the interesting point that in a public policy debate, people would happily sacrifice strict equality of wealth distribution for what they deem as a fair distribution. Of course, this becomes an unsolvable equation as soon as anyone seeks to determine the entirely subjective definition of “fair.”
THE RETAIL MELTDOWN
Despite recent overall positive economic outlooks, the future still looks grim for the retail industry, with dozens of large retailers closing stores, announcing bankruptcy, or hitting multi-year stock lows. What is causing this retail meltdown? First, with half of all U.S. households now subscribing to Amazon Prime, consumers have come to expect free shipping, easy returns, and access to wide selections shopping online. Second, over the past four decades, the number of shopping malls in America grew more than twice as fast as the population – meaning we have more supply than demand. Lastly, spending on material possessions has decreased as Americans seek purchases aimed at experiences and activities, like hotels, travel, and restaurants. In order to stay alive, retailers will have to get creative in capturing consumer spending that once had nowhere else to go.
DO YOU CITE WHAT I CITE?
Until recently, scientists could only track citation records and measure the influence of an article or idea if they subscribed to one of two proprietary databases: Web of Sciences or Scopus. Now, the Initiative for Open Citations, backed by a coalition of open data advocates, is asking publishers to make article references freely available. In just six months, the Initiative has increased the number of freely available citations from 1 percent to 40 percent. This step not only benefits scientists who hope to establish credibility; it also helps the public at large, who can now trace each link back to the source of a particular foundational idea. Mapping and analyzing this web of sources and citations may provide greater insight into how common conceptions are formed, something that could prove very useful when trying to combat the rise of fake news.
Related Posts:
THE HARD TRUTH FOR THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY
The defense industry’s optimism in President Trump’s pledge to rebuild the military, which sent their stocks soaring, may have been misplaced. Trump’s proposed military spending increases are relatively modest – only three percent higher than President Obama’s last budget. Even still, these spending hikes will be difficult to achieve. Trump will need to garner support from Democrats and GOP fiscal hawks alike to achieve the necessary 60 votes in the Senate to lift the budget caps from the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA), and his repeated promises not to cut entitlement programs leave him with little room for finding cuts to offset these increases. Trump would also face Congressional opposition to any attempt to increase military spending through war spending or Overseas Contingency Operations, which are not beholden to budget caps. As a result, defense spending may increase somewhat, but a significant boost in military spending appears improbable.