Hart Research Associates in a public opinion research firm, best known for its long-standing contracts with NBC and the Wall Street Journal.
In the memorandum they offer 10 talking points/advice for Democrats when talking about the economy. It is this kind of research that frames how politicians talk about issues like income inequality. I want you to evaluate 1 point: what evidence do they provide to support the point?; do you agree with their conclusion?
I agree that this is an enormous challenge to the US economy and specifically income inequality. Corporations don’t want to keep jobs in the US because they labor is more expensive (thanks to minimum wage, child labor laws, worker unions, and other workplace safety measures) Corporations essentially have no regard for human life, only their profit margins and take-home pay. By outsourcing jobs to other countries, they take in a greater profit margin because they don’t have to pay as much for the labor. I agree with the conclusion reached, as outsourcing is a key source of inequality in the US.
ReplyDeleteOne point is addressing the issue of improving workers wages. The evidence provided is 62% of people with incomes below 75,000 worry they are not being paid a fair wage. In addition voters of all incomes express fairly similar levels of concern about retirement security or the cost of gas. Furthermore, people do not want to simple hear "raising workers wages" but to hear more specific language people can relate to such as "people are paid enough to support their families." I agree with this point, I have heard many facts about inequality in America, but felt disconnected. I think the approach provided by this memorandum is on point.
ReplyDeleteAs a both a college student, and a Democrat, the point concerning "affordability of higher education," caught my attention. From following the news and policies of my local representatives and the general stances of both parties regarding education, I see a lack of attention regarding this specific issue.
ReplyDeleteOne piece of evidence provided to express the importance of this point, is that parents feel that decreasing/regulating the prices of higher education would lift a burden off of them. Another reason stated, is that a majority of Democratic voters see this type of education reform as very beneficial in the long term for our country as a whole.
However, I see this inaction on the rising prices of higher education coming from both the Republicans and the Democrats. This is specifically why I agree strongly with this idea that it would be a powerful point for the Democratic party to address. I think that Hart Research failed to notice another important reason; Many young people have an idea where they stand politically, but there is a lot of room for that opinion to grow and shift, more so than people who have had a rigid political ideology for a majority of their lives. Yet, getting college students to vote and care about politics is no easy feat. Speaking about an issue that they care deeply about, how much they are paying for college, would be a tactical political move for not just one election, but for future elections. The current and future college students who are effected by this will be the future voters and or politicians.
(Ana Kyriakos)
I choose to evaluate the 9th point: "Education issues - both K-12 schools and the affordability of higher education - are extremely important for key groups of voters". The first thing I noticed was that there was much less evidence for this problem compared to the other ones on the list. They talk about how the audience with the most concerns on this issue is parents, in the way that the majority of them want to increase funding for K-12 public schools and laws that reduce the cost of college, and therefore decrease student debt. Democrats, as the article states, see education as a main priority. I agree with the issue that education is a main priority and it should be because statistically, the more educated you are the better off you will be. However, one part that did upset me is that if you're not a parent, you are only 24% likely to want to increase the funding in public schools and only 40% likely to want to lower the costs of college. I think this is heartbreaking because it is an issue that effects everybody, it shouldn't be just a small fraction of the population (or a little bigger one if you are a parent). I really don't see what anyone has to lose if more money was put into the education system - it would only create America and our economy that much stronger.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though many are hurt by the economy and do not care about any person's political background as you can see in this reporting. It shows just how much our voters views have changed. Many who may consider themselves of middle class may not feel as though they are of that class due to their cost of living which is unfair. I believe that the article shows that in order for someone to be elected Democrat they have to have the economic savvy to make the country move forward in a progressive way.
ReplyDeleteOne point that democrats constitute about the economy is that the outsourcing of jobs is seen as one of the greatest challenges facing our economy. Outsourcing is the practice of having certain job functions performed by people outside of a company, or the country instead of in one’s country or in-house department. This is common in jobs like human resources where people in foreign countries can be paid less to do the same job that Americans can do. The democrats share statistics about voters who view outsourcing as the nation’s greatest economic problem (36%), ahead of the budget deficit (30%), healthy costs (26%) and other problems. Democrats believe that tax breaks that companies who outsource acquire, is not fair especially because they are giving away American jobs. I agree completely because companies that are outsourcing who are avoiding tax payments by hiding their outsource, are harming the American economy in 2 ways. First, they are taking away jobs that could be occupied by Americans, and thus could help stimulate the economy. Second, they are robbing the government of taxes that could be used to better our American society.
ReplyDeleteI was not surprised by point 7 which said that voters are more likely to respond positively to candidates who give concrete statements about helping the middle class. Politicians biggest downfalls are being vague and indirect a lot of times when they make statements about their big plans to fix issues plaguing the nation. The middle class, however it is classified, is a large and very important demographic so appealing to them could be very beneficial for a candidate in either party. It was interesting to see the number of people who supported things such as making a minimum tax rate for millionaires and increasing the minimum wage. These are crucial steps towards bridging the gap between rich and poor and a majority of the nation supports it. I believe it is important for people to vote based on the common good and not always specifically for their personal benefit. Many Republicans argue about us being a welfare state but doing things like educating children and paying working people will effectively reduce the amount of welfare and food stamps the lowest classes need.
ReplyDeleteJack O'Connor
As a student, I choose to talk about point 9. Although I, personally, do not have to pay off student loans, a number of my colleagues do. This point seems most relevant to me at this point in my life. While they do a great job of talking about the small populations of people who care about this issue, such as the 70% of swing voters who have college loans to pay off and the parents who have to worry about paying for their childrens education. They do not to a great job of talking about how urgent and important the issue of America's education system is. All citizens would benefit from better education in our K-12 schooling and more affordable college education. It would make our nation better as a whole. Point 9 had much less evidence as the rest of the point and seemed like less of an issue. However, they did talk about how, "Democratic based voters see improving our nation's education system as a central priority", but they only followed it up with a quote instead of more information on why it is a central issue.
ReplyDeleteCaitlin Crouse
I must say that I agree with point 9, higher education is priced ridiculously, especially when compared with other parts of the world. I would imagine that it is indeed true that education issues do not rank as a top concern for voters, as many are no longer in education. However the memorandum does not take into account the amount of the population that chooses not to vote, if their considerations on education were taken into account education may rank more highly. It makes sense that swing-voters that have an outstanding lean amount to pay off would be more concerned with paying it off; I know I am £12,000 and counting. I agree with the conclusion, one of the best ways to help strengthen the American economy is to improve the education system. This will see students leaving high school and/or university better qualified and more knowledgeable, meaning they will be able to have a more positive impact on the employment market.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA point that caught my attention was point 9. The reason it caught my attention is because I can personally relate to it. As a student with multiple loans, my biggest concern is how I'm going to pay them back once I graduate. Additionally, I would like to continue my education by going to law school, which means that tuition will be higher and so will my loan debt. I definitely agree with a point they made regarding the education system. It is a way to improve our economy. If people are receiving better education, the more successful they will be.
ReplyDeleteA point that was intriguing to me was number 7. I agree that in order for this society to become better, we need to focus our attention on expanding opportunity for people by increasing pay, improving education and creating more jobs. Although these points are very concrete, it is hard for politicians to put these points into action. In order for society to move forward and bridge the gap between wealthy and poor, we must implement a better educational system because education is the building blocks for obtaining a high paying job. If college can become more affordable and with the help of funding for k-12 schools, there can be an increase in the number of children and adults getting educated, therefore increasing the number of jobs they can obtain and closing the wage gap.
ReplyDeleteThis article was well-written, informative, and used examples and charts when necessary to convey a point. One sentence that truly stuck out to me was, “For Democrats to succeed politically in the 2014 elections and beyond, it is imperative that we articulate a more compelling economic vision and agenda”. I found this interesting because politicians of all parties should feel similarly about this- that we need a more definitive, detailed, and promising economic vision and agenda. Two points that I found extremely interesting were numbers 4 and 9. The fact that 65% of swing voters worry about their economic stability forces me to question minimum wage and how taxes should be broken down. Number four leads into and interesting ninth point. Number nine claims that voters want to see an education reform. Voters want to see that students will be able to receive a good education with plenty of opportunities. Because of the problems stated in the fourth point they are unable to afford much else other than their basic living expenses. Since Democrats believe that education is an important issue it would behoove them to concoct a sound agenda incorporating these two issues, which would hopefully encourage swing voters to vote for them. This argument shows that swing voters often take into account the inequality they face and look at the politicians that could help eradicate that dividing line.
ReplyDeleteI decided to read this article because I feel at times some people do not have a complete understanding of the issues at hand. Number 4 is the most important to me because the cost of living is always a hot bedded issue during elections. 65% of swing voters are experiencing the worry that their income is not being able to keep up with the cost of living. I think this is very alarming because when voting it should be a well thought out and confident decision. Hart is doing something that can be very important to the process of deciding to vote democrat.
ReplyDeleteKendall Heatley
The 6th tip warns that attempting to get more jobs for the "middle class" is a bad idea because not many people identify as the middle class anymore. Because of this if one were to spread the democratic message of creating better jobs for the middle class then it would weaken the argument since that doesn't include the desired members. They tell us that apparently only 49% if swing voters believe themselves to be middle class. I suppose I agree with this however I am not sure if people would be the warded off by saying better jobs for the middle class is a good idea.
ReplyDelete-Matt Fera
Point 4: The central economic concern for voters today is that their incomes are not keeping up with the rising cost of living. Many voters experience this as a crisis of affordability.
ReplyDeletePrices seem to be rising for everything and this is making it more difficult for people to afford even the most basic of necessities. In the article, it says that two thirds of swing voters report that their income is falling behind the cost of living, while most of the remaining voters are breaking even. It also notes that the cost of gas is a problem for people because many need to travel to get to work/ school/ etc., as well as to buy food and other goods. Point four also relates to point nine about college tuition, which is also rising and has many students drowning in their student loans.
I agree with the statement that was posted at the end - "It's getting harder and harder for working people to afford a middle-class lifestyle. College tuition keeps rising, putting college out of reach for many, and burdening others with student debt. It costs over $50 to fill up your tank. Politicians and CEOs keep giving themselves raises, while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet. If you work hard and play by the rules, you should be paid enough to live on." For a start, it is relatable. If people can't afford the most basic things, especially here in the U.S. of all places, then clearly there is a problem that needs to be solved.
There is no denying that people like ideas that they believe will benefit them. Which is why it is no surprise to me that they claim voters respond favorably when get a message about economic growth that benefits "all of us".
ReplyDeleteThey support their claim with results form a survey citing:
1) Fully 59% of voters say making the economy work for everyone, not just the
wealthy few, is an extremely important goal.
2) Similarly, 59% completely agree that “we need to make sure that everyone, not
just the CEOs, get their fair share in a growing economy.”
Along with several other surveys.
I completely agree that people would respond favorable to messages claiming that those people will benefit. It seems rather intuitive. The tricky part is actually supporting programs which will bring REAL benefits, and aren't just nice things to hear.
I agree with your findings. It is surprising how often people do not realize that people like ideas that they themselves will benefit from. It then also makes sense that the majority of voters would support economic growth that supports all classes instead of just the upper class and wealthy 1%.
Delete-Lindsey Stalnaker
The point that appealed most to me was point number 9, specifically the part that states that college tuitions and fees should be lowered. In the article, it says that democrats put a big emphasis on the education system and that the education system is important because it educates the people that are going to be the future of our country. One thing that puzzles me is that if democrats think that education is so important, why are they not doing much to make higher education more readily available and affordable to the typical American? This creates a system where for the most part, only people with a certain socioeconomic background can have a readily available access to higher education. This directly points out the problem of inequality because education should not be for profit to the point that it weed out those who may not be able to afford it. If higher education was readily affordable to everybody, there would be less inequality in America.
ReplyDeleteTZUtition has been out of control yes but what is really bunkers is the for profit school's who tag on negative numbers for people. Between the internet school scandals and the extreme amounts of money the presidents make you have to wonder if anybody actually cares about education anymore.
ReplyDeleteMichale Marinelli
Yes, I agree that higher education is very expensive these days within the United States; however, I am not sure what you mean by "profit schools?" Private schools? Additionally, I am not familiar with the internet school scandals and why you believe that people may not care about education anymore? The fact that the majority of people within the United States tries to attain higher education, despite how ridiculously expensive it is, makes me think the contrary.
Delete-Lindsey Stalnaker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_for-profit_universities_and_colleges
DeleteEducation isn't being supported the way it should have. That is the for profit school list and doing a bit of research you can find their degree's aren't worth very much and often neglected by the market. Also, I would argue you that people aren't pushing for reform as they should. State school's for us who live in the state are pretty cheap.
While looking Ten Things Democrats Need to Know point 9 caught my eye. Higher education within the United States is ridiculously expensive. Most students are drowning in student loans by the time they graduate, which is why I am surprised that this point was shorter than the rest and not higher on the list. Higher education is much more expensive here than in other countries and it affects a huge majority of citizens.
ReplyDelete-Lindsey Stalnaker
This article suggests that voters do not understand the value of their own labor in the greater economy. Business owners and CEO's do not make altruistic decisions when it comes to making profit. Therefore, raising minimum wages guarantees that these leaders will find other ways to offset increasing labor costs; either through a decreased payroll or automation.
ReplyDeleteI am choosing to focus on point number one which states:
ReplyDelete"Voters respond most favorably when Democrats deliver a populist
economic message centered on the idea of building an economy that
works for all of us, not just the wealthy and big corporations".
I agree with this point to an extent. When there is a lot of economic turmoil or noticeably high inequality, American voters tend to want to vote democratically. Historically democrats have been the political party that fights for the middle class and promotes equality for all. In the latest round of elections however, a majority of Republicans were elected even though they did not run on this type of campaign. People will vote Democratically when times are tough but when the economy gets a bit better Republican leaders tend to be elected for various reasons. For this past election, it was assumed that Democratic voters did not show up to vote as they did in previous elections. People were upset and you could see that on social media. Even though the Republicans were in power, people overall wanted Democrats. The first point from the memorendum is valid.
point 9 is true. The price of higher education, is crazy. With the amount of debt I have accumulated through students loans, it is like I am going to have a mortgage with out owning a house. If higher education was cheaper we may of have more potential student and a more productive society.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the one evidence provided to express how important this is especially for parents putting their children in higher education. If there were a decrease and regulation on the price of higher education, it would certainly be less burdensome for parents. Also, education reform in the long term may be beneficial for our country. However this raises argument from people that don’t have children’s are less likely to consider raising public funding simply because they don’t understand how much stress it causes parents to be able and afford to provide their child with the best education possible. I feel that this is a bit upsetting because it affects everyone as a whole. Also with that said, it puts a greater challenge in the job market.
ReplyDeleteIn point 4, the researchers look at how people are concerned about their incomes not being enough to keep up with the costs of living. They their concerned about their abilities to secure retirement savings, being able to take care of housing costs and health expenses. One of the main concerns that noted were that the rising costs of gas are of extra concern. Gas is a necessity for those that commute to work and they have to reconsider how to spend their money based on their ability to afford gas. I do agree with this point that incomes aren't enough to sustain oneself where costs of living are rising, but I think the focus shouldn't just be on high gas costs. Researchers needed to consider the costs of utilities and food necessities, as well as how companies aren't paying their employees.
ReplyDeleteI will be talking about point 10, which is utilizing a populist frame to convince voters to get over their worries about government spending and the size of government. They believe that showing smart government working for everyone will convince the average voter to buy into the Democratic agenda. They would also paint the GOP as favoring the corporations when they are in charge of the government.
ReplyDeleteI do not think this point provides much merit in the 2014 elections. Elections are usually run on a few issues - the economy, healthcare, etc. While using populism can be useful, it is important to show how you have been successful on the issue. That means you need to show success on all levels. For the economy, this means show that the Dow Jones (Wall Street) has grown to new heights.
Point 4 talks about the the central economic concern for voters, being that incomes are not keeping up with the rising cost of living. This is summarily dismissed as being a "crisis of affordability". While I partially agree with this statement, I also see that it fails to identify or acknowledge the underlying cause of the rising costs of living and lack of incomes keeping up, which are inevitably a result of perpetuated financial inequality within the United States. I would be more prompted to vote for a democrat if they actively identified the corporations and legislative systems which raise prices for their own net worth, while subsequently minimizing pay to its workers.
ReplyDeletePoint number 6 advises the party to avoid using the term "middle-class". They say that this is because an increasingly high number of Americans no longer identify as middle class. The growing income disparity in the USA leaves most citizens as either upper class, or "comfortable", or in the lower class struggling to get by. At one point in America's history the middle class was most of the population. A few were rich, a few were poor, but the American dream thrived and whoever won the middle class won the election. But now, it is clear that this is no longer the case as income distribution either leaves you as upper or lower class. A factory job no longer makes you a middle class living- to win an election a party needs to stay away from targeting the no longer existent middle class.
ReplyDeletePoint 4 discusses the voters concern for income not covering the raising cost of living. Many Americans are facing crises' becuase their paychecks are staying the same, but rent, food and gas prices keep rising. This is something I can strongly relate to. I graduated from Towson in 2010 with a psyc degree. I found a job, but half of my income went into housing. By the end of the month, I was living on ramen my car was running on fumes to get to work. It's a hard and stressful cycle and it's why I'm back in school getting a more practical degree.
ReplyDeletePoint 7 stood out to me because as a democrat, believe that all of the points raised are important and beneficial to me. I think that the evidence they used is strong because it shows the facts and statistics. I also believe that all of the things discussed in point 7 are not only beneficial to individuals, but society as a whole. They are all things that would improve the economy if they were to be implicated.
ReplyDeletePoint 4 is obviously the most relatable point, minimum wage should be a living wage, many peoples wages cannot keep up with affordability, especially when companies really higher people just to look good, BUT, the thing about minimum wage is the employer basically saying, if i could pay you less, i would. This is perfect example of how big companies are really only looking out for their finances, and spend more money on campaign funding than on their workers welfare, People constantly assume the government has majority to do with minimum wage, but really its lawyers and finance geeks who don't care about anything but capital gains
ReplyDelete-Crash
Point 8 is conflicting because, while I agree that we should focus on bringing work back into the country, I'm not sure that the system can be changed now. If big American corporations were to bring back their factories to America, would they be able to pay their workers measley wages to maintain their same production costs? They certainly wouldn't be able to hide it anymore. American workers likely would reject working under those conditions and for that pay regardless.
ReplyDeleteThis article gave interesting insight into what causes voters to be in favor of voting for the democrats. Many of the issues they mentioned were prior knowledge to me, however, I found it interesting when they examined the language of inequality. Much has been made of Obama’s efforts to decrease the inequality gap, often being called “class-warfare” by the media of the Right, and Obama even made a point to try to avoid pushing this effort in a way that would attract these attacks. I thought the tax fairness language was interesting as well, because it shows how important the syntax of statements are.
ReplyDeleteOne of the ten things listed in Hart's work stood out to me, the notion that voters are more worried about economic opportunity and growth rather than equality. I believe this is because people are searching for equity and a chance to actively participate in the economy. At the end of the day, the unemployed would like to be employed and provided a platform where they can lift themselves out of their current situations. I personally do not really wish to be a billionaire when I really just want to be able to buy myself and my family food to make it through the day. Being able to the simple things for yourself is what matters to people who have nothing, from the very basic to the extremely extravagant. Hart provides substantial support for this claim, that proves most Americans are just wishing for the chance.
ReplyDeletePoint 8 is interesting, the author talks about exporting manufacturing work outside of the US to reduce production costs, and how jobs need to be brought back into the country. This is a difficult issue, because there are clearly huge concerns with how the laborers are treated, and it would be absolutely unacceptable here in the US, which means companies would have to increase pay and give benefits, which would lower profits for the big corporations. I don't see this change being made unless through strict law or policy reform, especially because there are benefits for the Countries who are manufacturing products (brings jobs and form of income for low class), but we'll see if things change in the future.
ReplyDelete