PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
Democrats wonder why, at a time when the economy remains sluggish and stocks are mired in the longest bear market since the Great Depression, they're getting no public backing for their economic agenda. Here's a clue: They don't have one.
Sure, Iraq has pushed economic news off the front page. And it's also true that this slowdown hasn't generated the kind of steep rise in unemployment that usually galvanizes worried voters. But the big reason the Dems are nowhere is that they have nothing innovative or even interesting to say.
Their agenda? The Dems have no trouble slamming President Bush for his handling of the economy. They say the minimum wage should be raised and unemployment benefits should be extended. And they want tougher regulation of accountants and crooked CEOs -- but so does Bush.
TERRIFIED MUMBLING. Ask if Democrats want to roll back the 2001 tax cuts, however, or what they would do with the public money if the tax bill were scaled back, and you get a cacophony of answers. Most Democrats are terrified of confronting the tax issue before the election. So they mumble about it being the President's problem.
Lately, they've begun calling on Bush for an economic summit to get them off the hook. Fat chance. It's not just that Bush won't rise to the bait. Who really needs another Beltway summit right now, anyway?
On Oct. 11, the Dems trotted out their weak-kneed agenda for all to see at an economic forum on Capitol Hill. The event featured a fistful of party luminaries, from House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) and Senate Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) -- both possible 2004 Presidential candidates -- to Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and a gang of former economic advisers to Bill Clinton.
NO NEWTS. And on Oct. 15, Gephardt is scheduled to give what's he's billing as a major economic address, calling for pension reform and tough new accounting oversights. A couple of week's ago, Daschle laid out his agenda -- a similarly bland pastiche, with a couple of different twists here and there. So did former Vice-President Al Gore.
Given that high-stakes midterm elections loom in November, you would think that the Democrats would be bolder and more unified than this. Contrast this year's Dems to the GOP in 1994 -- the time of Bill Clinton's midterm contest. That year, Newt Gingrich designed his Contract with America, and it became the umbrella under which Republican candidates throughout the country could stand. Through the Contract, Gingrich was able to nationalize individual House and Senate races and give voters a way to focus their economic frustration. The result: a stunning off-year victory in which Republicans captured the House for the first time in 40 years.
Democrats can only dream of such a platform. Instead, they offer little more than tinkering. Because the party has no consensus on the two big fiscal issues -- tax cuts and budget deficits -- the Dems are left to flop around, talking around issues rather than confronting them.
MAJOR ISSUE. They all have the anti-Bush patter down: Since the President took office the stock market has lost $5 trillion, business investment is off 7.6%, 2.1 million private-sector jobs have been lost, the $5.3 trillion, 10-year projected budget surplus has disappeared, etc., etc.
Voters aren't oblivious to the nation's economic ills, either. An Oct. 6 New York Times/CBS News poll reported that 26% of those surveyed felt the economy was the most important issue facing Washington, nearly equal to the 30% who called terrorism the highest priority. And an Oct. 10 Fox News poll reported that 45% of those surveyed were more concerned about the economy and jobs than about terrorism.
When asked which party was doing a better job on the economy, however, these polls show voters evenly divided. Amazingly, the Dems are getting no traction on an issue that they should own right now.
It remains possible that economic issues will somehow catch fire in the three weeks before the election. But the Democrats are going to have to do a lot more than criticize Bush if they hope to energize voters. Where's a real plan? If they can't come up with an alternative economic blueprint with appeal to voters, they'll look at 2002 as a lost opportunity of historic proportions.
Gleckman is a senior correspondent in BusinessWeek's Washington bureau. Follow his views every Tuesday in Washington
Watch, only on BusinessWeek Online Edited by Douglas Harbrecht
Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.
Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed.
Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video.
To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here.
Copyright 2002, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.
Printer-Friendly Version
