In our discussion of Trump’s victory among red-state moochers, I cited David Roberts’s smart linkage of the social issues that some South Dakota Democrats are telling me we need to mute and the economic issues those Dems are telling me we need to focus on:
If you acknowledge urban minorities as part of the working class, you have to acknowledge that they face unique barriers to prosperity. Being harassed and shot by police is not some boutique issue — it’s a huge drag on workforce participation among minorities. For a transgender employee, being able to use the restroom in peace is very much an economic issue. For a Latino immigrant, the threat of deportation is an economic issue. For gay and lesbian voters, the ability to marry and have children is an economic issue.
These are economic issues facing the working class. They are about giving every American full and equal participation in American cultural and economic life [David Roberts, “Everything Mattered: Lessons from 2016’s Bizarre Presidential Election,” Vox, 2016.11.30].
Social issues are inextricable from economic issues. In a conversation last night, a good friend noted that social issues are vital to one key component of economic development in South Dakota: recruiting and retaining young workers. Young people care about social justice. In larger proportions than their elders, they want diversity, tolerance, and equality for all. Even if you don’t think women’s reproductive rights, LGBT equality, religious tolerance, and racial discrimination are big voting issues for the “average” South Dakota voter, they are issues for a big chunk of young workers. If South Dakota creates a political and cultural atmosphere notorious for excluding people of different nationalities, skin colors, religions, and sexual orientations, we write off a significant number of workers who won’t stay here to staff our nursing homes, packing plants, and factories. That deterrence of young workers (not to mention businesses and big cultural events) will constantly drag down our economic development efforts.
Thus, telling Democrats to campaign solely on economic issues misses the true complexity of South Dakota’s general welfare. Our fullest possible economic prosperity depends on promoting inclusiveness and equality.
Social issues are economic issues. We Democrats must make that case.
Where the campaign needed to win upward of 60 percent of young voters, it was able to garner something “in the high 50s at the end of the day,” Mook said. “That’s why we lost.”
Clinton’s 55-36 margin among those ages 18 to 29 is also significantly worse than late polls suggested it would be. A mid-October poll from the Harvard Institute of Politics showed her leading Trump 49 to 21 with third-party candidates included and 59 to 29 in a two-way matchup with Trump — either a 28- or 30-point margin. A GenForward survey conducted by the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, meanwhile, had her up 41 points, 60 to 19.
These were large, quality surveys testing only young people, but they differed hugely from the results. Clinton’s final margin was 19.
They, of course, are national polls, and the race was really decided in a handful of close states — Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, in particular. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/02/yes-you-can-blame-millennials-for-hillary-clintons-loss/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-politics%3Ahomepage%2Fcard&utm_term=.2690d8b20dc8
The governor and the rest think that economy means building a nuke dump or CAFO to bring in business. Fine if you want to be Homer Simpson and milk a bunch of cows for minimum wage if you are lucky. That is it. They do not want to provide healthcare, they do not want to offer social protections, they do not want to do anything because it is easier to go to Pierre and pretend. Sure, there are a few that would love to see things change there, but the rest just soil the nest. They will be after more stupid stuff again this year. Not because of Trump either, this is how they operate. Raise the property taxes to put more money into the inefficiencies of the Pierre empty thinking.
Are there any businesses or industries that could apply economic pressure on the state if they pass the potty bill or any other prejudicial legislation?
The biggest question I see about keeping young people in the state is, how does the Democratic Party involve them more in social justice issues?
Yes there are Roger. Here’s the list of companies that support LGBT policies. If you look at the list (starts on page 39) you will see many large SD companies that have a presence in SD and when you look at the big banks, you will see many who have used our usury laws to have their charter here.
http://hrc-assets.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com//files/assets/resources/CEI-2016-FullReport.pdf
What you will also see on this list is hundreds of companies who will think twice before coming to South Dakota and a state so willing to object to their stated corporate policies.
One would think that fiscal conservatives would see that discriminating against and nurturing a hostile environment to LGBT people is probably not a sound economic development policy.
But then, the knuckle draggers that wag the tail of the GOP dog aren’t really concerned about conservative fiscal policies.
Just a suggestion, but could we get our largest employers to either embrace the anti-LGBT legislators or condemn them?
Guessing that companies with a significant presence in SD like 3M, Citibank, Wells Fargo, etc. won’t want to touch any politician or state who takes a stance different than their stated public policy.
Hey Arch Beal! Anheiser Busch supports LGBT issues…want us to call them and tell them you are in disagreement with A-B beliefs?
Wait a minute…let’s send a letter to all of these companies telling them that South Dakota is actively looking at legislating against LGBT people that go directly against their corporate policies.
Also wondering how David Owen and Mark Lee of Sioux Falls would want to weigh in on this as Chamber of Commerce leaders. Do you think either of them has the guts to stand up and advocate for sound business policies of inclusion and acceptance that the majority of the Fortune 500 have stood up for?
The awareness of the silence of business leaders will be a factor in keeping young people and recruiting new young people to South Dakota…you’d think that the Chamber and GOED would want to weigh in on this issue.
Go Away – Stay Away!! Doesn’t it seem that the party in power doesn’t want young people to stay home and build a career? Doesn’t want people to move to the state from elsewhere? It might be because the young people and the new people might look different, might think differently and by God, they’ll probably be damn Democrats. “Don’t disrupt the good thing we’ve got going.”- SDGOP
The big ideas for development in Winner have been a dead animal processing plant which thankfully never happened. Converting city hall to a larger jail to bring revenue to the city did happen. Along with the felons come their families on welfare and pushing drugs. Building sports facilities like an unneeded 4th auditorium and an equally unneeded multi-million dollar swimming pool replacement are the other big ideas.
What seems to be missed is that nobody of substance is moving here if there are no jobs for them.
There’s a bind, Roger, or at least a trick that requires doing two things at once. To engage young voters, we need to give them the message that we believe equality matters inherently: treating LGBT and other minority neighbors fairly is the right thing to do, the American thing to do. To sell the point to a more conservative electorate, we need to make the practical point: write more discrimination into law, and we look like yahoos, and looking like yahoos loses us workers, businesses, and money.
Business allies: When we discussed boycotting the employers of our Sharia-inclined legislators last winter, folks said Esurance is pretty solid on LGBT inclusion. Wells Fargo has a decent rep on this issue (they try to upsell everyone, regardless of race, sex, creed…). Perhaps they can bend the Governor’s ear. Jana’s list is great: let’s use it when we put pressure on those legislators and target connected dudes like Beal specifically!
Along with employers, we should not be ashamed to engage and support social justice groups like the ACLU and Human Rights Watch. The ACLU did bang-up work this year fighting the potty bill, taking a chance on investing resources in South Dakota and winning; they are an important ally. I don’t think we have to focus solely on “safer” economic issues; I think we bring along more supporters and win fighting on both the social and economic justice fronts.
You would think Raven, 3M and Daktronics would be open and supporting diversity. When Republicans advise us to promote discriminatory, backward thinking, conservative agendas in order to win elections, they’re really just trying to shut us up. That’s because they’re afraid our message resonates with more validity than there’s.
If there is not going to be diversity, then lets cut the 35 jobs that Daugaard claims are for economic development. That million and a half dollar salary paid to these guys could go towards reducing the payments that federal taxes pay to balance the budget here.
Here is the conversation within the confines of the 35. Ring….”hello”, HR inquirer “Do you honor diversity in South Dakota?”….long pause…”can we get back to you, like never”
… good one, Jerry
” ……. like, never!” ???