The provocative Donald Trump certainly seems to be disliked by a majority of African-American professional athletes, cable-news hosts, academics, and the Congressional Black Caucus. Yet there are subtle but increasing indications that his approval among other African Americans may be reaching historic highs for a modern Republican president.
To get a sense of California zeitgeist in this election, hop in a car (for now, forget about high-speed rail) and start driving due east from San Jose—away from Silicon Valley, into the Central Valley and California’s 12th State Senate District.
Tragically, the mold seems to have been irrevocably shattered, if not discarded on the ash heap of history. Surrounded by the politics and politicians that plague us today, and the wretched campus climate that we’re living with, to view the great new documentary about the late Pat Moynihan is to weep over what’s practically vanished from American public and intellectual life: independent thinkers, policymakers both intrepid and persistent, respect for data, reverence for the truth, determination to stand up for what’s best about America while acknowledging its failings, and a willingness to cross the lines of party and ideology in pursuit of better outcomes for people who need them.
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2018 World Competitiveness Report ranks the United States No. 1 in global competitiveness, up from No. 3 in the past few years and its first top ranking in a decade. A high ranking matters.
"The first thing that Martin did for Richard Nixon—one of the first things—it’s dated July 4, 1967—is to make the argument for abolishing the military draft and moving to an all-volunteer armed force." This is my Hoover colleague Annelise Anderson reminiscing about how she and her husband, the late Martin Anderson, got involved in Richard Nixon’s 1967-68 campaign for president of the United States.
Russian Literature Professor Kevin McKenna of the University of Vermont talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the characters, plot, and themes of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's masterpiece, In the First Circle. This is the second episode of the EconTalk book club discussing the book. The first episode--a discussion of Solzhenitsyn's life and times--is available on EconTalk at Kevin McKenna on Solzhenitsyn, the Soviet Union, and In the First Circle.
This article proposes the creation of an international organization modeled after the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to provide assistance and relief to vulnerable citizens and enterprises affected by serious cyberattacks. Companies that have signed onto the Tech Accord principles would form the core of the organization, thereby filling an important gap in an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment. In this article, the term “cyber-ICRC” is intended to be suggestive of the role that such an organization might play but not to imply any kind of formal connection to the ICRC.
California practically invented the modern transportation system. Without our historic highway and road network, connecting farm and city, factories and ports, California would be Albania—a pretty coastline with an underperforming economy.
The 2018 cohort of the Hoover IP² Summer Institute on the Economics and Politics of Innovation overwhelming endorsed the program that ran from August 5 to August 18, 2018, at Stanford University. In a survey of participants administered at the program’s conclusion, all respondents stated that they were satisfied with the institute and they would recommend it to other students and young professionals. In the words of one participant, “the Summer Institute was one of the best experiences I’ve had in my professional and student life.”
The campaign for financial deregulation should have you worried. Is bank supervision tight enough to prevent another meltdown? Is it loose enough to let the economy grow? The Trump Administration will tell you that it is scoring on both counts, but you may harbor doubts.
How divided are we? Victor Davis Hanson wrote this about what the Kavanaugh hearings showed: “The lesson of the hearings transcends the Kavanaugh confirmation. We were presented with two radically different and now competing versions of American jurisprudence and due process, one traditional and constitutional, one fluid and revolutionary. It will be up to Americans, ultimately, to decide by which version they wish to conduct their lives.”
Economics: it’s the study of human action and its unintended consequences, and I think it teaches us a lot about wise Christian stewardship and compassionate, prudent public policy. Here are four examples I recently shared with students in a colleague’s class at Samford University.
In less than a month, many Americans will participate in yet another critical election. I say “yet another” because we have recently experienced an unusual spate of critical midterm contests. For most of the post-World War II period, midterm elections were sleepier, less impactful events. The Democrats controlled the House of Representatives for 40 years up until 1994 and the U.S. Senate for 26 years until 1980. Since 1994, the House has flipped twice and the Senate four times. If the polls and projections are correct, the House will change hands once again.
Is the world converging or diverging? In 2001, Chicago historian Kenneth Pomeranz wrote about the great divergence between China and Europe in the 18th century, ending up with the West taking over global dominance. In 2011, Nobel laureate Michael Spence argued that the world was again converging in The Next Convergence: The Future of Economic Growth in a Multispeed World — with China, India and the rest catching up with the West.
Ten years ago, the national real estate market crashed. Except in The Villages. Sales of high-risk subprime mortgages created a foundation of sand that collapsed as marginally credit-worthy homeowners defaulted under originally cheap adjustable-rate mortgages that ballooned beyond their means and erased all disposable household income.
On the face of it, it would seem reasonable to believe that education policy makers could learn much from successful policies and programs. But they often don’t. Here are two relatively clear examples of policy makers failing to learn from effective policies/programs. In both cases, the policy makers were the members of a state board of education. One is from California, the other from Massachusetts. Both sets of policies or programs were known to state policy makers at the time that the Common Core standards in mathematics and English language arts were being developed.
A group of Asian-Americans is suing Harvard with backing from the U.S. Department of Justice, which filed papers stating: “The record evidence demonstrates that Harvard’s race-based admissions process significantly disadvantages Asian-American applicants compared to applicants of other racial groups — including both white applicants and applicants from other racial minority groups.” This is a rare case where California policy could provide positive guidance.
As Americans approach another even-year trip to the polls, those currently running and those positioning themselves for 2020 are revealing their vast ignorance in how they would “fix” what they think are our core problems. The many free lunches (or more accurately, stolen lunches) they promise, all the way up to multi-trillion dollar utopian health care boondoggles-in-waiting, show that few know enough to pass an economics principles course, much less to advance Americans’ general welfare.