Timothy Carney
2008-05-09 07:00:00.0
Current rank: Not ranked

WASHINGTON -

T ax and tax. Spend and spend. Elect and elect!” New Deal architect Harry Hopkins may not have actually spoken those words, but they have nonetheless been the working motto of Democrats for 75 years.

Republicans, trying to skip the “tax” part, have found that spending is easy enough, but no matter which party is spending and which party is increasing government, it’s mostly Democrats who get elected.

Increasing the size of government creates more bureaucrats, more government staffers, more government contractors, more lobbyists, more special-interest groups and more subsidy seekers. These folks aren’t likely to seek smaller government, so they are more likely to be Democrats or, at best, moderate Republicans.

In recent elections, we’ve seen once-Republican precincts throughout the Beltway region shifting solidly to Democrats. Last November, Democrats took over the Virginia State Senate by knocking off incumbent GOPers Jay O’Brien and Jeannemarie Devolites Davis, who represented once-conservative D.C. suburbs.

George W. Bush won Fairfax County in 2000, but in 2004, while improving his performance statewide, he lost Fairfax. This year Democrats are heavily favored to win the Northern Virginia congressional seat of retiring Rep. Tom Davis and may also threaten the nearby seat of another veteran GOPer, Rep. Frank Wolf.

The emerging pattern is clear: The closer to the U.S. capital, the more blue a city or county is. The pattern cuts across racial and income lines: Close-in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties — and to a lesser extent Howard and Charles counties — are Democratic strongholds in Maryland.

Similarly, Arlington, Alexandria and Falls Church are Virginia’s blue bastions, while Loudoun and Fairfax are a slightly paler blue. Go out farther in any direction, beyond the reach of Metro, MARC and the VRE, and it’s Republican country.

A similar theme is found across the country: Where there is government, there are Democrats. Excluding the seven single-district states, 28 state capitals are represented in Congress entirely or mostly by Democrats, while only 12 are represented entirely or mostly by Republicans (three are split). 

Last weekend’s special election upset in Louisiana by Democrats could be another sign of this trend: Democrat Don Cazayoux won the Baton Rouge seat long held by Republicans in a state trending hard toward the GOP. In Ohio one of the two Columbus seats will probably flip to Democrats with Republican Rep. Deborah Pryce, who barely won re-election last year, retiring.

Government is not the only reason state capitals tend to be Democratic, but with the pattern as strong as it is, it must be assumed to be a factor. After all, we know that government employees tend overwhelmingly to be Democrats.

The largest source of campaign contributions to candidates for federal office since 1989, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, has been the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, whose members, political action committees and employees have given 98 percent of their contributions to Democrats. 

Government employees, for obvious reasons, are more amenable to the bigger government that Democrats promise (and Republicans also deliver), and not as enticed by GOP promises of tax cuts and pro-growth economic agendas.

The City Journal’s Steve Malanga has studied the electoral influence of “tax eaters” — government workers and employees of organizations that depend on government money. In the 2001 New York City mayoral race, Malanga reports, Democrat Mark Green won the tax eater vote by 15 points, while Republican Michael Bloomberg carried the private-sector vote by 17 points. In that year’s Democratic primary, tax eaters were half the electorate.

Nonprofits living off government money support Democrats (look at Planned Parenthood and ACORN). Industries that live off government support also back Democrats (the health care industry and the renewable-energy industry, for example; military contractors are an exception to this rule).

For Democrats, this is a positive feedback loop: Spend more money, make more Democrats, spend even more money and make even more Democrats. Maybe Republicans tried to spend their way to reelection from 2001 to 2006, but instead they got the ball rolling again for the Democrats.