The World and Everything in It - November 7, 2022

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning!

Should race be a factor in who gets into college if diversity is the goal?

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Also today, the Monday Moneybeat: economist David Bahnsen has answers to your questions, including his top money principles to teach your children.

Plus the WORLD History Book. Fifty years ago Delaware elects Joe Biden to his first term in the US Senate.

REICHARD: It’s Monday, November 7th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: U.S. Election »  Today is election-eve, and Republicans are feeling confident. Florida Senator Rick Scott says a red wave is coming.

SCOTT: This election is about the Biden agenda. People don’t like high inflation, high crime, open borders, fentanyl. That’s what we’re talking about.

Democratic New York Congressman Patrick Maloney says Democrats are campaigning on abortion access and voting rights.

MALONEY: Because our candidates have real plans, they’re going to do better than people think on Tuesday night.

Election (Senate) » And heading into Election Day, control of the Senate balances on a knife’s edge. No race is closer than the contest in Pennsylvania, where Republican Mehmet Oz is trying to ride a late surge of momentum to Capitol Hill.

OZ: I believe in the American dream because I’m an embodiment of it. My father grew up on a dirt floor, immigrated here …

Oz blasted Democratic opponent John Fetterman for supporting sanctuary policies for illegal immigrants. Fetterman, meantime, told his supporters …

FETTERMAN: And Oz of course stands with Mastriaono, and they all want to ban all abortions here in the state of Pennsylvania.

An average of recent polls has that race tied. However, the three most recent polls give Oz a 2 to 3 point edge.

Election (governors) » Numerous governors races have also grown tighter in recent weeks, including one in New York. Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul told supporters,

HOCHUL: When Democrats turn out to vote in the state of New York, we win. It’s that simple, that’s all we need to do. You turn out to vote, we win this!

But her Republican challenger Lee Zeldin predicted an upset victory. He said New Yorkers are growing weary of rising crime.

ZELDIN: I mean, the number of murders in Rochester this year already has set a record.

One recent poll showed the race tied, but an average of recent polls still shows Governor Hochul with a 6-point lead.

Biden criticizes oil companies  »  Last month, President Biden touted falling gas prices as he campaigned for Democrats. But with pump prices on the rise again, he lashed out at oil companies over the weekend saying they’re enjoying record profits.

BIDEN: They should have used that money—what they’re supposed to do—to lower gas prices at the pump for the American people.

Republicans blame Biden’s energy policies.

AAA has the national average at $3.80 per gallon. That’s 4 cents higher than a week ago.

Korean miners » Two South Korean men are recovering in a hospital after being trapped in a collasped zinc mine shaft for nine days.

The miners, aged 62 and 56, were pulled to safety over the weekend. They survived on instant coffee powder and water falling from the ceiling.

The doctor who treated the miners said both men suffered hypothermia and muscle pains, but they’re in fairly good condition and should be released soon.

Rock & Roll Hall of Fame » The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame inducted a new class of artists over the weekend, including some that most people wouldn’t think of as “rock-n-roll.”

SOUND (Jolene):  Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene....

It was a diverse field. Dolly Parton was inducted alongside Eminem, Duran Duran, Lionel Richie, Carly Simon, and several others.

Inductees absent from the ceremony included Duran Duran guitarist Andy Taylor, who is battling prostate cancer, and 95-year-old Harry Belafonte.

I'm Kent Covington. Straight ahead: The Supreme Court tackles affirmative action.

This is The World and Everything in It.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s Monday, November 7th.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. So Election Day’s tomorrow!

I can tell you where I’ll be. WORLD’s Election Center at wng.org/election. That's the place where we’ll be featuring live updates and interactive maps on every single Senate, House, and governor’s race.

Plus results on important state ballot measures. And reporting from our WORLD team all in one place.

EICHER: Wng.org/election for our WORLD election center 2022.

It’s time for Legal Docket.

It’s rare for the Supreme Court to overturn one of its precedents. And that’s because by and large, the court’s rulings are well-reasoned and legally workable, even though every decision produces an unhappy party.

Statistically, precedents hold up 99.5 percent of the time.

So in that half percent of cases that do not, it’s big news--as when Roe versus Wade finally fell.

And today, more potentially big news: we have two companion cases from this term where, once again, a party asks the Court to overrule precedent. The topic this time is affirmative action in school admissions.

REICHARD: The two cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case. She attended undergrad and law school there and served on Harvard’s Board of Overseers. So she only participated in oral arguments in the University of North Carolina case.

EICHER: That meant the court had to hear separate oral arguments in these cases. It did so one week ago today in a five-hour marathon session. Our Washington, D.C., legal reporter Jenny Rough was there to listen to it all in person.

Hi, Jenny!

JENNY ROUGH, GUEST: Hi, Nick and Mary.

Well, you know me. I like to nerd out on Supreme Court arguments and speaking of being a nerd: now I’ll give you some Supreme Court news that will fast become Supreme Court trivia. The U.S. Postal Service has announced that the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be featured on a stamp and, here’s the trivia part, she becomes the first female justice to appear.

REICHARD: Right, because, more trivia here, the first justice on a stamp was former Chief Justice John Marshall. In 1894, he was on the $5 stamp. A dozen other justices have been featured since then.

EICHER: A five-dollar stamp. I’ll give you both some trivia. Any idea what five dollars then would be equivalent to today? (Not putting it in script.)

Can you imagine a stamp worth that much? I looked this up: I could send you a 60-pound package two-day express and just slap a Chief Justice Marshall on there, and we’d be good to go. (You ladies started it, just sayin’.)

ROUGH: Some fun trivia there.

Okay, onto the cases now. Both UNC—the University of North Carolina—and Harvard College take race into consideration as one of many factors when deciding whether to admit students. The schools say a diverse student body has educational benefits.

Students for Fair Admissions sued. That organization believes race should not harm or help a student gain admission to higher education.

REICHARD: A 2003 Supreme Court case called Grutter v. Bollinger held it’s okay for schools to use race in a holistic review of each applicant. But its use must be narrowly tailored and only for a compelling interest. Now, Students for Fair Admissions asks the court to overrule that 2003 case. So how did things go?

ROUGH: Really interesting! The questions from the justices about diversity were diverse!

First, the court heard the case against the University of North Carolina.

UNC is a state school, so the analysis is a little different than for Harvard. For a public school, the legal question is whether the admissions policy violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. That says a state cannot deny any person equal protection under the law.

Patrick Strawbridge argued for Students for Fair Admissions.

STRAWBRIDGE: Racial classifications are wrong. Whatever factors the government may use in deciding which jurors to sit, who you may marry, or which primary schools our children can attend, skin color is not one of them. Grutter is a glaring exception to this rule. The Court should overrule it.

One major line of questioning he fielded had to do with application essays. Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked him if admissions policies were race neutral, as his client wants, how should a school handle an applicant who refers to race in an essay?

BARRETT: And I want to know whether in your view of the world if a student wrote an essay describing some of the experiences that Justice Sotomayor said, you know, I struggled with socioeconomic diversity, racial prejudice, things that shape who I am. In your view of the world, could a university take that into account without offending the Equal Protection Clause?

STRAWBRIDGE: Yes. I think this court’s precedents even note that the act of overcoming discrimination is separate and apart distinction from race. What we object to is a consideration of race and race by itself.

BARRETT: Race in a box-checking way as opposed to race in an experiential statement?

STRAWBRIDGE: Which the record in this case is that they can give the preference based on the check of a box alone.

Ryan Park argued on behalf of the University of North Carolina. And said the school seeks a student body that is you guessed it, diverse!

PARK: This learning environment helps us seek truth, build bridges across students of different backgrounds, and critically here, equip students with the tools needed to function effectively as citizens and leaders in our complex and increasingly diverse society.

The justices peppered him with questions about when and how the school’s race-conscious policy will be replaced with a race-neutral one. Even the Grutter case that held it’s okay to consider race as one of many factors said it envisioned schools would develop race neutral policies in 25 years. That would be six years from now.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked about that.

KAVANAUGH: The opinion didn’t say until you reach a point where you’re satisfied that diversity has been achieved or something vague like that. It said 25 years in there. And so I want to hear how you address that part of the Grutter precedent because as I understand your answer, you would extend it far beyond 25 years indefinitely.

PARK: We don’t read the 25-year as some sort of strict expiration. I think every institution in every state will differ.

Next up, the Harvard case. Harvard is a private school. This is not a 14th amendment issue. This dispute arises under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. That prohibits discrimination based on race for schools that receive federal funding. Similar legal question. Different law.

Harvard is very exclusive: For 1600 spots, Harvard considers 61,000 applicants. Meaning 97 percent are rejected.

Cameron Norris argued on behalf of Students for Fair Admissions. He said that if Harvard really wants diversity, it should eliminate its preference for rich kids and children of alumni, so-called “legacies.”

NORRIS: Harvard is not diverse at all. Harvard is 82 percent wealthy. There’s 23 rich students for every one low-income student.

Here he is in an exchange with Justice Sonia Sotomayor about how a race-neutral policy could change things.

NORRIS: We have a very sophisticated race-neutral alternative in this case that takes into account socioeconomic status and forces Harvard to eliminate its preferences for the largely white legacies. The number of Asians would increase on campus; the number of Hispanics would increase on campus; the overall number of under-represented minorities would increase on campus.

SOTOMAYOR: Blacks wouldn’t increase.

NORRIS: Black representation would be 10 percent.

Justice Sotomayor later asked what’s a school to do with so many qualified candidates?

SOTOMAYOR: If you have perfect scores on every metric, you’re not guaranteed a spot at Harvard because they have enough people with perfect scores of every background that exceeds their class limit.  And you’re saying a school can’t look at its general diversity figures and say, among equal applicants, I might make race a tie breaker if the numbers that I have on that matrix seem fairly low otherwise? You’re saying no, you can’t do that.

NORRIS: No, you cannot do that.

Seth Waxman argued on behalf of Harvard. Chief Justice John Roberts returned to that tie-breaker question.

WAXMAN: Take two African American applicants. Some of their views may contribute to diversity from the perspective of Asians or whites, some of them may not. And yet it’s true that they’re eligible for the same increase in the opportunities for admission based solely on their skin color?

Waxman conceded that in some cases race will be the one factor of many that gets a student in.

ROBERTS: So we’re talking about race as a determining factor in admission to Harvard.

WAXMAN: Race for some highly qualified applicants can be the determinative factor, just as being an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe orchestra needs an oboe player will be the tip.

ROBERTS: We did not fight a Civil War about oboe players. We did fight a Civil War to eliminate racial discrimination. And that’s why it’s a matter of considerable concern.

REICHARD: Wow! The Chief was fired up right there! That must have been something, Jenny!

ROUGH: Yeah, it was really something to be there. The arguments were momentous and the grandeur of the architecture really fit the occasion.

Something really struck me about it as I walked through the building. You know, the Court houses artifacts and exhibits about the law, sort of like a museum. After oral arguments, I passed a display of Lady Justice. She caught my attention right away. Her sword and balancing scales and her blindfold.

The blindfold symbolizes impartiality. Judgment shouldn’t be based on appearances; shouldn’t show favoritism.

Eyesight can be deceiving. At oral argument, both parties seemed to agree that in an ideal world, admissions policies would be race neutral.

But we live in a broken world. And the question remains: How should we navigate race in college admissions given that our society still treats races differently? And given that race is intricately tied to culture, tradition, and heritage?

I’m not sure color-blindness is the answer here, but I think Lady Justice might be onto something. It’s not so much eyesight that’s needed. A just and right decision will take insight.

REICHARD: All right, that’s my partner, Jenny Rough, with this week’s Legal Docket. Great stuff, Jenny!

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Next up on The World and Everything in It … the Monday Moneybeat.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Time now for our weekly conversation on business, markets, and the economy. Financial analyst and adviser David Bahnsen is here. He’s head of the wealth management firm The Bahnsen Group. David, good morning!

DAVID BAHNSEN, GUEST:  Good morning, Nick!

EICHER: Well, as we’ve been doing, David, let’s tackle the top story of the week before diving into listener questions. I did see the October jobs report come in, with a revision for September and August netting out at plus 30,000, give or take. So that gives us a three-month average of about 290,000 jobs per month with October trending down, even as it beat expectations. So did you see jobs as the top economic story of the week or what about any of the other October data that has come in?

BAHNSEN: No, I think that there was a sort of blend of things the Fed raised rates three quarters of a point as expected; there is increasing possibility that the next Fed rate hike will only be half a point, not three quarters; the jobs data came in above expectations--not significantly, but enough that it still looks like a very stubbornly strong jobs market; the job openings we know were about a million more than had been expected; the ISM manufacturing was barely positive and the ISM services was still positive, but less than expected. So when you blend all of it together, you have a very redundant theme of the Fed is still tightening, getting closer to being done tightening, and an economy that doesn't look to be in great condition, but does not look to be in recessionary condition - yet.

EICHER: Yet. Alright, to listener questions. Let’s begin with a question from John Banks, a younger listener who is asking about the stagflation of the 1970s. We are hearing the term thrown around in the economic news. John grew up post-70s and says he cannot visualize what that would be like. So could you describe “stagflation” as an economic phenomenon?

BAHNSEN: Yes, it refers to a period - and he's right to say he can't visualize it, because it hasn't happened since and I don't believe it will happen. But essentially, where you get what feels like recessionary economic conditions, high unemployment, decreasing wages, at the same time that you have high-er inflation and higher interest rates. So in our case, the notion of three and a half percent unemployment, even with an elevated price level, doesn't meet anybody's definition of stagflation, let alone what we dealt with in the 1970s. But essentially, yeah, it's a period of the worst of all worlds in the ‘misery index,’ as they called it, where prices are high, and wages are low, and job opportunities are low. Right now, we have growing wages, growing jobs, and yet also going prices that, as WORLD listeners know, I believe, is largely related to abundance of problems in the supply side of the economy. So the term ‘stagflation’ was created out of the 70s - it legitimately existed. I would also point out not only was there real economic problems to go with higher prices, but the higher prices themselves, the monetary inflation in the 1970s, lasted for many, many years. It was really baked in and I suspect will prove very different than the inflation period we're living through now.

EICHER: Listener Elle Jones writes in with an inflation question. Lots of questions around that subject, but this one is different in that she wants you to come at the subject from the perspective of those who are living and serving the Lord outside the First World. So inflation effects in underdeveloped or developing economies and how is it different from inflation in an advanced economy such as Europe or the United States?

BAHNSEN: Yeah, I think it's a great question because there definitely is different inflationary conditions in other countries. And you can see a lot of this even in the currency of other countries. In other words, the dollar has rallied very strongly this year against the euro and yen. But in fact, there's some currencies that are actually up against the dollar this year, which might indicate that they're in a stronger position in terms of their monetary conditions and fiscal strength. But as a general rule of thumb, there are emerging market countries, you know, third world, that we almost use as sort of a euphemism for really reckless monetary health: Argentina, Zimbabwe, and Venezuela come to mind.

But when you look across the spectrum, it isn't this case anymore that they all are in inflationary conditions together or all in non-inflationary conditions together. Countries now are able to have a high dispersion of results amongst themselves based on respective policies and economic health and fidelity to a strong currency. And so I would argue that it's a great development in the emerging world that countries at least have the potential to not be lumped in when Argentina is going to have 90% inflation or Venezuela's going to have 1,000% inflation, etc. But it is oftentimes that they are very debt-ridden countries who denominated their debt in US dollars. And then when the dollar is rallying as their currency is weakening, they have to pay back their debt in more expensive currency. That can be fatal to the economic health of an emerging country. And it has profound significance on the economic health of the people in the country.

EICHER: And our last question today: Carrie Fong of Canton, South Dakota.

FONG: I'm a mom of four kids in elementary and middle school. I am wondering what you would consider your top two or three values to teach kids around the issues of good stewardship of money and personal finance in general. And then if you would have any ideas on how to teach those values to your kids as you're raising them, thank you.

BAHNSEN: Well, first of all, it's far easier for me to come up with number one of values around money, than even two and three, because once you get past number one, there's a lot of values that I consider, you could argue there are 10 different ones that might be tied for number two, but number one for me, is the one most often forgotten and oftentimes even disagreed with in the Christian community. But it is that money is a byproduct of production; money is not cash, wealth is production minus consumption. And so the evangelical community has, by and large, chosen to focus on a low view of C - consumption, instead of a high view of P - production.

Now, obviously, spending less - a mentality of thrift - spending responsibly, these are all principles I agree with. But I don't agree with making it paramount versus the Creational mandate for Christians to work. And so while this may seem theological, or existential, it's certainly Creational - it is economic, it is financial, because there is a significant capacity for wealth creation and financial stewardship, and cultivation of resources, by people working harder, and working more and working more diligently and faithfully, with a spirit of excellence. This notion of being shy about cultural dominion, instead of saying we want to be senior executives in media, or really productive tradesmen, or craftsmen or, or what have you, there is a whole entire spectrum of professional opportunity that is my number one value when it comes to thinking about money. But then when you look into number two, number three, I am a huge believer in the second variable, as well, that one's consumption ought to be less than their production. And that wealth building - risk taking with capital that has been accumulated - is a virtue. And we I think too often view it as something to be afraid of. So those are some of the starting points.

And then as far as the question of how you go about teaching it. I think we all know the answer to this. There are a lot of effective ways that can be the second third or fourth most effective in teaching anything we want to teach our kids. But there's never a replacement for the number one, which is modeling it, living it, being an example of it. So households that demonstrate and model fiscal responsibility, a mentality of ‘P - C = W,’ production minus consumption equals wealth. Hard work is a virtue. These are our I think, the most effective way is passing down that lesson to our kids and grandkids.

EICHER: All right, we appreciate the questions and hope you appreciate the answers. If you have a question, please send it to feedback@worldandeverything.com. I’ll be happy to summarize your question, or if you’d like to put it in your own words, in your own voice, just make a voice memo recording and email the file. Same address: feedback@worldandeverything.com.

David Bahnsen is founder, managing partner, and chief investment officer of The Bahnsen Group. His personal website is Bahnsen.com. B-A-H-N-S-E-N.

David, appreciate your faithfulness to be with us each week. Thank you.

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Monday, November 7th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Coming up next, the WORLD History Book. Today, a milestone for the US strategic petroleum reserve. Plus 50 years ago, Joe Biden enters national politics.

But first the debut of a science fiction icon.

With research help from Harrison Watters, here’s WORLD Radio executive producer Paul Butler.

PAUL BUTLER, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: 90 years ago today—on November 7th, 1932—the first science fiction radio show stormed American airwaves.

ANNOUNCER: Buck Rogers in the 25th Century!

The earliest recordings of Buck Rogers in the 25th Century are no longer available. This audio is from a later season.

ANNOUNCER: As you probably know, Buck was born in our own times--in the 20th century. The story of how he got started on his amazing adventures so far in the future is mighty interesting. But instead of telling you about it, let's turn the dial that will project us ahead in time and find out all about it that way...

Buck Rogers was based on a popular syndicated comic strip. It featured the adventures of a young WWI veteran frozen in time until the year 2429—when another war is ravaging the planet and America is ruled by red Mongol invaders.

CLIP: Central Radio Bureau. Davidson speaking. | This is Buck Rogers Dave. | Oh yes Captain Rogers, what can I do for you sir?

With his new friends Wilma Deering and scientist Dr. Huer, Buck Rogers goes on various swashbuckling adventures fighting with futuristic weapons.

CLIP: Impenitride? | Well that's what he said before he went down there. | Oh, probably with the idea of making up another Gyro Cosmic Relativator.

Buck Rogers made science fiction popular, moving tales of the Wild West to the furthest reaches of the galaxy.

CLIP: When Buck Rogers made his entry he zoomed past the cowboys who were the contemporary heroes of the youngsters of America. All of a sudden the American youth became fascinated with spaceships and cool ray guns.

Audio there from Marvelous Videos. Today, Americans have hundreds of options for science fiction movies and TV shows, from Star Wars to Marvel, but it all began with a 15-minute radio drama.

CLIP: Beginning next week Buck Rogers will no longer be heard at this time.

The Mutual Broadcasting network canceled the show after its 1947 season.

CLIP: This is the Mutual Broadcasting Network.

Next up, 50 years ago this week Delaware voters elected Biden to Congress for the first time—making him the youngest Senator-elect, two weeks shy of his 30th birthday.

In 1973 Biden told ABC News that he was having trouble convincing people in Washington that he was really a senator, but said he hoped to win their respect.

BIDEN: I expect these fellas are going to eventually judge me on my merits and not on my age, and I have to establish that merit, assuming there is any there.

Joe Biden went on to be re-elected 6 times and unsuccessfully ran for President of the United States twice. Audio here from his 1987 concession speech.

BIDEN: There’ll be other presidential campaigns. And I’ll be there out in front. I’ll be there. There will be other opportunities. There will be other battles in other places, other times. And I’ll be there.

Turns out he was right. He served as Obama’s vice president from 2008 to 2016. And he became the 46th president of the United States on January 20th, 2021.

CLIP: BIDEN INAUGURATION

And in just under two weeks, Biden will celebrate his 80th birthday—making him the oldest President to serve.

And finally today, we end with a milestone for the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve—or the SPR.

On November 13th, 2001, President George W. Bush ordered the Secretary of Energy to refill the SPR to its capacity of 700 million barrels. The crude oil was to be held in four Louisiana and Texas underground facilities. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the price of crude fell to $32 dollars a barrel. Bush saw an opportunity to protect the country against the kind of oil shortages sparked by the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

Over the next four years, the department of energy worked aggressively to ramp up supply with US producers and expand the reserve’s overall capacity. On August 17th, 2005, the Department of Energy announced that the SPR met its goal of 700 million barrels, but it didn’t last long. Both Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the gulf coast hard that year. President George Bush:

BUSH: It’s important for our people to know that we understand the situation and that we’re willing to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to mitigate any shortfalls in crude oil that could affect our consumers.

Under President Obama, the Department of Energy increased the SPR capacity to 727 million barrels in 2009. Subsequent presidents have ordered withdrawals that have drained the reserve down to just under 400 million barrels today.

BIDEN: The Department of Energy will release another 15 million barrels from the Strategic Oil Reserve...

If all other oil production and imports were to be suddenly cut off, the SPR would keep America running at its current consumption rate for less than 3 weeks.

That’s this week’s WORLD History Book. I’m Paul Butler.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: how to improve math scores, plus an Election Day preview of the many abortion ballot initiatives nationwide.

That and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio.

WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

The Bible says that "without faith it is impossible to please [God], for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him." (Hebrews 11:5-6)

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.