Capitol Report
By State Representative, Leon D. Young
Leon D. Young
Now that the initial shock has begun to wane following the United Kingdom’s historic referendum to leave the European Union (E.U.), perhaps we can begin to make some sense of this controversial decision.
To say that the political pundits and pollsters in Britain were taken by surprise would be understating the obvious. Granted, most of the early polling suggested a very close vote. And, in most political quarters, it was generally expected that the referendum vote would be to remain in the 28-nation bloc. However, when the dust had finally settled, the margin of victory was 52% to 48% to leave.
Reaction to the vote was swift. The British pound fell to a 31-year low and global currency markets went into a proverbial tailspin. And, in the immediate aftermath, Britain’s Prime Minister, David Cameron, announced that he would resign once his party chose a successor.
This begs the question: What prompted the United Kingdom to embark on such a radical political course? In retrospect, there are a number of factors that may have attributed to the electorate’s decision to leave, but clearly two of the most pressing reasons were: national populism and immigration.
From most accounts, Britain’s Labour Party, the conservative wing of its government, succeeded in making the case that it was time to take their country back.
Not to mention that many Brits openly resented that Brussels (Belgium) was the seat of power for the European Union. Another poignant factor was the E.U.’s freedom of movement laws.
Freedom of movement allows citizens of the European Union (EU) to move to, live in, and in certain circumstances access the welfare system of the EU country to which they have moved.
Freedom of movement is one of the founding principles of the EU. It has been in operation since the creation of the European Economic Community and is primarily designed to support the economies of EU countries by providing a mobile work force.
But, in truth, the Brexit issue got hijacked by a bunch of anti-immigration isolationists who were obsessed with the idea that foreigners were stealing their jobs.
Opponents of immigration made the argument that they don’t hate immigrants, but if you bring in lots of low-skilled [foreign] workers it drives down wages. If this (at all) sounds familiar, well it should.
Donald Trump has made these same two issues the cornerstone of his campaign. He asserts, unapologetically, that we’re getting screwed on trade and there are too many immigrants in this country.
Moreover, Trump sees Britain’s exit from the E.U. as a good thing, and a harbinger of things to come. Truth be told, the political elite in Britain couldn’t envision a leave referendum passing.
While the political establishment in this country has, in large measure, underestimated the appeal of Donald Trump. As we have just seen, could something so unimaginable as the Brexit vote in Britain, happen in this country in the form of Trump being elected president? This is clearly food for thought.