There are many things that confuse me. Let’s face it, I am a guy who is easily confounded by all sorts of things like my smart watch which is way smarter than me. Often, my troublesome issue lies with how and why other folk see the world so differently than I do. The culprit here is either me or something amiss with all these other good people. Occam’s razor would suggest the problem lies with yours truley. Sigh!

Let me start with a common conundrum. Over time, I have heard many working class people assert that Republicans, or even more absurdly Trump, represent their interests with more fidelity than that other nefarious political party. I simply find that mind-numbingly absurd, simply beyond comprehension with my limited brain. Really, how could a party, and a group of politicians, whose transparent and sole purpose is to serve the interests of the filthy rich be seen to represent the average Joe. That simply beggers the imagination.

Okay, I get that some people in rural areas see their quality of life being diminished as towns and small cities decline, as farming increasingly becomes the domain of agri-business corporations, and as younger folk leave home in search of better, or any, attractive opportunities. If Wisconsin is any kind of bellweather state, the urban-rural split reflects our political landscape writ large. The state as a whole is seen as purple … it can go one way or the other by relatively small margins in statewide races.

At the same time, extreme gerrymandering has cemented Republican control of the state Senate and Assembly despite Democrats getting a small majority of all statewide votes cast. The bottom line … the Badger State is a microcosm for the nation where the Dems typically win the overall vote but, with the Electoral Vote favoring more rural and red states, Presidential elections are in doubt while control of Congress is typically hotly contested.

In our state petri dish, most rural Cheesehead counties are overwhelmingly Republican and conservative, which was not the case for most of my tenure in this state. I personally knew a number of liberal democrats who won elections in mostly rural western and northern counties, areas now solidly Republican. Still, I do understand the growing angst in such places. When you drive through small towns amidst the bucolic rolling hills of what is called the ‘driftless area,’ a terrain long ago carved out by past glacial movements, you can see and feel the economic and social decay. Businesses are boarded up and those yet open often look as is they could use a new coat of paint. It is sad in many cases.

Then you look at Madison, home of the State Capitol and the flagship campus of the University of Wisconsin system. It is booming, with new businesses and residential buildings sprouting up all over the place. Increasingly, it is the home of many high-tech oriented firms and increasingly is seen as the region’s health care and financial center. It is a place where professionals want to live and work. The oft-used example of the Madison boom is Epic Systems, the premier developer of computerized medical record keeping. It was started in 1979 by a UW grad with a couple of helpers and a stake of about $250,000 (in today’s dollars). Judy Falkner, the founder, is now worth billions.

Epic has a stunning campus just outside Madison (Verona Wisconsin). It employs about 12,000 mostly high tech workers with plans to expand their futuristic campus (a visit there rivals Disneyland) by adding another ancillary campus with 1,700 more workers this year alone. These are younger, well educated, professionals who tend to be liberal. Madison (and Dane County) now votes overwhelmingly Democratic … 82 percent for the liberal candidate in the latest election. It is tipping the state in a bluish direction. (Note, with gerrymandering, control of the state senate and assembly will remain firmly in Republican hands at least until after I pass from the scene.)

Many believe that the so-called outstate, those mostly rural counties located away from the big cities, are motivated in their political beliefs by a growing resentment what they see as effete, urban elites … those pampered and over educated prima-donnas who look down upon their country cousins with disdain as slow-witted bubbas. Thus insulted, at least in their imaginations, they vote for hard conservatives who sate their anger with histrionic rheoric about radical socialists and sometimes with confounding votes.

In the recent budget, the Republican controlled Senate and Assembly hacked out $32 million from the University budget to punish administrators for attempting to enhance diversity and inclusion in higher education. It is hard not to see this as ill-disguised racial animus … why are we helping those unworthy kids when my worthy kid is struggling.

But Republicans also refused to green light a new engineering complex on the Madison campus, a project that would mostly be financed with private donations. With everyone screaming that we need more STEM educated workers in this state as well as the country at large, this decision is simply nuts. Just watch China pull away from us laughing all the way to being the number 1 economic and technological power. Why not put up a sign at the state border or our national ports of entry saying ‘educated people go away.’

Now, I get the anger. I really do. I also make much fun at the expense of my former academic colleagues. They give me so much ammunition. Yet, I feel the conservative anger from average folk (not the filthy rich) misses the mark, by a lot. Hard working stiffs who vote Republican see these so-called elites doing well while they are struggling. They often believe that some traditionally disenfranchised groups are being helped disproportionately … with the recent SCOTUS ruling scaling back the use of affirmative action in higher education perhaps reflecting a mild backlash in the face of such sentiments. In fact, a recent poll in liberal California found a majority of respondents saying we might be going too far in redressing inequality of opportunity. Our melting pot has never adequately dealt with tribal competition and tensions.

However, and here is my incredulous amazement, why in God’s good name would you vote for a party and for politicians who have NEVER supported policies that favor people like you, other than attacking the same people you are likely to despise. And I mean NEVER, and I seldom employ absolutes except when vexed. While I know well that old saw about the enemy of your enemy being your friend, voting Republican in the belief they will help you economically is a bridge too far for me. There simply is no evidence to support this belief.

Why am I so perplexed this morning? Let’s just look at a few trends. As I’ve mentioned in the past, the golden era of America’s economy occured in the three decades following WWII when the tax system was very progressive and public spending on things like infrastructure, education, health, and social opportunities was rising. That ended in 1980 with the onset of the Reagan revolution. Since then, Republicans have held either the Presidency or Congress for all but a few years.

There have been momentary bright spots. Clinton had a couple of unfettered years where he started us toward budget surpluses and spurred several years of robust economic growth before Gingrich and crowd opposed him at every turn, eventually shutting down our government. The two years at the beginning of Obama’a administration also was an exception in which Obamacare was passed and we made our way out of the housing financial crisis. The same was true on Biden’s first two years which saw an impressive array of investments in technology, infrastructure, and middle-class well-being while he dug us out of the pandemic-induced economic reversal.

That being said, the last four decades have mostly seen the reign of top-down economics. Provide optimal economic incentives to the wealthiest Americans, and remove all impediments on them to act prudently, and we will all benefit. Be patient and the crumbs will fall off the tables of the uber rich to those waiting below. At every turn and for every problem, the solution was more tax cuts for the wealthy even as the national debt held by the public soared to almost $25 trillion in May, 2023. Though much of this debt growth was due to additional tax cuts favoring the wealthy under Trump, Republicans blamed it on spending for programs targeting ordinary folks.

The ‘trickle down’ con game has ruled our policy debates for decades now with some very questionable outcomes:

First, the distribution of the pie in America has become embarrassingly unfair. In 1970, the middle of the income distribution (the middle class) obtained 62 percent of aggregate income. That fell to 43 percent in 2018, while the share going to the more wealthy group rose from 29 percent to 48 percent (the poorest remained comparatively unchanged). However, the richest of the rich did very well. The top 1 percent saw their share go from less than 10 percent in the late 1970s to almost a quarter of the pie in recent years.

While there are several reasons for this, our tax system remains a big one. The top marginal tax rate was 91 percent during the Eisenhower years as we paid down our war debt and invested in a growing middle class. Kennedy knocked the top rate down to 70 percent but it was not until Reagan came along that the uber wealthy began smiling all the way to the bank. The top rate was dropped to 28 percent. While we have retreated from that low point somewhat, the really rich still do very well. There are special breaks for certain types of income available only to the richest of the rich (e.g., hedge fund managers).

All this leads to atrocious inequities. For example, Big Oil made $200 billion last year and still got a $30 billion dollar tax break. Many billionaires, like hedge fund managers just mentioned, pay something like 8 percent in income taxes on average, a rate well below what your typical working stiff pays. This was a point made repeatedly by Warren Buffet who did not understand why he paid proportionately less in taxes than his secretary. Can anyone answer his question besides the obvious response that the wealthy can buy off too many of our politicians?

Such trends, or outcomes, lead to … guess what … more inequality. A study of G-7 nations (the U.S., the U.K., Italy, Japan, Canada, Germany, and France) found that we had the most distorted economic outcomes among these rich nations. The most commonly used measure of inequality is the GINI coefficient with 0 being perfect equality and 1 being perfect inequality. We were at 0.434 (quite high inequality) while France was the most equal of the group at 0.326. If the Scandinavian countries had been included, the U.S. would be way down the list … looking relatively worse that is.

Extremes of inequality lead to bad outcomes for vulnerable groups. Take children for example. Kids in America are much more likely to be poor when compared to ther peers in other wealthy countries. Poverty gets measured in different ways but most studies put about one-in-five American kids below the poverty line in recent years. Again, other wealthy countries see rates almost half as much. Several Scandinavian countries have rates at 5 percent or lower with the Danes coming in at 3 percent. As the old maxim goes, the moral worth of any country is measured by how it treats its most vulnerable citizens. Need I say more.

These extremes also tend to get systemized over time. Higher inequality gives the uber rich more leverage in tilting the rules in their favor. It is not rocket science that they can then fund candidates they like and policies that favor them. They want to preserve their favored situation in the future. Duh!

A study of global social mobility bears this out. An index has been created that assesses the prospects of moving up (or down) in society. A measure of 100 indicates the greatest social mobility possibilities while lower scores indicate lesser mobility or less of a chance of moving up the economic and social ladder. Robust social mobility used to be thought of as the American dream, where hard work could realize anyone’s dreams. Denmark came out #1 (a score of 85.2) while the U.S. ranked 27th (a score of 70.4), just below Lithuania but one spot above Spain. In truth, the old American Dream is now found in those socialist northern European countries which, not surprisingly, have the happiest citizens according to global hedonic studies (the U.S. has ranked about 17th in happiness recently).

It is not that all Americans have their heads buried in the sand. Some 61 percent of all Americans feel there is too much inequality here, though only 41 percent of Republicans feel this way. Similarly, some 70 percent have indicated in recent survays that the economic and political system is unfair. Perhaps that discontent is reflected in our widespread disillusinment with the federal government. Slightly less than one-quarter of respondents now express trust in our national government to do the right thing, down from over 70 percent in the early 1960s. Even insiders now despair. Liz Cheney, a conservative Republican who also happens to have principles and brains, said recently, “what we’ve done in our politics is create a situation where we are electing idiots.” Wow!

See my confusion. By most, if not all metrics, Republican leadership is leading us into 3rd world status. Why aren’t more folks outraged? Why do so many continue to support those who act contrary to their basic interests and against our national survival as a country of promise where all might prosper?

Can anyone help me out here? I do remain confused.