May 11, 2006
Up, Up and Away!
by Jeffrey Feldman
In the past few weeks, there has been a remarkable turn of events in the political debate over the economy.
For years -- it seems like forever -- the Republicans have controlled the debate on the economy. Suddenly, that is no longer the case. Republicans are caught in a tailspin even though the stock market is soaring again, hiring is up, prices are rising fast enough to force the Fed to raise interest rates. Despite all this, confidence in the Republican economic policies is way, way down.
The simple explanation to this turn of events is: gas prices. Gas prices go up at the pump, and the people turn against whoever is running the country. Fair enough.
But the bigger picture about the economy debate has to do with a simple transition in how Americans are talking: We've moved from "down" to "up."
The real reason the Democrats now control the debate on the economy is that they have seized control of the word "up." And if Democrats want to stay in control through 2008, they should focus not on complicated economic proposals, but on controlling that one word: "up."
Up? Down? How are these simple words the key to the debate?
"Down" Is Good
Over the past few decades, the central Republican economic idea has been this simple idea:
Low taxes
Every Republican running for office in the past twenty years has emphasized this point. When taxes go ''down' then the economy goes 'up,' leading to benefits flowing from 'top' to 'bottom.' Some call this 'trickle down' economics, which reinforces this basic idea of 'up' and 'down' in the GOP debate.
Rather than saying that the GOP believes more money should flow to the top of the food chain, they say that the key to economic prosperity is to bring taxes 'down.' Their entire economic strategy can, therefore, be reduced town to a simple formula:
down is good
The basic way of talking about "low" or "down" as good, is something that George Lakoff and Mark Johnson call 'grounding' a debate in a basic 'orientation' metaphor. We all know what we mean when somebody says 'up' or 'down.' They are among the most basic concepts in the human experience. So, when Republicans talk about Democrats wanting to make 'up' our taxes, we all know what this means -- or at least we feel that we know.
Down, down, down has been the GOP economic mantra. 'Lower' taxes leads to talk of 'relieving' Americans from tax 'burdens.' Here the notion of 'down' is tied to the idea of taxes as something 'heavy' that sits on the shoulders of citizens, preventing them from realizing their personal aspirations.
Like it or not, agree or disagree, there is no doubt that the GOP 'down is good' logic has been very effective at controlling the debate.
So what happened? Why is it slipping away from them?
"Up" Is Bad
The big change in the past few years of George W. Bush's presidency has been the rising sense that in the economy "Up" is bad.
For example, despite all the talk about bringing taxes 'down,' the Bush Presidency has been plagued by talk of the deficit being 'up.' In the past few months, the media has reported on the Republican Congress raising the debt 'ceiling,' thereby moving the deficit even 'higher.'
All this talk of spending being 'up' under a Republican government has slowly, but surely switched the focus of the economy debate in America.
But the real kicker has been the dynamics of 'up' and 'down' that unfolded in the gas prices debate.
As gas prices rose above $3 per gallon nationwide, the debate began to cripple the Bush Presidency and the GOP election prospects in general. How can the economy be 'good' if gas prices are 'up' so high?
In this environment, the economic debate was suddenly being controlled by a new formula:
up is bad
In response to this new debate logic, Republicans attempted to retake control by reasserting the logic of 'down is good.' Do do so, they proposed their familiar tax break or refund -- a check for $100 to be mailed to every American.
What was the strategy of the $100 refund proposal? It had very little to do with actual money, but was largely an attempt to take control of the debate again by reasserting the logic of 'down is good' in an economic debate that had switched over to 'up is bad.'
While talk of the deficit being 'up' had primed the debate, rising gas prices were the spark that set national anger at the President ablaze.
In this new debate dynamic, where 'up' was suddenly seen as bad, news that an Exxon executive was to be paid $400 million dollars in retirement benefits was quickly seen as a moral problem.
Imagine this news unfolding five years ago when the debate about the economy was still being controlled by the Republican logic that 'down is good.' In that environment, a high corporate salary would have been greeted as a sign of successful economic policy. But in the new economic debate controlled by the logic of 'up is bad,' the high salary was seen as evidence of corruption, greed -- poison to the economy.
Keeping The Debate 'Up'
Over the next two years, the success of Democrats in the economy debate will not rest on their sweeping and complex policy proposals, but on their ability to control the simple logic of 'up' and 'down' in the debate.
In a national debate where 'up' is defined as 'bad,' Democrats are at the advantage. And keeping the debate in that logic will be the key to winning votes.
But what can we say to make this happen?
The economic debate can be lead by Democrats by focusing on those issues that re-enforce the basic logic of 'up' being 'bad':
Gas prices are up!
The deficit is up!
The cost of living is up!
Executive salaries are way up!
Up, up and away -- with Republicans in office! The logic of 'up is bad' extends the framework of Democratic ideas to every aspect of the economy debate. The problem is not high taxes, but CEO salaries and bonuses that must come 'down.' The problem is not high spending on social programs, but the soaring cost of Republican corruption scandals that must come 'down.'
And these ideas can easily be backed up by staking out an equal claim on the logic of 'up is good' vis-a-vis investment:
Unless investment goes 'up' on preventative medicine, our
children's health will go 'down.'
Unless investment goes 'up' on
alternative energy, the quality of the environment will go 'down.'
Unless investment goes 'up' on smart intelligence, the war in Iraq
will drag our economy and our morale 'down.'
To win big in 2006 and 2008, the logic of 'up' and 'down' must become the standard fare of Democratic debate. And if Democrats are up to the challenge, Americans will be down with them--at the polls.
© 2006 Jeffrey Feldman
Jeffrey Feldman is the Editor-in-Chief and Founder of Frameshop. First established in late 2004 on several large blogs and launched as an independent website Jan. 1, 2005. Dr. Feldman has a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology which he applies broadly to the analysis of politics and communication. He lives and teaches in New York City, conducts workshops on framing throughout the country, and is s a regular guest on the national syndicated radio show The Thom Hartmann Radio Program.