For all the "experts" on Reagan from both sides, a little perspective.
Closing the ‘Empathy Gap’
The arch-conservative Ronald Reagan won the allegiance of blue-collar voters. How he did so may offer a lesson (or two) for today.
PHOTO: THE LIFE IMAGES COLLECTION/GETTY IMAGES
By
Morton Kondracke
July 25, 2017 6:47 p.m. ET
23 COMMENTS
Donald Trump’s election has riveted attention on blue-collar voters, whose economic and social woes—and discontent with the status quo—gave Mr. Trump his margin of victory. It is this group that Henry Olsen discusses in “The Working Class Republican,” an attempt to understand the future of “blue-collar conservatism.” Mr. Olsen’s title character—hero, really—is Ronald Reagan, the last Republican before Mr. Trump to win the blue-collar vote. His book explores how Reagan did so and what his example means, in the long term, for the GOP and the country.
A career conservative think tanker now with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, Mr. Olsen admits that he long thought of Reagan as basically a tax- and government-slashing near-libertarian, succeeding politically where Barry Goldwater failed but following a similar script. Mr. Olsen decided to re-examine the record and concludes that Reagan was a proponent of “New Deal conservatism” who believed that government should help those in need and enable America’s working class to enjoy “dignity, comfort and respect.”
Both political parties, Mr. Olsen says, have ignored the needs of a working class rocked by globalization, technology and immigration, setting the table for Mr. Trump’s election. Like Reagan, Mr. Trump is opposed to cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits and seems committed to combating what he sees as unfair foreign trade practices. Like Reagan, he has appealed to white workers who are today disdained by conservative elites as “takers” and by liberals as “deplorables.”
But Mr. Olsen disputes the idea that Mr. Trump is “the new Reagan.” Mr. Trump has employed “racialism and white nationalism,” he says, while Reagan was “free of bigotry” and welcoming toward immigrants. Mr. Olsen also doubts Mr. Trump’s ability to deliver on his promises to better the lot of workers. “He has shown no inclination to develop the type of comprehensive philosophy that drove Reagan’s political ambitions.” Like Reagan, Mr. Trump expresses a “love” for ordinary Americans, but Reagan meant it.
PHOTO: WSJ
THE WORKING CLASS REPUBLICAN
By Henry Olsen
Broadside, 345 pages, $27.99
Mr. Olsen repeats this thesis incessantly and irritatingly, but he has Reagan’s outlook right. Reagan grew up in a working-class home, experienced the Depression and knew what hardship was. He cast his first vote for FDR in 1932, wrote that he “idolized” Roosevelt and called himself a onetime “hemophiliac liberal.” He was president of the Screen Actors Guild, opposed right-to-work laws and campaigned for Harry Truman.
Reagan began doubting the liberal faith in the 1950s after fighting communists in Hollywood and having to pay taxes as a movie actor at the top marginal rate of 94%. He started making speeches for General Electric in 1954 and discovered virtues in business and businessmen. But he did not become a Republican until 1962. He often said that he did not leave the Democratic Party—it left him, by becoming weak on national security and ever more wedded to high taxes, regulation, welfare and metastasizing bureaucracies.
Critics can cite plenty of evidence that Reagan became a hardline conservative, notably his 1964 speech a week before the election boosting Goldwater and his early efforts (blocked by congressional Democrats) to slash domestic spending. But a close review of Reagan’s speeches and actions, Mr. Olsen says, shows that he “always recognized that government could and should legitimately act to ensure that every American had sufficient material goods and opportunity.” In the 1964 speech, he defended Social Security and declared that “no one in this country should be denied medical care for lack of funds.”
Reagan won workers away from the Democratic Party in 1980 by asking “are you better off than you were four years ago?” In the Carter era of stagflation and gas lines, the answer was obviously “no.” Reagan made it clear, as Mr. Olsen emphasizes, that he valued workers and respected their values. But his appeal to this bloc wasn’t merely rhetorical. He won the allegiance of working-class voters—“Reagan Democrats,” as they came to be called—by conquering inflation and rekindling economic growth through across-the-board tax cuts and tax reform, creating millions of jobs. What he sought to cut from the budget, Mr. Olsen maintains, was bureaucracy and spending not targeted at the “truly needy.”
Mr. Olsen is at odds with current attempts at entitlement reform, especially the proposals of House Speaker Paul Ryan, Sen. Ted Cruz and Tea Party Republicans. He also opposes tax cuts skewed to the wealthy. After Barack Obama’s 2012 victory, he notes, GOP strategists said that they had to close a gender gap and ethnic gap. Mr. Olsen says that what really hurts the party is “an empathy gap.” To make empathy concrete, he favors cutting payroll taxes for workers and allowing tax cuts for corporations that hire Americans or raise wages.
What would Reagan do at the current moment? Mr. Olsen speculates that he would repeal ObamaCare’s coverage mandates but guarantee that people would not lose the coverage they had obtained through the program’s exchanges or Medicaid expansion. To deal with out-of-control entitlements, he would means-test Social Security and Medicare on the Reaganite principle that, in Mr. Olsen’s words, “benefits should go to people who need them.”
As to a 2020 posing of the question “are you better off?”: Mr. Olsen fears that if Republicans continue to misread Reagan—and assuming that Mr. Trump does not fulfill his pro-working-class promises—the answer will be “no.” He implies that “Reagan Democrats” will then return to FDR’s party if it can figure out how to appeal to them. What will happen if Democrats continue heading left toward high-tax, high-unemployment, European-style social democracy is anyone’s guess.
Mr. Kondracke is the former executive editor of Roll Call and co-author, with Fred Barnes, of “ Jack Kemp : The Bleeding-Heart Conservative Who Changed America.”
Appeared in the July 26, 2017, print edition.
Closing the ‘Empathy Gap’
The arch-conservative Ronald Reagan won the allegiance of blue-collar voters. How he did so may offer a lesson (or two) for today.
PHOTO: THE LIFE IMAGES COLLECTION/GETTY IMAGES
By
Morton Kondracke
July 25, 2017 6:47 p.m. ET
23 COMMENTS
Donald Trump’s election has riveted attention on blue-collar voters, whose economic and social woes—and discontent with the status quo—gave Mr. Trump his margin of victory. It is this group that Henry Olsen discusses in “The Working Class Republican,” an attempt to understand the future of “blue-collar conservatism.” Mr. Olsen’s title character—hero, really—is Ronald Reagan, the last Republican before Mr. Trump to win the blue-collar vote. His book explores how Reagan did so and what his example means, in the long term, for the GOP and the country.
A career conservative think tanker now with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, Mr. Olsen admits that he long thought of Reagan as basically a tax- and government-slashing near-libertarian, succeeding politically where Barry Goldwater failed but following a similar script. Mr. Olsen decided to re-examine the record and concludes that Reagan was a proponent of “New Deal conservatism” who believed that government should help those in need and enable America’s working class to enjoy “dignity, comfort and respect.”
Both political parties, Mr. Olsen says, have ignored the needs of a working class rocked by globalization, technology and immigration, setting the table for Mr. Trump’s election. Like Reagan, Mr. Trump is opposed to cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits and seems committed to combating what he sees as unfair foreign trade practices. Like Reagan, he has appealed to white workers who are today disdained by conservative elites as “takers” and by liberals as “deplorables.”
But Mr. Olsen disputes the idea that Mr. Trump is “the new Reagan.” Mr. Trump has employed “racialism and white nationalism,” he says, while Reagan was “free of bigotry” and welcoming toward immigrants. Mr. Olsen also doubts Mr. Trump’s ability to deliver on his promises to better the lot of workers. “He has shown no inclination to develop the type of comprehensive philosophy that drove Reagan’s political ambitions.” Like Reagan, Mr. Trump expresses a “love” for ordinary Americans, but Reagan meant it.
PHOTO: WSJ
THE WORKING CLASS REPUBLICAN
By Henry Olsen
Broadside, 345 pages, $27.99
Mr. Olsen repeats this thesis incessantly and irritatingly, but he has Reagan’s outlook right. Reagan grew up in a working-class home, experienced the Depression and knew what hardship was. He cast his first vote for FDR in 1932, wrote that he “idolized” Roosevelt and called himself a onetime “hemophiliac liberal.” He was president of the Screen Actors Guild, opposed right-to-work laws and campaigned for Harry Truman.
Reagan began doubting the liberal faith in the 1950s after fighting communists in Hollywood and having to pay taxes as a movie actor at the top marginal rate of 94%. He started making speeches for General Electric in 1954 and discovered virtues in business and businessmen. But he did not become a Republican until 1962. He often said that he did not leave the Democratic Party—it left him, by becoming weak on national security and ever more wedded to high taxes, regulation, welfare and metastasizing bureaucracies.
Critics can cite plenty of evidence that Reagan became a hardline conservative, notably his 1964 speech a week before the election boosting Goldwater and his early efforts (blocked by congressional Democrats) to slash domestic spending. But a close review of Reagan’s speeches and actions, Mr. Olsen says, shows that he “always recognized that government could and should legitimately act to ensure that every American had sufficient material goods and opportunity.” In the 1964 speech, he defended Social Security and declared that “no one in this country should be denied medical care for lack of funds.”
Reagan won workers away from the Democratic Party in 1980 by asking “are you better off than you were four years ago?” In the Carter era of stagflation and gas lines, the answer was obviously “no.” Reagan made it clear, as Mr. Olsen emphasizes, that he valued workers and respected their values. But his appeal to this bloc wasn’t merely rhetorical. He won the allegiance of working-class voters—“Reagan Democrats,” as they came to be called—by conquering inflation and rekindling economic growth through across-the-board tax cuts and tax reform, creating millions of jobs. What he sought to cut from the budget, Mr. Olsen maintains, was bureaucracy and spending not targeted at the “truly needy.”
Mr. Olsen is at odds with current attempts at entitlement reform, especially the proposals of House Speaker Paul Ryan, Sen. Ted Cruz and Tea Party Republicans. He also opposes tax cuts skewed to the wealthy. After Barack Obama’s 2012 victory, he notes, GOP strategists said that they had to close a gender gap and ethnic gap. Mr. Olsen says that what really hurts the party is “an empathy gap.” To make empathy concrete, he favors cutting payroll taxes for workers and allowing tax cuts for corporations that hire Americans or raise wages.
What would Reagan do at the current moment? Mr. Olsen speculates that he would repeal ObamaCare’s coverage mandates but guarantee that people would not lose the coverage they had obtained through the program’s exchanges or Medicaid expansion. To deal with out-of-control entitlements, he would means-test Social Security and Medicare on the Reaganite principle that, in Mr. Olsen’s words, “benefits should go to people who need them.”
As to a 2020 posing of the question “are you better off?”: Mr. Olsen fears that if Republicans continue to misread Reagan—and assuming that Mr. Trump does not fulfill his pro-working-class promises—the answer will be “no.” He implies that “Reagan Democrats” will then return to FDR’s party if it can figure out how to appeal to them. What will happen if Democrats continue heading left toward high-tax, high-unemployment, European-style social democracy is anyone’s guess.
Mr. Kondracke is the former executive editor of Roll Call and co-author, with Fred Barnes, of “ Jack Kemp : The Bleeding-Heart Conservative Who Changed America.”
Appeared in the July 26, 2017, print edition.
