It’s not just Republican
politicians who are responsible for cutting off government help to poor Americans.
It’s also Republican voters.
Everybody recognizes the
existence of poverty: Two-thirds of Americans say that the “gap between rich and everyone else has
grown,” and the difference between Republicans and Democrats is minimal. But
the most conservative Americans don’t want their and our public dollars used to
help. About two-thirds of Tea Party Republicans favor cutting unemployment benefits, food stamps and federal housing programs.
There is a fundamental divide
in America, more important than between Republicans and Democrats. It’s between
Americans who want to use public assistance to help poor people live a
minimally decent life, paid for by all of us through taxes, and those who
don’t.
Those who don’t offer a
bundle of justifications. Most Republicans believe that hard work alone is the guarantee of success;
those who are poor need to work harder. Poverty is their own fault. Too many of
the “poor” aren’t poor anyway; they fit the stereotype that Ronald Reagan
popularized with invented stories, the “welfare queen”.
Another claim is that the
richest nation on earth can’t afford it. Over three-quarters of Republicans
believe that “the government today can't afford to do much more to help the
needy.”
A popular conservative line
is that government assistance is bad for the poor. Rand Paul said
in December that extending unemployment benefits beyond 26 weeks does “a
disservice to these workers.” More than 8 in 10 conservative Republicans think
that public aid to the poor does more harm than good. By this argument, giving
aid makes good Americans into Mitt Romney’s 47%, the moochers who vote for Democrats. Beliefs like these are
concentrated in the loudest and angriest section of Republican voters.
What is the responsibility of
Republican politicians? They have been pounding these ideas into the heads of
anyone who will listen for decades. But their contribution has also been
passive and deniable: they let the extremists of popular culture say what they
don’t want to say themselves. Rush Limbaugh knows how to get people to listen
far better than any elected official. Donald Trump has amassed enormous wealth
and thereby media attention by creating a fascinating persona of moneymaker and
clown.
Republican leaders encourage
these multi-millionaires to sneer at poor people. They let these white men mock
minorities. They wink when these men call women “sluts”. John Boehner’s strongest criticism of Limbaugh’s derision of Sandra Fluke, made only through his
spokesman two days later, is that it was “inappropriate”. That is a green light
for Limbaugh and others to keep talking.
Every time a new Republican
president is elected, Limbaugh gets invited to the White House. Ronald Reagan
sent Limbaugh a letter thanking him “for all you're doing to promote Republican
and conservative principles ... you have become the Number One voice for
conservatism in our Country.” Conservative think tanks give
him awards. Republican politicians appear on his show, where they talk to him
like an old friend.
Donald Trump’s single
political idea is that Barack Obama was born in Africa. Would most
Republican voters also hold that
belief if Republican Party leaders didn’t keep patting Trump on the back and
putting their hands in his pockets? During the presidential primaries, Michele
Bachmann reacted warmly to the suggestion of Trump as Vice President. Mitt Romney
brought Trump into his campaign in 2012. Trump was a featured
speaker at the 2013 Conservative
Political Action Conference, as was Limbaugh before him. Now some New York Republicans in New York want Trump to run against Democrat Andrew Cuomo for
governor this year.
Would Trump still have any
political credence if the Republican Party itself didn’t keep doubting Obama’s birth certificate? Just a couple
of months ago, the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee featured a birther website in its daily web
communication.
Poverty is not mostly poor
people’s fault. Rich people make bad choices, too – they use drugs, abuse loved
ones, have accidents, do poor work, break the laws. But their resources
insulate them from the worst economic consequences.
Americans who reject public
help for our poor embrace those myths which seem to justify their selfishness.
Conservative leaders with ulterior motives let media extremists fan the flames
of division by encouraging disdainful ideas about the poor.
If everyone followed the
example of a first-year class at Illinois College, whose students interviewed
Jacksonville’s homeless at the New Directions shelter, they could pierce the
convenient stereotypes about American poverty. These students found out that
500 different people were warmed and sheltered over three years of operation at
the Grace Methodist Church. They needed help badly, received kindness, respect,
and food, and got on with their lives.
Knowledge and mercy can go
together to make public policy. Rather than give millions in public funds to
the richest American corporations to stay put, we need to help the poorest of
our neighbors move up.
Steve Hochstadt
Jacksonville IL
Published in the Jacksonville
Journal-Courier, January 28, 2014
This is good news for former military men. Many businesses nowadays are starting to emerge so they can really make use of the opportunity.
ReplyDeletesmall business assistance