The Submerged State: How Invisible Government Policies Undermine American Democracy

"This book really resonates with people. When I assign it, my students often have an ‘aha’ moment. One of the main contributions of The Submerged State is it pushes us to think about how government benefits are distributed and whether it is obvious that the benefits are coming from the government and what the implications of that are. Suzanne Mettler says that this matters for American democracy. When government is taking action to provide help to the American people but the form of the action— whether it’s through tax credits or subsidies for benefits that flow through employers—obscures the fact that the help comes from the government, people do not realise what the government is doing for them. And if people do not realise what the government is doing for them, they won’t support government programs, they won’t defend that funding, they won’t take action to ensure the continuation of those benefits. “If people do not realise what the government is doing for them, they won’t support government programs” The Submerged State points us towards thinking about policy design. Policy isn’t just about getting things to people in need. How we get those things to them matters. The Affordable Care Act is a perfect example of this. Many people who are benefiting—through subsidies or tax breaks for their employers—don’t realise that they are benefiting, so they don’t support the program. What many middle class people see are direct government benefits, like Medicaid, that are for people living in poverty who are stigmatised. Many folks don’t want to support poor communities, so they turn against the Affordable Care Act without realising that they are harming themselves. By submerging some parts of the Affordable Care Act, particularly those parts that benefit middle class Americans, who are more politically powerful than the poor, and by leaving on the surface other parts, particularly those parts that help stigmatised populations, you weaken and undermine the policy. So The Submerged State is a straightforward interpretation of policies, but it contains a critique that is profound and foundational. I’ve yet to think about this extensively in a comparative context. But a few things come to mind when I hear your question. One, submerged policies have increased since the late 1970s. This is reflective of a neoliberal approach to government in the United States, which institutes market approaches in the government realm. Submerged policies, whether tax breaks or subsidies, often work through the market. So it appears that the market is providing the benefit, rather than the government. We might see more submerged policies in the US then in other places because neoliberalism has gotten more traction here. “It appears that the market is providing the benefit, rather than the government” Additionally, the US has an inclination toward limiting the role of the state. Submerged policies comport with that, policies that blatantly give government a central and strong role in the lives of the people are historically less favoured. Submerged policies fit American political culture and that, in combination with the neoliberal turn in the United States, has made for a unique environment for submerging state action. We see some aspects of this in other places, but not to the same degree. Absolutely. I’m glad that you brought this up. During the New Deal era, certainly, and all the way through the Johnson Administration of the 1960s, many of the social welfare policies that were developed explicitly provided benefits directly to the American people. But, by the time we hit the 1970s, there is a conservative turn. Both the American public and political elites are losing their taste for providing people with direct benefits. At the same time, we see widening political polarisation. So the kind of policies we get going forward are things like the ‘earned income tax credit’—efforts to help low-income people through the tax code. You do appear to see a relationship between increased polarisation and policies designed in a way that is submerged. “When I ask students in my classes to come up with policy proposals, they rarely propose direct benefits for the indigent” When I ask students in my classes to come up with policy proposals, they rarely propose direct benefits for the indigent because they see such proposals as politically infeasible. Instead they’ll say, ‘Let’s expand the earned income tax credit.’ Their proposals work through the market. Their instinct, that policies that are submerged are more politically feasible, is just right."