Featured Post from Cedarville University

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs

Sep 18, 2026

2 min

Rising oil prices are often felt first at the gas pump, but their effects can quickly extend to the broader economy. As higher costs for gasoline, diesel and jet fuel work their way through transportation, manufacturing and food production, investors are increasingly concerned that inflation could remain elevated longer than expected.

That concern is helping push Treasury yields higher. When investors expect inflation to erode the future value of fixed-income returns, they typically demand higher yields on government bonds. The result can be a ripple effect across the economy: mortgage rates, auto loans, credit-card rates and business borrowing costs may all remain high or move higher.

This is an important second stage of the oil-price story. The first concern is the direct impact on consumers and businesses as energy costs rise. The next concern is whether those higher costs become embedded in the economy, causing inflation expectations to increase and making it more difficult for the Federal Reserve to ease interest rates.

For policymakers, the dilemma is clear. Raising or maintaining higher interest rates can help slow inflation, but it also makes borrowing more expensive for families, businesses and the federal government. If high energy prices persist, the Federal Reserve may face added pressure to prioritize inflation control even as consumers and employers feel the effects of tighter financial conditions.

The issue is also global. Oil markets respond quickly to geopolitical instability and supply disruptions, while Treasury yields influence borrowing and investment decisions far beyond the United States. Together, high energy prices and rising yields can become a powerful test of economic resilience—affecting household budgets today and financial decisions for months to come.

Connect with:

Jared Pincin

Associate Professor of Economics

Dr. Jared Pincin is a nationally respected expert on economic issues facing the United States of America

Economics and EducationEconomicsEconomics and Behaviour

Jeff Haymond, Ph.D.

Dean, School of Business Administration/Associate Professor

Research interests include economics and religion, as well as monetary theory

Financial Markets (General)Federal Trade Reserve PolicyFree TradeMinimum Wage / UnemploymentGovernment Regulation

Find Experts

Oct 28, 2026

1 min

Inflation Puts Household Budgets—and Candidates—Under Pressure

Inflation is keeping affordability at the center of American life as voters prepare for the November 3 midterm elections. Consumer prices rose 3.7% over the year ending in September, with gasoline and other everyday expenses adding pressure to household budgets. For families already adjusting their spending, persistent price increases can mean difficult decisions about groceries, transportation and discretionary purchases. Those pressures also create political challenges. President Donald Trump and Republican candidates are defending their economic record, while Democrats argue that the administration’s policies have made everyday life more expensive. Tariffs and energy disruptions associated with the Iran conflict have become central points of debate. Although growth and employment remain important measures of economic performance, voters often judge the economy through the expenses they encounter most frequently. The debate highlights a distinction that can become lost in campaign messaging: slowing inflation means prices are rising more slowly, rather than returning to earlier levels. Families may continue feeling financial strain even when economic indicators improve. As candidates offer competing solutions, the larger question is which policies can improve purchasing power while supporting employment and economic stability. The election will test how strongly Americans connect those daily financial pressures to the leaders seeking their votes.

Oct 26, 2026

1 min

Midterm Campaigns Enter Their Final Full Week

The final full week before the November 3 midterm elections is bringing a surge of campaign appearances, advertising and voter outreach as Republicans and Democrats compete for control of Congress. President Donald Trump and prominent Democratic leaders are campaigning across key states, while competitive races in places such as Mississippi illustrate how the political battleground has expanded. Republicans are defending their congressional majorities as Democrats seek to turn dissatisfaction with the administration into electoral gains. The stakes extend beyond which party wins the most seats. Congressional control helps determine which legislation advances, how federal spending priorities take shape and how closely lawmakers investigate executive branch decisions. Continued Republican control could help the president advance his agenda, while Democratic gains could create additional obstacles and strengthen congressional oversight. Voters are also choosing governors and other state officials whose decisions directly affect schools, public services and local economies. For campaigns, the closing days present a challenge: persuading undecided voters while ensuring existing supporters cast their ballots. For voters, the election offers an opportunity to evaluate both candidates’ promises and their ability to govern. The results will help shape the direction of national policy during the remaining two years of the president’s term.

Oct 14, 2026

1 min

Supreme Court Expansion Debate Raises Questions About Judicial Independence

Should the Supreme Court remain at nine justices, or would a larger bench strengthen the nation’s highest court? That question is drawing renewed attention after a Republican-backed constitutional amendment to permanently limit the court to nine seats failed in the House in September. Democratic proposals include expanding the court to 13 justices, while supporters and opponents disagree over whether changing its size would improve its credibility or deepen political divisions. Although nine justices may seem like a constitutional requirement, Congress determines the court’s size. Its membership changed several times before settling at nine in 1869. Legislation introduced by Rep. Al Green would increase that number to 13, reopening a debate over how much influence elected officials should have over the structure of the judiciary. Supporters see expansion as a way to restore balance and bring additional perspectives to the bench. Critics worry that adding seats to secure favorable rulings could encourage future majorities to pursue similar changes. The broader issue is how to preserve public confidence in an institution designed to exercise independent judgment. The Constitution’s protections for federal judges, including service during good behavior and protection against salary reductions, are intended to shield them from partisan pressure. Changing the court’s membership would create new opportunities for presidential appointments, with consequences that could extend well beyond a single administration. As the debate continues, Americans face a consequential question: What reforms would strengthen accountability while preserving the Supreme Court’s ability to interpret the law independently?

View all posts