If Erskine Bowles and John Edwards had been courageous enough to call one, a well-planned news conference in North Carolina would have received tons of free publicity. Not only that, it would have framed the political debate in their favor for the rest of the campaign.
Such a news conference would have drawn immediate outrage from right-wing pundits on radio and TV, and would have created an on-going discussion about the very issues where Ds are strongest and Rs are extremely vulnerable.
In checking out the positions suggested below, news reporters and analysts would have to delve into economic issues where all the facts favor Democrats.
Bowles and Edwards could have made the following points:
Both are very well off financially. No one can accuse them of trying to make voters "envious of the rich." Like Franklin Roosevelt, Bowles was born rich, his parents sent him to good schools, he became successful in business, and now wants to do what is best for the greatest number of citizens in the U.S.
Like Harry Truman, Edwards was born into the middle class, worked his way through college, became rich as a successful lawyer and also wants to do what is best for the greatest number of citizens in the U.S.
Then they would explain the difference between a rich Democrat and a rich Republican:
Rich Democrats appreciate the fact that a major reason they are rich is that present laws greatly favor investors and the wealthy, at the direct expense of working-class Americans. Rich Republicans, on the other hand, believe that they are rich simply because they are virtuous and work hard. Others are not rich because they are ignorant, lazy or incompetent, and they deserve to be poor.
Rich Democrats believe that this is not only an unfair situation, it creates a huge wealth and income disparity between rich and poor, and it has long-term detrimental effects on our society and needs to be rectified. Rich Republicans not only do not want to make the system fairer for working-class Americans, they want to make sure that their political and economic advantages are continued for the benefit of their direct descendants.
Closely associated with the above (as clearly described by Kevin Phillips Wealth and Democracy) this wealth and income disparity has historically created huge problems for societies. If this situation is not reversed, there will be dire consequences in the future for both poor-and-middle-class and the wealthy of America. Rich Democrats are proactive managers of the economy. The loyalties of rich Republicans is to their wealthy supporters, which forces them to be reactive managers of the economy.
As matters of simple fairness and justice, rich Democrats believe that workers create the wealth of the nation, and they deserve to be fairly compensated. They believe that wealth, political power and social position should be earned through work, and that an economic and political system should produce mostly winners and few losers. Rich Republicans believe in aristocracy: that wealth, political and economic power, and social position should be inherited, and that there should be relatively few winners and many losers.
Ways that present laws and governmental policies favor the wealthy and investors at the direct expense of working-class Americans:
Manipulation of the prime interest rate
Real estate laws (depreciation, deductions, capital gains treatment, etc.)
Anti-union laws and anti-union judges appointed to courts
Shifting tax burdens from income to social security
Giving tax breaks mostly to the wealthy
Elimination or reduction of estate taxes
Increases in sales taxes
Globalization (which is not the same as international trade)
Democrats who have previously taken a position that globalization is “good for American workers,” can modify it now. “Although I still support international trade, that’s not what globalization has become, and it has created many hardships for American workers for the past 20 years.” Then, explain what you intend to do to make up for those hardships:
Insist on environmental and worker protection for trade agreements.
Increase the minimum wage to at least $10/hour.
Bring back estate taxes. (Sure, anyone should be able to leave his money to his descendants. But those who receive, say a million dollars just for being born, should at least pay as much tax on that income as a person whose income comes from working in a coal mine.)
Protect American workers from unfair labor competition from third world countries (criminals, brutalized workers, etc.). American workers live in this country with this country’s standard and cost of living.
Make those who profited most from globalization (investors and top executives) pay more in taxes (progressive income tax) to pay for the social costs of family and community disruption.
Reduce the social security tax to benefit working-class Americans, and make up for the shortfall by raising (or totally eliminating) the top cutoff point that only benefits upper-income taxpayers (the ones who benefited most from globalization).
In the last several years, most Democrats have wimped
out on these issues, and let Republicans frame and control the debate. As a result, voters have beem choosing real Republicans
vs. their apparent alternative, the ersatz Republicans.
If Democrats would conduct news conferences like the above across the country, the total nature of the national debate would dramatically shift in their favor.