The promise of good jobs continues to be a mainstay of American politics. That’s why automation will be one of the defining issues of the 2020 elections, at least according to the Brookings Institution.
Researchers found that higher automation risk correlates with support for Republicans — 46 out of the 50 districts most at risk of job automation went for the GOP in the 2018 midterms. If Democrats cannot sell a positive vision for automation to these districts, they could be handing Trump another term.
Anxiety over automation’s role in fueling populist politics is clear. It’s why Trump’s focus on bringing back lost jobs resonates with voters. But little is being done to create new jobs.
Trump blames offshoring and predatory Chinese trade practices as the source of economic malaise. But the very same jobs that have been affected by trade are being changed by automation. Advanced robotics and artificial intelligence affect mostly routine jobs, which were prominent in those districts harmed by offshoring, so getting tough on trade will bring no benefits in the long-run.
Automation has a demographic-oriented component, too. Technologies that replace routine tasks most acutely affect both old and young workers, those who have worked at one company their entire life and those looking for their first jobs. These are the same two groups leading a revolt against the political mainstream on the Right and Left, desperate for increased access to the workforce.
Neither party has really grappled with the impacts of automation and the digital economy in shaping America’s future. The one that does, and does it well, will not only be able to craft policies that support growth and equality, but will also generate support from districts who have grown frustrated with the status quo. Democrats need to respond to the particular demographic and geographic concerns of the electorate, and they can do that by embracing an optimistic vision of automation that focuses on creating new types of jobs and worker retraining. It’s a good idea for them, too, because enacting short-term policies that focus on spreading the benefits of automation can actually create a more prosperous future, one in which the wealth from new technologies is more equitably distributed.
Among the current roster of candidates vying for the Democratic Party nomination, only Andrew Yang has taken this task seriously. While particular proposals, such as a universal basic income, may be politically taboo, his campaign has focused on the opportunities created by emerging technology rather than give in to frustration and resentment over it. This can do more to help reinvigorate post-industrial districts than either replicating Trump’s anti-automation stance on the Left or merely defending the status quo.
America’s tech heartland offers one interesting solution to the automation question. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called for a “data dividend,” compensating users for the data they generate through use of social media or the internet. The proposal views data production as a form of labor. Right now, the value of data is currently captured by those who know how to use it — tech firms — without compensating the everyday people who produced it.
Take truck drivers, for example, whose jobs are at risk of automation from self-driving cars. Driving data collected from humans helped develop the algorithms that replaced them, without ever giving them recognition or payment. But treating the creation of data as a form of labor would change that. It would also give displaced workers greater voice over their data, such as influencing who uses it and how. Data dividends are a step in that direction.
This is the ideal nexus of the fast-approaching future and the people who are frightened of it. Allowing disheartened voters to view themselves as more productive and more controlling of their data would go a long way toward restoring meaning and a sense of self-worth in places experiencing economic decline.
Unless Democrats craft a vision of automation that seeks to harness the potential of new technologies for widespread benefit, the discourse around the topic will continue to be one of anger and anxiety. This helps populist politicians win by attacking what does not work while failing to provide actual solutions. If they want to take the White House, Democrats need to advance an optimistic approach to automation and provide pragmatic hope to districts in decline.
Ryan Khurana is executive director of the Institute for Advancing Prosperity and a contributor for Young Voices.
