A Response to Greg Lehrer
Election thoughts of a moderate progressive (or liberal?)
I received a very thoughtful response from a former student, Greg Lehrer, to a recent column. It has helped me adjust my own thinking about this election. I cannot emphasize enough that we need to try and understand the reasons why we will vote for different candidates on Election Day.
The first lesson we need to learn is this. It is hard to be objective about abstract realities. We bring the lens of our past loyalties to bear when we try to make sense out of new information.
For example, is the American economy in good shape these days? Given that the idea of an “economy” is an abstraction, we are at a disadvantage (both sides) when we try to relate personal experience and yesterday’s judgements to present reality.
Many goods and services cost more. Check! There was inflation. Check! More than necessary? Caused by shipping disruptions and supply limitations due to Covid? Or too aggressive an attempt to expand the money supply in order to keep employment up? Or were some inflated costs due to increased profits in a semi-monopolistic market? Or, just perhaps, necessary given the economic realities of the past six years?
Now inflation is where we want it to be (according to almost all economists). Income has been increasing, on the whole, faster than prices have been rising. Some relatively conservative journals and newspapers report that our economy is the envy of the world. Still many live paycheck to paycheck and there are still many people living below the poverty line. An overview on Google:
In 2023, there were about seven million families in the United States living below the poverty line. The poverty rate in the US was 11.5% in 2022, which means that 37.9 million people fell below the poverty threshold.
The poverty threshold is the official measurement of poverty used by the federal government. In 2023, a family of four was considered impoverished if their income was $30,000 or lower. However, Alaska and Hawaii use a slightly different measure due to a higher cost of living.
Income growth over the past forty years has been low for the lowest income groups. Many blame government policies, or lack of them.
But is the economy the primary issue in this election? I personally think it should be, but I know that many voters think differently.
I think that many other issues are overblown, on both sides, and are a form of camouflage (like the trans athlete controversy), but others seem important to me, and I understand why they are important to others.
As for immigration and the Southern border. I believe that circumstances (technological, climate, political oppression, information sources, organized trafficking and illegal transport of paying customers) have radically changed in the past two decades. Our immigration laws are substantially out of date. We need to enact new comprehensive laws and then enforce them in an efficient, effective and humane way. This can be bipartisan. This should be bipartisan as there is no Republican or Democrat way of doing it. The next administration, I believe, will get it done. Therefore, is it really a partisan issue as of now? Maybe evidence of lost opportunities and playing politics with human lives for several decades? Neither Party can escape blame.
Much of what Trump says about illegal immigration is crowd pleasing exaggeration. Many feel that he won’t follow through with mass deportations. Some feel he will.
And then there is the fact that the President doesn’t govern alone. Hundreds of new people will replace political appointees across a wide range of government agencies and the White House staff. Congress and the Courts will play an oversize role. Will the Heritage Foundation policy proposals ( 2025 plan) carry weight with a Trump administration? Will what we call the “far-left” of the Democratic Party influence the Harris administration? And, in both cases, is it really likely? Or is it really bad?
The external world? Foreign policy? Not so foreign anymore. Woodword’s new book, War, claims the Biden administration has been very effective in this area. Many military personnel and experienced hands that worked for and with Trump, claim that he simply doesn’t understand the economic and political realities of our deeply interconnected world.
Others see the need for a major reset of American policy. Many think that Trump is incapable and Harris unwilling to do this.
I think Greg and I would both make reasonable explanations for our intended vote. That’s as it should be. It seems to me that intelligent people can emphasize different issues and weigh uncertainties as more or less likely. We know that both candidates receive constant exposure and either their repetitious but “safe” comments offend, as being lacking in specifics, or a misstatement is given far too much attention.
A note on political campaigning. Students of American election have long insisted that specific data and technical arguments fly past most voters and even give the impression that the candidate is not talking to them. Therefore, campaign advisors try to suppress them. Most candidates, nevertheless, do have policy statements that have depth and specifics, if a bit bland. Few read them.
I think most of us who are reading this newsletter can recognize and get passed vague threats, meaningless name calling, and petty personal slurs. We are likely to take them as the natural lack of civility in electoral politics. Unfortunately, it turns many people off to the extent of not listening at all and not voting.
In general, though, I think we can take most national candidates these days at their word. Trump plays to his base. Harris presents herself as a centrist. Thus, if Trump does some of what he promises to do it would be a risk to the economy and if Harris does what she promises to do, it is likely to keep us on the current relatively safe track. I personally would like to see a more progressive agenda, but suspect if I were on open seas and at the helm of the Queen Mary my actual turning the wheel would be almost unfelt.
Staying nautical. Roosevelt, as you may know, during World War II gave Winston Churchill a handwritten copy of some lines from Longfellow, “Sail on, oh ship of state, sail on, oh Union strong and great; Humanity with all its fears, With all the hopes of future years, is hanging breathless on thy fate.”
Maybe then an exaggeration. And maybe not. We have a right, I suppose, to be uneasy about the future. Fortunately, we don’t get to experience what didn’t happen.
So, Greg, we may cast different votes, and we may not. That won’t keep me hoping you will stop by soon for an alumni event and lift a beer.