Why Ohio moved away from being a swing state under Trump

As we enter the final three weeks of the 2024 presidential campaign, a lot of Ohioans continue to be surprised by the fact that we’re just not a swing state anymore. Ohio used to be the swingiest of swing states. When did our boys (and girls) stop swinging, David Bowie might ask?

Some new data from the Economic Innovation Group makes a pretty compelling case that Ohio having become a state where a heck of a lot of people are straight-up dependent on government programs and spending is the root cause. This is a state where Paul Ryan-esque calls to reform entitlements and curtail big government were never going to fly, because currently, in a crap ton of Ohio counties, a large proportion of the population is dependent on entitlements, food stamps and big government. Take a look.

Now, we’re not Kentucky, from which JD Vance’s family fled. Nor are we West Virginia.

But in that Ohio River valley section, especially, it’s pretty apparent that big government conservatism like what Trump and Vance champion is bound to be pretty popular. Not because it’s philosophically appealing, but because frankly, if it goes away, a ton of people are going to have to start making some very hard choices to which there may not be good or appealing options– or any options at all. (How many people on Social Security or Medicare are going back to work if their benefits get cut?)

While Vance’s Hamilton County is actually doing OK on these metrics– 16 percent rate of dependency according to EIG– a bunch of the state is not.

This probably helps explain also why things like defending the 340B drug discount program, which bolsters rural and safety net hospitals, has become much more important to conservative Ohio Republicans. Vance is, anecdotally, among them. Less anecdotally is Rep. Mike Turner who actually doesn’t represent one of the very most social safety net dependent parts of the state, but whose district does encompass Montgomery County– which shows a 23 percent transfer share according to EIG. That’s just 1 percent below Brooklyn, according EIG’s data. It’s also too-close-to-comfort to the 28 percent share in Detroit.

Turner– a member of the conservative Republican Study Committee– recently signed this letter blasting drugmaker Johnson & Johnson for trying to shift the drug discount program to a rebate program. Rural and safety net hospitals hate this proposal. Hate it. Capital “H.”

Not only do they consider this type of Pharma-internal-policy-shift flagrantly unlawful (which checks out). They consider that it would royally screw rural health care and the increasingly poorer, entitlements- and food-stamp-dependent Americans who depend on rural hospitals (again, this checks out).

After blasting it, together with a bunch of other colleagues, Turner & co appear to have gotten results. J & J turned tail within a matter of days and now the rebate plan is dead. At least for now.

What does this tell us?

Well, first, Big Pharma trying to kill off this program– which actually isn’t a big government, wealth-transfer program insofar as a) Pharma agreed to the thing in the first place and b) it is not taxpayer funded– is not going to play, politically. Maybe they can convince Scott Peters, who represents San Diego (15 percent wealth transfer share) to get on board with the idea of killing 340B, either through legislation or through Pharma-internal-policy shifts. But it’s going to be very hard to convince most representatives to do this if you’re looking at this map– and even members of the Republican Study Committee are saying “no way.”

Second, as long as the GOP remains in a populist frame of mind, Ohio isn’t becoming a swing state again anytime soon. Sorry. Or not sorry. Whatever.

Third, Sherrod Brown might still be better-placed than a bunch of more coastal-Democratic-philosophy contenders running in Trumpy states or areas to win, simply because he is way more populist and doesn’t seem to fixate much on the concerns of rich, white suburbanites as opposed to poorer Ohioans of all stripes. The underlying dynamics of Ohio are bad for him. But he might eke out a win, and– if you believe their current alarm-sounding about polls– Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin) and Elissa Slotkin (Michigan) might not (or if they do, they might squeak it while Brown might narrowly lose).

We’ll see. But for Ohio Republicans who have been closer to the Paul Ryan model than they have the Trump model, this is where political peril lives.