What We Read Today 25 October 2014

Econintersect: Every day our editors collect the most interesting things they find from around the internet and present a summary “reading list” which will include very brief summaries (and sometimes longer ones) of why each item has gotten our attention. Suggestions from readers for “reading list” items are gratefully reviewed, although sometimes space limits the number included.

Nobel Economics Laureate: Why I back banking union (Catherine Boyle, CNBC) The 2014 Nobel prize winner in Economics, Jean Tirole, is a strong backer of a banking union which would take bank regulation away from the individual Eurozone countries and make the ECB (European Central Bank the regulator. Econintersect thinks the critics of such a move have a point (loss of control of a country’s fiscal affairs) unless there is also a fiscal union (such as exists between the U.S. states).

Could non-citizens decide the November election? (Jesse Richman and David Earnest, The Washington Post) Hat tip to Sig Silber. Interesting even more for what it does not define than for what it does. The conclusion is that in very close election races non-citizens voting illegally can tip the race to a particular candidate. Democrats are favored by non-citizens who vote (according to this study). A specific race that might have been decided by non-citizens cited in this report was the election of Al Franken (D, MN) to the U.S, Senate in 2008 – he won by 312 votes. One thing that is worrisome to Econintersect is whether the samples are representative. In the two years studied there were 339 non-citizen respondents out of 32,800 surveyed (1.03%) in 2008 and 489 out of 55,400 (0.88%) in 2010. The total number of non-citizen residents in the U.S. is estimated to be about 25 million (13.3 million “green card” holders and 11.7 million illegal residents) or about 22.1 million total by another estimate. So that means between 7.1% and 8.1% of the population of the U.S. in 2008 and 2010 was composed of non-citizens. What are the uncertainties introduced by the under-representative sample contain 1% or less non-citizens. It looks like the small sample results (339 and 489) were projected onto what would have been representative samples of non-citizens (about 2,300 – 2,400 out of 32,800 in 2008 and about 4,100 to 4,200 out of 55,400 in 2010). This can only be done if there are exacting measures taken to assure the very small numbers are truly representative random samples.

For details of study data see Cooperative Congressional Election Study (Survey Study)

Jaw-Dropping Study Claims Large Numbers of Non-Citizens Vote in U.S. (Jim Geraghty, National Review) This is a disappointing non-critical review of the study discussed in previous article. Good reading to determine how this information may be ineffectively interpreted, poorly presented and incorrectly used.