In the last several postings, this writer has reviewed political
developments prior to this last election that led to the results the citizenry
faces today. To date, this blog has
described how the Democratic Party, if only rhetorically, turned its back on
its traditional base, the white working class (WWC). In this posting, the writer wants to briefly
describe what has been taking place on the other side, that being the
Republican efforts since the 1960s.
All of this is meant to aid civics
teachers who want to make sense of the current political landscape. The assumption is that while the most recent
election does not spell a transformational change, it does promise to be quite unsettling
to what Americans have come to expect of their political universe. While they might have voted for change, what
is in the offing might be a tad different from their expectations.
The variance of expectations is
mostly due to how Republicans have sold themselves to frustrated whites. The “make America great again” slogan can be
read as code to recapturing a time in which public policy catered to the whims
of the white population.
In the last posting, it was pointed
out that this current disaffection reflects both economic and social
complaints: economic loss of jobs and
minority claims for equality. The goal: recapture a time before there have been
significant changes in both our economic conditions and in the civil rights
status of many minority citizens.
These changes are judged by many to
be the causes of their problems. The
common wisdom among the unconnected[1] is that
such programs as welfare exist only to get minority votes at their
expense. This whole area of concern has
a strong racial component.
This spelled opportunity for
Republicans. Beginning with the sixties
and President Johnson signing the civil rights laws of that time, the GOP
captured the southern states from the Democrats. Whereas it used to be the solid South for the
Dems, they have ever since been solid red states.
But then there came opportunities in
the previously strong manufacturing states of the Midwest, commonly referred to
as the “rust belt.” There, jobs began to
be either transported to cheaper labor sites in the South or foreign countries,
or eliminated by automation. In
response, the GOP was in the position to promise better job creation with business-friendly
policies.
Their spiel was: workers could get back their jobs if they
lowered taxes for corporate America and the rich – this would free up money for
investment – and get rid of regulations.
If implemented, jobs would pour back to these areas. They cite Ronald Reagan’s “trickle down”
policy and the eventual boom to the economy during his administration.
What is not mentioned is the stimulus
effect that federal defense spending had on the economy. What is also glossed over is what happened to
the national debt. It mushroomed under
Reagan and it also shot up because of George W. Bush’s version of Reaganomics.
Bush’s efforts did not have the job
creation of the Reagan years and ended – due to regulation easing – in a ruined
economy. The Trump plans also promise the
same with a promised explosion in defense spending, infrastructure spending,
and a lowering of taxes and elimination of regulations. What can go wrong?
Well, this may be a question civics
teachers might ask their students.
Perhaps this time, the nation will experience the promise of supply-side
economics and there will be a significant uptick in jobs – hopefully so. Defense and infrastructure spending might do
the “job.” But there are other concerns.
Now that the GOP is in full control –
the only check on conservatives is that they do not have a filibuster proof
Senate – there is little to stand in their way of fulfilling their wish
list. What is included in that list? An overall word that describes what they want
is “privatization.”
They want to privatize just about all
government services so that their true constituents – the business class – can
reap a potential profit windfall. At the
state level, with Republicans gaining control of most statehouses, there has
been a rush to privatize, for example, prison systems.
This has resulted in significant
incidents of reported prisoner abuse.[2] Most citizens are unaware of this
problem. What is promised at the
national or federal level will affect the welfare of many citizens and will be
experienced not behind hidden places, like prisons, but in broad daylight.
Take plans to privatize Medicare. There, if Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s
plan is adopted, beneficiaries will be given a voucher and then individually
deal with insurance companies and medical facilities. The plan is seen by commentators as part of
replacing the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).[3]
Given that among the elderly, in the
upcoming years, there will be the last of those who benefitted from dependable
pensions programs – and instead will be on undependable 401 plans – the future
for the elderly seems precarious. But
that is not all the GOP might affect.
Of course, the Republicans will
continue to be against upping the minimum wage and still be against policies
that protect and advance organized labor.
While their leader, Mr. Trump, has come out against open trade – he
promised to negotiate better deals (whatever that means) – his party is firmly
in favor of continuing current trade policies.
This, if Trump is serious about his promises, will probably be a bitter
fight within the Republican ranks.
The bottom line is that in two years,
the WWC will probably not be any happier than it is today. In addition, because it is usual that a sitting
president’s party loses support in Congress in off-year elections, the
Democrats can situate themselves to begin their comeback in 2018.
One will see. In the Senate, many Democratic seats will
need to be defended – not a good sign for them.
But if things don’t get better for the WWC, given the promises of this
election, who knows what will happen?
But as important as 2018 will be,
2020 – a census year – election will be more so. If the Democrats can gain control of
statehouses and with the result of the census, they will draw the new
legislative and Congressional boundary lines.
This current control is what has given the Republican Party such an
advantage in the 2010s. One can be sure
that the pros of both parties are well-aware of this potential gain or loss and
will strategize accordingly.
[1] A moniker used by George Packer. See George Packer, “The Unconnected,” The New Yorker 92, no. 35 (2016): 48-61.
[2] See, for example, http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/09/12255/violence-abuse-and-death-profit-prisons-geo-group-rap-sheet
, accessed November 29, 2016.
[3] See, for example, http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/11/26/503158039/paul-ryans-plan-to-change-medicare-looks-a-lot-like-obamacare
, accessed November 29, 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment