I’m cheering for gridlock tomorrow on Election Day. As a political independent and small government advocate, I prefer when the two major parties can’t convince each other to provide costly solutions to problems government almost never can solve.
We came close to gridlock two years ago. The Georgia Senate seats went to a special election and the Democrats won both of them, giving them a 50/50+VP majority. I think the USA economy would be healthier today – with less inflation – if we had a split legislature.
The financial ‘experts’ agree with me, although we all know how little ‘expertise’ counts for these days. An article in USA Today suggests that the stock market averages a solid +13% growth the year after a divided Congress is elected.
I’m guessing we will return to growth in 2023, because if nothing else we’ll anniversary the bad numbers from this year. My old MegaCorp boss used to say, “the best way to have a good year is to wrap a bad year.” The S&P 500 sits at -20.4% YTD this year, so it would seem like there is no place to go but up.
On a state level, we’ve had legislative gridlock for the last 4 years and I expect that will continue. Minnesota has a big $8B budget surplus (about 15% of spending) that the two parties will have to fight over. If one party gets control, we’ll end up with a lot of partisan pork, I’m sure.
What are you ‘cheering for’ on Election Day?
Image Credit: (c) MrFireStation.com
MrFireStation 
I am also cheering for Congress to provide adult supervision AKA assisted living for the White House. We need Congress to follow their “Commitment to America” which reads to me a lot like the “Contract with America” that was the playbook when the Republicans took Congress for the first time in 40 years with Newt Gingrich. The “Contract with America” brought the US its first (sort of) balanced budget in decades. I used the term (sort of) because government was collecting excess Social Security ‘contributions’ at the time, that they issued IOUs in the form of Treasury Bills for and subsequently spent instead of saving.
The US does not need the Republican Congress to waste political capital impeaching the President. Simple math tells us that it is a waste of time if they have less than 67 true Republican Senators who are willing to vote to impeach.
The founders of our country did not want an efficient government where it was easy to pass laws. They wanted gridlock AKA checks and balances. The last time we had this gridlock was a great time to be an American, especially so if you were an investor.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think if the GOP win the House, but not the Senate, we will end up with a lot more House “investigations”, which they’ll use to try to embarrass Biden with scandals before 2024. That seems to be the M.O. both parties will use going forward.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Biden doesn’t need any help getting embarrassed. He is doing a fine job on his own. One area of concern are government agencies that seem to think it is okay to be politically motivated.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Economically, I’m guessing things will be looking brighter in 2024 than they are in 2022. It’s inevitable that we turn out of this economic malaise at some point. That will be played as a big “win’ for Biden to get re-elected. The GOP House will want to come up with some other dirt on him in the meanwhile.
LikeLike
Bring the gridlock. Austerity by default to get inflation under control
LikeLiked by 1 person
With spending bills starting in the House, that could really work!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gridlock, gridlock, gridlock!
LikeLiked by 1 person
More gridlock – more better! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gridlockest!
LikeLiked by 2 people
What concerns me the most is the lack of quality 40 year olds getting into politics. The young people in congress who get attention are on the extremes such as “the squad” on the left and Bieber, Marjorie Taylor Greene on the right. Say what you want about Pelosi, but she gets deals done. McCarthy after criticizing Trump over January 6 then kissed the ring.
The last few elections for the White House were geezers. We have a minimum age of 36 for President which I support, but should a 75 year old be allowed to run? I’m not sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When 36 was set minimum age, it was 2/3 of expected lifespan. Today, someone in their 70’s expected life span is another dozen years. Can experience and wisdom benefit our country? Certainly! We have so little of either anymore.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m not a fan of McCarthy or Pelosi. I think Pelosi is well over your potential 75 year limit, isn’t she? She’s been in Congress for decades and decades.
LikeLike