Connect with us

Economics

Florida is the first state to reject an abortion-rights measure

Published

on

AMONG THE results that came early on election night was for a ballot measure in Florida to enshrine a constitutional right to an abortion. Though 57% of Floridians supported it (with 91% of the vote counted), it failed—falling short of the 60% majority required in the state. The defeat marks the first time state-level abortion-rights campaigners have lost such a ballot campaign since the Supreme Court overturned a national right to the procedure in 2022. Florida’s current law will stand: it bans abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy, with limited exceptions.

Nine other states also voted on abortion-related measures on November 5th (see map). Most, including those in Arizona and Nevada, are expected to pass. Tallies in Midwestern states—South Dakota, Nebraska and Missouri—may be the tightest. The ballot measures vary in scope, from New York’s expansive equal-rights amendment to South Dakota’s measure offering unfettered access to abortion only in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Only Florida required a 60% supermajority.

Map: The Economist

Florida’s proposed constitutional amendment would have made abortion accessible until a fetus’s viability, about 24 weeks from conception, and later if necessary to protect the health of the woman. Its failure will affect not only more than 4m women in Florida but millions more across America’s south-east. If the measure had passed, it would have offered relatively permissive access in a region blanketed with highly restrictive laws. None of the states bordering Florida have procedures for citizen-led ballot initiatives that might overturn their laws.

Florida’s abortion-rights activists had raised $110m, a record for such a campaign. Their messaging emphasised health care and freedom from government interference, hoping the Sunshine State’s social liberalism would help them reach a super-majority. While one famous Floridian, Donald Trump, said that he would be voting against the amendment, he did not join the opposition campaign. Instead Ron DeSantis, the state’s governor, became its figurehead. He labelled the amendment too extreme for Florida and defended the state’s six-week ban.

The campaign was contentious. The state agency that regulates medical providers published videos opposing the proposed change, and the Department of Health threatened criminal prosecutions against television stations airing supportive advertisements, claiming they could discourage women from seeking emergency care. (A federal judge rejected the threatened sanctions, saying: “It’s the First Amendment, stupid”).

More than two-fifths of Americans have now voted on abortion since 2022. The breakneck pace of ballot-measure campaigns will slow. Only two more states with bans—Oklahoma and Arkansas—have provisions for citizen-led ballot initiatives. America’s abortion environment is becoming calcified along regional lines, with little appetite for reform in states with restrictive laws. Given that a national law is unlikely to pass in Congress, many Americans will continue to be forced to travel to receive abortions, or receive posted pills. And harrowing accounts of women in restrictive states who have died from complications during miscarriages, or faced serious health risks because doctors were afraid to treat them, will continue to accumulate.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Economics

The Fed is likely cutting rates again Thursday. Everything you need to know

Published

on

Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell holds a press conference following a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on interest rate policy in Washington, U.S., September 18, 2024. REUTERS/Tom Brenner

Tom Brenner | Reuters

The Federal Reserve likely will stick to the business at hand when it wraps up its meeting Thursday with another interest rate cut, but will have its eye on the future against a backdrop that suddenly has gotten a lot more complicated.

Financial markets are pricing in a near-certainty that the central bank’s Federal Open Market Committee will lower its benchmark borrowing cost by a quarter percentage point as it seeks to “recalibrate” policy for an economy that is seeing the inflation rate moderate and the labor market soften.

The focus, though, will turn to what’s ahead for Chair Jerome Powell and his Fed colleagues as they navigate a shifting economy — and the political earthquake of Donald Trump’s stunning victory in the presidential race.

“We think Powell will refuse to give any early judgment on the implications of the election for the economy and rates, and will seek to be a source of stability and calm,” Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI, said in a a note issued before the election’s outcome was known.

In keeping with policymakers’ historical desire to stay above the political fray, Powell “will say the Fed will take the time it needs to study the new administration’s plans” then will “refine this assessment as actual policies are developed and enacted,” Guha added.

So while the immediate action will be to stay the course and enact the cut, which equals 25 basis points, the market’s attention likely will turn to what the committee and Powell have to say about the future. The fed funds rate, which sets what banks charge each other for overnight lending but often influences consumer debt as well, is currently targeted in a range between 4.75%-5.0%.

Market pricing currently favors another quarter-point cut in December, followed by a January pause then multiple reductions through 2025.

Preparing for Trump

But if Trump’s agenda — tax cuts, higher spending and aggressive tariffs — comes to fruition, it could have a meaningful impact on a Fed trying to right-size policy after the mammoth rate hikes aimed at controlling inflation. Many economists believe another round of isolationist economic moves from the president-elect could reignite inflation, which held below 3% during Trump’s entire first-term despite a similar recipe.

Trump was a frequent critic of Powell and the Fed during his term, which ran from 2017-21, and is in favor of low interest rates.

“Everyone is on the lookout for future rate cuts and whether anything is telegraphed,” said Quincy Krosby, chief global strategist at LPL Financial. “Also, however, there’s the question of whether or not they can declare victory on inflation.”

Any answers to those questions would be largely left to Powell’s post-meeting news conference.

Though the committee will release its joint decision on rates, it will not provide an update on its Summary of Economic Projections, a document issued quarterly that includes consensus updates on inflation, GDP growth and unemployment, as well as the anonymous “dot plot” of individual officials’ interest rate expectations.

Beyond the January pause, there’s considerable market uncertainty about where the Fed is heading. The SEP will be updated next in December.

“What we’re going to hear more and more of is the terminal rate,” Krosby said. “That’s going to come back into the lexicon if yields continue to climb higher, and it’s not completely associated with growth.”

So where’s the end?

Traders in the fed funds futures market are betting on an aggressive pace of cuts that by the close of 2025 would take the benchmark rate to a target range of 3.75%-4.0%, or a full percentage point below the current level following September’s half percentage point cut. The Secured Overnight Financing Rate for banks is a bit more cautious, indicating a short-term rate around 4.2% at the end of next year.

“A key question here is, what’s the end point of this rate cut cycle?” said Bill English, the Fed’s former head of monetary affairs and now a finance professor at the Yale School of Management. “Fairly soon, they’ve got to think about, where do we think this rate cut period changes with the economy looking pretty strong. They may want to take a pause fairly soon and see how things develop.”

Powell also may be called on to address the Fed’s current moves to reduce the bond holdings on its balance sheet.

Since commencing the effort in June 2022, the Fed has shaved nearly $2 trillion off its holdings in Treasurys and mortgage-backed securities. Fed officials have said that the balance sheet reduction can continue even while they cut rates, though Wall Street expectations are for the run-off to end as soon as early 2025.

“They’ve been happy to just kind of leave that percolating in the background and they probably continue to do that,” English said. “But there’s going to be a lot of interest over the next few meetings. At what point do they make a further adjustment to the pace of runoffs?”

Continue Reading

Economics

Donald Trump wins big and fast

Published

on

IT IS AN extraordinary comeback—or, as Donald Trump triumphantly put it in West Palm Beach, Florida, in the early hours of November 6th, “a political victory that our country has never seen before”. After losing four years ago he has survived impeachment, conviction as a felon, numerous other indictments and two assassination attempts, and will become America’s 47th president, to add to his stint as the 45th. He becomes the oldest man ever to win the White House.

Many had expected a long wait for the result of an extremely close election to become clear. In the event, the outcome was evident within hours. Mr Trump looked set to win all seven of the critical swing states: he triumphed in North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and had strong leads in Michigan, Arizona and Nevada. That translates into a decisive advantage in the electoral college.

It appears that Mr Trump was able to draw support from both urban and rural voters at levels notably higher than in his contest against Joe Biden in 2020. In state after state, Mr Trump performed better than he had in 2020. In Florida, for example, where he won by three percentage points last time, his margin is on track to surge to 12 points. And although opinion-poll aggregates had consistently shown Kamala Harris to be ahead in the national popular vote, it seems that Mr Trump may have won that too. Just as in 2016 and 2020, in other words, the polls underestimated Mr Trump’s support.

What went wrong for Ms Harris? For one thing, her advantage among women voters, on whom Democrats were pinning their hopes, turned out to be smaller than expected. The gender gap, between the votes of men and women, actually narrowed, from 23 points in 2020 to 20, according to exit polls. Among Hispanic voters, Mr Trump made striking inroads, improving his margin by ten percentage points compared with 2020, according to CNN’s exit poll. The trend was particularly strong among Hispanic men: Joe Biden won their vote by a margin of 23 points; this time Mr Trump was on track to prevail among them by a margin of ten points. More broadly, dissatisfaction with high inflation and immigration contributed to a sense among voters that the country was on the wrong track, for which they naturally blame the incumbent. Much as Ms Harris sought to present herself as the candidate of change, she was stuck with her association with the current administration.

As well as the White House, the Republicans also wrested back control of the Senate. It was always going to be hard for Democrats to hold on to their slender majority in that chamber, given that they were defending a disproportionate number of seats (a third of which are up for election in each election cycle). Not only did Republicans take the vacant seat in West Virginia, as expected; they also flipped Ohio and Montana and prevailed in a close contest in Nebraska. The upsets Democrats hoped for in Florida and Texas failed to materialise. Republican control of the Senate smooths the way for Mr Trump to make important appointments—from cabinet secretaries to generals to Supreme Court justices—that require Senate confirmation.

Whether the Republicans complete their sweep by retaining control of the House of Representatives is still not clear. Results in California, to arrive later, will determine that. But Mr Trump, in his victory speech, was confident that the House would be his, too.

“This will truly be the golden age of America,” he declared. Few will question that the country is indeed entering a new age. Whether Mr Trump will truly “heal” America, as he promised, is more debatable. Beyond America’s borders, too, the consequences are momentous. From tariffs to climate change to Ukraine, the world must brace itself for Trump II.

Continue Reading

Economics

Donald Trump claims victory

Published

on

DONALD TRUMP claimed victory in the 2024 presidential election, saying that “America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate”. Pennsylvania was called for the Republican shortly after 2am Eastern time. He had already taken a clear lead in the race, having earlier claimed the swing states of North Carolina and Georgia. Kamala Harris’s path to victory vanished, as she badly underperformed Joe Biden’s showing of four years ago.

Ms Harris’s fortunes shrank remarkably quickly. Within a few hours of the first polls closing it had become clear that she was failing to make headway against Mr Trump. It appears that Mr Trump was able to draw support from both urban and rural voters at levels notably higher than in his contest against Mr Biden in 2020.

Mr Trump was speaking during the early hours of November 6th, at Palm Beach County convention centre, in Florida. In the previous days opinion polls had appeared to show that momentum favoured Ms Harris, whereas the former president had appeared tired and frustrated with his campaign. That makes his apparent success all the more remarkable. Republicans also claimed control of the Senate, as had been widely expected, and seemed well placed to take the House too.

Beyond the key battlegrounds, the picture had been similarly dispiriting for the Harris campaign. In Virginia, which Mr Biden won comfortably in 2020, Ms Harris eked out only a narrow victory, though even there she was lagging behind Mr Biden’s performance in suburban counties such as Loudoun, outside Washington, DC. That was a concerning trend—and a hint of her eventual losses in Pennsylvania. Her prospects in other parts of the Midwest, including in Michigan and Wisconsin, where suburban voters were crucial to her chances, looked no better. In Florida, Ms Harris did worse than Mr Biden, who lost by just over three percentage points in 2020.

A pressing question for Ms Harris—and the Democrats more widely—is why they did so poorly. As incumbents in other parts of the world discovered, voters were evidently ready to punish those in office. In addition, expectations that women would turn out in sufficiently large numbers to elect the first female president proved wrong. Mr Trump, meanwhile, appears to have done enough to fire up non-white voters, including Latinos and black male voters, to broaden his appeal beyond his showing in previous presidential elections. As a political comeback story, it is a striking one.

This story has been updated

Continue Reading

Trending