Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 1, 2024

Walmart retreats from healthcare, closing clinics across US

 For the last few years, Walmart has been promising to disrupt the US healthcare sector with a national network of clinics providing low-cost care and telehealth services. Now, it is reining back on those plans.

The retail giant has said it will close all 51 of its Walmart Health clinics across the country and shut down its telehealth service, built with its acquisition of MeMD in 2021, saying “there is not a sustainable business model for us to continue.”

The company said the decision was taken on the back of “the challenging reimbursement environment and escalating operating costs” that were making it impossible to run Walmart Health as a profitable business.

The clinics – which provided medical, dental, and behavioural health services – are clustered in five states, namely Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Illinois, and Texas.

It’s not a complete retreat, as some health services will be provided through its 4,600 pharmacies and 3,000 optician centres, a network which also underpins its recently launched clinical trials business. However, there’s no doubt it is a major reversal and comes just weeks after Walmart said it planned to open up more than 20 new clinics this year.

Other big retailers like CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, and Amazon have also tried to provide healthcare services, and so far the track record is mixed, reflecting the difficulties of bringing real change to an entrenched sector.

Walgreens has been closing dozens of its VillageMD primary care clinics and took a $5.8 billion charge in connection with the business in its last quarterly results, for example, although CVS Health has said it is committed to growing its network of Oak Street Health clinics. Amazon, meanwhile, has been adding additional sites to its One Medical service, bought for $3.9 billion in 2022, but has been slashing staff to cut costs.

The Walmart decision has raised concerns that some patients may face a gap in access to healthcare, particularly those on lower incomes and no insurance or high deductibles. The company said when it announced its first clinic in 2019 that a key objective was to provide access to people in underserved communities.

In its statement on the decision, Walmart said its “priority will be ensuring the people and communities who are impacted are treated with the utmost respect, compassion, and support throughout the transition,” adding: “In the coming days, we are focused on continuity of care for patients and providing impacted associates with respect and assistance as we begin the closing process.”

https://pharmaphorum.com/news/walmart-retreats-healthcare-closing-clinics-across-us

'Biden directs spy agencies to share more intel with private sector over China, Russia threats'

 President Biden is directing U.S. spy agencies to more proactively share intelligence with the private companies handling critical American infrastructure, to guard against risks from foreign adversaries like China and Russia, or criminal groups and hackers.

The new directive is part of a national security memorandum on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience that Biden issued on Tuesday. The memo serves to update guidance first introduced in 2013 during the Obama administration, identifying new security procedures for 16 critical infrastructure sectors to guard against natural disasters and man-made threats. 

“The policy is particularly relevant today, given continued disruptive ransomware attacks, cyber-attacks on US water systems by our adversaries and their frequent and repeated testimony of the FBI director and other senior administration officials who have sounded the alarm about the ways our critical infrastructure is being targeted by our adversaries,” Caitlin Durkovich, Biden’s deputy Homeland Security Advisor for Resilience and Response, said in a call with reporters previewing the memo. 

The Biden administration, drawing on lessons from its warning about Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, said they are tasking intelligence agencies to lean into declassifying information to share with the private sector, or share information with private companies with the proper clearance, to better guard against security threats. 

“I know that the IC [intelligence community] is looking to make sure that if the information can be safely declassified, then it is,” said Jen Easterly, Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Easterly said that the IC declassified potential retaliatory attacks by the Russian government to share with critical infrastructure owners and operators leading up to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in Feb. 2022. 

She said that work is becoming more urgent with “serious” threats from the People’s Republic of China. The Biden administration warned in February that Chinese cyber actors are pre-positioning themselves in U.S. critical infrastructure to launch potential cyber attacks, in an operation named Volt Typhoon.

“We have held extensive briefings at various levels of classifications with cleared sector personnel to ensure that they are aware, that we’re aware — in 2022 of the Russian threat — and are aware now of the serious Chinese threats to our critical infrastructure,” Easterly said. 

“Specifically pre-positioning to disrupt or destroy critical infrastructure in the event of a major crisis.”

The memo also tasks the Department of Homeland Security with overarching responsibility for coordination among the different federal agencies, directing DHS to submit to the president a biennial “national risk management plan” summarizing the work on mitigating risks to the nation’s critical infrastructure. 

Also, the memo seeks to codify and require minimum security and resilience requirements for critical infrastructure entities that earlier were only voluntary. 

“Voluntary approaches to enhance critical infrastructure security and resilience have meaningfully mitigated risk over the past decade, but more must be done to ensure the Nation’s critical infrastructure is secure and resilient against all threats and hazards,” the memo reads. 

“The Federal Government must focus on increasing the adoption of requirements that address sector, national, and cross-sector risks to critical infrastructure.”

The memo also reaffirms the 16 critical infrastructure sectors, identifying which government agencies should be liaising with which sectors. 

“This is part of what we refer to as our all hazards approach to the resilience of the nation,” said Durkovich.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/4633131-biden-directs-spy-agencies-share-china-russia-threats/

Judge rules some North Carolina abortion pill restrictions unlawful

 A judge ruled Tuesday that some of North Carolina’s restrictions on the distribution of abortion pills are unlawful, citing arguments over the drug mifepristone that bypassed federal regulators.

In her order, U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles in Greensboro granted a partial victory to the plaintiff, a physician who sued the state over the regulations for concerns around the pill that were not addressed by the Food and Drug Administration, The Associated Press reported.

Some restrictions on the drug that have not been expressly reviewed and rejected by the FDA — such as requiring an in-person consultation 72 hours before an abortion, an in-person examination, and an ultrasound before prescribing the drug — are allowed to remain in the state, Eagles wrote.

The judge noted the state-level laws also hinder Congress from creating a federal regulation for mifepristone.

“The Court finds and concludes that to the extent North Carolina law imposes safety restrictions on the distribution of the drug that the FDA has implemented and then later affirmatively rejected and removed, those laws frustrate the congressional goal of establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework under which the FDA determines conditions for safe drug distribution that do not create unnecessary burdens on the health care system or patient access,” Eagles wrote.

The lawsuit was filed Jan. 25, 2023, by Dr. Amy Bryant, alleging it was unconstitutional for North Carolina’s government to impose regulations on medication abortion because the federal government already had through the FDA.

Following Eagles’s ruling, Bryant released a statement saying she was pleased the judge recognized the state can’t impose all restrictions on the FDA-approved medication.

Bryant said the state’s restrictions “second-guess or interfere with the FDA’s expert judgment, and that many of North Carolina’s restrictions on mifepristone are preempted — including requirements that mifepristone be prescribed, dispensed, and administered in person,” and the mandatory in-person follow-up appointments and laws that restrict nurse practitioners from prescribing the drug.

“We are carefully reviewing the ruling and the implications it has for providing care to patients in North Carolina,” she wrote.

North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein (D), a gubernatorial candidate who has supported abortion access throughout his campaign, was named a legal party in the case. He blamed GOP legislators who enacted the law for making it “harder for women, especially in rural North Carolina, to get medication abortion,” per the AP.

The ruling is the latest in efforts to target abortion rights after Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court in June 2022 — ending a federal right to abortion access. North Carolina’s Republican-led General Assembly enacted new laws in 2023 that moved the ban on abortions from 20 weeks of pregnancy down to 12 weeks.

Restrictions were also placed on medication abortions and violating some rules could result in criminal, civil and professional penalties, the AP noted.

The FDA approved mifepristone in 2000 as a drug that could end pregnancy, when used with a second drug, misoprostol. The FDA announced in 2021 that women would be able to get the drug via an online consultation and through the mail, but the Supreme Court heard arguments in March for advocates who want to further restrict the drug.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4635451-north-carolina-abortion-pill-restrictions-unlawful-judge-rules/

Dems, MoveOn launch early efforts to persuade undecided voters

 Democratic groups are ramping up persuasion efforts to convince undecided voters to cast ballots for President Biden. 

In an election where enthusiasm is low and voters are lukewarm on support for both parties’ candidates, Democrats are focusing on early persuasion in battleground states to help sway so-called surge voters — the part of the electorate who sat out during the 2016 presidential race but backed Biden during the 2020 cycle. 

The Democrats say they’re seeing a need to launch these efforts earlier than usual because of the unprecedented race between Biden and former President Trump and threats from third-party candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 

This week, for example, the progressive activist group MoveOn is intensifying the persuasion phase of a $32 million election program, which will engage those much-desired voters, sources tell The Hill.

Biden lags Trump across several polls, which have strategists saying the early contact is essential.

As part of their efforts, MoveOn members will participate in house parties beginning later this week to strengthen local connections with voters. Those parties will focus on what they say is one of their marquee issues: abortion. 

Organizers at MoveOn say issues like abortion and the fight for democracy have shown to be motivating for Democratic-leaning voters. 

MoveOn’s persuasion efforts will be handled by three “personalized contacts,” the sources say, which include phone, postcards and through in-person door-knocking, the sources say.

In 2020, the group took part in get-out-the-vote efforts much later in the cycle, in August. But it didn’t focus as much on persuasion, something they say is needed during this election.

“We believe that this strategy is key to doing the important work to successfully persuade voters and supply them with the information they need to protect their progress and their freedoms from Donald Trump and MAGA,” said Britt Jacovich, a press secretary for MoveOn. 

Other Democratic groups —including Indivisible and the Renegade Collective — and even unions including AFL-CIO are also expected to engage voters early through persuasion efforts. 

One source familiar with the AFL-CIO’s efforts says there is a specific focus on the Rust Belt states and having discussions on health care, wages and other issues.

“There’s so much noise and the only way to cut through that noise is conversation,” the union source said. “People don’t want the political speak.”

The efforts come as Trump continues to lead Biden in a string of recent polls. A CNN poll released earlier this week, for example, shows Trump ahead with 49 percent support to 43 percent in a head-to-head match-up. 

And in key battleground states — Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Michigan, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — the former president has a slim advantage over Biden, according to surveys published Tuesday from Emerson College Polling/The Hill, but the difference is within the survey’s margin of error. 

The polls have added to fears among Democrats who say more work should have been done in the previous presidential elections to turn out more Democrats.

“Ask Hillary Clinton about 2016 and whether or not voter contact is important,” said Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons. “You have to do voter contact, and you have to do it early.”

“The president and his team can’t do it alone. You need the echo chamber to tell the story,” Simmons added. “You need the surround sound telling voters what the administration has done, what it wants to do and what’s at stake in this election.” 

But Republicans say Democrats won’t move the needle by talking only about certain issues like abortion. 

“They have to be able to talk about other issues, and they seem stuck,” said Republican strategist Doug Heye. “For all the attention abortion has gotten in Arizona, you might forget from a D.C. newsroom that it’s a border state.”

Heye said the persuasion is only effective if they’re talking about the issues “that voters are clamoring for solutions on,” including the economy, inflation and the border. 

But Democrats say persuasion is particularly important now that Biden is president. 

“When you’re in power and your side controls the White House, there is a tendency for your side to become complacent, and that’s where the turnout message becomes important,” said Rachel Bitecofer, a political strategist and author of the new book, “Hit ‘Em Where it Hurts: How To Save Democracy By Beating Republicans At Their Own Game.” 

“At the end of the day, the field work is important,” Bitecofer said. “A lot of these surge voters are not paying attention to the daily news … The more contacts those people have to vote and vote Democrat, the better.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4633858-democrats-launch-persuasion-efforts-undecided-voters/

Stefanik files ethics complaint against Jack Smith

 Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) filed an ethics complaint against special counsel Jack Smith on Tuesday, accusing the prosecutor overseeing the federal investigations into former President Trump of trying to “unlawfully interfere with the 2024 presidential election.”

Stefanik, the House GOP conference chair and a close Trump ally, filed the complaint with the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, arguing Smith is trying to “rush” Trump’s federal election subversion case.

“It’s obvious to any reasonable observer that Jack Smith is trying to interfere with the 2024 election and stop the American people from electing Donald Trump,” Stefanik said in a statement. “At every turn, he has sought to accelerate his illegal prosecution of President Trump for the clear (if unstated) purpose of trying him before the November election.”

Smith should be censured for violating the Justice Department’s manual, she argues, citing a section that says attorneys may “never select the timing of any action … for the purpose of affecting any election.”

“Smith’s conduct has brought disrepute to the Department of Justice and the entire federal government, and the … Office of Professional Responsibility should impose the discipline that such conduct warrants,” Stefanik said in her statement.

The New York Republican points to Smith’s actions in court to support her claims of political animus, including asking the Supreme Court to weigh Trump’s immunity claims before they had yet been weighed by an appeals court.

The complaint is unlikely to prompt any action from the Justice Department, however, as Smith’s case kicked off with an August 2023 indictment, some 15 months ahead of the presidential election.

Smith’s office declined to comment on Stefanik’s letter.

Though an unwritten policy, the Justice Department encourages prosecutors to follow the “60-day rule” — avoiding any action that might influence an election in the 60 days prior to it.

A prosecutor on Smith’s team handling Trump’s documents case in Florida recently made clear they see the “60-day rule” as applying to investigative steps or filing a case that could influence an election, as opposed to continuing efforts in an ongoing case.

Jay Bratt, the prosecutor, told the judge in that case that Smith’s team had consulted the department’s Public Integrity Section on the portion of the manual cited by Stefanik.

“That provision does not apply to cases that have already been charged, that are being litigated. It doesn’t apply to setting a trial date. We are fully in compliance,” Bratt told the court.

Trump is of course the first presidential candidate to test the limits of that rule by facing an ongoing prosecution while again running for office.

Stefanik’s complaint otherwise echoes a series of arguments already made in court by Trump’s own attorneys, saying they are being overwhelmed by the extent of evidence they must review in the case.

She also picks apart Smith’s filings to the Supreme Court. Smith at one point urged the court to leapfrog the appeals court by taking up Trump’s argument he is immune from prosecution as a former president, an unusual move that if successful would have sped resolution of the issue. 

“Aside from the upcoming election, what ‘compelling interest’ does the public have in the prompt resolution of this case?” Stefanik wrote.

She also criticized Smith for making a filing in the case after District Judge Tanya Chutkan had paused proceedings on it. While the deadlines in the case were lifted, her order did not prohibit new filings. Still, after complaints from Trump, Chutkan ordered Smith’s team to first seek permission before making any new filings.

Tuesday’s ethics complaint is the latest example of Stefanik, who is considered a potential Trump running mate, publicly demonstrating her loyalty to the former president.

In November, Stefanik filed an ethics complaint against Judge Arthur Engoron, who oversaw the former president’s civil fraud trial, accusing him of “inappropriate bias and judicial intemperance.” She called on him to resign.

Then, in December, Stefanik asked for an ethics investigation into U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, a federal judge who oversaw cases connected to Trump and Jan. 6 rioters.

Stefanik has kept the door open to serving as Trump’s running mate, telling NBC News in a January interview “I, of course, would be honored to serve in any capacity in a Trump administration,” when asked if she would serve as his vice president.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4631023-stefanik-jack-smith-ethics-complaint/

'US losing ground to Russia in geopolitical battle over Africa'

 The expected withdrawal of U.S. forces from Niger will endanger U.S. counter-terrorism operations and hand Russia more influence in Africa as American and western ties on the continent fracture. 

Around 1,000 troops in Niger are expected to eventually withdraw from the country after the conclusion of ongoing high-level talks between Niamey and Washington following a military coup in the African country last year, the Pentagon has said

A forced withdrawal from Niger is a major setback for U.S. military as it fights against Islamic extremist groups across the Sahel, a volatile region that stretches from Senegal in western Africa to the Red Sea. 

At risk for the U.S. is not just keeping ISIS, Boko Haram and other insurgent groups in check, but also the growing influence of Russia, Iran and China, all of which are jockeying for power in Africa along with the West.

But Western powers like the U.S. and European Union seem to be losing the battle in the Sahel.

“There’s been this hollowing out of all of the international security cooperation,” said  Joseph Siegle, director of research of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies at the Pentagon-funded National Defense University. “They were all part of a broader regional effort to try to support those countries.” 

Siegle attributes the shift to a series of governments being toppled by military juntas and an anti-western disinformation campaign supported by malicious actors in Russia or other hostile nations. But he said closer ties with Russia will harm those countries in the future, because Moscow is not investing economically into those nations.

“These countries are going to feel huge strains, and they’ll continue to try to put on a good face to [show] this is working, but it’s not something they’re going to be able to sustain,” he added. “Something’s going to have to give here.” 

The immediate risk of a Niger withdrawal is that the Sahel could erupt into more violence as the U.S. and France, along with other western powers, face eroding influence with military juntas that have close ties with Russia and other rival powers. 

Threats from al-Qaeda and ISIS-linked insurgent groups have already spiked in other countries ruled by military governments, including Mali, which booted French forces in 2022 but has since seen terrorist groups double their territorial control.

Jacques Du Preez, analyst at the South African research and intelligence firm In on Africa, warned that a hollower U.S. presence in the Sahel could create conditions for an Islamic extremist resurgence like the rise of ISIS in 2014. 

“It’s the most active frontier in the global conflict against terrorism outside of the Middle East,” he said of the Sahel. “The place that al-Qaeda and ISIS both focused in on was the Sahel.” 

“They understand that this is a very vital region [and] very strategic region that if they could get a foothold,” he explained, “it could allow them to have a very big impact, not just in Africa, but also in surrounding regions like Europe.” 

Du Preez also stressed that other nations in the Sahel region are at risk if instability rises, including Nigeria. 

A near-term risk is Chad, where the U.S. is repositioning some troops after a military coup about three years ago. Talks are ongoing, however, and are expected to pick up after elections beginning May 6. 

Chad’s leader, Mahamat Idriss Déby, has closer ties with the U.S. than he does with Russia. 

Déby will likely prevail in what is expected to be a sham electoral process and would have no reason to push the U.S. out of the country, experts say. Still, Chad faces other political factions inside of the country that are closer with Russia, posing a potential longer term threat. 

“The Russians have thrown a lot in with many of [Déby’s] potential challengers,” said Du Preez. “There’s a clear move to isolate Chad and attempt to install their own regime.” 

While experts see the rise of juntas — and sidelining of western powers — as creating instability that could empower terrorist groups, these same military leaders have cited the inability of governments to suppress extremist threats as justification for their takeovers. 

The Niger government fell in a July military coup that paved the way for Gen. Abdourahamane Tchiani to seize power, promising to more effectively counter terrorist threats.

Instead of turning to the West, Tchiani has fostered relations with Russia’s private military company Wagner Group, which has ties to Moscow and has long exploited the resources of African nations. 

The Wagner Group was previously led by founder Yevgeny Prigozhin, who staged a short-lived mutiny against Russian President Vladimir Putin and was killed in a plane crash last August. 

Putin has since moved to exert more influence over the mercenary group, which gives Moscow a low-profile foothold in Africa. Wagner Group appears to have rebranded into a successor in the newly formed Africa Corps, which sent military trainers to Niger in April. 

Russia also has close relations and security agreements with Mali and Burkina Faso, both of which are controlled by military juntas, and Libya, a country torn between two major rival factions. The Central African Republic is also close to Russia and is reportedly discussing an agreement to host a Russian military base. 

A scaled-back U.S. presence in the Sahel is likely to encourage more Russian influence in the region, particularly if terrorist threats grow.  

Siegle, from the National Defense University, said the “main way that Russia has gained influence is at the expense of the West.” 

“A lot of this is an information war that’s happening,” he said. “But its entry point are these military leaders who are authoritarians that are seeing Russia as their strongest international patron to keep their hold on power.” 

It’s not just Russia: China also has its hands in Africa. 

The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, a project of large-scale investments primarily for infrastructure in Asia and Africa, has financed loans to African nations that the West has accused of being predatory to give Beijing military, financial and political influence. China, however, only has one base in Africa, in Djibouti.  

Iran is also another regional player, backing a proxy group called the Islamic Movement of Nigeria and the government in Sudan, which is waging a destructive civil war against a rebel group. 

Last year, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi traveled to Kenya, Uganda and Zimbabwe to shore up ties with all three nations. 

Some experts see a populist, anti-western movement that is organic in nature — even if fueled in part by China and Russia and exploited by military juntas — and centered on long-standing grievances with formerly western colonial powers, but also disenfranchisement with the current state of conditions.

Abigail Kabandula, director of the Africa Center at the University of Denver, said the U.S. is losing its influence in Africa partly because Washington has failed to address terrorism, a threat she added has “mushroomed” in the past decade. 

“The question that a number of [people] propose is why is the West or the French in the region if we still have the same problems and the problems have actually grown?” she said. “It’s a matter of rethinking the whole counterterrorism approach in the region. Whether we have the U.S. or not, it’s about how counterterrorism is being addressed.” 

Kabandula also said the U.S. has relied largely on security arrangements with African nations in the Sahel and failed to focus more cooperation on economic or other needs, creating a “power vacuum around the continent.” 

“The U.S. has not supported a number of countries in the things that they wanted to pursue,” she said. “A number of African countries have really asked for other things like development, development projects, development aid, or infrastructure development. Those have not come forth from the U.S. and so African countries [look] to China for help.” 

Will Walldorf, a professor studying politics and international affairs at Wake Forest University, said he supports the U.S. withdrawal from Niger because it can allow Washington to recalibrate its approach to Africa and counterterrorism. 

Walldorf said the U.S. focus on counterterrorism is “missing the heart of the problem” and that it was “staggering” how terrorism has surged under U.S. watch. 

“The lack of good governance, the lack of meeting the everyday needs of citizens in West Africa, where we know food insecurity is extreme, has been really the core driver of terrorist recruitment in the region,” he said.  

“If you can get to those sort of core issues,” he added, that would be “on a different playing field then what we’re offering now in terms of kind of a force-first approach.” 

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4634201-us-losing-ground-russia-africa-niger/

Biden’s worst-case economic scenario is unfolding at the worst possible time

 Last Thursday, the Bureau of Economic Analysis released its advance estimate for 2024’s first-quarter real GDP growth. At 1.6 percent, it is the worst quarterly performance since the economy contracted by 0.6 percent almost two years ago in the second quarter of 2022. This was a growth level one-third below economists’ expectations of 2.4 percent. It is also a precipitous drop from 2023’s fourth quarter rate of 3.4 percent and 2023’third quarter rate of 4.9 percent.

This slower growth comes on the heels of higher inflation. The March report on overall prices showed the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers rose 3.5 percent over the last year — 3.8 percent when core inflation (minus food and energy) was considered. That figure was higher than any since September 2023 and marked the third consecutive monthly increase.  

Then on Friday, came more bad inflation news, this time on personal consumer expenditures excluding food and energy. This is the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge, and in March it rose 2.8 percent compared to a year ago — the same as in February and above expectations. 

This jujitsu juxtaposition of higher inflation and lower growth must not be underestimated. Gone is the charade of someone who has effectively never worked in the private sector telling working Americans how good the economy is. Joe Biden, who loves to harken back to blue-collar Scranton roots, should have known better. Americans now do.

There is but one real measure of the economy for them: Am I putting more on my family’s table? Inflation’s insidious impact is its cumulative effect. Just because inflation’s rate of increase slows (which it isn’t) does not mean its past effect is wiped away (which it’s not). Now the economic growth that the administration hoped would at least outstrip inflation’s increase — and reverse some of that cumulative effect — is not.

The expectation has been for some time that there would be a soft landing from inflation’s lofty heights. The Federal Reserve would begin cutting its interest rates and the slowing economy would pass the baton to lower interest rates that would keep the economy from falling too far. It was the proverbial economic unicorn. And it was going to be seamless.

However, Biden’s high inflation — spurred on by his profligate spending over three-plus years, has given the Fed no opening to begin lowering rates. Expectation has given way to hesitation. Now, rate reductions are not expected for months (if at all this year). 

Biden does not have months to spare. He has six — total — before November. While six may be a lifetime in politics, it is just two quarters in economics. It is the difference between chronological and geological time. Economists can wait; politicians cannot.

Biden’s trajectories leading into these six months are not good. Excessive inflation continues. Could it stay high longer — or even go higher still? The economy is slowing. Quickly. Could it go lower still — perhaps even negative?

The stock market was stoked for months by its rate-cut expectations. When these have not come, it refocused on an unexpectedly strong economy — just recently its evidence appeared to be strong corporate earnings reports. Last Thursday’s GDP report argues the economy is no longer strong. Where do the markets look now for reassurance against money being withdrawn from them?

Biden is already down in the polls. According to Real Clear Politics average of national polling, his overall job approval rating is just 40.1 percent. His approval rating on the economy is lower still: just 39.4 percent.  

Both ratings were compiled while the administration and much of the establishment media said Biden’s economy was good. Now that the data say otherwise, where do those Biden ratings go? Already voters see the recent upswing in prices; soon, they are likely to feel the economy slowing. 

Facing these, Biden has few solid options. He has no prospect of getting more spending through Congress — the crutch he has used throughout his presidency, and which helped spike the still persistent inflation. He can, and undoubtedly will, try to curry favor with more targeted giveaways — sector-specific rules and regulations and student loan forgiveness. 

But these do not have impacts as broad as the economy itself. There is a reason the economy is the most important political variable: it affects everyone. 

Perhaps it is too early to call two reports stagflation. Two data points are a snapshot, not a trend. But their contents — high inflation and low growth — are precisely what stagflation is if they continue.  

Biden has six months to see if they will be. 

J.T. Young was a professional staffer in the House and Senate from 1987-2000, served in the Department of Treasury and Office of Management and Budget from 2001-2004, and was director of government relations for a Fortune 20 company from 2004-2023.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/4633147-bidens-worst-case-economic-scenario-is-unfolding-at-the-worst-possible-time/