The GOP's Hardest Sell

A few weeks back, I wrote for FrumForum on the ongoing battle in Alabama between Republican legislators and the state’s two largest teachers unions. So far, the GOP is winning, and as a conservative deeply worried about the fiscal stability of my state and nation, this makes me glad. But I fear that here in Alabama it will prove to be a pyrrhic victory. The comments from my fellow teachers sound like this: “I’m conservative, but this is too much.” “I might vote for the Republicans in a national election, but I’ll never vote for them again in a state election.” And on it goes. Many of the state workers who helped put Republican state governments in power are now turning away.

Part of this is a natural reaction – most voters want to know that their state is in good fiscal shape, but no one wants to see their own paychecks cut or benefits reduced. Think of it as fiscal NIMBYism, the old environmental adage about development – “not in my backyard.” My fellow state workers may be wrong on the merits, but I don’t blame them for feeling the way they do. After all, despite the fiscal risks, it’s their paycheck and pension on the line.

The bigger problem, though, is one of the GOP’s making, and one that I believe will have long-term negative consequences for both the Republican Party and our state and federal governments. The basic problem is this: by rallying the base on social issues, the Republican Party is gathering large numbers of voters who do not understand their party’s fiscal policy and have not been persuaded that the GOP’s plan for economic stability is correct.

I think of myself as a social conservative. I support modest, incremental restrictions against abortion, and while I’m uncomfortable with same-sex marriage, I could make my peace with some sort of civil union arrangement.  I support social conservatism, and I’m not suggesting the GOP abandon it outright. What I’m suggesting is that it’s dangerous to win elections on the basis of social issues, and the current furor over teacher benefits, pensions, Medicare, and Social Security at the state and federal level back up the point that the GOP and its conservative media outlets have vastly underestimated the level of middle-class anxiety about these plans, even among their own supporters.

The unfortunate truth about social conservatism is that, for the most part, these issues do not affect the day-to-day operations of government. They do not affect earnings, savings, investments or retirement. They do not relate to national defense or protections against terrorism. And while people on both sides of the aisle may believe that an issue like abortion is deeply important, the truth is that abortion can be reduced without government intervention. On the other hand, the only way to solve a very serious debt crisis at the state and federal level is by proposing and passing serious legislation. On that score, the GOP deserves a lot of credit for working hard at the state and federal level in the wake of last fall’s election.

The problem is that for a great many of those Republican voters, they didn’t really understand what they were getting. They understood the talk about cutting spending, but they never took seriously that it would mean cuts to Medicare or teacher pensions, or that their state-employed neighbor might be contributing more to insurance and retirement. GOP voters bought all of this without knowing what exactly they were buying because they felt comfortable with the culture of the Republican Party.  That culture is based in a large part on social issues that, though very important, ultimately take up very little time on the legislative agenda. The end result for the GOP is that when elections are based on cultural and social rhetoric, voters are left unprepared to support drastic economic measures, particularly those that run the risk of upsetting the public sector applecart.

So here we are in Alabama and Wisconsin and Ohio with teachers and other state workers furious at their Republican state governments, despite the fact that many of them were voted in less than year ago by the people who now feel so betrayed. The truth is that these politicians are doing exactly what they said they would do, and even though reducing government expenditures and gutting bloated bureaucracies has been a standard GOP issue since the Reagan years, state voters may well flip back to the Democrats in two years.

Of course, that would be an unwise decision. Out of crass self-interest voters may continue to support policies that will send their states and perhaps their nation off a financial cliff. But the Republican Party has to take a piece of the blame if this happens. By relying on social issues to win power – those that get out the vote but rarely dominate the legislative agenda – the GOP has failed to win elections on the basis of the specific policy proposals necessary to create a dynamic economy that in turn maintains a prosperous, upwardly mobile society.

Tweet