entitlment reform

Conservatives are carrying the water for one of the more enduring myths in American politics:  Economic malaise under Carter gave us Reagan and it stands to reason that a bad economy will bring in another GOP president.  As much as I'd like to strangle anyone hoping for a sustained FOUR YEARS worth of recession because it's not only your pocketbook being decimated, but also how such an event would eradicate the Republican Party as well.

Forget about the 1980 election for a moment, and think of other momentous elections in US history.  While Democrats win elections under different kinds of economic environment, Republicans only win during a sustained economic recovery.  By the time the 1994 Republican Revolution came around, the economy had been expanding since 1991 and held on to it during the subsequent boom years.  Bush I win in 1988 was also helped by the Reagan boom.  The oncoming recession of 2000 when the tech  bubble popped, Republicans saw its first losses in the Senate since 1994 and Bush losing the popular vote.  Recessions in the 1950s whittled the ranks of GOP congressional members despite Eisenhower's victories.  Richard Nixon's victories was brought in part by the fact that there were no recessions in the US from 1957-1973.  The sick economy brought on by the oil crisis in 1973 probably exacerbated his declining popularity.  By 1976, the expected happened with a Democrat being elected to take care of runaway inflation. 

What makes 1980 standout is that Reagan carried the election despite the fact that the economy was tanking.  Maybe this was one of the signs that a political realignment was finally complete that voters have abandoned the idea for the time-being that Democrats will protect Americans from tough economic times.

"Protect".  I think that's the reason why voters would rather have Democrats during tough economic times.  At the first appearance of economic downturn, the reaction is to hunker down and look for protection.  The first shock to come in during a recession is unemployment and the lack of future prospects of employment.  Democrats (and to be honest, Bush) will promote policies that are not growth-oriented but protection-oriented such as higher entitlment spending, bailouts, stimulus packages, trade protectionism, stronger union powers, and tax increases for the "rich".  The GOP is stuck with responding with policies that is too future-oriented to resonate with the voting public.  The GOP is there to promote policies to sustain an economic recovery  and to prevent the state from interfering in the people's consumption of the fruits of economic growth (e.g., entitlement reforms, reversal of statist policies, tax cuts, pro-business regulations, free trade). 

I know not to get carried away in using economic graphs to determine people's voting intentions.  Look what happened to all the silly predictions of Gore winning in 2000 and Bush losing in 2004 just because of economic performance.  However, we (conservatives) can not wish for an economic catastrophe under this administration.  It won't bring us a Reagan, just widespread poverty and international embarassment.  It's hard to argue for tax cuts when people are not making enough money to tax.