The 2006 elections are fast approaching and the Democratic Party seems to have figured out who its running against. The problem is, they appear to be running not against Republicans, but against the world’s largest retailer.
DES MOINES, Aug. 16 ? Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, a likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2008, delivered a 15-minute, blistering attack to warm applause from Democrats and union organizers here on Wednesday. But Mr. Biden?s main target was not Republicans in Washington, or even his prospective presidential rivals.
It was Wal-Mart, the nation?s largest private employer.
Among Democrats, Mr. Biden is not alone. Across Iowa this week and across much of the country this month, Democratic leaders have found a new rallying cry that many of them say could prove powerful in the midterm elections and into 2008: denouncing Wal-Mart for what they say are substandard wages and health care benefits.
Six Democratic presidential contenders have appeared at rallies like the one Mr. Biden headlined, along with some Democratic candidates for Congress in some of the toughest-fought races in the country.
?My problem with Wal-Mart is that I don?t see any indication that they care about the fate of middle-class people,? Mr. Biden said, standing on the sweltering rooftop of the State Historical Society building here. ?They talk about paying them $10 an hour. That?s true. How can you live a middle-class life on that??
The focus on Wal-Mart is part of a broader strategy of addressing what Democrats say is general economic anxiety and a growing sense that economic gains of recent years have not benefited the middle class or the working poor.
Their alliance with the anti-Wal-Mart campaign dovetails with their emphasis in Washington on raising the minimum wage and doing more to make health insurance affordable. It also suggests they will go into the midterm Congressional elections this fall and the 2008 presidential race striking a populist tone.
David Griswold at Cato@Liberty makes this observation about this new campaign strategy:
This new strategy tells us much more about the lingering anti-business, anti-market and, yes, elitist mindset of the Democratic Party?s national leaders than it does about Wal-Mart itself.
Wal-Mart and other price-conscious discount retailers are really a working family?s best friend. They operate in the marketplace as representatives for millions of consumers, ensuring that they get the best and lowest prices possible from wholesalers and producers. Tens of millions of American shoppers vote with their feet every week by visiting their local Wal-Mart.
I made much the same point back in November when this whole Wal-Mart controversy seems to have started:
If Wal-Mart didn?t exist, the truth of the matter is that most of the people wearing the blue vest today either wouldn?t be employed at all or would working longer, more dangerous hours somewhere else. Just as Wal-Mart has benefited consumers at the lower end of the economic spectrum, it has benefited workers as well.
That doesn’t seem to matter to the anti Wal-Mart crowd or the Democrats who have taken up their battle cry.
August 18th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
Makes perfect sense to me that the Dems’d be running against WallyWorld.
1.) WallyWorld is the perfect example of trade with some of the Dems’ fav people: commies in China, Muslims in Pakistan, etc.
2.) Wally World is doing AT LEAST as good a job on national security as Homeland (in)Security (wnna buy some tracphones?)
3.) WallyWorld is safe to attack (it has more power and is more secure than the Democratic Party, but will not use it against the Dems in any substantive manner… as long as the Dems are still losing and are insincere/impotent in their attacks on WallyWorld)
….and a host of other reasons, mainly hinging on the fundamental fact that NOTHING the Democratic Party says or does is based on any principle other than short-sighted election tactics based on rigged polling.
August 18th, 2006 at 9:18 pm
Terrorists, Wal-Mart, Whatever…
We must defeat the enemy!Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, a likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2008, delivered a 15-minute, blistering attack to warm ap…
August 21st, 2006 at 12:01 pm
Mr. Griswold’s comments are correct generically, that increasing wages at Wal-Mart would impact the cost of the products sold by Wal-Mart. That said, I wonder how much of the total cost of the products sold at Wal-Mart can be attributed to the wages paid to its workers by Wal-Mart.I have read in some places that it is as little as 2.5 cents on the dollar. Perhaps Mr. Griswold can comment on that.
Assuming that the increase is indeed 2.5%, I doubt seriously that pragmatic Americans would resent paying that much more to support a living wage for their fellow citizens.