Dr. Oren M. Levin-Waldman, Professor at the Graduate School for Public Affairs and Administration at Metropolitan College of New York, Mike Spano, Yonkers Mayor, and Hezi Aris, Yonkers Tribune Editor-at-Large on Westchester On the Level – Wednesday, May 22, 2019th @10am-12Noon EST

Oren M. Levin-Waldman Campaign Trail, Finance, Governance, History, National, New York State, People, Politics, Radio, Westchester County, NY, Yonkers, NY 1 Comment

Computer access to Wednesday’s broadcast “Live” or “On Demand” is accomplished via this hyperlink … http://tobtr.com/s/11321469 

      Share your perspective or inquiry. Call: (347) 205-9201.

Prof. Oren M. Levin Waldman attends the Wednesday, May 22, 2019th broadcast of the Westchester On the Level Internet Radio Broadcast from 10-11am.

Yonkers Mayor Mike Spano will be heard from 11am.

Yonkers Tribune Editor-at-Large Hezi Aris speaks to international, national, state, and hyperlocal news with commensurate analysis thereafter …  concluding at 12Noon.

WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NY — Westchester On the Level opens the broadcast day in discussion over the article,  Candidates Need to Identify the Median Voter By Oren M. Levin-Waldman”. This segment heard from 10-11am.

Yonkers Mayor Mike Spano discusses his accomplishments during his years in office over the next few weeks until the June 25th Primary Elections. In the following weeks we engage in his vision for the next 4 fours and what the voters want him to tackle next. We engage in an introspection with respect to those  concerns and his plans to mitigate those issues. This segment from 11am.

Thereafter, Yonkers Tribune Editor-at-Large Hezi Aris delves into hyperlocal, state, national, and international news and issues with commensurate analysis. This segment concludes at 12Noon.

###

Candidates Need to Identify the Median Voter By Oren M. Levin-Waldman

Oren M. Levin-Waldman, Ph.D., Professor at the Graduate School for Public Affairs and Administration at Metropolitan College of New York, Research Scholar at The Global Institute for Sustainable Prosperity, as well as faculty member in the Milano School for International Affairs, Management, and Urban Policy at the New School. Direct email to:
olevin-waldman@mcny.edu

It has long been a truism of American politics that to win the party nomination for president one has to run to the party’s extremes, and to win the general election for president one has to run to the middle. This means that Democrats need to run to the extreme left while Republicans need to run to the extreme right. Of course, this means that party activists on either side of the aisle fail to pick candidates that appeal to the majority of American voters.

Does this mean that the American political system is no longer capable of selecting candidates with broad appeal? One would think that out of a field of 24 candidates for the Democratic party nomination that one or two would stake a middle position as a contrast to the rest of the pack that continues to move increasingly to the left. Each candidate feels the need to be more to the left than others.

Still, one would think that the person who runs to the middle, even in the primaries, demonstrates that s/he is perhaps more electable. Or at least this would be consistent with the classic 1960 publication of The American Voter by Angus Campbell, Phillip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes. Here the argument was that candidates appealing to voters who were in the middle were more likely to win general elections.

This idea was also consistent with another idea found in economics, which is the median voter theorem. One version of the median voter theorem holds that the median voter decides the size of government. That is, the greater the distance between the median voter’s income and the average income of society, the greater is the level of inequality. Therefore, the response will be redistribution, in which case the median voter will decide the level of redistribution. As redistribution will require a greater role for government, the median is effectively opting for a larger size government.

The political version of the median voter holds that the voter in the middle of the spectrum ultimately decides the composition of government in terms of party and ideology. The median voter, in short, decides the election, which means that candidates that run to either extreme cannot possibly win. Of course, this raises the obvious question of why candidates are running to their respective party extremes?

Before we explore why, let’s see what happens when we put both the economic version of the median voter theorem together with the political version. If the voter in the middle of the political spectrum is the same as the voter in the middle of the income distribution, it has to follow that the median voter may decide the size of government, but only indirectly. First the median voter is deciding the composition of the government and what set of policies based on the candidates’ presentation of them that best reflect the values and preferences of the median voter.

This means that the median voter could be opting for a larger government if in fact the median voter opts for candidates running on a program of more active government and more spending on programs. But the median voter could also be opting for a smaller government if the median voter instead opts for candidates running on a program of more limited government, fewer programs, and less spending.

According to the economic version, it is the distance between the median voter’s income and the average income of society that determines whether the median voter ultimately opts for less government or more government. In other words, the more inequality there is, the more likely the median voter is to opt for larger government, and the less inequality there is the more likely the median voter is to opt for smaller government.

All of this, of course, presupposes that public officials listen to voters at all generally, and pay attention to the median voter more specifically. But as most public officials are only responsive to the affluent, it is highly unlikely the median voter decides anything at all.

Here is where our 24 contenders for the Democratic party nomination come in. If they can manipulate the public and lead them to believe that income inequality is increasing and poses a serious threat to our democracy, they should be able to run on even more leftist platforms of redistribution and win. At issue here is which candidate best speaks to the level of redistribution desired by the median voter.

Still, there is a problem here. The median voter of the Democratic party is not the same as the median voter of the general electorate. Moreover, the median voter among Democratic party activists — those most likely to participate in primaries and nominating caucuses — is also not the same as the median voter among the entire registered Democratic party electorate.

Campbell et. al. assumed that through traditional measures of public opinion, candidates for office could then identify the median voter. But unless campaigns are actually looking at income figures in a particular political region, can we really identify the median voter? At least 22 of our 24 contenders for the Democratic party nomination are making no efforts to identify the median voter, at least in economic terms.

Of course, they don’t feel they need to because, as all elites do, they profess to know what is good for them. But the candidate that truly wants to win, especially in the general election would take greater steps to identify the median voter in terms of where that voter sits on the income distribution.

Were this to be a serious campaign with candidates presenting a range of different views, our more “centrist” candidates would take steps to seriously identify the median voter and then discuss which policies would best meet the real median voter’s needs. Until that happens, there will continue to be a disconnect between candidates and the voting public. Unfortunately, this disconnect only mirrors the parallel disconnect between elites and the general public.

# # #

Restoring the Middle Class through Wage / Oren M. Levin-Waldman / Palgrave MacMillan

 https://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9783319744476

This book makes the case for minimum wage as a way to improve well-being of middle-income workers, reduce income inequality, and enhance democracy….

###

Minimum Wage: A Reference Handbook / ABC – CLIO

https://www.abc-clio.com/ABC-CLIOCorporate/SearchResults.aspx?type=a 

The Minimum Wage: A Reference Handbook By Oren M. Levin-Waldman. As of 2014, the minimum wage in Seattle is $15 an hour — double the federal minimum wage.

###

“Wage Policy, Income Distribution, and Democratic Theory” By Oren M. Levin-Waldman

http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415779715/#reviews

###

 

Oren M. Levin-WaldmanDr. Oren M. Levin-Waldman, Professor at the Graduate School for Public Affairs and Administration at Metropolitan College of New York, Mike Spano, Yonkers Mayor, and Hezi Aris, Yonkers Tribune Editor-at-Large on Westchester On the Level – Wednesday, May 22, 2019th @10am-12Noon EST

Comments 1

  1. I intended to send you a very small observation to say thanks the moment again on the awesome thoughts you’ve featured in this article. It has been so shockingly generous with you to provide publicly what many individuals would’ve sold for an electronic book to end up making some bucks for themselves, particularly considering the fact that you could have tried it if you ever desired. The thoughts likewise served to become a fantastic way to know that other people have the identical zeal the same as mine to see a good deal more when considering this condition. I’m certain there are millions of more pleasant times in the future for individuals that read through your website.

Leave a Reply

This comment will be displayed anonymously. Your name and email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.