Skip to main content

What's the Matter With Democrats?

Thomas Frank wrote a piece in the Wall St Journal Wednesday with that title. His answer: they embraced globalization, which enabled companies to outsource/offshore all the good union jobs, crushing the Democratic Party's core union/workingman membership.
Interesting theory, but I believe it is off the mark.
When I grew up in the South, the Democrats were clearly the party of the workingman. John Kennedy, stumping for votes in West Virginia coal mining country. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, creating the National Labor Relations Board, etc. Republicans were the party of John Lindsay, Nelson Rockefeller and Preston Bush. Wealthy country club members with Ivy League education.
So I share Mr. Frank's point of view of the origins. But not of the cause of the detour.
The Democratic leadership have converted en masse to the Religion of Environmentalim. As a result, they willingly sell out workers to (possibly) preserve some life form we would otherwise have no interest in protecting. Actually they sell out workers over the possibility that there is some lifeform at risk.
There is actually an excellent case in point in the February 8th Wall St. Journal p. A6, which describes an average wait time of seven years for approval for a new mining project. Mining jobs tend to be high-paying; commodity prices are doing well in this economy, and the country could certainly use the jobs. And mining jobs can't be off-shored.
However, the environmentalists, with their band of skilled lawyers, have learned how to delay or completely prevent many forms of development. (I won't defend the Republicans here; when they were in the majority they did little to reign in power of environmentalists and their legal counsel).
Mr. Frank: if you want to see the Democrats keep their majority position and reclaim the mantle of defender of the little man, don't worry about globalization, worry about the new religious order that has swept an old party.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Reasons We Think America is On the Wrong Course

I was listening to the Michael Medved show yesterday. He does a nice job at talk radio. But he was worked up because the CBS News Poll showed that 72% of Americans surveyed think the U.S. is on the wrong track. (When I went to CBS' site, it looks to me like the number is 69%, but that's an insignicant difference). Medved's view is that income for the poorest citizens are rising (recent government data), unemployment is low, stock market is high, no cold war, so why so pessimistic? Here are my answers: Several of our young men and women are being killed every day in a war that we are getting sick of. The deficit is some unimaginable, staggering number that my generation is imposing on my children. Social Security is bankrupt and both Congress and the Administration (both previous and current, and both Republican and Democratic) are unwilling to face the issue. There are virulent infectious agents in hospitals that are resistent to essentially all antibiotics, and the drug co...

Stimulus Plan

Mr. President: The House stimulus bill is awful. Dangerous. Counter-productive. It has a very high probability of making things worse!. Your man Rahm Emanuel is supposed to be a tough guy: turn him loose on the House Dems - they are selling you down the river. Some simple tests: the spending will improve long-term productivity; the spending will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the spending will happen fast; very, very fast. There may need to be some legislation to enable spending without years of environmental review. For example, spending on wind farms would improve long-run productivity and reduce dependence on foreign oil. But let's say the wind farm is a couple of miles offshore. You can't have environmental groups stopping the development to see if some fish will be harmed. This spending has to happen now. And, no tax cuts with the possible exception of AMT. People aren't going to spend any tax savings; they are going to pay their credit card bills or r...

Romney/Thompson dream ticket?

The role of Fred Thompson in yesterday's SC primary is as murky as his next step. Did he divide the religious vote and thereby hand Huckabee a loss? Or would those votes, had he not been there, have gone elsewhere? My instinct is that more of those votes would have gone to Romney or McCain than to Huckabee. Fred comes across to me as the thinking person's conservative: thoughtful on positions, a sense of history, a Federalist, serious about the war on terror and prepared to take the long view on it. His addresses have content, not sound bites - which may, unfortunately, be a drawback in 2008. Mitt is quickly seizing the stage as the most knowledgeable in the field on economics, growth and job creation. With a war still consuming dozens of billions, it isn't clear that the race will be won on voters' views of candidates job creation prowess. However, he gives off as much energy as Fred seems to absorb - Mitt's electron shell could power Fred. So, Mitt may be drawi...