Economic and foreign policy influences on U.S. presidential elections

U.S. Elections influence

There are several different factors that influence U.S. elections, in particular at the presidential level. Economic issue are usually among the most important influencers for any national-level election, but there are other factors as well. Among the President's duties are not only stewarding the economy, but handling foreign policy, so both of those issues will come into play. The economy of course in recent years has become so highly globalized that foreign policy plays a role in how the economy develops. This paper will take a look at the factors that drive U.S. elections, and in particular will examine how certain areas of the economy and foreign policy influence the election. Of note will be the relations with China, as that nation has played an increasing role in both the U.S. economic environment and the U.S. foreign policy environment in recent years. While elections are often seen as being decided on factors over which the President has little control, the reality is that economic outcomes are often shaped by public policy -- there just is not always an easy and direct connection between the action and the economic outcomes due to the other factors involved (Merrifield, 1993).

Drivers of Elections

Election observer FairVote.org notes the key factors that drive voter turnout relate to the structure of the election, voting laws, demographics and electoral competitiveness. U.S. elections, especially the Presidential elections, are hotly contested. Demographics are also going ot play a role, as certain demographics vote much more often than others. In particular, older people, and wealthier people vote more often than the poor, the young and many minority communities (FairVote.org, 2015). Demographics are particularly important because how voters react to certain economic and foreign policy issues will be in part characterized by their demographic makeup.

How people vote will also be affected by demographics, but also by a number of other factors. Voters look for candidates who share their views and their values on a number of issues. So race/ethnicity, geographic region, religion, gender and family status are all factors that affect voting patterns. In particular people like to vote for candidates to whom they relate, or share similar views on some of these key issues (U.S. History.org, 2015).

Beyond these factors, voters look to the state of the economy. They are more likely to vote for the opposition candidates when economic performance is poor -- note the way that the tanking economy in 2008 completely broke open the deadlock between Obama and McCain that had existed that summer, delivering a landslide victory for the opposition party in the election that November. When the economy is doing well, people are more oriented towards the status quo and when the economy is doing poorly they are more oriented towards changing the government (Eldred, 2012).

Steinhauser (2014) identified several other factors that were driving the 2014 midterm campaign. These included the prognosis for Obamacare, the President's approval rating, income and gender equality, and foreign policy with respect to global hot spots. Many of these issues are factors that are driven by or in some way relate to foreign policy. Among global hotspots, that is usually the Middle East, in particular given the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. While there are geopolitical issues with China, foreign policy towards China is usually a background issue for voters, and does not in general sway voting patterns. Issues such as income equality are economic issues, so it is not just the major economic issues that are things people vote on, but specific niche issues within economics.

Economic Issues: Unemployment

Americans understand unemployment. The fear of growing unemployment in 2008 created a strong motivation to vote Democrat, and that was before the worst of the unemployment hit the U.S. economy. Unemployment affects millions of voters directly, and when unemployment rates are high, this tends to be something that most Americans either are directly affected or that the know someone who is affected. Thus, unemployment is a major issue among the leading economic factors that contribute to voting policies (Toplin, 2014).

Now, with unemployment there is usually a direct trade-off with economic growth and trade policy. Offshoring has been a major issue for Americans for several decades, and a lot of this offshoring has been to China. Where America has lost jobs is with the opening of trade deals with foreign countries. This is the thing with comparative advantage -- it implies a restructuring of both economies, which will create some jobs and eliminate others. Much of America's manufacturing has been moved to China, where costs are lower. So while this delivers a higher GDP, and it provides for a constraint on inflation, the cost comes with unemployment. Restructuring the economy is a low process, and many workers whose jobs become obsolete are not skilled, and therefore have trouble finding other jobs. So unemployment is a big issue, and there are many who have made the direct connection between pursuing greater trade with China through pushing China into the WTO and removing trade barriers between the two nations and the loss of American jobs. In elections, candidates do not talk about China, but they do talk about creating jobs for Americans.

In theory, America's last several presidents all have a high respect for the principles of free trade, and they have recognized that freer trade is a powerful took for increasing wealth. Politicians are in particular aware of this because of the emphasis on voting patterns. Voters do not necessarily grasp the balance and subtlety of the issue, but they do understand the threat of losing jobs. This can affect foreign policy, because actions taken to protect jobs domestically -- such as trade barriers -- represent foreign policy decisions. The relationship between the U.S. And China has been characterized by a general unwillingness on the part of either country to undertake protectionist measures that would compromise their growing trade relationship.

Can U.S. Voters Influence Policy vis-a-vis China?

It is fairly evident that the vast majority of U.S. voters are not particularly skilled in economics or in international relations. So they certainly are not in much of a position to judge policies relating to these matters. IR is not something that drives votes except where wars are concerned, but in general economics is a vote driver. The issue with determining how much impact U.S. voters have with respect to American policy decisions regarding China is that if voters are not connecting the two, they are not voting on the two at the same time. The state of America's relationship with China is not normally something that will be a deciding factor for voters, and therefore officials on the campaign trail are unlikely to invoke China all that often, and even less likely to follow through with actual policy.

As such, a reasonable hypothesis is that for the time being U.S. voters do not really have any impact on policy with China. For one, voters like a strong healthy economy. It is basically a utilitarian calculus that states that the greatest good for the greatest number lies with a healthy GDP. If there are sectors of the economy that are suffering as the result of promoting free trade between these two nations, then that is a small price to pay. This is the view of most Americans, as one would need to be directly affected by unemployment and specifically draw a link between that and a politician's policies in order for China trade to be a specific issue. Given that both parties have encouraged free trade between the two nations, drawing such a link based on evidence would be difficult. Thus, voter perceptions of China are not a big enough issue, even when there might be a case that they should be.

For example, in 2012 there was specific impetus for protecting American economic growth. The economy was growing slowly, and unemployment was coming down even more slowly. The state of the economy was a campaign issue, but after the election more free trade agreements were signed, as well as other measures to promote trade. While speculative, it is reasonable to think Mitt Romney would have done the same, based on his platform. So if China was going to be an issue with respect to the U.S. economic situation, the candidates would likely need to be better differentiated.

Does the President Influence relations between the U.S. And China?

The President has certain powers with respect to foreign policy. With respect to economics, much of that is under the influence of the Federal Reserve but there are trade agreements that are negotiated by representatives and then signed into law by the President. The President has the power to guide these representatives, but likely the trade agreements will reflect a broad policy of encouraging trade between the two nations, and little more.

There may not be any major differences between the two parties with respect to policy with China. Both will engage in rhetoric with respect to China's influence on unemployment, and that is about it. The rhetoric about the trade relationship changes little, and does not necessarily reflect what the governments do in practice. The implications for this are that the election of a U.S. president does not necessarily have any major influence over relations with China. With other countries, that it not necessarily the case, but some of those other countries do not have the same balance of trade with China. It is interesting to consider that China's position with respect to its trade relationship and the U.S. economic dependence on that relationship, that it promotes stability. The government might change, but there is stability in the relationship with China. Both sides agree that it is necessary to maintain free trade with China, as much as possible, as this is beneficial for both countries. In foreign policy, they are sometimes strategic partners and sometimes adversaries, but the economic mutual dependence is an important factor that governs this relationship.

Overall, the sitting U.S. President will typically seek to look relatively tough when dealing with the domestic audience, and will work closely with China on trade issue. Matters of foreign policy as relates to security are governed, as with trade, by the fact that there is economic mutual dependence. The use of hard power by either country would be detrimental to this trade relationship. This is something that would have a negative effect on the U.S. economy, so the President will not engage in activity that would threaten than relationship, as it would also threaten his ability to be re-elected. The electorate may not vote on China specifically, but it does reward the sort of stability that allows the U.S. economy to grow -- and trade with China promotes GDP grow and the slowing of inflation.

Conclusions

The economy is a very important driver of voting in the United States. In particular, people look to the headline numbers like GDP and unemployment and inflation. Where China is concerned is that the relationship with China will affect these metrics. Therefore, it is important for a U.S. official looking to get elected to encourage stability and a stronger trade relationship with China. This will also manifest in foreign policy. Because there is a mutual interest between the U.S. And China to promote stable, growing trade between the nations, it is entirely necessary that foreign policy be focused on the use of soft power, with open conflict and the use of hard power to be dramatically curtailed.

So while the average voter has little ability or inclination to evaluate candidates on their stances with respect to China, they do understand basic economic metrics, and politicians will need to be aware as to how those metrics are affected by America's relationship with China.