United We Oppose, Divided We Govern
Anyone can tell you that Republicans are on the right and Democrats are on the left. But the left and right of what, exactly? The ubiquitous left-right dichotomy assumes that political parties can be placed along a one-dimensional ideological spectrum. This political fiction underlies most partisan political rhetoric; at the same time, it is becoming less and less true. Both Republicans and Democrats are largely unified on social issues, but are increasingly divided on the direction of proper economic policy.
Recent events in the United States highlight growing divides in both the political right and the political left. On the right, last year’s presidential election signaled the arrival of the alt-right and ethno-nationalism to the political mainstream. Since the Reagan Revolution, the Republican party has comprised a coalition between social conservatives and small-government economic conservatives. The essence of Republican coalition was reciprocity: each component of the coalition would support the other’s agenda, and received support for its own in return.
There is a growing rift between the party establishment and the Trump wing. Trump’s ideological coalition is distinct from the traditional social conservative-fiscal conservative marriage of convenience. Trump won with the support of Rust Belt swing voters more concerned with the relative decline of the white middle class in former manufacturing hubs than ideological commitments to “starve the beast” of the federal welfare state. In fact, many of these voters are beneficiaries of the welfare programs movement conservatives so wish to destroy. Are they, as a group, willing to give up Medicare and Social Security benefits in return for a lower top marginal tax rate?
Republicans’ failure to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act illustrates this dynamic perfectly. Even though Republicans have unified control over the Executive and Legislative branches, they have so far been unable to fulfill one of their central campaign promises. The reason for this is quite simple: Congressional leaders and Trump want different things.
Trump’s healthcare plans do not match those of the Republican mainstream. Although the White House has largely stayed quiet on the issue, his campaign positions included promises not to cut benefit programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and a pledge to devote resources to fight the opioid epidemic. Additionally, he derided the House version of the repeal and replace legislation as “mean”. Clearly, this is not the standard Republican health care platform. Trump’s base is not composed of small government fiscal conservatives.
Neither the House nor the Senate bills bore much resemblance to Trump’s professed policy positions. Trump let the more experienced Congressional Republicans draft his healthcare legislation, and the result is even less popular than Trump himself. Congressional Republicans came up against a central dilemma in healthcare policy: the most popular provisions of the ACA, such as coverage for pre-existing conditions, only work with government intervention in the healthcare market. McConnell and Ryan had a choice, and the Republican orthodox positions won out: the new bills nakedly cut taxes on the rich, and pays for those cuts with extensive benefit reductions to Medicaid and reduced subsidies to lower-income Americans to let them buy health insurance.
The Republican party is divided on economic issues. With the party in unified control of the federal government, it should be in a strong position to implement its platform. However, the Trump and establishment wings of the party want different things. Although both are conservative on social issues, establishment Republicans are laser-focused on cutting the size of the federal government, while Trump is more concerned with “America First,” restoring an idealized version of the country built on a strong, manufacturing-based middle class. There is an intrinsic tension between these two goals – the white middle class Trump seeks to restore relies upon government entitlements that fiscal conservatives aspire to eviscerate.
The beginnings of a similar divide could be seen in the Democratic party during the primary campaign, but the party has appeared unified since the election by its anti-Trump stance. There is growing dissension between the progressive and centrist wings of the Democratic Party. Both largely agree on social issues like guns and LGBTQ rights. However, there is a growing debate over economic policy. Centrists advocate for regulated capitalism and incremental change to the current system, while the party’s progressive wing advocates for a Northern-European style social welfare state with programs such as universal healthcare and free college tuition.
The Republican party’s transition to power after eight years as the opposition may foreshadow the future dynamics of the Democratic Party. While Democrats’ divisions may not be at the center of the political debate now, they won’t go away. The 2020 Democratic primary will be a contentious debate over the direction of the party, despite the appearance of unity in opposition to Trump.
Michael Fogarty ’19 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at michael.fogarty@wustl.edu.