The persistent appeal of Donald Trump to the working class has long infuriated his detractors, who contend that.
The wealthiest disproportionately profited from his largest first-term legislative achievement, the 2017 Tax and Jobs Act.
They believe the president-elect is deceiving working people by playing on their anxieties about immigration and cultural change.
George Wallace, the former governor of Alabama, is another conservative populist whose experience shows that these concerns are legitimate.
During his first time as governor (1963–1967), Wallace is most known for the racial violence and hatred he inflicted on the state’s civil rights demonstrators.
However, considering his later, sometimes overlooked tenure as governor in the 1970s and 1980s highlights.
Both Trump’s appeal to the populace and the possibility that his business-friendly policies would actually harm his base of working-class supporters.
Wallace consistently used populist language to win over white working-class Alabamans. However, the governor teamed up with special interest organizations.
To advance laws meant to safeguard large corporations at the cost of regular Alabamans when the civil rights movement’s victories in the 1960s threatened to weaken his base of support.
High sales taxes, subpar public services, and restricted economic mobility were the outcomes. When Wallace became office in 1963, the state’s economy was already starting to shift.
Alabama’s billion-dollar forestry business just overtook heavy metals as the state’s most lucrative industry. In order to benefit from Alabama’s inexpensive land and low taxes,
Timber and paper firms were keen to purchase as much property from farmers as they could. Read More: Trump: The Demagogue Who Cannot Think
These large corporations specifically sought land in rural, mostly Black counties, where whites controlled the county offices that set the property-tax assessment rate due to disenfranchisement.
Because these white authorities kept taxes low, the companies that were purchasing large areas of property benefited disproportionately.
The businesses were concerned that their bottom line would suffer significantly if Black authorities were elected because they would boost property taxes to provide much needed social programs.
Wallace, a fervent segregationist, became an ally as a result, even if the governor’s rhetoric made their relationship difficult to discern.
Wallace presented himself as a supporter of Alabamans’ freedom to participate in their own governance.
While combining his racial appeals to white Alabamans with a lot of populist rhetoric. Working-class white Alabamans who saw the social, political,
And economic transformations of the 1960s as a danger to their “way of life” found solace in his demands for “freedom of choice,” state sovereignty, and low taxes.
However, if one looked behind Wallace’s rhetoric, it was evident that he was using white supremacy to support a tax system that favored white elites over the same people he professed to represent.
Wallace denounced federal demands to reapportion the legislature and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as assaults on local authority.
He said that federal directives to equalize representation and taxation were really ruses to have white people pay higher taxes for “radical” racial rights programs.
But the true danger posed by those federal regulations was to Wallace’s largest donors’ business profits.
Wallace’s policies, however, were the ones that harmed the white Alabamans that the governor professed to be defending.
For instance, the governor had to increase sales and excise taxes to fund basic government operations while maintaining low property taxes for large corporations.
Wallace unsuccessfully ran for president in 1968 after leaving office in 1967. He then campaigned in 1970 to retake the governorship from Albert Brewer,
Who had taken control when Wallace’s wife Lurleen passed away from cancer in 1968. Wallace made racially populist promises to white people as part of his fervently racist campaign.
He specifically attacked “federal overreach” and excessive taxation, which he blamed on property reassessment, forced desegregation, and parliamentary reapportionment.
Wallace’s true priority in advocating for low property taxes, however, was serving his business backers in spite of this populist rhetoric.
Wallace barely prevailed, and his strong support for corporate interests was made clear when he supported a number of so-called “lid bills.”
By setting property tax assessments and rates at absurdly low levels and denying local governments the authority to alter them, these rules maintained the power and profit margins of major landholders.
They took away local Black leaders’ ability to demand equitable compensation from huge forest and paper corporations and utilities firms, who were elected after the Voting Rights Act.
See Also: The Disturbing Effects of State Control on Local GovernmentThese industries invested thousands of dollars in these efforts, which is not unexpected.
They played a pivotal role in the passage of the lid laws in 1972, and by 1978, lawmakers had incorporated the restrictions they imposed into Alabama’s constitution.
The biggest landowners in Alabama tripled their holdings, and these interests saved millions of dollars because to the lid bills.The passage of the lid laws demonstrated how vacuous Wallace’s populist rhetoric was.
After professing for years to be against “central government meddling in local affairs,” the governor suddenly supported doing precisely that in order to benefit companies.
These initiatives had disastrous practical effects on two levels. In the first place, they significantly reduced the local contribution to healthcare and education,
Which led to subpar public services. Additionally, they compelled the legislature to pass one of the most onerous sales tax laws in the state.
Even while businesses like Alabama Power saved millions in property taxes, the high sales taxes disproportionately impacted the poorest citizens.
For many years, these regulations have hindered Alabama’s ability to attract new companies and retain qualified employees.
Additionally, they have made it more difficult for local governments to finance necessary services and foster economic expansion.
They draw attention to the harm that might result when policies put corporate interests ahead of the general welfare.
Like Wallace, Trump’s ascent to prominence is predicated on taking advantage of contentious social problems and portraying himself as an advocate for the “common man.”
Many Americans in the working class are moved by his pledges to improve the economy and generate employment.
However, Trump’s working class supporters should take note of Alabama’s experience under Wallace:
While populist language may seem to provide voice to those who feel alienated and disenfranchised, the policies that result from it often fall short of meeting their needs.
Trump’s largest fans may suffer in a race to the bottom if his second term’s policies don’t go in the other direction from his first and involve large investments in public services.
Brucie Porter is an Auburn University PhD candidate. The history of race, education, and policy in the American South is the main subject of her writing.
Born in Auburn, Alabama, Brucie graduated from the University of the South with a bachelor’s degree. With pieces authored and edited by qualified historians,
Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines. Visit TIME to find out more about Made by History. The opinions stated do not necessarily represent those of the editors of TIME.
