In 2008 Democrats made historically large gains at the state level in state senators and state representatives and governors. In 2010 they lost 680 of those seats, a historically large setback, and a far larger defeat comparatively than we took in the Federal level House. Why voters behaved this way at state level and how it affected their Federal level vote is absolutely central to making sense of the election results and particularly the exit polls. The exit polls show that many people support policies Democrats at the Federal level advocated and voted for in various bills, but then voted for Republicans at state and Federal level.
So how can this contradictory behavior make any sense?
Certainly messaging played a part as did the perception among so called “low information” voters that Democrats had the majority in House and Senate and did not deliver on many crucial policies, especially in the Senate. But these are NOT the main reason Democrats took a drubbing. And continuing to ascribe voters behavior in 2010 to ignorance is not the way to win hearts and minds, folks, even if there’s some truth to it.
So what is this alternative explanation?
The states nearly all have balanced budget requirements that mandate cuts in expenditures when revenues shrink. While the Federal government has been stimulating spending fairly significantly and the FED has been pushing on the string of interest rate cuts, the states have been cutting jobs and expenditures at a massive clip that has matched or exceeded the Federal stimulus. States began cutbacks in 2007 that accelerated in 2008, and that cost Republicans hundreds of seats as austerity began to inflict pain at the state level in the 2008 election.
But the pain caused by state level cutbacks has not diminished since 2008; it has increased. Further, at state level, taxes have been increased, not cut. Let me repeat that, at state level, where Democrats had the lion’s share of state and senate and governorships until this election, taxes have been increased, not cut.
Democrats increased taxes and cut spending at the state level. The nice little Federal tax cut that Obama and Federal level Democrats delivered disappeared in the face of state level increases and cutbacks. Voters didn’t notice it not only because Democrats at Federal level did not trumpet it enough, they didn’t notice it because it did little to offset the pain of mainly Democratic inflicted tax increases at state level. And that direct state level pain has had particular impact in states that have not seen any recovery in revenues (Florida and much of mid-west where Democratic losses were huge) and where tax increases and expenditure cutbacks have been most dramatic.
California went Democratic at state level and stayed Democratic at Federal level because the Republicans inflicted the pain at state level. The state level support the Federal level Democrats sent last year to the states has made little impact—it was sucked up just staving off some of the expenditure cutbacks and did little to prevent job cuts that take months to put into action and which would need to happen anyway given revenue trends at state level. And while private sector jobs are very slowly coming back, the public sector continues to be cut massively, particularly since the census has been completed. This is why the unemployment rate continues high despite people dropping off the unemployment rolls in massive numbers and despite the slow growth in private sector jobs. (And the private sector job growth alone is just not enough to even keep up with population increase, much less cut into the unemployment and underemployment that already affects about one in six.)
So what must be done? The Democrats at Federal level need to push, and push hard, for infrastructure expenditures, particularly road and bridge repairs that cannot be delayed much longer. Bridges are designed to have 50 year lifespans and the average age of bridges in the US is now 43. If you’ve ever had a refrigerator or any other appliance or car, you know design lifespans can sometimes be exceeded, but fairly rarely. Our bridges are going to start to fail at a frightening clip if nothing is done.
The 50 billion Obama proposed to spend on infrastructure is nothing compared to what is actually needed. What is also needed is to pair Federal spending with authorizing state level borrowing with Federal backing on those loans for infrastructure repair. States are very likely to soon start having credit problems, so Federal loan guarantees are probably necessary for state borrowing to repair infrastructure to be done at the lowest interest rate possible.
Democrats at the Federal level need to make this priority number one. Democrats in charge of states and cities need to push for significantly increased Federal level assistance to states, counties and cities.
Second, state level cutbacks are having tremendous impact on education. We need a massive education funding bill, and most importantly, we must persuade Obama to stop bashing public education and unionized teachers. If he doesn’t he will be, and will deserve to be, a one-term president. I would support the teacher’s unions to state now, unequivocally, that unless Obama fires his current anti-union Education Department staff, they will not support his run for a second term. (In fact, I would support all unions to do that and also to do that for any Democratic candidate for any office who does not support card check and other pro-union legislation. Reid won only because of strong union backing; Lincoln lost largely because unions sat on their hands as they should have. Let that be a lesson.)
Republicans are now unable to avoid the blame for cutbacks and austerity, both at state and Federal level. The stealth obstructionism practiced by House Republicans in cahoots with Blue Dog Democrats is now impossible to hide. If the Democratic caucus in the House and President Obama push hard for infrastructure and education support, and the Senate reforms its rules so that Republican obstructionism there is made crystal clear and constantly public (we all know and most of us support the various ideas on Senate filibuster reform advocated by this site), this state level aid and job creation should have significant impact. If it is nixed by Republicans at either state or federal level, Democrats at all levels must scream that every bridge that fails, every pothole that damages someone’s car, every state level cutback or tax rise is their fault. Every job shipped overseas because we supposedly don’t have the workforce skills for it, every kid who can’t read or write or understand science, every one of our educational failures and cutbacks must be squarely blamed on Republicans. Jobs in infrastructure (including repairing our power distribution system and shifting to an energy independence power infrastructure via solar, wind, electric vehicle and 4th generation nuclear development) and education must be the Democrat’s theme going into 2012. These are two key areas of traditional Democratic strength, and two key areas that would have state level impact in every state. (And again, Democrats won in CA because they strongly supported these kinds of initiatives, especially solar and wind.)
Voters voted against austerity and cutbacks at the state level, and kept marking the ticket for Republicans right on up the ticket for the most part. They voted against tax rises at the state level. If Republicans insist on borrowing money to keep Bush's tax cuts for the rich, they must be nailed on it. Democrats must insist on no tax cuts for the rich--the rich tax cuts Republicans want must go to infrastructure and education and state level support. And they must state it in just those terms. And if Republicans fail to agree, the tax rise on the middle and poor IS THEIR FAULT. If that money from Bush taxcut rollback is not sent back to the states, IT IS THEIR FAULT.