Jon Kasparek is assistant professor of history at UW-Waukesha and the author of Fighting Son: a biography of Philip F. LaFollette and a co-author of Voices & Votes, a civics text for elementary students.
Wisconsin Vote on Campus asked him three questions about this year's election.
Apart from the obvious firsts of race and gender in this year’s presidential election, what is capturing your attention as a historian?
Race and gender are clearly the big headlines in the 2008 election, but I’m also very interested in the regional aspect of this campaign. It seems clear that Senator McCain will do well in the South and Western states (as Republicans have tended to do) and that Senator Obama will do well in the Northeast and Pacific Coast (as Democrats have tended to do). The big battleground is in the Midwest: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, and Missouri are all up for grabs. Both John McCain and Barack Obama have the potential to do well in this region. I think the election may very well turn on whether Midwestern voters on election day are more concerned about the economy or about foreign affairs. At the moment, it certainly seems that the economy, particularly the Wall Street bailout and the mortgage crisis has people worried, and the Midwest seems to be moving strongly toward Obama.
For your biography of Wisconsin’s Philip LaFollette (Fighting Son) you must have immersed yourself in the progressive era. Do you see any parallels in today’s politics?
It has become conventional to observe that we live in a “second Gilded Age,” dominated by conservative politicians and powerful corporations. There is also an increasing disparity of wealth, with working- and middle-class families unable to keep up with inflation. At the same time, however, I also see an anxiety about economic issues and environmental issues, both of which could drive a wave of progressive reform. The big issues of Theodore Roosevelt’s administration are remarkably relevant today: conservation, antitrust, and consumer protection. The next president is going to have to respond to those concerns and use the White House to push those kinds of reforms. I think the recent problems with oil prices (and the corresponding inflation), tainted food supplies, and product recalls (remember Thomas the Tank Engine?) suggest that the public will respond positively to the kind of regulatory legislation that was pioneered under Presidents Roosevelt and Wilson.
With the bailout and the mortgage crisis we also see something we have not really seen since the 1930s—widespread, genuine anger and resentment against the banking industry and Wall Street. For years, Americans have been told again and again to invest in 401ks and other portfolios, and now it looks like they need to bailout the same investors who since the 1990s promised them big returns. Americans have a fear of collective action but can embrace such activity if they perceive a genuine need, which was certainly the case during the Progressive Era and the 1930s, and seems to be the case today.
Your earlier book (Voices and Votes) is a political primer for Wisconsin elementary students. Is education enough to motivate young people to participate?
Education is certainly a prerequisite, but I’m not sure it is enough by itself. Education can tell young people why they need to participate theoretically, but we’re up against a feeling of cynicism and disconnect. I think there is a tendency among young voters to dislike politicians of ANY party and to not perceive any reason to vote. Both parties have made tremendous efforts recently to reach out to college-age voters and shape their message in a way that is relevant to them. I am cheered by increased political activity on college campuses, but I don’t think the media have done a good job emphasizing the issues affecting new voters, and I’m not sure young voters perceive themselves as a group or as the youngest members of more traditional voting blocks (ie, “values voters” or liberal reformers). I think the key is for first- or second-time voters to realize they have made a difference. If the youth vote swings the election one way or the other in a key state, and the media recognize that fact, it will make them politically active for life.
Your earlier book (Voices and Votes) is a political primer for Wisconsin elementary students. Is education enough to motivate young people to participate?
Education is certainly a prerequisite, but I’m not sure it is enough by itself. Education can tell young people why they need to participate theoretically, but we’re up against a feeling of cynicism and disconnect. I think there is a tendency among young voters to dislike politicians of ANY party and to not perceive any reason to vote. Both parties have made tremendous efforts recently to reach out to college-age voters and shape their message in a way that is relevant to them. I am cheered by increased political activity on college campuses, but I don’t think the media have done a good job emphasizing the issues affecting new voters, and I’m not sure young voters perceive themselves as a group or as the youngest members of more traditional voting blocks (ie, “values voters” or liberal reformers). I think the key is for first- or second-time voters to realize they have made a difference. If the youth vote swings the election one way or the other in a key state, and the media recognize that fact, it will make them politically active for life.
