More nonsense has been written about white
nationalism/supremacy in the wake of Donald Trump’s election than anyone should
have to read. So, it is a pleasure to find some actual data analysis on the
role of the non-college educated white citizen in the success of the Trump
candidacy, especially versus Mitt Romney’s failed 2012 campaign.
The
Economist
has determined
health status explains the Trump vote better than being a non-college educated
white citizen does. The sicker you are, the more likely you are to have voted
for Trump. Non-college educated whites are also likely to be sicker, so the two
variables are not independent. Nevertheless:
Although we could
not find a single factor whose explanatory power was greater than that of
non-college whites, we did identify a group of them that did so collectively:
an index of public-health statistics. The Institute for Health Metrics and
Evaluation at the University of Washington has compiled county-level data on
life expectancy and the prevalence of obesity, diabetes, heavy drinking and
regular physical activity (or lack thereof). Together, these variables explain
43% of Mr. Trump’s gains over Mr. Romney, just edging out the 41% accounted for
by the share of non-college whites.
(“Illness as an
Indicator,” The Economist, November
19, 2016, available at http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21710265-local-health-outcomes-predict-trumpward-swings-illness-indicator.)
Okay, so let’s get this straight:
Obamacare had been signed in 2010, but did not provide subsidized benefits
until 2014. The people who should have been most grateful for Obamacare
rejected it in the 2016 election, more than they had in 2012. (Romney also ran
against Obamacare.) The Economist
column also cited a 2015
paper by Nobel-award winning economist Angus Deaton, which shows
significant deterioration in health metrics among middle-aged, non-college
educated whites since around the turn of the millennium:
Fig. 1 shows a
cessation and reversal of the decline in midlife mortality for US white
non-Hispanics after 1998. From 1978 to 1998, the mortality rate for US whites
aged 45–54 fell by 2% per year on average, which matched the average rate of
decline in the six countries shown, and the average over all other
industrialized countries. After 1998, other rich countries’ mortality rates
continued to decline by 2% a year. In contrast, US white non-Hispanic mortality
rose by half a percent a year. No other rich country saw a similar turnaround.
The mortality reversal was confined to white non-Hispanics; Hispanic Americans
had mortality declines indistinguishable from the British (1.8% per year), and
black non-Hispanic mortality for ages 45–54 declined by 2.6% per year over the
period.
(Anne Case &
Angus Deaton, “Rising morbidity and mortality in midlife among white
non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st century,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 112, no. 49,
December 8, 2015, pp. 15078-15083.)
As I noted
previously, there has been a significant increase in government dependency
for health care since 1997, and that shift from job-based benefits might have
had a negative impact on this population. However, the crisis among
middle-aged, non-college educated whites is not directly to do with the health
system. Drinking, drug abuse, and suicides all increased significantly in the
last two decades.
Whether President Trump’s plan to “Make America Great Again” will restore the previously positive 20th century trend of mortality improvement for non-college educated whites is a question that will be examined carefully in the years to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment