As the Democrats have lost ground to the Republicans with noncollege educated and working-class voters, particularly among white and Latino populations, researchers have wondered how Democrats might regain these voters’ support. While some have proposed a more socially conservative platform and others have advocated an “abundance” agenda, the Center for Working-Class Politics (CWCP), in collaboration with the Labor Institute and Rutgers University, recently released a report looking at the possibility that economic populist appeals might win back voters, particularly in working-class heavy Rust Belt states.
The study surveyed 3,000 Rust Belt residents, including 750 individuals from Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Overall, the report finds that economically populist appeals, such as those targeting economic elites and corporate greed, are broadly and deeply popular among Rust Belt voters. Economic populism played well with both Democrats and independents—and with Republicans when delivered by an independent, rather than a Democratic candidate. In addition, the survey tested specific messaging and proposals that might garner broad support among voters.
One proposal that we think might appeal to Rust Belt voters is an initiative to stop involuntary mass layoffs by companies that receive federal tax dollars. Our perspective is that if companies are receiving taxpayer funding than they have a responsibility to ensure stability for those very same individuals who fund them. Over the past half century, mass layoffs have disproportionately affected the Rust Belt. For instance, from 1996 to 2012, mass layoffs affected 16% of the Ohio workforce, particularly around Northeast Ohio and the state’s river towns.
While this might seem like a radical proposal, a comparative look at how Siemens layoffs simultaneously affected the U.S. and Germany is telling of how such a policy might play out. When the technological giant pursued mass layoffs in 2020, all American workers lost their jobs. In Germany, however, where workers have strong representation on the board of directors and unions have more influence, no one was involuntarily laid off. Instead, workers were offered buyouts. While American workers don’t have the same sort of influence, we believe that federal contracts and taxpayer dollars could provide the hook needed to ensure that mass layoffs do not ensue.
To test the popularity of this idea, we surveyed voters asking them about their preference for 25 policy proposals. Among those proposals, stopping mass layoffs was tied for the 5th most popular proposal. Indeed, this proposal was more popular than tariffs and raising the minimum wage. More specifically, it was highly popular among manual workers, noncollege graduates, independents, Democrats, and families making under $50k per year.
Despite this policy’s popularity, however, the report finds that support diminishes substantially when the proposal is delivered by Democratic politicians rather than independents. To address this partisan penalty, the survey also tested how such a proposal would fare as a non-partisan ballot initiative, which allows voters to show support for specific policies without getting bogged down in partisan polarization. Overall, support for the initiative substantially outpaced opposition, even after survey takers were shown counter-messages that critiqued the proposal in different ways.
Over the past several decades, working-class populations have increasingly moved away from the Democrats and towards GOP candidates. Despite its historic reputation as the party of the working-class, the Democrats have now become a party of the college educated. To win back working-class voters, the CWCP report demonstrates that Democrats should embrace an economically populist agenda that confronts corporate greed and economic elites. Otherwise, we should not expect this trend to reverse any time soon.
Tim Gill is a native Clevelander, Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Tennessee, and a Research Associate at the Center for Working-Class Politics.