Wondering on Wednesday 1/24/24

 

Ready... set... wonder!

If you've been paying attention to financial news lately, you're likely aware that the stock market is booming. The Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P have all hit or neared record highs,  sometimes on consecutive days. 

Remember how big a deal that was during the Trump administration? He talked about it all the time in interviews and on social media. I found over 140 tweets or retweets from him raving about how high the market was, how many records it hit, and how fabulous it was when he was president. For example, here's one from December 31, 2020.

That was then, but this is now, and with Joe Biden in the White House, Trump is no longer excited about the market's success. Rather, he's telling his supporters that "the stock market is making rich people richer" - as if that's ever been a bad thing for an alleged billionaire. 

So, I'm wondering, am I supposed to be happy with my 401(k) doing so well, or am I supposed to be mad about rich people? 

*** *** *** *** *** 

This week marked the fourteenth anniversary of Citizens United, the case in which the Supreme Court decided that there are no limits on how much money corporations, non-profits, unions, trade organizations, and the like can spend buying elections, because limiting their money limits their speech.

According to an article from The Hill, 

AdImpact, a political advertising tracking firm, anticipates $10.2 billion will be spent on political advertising across broadcast, cable, radio, satellite, digital and CTV during the 2024 cycle, which would make it the most expensive in history.

And, if the estimate proves true, that'd be over a billion dollars more than was spent during the 2020 cycle, the previous record (emphasis added). The article also notes that

Outside groups have dumped nearly $318 million into 2024 presidential and congressional elections as of Sunday, OpenSecrets reported.

And how does that compare to 2020? It's "more than six times" what was spent during the same time period in '20 (emphasis added).

I won't bother wondering what this does to the voices of regular folks like you and me; I mean, that's pretty obvious, right? We're not actually muzzled, but our voices are surely being drowned out. 

I do wonder, though, why the amount living, breathing people can spend is limited. After all, we're the ones who actually vote.

*** *** *** *** ***

An article from HuffPost informed us that Ron DeSantis ran a pretty expensive campaign.

The DeSantis campaign and Never Back Down combined had roughly $150 million to work with. Much of that came in the form of an $82.5 million transfer from the Florida political committee that DeSantis used to run for governor in 2019 and 2023. It’s highly likely that money dried up in the waning days of his presidential campaign, as many of the governor’s donors had already maxed out their contributions while his donor base did not show signs of expanding.

I'm not surprised he dropped out of the race; many folks think he was really prepping for 2028 and a run against Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA). The two debated last November, which is when Newsom famously said, "Neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024." 

As DeSantis half-heartedly endorsed the front-runner, Trump told us he would officially retire the 'Ron DeSanctimonious' nickname. I'm half-heartedly wondering if no longer having to hear the name is why DeSantis suspended his campaign - and if his donors, and their wallets, wish he had done it sooner.

*** *** *** *** ***

One more about politics, and then we'll move on - I promise. I've been talking about endorsements quite a bit lately, I know, but did you see this one?

Nikki Haley receives major endorsement from Judith Sheindlin ahead of New Hampshire primary

You may be wondering, as am I, how many people knew who Judith Sheindlin was without watching the video or googling her. And I can't help wondering how much influence Sheindlin has? I guess she's still on TV in syndication, but her show ended in July 2021. And finally, I wonder how on earth this can in any way be considered "a major endorsement."

*** *** *** *** ***

It's FAFSA season - that time when families with high school seniors sit down and try to figure out how they're going to fund further education for their kids. While there are reports of issues with the form, the lateness of it, and most importantly with the calculations, that's not what I'm wondering about. 

Rather, I'm thinking about what happens long before FAFSA - when parents fight their way through the challenge of finding available and affordable childcare - and long after, when the kids have been out of college for 10, 15, or 20+ years and still owe on their student loans. 

Here's what I'm wondering: why don't we hear the same complaints about childcare tax credits as we do about student loan forgiveness? If the argument against the former is that we shouldn't have to bail out people who can't afford college, I'd expect the same people to argue that we shouldn't have to bail out people who can't afford to raise their own children.

*** *** *** *** ***

I'll close with a silly observation. I follow a couple of 'old house' pages on social media, which share photos of houses built as far back as the late 1600s, with most being around 100 years newer than that.

Followers of the page are very passionate; for people who complain, and for those who love what they see, everything is fair game:  windows, walls, floors, and ceilings; rugs, art, and collectibles, and where they are displayed;  and most especially, the kitchens and bathrooms. The most common complaints about those two rooms are that everything is too modern, the wrong material, in the wrong spot, or just plain ugly.

I haven't officially commented on this yet, but I wonder why no one ever complains about the houses having indoor plumbing and electricity in the first place?

*** *** *** *** ***

What's on your wondering mind today?

Quick Takes (v65): Disrespecting Campaign Donors

Most people don't pay a lot of attention to the Federal Election Commission or its members. And, it would seem, at least one of the FEC commissioners doesn't pay a lot of attention to how campaign funds are used. 

Here's the background: Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) asked the FEC for a ruling on whether he can use campaign funds for childcare "when campaigning or traveling in his capacity as a member of Congress." I added the emphasis so folks don't have to spend a lot of time telling me that candidates can use campaign contributions for child care when they're running for office.

Now, before I get to the meat of this post, I'll share aa comment from the meeting to consider Swalwell's question. It's from Trey Trainor, one of the commissioners,  who thinks it's beyond the pale for a Congressman to want to, you know, do his job, even when it includes taking a foreign trip. Here's what Trainor said about that.

To be really honest with you, I’m actually going to pass judgment on it. I think it’s abhorrent that Congressman Swalwell would have such a young child and want to leave them in the care of someone else for a weeklong trip overseas.

Egads! In this day and age, that's the conversation Trainor wans to have?  

Well, it got worse. After the meeting a fellow commish, Ellen Weintraub, tweeted about Trainor's comment, saying in part

I have never seen a requestor treated so disrespectfully by a member of this Commission. We do not 'pass judgment' on the personal lives of those who come before us asking for guidance.

And, because #thisisus, Trainor responded, misspelling Swalwell's name in the process.

I've never seen campaign donors treated so disrespectfully! The Republic will persevere even if Swallwell (sic) doesn't get all the junkets he'd like.

Way to adult there, Mr. Trainor.

Now, I don't know what Trainor did before joining the FEC, but based solely on this exchange, I'm guessing it  didn't have much to do with campaign finance stuff. So, in the interest of furthering his (and everyone else's) knowledge,  I'm happy to share some examples of campaign donor abuse. 

Oh, wait, sorry - campaign donors "being treated so disrespectfully!" 

Below are just a few of the itemized expenditures reported by the Onondaga County District Attorney - my very own DA-for-Life - William Fitzpatrick, back in 2005 - 2013. Fitz was first elected as DA in November of 1991.

• Restaurants and bars: at least $63,000
• Golf courses, golf clubs, golf tournaments: at least $57,000
• Donations to other political campaigns or political parties: at least $53,000
• Polls, political consultants: at least $10,000
• Ads: at least $64,000

But wait - there's more!

• Over $93,000 of the expenses were paid outside of Onondaga County; of that, close to $37,000 was spent outside New York State, in places like New Mexico and Idaho and Hawaii, Virginia and Tennessee and Florida (and, oddly, in Canada).
• One restaurant - Peter Lugar's Steakhouse in Brooklyn - received over $29,000 of Fitz's campaign funds.
• Fitz reimbursed himself over $61,000 out of campaign funds.

If Trainor's got himself all tangled up in a knot over Rep. Swalwell's junkets, I wonder what he'd think of stuff like this.

  

Maybe these'd be OK with him, as long as there were no babysitters involved?