M.P. expects set-back for Reagan

Press, 1 November 1982, Page 24

M.P. expects set-back for Reagan

“There are clear signs that the tide has turned against the Republican Administration in the United States,” Mr Geoffrey Palmer. M.P. for Christchurch Central, said yesterday on his return from a month in the United States. “The mid-term elections to be held on Tuesday are critical to President Reagan’s future. The elections have turned into a vote on the economic policies the President has been pursuing. Those policies have been controversial and they are seen by many to have failed,” Mr Palmer said. Mr Palmer spent time in ten states investigating social welfare administration, freedom of information, and the legislative ‘process at the state and federal level. He was also a New Zealand delegate to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Conference held in the Bahamas. “It is probable that the Republicans will sustain heavy losses in the House of Representatives in Tuesday’s election,” Mr Palmer said. “I predict they will lose more than 30 seats.” According to Mr Palmer the nation-wide campaign for the Federal House and Senate is dominated by two issues: unemployment and social security. “Both issues are damaging to President Reagan,” said Mr Palmer. “If this election turns out badly for the Republicans it is quite possible that President Reagan will be a one-term president. Against this must be balanced the fact that the Democrats are in considerable disarray.

“Unemployment in the United States exceeds 10 per cent and is still rising. In some areas the rate of unemployment is much higher than the average. One small railroad town achieved considerable publicity because the rate of unemployment there was 70 per cent and the Mayor was among the unemployed. “The industrial north-east is particularly badly hit. Big layoffs in the steel mills have badly affected states such as Pennsylvania. “It was announced last week that there were more people receiving the unemployment benefit in the United States than at any time since 1935. “Unemployment is seen as a direct result of the President's economic policies. A series of tight money policies has reduced inflation and interest rates. The price has been high — a long recession and skyrocketing unemployment. Concern with the social consequences of unemployment is very high everywhere,” said Mr Palmer. “President‘Reagan won 44 states in the 1980 presidential campaign on the basis of promising: strengthened defence, tax reductions and reduced domestic spending, and more responsibility for the states and less for the Federal Government. “One aim of these policies, collectively labelled ‘Reaganomics/ was to stimulate economic growth by different methods than had been used in Western economies since the Great Depression. The economic policies have not produced

acceptable results so far. The President's answer on the hustings is that he will 'stay the course.’ It will take further time for the policies to work, he says. “The indications are, however, that the voters do not believe the policies will produce economic recovery and increased employment,” said Mr Palmer. “President Reagan’s general political stance, and his numerous statements over a period of many years on social security, have produced for him a serious political problem. Early in his administration he made moves to change the system. The political response was such that there was a retreat and a bi-partisan Presidential Commission was appointed. That will not report until after the election. “The Republicans put out a fund-raising letter for the election in which they raised the idea of making social security voluntary or cutting the benefits. “To the millions of people who depend on social security these possibilities were alarming. It is not surprising that the Democrats jumped on the issue. “The House Speaker, Mr Tip O’Neill, accused the Republicans of plotting to destroy the system. The President has issued strident denials, but substantial damage has been done. “Something will have to be done soon to fix up America’s social security system. It is in financial crisis and the administration is far . from satisfactory. The man who runs the scheme, Commissioner Jack

Svahn. told me that the problems surrounding the scheme are monumental,” said Mr Palmer. “Either the taxes to support the scheme will have to be put up, or benefits cut. Before the election Congress was not happy to do either. It did nothing. “Only one third of the 100 Senators are up for re-election. At present Republicans have a 54-46 majority. Each state has two Senators regardless of population and those seats which are being contested this time tend to favour the Republicans. “The President is relatively much more popular in the rural and Western states than in the industrialised, states. So it is thought to be unlikely that the Senate will go Democratic,

although the Republican candidates in New Mexico and Utah are in some trouble. “If the President loses control of the Senate it will be a massive defeat. In the House of Representatives the President already faces a Democratic majority. But the Republicans rely for support on conservative southern Democrats to get their programmes through. "If more than 30 seats are lost in the House, the President will be in the gravest difficulties whatever the results in the Senate. All members of the House are up for election. “In my view, the Administration is likely to lose more than 30 of its supporters in the House. This will result in a very different political climate in the United States than that which has existed since 1980," said Mr Palmer. “Much will depend on voter turn-out. Mid-term elections produce a much lower turn-out than when there is a Presidential contest as well. In the last mid-term election,' in 1978, fewer than 40 per cent of eligible voters bothered to vote, a record low. “One measure of the situation facing the President is that his campaigning has been restricted to areas where his policies remain popular. Many strategists think his appearances have a negative effect and he has been asked to stay away from some campaigns. It is notable that the President has not campaigned in California and many other highly populous, industrialised states. "One feature of the campaign has been the death of

ideology. Almost none of the candidates speak in terms of philosophical issues, or even dogmas and doctrines. Most of the television advertisements I saw did not even identify the candidate’s party.” said’ Mr Palmer. > “There are signs in the United States that the party system is breaking down. It has always been loose. Now it is often difficult to discern where each party really stands on the issues. "It is almost as if there is a general admission that nothing -works. The Democrats see that big spending and high tax policies are not popular so they do not advocate them. “Republicans know that tight economic policies have produced massive unemployment and they want to distance themselves from those policies. "In such circumstances, personality politics has become the prevailing mode. Candidates stress their integrity, experience and personal qualities," said Mr Palmer. "Television image is everything. Ex-actor Reagan is the master of courtesy, charm and the soft image on television. People like him, even if they do not-like his policies. Other candidates copy his actor’s technique. "The money being spent is phenomenal. An ordinary contest for the House of Representatives seat will cost a minimum of $250,000. Some stretch into the millions. In the area of money the Republicans have a great advantage. They have much more campaign money than the Democrats," said Mr Palmer.