[Effortpost] Using Japan's LDP as a Model for a Post-Trump GOP

Preface:

I first thought up this idea for an effortpost after reading Noah Smith's article on the current state of Japanese politics. Before reading this I was under the impression that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had governed far to the right, as much of western media seems to suggest this is the case by bringing up his ties to Nationalist groups, but Smith gave a different perspective than I was accustomed to hearing (especially coming from someone who leans quite a bit to the left like Noah Smith). I bring up some of his points in this post, but the focus and goal of this is much different than his article. As I looked more into Japanese politics, I found Japan’s governing right-wing party, the Liberal Democratic Party, (I’ll be referring to them as the LDP throughout this post, but they’ve collationed with a small center-right party for the past two decades) to be surprisingly similar to the GOP. Not similar in the legislation that passes through each party, but rather in the groups that make up the party. There seems to be a dichotomy between the liberalism the party’s name would claim to support and the fact that Steve Bannon earlier this year went to Japan and praised Abe's performance, comparing it to Trump so I wanted to share my observations and why I think the LDP can serve as a good model for a better (but certainly still imperfect) GOP. At the very least, any political party that receives praise from voices as distinct as Noah Smith and Steve Bannon will be interesting to look at.

Before I go too deep into looking at what the LDP has done in Japan, I want to outline some of the biggest problems I think need to be adressed within the GOP (in no particular order):

• Poor quality policy (Including the disaster of Obamacare repeals that failed dramatically and recent proposals to cut immigration levels in half)

• The GOP’s sway away from liberalism is a concerning development as many new, rising stars in the GOP seem far less interested in upholding the tenants of liberalism

• The party fails to appeal to younger voters especially as issues like climate change aren't uniformly taken seriously. Support of other growing groups such as nonwhite voters and voters who don't identify as Christian is also quite low.

My primary goal here is to find a way for the GOP to pass liberal policy and uphold liberal values while still having illiberal people within the coalition. I think the LDP provides a strong model for how to do this.

On the issues

Going into the midterms, the three most important issues for voters were healthcare, immigration and the economy. In Japan, the LDP has been able to find effective answers to each of these issues.

Healthcare

This won’t be a super comprehensive view of the Japanese healthcare system, but for more information, check out this profile that does a better job explaining how their system works than I ever could. Essentially their system revolves around publicly funded insurance with supplementary private insurance being commonplace. The system is substantially cheaper than America's, and contributes to Japan being one of healthiest countries in the world with the highest life expectancy in the OECD (the low self-reported health quality is likely due to cultural norms rather than poor quality levels of healthcare). The Japanese healthcare model shouldn’t necessarily be the model that should be used as a prescription to cure the US healthcare system of its woes, rather what should be taken out of its success is that the right can have success in creating a system of universal healthcare. If universal healthcare isn’t done by the right, it’ll be done by the left, and if a single payer system were implemented, it’d be incredibly challenging to undo.

Generally public opinion on healthcare tends to favor the status quo (at least in the short term). Think back to the massive unpopularity of the ACA when it was first being implemented, and contrast that with its relative popularity now Any dramatic overhaul of the healthcare system to the right or left is likely to create similar backlash to that of the ACA, so likely the best thing the GOP could do is find a way to improve our current system without changing too much. It’s been proposed countless times and not really gotten anywhere, but Singapore's system could provide a good model as it can be built around HSAs that already exist in the US system and private insurance along with essentially universal catastrophic coverage. Coming up with fixes to healthcare that aren’t disruptive can be a winning issue once the realities of Medicare for all begin to set in for the general public.

Immigration

I’ve long thought of Japan as a highly homogeneous country that’s very xenophobic and unwelcoming to immigrants, but in fact, Japan is one of the most open to immigration countries in the world, and more people there would like to see an increase than a decrease in levels of immigration. There are a handful of reasons why this could be that I’ll go into. First is that Japan has a far lower net migration rate than that of many western countries; with a smaller amount of immigration to begin with, it’s only natural that Japan would be more open to increasing numbers than other countries with much more immigration. I don’t think that this is the primary reason that immigration is seen so much more favorably though. While America and other western countries have historically been bastions of immigration, Japan has notoriously been highly closed. This history in theory creates a culture that’s much more hostile or at the least skeptical of immigration, and yet that clearly isn’t the case, so why is Japan such an outlier?

For over a decade, one of the biggest issues in Japan has been population decline. As birthrates have fallen well below the replacement rate of 2.1, Japan has found itself in desperate need of people. I’ll go into some of the pro-natalist policies their government has introduced to combat this a bit later, but without a dramatic rise in birth rates, the only way Japan has to address population decline is to let more people in. And that’s exactly what they’ve been doing with legislation such as expanding guest worker programs

Population decline isn’t just an issue for Japan though, in the US it’s a serious problem that needs to be addressed as rates of having children are trending down. With this being the case, and as big an issue as it is, why is it that this hasn’t gotten nearly the attention it has in Japan? While we focus on insignificant culture war issues and partisan bickering in America, we miss out on the major problems that aren’t getting addressed. Changing our immigration system is a great way we can work to prevent population decline in the US from becoming the issue it’s become in Japan, but the longer we wait, the more severe this problem becomes.

The first step that needs to be done is sounding the alarm on this, if people are aware of a need for more people in the country, more of those whose opinion on immigration rates is to keep things more or less the same can be swayed to supporting an increase in net migration. Just getting the word out isn’t enough, we need to find exactly what areas need to be addressed and create an immigration regime that can solve those problems. Some ideas that should be included in future immigration legislation:

• Transition away from the family based approach we currently have, and to a more economically focused approach. We shouldn’t eliminate all family sponsored migration, but we shouldn’t prioritize it like it currently is. Spouses and underage children should still be given priority, but other relatives should be near the bottom of the priority list if they apply on family ties alone.

• Get rid of temporary visas as a whole as they're a leading factor that allows illegal migration to persist. These visas should be replaced with permanent visas that don’t allow the problem of overstaying a visa to exist at all. In addition, an amnesty for current unauthorized immigrants should be done. Alex Nowrasteh and David Bier at CATO have three proposals for how to do this in a more politically viable manner. I’m personally partial to the first option as I think citizenship is the biggest deterrent to amnesty for many conservatives, so this would ensure safety from deportation for those who need it most while not completely taking citizenship off the table for those who want it.

• DACA recipients however should still get an expedited path to citizenship as there’s no reason to punish them for what’s largely out of their control. A path to citizenship for DACA holders is even favored by a large majority of Republicans, so this shouldn't be a difficult ask.

• Much like Japan’s guest worker program prioritizes areas where there is a labor shortage, we should create a new visa category that prioritizes visas in areas determined to have a labor shortage by the Department of Labor. This visa should be fairly flexible in the numbers given out and to who it’s given to based on reported need. It should prioritize neither high skilled nor low skilled labor as needs for both can be subject to change. For example, currently agricultural workers and construction workers are needed in their respective fields, so this visa could be given out to workers in those fields, but ten years from now those areas may not be in need of as many workers, making a more flexible visa allows needs to be met quicker without admitting workers in fields that over time no longer have a shortage problem.

• Another visa that should be created is one that gives international students who study in America permanent residency upon graduating and finding employment. The H-1B system is horribly flawed, not just in that it’s a temporary visa, but also that not nearly enough are given out. This makes countless individuals who already have job offers within the country lose the opportunity not only for that job, but also to live in the country period. Rather than keeping the best and brightest of other countries, we’re sending them back home, rather than giving them a new one. International students also already have experienced living in the US for many years, so any concerns those who are wary of immigrants’ ability to adjust to living in the country aren’t a problem. When international students from China for example are denied a long-term career in the US by immigration restrictions, they go back to China and make our chef global rival stronger. By framing immigration as a zero sum game (which to some extent it is), those who may be more hawkish on immigration, but weary on the threat from China may be able to be swayed to support greater immigration of this sort since it keeps talented young people out of the hands of our greatest geopolitical rivals.

Fixing immigration shouldn’t be presented as the culture war issue it is in America. It should be seen as economically imperative, not as only human rights issue or a threat to American life as we know it. Fortunately there’s been some enthusiasm recently for immigration fixes on the right that will actually help such as Rand Paul's latest proposal. Rather than letting the nativist wing of the party attempt dangerous legislation such as the RAISE Act, proposals such as Paul’s should be lauded for their ingenuity and used as a base to help introduce new immigrants to the country. The GOP should follow the LDP’s example on how to make support for immigration a popular position, by making sure the public is aware of what immigration increases are— a need.

Economic Issues

Taxation is far from my specialty, but here’s a very brief overview of Japan’s tax regime: essentially, it’s similar to the US but rates on top earners are substantially higher, and there are much less deductions, so it’s a much simpler system. Non income tax rates are fairly comparable with the addition of an 8% (soon to be 10%) consumption tax. Comprehensive info on most of the specifics on their tax regime can be found here (the website is a bit old, but from what I’ve looked up, most of the info seems up to date). Various prefectures have different tax rates on top of that too, so it’s similar to the US system in that way too. The tax burden is higher on top earners than America’s, but it’s fairly comparable to most non-Nordic government’s tax regimes in Europe. Rather than deficit expanding tax cuts, the GOP should look to a more efficient tax system, even if that means some tax hikes for certain groups.

While I mentioned immigration as a tool the LDP uses to combat population decline, that’s not the only thing they’ve done. Pro-natalist legislation has been a popular part of the party’s platform. Getting more women in the workforce has been a major goal of both the LDP and the opposition in Japan, so to encourage both more women in the workforce and more women in the maternity ward, the LDP has written legislation that provides free or subsidized childcare. Republicans have always campaigned as the party that supports stronger families, and looking at ways to make it easier to build a family should be a key goal to keep that legacy going. Especially as the left in America has taken increasingly more anti-natalist positions, the right can position itself in contrast to that position with legislation that makes having children easier and more affordable, especially in households with two working parents.

Japan has one of the most educated populaces in the world, with more than 70% of the workforce going into some form of higher education. Where that 70% is getting educated varies a lot though, there are three types of higher education institutions in Japan:

• Traditional universities are mostly private with most degrees requiring four years, while most medical paths are six-year programs. Graduate programs exist as well for those who have completed a four year degree. Overall the system is very similar to that of the US, at least in terms of structure.

• Junior colleges are generally made up of women looking for training for a job to work before marriage. As Japan’s elderly population grows, jobs in elder care will become more needed, and junior colleges can train people for these jobs as well as other jobs in human resources or health for example. Looking at Junior College as a viable alternative should be a key position for the Republican Party, examples of the party's success here can be found when Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam signed a bill entitling all high school graduates to two years of tuition free community college. Programs like this offer low cost alternatives to the cries by Bernie Sanders and other progressives for higher education that’s entirely paid for by the state. With free community college plus two years at an in state university, tuition for a four year degree ends up being a little less than $20,000, while not an insignificant amount, it's certainly not unaffordable, especially factoring in aid that’s given to those who come from lower income families.

• Technical schools also exist in a similar form to those in the US. Haslam’s free community college bill also gave free access to two years of technical school as another option. A comprehensive liberal arts education isn’t for everyone, and a free two years at a technical school make these paths better known as alternatives to those who might not think university is for them, and as well allows people to enter the workforce at a younger age rather than having to take four years to graduate.

By looking for a multi-pronged approach to education in America rather than the one size fits all approach we tend to use now with university, people can be better prepared for the careers they want, and take on less costs by doing shorter vocational based programs rather than a four-year university. On the state level Republicans should try to change the process of college recruitment straight out of high school to require better representation of technical schools and community colleges as equals to a four-year school rather than the place where people who can’t get into a four year go.

The Challenge of Illiberalism

I don’t want to spend this whole post just looking at policy alone, because in the end policy doesn’t win you a general election or a primary. Jeb Bush had excellent and comprehensive policy positions while campaigning, and despite this his campaign fell apart to other less wonky rivals, including Donald Trump who showed absolutely zero concrete knowledge of policy, and hasn’t showed much improvement in this area since becoming president. Elections in America aren’t about who has better ideas, they’re about who can sell themselves to their party first, and then the country as a whole. For right leaning liberals to attain their goals, they first must gain power within the party, a challenging task when the strongest growing current on the American right now is illiberalism.

The LDP has constantly been linked to illiberal groups within Japan, especially under Abe’s tenure as PM. I’ve already mentioned Bannon’s praise of Abe, but just as a brief list of some of the illiberal activities that have been associated with the party we have a recent scandal involving PM Abe and a private school being run by Japanese Nationalists, LDP lawmakers' continuous visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, and a current dispute with South Korea related to Japan's past as a colonial power. Downplaying Japan’s horrendous war crimes in WWII is a common tactic of the Japanese far right who want to return Japan closer to a state of where it was before their defeat in the Second World War. Abe's desire to repeal article nine of the Japanese constitution (which enforces a policy of pacifism from Japan’s military) has also been shown as example of evidence that he’s nothing but a spokesman and leader for the most fringe groups in the country.

I don’t want to downplay how troubling it is that there are legitimate nationalist politicians within the party. Removing the far-right elements from the LDP should be a priority for LDP leadership, and for too long, they’ve not done enough to distance themselves from these groups in the public eye, but if you look at Abe’s track record, it’s been an almost constant slate a losses for the far right. A year after passing an anti-hate speech law, rallies by far right anti-Korean groups fell nearly 50%. Many accusations of nationalism stem from Abe's desire to move Japan away from the pacifist roots of the current government, but in the face of a rising China, a stronger Japan is needed to counter Chinese aggression in the region. Under Abe's premiership, ties with China have gotten closer, and while the relationship with South Korea has been tenuous, the two are still able to cooperate. Cooperation with Korea and China is completely anathema to Japanese Nationalists. The elements are still in the party, but they’re a very weak force in terms of where they’ve been able to succeed (which is pretty much just with expanding the military, something that still results in massive protests which are always allowed by the government)

It’s interesting to see Steve Bannon go to Japan and support a Prime Minister who’s made pushes to increase immigration, pushed for greater gender parity within the country, and even worked closely with China on various projects. I think this is the case because all Bannon knows about the party is the bad press it gets from the west, and he hasn’t looked too deeply into what the party’s been doing or he’d notice the policy they’ve supported has been broadly liberal and inclusive. This lack of attention to detail by the far right can be used to liberal’s advantage when trying to hijack the GOP’s future.

Much like the fringe figures within the LDP, there are countless fringe figures within today’s GOP, as well as a rising illiberal wing led by Trump, but this wing of the party has had nothing but failure in legislation. Everything Trump has tried to push the party to pass has failed disastrously. When Trump's preferred immigration plan was up for a vote in the Senate early last years, it couldn't even get close to the full support of his party., and attempts at overhauling Obamacare were a disaster. The biggest success for Trump and the GOP hasn’t been anything proposed by the nationalists, but rather, the liberal/libertarian wing of the GOP in the First Step Act. When the far right of the party continues to push legislation doomed to fail, the liberals can still have success in their place.

I look to the dichotomy seen in the different faces of Japan’s politics as a model for not an ideal, but a better GOP. The LDP is far from a perfect party and example to use for an ideal center right government, and there are still problematic individuals within the party, but I think it’s the closest thing we can use as a model to realistically get to a better version of today’s GOP. LDP has both a nationalist and liberal faction, but while Abe represents the nationalists, the actual actions of the government have generally not been great for the far right in many respects. The nationalists don’t need to be totally defeated to give the GOP a strong, liberal platform, the liberals just need to make sure they’re the ones guiding the ship.

Shortcomings of the LDP as a Model

• America and Japan are extremely different countries, not just culturally and historically, but also in how their systems of government function. As a parliamentary democracy, a won election results in a unified government that doesn’t have to worry about the opposition obstructing every policy the majority wants to enact. This means an LDP coalition government can get a lot more done, and a lot faster.

• As well the LDP has been in almost a constant state of power since the beginning of modern Japan, this gives them a far greater level of experience legislating and a culture of getting things done. It’s unlikely the GOP will be in a position like this (perhaps the closest example is the democratic dominance of the house until the 90s, but even then they didn’t control all branches of the government). As the party that’s almost always been in governance, the LDP is the “safe” choice for many voters

• Party elites in the LDP have more control of who gets leadership positions in the party. While there is some level to which party elites still maintain control in the GOP (after all Jim Jordan isn’t minority leader), presidential primaries allow for populist movements to take control of the part much more than would be possible for the LDP.

• Japan’s populace tends to lean more conservative as a whole than America’s, so the opposition in Japan is made up of a coalition of centrists and those left of center. This is similar to Israel’s opposition being made up of both the centrist Blue and White party and the left of center Labor Party. America isn’t as universally centered around the right as default as the GOP and Democratic Party both have fairly wide-ranging coalitions (though the Democrats’ is more big tent). If the GOP continues to shed its liberal members, the Democratic coalition will look more like the more big tent coalitions you see in Japan, but without the conservatively inclined populous of Japan, this would result in electoral disaster for the GOP.

Gridlock is difficult to fix since so much of the US political system is built around checks and balances. Generally, to solve gridlock requires either large majorities in both chambers of congress, or a skilled politician who can negotiate with the opposition and get legislation passed. Replacing Mitch McConnell with a less obstructionist-oriented Republican is probably the only way to get past the gridlock in congress. Other possibilities would be if a more liberal minded republican was president they could use their platform to force votes on legislation they want, or if a moderate faction of the GOP tried to use the freedom caucus strategy of being the loudest voice in the party even if they aren’t the majority. These last two seem less likely to occur in the short term than McConnell retiring. Despite his semi-recent embrace of Trump, Lindsey Graham has continues to buck the president on many areas of policy including Middle East policy and climate change this suggests to me he's using him pro-Trump attitudes as both a safeguard to a potential primary challenge as well as an opportunity to get closer to an influence a notoriously easily swayed president. As he’s risen in the ranks of the party, he could prove to be a potential successor to McConnell who’s more willing to cooperate with Democrats in areas where it’s needed. Realistically Graham seems to have to best chance at pushing positive change in the party from a leadership position considering his powerful role now, popularity among the base, and history of bipartisan work in his time as a senator. Whether or not you like him, I don't see anyone else with a more clear path to leadership who I think is more likely to make change in a positive direction.

Building a Broader Coalition

With a voter base made up of mostly older voters, Republicans will eventually need to find way to appeal better to other generations and groups than they do now. Republicans can use the generally more conservative views of many minority groups to their advantage, but will be very difficult to win the Black vote with the almost universal consensus against the GOP. Hispanic and Asian votes are less partisan, but still present a big gap. The strategies for diversifying the GOP have been around for a while though and consistently fail. Bush 43 tried to get a more diverse coalition going, and in 2016 many of the primary candidates could’ve appealed well to nonwhite voters, but time and time again the typical strategy of focusing on comprehensive immigration reform to win the votes of Hispanic voters has failed to take hold of the party. I want to try to think of a different strategy for attracting more diverse voters into the coalition.

I’d like to see the GOP use certain issues to appeal to younger voters. We shouldn’t just look at ethnicity as a way for right wing views to be more appealing to people. We should look for issues that are winners within groups that you want to win. One very powerful moment I remember in an early GOP debate in 2015 was Rand Paul's attacks on Jeb Bush over marijuana I had never heard a Republican (or even a Democrat for that matter) willing to speak as clearly on racial injustice as Rand did in that debate. Rather than using language of broad values of diversity and civil rights, he took a specific issue that disproportionately effects African Americans and explained why it’s important all are treated equally before the law. Marijuana legalization is an easy way to get the support of younger voters. If a 2020 democrat wins and doesn’t legalize it, it will be a winning issue for a Republican in 2024 (which by then I'd expect support for legalization even within the GOP to be over 50%).

Similarly, Republicans should make criminal justice reform a central issue, Republicans have done great work on it for years, but on the campaign trail don’t emphasize the position as much as much as they could. With over two million behind bars and countless more on bail (along with family members who are impacted by their incarceration), a huge amount of the population can be affected by criminal justice reform. Along with criminal justice reform being a winning issue to push on the right, locking up less people also saves money. Finding ways to move non violent offenders out of prisons and into ankle monitoring programs may be a fairly radical idea, but could yield loyal votes from those who’ve seen the benefits of the program (such as getting to spend time with a spouse or parent who'd otherwise be in jail) as well as cutting a lot of the wasteful spending on prisons. Most criminal justice issues are best dealt with on a state or local level since most of the law enforcement people interact with isn’t federal.

Going back to the party’s union busting roots and targeting police unions could be a good way to sell an issue to multiple constituencies. The current Republican base can support the weakening of public sector unions as has been standard party protocol, but leading the way on taking on police unions could appeal to those who are concerned with abuse of power by police officers. If a politician is able to lead to a concrete change in a person or family’s life that improves it, those are long term votes they can hold for a long time. Taking on criminal justice is possibly the easiest way to do this with many people.

Taking on deregulation in the form of occupational licensing is yet another powerful tool occupational licensing reform can serve as a powerful driver for economic growth for low income individuals. If Republicans can be vocal leaders in taking away restrictions for people to start their own businesses, they can position themselves as a contrast to Democrats who push increased regulation that disproportionately hurts women. and those in lower income professions. Arizona Governor Doug Ducey recently signed a bill that makes Arizona the first state in the nation to recognize licenses from other states in spite of the state Democratic Party's opposition. The more Democrats continue to support wasteful regulations, the more Republicans can present themselves as the party of greater opportunity for lower income individuals.

Conclusion

My goals here aren’t exactly to focus on specifically what Japan’s solutions are, but rather that they’re able to find solutions that are more centrist than their coalition’s composition would suggest. The people in Japan are aware of problems like population decline, giving politicians the liberty and public support to institute a less restrictive immigration system. Focusing on making problems and solutions well known can make a significant impact on people’s lives and get loyal supporters on the party’s side. The LDP is far from a perfect party, but I think it provides a useful model for liberals to regain power within the GOP without naively expecting all the nationalists in the coalition to just fade away.

• Liberal Republicans can use the lack of policy knowledge from far right to get a movement in support of a center right policy started (similar to lack of unity on climate from the center left allowed the Green New Deal to become the face of the democrat’s climate movement). Especially as long as Trump is the face of the GOP, being some of the only people with ideas makes liberal’s position in the party disproportionately powerful.

• Without institutional advantages like the LDP has, the GOP must find ways to attract new voters. Rather than using the old position of thinking supporting comprehensive immigration reform and running more non white candidates is all the party needs to do, they should strive to find issues that stay true to their ideology, but framing said issues in a way that can appeal to a greater diversity of voters. Concrete policy changes can lead to improvements in many lives and give the GOP larger support from those they help.

I’m not sure how optimistic I am that this plan will ever happen, especially with the illiberal wing of the party’s growing strength as a distinct element from Trump, but I think if the Republicans are going to moderate their stance, this is the most realistic way to do it. So many dissatisfied Republicans I’ve heard seem to believe that Biden will win in 2020 and then after than Trump’s influence will just fade away and the party will remain the same as they remember it. I just can’t see this realistically happening. Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton may not be the most powerful members of the caucus, but they are two of the youngest members of the party, and look to be in the senate for a long time considering how safe their seats are.

The illiberal republicans aren’t going anywhere, and with that in mind, the primary goal within the party should be how to grab ahold of the legislative agenda before they do. It’s hard to gauge how much bigger their movement will grow when so much of the Republican agenda seems to be nothing but unquestioned support for Trump, but I hope once the era of Trump is over and people begin asking “where do we go from here”, those who want a better, more liberal Republican party can look eastward for a potential solution.

Submitted July 19, 2019 at 03:16AM by Paramus98 https://ift.tt/2LwewQi