In JFK Airport, en route to Salt Lake City: Two decisions regarding

the Dean presidential campaign appear imminent. Gov.

Dean is likely to refuse federal funding (thus gaining the freedom to

spend unlimited private money); and he is expected to receive the endorsement

of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU, pronounced "see

you"). These events are symptomatic of the collapse of a set of

institutions that, 20 years ago, amplified the political voice of ordinary

people. In those days, federal funding for presidential campaigns was

adequate to replace private money, so there were no big donors in presidential

politics. Everyone counted the same under the presidential campaign

finance system. As for major unions, they had a powerful influence on

the institutional Democratic party and supported candidates with whom

they had lasting relationships—politicians who had risen through

the political ranks mainly because of organized labor. Today, SEIU evidently

thinks that it cannot afford to support the man who best fits that description,

Dick Gephardt, because his chances of winning the presidency are too

low. Instead, they are backing someone who owes them nothing, who has

never had much to do with them, but who has harnessed mostly white-collar

support through clever use of the Internet and a strong anti-War stance.

Evidently, they think Gov. Dean has the best chance of winning and they

want to have some leverage over him.

Continue reading →

My Oct. 30 entry argues that

today’s "progressives" are best understood as conservatives,

seeking to maintain a set of institutions that they do not believe are

well designed, but which they prefer to the speculative market alternatives

promoted by the Right. I did not mean this as a criticism, since such

conservatism is valuable. Edmund Burke taught that we should hesitate

to overturn interrelated social systems that have evolved over generations;

they embody the experience of the people who have learned to live with

them. It is easy to prove that their design is inefficient or inequitable,

compared to some chalkboard alternative. But radical changes often go

awry. On these grounds, Burke rightly preferred the Old Regime in France,

for all its aribitrary, wasteful, unjust features, to the revolutionary

system that fell apart after it had cost millions of lives. Similarly,

I respect people who believe that public schools, unions, and welfare

programs are better than the radical alternatives suggested by economic

theory. The problem with progressivism is not that it is wrong. Rather,

it is politically and rhetorically weak, for it’s always difficult to

win elections with a grudging defense of the status quo.

Continue reading →

En route from Colorado to DC: I frequently talk to progressives who claim that Republicans and conservatives play the political game more skillfully (and roughly) than Democrats and liberals, which explains the success of the Right. Democrats would win if they could come up with simpler and more effective messages; choose issues that embarrass Republicans or split their constituencies; and tie individual conservative leaders to scandals.

Continue reading →

Alabama Governor Bob Riley is a very conservative Republican who is now fighting tooth-and-nail to rise taxes, increase school spending, and make the tax system more progressive. Currently, the effective tax rate on Alabama’s poorest citizens is about 10 percent of income; on the richest, it is less than 4 percent. Gov. Riley has decided that this is not What Jesus Would Do.

I think there are three crucial reasons why people on the left of center (the Civil Rights organizations, liberal Democrats, MoveOn, and others) should be rushing to Alabama and making a hero out of Gov. Riley:

• His proposal will lose without organized support on the left, butit could win with such support. Current polls show that Riley is getting only 27 percent support in households that earn less than $30,000, and only 44 percent of African Americans support the reforms. Poor people and people of color in Alabama are suspicious of government and especially of a Republican governor—understandably so. But they could be persuaded that the Riley plan is directly and powerfully in their interests. Imagine the effect, for example, of a Bill Clinton endorsement on Black radio stations.
• Changing Alabama’s tax code matters. There are 4.49 million souls in that state. Their tax code is deeply unfair, and their schools are terrible because of under-funding. The difference between passage and defeat for the Riley proposal is much more important than, say, the difference between a Schwartzenegger or a Davis victory in California.
• There is a potential to form a new coalition including African Americans, liberals, and some white evangelical Christians. There is no reason that white evangelicals should favor libertarian economic policies. Typically, their parents voted for FDR, and they should vote for equitable taxation. People like Gov. Riley are driven by principle. Their principles are wrong, in my opinion, when they consider such matters as whether the Ten Commandments should be engraved on huge boulders in courthouses. But they are principled people, and they could be persuaded to move left on economic matters. As Gov. Riley says,”According to our Christian ethics, we’re supposed to love God, love each other and help take care of the poor. It is immoral to charge somebody making $5,000 an income tax.”

So why aren’t the liberal national organizations running ads in Alabama?

My hunch is: they don’t want a Republican to get a “win,” and they’re not paying attention to a Southern state because they live on the East and West Coasts and wrote off Dixie long ago. If

I’m right, shame on them.

[Discussing this topic with colleagues today, I learned that Peter Beinart makes a very similar argument in an article entitled “Eyes on the Prize” in the New Republic (08/29/03). His article is very good, although it only chastises the civil rights organizations. I would think that other liberal groups are equally remiss.]