Raising the Issue: The ?two Americas? theme may or may not be politically correct in 2004, but it embodies an essential truth that the Democrats should keep pounding.
Dear John:
With less than four months to go until election day, it seems clear that the national political debate can really be distilled down to two central issues. Number one, of course, is the war. Number two is the domestic economy?and more specifically, the Bush administration?s inept performance in managing the economy so that the benefits and pain that accompany positive and negative developments are broadly shared. On November 2 a large number of Americans are going to ask themselves Ronald Reagan?s old question from 1980: ?Am I better off than I was four years ago??
If they are honest with themselves, it is clear that the answer must be a resounding ?no.? And frankly, they might also answer the same way if they were to look back 20 or 30 years, rather than just four. The truth of the matter is that the George W. Bush years have been mostly about a dramatic acceleration in a series of negative economic trends that have plagued the American economy for the last few decades. Chief among these trends are the stagnation in wages and incomes for low and moderate-income people and the explosive growth of incomes and wealth for people at the top.
What people like Senators Kerry and Edwards are saying with their ?two Americas? talk is that it is fundamentally unfair and un-American when such a huge proportion of the growth in our economy is tilted toward comparatively small number of folks doing spectacularly well ? especially when millions in the ?middle? do not have access to basic necessities like health insurance or decent, affordable housing.
As I argued earlier this year in an issue of NC Policy Brief, the data confirm the two Americas argument. During the last two decades of the 20th century, the after tax incomes of the top 1% of Americans has increased by more than 200%. The after tax incomes of the bottom fifth have increased only 9%. Today in America, the top 1% (about 2.8 million people) own more than the bottom 40% (110 million people) combined. These trends slowed slightly during the Clinton years, but have picked up again under President Bush as, even during the recession, incomes for the wealthy continued to rise. These trends contrast dramatically with the 1950?s and 60?s when the income gaps shrank or held steady.
Now, I know that many observers are uncomfortable with the ?two Americas? talk. Some Democrats are concerned that the theme doesn?t poll well in some circles. They may be right. There may be better and more artful ways to say what has to be said. The fact remains, however, that more and more Americans are becoming painfully aware of the fact that they are not sharing in the growing prosperity that is enjoyed by their wealthier fellow citizens. Moreover they know instinctively that this inequity is not the result of ?big government? or ?high taxes? or ?burdensome regulation.? These people know that the democratic institutions of the American government are probably all that stands between them and the transformation of our country into a kind of banana republic on steroids. These people are ready for the basic economic message that Kerry and Edwards are selling.
