Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The Mass. Election and The Direction of the Economy

I prescribe to the following theory. Having the executive branch and the House and Senate, all controlled by a single party, has seldom been good for the economy and investors.

Reagan had great success with the economy when the House and Senate were controlled by the other party. Clinton had success when the other party had some control as well. In both cases, Reagan and Clinton were required to govern from what the media calls the "center." Let me keep this simple. Obama, due to the current control of all branches of government, is nowhere near the center. All the polls indicate Americans are not in majority support of what he wants.

Remember, what I am looking for is what "combination of politicians" in Washington will allow for:
1) The representation of the majority of Americans on a given topic.
2) The economy and stock market to recover vs. enter another recession.

If the country gets lucky in Mass., we may just end up with what can get the focus back on what Americans want: A group of politicians in Washington, that due to shared control, is forced to compromise and forces Obama to govern from the center like Clinton did. I have said for a year, give me Clinton back!

If the above happens, it will be a first step in improving my outlook for the short and long term future of the global economy. That said, the trillion dollar deficit spending authorized by essentially both parties is a LARGE, LOOMING issue, that whoever wins in Mass. does not address.

Too much government control by a single party has seldom = a good economy.

No comments:

Post a Comment