the stupid economy

From the start of the race until now, what we call "Iraq" has become a less prominent issue in this campaign and the economy has become more prominent. When people are asked what's important to them (check the polls linked to the blog for evidence) they say, to paraphrase the Clinton campaign of 1992: it's the economy, stupid. On one level, this is not unexpected. People need to feel, deeply, the consequences of federal policy before they see connections between themselves and national political races. And few issues run as deep and broad those concerning the pocketbook. I also find the rise of the economy as a campaign issue disheartening, for it means that many Americans can forget or ignore Afghanistan and Iraq and the devastating consequences of our foreign policy. The pocketbook is an everyday, felt reality but the wars can be turned off.

But for a moment, let's live with the economy as a hot-button issue. There's certainly plenty to make of it. According to The Nation, in the last year prices of staples in the American diet like oranges, eggs, bread, and milk have risen double digits (10-20 percent). For families living month-to-month, paycheck to paycheck, this is a painful blow. As we all know, the current administration's economic policies favor tax cuts for the top one percent, who've become richer during the administration of President Bush. And now we see an attempt to stimulate the economy and plans to bail out the banks who carelessly lent money to high-risk home buyers with bad credit because those loan recipients are now, quite predictably, defaulting. According to the same Nation article, real wages have been declining since 2000 when adjusted for inflation--your money just won't go as far. Add to this the related and even steeper rise of gas prices--which adds to the retail cost of many consumer products--and you've got a snowball of seemingly small-time economic issues that erect serious obstacles in front of every working family.

Echoing Billy Joel, Oratorical Animal says the problems with the economy in this campaign are rhetorical and boil down to a matter of trust: the candidate who can communicate on the economy question will win the nomination.

Let us hope one of them emerges. Clearly John Edwards' platform makes him the undisputed champion of the working class in this race, but his candidacy is floundering against the glitz of two fellow Democrats. Lacking Edwards, can basic economic issues energize supporters of a winning ticket? We know the GOP will be shouting "class warfare" and will be happy to make Iraq a second or third most important issue. (Immigration, anyone?) Democrats interested in winning cannot let them get away with it, and the best way to do this is to be faster and better at talking about and talking to the people who've been losing out in this economy for years.