WSJ echoes me on housing and GOP

Haven’t I been saying this?

The housing crunch is most severe in some of the most hotly contested political battleground states, a trend that could spell trouble for Republicans next year.

Six of the 10 states with the highest foreclosure rates in the country last month are considered by leaders of both parties to be swing states. They include the two biggest prizes of the past two presidential campaigns: Florida, which came in No. 2 on the list, with one foreclosure filing for every 248 households in September; and Ohio, No. 7, with one foreclosure for every 319 households, according to a survey by RealtyTrac Inc., a California property-research company. …

"For better or worse, as the incumbent party, Republicans own the economy," ISI Group Inc., a stock brokerage that specializes in policy research, said in a recent report. "Therefore, falling home prices, particularly if they lead to broader economic woes, will hurt Republican prospects for maintaining the White House and picking up seats in Congress."

In the Republican presidential candidates’ first debate focused on economic issues last week, none raised housing concerns.

Why?

One reason for Republican silence may be that, for all the headlines about a housing crunch, the issue doesn’t rank high in national polls. In an early September Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, when people were asked to name two items that should be "the top priorities for President Bush to address," 7% cited "the home-mortgage and housing markets."

Elections are determined at the margins though. The margins in Presidential politics are margins in swing states. Housing is a big one of those.

Tags: , ,

Housing hitting Republicans?

The Foreign Policy blog has some interesting details about rich people losing their homes:

A good example of this is the greater Washington, D.C., area. One might think that subprime loans would be most popular in poorer areas of the District. And they’d be right. According to a study by the nonprofit Urban Institute, high-interests loans were indeed popular in low-income neighborhoods. However, they were much more popular in Fairfax County, which has a median income of $100,318—the highest in the country. Many homeowners there used subprime loans to upgrade to a larger house. In fact, these kinds of loans fueled the McMansion phenomenon.

When more wealthy homeowners start to lose their homes (and as Passport noted a few weeks back, the worst is yet to come), the confidence of U.S. investors will suffer greatly. This, in theory, will further slow global growth, as consumers will be less likely to spend.

More details also at the Journal.

Tags: , ,

More housing numbers

Another month. More lousy housing numbers:

A total of 223,538 foreclosure filings were reported in September, up from 112,210 in the same month a year ago, according to Irvine-based RealtyTrac Inc.

The number of filings in September was down 8 percent from August’s 243,947, the firm said.

Sounds like it is getting better? That’s not what the realtors say:

"August was an extraordinarily high month for foreclosure activity, so some falloff was almost predictable," said Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac’s vice president for marketing. …

"We don’t see September as the beginning of the end in this cycle of foreclosures," Sharga said.

How bad?

Nevada reported one foreclosure filing for every 185 households, earning the state the highest foreclosure rate in the nation for the ninth month in a row. The state had 5,504 filings in September, down 11.1 percent from August and more than triple from September 2006.

Florida had one foreclosure filing for every 248 households. The state reported 33,354 foreclosure filings in September, down just less than 2 percent from August, but more than three times greater than September 2006’s total.

Chaos in high-growth swing-states.

Tags: , , ,

Huckabee against the robber barrons?

Last night, I was really struck by Mike Huckabee’s language on economics. Let’s go to the transcript for a moment:

Mr. Huckabee: The real fact is, unions are going to take a more prominent role in the future for one simple reason: A lot of American workers are finding that their wages continue to get strapped lower and lower while CEO salaries are higher and higher.

And the reality is that when you have the average CEO salary 500 times the average worker, and you have the hedge fund manager making 2,200 times that of the average worker, you’re going to create a level of discontent that’s going to create a huge appetite for unions.

So unions are the natural result of workers finally saying, "Look, I can’t go from a $70,000 year job to a $15,000 a year job and feed my family of four." That’s when unions are going to come back in roaring form.

Does Mike Huckabee think that the financial services industry is today’s robber barrons? Is he right? Certainly in a post-industrial economy, there’s an analogy between railroads and financial services, even if it is somewhat strained.

I contrast this with John Edwards. He targets the rich. Huckabee may be targeting Wall Street. That’s a difference. Perhaps an important one. What would Huckabee have to say about the housing crisis?

Tags: , ,

Reflection on the debate

If the test of a debate is memorable lines or gaffes, then Mitt Romney’s line about lawyers was a big problem. Marc Ambinder has the exact quote:

"We’re going to let the lawyers sort out what he needed to do and didn’t need to do."

Dave Freddoso at NRO doesn’t buy it either. This speaks to his biggest weakness. Combine this with his line about his kids serving America. That’s a problem. At that point, Rich Lowry said, "Not very crisp. Not his greatest night."

On the other hand, Romney’s line about Fred… "Great cast and Fred Thompson comes in at the end," was quite good. As Patrick Ruffini notes, this was repeated on twitter a bunch.

If people were worried about Fred Thompson, then I think that he did pretty well. A couple of people suggested that he looked old. But the spin was, if he doesn’t fall on his face, he wins. And he didn’t. Does that mean he wins?

John McCain did pretty well. Someone is going to make fun of his squinching to hear.  It is also striking that everyone is saying that McCain is right.

In the end, I would say:

  • Giuliani was probably solid. Given that he is the front-runner, and didn’t botch, he is happy. Thompson may have moved the ball. Or he might have stopped the slide.
  • John McCain is probably happy. Since his narrative is survival, he moved the ball.
  • Fred Thompson is probably happy. He didn’t face plant, so he moved the ball.
  • Mitt Romney is probably less happy. I talked about these above.
  • I like Huckabee, but I don’t have great memories of him tonight.
  • The others…. Not so much.

No clear winner, but incremental progress for McCain and Giuliani. Thompson does what he has to. Romney struggles. Again.

Tags: , ,

CNBC/WSJ Debate

They start with Fred Thompson.

Thompson: No reason to believe in a recession. He rattles off the numbers. He cuts to long-term spending, which is right up his ally. They follow up and ask about the polling and the angst.

They switch to Romney and ask about foreclosure. 1/100-some. Romney responds. "Inexcusable that Michigan is suffering a one-state recession." Good line. Invest in technology and research. Fix schools. Etc. He gets in a great line about Granholm’s taxes.

Matthews asks Giuliani about private equity. Rudy responds that "the market is a wonderful thing." He gets his whack at Hillary. "Presidents have to work on the fundamentals." It is interesting that he throws in tort-reform as a basic economic issue.

Matthews asks Ron Paul about the Hedge Fund industry. Paul gets to talk about inflation and the working class.

Now they ask McCain about the income gaps. McCain responds about industrial jobs and health care. Whacks at S-CHIP. The smoking line doesn’t quite work though. But it does point out the absurdity of the funding mechanism for S-CHIP.
Mike Huckabee jokes that people want to spend money. He then talks up the Fair Tax. He makes a nice point about the underground economy. Then he pivots to talking about poor-people.

Duncan Hunter then makes Mike Huckabee look like a radical free-trader.

Thompson responds as a decent free-trade advocate.

Sam Brownback pledges not to raise taxes. Solid and easy. He pivots to a flat tax. Then he talks about spending. Brownback then gives a back slap to McCain. They really are buddies.

Tancredo makes the right point about earmarks and mandatory spending.

Mitt vs. Rudy on taxes.

Rudy talks about his tax cuts. 23 times and a 24% income tax cut.

Romney talks about his tax cuts and spending. And he bashes Rudy on the line-item veto.

Rudy crushes Romney on the response. Romney struggles. Rudy delivers a great line. Rudy did won that exchange.

Job losses and manufacturing.

They ask Thompson about people who lose jobs. He doesn’t say that much that is interesting.

Hunter then talks more about rules and China.

McCain talks about the new economy. "We know that the people have been left behind." He talks about the differences between health care between UAW and non-union plants. He talks about retraining. He then riffs on spending.

Trade

Romney says that he is a pro-trade guy… $9k/family richer because of trade. He talks about his business record.  He reminds the business groups that he would be their tool

Giuliani. He talks up trade more. But it did duck the question about foreign ownership.

They ask everyone about a Dubai company buying part of NASDAQ. Paul yes. Huckabee dodges and talks about tariff and tax systems. McCain yes. He then sounds like an adult on trade. Romney yes. "America can compete around the world." Thompson, yes. Hunter, no. Brownback, yes. Tancredo, no.

Taxes. Thompson. AMT. He gives a good riff on taxes. Phase out AMT. Short-term is to index for inflation.

Iraq

They ask Thompson about Iraq. He says that "this is the right policy." "Not have to leave with our tail between our legs."

They ask McCain about his criticism of Bush. He would have asked people to join the military, the Peace Corps, Americorps, etc.  Gives Rudy a back slap. Points out his Rumsfeld criticism.

They ask Ron Paul about "war for oil". Paul rejects that. So does Brownback. "I voted to go to war in Iraq to fight the War on Terrorism." Brownback plays up his partition plan and that meeting.

Congressional Authorization of an attack on Iran. This is a good question.

  • Romney: "Would you need Congressional approval?" He talks about other strategies and the Ahmedinejad thing in NYC. Romney makes a potentially colassal blunder. Marc Ambinder has the exact quote. "We’re going to let the lawyers sort out what he needed to do and didn’t need to do." Dave Freddoso at NRO doesn’t buy it either.
  • Hunter: Maybe. On the path to building a nuclear device.
  • Paul: Yes. Need a declaration. "Just war propaganda. Continuing war propaganda." Big applause for that.
  • Huckabee: No-ish.
  • McCain: He qualifies the hypotheticals. He says that the minimum is consult. He suggests that we are closer to a conflict than people realize.
  • Thompson: Says "John has it right." Cites War Powers. Says that we should go to Congress to get political support, even if illegal.
  • Giuliani: Depends. He whacks at Ron Paul. Paul misses the right response, which is that we declared war on the Barbary Pirates. Rudy whacks Hillary and Iran.

Energy and Oil Independence

Rudy gives the generic answer…

Brownback talks about "energy secure." And says we have to chase it down. "Get more electricity involved in our car fleet." Supports ANWR and Florida drilling if it is environmentally sound.

Tancredo gives the generic answer.

McCain says that the energy companies should be using their profits to invest.

Huckabee is asked about ethanol. He says that national security is a good reason to subsidize ethanol.  Hmmmm. Huck then talks about renewables in general.

Thompson on ethanol. He repeats Huck.

They ask Romney about subsidizing farmers. He is for it. Of course, that’s not what he used to think. FLIP-FLOP.

How does the GOP win back the economy as an issue?

  • Paul: Overtaxed. Over-everything. Can’t be bailing out farmers and subsidies for ethanol.
  • Huckabee: Points to the restoration of confidence.
  • McCain: He talks about faith in the government. Good contrast with Huckabee, although the emphasis on the government is awkward.
  • Romney: Don’t be doom and gloom. "The future is going to be even brighter than the past." He talks about business and implementing health care legislation
  • Thompson: Tell people the truth.
  • Giuliani: He keeps going after Hillary. A good place for him to be.
  • Hunter: Save the economy by closing the borders.
  • Brownback: Be optimistic. And flat tax. "This place rocks."
  • Tancredo. Lemme guess. Immigration. Stop pandering.

Social Security. They ask Thompson what he would do about social security. He talks about indexing to wages. He talks about accounts. And he talks about growth.

Trade. They ask Tancredo about Romney’s comment about the Bush administration trade negotiators. Tancredo says that the agreements have been lousy. I more or less agree.

Health care. Romney talks about market dynamics in health care.

Are unions good for America?

  • Paul. People should be able to organize.
  • Huckabee. Unions will take a more prominent role as a response to income inequality. He bashes CEO and hedge fund salaries.
  • McCain. Unions have played a very important role. Advocates Right-to-Work.
  • Romney. Back slaps McCain. Some good, some bad. Praises the Carpenters.
  • Thompson. Unions are good. Same stuff.
  • Rudy. Grandma was a garment-worker.  "UAW reached a responsible pact."
  • Hunter. Praises the steelworkers. Aren’t they the worst?
  • Brownback. Can be abuses. His ma was a postal worker. DoL is documenting abuses.
  • Tancredo. Slams Brownback’s union mom. Brownback responds. "Don’t attack my mother." Awesome. "My mother is not an illegal immigrant."

GM and Ford. McCain. McCain points out that health care is a good bunch of the problem for companies like Ford and GM. "My dear and beloved Ronald Reagan. He must be spinning in his grave." Awesome.

Chrysler. Thompson. The government shouldn’t step in. The right answer is markets. Matthews pushes back. Thompson slams him, "That’s your opinion, Chris." Nice.

Internet stuff.

Giuliani. Don’t tax the internet. Police the internet. Don’t need a new organization.

McCain. Must stop internet pornography. Go after the money.

  • Huckabee S-CHIP. The issue on the S-CHIP bill was political posturing. Says Bush screwed up on the framing. Not certain about the veto. The political loss on the veto is huge. ‘I don’t trust the government, the insurance companies. I trust me."
  • Romney. Arab-American bias. We don’t discriminate. We are nice people.
  • Thompson. Dangers of a weak dollar. Will damage us internationally. Creditors. Helps our exports. Didn’t really answer the question.
  • Rudy. Too much owned by foreigners. How about we sell more things.
  • Brownback. Who would be the economic advisor? Greenspan’s thoughts. Brownback doesn’t have an answer.
  • McCain. Bernancke cut enough? McCain says "I don’t know." The problem hearing thing looks bad on him.
  • Paul. Won’t promise to support the party.
  • Tancredo. Won’t do lesser of too evils.
  • Brownback.  Will support the nominee. Nominee will be pro-growth and pro-life.
  • Hunter. Will also. Built on a respect for human beings. Sounds like
  • Giuliani. Will London replace New York as the financial capital? He is not answering the question. He is just praising the US. There are real problems. They give him a second bite at the apple. And he talks about corporate tax rates.
  • Romney. Same question? He addresses Sarbox. Says he would support people. His line about Thompson was good
  • Thompson. He says that the relationship with Canada is great. Gave a shout-out to Canadian oil
  • Huckabee. Airline issues. Cracks a joke. He talks about airlines "getting in the program." What is he talking about?
  • McCain on finding Bin Laden. Set up a new intel agency just for that.
  • Romney on the biggest threat. Sense of optimism. Good answer.
  • Brownback on the biggest threat. Breakdown of the family.
  • Giuliani on third-parties. Sure, whatever, next. Points out that education is the biggest problem.

Tags: , , ,

Americans for Prosperity

I spent Friday morning at the Americans for Prosperity Conference, Defending the American Dream. (blog here) I was struck by several things about it.

First, there were a lot of people. 1,600, and they said that they turned away more people. A lot of these are Republican activists. Some of them are the standard crowd that you always see at these things. But not always. The core of the huge North Carolina delegation was the rebuilding North Carolina Young Republicans. I saw both more energy and, to a degree, more seriousness than other conservative confabs.

Second, this is for a different set of issues. There has not been, really, a real economic conservative grassroots group in this country for a while. Americans for Tax Reform is a product of Washington with little reach beyond, perhaps, satellite meetings. Club for Growth is important, but donor focused. The meetings are a bunch of rich guys. There have been fusionist movement organizations (Republican Assemblies). There have been real social conservative groups. But, again, nothing like this.

Third, they got attention. All the prez candidates were there. The people came jazzed. They left (at least at noon on Friday, when I left) even more jazzed.

Fourth, the party was not present. The RNC was not there moving swag or signing people up. The Young Republicans and College Republicans didn’t have tables. Neither did the women. The Libertarians were there though, and they don’t really matter.

The upshot is that we may see the beginning of a new movement in American politics. Putting bodies in rooms is a real test. Seeing this level of success is very hopeful. It will be interesting to compare this with Washington Briefing, sponsored by FRC, next week.

Tags: , ,

Rudy’s speech to Americans for Prosperity

The whole framing of this is interesting. Rudy is speaking in the middle of a nasty fight with Mitt Romney over their economic records.

Rudy starts by saying that he is a supply-sider and that he had made supply-side policies work That’s his theme of 23 tax cuts. He also borrowed McCain’s line from last night.

Rudy talks a long, long, long time about his record. Both substance and symbols. My favorite? Renaming welfare offices to "job centers."

He also attacks Hillary Clinton for her baby bond. I think it is worth pointing out that Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) has proposed similar things. And Rep. Phil English (R-PA) and a Giuliani endorser, has endorsed a very similar idea.

Rudy meanders for a while. But then he gets to substance.

He wants to end the death tax.

He wants to index the AMT. (most want to kill it. That’s room for a difference)

A one-page tax form. (don’t we have that with the EZ? Complicated incomes have complicated taxes.)

New savings vehicles. (Good idea. Combine it with one that starts at birth with, perhaps, matching for poor kids, and you get a much cheaper baby bond… That’s a difference that we could offer that isn’t too different from Ramesh Ponnuru’s tax-break for families)

Then he comes to a riff on Europe again. He attacks Hillary care with a great line and Michael Moore.

All in all good substance. Funny. But it didn’t appeal that much to me.

Tags: , ,

Housing crisis in Florida

From WESH Orlando:

Flagler County is the fastest-growing county in the United States. One of every five homes in Flagler County is for sale. Celebration is feeling the same pain because 50 percent of the homes there are for sale.  Moss Park, east of Orlando International, where nearly 9 percent of the homes are in foreclosure, 8 percent in the ZIP code west of Palm Bay and 7 percent in Poinciana.

Who are these people?

In fact, the most homes in foreclosure are in ZIP codes that didn’t exist five years ago.

Those are exurbs. Those are Republicans.

H/T: Atrios.

Tags: , ,

Politics of UAW strike

Now there are plenty of interesting things to say about the economics of the UAW strike. But let’s talk politics.

What are the Dem candidates going to do? Does John Edwards run to join the picket lines? Does Hillary Clinton, confident in her primary victory, stay lukewarm? Or, sensing that she needs the votes of those struggling factory workers in Ohio, feel forced to say something?

What are the implications for the calendar debate? Doesn’t this put Michigan even more at the forefront of the debate?

What about the fact that the Democratic Party is going upscale? I suspect that the anger in the new upper-middle class progressive voters isn’t going away. But do they really want a full-throated rally against globalization?

UPDATE: Marc Ambinder asks the UAW. They say, basically, that this is tactical not strategic, and the strike should be very short.

Tags: , ,