Nate Silver: GOP Has 60% Chance of Taking Control of Senate

Nate Silver has built a brand as a successful prognosticator of U.S. elections — and fantasy baseball projections, for the record. So Democrats are understandably concerned about his prediction that Republicans will regain the U.S. Senate in 2014. The Huffington Post writes:

Cue the hand-wringing in Democratic circles everywhere: Nate Silver says the GOP will probably re-take the Senate in November’s elections.

After he ran the table in 2012, correctly predicting the electoral outcomes in every single state, Silver has become something of a modern-day oracle to political junkies.

On Sunday, Silver took to his new FiveThirtyEight website—and his new TV home on ABC—to deliver one of his breathlessly awaited prognostications.

Republicans need six seats to regain control of the Senate chamber. How many seats did Silver think the GOP would win? “Exactly six,” he told ABC’s Jonathan Karl.

Silver gave Republicans a 60 percent chance of wresting the Senate out of Harry Reid’s hands—a big blow to the final two years of the Obama presidency. In Silver’s words, that only makes the GOP “slightly favored” to win, and there are still very many months to go until November.

Stossel to Economic Club: Innovation Will Die as Government Grows

John Stossel, former ABC journalist and soon-to-be host on Fox Business Network, has won 19 Emmys for making viewers think. He did just that today as well, addressing nearly 950 attendees of the Economic Club of Indiana luncheon.

The key focus of today’s discussion was health care reform. Stossel notes his hesitation at referring to "Obamacare" as reform due to his contention that it won’t really improve anything. Prior to the speech, a video was shown in which he points out that Lasik eye surgery costs have dropped significantly over time in the free market, and tied that to the fact that the surgery is not covered by insurance (adding that costs of procedures that are covered have climbed over the same span).

"Obama says the current (health care) system is unsustainable, and he’s right," Stossel offered. "Medicare is $36 trillion in the hole."

Stossel referred to the program as a Ponzi scheme, adding, "We locked Bernie Madoff up for this."

He contended that though some may claim Europe has been successful with its government-oriented health care, the continent is reaping benefits of American innovation when it comes to procedures and technology.

"If you ask doctors what have been the most significant developments in the past 20 years… most are from the United States," Stossel said. "Europe is freeloading on American innovation. If the government gets more involved, the innovation will stop."

Additionally, he offered an indictment of community rating, quipping, "If they did that for car insurance, you’d be paying the same as Lindsay Lohan."

Possible solutions from Stossel included allowing insurance companies to offer different types of plans for different people, allowing those plans to cross state lines, and to promote tort reform (touting a "loser pays" system, something he claims the rest of the world already does).

When asked how he developed his "brand" as a libertarian and contrarian in the media, he claimed, "I think it comes from not going to journalism school. I just thought about what I would want to watch." 

For more from Stossel on these and other matters, see his July op-ed from Reason magazine and check your local listings for his new show.

John Stossel, Freedom Enthusiast

If I were you, I’d go ahead and book my tickets now for the Economic Club of Indiana luncheon on October 6 at the Indianapolis Convention Center. The lunch will feature the musings of libertarian journalist/malcontent and winner of 19 Emmys John Stossel of ABC’s "20/20." Stossel, known these days as a champion of free markets (and owner of my second favorite TV mustache, next to that of PGA analyst Gary McCord), actually got his start as a consumer reporter.

Love him or hate him, he’ll probably make you think.

Here’s an excerpt from his blog today as he discusses ABC pulling his piece on health care reform in favor of more Michael Jackson coverage:

Here’s one blog comment, after I reported that ABC will hold my health care report in favor of more Michael Jackson coverage:

"Free market in action. See there Stossel? What’s not to like about that?
Posted by: jan | Jun 26, 2009 5:12:12 PM

p.s. Stossel. You’ve been hoisted on your own petard. Cheerio."

Jan is right. It’s the free market in action. 

Of course, maybe my bosses made the wrong choice.  Maybe more viewers would have tuned in for my health care report.  But the beauty of the market is that if they regularly choose wrong, they will go bankrupt. Networks better at giving the public what we want will take their business.   I’d rather have viewers vote with their remotes than have elites govern our choices, making sure we watch “serious” programming. 

Yes, I am sick of the coverage of Michael Jackson.  I hate it that ABC didn’t run my piece. Free markets sometimes encourage pandering to the masses. I still say, bless the market. The good outweighs the bad.

Free speech means rude obscenity and hate speech.  I treasure free speech too.

Stossel: Stop Hating the Business Community

Reason Magazine, which is just about my favorite publication going today, recently sat down with "20/20" taxpayer/consumer advocate John Stossel. During the interview, Stossel — and his awe-inspiring mustache — aptly articulate his confusion about why people in some circles find it necessary to constantly bash businesses:

This hatred of business — I’m not sure what that’s about. I used to think it was envy, that the college professor is angry that his slightly stupider roommate is making more money than he is because he’s in business. Then you think about the kings and queens of Europe. People didn’t hate them for all their wealth, and their wealth proportionately was vastly greater than now, but they hated the bourgeoisie. They gave them that nasty name. They hated the very people who sold them the things that they needed to make their lives better. What’s that about?

My best guess is that it’s the intuitive reaction that the world is a zero-sum game, that if he makes profit off you, you must’ve lost something. If you don’t study economics, that is how people think. I see why politicians think that way, because that’s how their world works. One wins. Somebody else has to lose. We have a lot of work to do to explain that free commerce doesn’t work that way, that everybody gains.

He also discusses his fondness for free market medicine and school choice, even promoting his web site, stosselintheclassroom.org. Though you may not agree with everything he says (and it’s not entirely G-rated), you can read the transcript of the Reason interview here. At the very least, it should make you think.

Ohio Still Entangled in Lawsuits from Election — the 2004 Election

The Cincinnati Enquirer published an article last week claiming Ohio taxpayers are still "on the hook" for legal fees stemming from lawsuits against the state in the 2004 election. Yikes. It states there were 23 lawsuits against the former Secretary of State, with over $1 million still needed to settle seven of the suits.

All but one of the settled cases involved election law. That one, settled for $73,139, involved a business-records suit in which a Brown County truck driver sued because his Social Security number was posted on a state Web site.

Last week, the Ohio Controlling Board OK’d payment of the latest judgment, awarding five TV networks and the Associated Press $325,521 in attorneys’ fees and expenses from a 2004 case. The lawsuit challenged (former Sec. of State Ken) Blackwell’s order to block ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Fox News and the AP from conducting exit polling within 100 feet of the polls on Election Day 2004.

Brunner, a Democrat, fired some of the outside counsel hired to defend those cases shortly after she took office in 2007. But 13 of the cases remain active in state and federal courts, including a lawsuit that challenged Bush’s narrow re-election.

Pretty brutal considering times are tough and taxpayers need all the breaks they can get. No word yet if anyone plans to sue the Bengals for having to endure their games this season.

Hat tip to our very own Glenn Harkness for the info.

Reporter: No Excuse for Indiana Legislature to Ignore Consolidation

WRTV6 reporter and blogger Norman Cox offered some very sensical commentary over the break, asking the Indiana legislature to "walk and chew gum at the same time" when it comes to consolidating government. Most notably, he believes the legislature should stop making excuses and actually work to implement the township consolidation put forth in the Kernan-Shepard report. He writes:

As soon as Governor Mitch Daniels announced his plan to reorganize county government and get rid of townships, a modified version of last year’s Kernan-Shepard report, House Speaker Pat Bauer immediately shot down the idea, saying that legislators need to spend all their time on salvaging Indiana’s economy, balancing the budget, and keeping critical state functions such as schools afloat. Why? Are our senators and representatives collectively unable to do more than one task at a time?

I suspect the real reason for deep-sixing any reform package is that too many members simply oppose the idea for various reasons. Because they once held the lower-level offices that would be eliminated. Because their friends and supporters now hold them. Maybe because they genuinely believe getting rid of the offices is a bad idea. But don’t use the economy as an excuse.