Candidates must talk about jobs

So far, Iraq has dominated the preliminary campaigning for the 2008 presidential election. On the Democratic side, rabid critics of the war have failed to force an apology out of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., for her 2002 vote authorizing military force. On the Republican side, candidates try to find phrasing that distances them from the quagmire without expressly criticizing President Bush.

But the war won't be the only thing on voters' minds when they head to the polls a year and a half from now. Iraq and terrorism will be important, of course -- magnified if jihadists manage another successful attack on American soil.

Still, there is an undercurrent of economic distress among working- and middle-class voters that presidential candidates cannot afford to ignore. It has already shown itself in the hysteria over illegal immigration, the clamor for affordable health care, in the distrust of globalization.

According to a Gallup poll conducted in February, 43 percent of Americans rate the economy as good to excellent, while 57 percent view economic conditions as fair to poor. No serious candidate for the presidency can afford to ignore the economic unease expressed by the majority.

So far, though, few public figures have found a smart and appealing way to discuss this new economy. We don't have a language for it. Still mired in the rhetoric of the '60s, we discuss the poles of poverty and affluence. Traditional conservatives still point to family dysfunction as a major cause of generational poverty, and traditional liberals still decry corporate greed and institutional neglect. There is some truth in both views about the underclass.

But what about a different group of Americans, hardworking and law-abiding but still kicked around by an economy that doesn't reward their efforts? What about those who lost jobs because a factory closed and are now struggling to find work that pays as well? What about those whose employer does not provide health insurance? What of those parents who joined the military just so their children could get dental care? What about middle-aged office workers laid off in a corporate downsizing and undesirable to other employers because of their age?

The very nature of this economy has made many of those Americans invisible. We still focus on broad statistics such as the national unemployment rate, which hovers at a respectable 4.3 percent. And despite a recent stock market slide, many Americans are enjoying unprecedented prosperity. This nation has produced a growing group of two-income families with vacation homes and healthy stock portfolios. Since the nation's most successful politicians share that economic bracket, we don't hear much about Americans outside those affluent enclaves.

It's helpful to think of economic conditions in terms of the cleavage expressed in the Gallup poll -- 43 percent of Americans think the economy is doing just fine, while 57 percent don't share that rosy view.

Here's the rub: Both groups are right. On the lucky side of the divide are well-educated professionals, perhaps with a creative bent, who navigate the information economy with ease and live well in big cities that also thrive, such as New York, Chicago or Atlanta. On the unlucky side are employees of Ford or GM, housepainters struggling against immigrant competitors, or former textile workers in rural towns with no prospects. The latter group is battling against a wave of change likely to leave them shipwrecked.

While many workers and their advocates are ready to dump globalization and support proposals that would prohibit U.S. corporations from outsourcing jobs, that desperate idea just won't work. Think about it. Many companies would simply pull up and move to China or Mexico. Others would incorporate offshore, U.S. companies no longer. There is simply no practical way to prevent capitalists from spending as little as possible on labor.

Instead, the nation needs to find ways to support workers in transition. Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is among the very few who have offered detailed proposals, including a plan for universal health care and a program to make college more affordable.

Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.