Episode Details

Although the conflict in Iran keeps dominating the news cycle, investors have an eye on the upcoming U.S. midterm elections. Our Deputy Global Head of Research Michael Zezas and Head of Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore consider policy implications – from healthcare and consumer to AI.

Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.

----- Transcript -----

Michael Zezas: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Deputy Global Head of Research for Morgan Stanley.

Ariana Salvatore: And I'm Ariana Salvatore, Head of Public Policy Research.

Michael Zezas: Today we're discussing the midterm elections and their implications for U.S. markets.

It's Wednesday, April 22nd at 10am in New York.

All right, so Ariana, midterm elections are coming up. And I feel like every cycle we hear the same question. How much do elections actually matter for markets?

Ariana Salvatore: Yeah, I would say, you know, we're still six months out and obviously a lot of the market's focus has been on the U.S.-Iran conflict. But it does keep coming up in our conversations with investors.

And to your question, our view is these elections probably matter a little bit less than people think, at least from a macro perspective.

Michael Zezas: Okay, so that seems a bit counterintuitive, right? Because policy has felt like a huge driver of markets recently. Tariffs. Geopolitics. Really all the above.

Ariana Salvatore: Exactly. But there's some nuance here. So, policy does matter, but the big takeaway is that the direction of policy doesn't really change based on the midterms. That's because some of the key policy variables that you mentioned – trade, geopolitics, also deregulation – those are all likely to keep going regardless of who wins.

At the same time, it's worth noting upfront that the race itself is still pretty fluid. A lot of the indicators that investors are watching – polling prediction markets, the president's approval rating, even things like domestic gasoline prices and consumer sentiment – they're somewhat giving mixed signals right now. There's a growing narrative around a potential democratic sweep. But when you actually look in more detail at the Senate map, we think the path there is still pretty challenging.

So, I think it's important to emphasize there's much more uncertainty in the outcome than the headlines right now might suggest.

Michael Zezas: So, if those indicators end up being right and we do in fact see a divided government, what do you think investors should be paying attention to?

Ariana Salvatore: There are some incremental shifts that will be worth watching. In particular as they pertain to fiscal policy. So, for example, things like SNAP and Medicaid, those are the real swing factors depending on the election outcome.

If you recall last year, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act legislated some changes to those programs that are meant to start taking effect in 2027 and 2028. Things like shifting more of the cost burden onto states and tightening eligibility requirements to offset some of the deficit impact from tax cuts.

And where elections come in is around whether or not those changes actually get implemented or delayed or softened. In our view, the most likely way you can get meaningful adjustments is in some form of divided government where there actually might be an incentive to negotiate around those fiscal cliffs.

But crucially, we think that can only happen if you have what we call a robust rather than a fragile majority.

Michael Zezas: Okay. Can you explain the difference between those two things?

A