- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,114
- Likes
- 10,945
- Points
- 113
Change!
http://www.boston.com/news/politics...transfers_its_loyalty_money_to_the_democrats/
Big Business transfers its loyalty, money to the Democrats
By Peter Canellos, Globe Staff | December 2, 2008
The crush of economic developments surrounding Barack Obama last week - from the promise of a large government stimulus package, to the possibility of a bailout for automakers, to the creation of a new presidential advisory panel of economists - may or may not turn the economy around. And with a credit crisis of vast proportions, the economy may be bad enough that it will be hard to judge the impact of all the government activity.
But the Obama administration's promise of swift government action to protect companies and workers is likely to achieve one result that has been unthinkable for 75 years: It will make the Democrats the party of Big Business.
The two major political parties have been shifting their coalitions for a while now, as higher-income Americans move closer to the Democrats, despite the prospect of tax increases on high-wage earners. The Iraq war, which unsettled global markets, and the conservative social agenda combined to alienate many Wall Street executives from the Republican Party even before the recent financial meltdown.
In the recent presidential campaign, the financial sector, long the biggest backer of the Republicans, actually gave more money to the Democrats, by roughly $65 million to $59 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
This may not be a significant difference, given that Democrats outraised Republicans by substantial amounts overall. For example, lawyers and lobbyists, a traditionally reliable Democratic constituency, backed the Democratic presidential candidates over Republicans by a whopping $68 million to $21 million. The presence among the top-tier Democrats of Hillary Clinton, a New York senator who had cultivated a close relationship with Manhattan financiers, probably boosted Big Business contributions to her party beyond what they otherwise would have been.
But if the financial sector split the difference between the two parties in 2008, it will probably skew toward the Democrats in succeeding elections, as Obama becomes the chief advocate of the Wall Street bailout. Such a development would be shocking considering the animosity between Big Business and the Democratic Party that began during the New Deal of the 1930s, which drove up taxation and slapped new regulations across many industries. That animosity continued throughout the Reagan era, when businesspeople craved the lower tax rates and deregulation of Reaganite Republicans.
Since Reagan's heyday, however, the Republican Party has fallen apart in the Northeast and upper Midwest, home to many of the largest financial-service companies and industrial manufacturers. Corporate executives seem to be among the many Northerners who have bailed on a party that is increasingly dominated by Southern evangelicals.
There are no signs that Republicans are going to try to win back Big Business anytime soon. Even though the recent $700 billion bailout package was orchestrated by a Republican president, the GOP, as the party in exile, will almost certainly coalesce around opposition to it.
Many Republican House members were queasy about the plan to begin with, and the fact that they ultimately supported it won't prevent them from disassociating themselves from it in the future, the way Democrats voted for President Bush's No Child Left Behind law and then campaigned against it as soon as they had a plausible excuse.
Moreover, an antibailout position would be pleasing to the growing numbers of populists in the Republican Party. With Obama to blame for corporate giveaways, the populist lion of the GOP is likely to start roaring at any moment.
In fact, most of the party's 2012 presidential hopefuls - Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, and Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana - already conceive of themselves as heartland populists, eager to blame the coasts for the economic meltdown. Most of them are already warming up crowds with the type of anti-Wall Street rhetoric that used to be the bread and butter of Democrats.
Even former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, the only Northeasterner and businessman among the GOP contenders, recently weighed in against a bailout of the Big Three automakers, a surprising position, given his Michigan roots.
It's a reasonable guess that the more that Republicans become aligned with lower-income voters, the quicker they will lose their fondness for tax cuts and that the more that Democrats enjoy the support of upper-income voters, the more likely they will be to abandon plans to soak the rich with tax hikes.
Obama could end up resembling Ronald Reagan more than anyone could have imagined.
Peter S. Canellos is the Globe's Washington bureau chief. National Perspective is his weekly analysis of events in the capital and beyond. He can be reached at canellos@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics...transfers_its_loyalty_money_to_the_democrats/
Big Business transfers its loyalty, money to the Democrats
By Peter Canellos, Globe Staff | December 2, 2008
The crush of economic developments surrounding Barack Obama last week - from the promise of a large government stimulus package, to the possibility of a bailout for automakers, to the creation of a new presidential advisory panel of economists - may or may not turn the economy around. And with a credit crisis of vast proportions, the economy may be bad enough that it will be hard to judge the impact of all the government activity.
But the Obama administration's promise of swift government action to protect companies and workers is likely to achieve one result that has been unthinkable for 75 years: It will make the Democrats the party of Big Business.
The two major political parties have been shifting their coalitions for a while now, as higher-income Americans move closer to the Democrats, despite the prospect of tax increases on high-wage earners. The Iraq war, which unsettled global markets, and the conservative social agenda combined to alienate many Wall Street executives from the Republican Party even before the recent financial meltdown.
In the recent presidential campaign, the financial sector, long the biggest backer of the Republicans, actually gave more money to the Democrats, by roughly $65 million to $59 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
This may not be a significant difference, given that Democrats outraised Republicans by substantial amounts overall. For example, lawyers and lobbyists, a traditionally reliable Democratic constituency, backed the Democratic presidential candidates over Republicans by a whopping $68 million to $21 million. The presence among the top-tier Democrats of Hillary Clinton, a New York senator who had cultivated a close relationship with Manhattan financiers, probably boosted Big Business contributions to her party beyond what they otherwise would have been.
But if the financial sector split the difference between the two parties in 2008, it will probably skew toward the Democrats in succeeding elections, as Obama becomes the chief advocate of the Wall Street bailout. Such a development would be shocking considering the animosity between Big Business and the Democratic Party that began during the New Deal of the 1930s, which drove up taxation and slapped new regulations across many industries. That animosity continued throughout the Reagan era, when businesspeople craved the lower tax rates and deregulation of Reaganite Republicans.
Since Reagan's heyday, however, the Republican Party has fallen apart in the Northeast and upper Midwest, home to many of the largest financial-service companies and industrial manufacturers. Corporate executives seem to be among the many Northerners who have bailed on a party that is increasingly dominated by Southern evangelicals.
There are no signs that Republicans are going to try to win back Big Business anytime soon. Even though the recent $700 billion bailout package was orchestrated by a Republican president, the GOP, as the party in exile, will almost certainly coalesce around opposition to it.
Many Republican House members were queasy about the plan to begin with, and the fact that they ultimately supported it won't prevent them from disassociating themselves from it in the future, the way Democrats voted for President Bush's No Child Left Behind law and then campaigned against it as soon as they had a plausible excuse.
Moreover, an antibailout position would be pleasing to the growing numbers of populists in the Republican Party. With Obama to blame for corporate giveaways, the populist lion of the GOP is likely to start roaring at any moment.
In fact, most of the party's 2012 presidential hopefuls - Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, and Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana - already conceive of themselves as heartland populists, eager to blame the coasts for the economic meltdown. Most of them are already warming up crowds with the type of anti-Wall Street rhetoric that used to be the bread and butter of Democrats.
Even former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, the only Northeasterner and businessman among the GOP contenders, recently weighed in against a bailout of the Big Three automakers, a surprising position, given his Michigan roots.
It's a reasonable guess that the more that Republicans become aligned with lower-income voters, the quicker they will lose their fondness for tax cuts and that the more that Democrats enjoy the support of upper-income voters, the more likely they will be to abandon plans to soak the rich with tax hikes.
Obama could end up resembling Ronald Reagan more than anyone could have imagined.
Peter S. Canellos is the Globe's Washington bureau chief. National Perspective is his weekly analysis of events in the capital and beyond. He can be reached at canellos@globe.com.
