Senior Women Web

Author: SeniorWomenWeb

  • Fed Reserve Governor Michelle W. Bowman: The Changing Structure of Mortgage Markets and Financial Stability

    November 19, 2020Governor Michelle Bowman

    At the “Financial Stability: Stress, Contagion, and Transmission” 2020 Financial Stability Conference hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland and the Office of Financial Research, Cleveland, Ohio 

    Right, Chair Jerome H. Powell swears in Michelle W. Bowman for her second term, accompanied by Wes Bowman, as a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 

    It seems especially relevant to look closely at financial stability at this time, as the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the US economy and has tested the resilience of our financial system over the past nine months. Efforts to contain the virus triggered an economic downturn that was unprecedented in both its speed and its severity. Early on, more than 22 million jobs were lost in March and April, and though a significant number of people have returned to work since that time, we still face a shortfall in employment relative to its level before the onset of the pandemic.

    Fortunately, both our economy and our financial system were very strong when the pandemic hit. Most banks began 2020 with higher capital ratios and more liquid assets than they had in previous downturns, which helped them remain a source of strength in March and April. As the crisis intensified in March, serious cracks emerged in several areas of financial intermediation crucial to the health of the economy, including Treasury markets, corporate and municipal bond markets, money market mutual funds, mortgage real estate investment trusts, and residential mortgage markets. Today I am going to focus on the strains in mortgage markets.

    To address strains in mortgage finance, the Federal Reserve took prompt action to purchase large quantities of agency-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities (MBS), because as we learned during the previous financial crisis, the proper functioning of mortgage markets is necessary for monetary policy to support the economy. Unfortunately, the problems in mortgage finance in this crisis were broader than just the MBS markets. This crisis period has also revealed a number of new — or, in some cases, renewed — vulnerabilities related to lending and loan servicing by nonbank mortgage companies, which I will refer to from here on as mortgage companies.

    These vulnerabilities were not entirely a surprise to me. When I served as a banker and, subsequently, as the state bank commissioner in Kansas, I saw firsthand the increasing share of mortgage companies in mortgage origination and servicing as well as some of the weaknesses in the mortgage company business model. And in my role as a Board member with a focus on community banks, I frequently hear about the issues that have caused some regional and community bankers to pull back from originating and servicing mortgages. I view this as a significant problem, because I believe firmly that a healthy financial system must have a place for institutions of many different types and sizes that are able to serve the varying needs of different customers.

    I will begin today by describing the evolving role of mortgage companies in mortgage markets and the risks to financial stability that activity entails. I will then focus on developments in mortgage markets during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how actions by the Federal Reserve and the other parts of the government helped stabilize financial markets and prevent more severe damage to the economy. Finally, I will explain how vulnerabilities associated with mortgage companies could pose risks in the future, and I will review ongoing work across the regulatory agencies to monitor and address these vulnerabilities. I will end by enlisting your help. Figuring out how to achieve a balanced mortgage system — one that delivers the best outcomes for consumers while being sufficiently resilient — is a highly complex task that could benefit from the insights of those of you here today.

    The Role of Nonbank Financial Institutions in Mortgage Markets
    In the 1980s and 1990s, the share of mortgages originated by mortgage companies increased considerably, as expanded securitization of mortgages allowed mortgage companies, which lack the balance sheet capacity of banks, to compete with banks in the mortgage market. The role of mortgage companies increased further in the 2000s with the growth of the private-label mortgage market, where MBS sponsors are private firms without government support. But the last financial crisis and the prolonged housing slump that followed led to a sharp contraction in mortgage company activity. In 2006, mortgage companies accounted for around 30 percent of originations; by 2008, at the bottom of the housing crisis, this share had fallen to around 20 percent.

    In the past few years, the market share of mortgage companies has risen sharply, well surpassing their share before the housing crisis. Today these firms originate about half of all mortgages, including more than 70 percent of those securitized through Ginnie Mae and the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.1 Nonbanks also service roughly three-fourths of mortgages securitized through Ginnie Mae and about one-half of those securitized through the GSEs.2 Although some mortgage companies specialize in origination or servicing, most large firms engage in both activities.

  • Over the Last Century, Life Expectancy in the United States and Other OECD Nations Has Risen at a Rate of Three to Four Months Per Year.

    Cemetery

    Laurel Hill Cemetery, one of many historic Philadelphia cemeteries, photo via Creative Commons

    By Yasmin Anwar, UC Berkeley News

    The gap in life expectancy between disadvantaged and privileged Americans has widened over the past half-decade, but so has the gap between the most affluent Americans and their peers in other prosperous nations, according to a new UC Berkeley study.

    Even average residents of wealthy countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), such as Japan, were on par with or outliving affluent Americans in 2018, said UC Berkeley demographer Magali Barbieri, associate director of the Human Mortality Database and author of the report funded by the Society of Actuaries.

    “Life expectancy for the most affluent American men was one year less than for the average Japanese man,” Barbieri said. “Meanwhile, the gap between average Japanese women and the most affluent American women reached nearly 3.5 years.”

    Using US Census and other national vital statistics data, Barbieri tracked mortality rates for residents in dozens of US counties based on education, income, employment, occupation, housing costs and quality, and other socioeconomic characteristics. She calculated the average lifespans of men and women, separately, in all these counties for every year from 1999 to 2018.

    Notably, Barbieri discovered that, in 2018, men in the most affluent US category could expect to live at least seven years longer than those in the most disadvantaged US group (80.5 vs. 73.2 years). For women, that gap was six years (84.9 vs. 79.9 years). The socioeconomic gap was particularly high for children and for adults between the ages of 40 and 60.

    By comparison, the socioeconomic gap in life expectancy in 1999 amounted to 5.5 years for men and 3.4 years for women.

    Although she did not factor in data for 2019 and 2020, which is still being collected, mortality rates in the US and worldwide are projected to rise sharply due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Over the last century, life expectancy in the United States and other OECD nations has risen at a rate of three to four months per year.

    But Barbieri found that, after 2010, life expectancy in the US leveled off and then decreased from 2014 to 2017, going up slightly in 2018. The higher death toll, she said, is partly due to the opioid epidemic and unsuccessful efforts to control cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death in the U.S.

    While the most disadvantaged US counties saw a rise in mortality between 2010 and 2014, the life expectancy of affluent Americans increased only slightly over that same period.

    As for how the lifespan of Americans compares to that of other industrialized countries, Barbieri finds the US is losing ground.

    “Overall, Americans are lagging further and further behind in life expectancy, compared to similarly wealthy democratic countries where mortality has continued to decline at a relatively fast pace over the first two decades of the 21st century,” Barbieri said.

    “Only the 10% of Americans in the most affluent U.S. counties can now expect to live as long as their peers in similarly wealthy nations,” she added. “And, when compared with Japan where the length of life is particularly long, and where progress has continued unabated, all socioeconomic categories of Americans are falling further and further behind.”

    FULL REPORT: Mortality by Socioeconomic Category in the United States

  • Envision Color: Activity Patterns in the Brain are Specific to the Color You See; NIH Research Findings Reveal New Aspects of Visual Processing

    Illustration of different spiral color stimuli

    Researchers at the National Eye Institute (NEI) have decoded brain maps of human color perception. The findings, published today in Current Biology, open a window into how color processing is organized in the brain, and how the brain recognizes and groups colors in the environment. The study may have implications for the development of machine-brain interfaces for visual prosthetics. NEI is part of the National Institutes of Health.

    “This is one of the first studies to determine what color a person is seeing based on direct measurements of brain activity,” said Bevil Conway, Ph.D., chief of NEI’s Unit on Sensation, Cognition and Action, who led the study. “The approach lets us get at fundamental questions of how we perceive, categorize, and understand color.”

    The brain uses light signals detected by the retina’s cone photoreceptors as the building blocks for color perception. Three types of cone photoreceptors detect light over a range of wavelengths. The brain mixes and categorizes these signals to perceive color in a process that is not well understood.

    To examine this process, Isabelle Rosenthal, Katherine Hermann, and Shridhar Singh, post-baccalaureate fellows in Conway’s lab and co-first authors on the study, used magnetoencephalography or “MEG,” a 50-year-old technology that noninvasively records the tiny magnetic fields that accompany brain activity. The technique provides a direct measurement of brain cell activity using an array of sensors around the head. It reveals the millisecond-by-millisecond changes that happen in the brain to enable vision. The researchers recorded patterns of activity as volunteers viewed specially designed color images and reported the colors they saw.

    The researchers worked with pink, blue, green, and orange hues so that they could activate the different classes of photoreceptors in similar ways. These colors were presented at two luminance levels – light and dark. The researchers used a spiral stimulus shape, which produces a strong brain response.

    The researchers found that study participants had unique patterns of brain activity for each color. With enough data, the researchers could predict from MEG recordings what color a volunteer was looking at – essentially decoding the brain map of color processing, or “mind-reading.”

    “The point of the exercise wasn’t merely to read the minds of volunteers,” Conway said. “People have been wondering about the organization of colors for thousands of years. The physical basis for color — the rainbow — is a continuous gradient of hues. But people don’t see it that way. They carve the rainbow into categories and arrange the colors as a wheel. We were interested in understanding how the brain makes this happen, how hue interacts with brightness, such as to turn yellow into brown.”

    As an example, in a variety of languages and cultures, humans have more distinct names for warm colors (yellows, reds, oranges, browns) than for cool colors (blues, greens). It’s long been known that people consistently use a wider variety of names for the warm hues at different luminance levels (e.g. “yellow” versus “brown”) than for cool hues (e.g. “blue” is used for both light and dark). The new discovery shows that brain activity patterns vary more between light and dark warm hues than for light and dark cool hues. The findings suggest that our universal propensity to have more names for warm hues may actually be rooted in how the human brain processes color, not in language or culture.

    “For us, color is a powerful model system that reveals clues to how the mind and brain work.  How does the brain organize and categorize color? What makes us think one color is more similar to another?” said Conway. “Using this new approach, we can use the brain to decode how color perception works – and in the process, hopefully uncover how the brain turns sense data into perceptions, thoughts, and ultimately actions.”

    References

    Rosenthal IA, Singh SR, Hermann KL, Pantazis D, and Conway BR. “Color space geometry uncovered with magnetoencephalography.” Published online Nov 16, 2020. Current Biology.

  • Jo Freeman Writes: The Trumpsters are Coming; Donald Trump’s Devoted Followers Demand Four More Years

    Million Maga March, Washinton DC

    Crowds at Washington D.C.’s Million MAGA March on November 14, 2020; crowds (top) at Freedom Plaza.  taken by Cronkite News’ Chase Hunter

    Cops stand guard during the Million MAGA March

     A Metropolitan Police officer stands between pro-Trump protesters and counter protesters outside the Supreme Court on Saturday. (Photo by Chase Hunter/Cronkite News)

     
    Around twenty thousand people came to Washington, D.C. to proclaim their love for Donald J. Trump on Saturday, November 14. Called the ‘Million MAGA March‘, the numbers were nowhere near a million, but were higher than all the DC Biden/Harris protestors and partyers put together over the five days between the election and the media’s declaration that Biden had defeated Trump to be the 46th President.
     
    A rally was called for noon at Freedom Plaza, to be followed by a march to the Supreme Court.  The MPD blocked off 30 square blocks of streets, just as they had on election day.   Around 10:00 a.m. a Trump caravan circled Freedom Plaza so he could see his supporters before going to Virginia to play golf.  He should have stuck around for the speeches; they were everything he loves to hear.
     
    I first went to BLM Plaza, just to check it out.  I saw only a few Trumpsters, but the signs that had decorated the top of the fence on Friday – LOSER, YOUR FIRED, FAILURE – were gone, as were most of the BLM signs that had decorated the entire length of the fence.  I had photographed them only a week before.  
     
    I had seen Trumpsters there on Friday who had come early from far away and were looking for something to do.  They got into a few arguments with anti-Trumpers.  (I hesitate to call them pro-Bidens because their feelings aren’t equivalent to the Trumpsters).  Two dozen marched from BLM Plaza to the law firm of King Spaulding to post signs saying that the lawyers were violating their oath by representing Trump in lawsuits challenging the vote.  Back on BLM Plaza several antis were dancing in the same space as the Trumpsters (not exactly with them), while a circle of cops watched closely.
     
    Getting to Freedom Plaza required a roundabout walk, as the cops had blocked off the direct route.  When I got there, it was packed with people, as were the surrounding streets – and it wasn’t noon yet. Listening to the speeches while walking around taking photos convinced me that this wasn’t a political gathering. It was a cult. The theme was different versions of  “Thank God for Donald Trump.”  He could do no wrong, including lose the election.  If the media said more people and more states voted for Biden, then the election was being stolen.  

    It was photogenic.  Flags flourished.  T-shirts, hats and posters were plentiful. Many people wore costumes, or turned flags into capes. Only buttons were scarce.  (As a button collector, I was looking to add a Trump button to my collection).  Everyone was pleasant. When I asked people to pose for a photo, I only got two negative responses – one from a man in a Chicago Proud Boys t-shirt, and another from a woman wearing a Biden-Harris cap who was waving at the marchers from the sidewalk of Pennsylvania Ave.

  • Ferida Wolff’s Backyard: Mushroom Hunt; Grasshoppers Leap Into the Future (on glass!)

    Mushroom Hunt 

    Ferida's mushrooms

    My grandson and I have been on a mushroom hunt these past covid months. Periodically we go out for a walk around the neighborhood, looking for varieties we haven’t yet come upon. I think we are up to thirteen.

    We haven’t identified the mushrooms we’ve seen but that doesn’t matter: we don’t plan to eat any. We are aware of their structure, color, and size as we compare our findings. It is a way to connect with nature and to spend time with each other.   

    These days it’s important to appreciate any connections we have, whether it’s with family or friends or nature, but safely. We keep a safe distance from each other on our walks. We wave to neighbors across the street. And when we find something interesting in nature to look at, we take turns going up close. I miss our hugs, to be sure, but I value our contact — however we need to do it.

    Here’s how you can effectively photo mushrooms:

    https://www.centraltexasmycology.org/blog/2020/7/17/photography-tips-for-mushroom-identification

    Here is a (very) detailed chart to help you identify mushrooms:

    https://www.mushroomexpert.com/  

    Grasshoppers Leap into the Future

    grasshopper on glass

    You never know what will greet you when you open your front door. This time it was a grasshopper that had settled on the glass, an intriguing start to the day. Grasshoppers seem so ordinary but they have a history of deep symbolism. Sometimes looking into symbolism helps us move along in difficult times.

    Grasshoppers are a symbol of good luck. They jump up and forward and encourage us to do the same, to move ahead and not get stuck on the past or regrets. It also is a symbol for freedom, joy, and creativity, among other positive qualities.

    During this pandemic we are often, understandably, lost in negative, worrisome thoughts. But there are positive things to focus on: neighbors greeting neighbors with smiles and friendly though distant conversations, gratitude for the dedication of our health practitioners, conscious appreciation of the people in our lives.

    The grasshopper eventually hopped away, taking a leap of faith that it will land safely. Perhaps it was a reminder for us to do the same.  

    Lots to know about grasshoppers:

    https://www.thoughtco.com/fascinating-facts-about-grasshoppers-1968334

     ©2020 Ferida Wolff for SeniorWomen.com

    November 14, 2020

  • Veterans Day: Post-9/11 Veterans Earn More, Work More Hours Than Those Who Never Served in Armed Forces

    Kansas City Memorial

    The Great Frieze by Edmond Amateis on the face of the Kansas City Liberty memorial in 1926. Inscription reads “These have dared bear the torches of sacrifice and service. Their bodies return to dust but their work liveth evermore. Let us strive on to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

    Employment among the nation’s three million post-9/11 veterans was higher from 2014 to 2018 than it was among those who never served in the armed forces, according to a new US Census Bureau report on November 10th. 

    In the 2014-2018 period, about 80% of post-9/11 veterans were employed compared with only 75% of nonveterans. 

    In contrast with older veteran groups, such as those from the Vietnam era or Gulf War, post-9/11 veterans encountered very different labor markets after returning from the armed forces. As a result, post-9/11 veterans represent a unique and growing segment of the veteran population and the broader U.S. workforce. 

    Employment Characteristics of Post-9/11 Veterans

    In the 2014-2018 period, about 80% of post-9/11 veterans were employed compared with only 75% of nonveterans.

    Among the employed, post-9/11 veterans were also more likely than nonveterans to work year-round (50 to 52 weeks a year) and full-time (35 hours or more a week). About 81% of post-9/11 veterans and 71% of nonveterans had year-round, full-time jobs.

    Post-9/11 veterans worked longer hours than nonveterans – an average of two hours longer for men (44 hours a week vs. 42) and nearly three hours longer each week for women (40 hours vs. 37 hours).

    They were also more likely than nonveterans to work for federal, state, or local governments. For example, 32% of post-9/11 male veterans worked in government compared to 10% of male nonveterans. In contrast, male nonveterans were more likely to work in the private sector (81% vs. 63% of post-9/11 veterans).

    Post-9/11 veterans earned more than nonveterans depending on their education level: a median $46,000 a year compared to about $35,000 for nonveterans.

    Occupations Among Post-9/11 Veterans

    Among people employed year-round and full-time, post-9/11 veterans often were overrepresented in only a few occupation groups (Figure 1).

    For instance, a greater proportion of veterans than nonveterans were employed in protective service occupations, such as police officer, firefighter and similar jobs.

    Post-9/11 veterans also were frequently in installation, maintenance, and repair occupations and less regularly in office and administrative support, sales, and related occupations. 

    post-september-11-veterans-more-likely-than-nonveterans-to-be-employed-figure-1

     These results are roughly consistent with the notion that post-9/11 veterans seek civilian jobs that utilize their military skills and training. For more information about how veterans’ military occupations relate to their civilian employment, see How Do Recent Veterans Fare in the Labor Market?

    November 11, 2020

  • Jo Freeman: Five Days in DC Where the Post-election Protests Were Puny but the Politics Were Not

    By Jo Freeman  

    The Women's National Democratic Club

    After voting on Tuesday, I took a bus to Washington, DC. My reasons were personal; my timing was not. I wanted to watch the returns at one of the few places hosting a live election-watch dinner: the Woman’s National Democratic Club near Dupont Circle.

    Right by SlowKing4: This is an image that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the United States of America.

    I quickly discovered that this election was as much about protest as politics. The local bus from Union Station was stopped at 9th St. by a police blockade. A 30-square block area around the White House was closed to cars to give space to protestors. 

    I got out and walked west on K. St. where I saw building after building boarded up. Some was the result of the George Floyd protests in June. A lot was new, in anticipation of election unrest. In June, fires had burned the lobby of the AFL-CIO building and the basement of St. Johns Episcopal Church on 16th St.

    As I passed McPherson Sq., one of the two Occupy DC hotspots in 2011-12, I saw several white tents and a stage. Days later I learned that these were put up by Bond Events, a female-owned event production company hired by the People’s Watch Party. PWP is a new coalition of 20 progressive groups which came together to produce an election day party on BLM Plaza.

    Black Lives Matter Plaza covers two blocks of 16th St. north of Lafayette Square that were turned into a pedestrian mall in response to the June protests. The DC government painted Black Lives Matter in 35 foot yellow capital letters from K to H Streets and DC’s Mayor officially renamed it on June 5. It has become the protest center of the Capitol. The stretch of Pennsylvania Ave. in front of the White House used to be the place to protest but is now inaccessible. After protestors were teargassed in June to clear Lafayette Square so the President could walk across it for a photo-op, the National Park Service erected a towering fence to keep people out. The fence became a gallery for protest signs and art.

    As I neared 16th St. I heard what sounded like white noise loud enough to wake the dead. A truck with a band on top was proceeding east with signs saying Count the Votes hanging from the side. At 16th St. several hundred people were milling around, looking for something to do. The PWP street party was scheduled to begin at 8:30.

    Lafayette Square

    At the WNDC, expectations for a blue tsunami were high. When everyone left at 11:30 p.m they were not. Many states were still contested, but the Trumpsters had turned out in force, perhaps persuaded by all the clamor about a looming Democratic victory.

    Wednesday I went to a labor rally at McPherson Sq., which is one block from BLM Plaza. There were only a couple hundred people, so social distancing was easy. Bond Events employees were passing out snacks and sanitizer. Posters were plentiful.

    Right, Statue in Lafayette Square, photo by Benoît Prieur

    Different coalitions have formed under such names as ShutDownDC and Protect the Results so it’s hard to tell who is behind what. RefuseFascism was there in force passing out its orange stickers and signs saying Trump/Pence Out Now. It is a front group for the RCP (Revolutionary Communist Party) and has been doing this for years. A couple of people were there from PLP (Progressive Labor Party) with t-shirts that said  “Let’s Smash Capitalism Together.” 

    Thursday I was back at BLM Plaza. Spaced out on the Plaza were little pods of media, waiting for something to happen. Many were from other countries in different time zones. A few hundred people were still partying, with drums, food, and lots of signs. 

    The heavy black fence along the north side of Lafayette Square had a thick, iron mesh so fine that you couldn’t see the park behind it. It was still covered with signs, most with a BLM theme. My feet were tired but my camera had a good time.

  • Holiday Gifting: Jill Norgren Reviews The Slave Who Went to Congress

    Reviewed by Jill Norgren

    The Slave Who Went to Congress, (A picture book with substantial text. For young readers age 7-10)

    By Marti Rosner and Frye Gaillard; illustrated by Jordana HaggardThe Slave Who WEnt to Congress
    Published by NewSouth Books, 2020

    The nightly news recently featured a fifth grader who, moved by the ideas of the Black Lives Matter movement, had started a “diversity” book collection. The book under review, Rosner and Gaillard’s The Slave Who Went to Congress certainly merits inclusion in that youngster’s library.

    Rosner and Gaillard’s illustrated storybook for young readers relates the life of Benjamin Sterling Turner, the first African American to elected — in 1870 — to represent Alabama in the US House of Representatives. Turner was born into a slave family, in North Carolina, in 1825. He and his mother were forcibly taken to Alabama in 1830.

    He lived, until the age of forty, as a slave on farms and in the town of Selma. Denied even the right to learn the alphabet, Turner used his wits to gradually, painfully recognize letters, learn to spell, and eventually read full text. The effort at times resulted in whippings.

    Turner was not only smart and motivated, from an early age he had the mind of a businessman. The authors illustrate how he found and used cracks in the system of slavery that permitted him to run small businesses for his owners, hire out, and eventually to keep a portion of his earnings.

  • 2020 Election Wrap-Up, Women’s Congressional Policy Institute: As of press time,130 women have been elected to serve in the 117th Congress

    People voting

    Women’s Congressional Policy Institute

    (as of November 6, 3:45 p.m.)

    Perhaps it should come as no surprise that in the same year we celebrate the centennial anniversary of women securing the right to vote we also recognize the unprecedented number of women who ran for Congress. According to the Center for American Women and Politics, nearly 650 women ran for seats in the House of Representatives and Senate in 2020, with more than 300 of these candidates making it through the primaries and into the general election.

    Right, Human Rights Watch photo

    As of press time, 130 women have been elected to serve in the 117th Congress. This number includes the 18 incumbent Senators who were not up for reelection this year, as well as the four Delegates to the House of Representatives reelected from American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. However, a number of races have not been called, so the number of women serving in the next Congress is expected to include a record number.

    SENATE

    Heading into this election season, Republicans controlled the chamber, holding 53 seats to the Democrats’ 47. With an already thin margin, Republicans defending 23 seats, and Democrats defending only 12 seats, control of the Senate was hotly contested throughout the cycle. Currently, the Senate is even, with Republicans and Democrats each holding 47 seats; at this time, 25 women will serve in the Senate next year.

    Incumbent Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Susan Collins (R-ME), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and Tina Smith (D-MN) were successful in their reelection bids. Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) lost her bid to Sen.-elect Mark Kelly (D-AZ).

    Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) was appointed by Gov. Brian Kemp (R) to fill the seat left vacant when Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) retired in December 2019. She will face Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) in a January run-off.

    Sen.-elect Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) will be the first woman elected to the Senate from Wyoming when she is sworn next year. She is a former Member of the House and Co-Chair of the bipartisan Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues.

    With the presidential election still too close to call, it remains to be seen whether California will continue to be represented by two women in the Senate (Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris). However, Minnesota (Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Smith), Nevada (Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen), New Hampshire (Sens. Shaheen and Maggie Hassan), and Washington (Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell) each will be represented by two women Senators in the 117th Congress.

    At the moment, four women of color will serve in the Senate next Congress: Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Mazie Hirono (D-IL), and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV). Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) are the only two members of the LGBTQ community in the Senate.

    HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    Democrats maintained control of the House this election cycle. With several races still too close to call, 203 Democrats and 188 Republicans will be sworn into Congress in January. This includes 105 women (including the four Delegates). It includes 82 women Democrats and 23 women Republicans. However, with many races still too close to call, the number is expected to increase.

    Currently, ten incumbent women retired, lost their races, or ran for another office. Reps. Susan Brooks (R-IN), Susan Davis (D-CA), Nita Lowey (D-NY), and Martha Roby (R-AL) will retire from Congress at the end of the year. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) retired after her unsuccessful presidential candidacy. Reps. Abby Finkenauer (D-IA), Kendra Horn (D-OK), Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), Donna Shalala (D-FL), and Xochitl Torres Small (D-NM) lost their reelection bids.

    In 2018, only one Republican woman – Rep. Carol Miller (R-WV) – was elected to Congress. However, so far this cycle, twelve newly elected Republican women will be sworn into the 117th Congress: Stephanie Bice (R-OK), Lauren Boebert (R-CO), Kat Cammack (R-FL), Michelle Fischbach (R-MN), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), Yvette Herrell (R-NM), Ashley Hinson (R-IA), Nancy Mace (R-SC), Lisa McClain (R-MI), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL).

    A record 115 women of color ran for the House this cycle. Forty-nine Black or African American, Latina, Asian/Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern/Northern African, and Native American women were elected, which will make the 117th Congress among the most diverse in our nation’s history. Cori Bush (D-MO), Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-NM), Yvette Herrell (R-NM), Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Marilyn Strickland (D-WA), and Nikema Williams (D-GA) were elected this cycle; Rep.-elect Bush will be the first African American woman to represent Missouri in Congress. Rep.-elect Strickland will be the first African American to represent Washington in Congress and the first Korean American woman elected to Congress.

    Two incumbent members of the LGBTQ community – Reps. Angie Craig (D-MN) and Sharice Davids (D-KS) – will serve in the House. Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) will remain as the only two Muslim women serving in Congress.

    NEWLY ELECTED TO THE SENATE

    Sen.-elect Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) defeated Merav Ben-David (D-WY) for the seat left open by the retirement of Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY). She served in the House of Representatives from 2009-2017; during that time she served as Co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues. Prior to Congress, Sen.-elect Lummis served as State Treasurer and in both chambers of the Wyoming State Legislature.

    WOMEN NEWLY ELECTED TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    Rep.-elect Stephanie Bice (R-OK) defeated incumbent Rep. Kendra Horn (D-OK). She was elected to the Oklahoma State Senate in 2014, and has served as Assistant Majority Floor Leader and Finance Committee Chair. She previously worked for her family’s technology company and later served as Vice President of Business Development for a boutique digital marketing company.

    Rep.-elect Lauren Boebert (R-CO) defeated Diane Mitsch Bush (D-CO). She defeated incumbent Rep. Scott Tipton (R-CO) during the Republican primary and became the first primary challenger to defeat an incumbent in Colorado since 1948. She is the owner of Shooters Grill, which became known nationwide for allowing staff to openly carry firearms.

    Rep.-elect Cori Bush (D-MO) defeated Anthony Rogers (R-MO) after defeating incumbent Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (D-MO) during the primary. She is a nurse, pastor, and activist who became a community leader during the social unrest in Ferguson, Missouri following the death of Michael Brown in 2014. She will be the first African American woman to represent Missouri in Congress.

    Rep.-elect Kathryn “Kat” Cammack (R-FL) defeated Adam Christensen (D-FL) for the seat left open by the retirement of Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL). She is the former Deputy Chief of Staff to Rep. Yoho, and previously interned with Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO). She is a small business owner and Co-Founder of “The Grit Foundation,” a nonprofit that supports local law enforcement, first responders, and veterans.

    Rep.-elect Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-NM) defeated Alexis Johnson (R-NM) for the seat left open by Rep. Ben Ray Luján’s (D-NM) decision to run for Senate. She is an attorney and breast cancer survivor who previously served as a White House Fellow during the Clinton Administration and as Vice Chair of the Advisory Council on National Historic Preservation during the Obama Administration.

    Rep.-elect Michelle Fischbach (R-MN) defeated incumbent Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN). The former member of the Paynesville City Council was elected to the Minnesota State Senate in 1996. During her tenure, she served as Minority Leader and became the first woman to serve as President of the Senate. She most recently served as Lieutenant Governor.

    Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) defeated Kevin Van Ausdal (D-GA) for the seat left vacant by the retirement of Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA). She grew up working in her family’s business. In 2002, she and her husband purchased a commercial construction and renovation company. She is the National Director of Family America Project.

    Rep. Yvette Herrell (R-NM) defeated incumbent Rep. Xochitl Torres Small (D-NM) in a rematch from 2018. She is a realtor who previously served in the New Mexico State House from 2011-2019. She has owned and operated several small businesses, and was awarded “Hero of the Year” by the New Mexico Business Coalition.

    Rep.-elect Diana Harshbarger (R-TN) defeated Blair Walsingham (D-TN) for the seat left open by the retirement of Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN). The first in her family to graduate from college, she is a pharmacist and business owner. She is a member of the local Chamber of Commerce and a former board member of the International Academy of Compounding Pharmacists.

    Rep.-elect Ashley Hinson (R-IA) defeated incumbent Rep. Abby Finkenauer (D-IA). She is a former award-winning broadcast journalist. She successfully ran for the Iowa State House of Representatives in 2016, becoming the first woman to represent the 67th District in the Iowa House. She is a member of the March of Dimes, the Young Parents Network, and the National Council on Youth Leadership.

    Rep.-elect Sara Jacobs (D-CA) defeated Georgette Gómez (D-CA) for the seat left open by the retirement of Rep. Susan Davis (D-CA). She is the founder and chair of San Diego for Every Child: The Coalition to End Child Poverty. She previously served in the Department of State during the Obama Administration and was a policy advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

    Rep.-elect Nancy Mace (R-SC) defeated incumbent Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-SC). She is a member of the South Carolina General Assembly, a position she has held since 2018. She is the first woman to graduate from The Citadel and is the author of In the Company of Men: A Woman at The Citadel. She is the recipient of the Taxpayer Hero Award from the South Carolina Club for Growth.

    Rep.-elect Kathy Manning (D-NC) defeated Joseph Lee Haywood (R-NC) for the seat vacated by Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC). She was a partner at a major law firm for 15 years before she left to start her own small business. She has held several leadership positions in the nonprofit community, including serving as the first female chair of the board of the Jewish Federations of North America.

    Rep-elect Lisa McClain (R-MI) defeated Kimberly Bizon (D-MI) for the seat left vacant by Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-MI). She grew up in a farming community in Michigan. She is a self-described “conservative outsider” who has extensive experience in the corporate sector and is the co-founder of a Michigan-based financial services company.

    Rep.-elect Mary Miller (R-IL) defeated Erika Weaver (D-IL) for the seat left vacant by the retirement of Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL). She is a teacher and businesswoman who decided to run for office to be a voice for families and businesses in Congress. She and her husband have run their family farm for 40 years.

    Rep.-elect Marie Newman (D-IL) defeated Mike Fricilone (R-IL) after defeating incumbent Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) in the primary election. She founded Team Up to Stop Bullying after her child experienced severe bullying in school. She attended President Obama’s White House Summit on Bullying in 2012 and 2013.

    Rep-elect Deborah Ross (D-NC) defeated Alan Swain (R-NC) for the seat left open by the retirement of Rep. George Holding (R-NC). The civil rights attorney previously practiced law for 25 years before becoming state director of the North Carolina ACLU. She was elected to the North Carolina House of Representatives in 2002, where she served as both Majority and Minority Whip.

    Rep.-elect Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) defeated incumbent Rep. Donna Shalala (D-FL) in a rematch from 2018. She is an award-winning journalist whose parents immigrated to the United States from Cuba. During her career, she worked with networks, such as Univision, Telemundo, and CNN Español.

    Rep.-elect Marilyn Strickland (D-WA) defeated Beth Doglio (D-WA) for the seat left open by the retirement of Rep. Denny Heck (D-WA). She served as mayor of Tacoma, Washington from 2010-2018. She previously served on the Tacoma City Council, and will be the first African American to represent Washington in Congress and the first Korean American woman elected to Congress.

    Rep.-elect Nikema Williams (D-GA) defeated Angela Stanton King (R-GA) for the seat left vacant by the death of Rep. John Lewis (D-GA). She is the first African American woman to chair the Georgia Democratic Party and a member of the Georgia State Senate. She is a self-described “fearless advocate for women and families,” and has been recognized as one of 100 Most Influential Georgians.

    Text courtesy of the Women’s Congressional Policy Institute

  • The Effects of Large Group Meetings on the Spread of COVID-19: The Case of Trump Rallies, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research

     trump rallies comparisons

     B. Douglas Bernheim Nina Buchmann Zach Freitas-Groff Sebasti´an Otero* October 30, 2020

    1 Introduction As of this writing, more than 8.7 million Americans have contracted COVID 19, resulting in more than 225,000 deaths (Dong et al., 2020). The CDC has advised that large in-person events, particularly in settings where participants do not wear masks or practice social distancing, pose a substantial risk of further contagion (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). There is reason to fear that such gatherings can serve as “superspreader events,” severely undermining efforts to control the pandemic (Dave et al., 2020).

    The purpose of this study is to shed light on these issues by studying the impact of election rallies held by President Donald Trump’s campaign between June 20th and September 30th, 2020. Trump rallies have several distinguishing features that lend themselves to this inquiry.

    First, they involved large numbers of attendees. Though data on attendance is poor, it appears that the number of attendees was generally in the thousands and sometimes in the tens of thousands. Because the available information about the incidence of COVID-19 is at the county level, the effects of smaller meetings would be more difficult to detect using our methods.

    Second, the set of major Trump campaign events is easily identified. We know whether and when the Trump campaign held a rally in each county. This property allows us to distinguish between “treated” and “untreated” counties.

    Third, the events occurred on identifiable days. They neither recurred within a given county nor stretched across several days. This feature allows us to evaluate the effects of individual gatherings.

    Fourth, rallies were not geographically ubiquitous. As a result, we always have a rich set of untreated counties we can use as comparators.

    Fifth, at least through September 2020, the degree of compliance with guidelines concerning the use of masks and social distancing was low (Sanchez, 2020), in part because the Trump campaign downplayed the risk of infection (Bella, 2020). This feature heightens the risk that a rally could become a “superspreader event.”
    Despite these favorable characteristics, the task of evaluating the effects of Trump rallies on the spread of COVID-19 remains challenging for the reasons detailed in Section 3. Briefly, our approach involves a separate analysis for each of eighteen Trump rallies. We identify a set of counties that are comparable to the event county at the pertinent point in time, based at least in part on the trajectory of confirmed COVID-19 cases prior to the rally date. We then estimate the statistical relationship among those counties between subsequent COVID-19 cases and various conditions, such as pre-existing COVID-19 prevalence and pandemic-related restrictions, along with demographic characteristics. We use this relationship to predict the post-event incidence of new confirmed COVID-19 cases for the event county.