Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Saturday, January 17, 2026
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 1027)
Culture, Health & Well-Being

After years of cultural health and wellness efforts, reinforced by liberal anti-tobacco legislation, fewer Americans than ever now say they smoke cigarettes. However, while many understand the risks, they also disagree with legislation, with fewer Americans supporting efforts geared towards smoking being outlawed completely.

A new Rasmussen survey found that only 10 percent of American adults report that they currently smoke, which is the lowest in nearly 5 years of Rasmussen surveying the question. More Americans than ever, 60 percent, now say they have never smoked, while 30 percent used to smoke but have at some point quit.

This is also reflected in the fact that most Americans think that even though someone is old enough to vote or die for their country, they’re not mature enough yet to decide whether they want to smoke. Ironic and surprising, sure to some extent, but to Americans it isn’t a matter of freedom, it is a matter of health.

Cigarettes are now viewed more risky to one’s health, with Americans viewing both alcohol and cigarettes to be more dangerous than marijuana. As such, 44 percent of American adults say marijuana should be legalized, with 42 percent saying no. Americans are still relatively divided on whether or not to legalize marijuana, but the latest results actually represent a sleigh, yet statistically insignificant shift toward legalization, as the previous survey showed the public split at 45 percent.

What has remained constant, is that most think it should be up to the states to decide, not the federal government.

As far as alcohol consumption, a significant amount of Americans — 29 percent — say that they never drink alcohol, and 46 percent say that drinking and driving laws are not tough enough.

Overall, the vast majority of Americans — 70 percent — believe they are healthy, however, just over 1 in 3 admits to being overweight, which we know is far from the reality. Most studies say that obesity is rampant, with anywhere from 60 – 68 percent of Americans being overweight.

A new high, 88 percent, of American adults say childhood obesity is “at least a somewhat serious” problem in the United States today, including 49 percent who see it as a “Very Serious” issue. And 73 percent of Americans know that children in the United States are more obese than in other countries.

But not everyone is convinced that government should do anything about it. Though a slight uptick, just 39 percent of American adults would like to see government address the problem, while nearly as many do not, or do not even believe it is a serious problem.

Michelle Obama has made a big issue over school lunches, but just 23 percent think that the federal government should have any say in the issue, with a whopping 92 percent opposing any form of a ban on school lunches prepared from home and brought to school.

October was Breast Cancer Awareness month, and only 1 in 4 American adults think a cure is right around the corner, while over half have contributed to the fight, with 26 percent saying we will find a cure for cancer within the next 10 years. Unfortunately, 40 percent still do not expect a cure for cancer that soon, but a sizable 34 percent are not sure.

Americans overwhelmingly, 81 percent, say they trust their doctor, with 74 percent saying they have a doctor that they see on a regular basis. Most Americans, too, visit a doctor at least once a year — also 81 percent — including 54 percent who visit more than once a year, and the majority of them spend 30 minutes or more with them. Frequent visits are greater than you might expect, with 11 percent visiting the doctor every month, while another 2 percent go several times a month, and just 16 percent rarely or never going to a doctor.

Both Gallup and Rasmussen reported findings showing 53 percent of Americans oppose the president’s health care law — ObamaCare — while the spread for Gallup was a bit wider, with only 41 percent saying they have any favorable inclination toward the law. Pew Research Center showed just 39 percent favored or approved of ObamaCare, while 56 opposed or disapproved.

The People’s Pundit Daily average disapproval rating for ObamaCare now stands at Disapprove +9.

American public opinion on health and wellness

Opinion

WASHINGTON — She who is about to become the most consequential woman in the history of American government will find it easier to be confirmed than it was to be nominated as the next chair of the Federal Reserve Board. Janet Yellen probably was the president’s second choice, but Senate Democrats demonstrated their intention and ability to reject Larry Summers.

Yellen, whose confirmation hearings are expected to begin Thursday, is suited to be the most important nomination of Barack Obama’s second term (unless there is another Supreme Court vacancy). She is experienced and accomplished, and she represents a broad swath of academic thinking about the power of monetary policy and the Fed’s proper role in wielding that power.

Yellen’s confirmation will warm the chilly heart of Wall Street, which fears “tapering” — slowing the $85 billion per month pace of buying bonds, aka printing money — even more than it seemed to fear the possibility of a default. She probably will continue, perhaps even longer than the departing Ben Bernanke would, the “quantitative easing” that is “trickle-down economics” as practiced by progressives:

Very low interest rates drive investors into equities in search of higher yields. This supposedly produces a “wealth effect” whereby the 10 percent of Americans who own about 80 percent of stocks will feel flush enough to spend and invest, causing prosperity to trickle down to the other 90 percent. The fact that the recovery, now in its fifth year, is still limping in spite of quantitative easing is, of course, considered proof of the need for more such medicine.

Easing serves two Obama goals. It enables the growth of government by deferring its costs with cheap borrowing. And it redistributes wealth: By punishing savers, it effectively transfers wealth from them to borrowers.

Although Yellen’s convictions are honestly convenient for the current administration, members of the Senate Banking Committee should question her about what she considers appropriate — and inappropriate — relations between a Fed chair and government’s political officers. The senators should read “Inside the Nixon Administration: The Secret Diary of Arthur Burns, 1969-1974,” and “How Richard Nixon Pressured Arthur Burns: Evidence from the Nixon Tapes,” by Burton A. Abrams in the Journal of Economic Perspectives (Fall 2006).

Various of Burns’ diary entries begin “President called and asked me to come over,” “The meeting at Camp David,” “President telephoned.” Although Burns insisted “there was never the slightest conflict between my doing what was right for the economy and my doing what served the political interests of RN,” RN took no chances. His speechwriter William Safire, in his memoir “Before the Fall,” recounts that Nixon planted negative media stories about Burns — e.g., saying Burns was requesting a large pay increase, whereas he actually suggested a pay cut — and threatened to weaken him by expanding the Fed’s Board of Governors.

In his memoir “Six Crises,” Nixon wrote that in March 1960 Burns, then a campaign adviser, called to warn about an economic slowdown before the November election and to advocate increased defense spending to counter this. Nixon never stopped treating Burns as a political asset. Nixon aide John Ehrlichman, in his memoir “Witness to Power,” described an Oct. 23, 1969, meeting between Nixon and Burns shortly after Burns’ nomination as Fed chairman. Nixon said:

“‘Arthur, I want you to come over and see me privately anytime. … I know there’s the myth of the autonomous Fed …’ Nixon barked a quick laugh. ‘… and when you go up for confirmation some senator may ask you about your friendship with the president. Appearances are going to be important, so you can call Ehrlichman to get messages to me, and he’ll call you.'”

According to Abrams, a University of Delaware economics professor, Oval Office tapes and monetary data suggest that Nixon “demanded and Arthur Burns supplied an expansionary monetary policy and a growing economy in the run-up to the 1972 election.” Nixon carried 49 states.

There is no reason to doubt Yellen’s intellectual integrity; there is reason to wonder where she thinks the autonomous Fed now fits in the government. The Fed seems to be evolving into a central economic planner with a roving commission to right social wrongs such as unemployment. About this Yellen talks with a humane passion that speaks well of her but is more suited to a political official.

There is considerable congruence between Yellen’s economic theories and the policy preferences of the Democratic liberals who secured her nomination. They probably favor quantitative easing forever, and consider themselves her constituents. Is she prepared to disappoint them?

George Will’s email address is [email protected].

WASHINGTON -- She who is about to

Opinion

Gov. Chris Christie won and won big in his bid for reelection, and the significance of his win in deep blue New Jersey would take an entirely separate column to chronicle. As Sean Trende noted, which I will not reiterate in detail, Chris Christie literally made political science history, while proving the national environment for the Republican Party brand is not nearly as bad as the Beltway pundits would like.

Chris Christie also proved that personality matters, a lot. I have written and voiced my concerns over my former governor’s positions on a host of issues, none of which, could honestly be considered “liberal,” however. Contrary to comments made by people who have no idea what they are talking about, Chris Christie wasn’t at all different from Ken Cuccinelli on social issues, for instance.

What was different was his ability to defend his positions on traditional marriage and abortion — both against his opponent and a bias media he is not afraid to bludgeon back — without giving the liberal media too much ammunition.

That said, aside from so-called lessons, Chris Christie also gave the Republican Party a choice to make, which is a choice many conservatives have already begun to debate. For the sake of argument, we can use two conservative columnists to underscore the decision facing the Tea Party and other unaffiliated conservatives who vote Republican.

Kurt Schlichter, whose conservative credentials are not in dispute, I have chosen to represent one side of the argument. In a recent column, which was written before Christie’s reelection, Schlicter wrote:

We would all love to see President Ted Cruz sworn in in 2017, but it probably isn’t going to happen. I wish it would, but we must approach the situation as it is, not as we wish it to be. Someone’s got to run against Hillary. I don’t like it, but I suspect annoying pseudo-conservative Chris Christie has the best shot of beating her.

Now, before you flood the comments with posts about how awful Christie is so that they actually outnumber the spam about how somebody’s cousin makes $4,879 a week working at home, remember: I don’t think Christie winning the nomination is a good thing. I think it’s a likely thing.

In politics, the time from now to the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, is a lifetime. We all remember “America’s Mayor” Rudy Giuliani, whom polling this far out showed cruising to the nomination. But in the end, he couldn’t even manage to win a single primary. And, I myself, have made the argument that Christie could win New Jersey in a contest against Hillary — which by the way, he would have done in that particular electorate by a smidgen, because exit polling underrepresented Christie by just over 4 points.

Nevertheless, Kurt Schlichter is the voice of reason within a somewhat unreasonable movement right now. There are some conservatives who just cannot comprehend the concept that you must win elections to affect policy. In order to argue their inaccurate assumptions they use superficial arguments, some of which, are demonstrably false and fabricated.

Take for instance, John Ransom, who is the Finance Editor for Townhall.com, but represents the reactionary, inaccurate assumption-making side of the debate that also happens to represent a sure path to defeat in 2016. Ransom is only one of many, but his column immediately following the historic reelection of Chris Christie — again, in deep blue New Jersey — was an almost unbeatable example of the sort of foolishness that must be purged from the minds of Republican activists.

The examples of false analogies and misrepresentations in his recent column were so numerous, we must take a few and address them one-by-one.

Don’t get me wrong: For an East Coast Liberal, Christie makes a heck of a conservative, just as Mitt Romney made a heck of Republican in blue state Massachusetts.

But the media love affair will last only until he becomes the Republican nominee, and then he’ll just be another Tea Party extremist, like John McCain and Mitt Romney were to the media.

For starters, the Tea Party didn’t even exist when John McCain was running and, just as a reminder, Mitt Romney was the conservative alternative to McCain before Ransom and others let the media play them, by duping them into thinking a national organization with party support makes you a sell out.

And P.S. Mr. Ransom, not to burst your bubble, President Ronald Reagan lobbied for and won the lion’s share of establishment endorsements on his path to becoming to the Republican nominee in 1980.

Second, there is no media love affair with Chris Christie, and frankly never was because, unlike both John McCain and Mitt Willard Romney, Chris Christie is a populous candidate with working class values and a working class vocabulary. And that wins majorities among Latinos (or, at least the tradition 40+ percent share), working class whites, women, and just in case you need it spelled out, general elections.

Does John Ransom consider the cover of TIME Magazine, which depicts Christie as a fat elephant, a “love affair”?

I’ve previously detailed, far before his reelection, why the comparison to Christ Christie and past establishment GOP candidates is intellectually simple, and just flat-out false. However, most importantly, whether the party runs a populous candidate, such as Presidents Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush, is the dominant factor that determines a Republican’s performance among minority voters.

Chris Christie, like George W. Bush in many battleground states back in 2004, outperformed Republican candidates among minorities, winning 20 percent of the black vote and 54 percent of the Hispanic vote. In a general election, if a Republican presidential candidate wins even 11 percent of the black vote (Bush won 13 percent of the black vote nationwide, but 16 – 20 percent in OH, PA, FL, etc.), then it won’t even be a close election.

I would like to know what position on what issue John Ransom qualifies Chris Christie as “an East Coast Liberal.” Aside from the ridiculous accusation — based on one out-of-context comment in one interview — that Christie doesn’t want to repeal ObamaCare, despite all previous statements and his refusal to setup the exchange in New Jersey, I am really not sure.

Could he be referring to gun ban legislation that passed both the state’s legislative bodies, you know, the one Gov. Christie vetoed? That’s more than we can say for Ransom’s ideal example of conservative reform in Colorado, the state that had to throw out their Senate president in a double off-year election, when hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters stay home, because they passed far greater gun restrictions than New Jersey ever even proposed.

Perhaps Mr. Ransom is talking about Christie’s fight against the teacher’s union, which would have been a complete conservative victory had the New Jersey Supreme Court not struck down most of the governor’s unbelievable accomplishment? Maybe he meant taxes, particularly property taxes, which have been at the lowest level the state has seen since the 1980s? Or, perhaps the increased privatization of school transportation that Christie managed to convince Democrats must be done for the good of the state?

He even won over my mother-in-law who wanted to kill him when she first dealt with the many school reforms.

Now my mother-in-law, who comes from a long line of traditional working class Democratic voters, is quick to vigorously defend Gov. Christie against full grown burly union men who hang around the Elks Lodge and VFW. In fact, Christie enjoyed a plurality of those voters, as well.

I could go on citing issues after issue, but I will leave you with a final word from Kurt Schichter, who really nailed it this time. You can open your mind and see the bigger, electoral victory picture, or you can side with false, inaccurate assumptions being made by people pandering to the angry wing of the party. After we lose, I know I can pee on your head and tell you it’s raining. Then, at least I can have a good laugh, even though I’ll be sadly watching my country’s future fade away.

So let’s pick the right fight, and let’s secure our flanks as best we can. Can we conservatives win a presidential fight in 2016? Probably not. But we can absolutely win down-ticket, where our strengths – activism and effort – really paid off in 2010. Let’s let the New Jersey governor secure our flanks and draw the fire and the ire and the lucre of the liberals. We will work in his figurative shadow, and they will never see us coming.

Chris Christie gave the Republican Party a

News, World

A man walks among the debris of destroyed houses in the aftermath of the super typhoon in Tacloban. (Credit: CNN)

Officials are now expecting a “very high number of fatalities” after Super Typhoon Haiyan, one of the strongest on record devastated the central Philippines.

A senior regional police official and a city administrator in the hardest hit city of Tacloban, which is a coastal city located in the central Philippines, both say the death toll there could reach 10,000 people.

Regional police chief Elmer Soria said he was briefed by Leyte provincial Gov. Dominic Petilla on Saturday, and that he was told there were about 10,000 deaths on the island alone, mostly the victims of drowning and from collapsed buildings.

Tacloban city administrator Tecson Lim said that the death toll in the city, alone, “could go up to 10,000.”

Earlier, the Philippine Red Cross told Reuters and other organizations it estimated at least 1,200 were dead in Tacloban, which is located about 360 miles southeast of Manila, and 200 deaths were expected in Samar Province.

Interior Secretary Max Roxas, who had arrived in the city of Tacloban on Saturday. said it was too early to determine how many people had died following Typhoon Haiyan, which is expected to hit the Vietnamese coast on Sunday afternoon.

“The rescue operation is ongoing. We expect a very high number of fatalities as well as injured,” Roxas said. “All systems, all vestiges of modern living – communications, power water, all are down. Media is down, so there is no way to communicate with the people in a mass sort of way.”

Rescue crews reported difficulty in delivering food and water to affected areas due to damaged roads and fallen trees. 

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement that America “stands ready to help,” and the president of the European Commission said a team had been sent to “contribute with urgent relief and assistance.”

As previously reported by People’s Pundit Daily, World Food Programme spokeswoman Bettina Luescher, said the U.N. group was pooling together its global resources to send enough food to feed 120,000 people. “These high-energy biscuits will keep them alive,” she said.

She said, the world body was also dispatching IT teams and telecommunications equipment to help other humanitarian groups to coordinate their efforts once they actually reach the difficult to reach area.

She noted that much of the infrastructure — including basic roads, bridges, airports, and ports — have likely been destroyed or damaged and that the government could use help with logistics.

Luescher pleaded for financial support from the international community and directed those wishing to donate to http://wfp.org/typhoon.

“Those are families like you and me, and they just need our help right now,” she said.

Officials are now expecting a “very high

News, World

Tacloban, Philippines — Update: Authorities expect a “very high number of fatalities” after Super Typhoon Haiyan, one of the strongest on record devastated central-coastal Philippines, cutting communications and severely damaging an airport in one of the hardest-hit regions.

A senior regional police official and a city administrator in the typhoon-ravaged Tacloban city in the central Philippines say the death toll there could reach 10,000 people, according to the Associated Press.

Read Full Story 

Earlier — One day after Super Typhoon Haiyan ripped through the Philippines, officials expect that the death toll will reach 1,200 or more, with the vast majority killed in Tacloban.

“We estimate 1,000 people were killed in Tacloban and 200 in Samar province,” said Gwendolyn Pang, who is the secretary general of the Philippine Red Cross. The two coastal areas where Haiyan hit first Friday across the archipelago, have been hit the worst.

The Red Cross said it would have more precise numbers for the media by Sunday, but the government’s official toll as of Saturday evening was 138 dead, 14 injured and 4 are missing.

But in reality, experts say that it will take days to get the full scope of the damage wrought by a typhoon described as one of the strongest to make landfall in recorded history.

“Probably the casualty figure will increase as we get more information from remote areas, which have been cut off from communications,” said Tomoo Hozumi, a UNICEF representative for the Philippines.

The storm affected 4.3 million people in 36 provinces, and mass casualties happened despite government preparations, including the evacuation of more than 800,000 people.

On Saturday, local Philippines time, there were more than 330,000 people who were in 1,223 evacuation centers, prompting the government to accept a U.N. offer of international aid.

The National Risk Reduction and Management Council said more than 70,000 families were affected, and nearly 350,000 people have been displaced — both inside and outside evacuation centers. The typhoon has literally destroyed thousands of houses, said the Management Council.

Tacloban has, a city of roughly 220,000 people, by far suffered the greatest amount of devastation, said Lt. Jim Aris Alago, who is an information officer for Navy Central Command. “There are numbers of undetermined casualties found along the roads.”

Thus far, officials have already found more than 100 bodies on the streets of the coastal city, which is depicted above in pictures taken by CNN correspondents.

“We expect the greatest number of casualties there,” Alago said.

Capt. John Andrews, deputy director of the national Civil Aviation Authority, said that another 100 Tacloban residents were injured.

The speed of the storm — which was 41 mph — actually minimized what could have been far more devastation. Still, many bodies were found in open as others emerged from their homes, including several at a chapel, which CNN reported one woman wept over.

The Philippine Red Cross succeeded in getting its assessment team in to Tacloban, but logistical challenges have prevented the Red Cross from getting its main team of aid workers and equipment to the city of Tacloban, says Philippine National Red Cross Chairman Richard Gordon.

“We really are having access problems,” he said. The city’s airport was shut to commercial flights, and it would be three days before a land route was open, so organizers were considering chartering a boat for the 1½-to-2-day trip, he said. “It really is an awful, awful situation.”

People’s Pundit Daily will continue to update readers on the situation, but as you may imagine, a lot of people need a lot of things, including basic provisions.

World Food Programme spokeswoman Bettina Luescher, said the U.N. group was pooling together its global resources to send enough food to feed 120,000 people. “These high-energy biscuits will keep them alive,” she said.

She said, the world body was also dispatching IT teams and telecommunications equipment to help other humanitarian groups to coordinate their efforts once they actually reach the difficult to reach area.

She noted that much of the infrastructure — including basic roads, bridges, airports, and ports — have likely been destroyed or damaged and that the government could use help with logistics.

Luescher pleaded for financial support from the international community and directed those wishing to donate to http://wfp.org/typhoon.

“Those are families like you and me, and they just need our help right now,” she said.

Tacloban, Philippines -- One day after Super

Policy

According to Gallup, media coverage of the problems with the ObamaCare exchange website is the least of the president’s and Democrats’ problems. As of now, too few uninsured Americans (18 percent) — who are the primary target population for the exchanges — have even attempted to visit one of ObamaCare exchange websites.

Among uninsured Americans, only slightly fewer — 22 percent — say they even have plans to get insurance through the exchanges. The finds by Gallup are very much in line with reports and Secretary Sebelius’ own comments, which now claim enrollment will be “very low.” People’s Pundit Daily recently reported that documents provided by insurers showed only 5 sign-ups in the D.C. area.

These results are based on a series of questions Gallup asked uninsured Americans about the health exchanges from Oct. 23-Nov. 6.

Gallup had previously found that less than one-half of uninsured Americans  — 44 percent — who reported plans to buy insurance coverage said they would purchase it through an exchange, while roughly 1 in 4 said they were “more likely” to pay a fine, rather than get insurance. While these findings, as noted by Frank Newport at Gallup, certainly help explain some of the abysmal numbers of uninsured Americans who have attempted to access the exchange websites, it doesn’t nearly suffice statistically.

“Still,” says Newport, “the fact that less than a quarter of uninsured Americans who say they plan to get insurance through an exchange have visited one so far suggests that other factors are at work.”

Perhaps, uninsured Americans are holding off until the problematic websites are fixed, or they may just be pushing off the decision until later. Even worse, however, two very probable possibilities Gallup didn’t even ask.

Perhaps, uninsured Americans cannot even afford insurance through the exchanges because, unless you are an ideological blind fool, everyone is well-aware that the so-called Affordable Care Act is making health insurance not-so affordable, particularly to middle Americans who are unfairly targeted to carry the burden.

Or, perhaps, the publicized ObamaCare website problems have instilled a deep distrust in the government — or, a lying president — to keep safe the sacred and private information exposed when an uninsured American uses the exchanges.

Nevertheless, the law is accomplishing none of the stated goals. Overall, about 17% of U.S. adults interviewed between Oct. 23 and Nov. 6 reported having no health insurance, similar to the percentages found in the first three quarters of this year. And the insurance is not at all affordable despite subsidies, unless of course, you are eligible to receive free substandard care under Medicaid.


According to Gallup, media coverage of the

Polls

President Obama is seeing further erosion in his approval rating nationwide, and the decrease in support is widespread. The latest poll from Pew Research Center shows 39 percent of Americans approve of the president, while a whopping 56 percent disapprove.

President Obama once arrogantly remarked that he didn’t want his presidency to resemble the presidency of Bill Clinton, because he was inconsequential. Obama commented that he would rather have a presidency that resembled the tenure of Ronald Reagan, because he “fundamentally transformed” and shaped American politics for the decades that would follow.

Unfortunately, for him, he is headed for history book chapters that will write his presidency resembled neither successful, popular president. “The latest national poll by the Pew Research Center, conducted Oct. 30-Nov. 6 among 2,003 adults, finds that Obama’s second-term job ratings have followed a similar downward trajectory as those of his predecessor, George W. Bush,” Pew stated.

Ironically, as Pew Research noted, his presidency currently resembles his predecessor, whom he continued to relentlessly blame for his own failures throughout the 2012 presidential campaign.

In 4 out of 5 issues the survey focused on, the Obama approval rating is underwater, save for terrorism, where 51 percent approve and 44 percent disapprove. Obama’s approval ratings on the economy have been more negative than positive for more than 4 years, which is not just a Pew finding, but the current measurement — 31 percent — is the worst ever measured during his presidency.

obama approval rating

Looking ahead to some of the battleground races in 2014, the presidents approval in the Midwest is more in line with his approval in the South, more so than any other part of the country, with just 29 percent approving and 65 percent disapproving. For comparison, the president’s approval in the South is only 24 percent, with 71 percent disapproving.

For the president or his party to be competitive in the 2014 House and Senate races, the president’s approval rating in the Midwest must be closer to the Northeast than the South, though shockingly, that wouldn’t be must better either. The Northeast gives the president the largest share of nationwide support, but Obama can only muster 42 percent approval in the Pew Research survey, with 54 percent still disapproving.

In the West, which we must remember encompasses populated California, just 32 percent approve of President Obama, and 63 percent disapprove. At this point, there isn’t a region in the country President Obama would find an overwhelming welcome, which may help to explain why McAuliffe was polling far better than his eked-by performance.

Rest assure, other Democrats in red and battleground states are watching closely. Despite pundit and talking head claims, Democrats are and should be very concerned about this trend continuing because, even more so than the Generic Congressional Ballot, presidential approval rating is the most liable indicator of the in-party’s midterm woes.

Just prior to the 2010 midterm election, public polling Obama approval rating measurements were hovering in the low-to-mid 40s, while many Generic Ballots were actually showing the Democrats with a 1 – 3-point lead. We all know how that worked out.

View More Polling 

obama approval rating

President Obama is seeing further erosion in

Politics

WASHINGTON –  President Obama is crisscrossing the country giving his ShamWow pitch to salvage his landmark health care law, including a visit to deeply red Texas. But abysmal new data showing only 5 people in the D.C. area have signed up for ObamaCare, suggests the president should have perhaps started right where he was.

The enrollment data, which was requested by Republican lawmakers, was provided by the four health insurance companies participating in the D.C. exchange and released Friday by Republicans Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah.

“A lot of Americans are getting cancellation notices from their current health care plan but they haven’t been able to enroll in a new plan,” Sen. Grassley said in a written statement. “The limbo and uncertainty are stressful for them, as they’ve been describing in emails to my office. The chaos imposed on so many people is reason to at least delay the individual mandate, if not outright appeal it.”

Grassley and Hatch had contacted CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield, Kaiser Permanente, UnitedHealthcare and Aetna in response to the Obama administration’s clear effort to keep the numbers secret. CareFirst reported two enrollees from Oct. 1 through Oct. 30. Kaiser Permanente reported three enrollees from Oct. 1 through Oct. 31. Neither UnitedHealthcare or Aetna had any enrollment data as of Nov. 4 and Oct. 24 respectively.

“With numbers like these, it’s no wonder the Obama administration hasn’t wanted to release how many people have signed up for ObamaCare,” Sen. Hatch said. “With data from D.C.’s four participating health plans in, there’s been a whopping five people enrolled in the city’s exchange. That’s right – five. Whether it’s significant problems with the website, people being forced off the coverage they had or skyrocketing costs, these numbers are even more proof of what a disaster ObamaCare is and why it should be delayed.”

Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told both Senators this week that they now should expect to see enrollment figures that were “very low.” But numbers this low have even managed to astonish the most ardent supporters of limited government, because it shows a level of inefficiency and incompetence that even exceeds the expectations of those who most loudly argue “no, government can’t.”

WASHINGTON – President Obama is crisscrossing

Polls

During the 2012 Republicans National Convention, Ron Paul succeeded in adding an audit the Fed plank to the party platform, and Americans agree.

Americans overwhelmingly favor a public audit of the Federal Reserve and a sizable number feel the Fed chairman has too much power over the economy.

The latest Rasmussen survey found that 74% of American Adults favor a move to audit the Fed and making the results available to the public, while just 10 percent opposed an audit, and 16 percent were not sure.

The finds are the latest in a string of Rasmussen surveys surround public opinion of the Fed and support for the audit the Fed movement. Perhaps it is a skepticism over the Fed having so much power, but coupled with a general lack of confidence in the industry they oversee is certainly not helping.

During the September debate over a change of leadership, a survey found voters skeptical of the Federal Reserve’s independence and believed the nation’s central bank is overly influenced by the president and big bankers.

While 42 percent have “at least a somewhat” favorable opinion of the Federal Reserve, another 48 percent view it “unfavorably,” including 11 percent with a “Very Favorable” opinion and 19 percent with a “Very Unfavorable” opinion. Nevertheless, Americans generally lack confidence in the system, itself.

Over 5 years since the financial collapse, and 46 percent of American Adults say they are “at least somewhat” confident in the stability of the U.S. banking industry, but only 7 percent are “Very Confident.”  with 50 percent lacking confidence in the banking industry today. Among the 50 percent lacking, 14 percent are “Not At All Confident.”

Clearly, the Republican Party has thus far missed out on a chance to capitalize on their populace credentials, no doubt because some in the GOP establishment disagree with the new generation of Republicans, who are far more in line ideologically with both Ron and Rand Paul on issues surrounding the Federal Reserve.

Americans, as a whole, are also more in line with the populace party message coming from libertarian-minded Republicans. Though the conservative ideology is fundamentally anti-cronyism, many party leaders have resisted the grassroots move to embrace what is clearly a winning strategy.

Voters hate crony capitalism in the United States, and 70 percent of Likely U.S. Voters think government and big business work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors, while just 13 percent disagree. Therefore, it is no surprise that most Americans want to end government subsidies for these ‘too big to fail’ institutions and half want to see those megabucks broken up.

A March survey found that 50 percent of U.S. Adults favored a plan to break up the 12 megabanks, which currently control about 69% of the banking industry. Twenty-three percent (23%) oppose breaking up the largest banks, while another 27% are undecided.

During the 2012 Republicans National Convention, Ron

Economy

The October jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics found the economy added 204,000 jobs, The unemployment rate rose by 0.1 percent to 7.3 percent, matching economists’ forecasts. The labor force participation rate – a measure of the proportion of the population employed or seeking employment – dropped to 62.8 percent, which is the lowest level since March of 1978.

While the report widely beat estimates the economy would add 125,000 jobs in the month of October, the data tells a few concerning tales.

The U.S. economy supposedly grew faster than expected over the summer, according to government data released Thursday. The 2.8 percent annual reported growth rate is — on its face — the best showing since last fall. But had the economy experienced a 2.8 percent increase in gross domestic product, then we should expect to see far more than 204,000 jobs in October, and far more than reported in the summer months.

That is, in large part, due to the government literally changing how they measure GDP. In reality, much like the October jobs report, the GDP report was “deceptively weak,” said Alan MacEachin, corporate economist at Navy Federal Credit Union. “You drill down below the surface, and you can see what’s going on.” MacEachin had lowered his forecast to just 110,000 jobs in the October jobs report.

“This is not an economy that is firing on all cylinders,” said James Marple, senior economist for TD Economics. So how did they miss the mark?

One reason, which is worth mentioning before looking further into the data, is that economists have forgotten their own foundation. They truly expected the government shutdown to have a significant negative impact on the jobs numbers. It didn’t, and it won’t, because money doesn’t simply disappear when the government loses control of it, but rather moves to or stays in the far more efficient private sector.

Economists are looking for a red herring, which in this case is the government shutdown, but that cannot statistically account for the increase in unemployment. The number of people who reported being on temporary layoff increased by 448,000, which includes furloughed federal employees, not driven by them, and these were classified as unemployed on temporary layoffs under the definitions used in the household survey.

But the civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in October. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent over the month. Total employment, as measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics household survey, fell by a whopping 735,000 over the month of October. And the employment-population ratio declined by 0.3 percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment decline can only be partly attributed to a decline in federal government employment, not driven by it.

In other words, as John Pethokoukis at AEI brilliantly prophesied how Republicans will phrase it, “the government shutdown was a non-event.” How do Americans, who have anecdotal evidence presented to them everyday, feel about the economy?

According to Rasmussen, who tracks regularly, “Americans are more pessimistic about the U.S. job market than they have been in nearly 2 years.” Rasmussen found only 19 percent of American Adults believe the job market is better than it was one year ago, which is down 6 points from 25 percent in September, and the lowest finding since December 2011. Also, now 38 percent believe the job market is worse today than it was a year ago, up 7 points from their previous survey and the most pessimistic assessment measured by Rasmussen since October of last year. A substantial 39 percent expect the job market to remain about the same.

This is very much in line with Gallup, whose index of consumer confidence plunged 16 points in October, the biggest monthly drop since the poll began in 2008. Many economists and news outlets would like to peg the bad economic data on the government shutdown, but as shown above, the data just doesn’t support this theory.

Americans were hurting long before the shutdown, and will continue to hurt, especially because the implementation of ObamaCare will not force companies to comply and increase cost, which will cost the economy more jobs and confidence.

The Rasmussen Employment Index which measures worker confidence fell another point in October to a new low for the year.

At 81.2, worker confidence is down one point from September and down 13 points from May of this year.  This is the lowest level of confidence measured — a new low from the previous month before the shutdown — since last November.

A preliminary reading on U.S. consumer sentiment from Reuters and the University of Michigan checked in at 72.0 for November from 73.2 in October, falling short of expectations of 74.5 and is the lowest reading since December 2011.

The bottom line, is although there seems to be a concerted effort to blame the government shutdown for a failed economic model, the data doesn’t agree, and neither do the American people. As far as the 204,000 jobs created in the month of October, it isn’t enough, and even former Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee agrees. The U.S. economy needs 250,000 jobs monthly just to keep pace with population, and far more to achieve the 2.8 percent GDP growth the government tried to sell us this quarter.

The October jobs report released by the

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe