Gyory: Age and income gaps feed discontent

Bruce N. Gyory is a political consultant with Corning Place Consulting and an adjunct professor of political science at the University at Albany.

The recently released Census Bureau statistics show just how deep this Great Recession has been -- and raise hints as to what its long-term political implications may be.

Median household income fell for the third year in a row to $49,445 -- 7 percent below its 1999 peak. This is the first time since the Great Depression that median household income has not risen for such an extended period, wiping out an entire decade's income gains for the middle class.

The Rockefeller Institute reported that one-fifth of Americans have seen their family income decline by 25 percent. These past few years have dealt the most devastating economic blow to the middle class in our history, as there wasn't a broad middle class in place in 1929.

The recession is increasing the ranks of the poorest, too. The poverty rate jumped to 15.1 percent in 2010, or 46.2 million Americans, and more than 20 million are in what the Census Bureau considers "deep poverty" -- earning less than half the income of the poverty line. The nationwide suburban poverty rate has soared to 11.8 percent, the highest rate since 1967.

Our faith in the American dream has been shaken. When 70 percent of gross domestic product is driven by consumer spending, if we don't crack this crisis in confidence, our economy will prove even more vulnerable to double-dip recessions.

What are the political implications? Anger is rising at the center of the electorate. Gallup reports that three-quarters of the American people believe the nation would be better off if elected leaders followed public opinion more closely. The public is right to take umbrage at being ignored. In polls, both Gallup and Pew Research have found the public supports policies injecting a short-term boost to promote job growth, while cutting the deficit over the long haul with a mix of mostly spending cuts, but some increased revenues. Instead of charting this smart approach, Congress has been gridlocked in partisan wrangling since summer.

If Washington's dysfunction continues, all incumbents should be afraid. Politics today is akin to playing golf in a lightning storm. Future strikes could hit incumbents, regardless of party.

If you dig a little deeper into the census data, politically important age differences appear. From 2007 to 2010, household income fell by 15.3 percent for those 15 to 24 years old, while income rose for those older than 65 by 5.5 percent. Fully 37 percent of young families with children -- but only 5.7 percent of elderly families -- live in poverty. In the 1970s, the poverty rate among young families was only slightly above that of elderly families.

This generational divide is likely to become the new fault line in our politics. It need not become a generational war, but the plight of younger Americans deserves the attention of policy-makers. The question is whether Americans younger than 30, traditionally inactive at the polls, will start voting their demographic weight and shift the political tide toward their views, or whether the 50-and-older voters will continue to dominate electoral outcomes. Political historians looking back may say the Great Recession woke the sleeping tiger of younger voters -- the Occupy Wall Street protesters may be the first wave of a new generational thrust, rather than the undercurrent of the old left -- fundamentally changing both the turnout template and, hence, political outcomes.

The Republican reflex to lock in government benefits for those older than 55, forcing eventual lower Social Security and Medicare benefits on younger Americans, could ultimately cost elections, as young voters cast protest votes in droves. Especially since, among younger Americans, there's a larger percentage of minorities, where Republicans have long been weak.

Alternatively, if over the long haul Democrats don't confront the affordability crisis underlying entitlement programs, buckling under baby boomer retirements, they will be on the wrong side of history, as inaction could rekindle stagflation.

"The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. . . . As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we shall save our country." So said Abraham Lincoln in 1862. The recession-driven storm today calls for new thinking and acting indeed. The voters will demand it.