For the state’s Democrats, now enjoying one-party rule in St. Paul, the election is theirs to lose. Thus the focus will inevitably fall on the Republicans’ response to the opportunity before them. Already, there is no shortage of advice, coming from all points on the political compass.
From the left, Hamline University professor David Schultz recommends that Republicans drop social issues and “concentrate on their core economic and limited government message.” From the center, Tim Penny and Tom Horner recommend that Republicans focus on reform for 2014. They write,
To be credible, Republicans need to show how Minnesota—through reform— truly can do more with less.
It sounds like we will be hearing more from Republicans this year on the subject of government reform. For my own part, I have offered a few modest suggestions.
Forgive me for reaching back 20 years to my business school education, but the concept needed here is “value proposition.” Simply put, each party needs to explain to voters why they deserve their votes in 2014.
Democrats appear to offer as a value proposition: “We’ll give you free stuff.” Consider this video (“2013”) issued immediately after the end of the legislative session by Minnesota’s leading Democrat group, Alliance for a Better Minnesota. The 94-second video devotes its first 22 seconds to a recap of Democrat alleged achievements this session—free kindergarten, property tax cuts—under the captions “middle-class” and “progress.” The remainder of the running time is given over to a libelous, dystopian fiction of what “would have happened” had Republicans won the 2012 election—an imagined future that shares little in common with what actually occurred when Republicans were in charge in 2011-2012.
I’m not worried about videos like “2013” because I am confident that no voters likely to decide the 2014 election will ever see it.
The target audience for each party’s message is no longer the “independents:” those swing voters at the center, attuned to the finely-calibrated appeals of each side, looking for a signal as to which way to lean. For independent voters, the choice comes down to “right or left?”
No, the target audience is now that mass of citizens on the fringe of politics–the low information voters—that is not engaged in the process. For the low information voter, the decision is not “right or left?” but rather “vote or stay home?” Elections are no longer decided by engaged voters in the middle of the political spectrum, they are decided by unengaged voters who pay little to no attention to the day-to-day machinations of state politics.
Catch phrases in years past may have swung elections, depending on the political and economic climate of the time. Phrases like “kinder, gentler nation,” “compassionate conservatism,” and “hope and change”—were effective (or not) because they played against specific circumstances and events of the time with which the general population would have been familiar. The low information voters of today simply have no context in which to place such messages.
A catch phrase would be meaningless to voters who have not been paying attention to the daily ebb and flow of state politics. Limited government? Limited in what sense? Limited in effectiveness?
When Republicans talk about limited government, we mean limited in scope and cost and in the ways in which the state intrudes upon peoples’ lives.
A Republican value proposition needs to be one that resonates with those voters not tuned in to the process. Words like “small government,” “opportunity,” and “growth” will resonate with those paying attention to the Democrats’ Government Gone Wild of 2013. The Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal quotes Charlie Weaver, Executive Director of the Minnesota Business Partnership,
“It was the most anti-jobs Legislature I've ever seen. Clearly, Minnesota just became a less attractive place to grow and attract jobs as a result of this session.”
Mr. Weaver is exactly right. For those paying close attention, the level of venality and vindictiveness on offer was truly breathtaking. But what will the low information voter learn about this 2013 session?
They were off living their lives, raising their families, working their jobs, and did not have time to read down to the last few paragraphs of a newspaper story. The news that does trickle through will be along the lines that “gridlock” was ended, the budget was “balanced,” and, for the first time ever, the “rich” will pay their fair share.
When the day arrives that the low information voter loses his or her job, have their work hours cut, or can’t balance the family budget because taxes and electricity costs have spiked, the connection will not be made back to the bills passed by the 2013 legislature.
When we reach that point—and we shall—will an abstract Republican message of “growth,” “limited government,” “business climate,” or even “reform” resonate with the low information voter?
I suspect that we Republicans will have to get more specific to cut through the clutter. I suggest a value proposition around the idea that Republicans can help you earn your own success.
Here are some suggestions,
· “We will make it easier for you to start and run your own business” (Opportunity/entrepreneurship/small business)
· “We will help get your child out of a failing school” (Quality education/achievement gap/school choice)
· “We will make sure your tax money is not wasted” (line-by-line budgeting/budgeting by results/spending cuts)
· “You will get to keep more of what you earn” (tax cuts)
· “We will help those who need it most” (reform/means testing/reforming middle-class entitlements)
I am convinced that our principles and our ideas for reform, growth, and opportunity will find favor with a majority of voters in 2014. That’s if we can find ways to express our ideas to reach the low information voter.
No comments:
Post a Comment