Guest Column: So let us promote the social welfare

EDITOR’S NOTE: Jon Seymour is a 2017 graduate of Wayland High School, a student at Grand Valley State University and an employee at Steelcase and McDonald’s. He was student rep for the Wayland City Council and Wayland Board of Education and winner of the Daughters of the American Revolution Award. He wrote this piece in December 2018.

by Jon Seymour

Every morning, I awoke to the sound of a blaring alarm clock at 4 a.m. precisely. My grind began. Somehow, I mustered up the strength to tie up my dreaded steel toes and trudge off to work. Day after day, for a year and a half, I was nothing but a replaceable pawn, tasked with putting edgeband on the sides of laminate table tops at the Steelcase Wood Plant.

Then after 10 hours of grueling manual labor, I would go and serve slop at my local McDonald’s. I labored 16 to 20 hours per day, seven days a week, transforming myself into a slave to my dreams and ambition, utterly hellbent on being able to afford the opportunity to further my education. I was, and still am, mortified by the loans.

However; through grueling work, I have the opportunity to graduate debt free. Still, I comprehend my privilege, for many kids will never be able to achieve their dreams. Thousands of individuals have no option but to anchor themselves with an education, forcing them to take on debt that our government has failed to check.

Our government is the very foundation of this society; the elected representatives who make up our governing body have continually ignored pressing issues that hamper prosperity in this nation. These men and women have turned their cheeks from the student loan crisis, while also ignoring cries for reform in  health care. These same officials have sat idly by and given tax breaks to the wealthiest, ultimately stealing the fruits of labor from working-class Americans. 

While I note the inactivity of government, I reflect on its crowning achievements, such as landmark pieces of legislation passed under progressive administrations, like that of both Roosevelts, and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Under these administrations, the shimmering lights that illuminate social welfare were lit, the illumination of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, each a stitch in the fabric that makes up our nation.

These social programs are something that citizens can rely on, designed to alleviate financial responsibilities from those unable to stand on their own. All three have fallen victim to unrelenting scrutinization that stems from the history that helped cultivate such programs. The Second Red Scare had a lasting impact, fostering fear of liberal policies among the public. The rise of Ronald Reagan, a president who championed a rollback in federal government oversight, brought forth sweeping cuts and tax reform, resulting in a weakening of social welfare programs. These programs may ultimately be the solution that results in progress, and a more prosperous United States. 

The Second Red Scare was a period of mass hysteria, associated with the fear of the spread of communism, that ultimately lead to the unfortunate bastardization of the American left. Robert P Kolker, emeritus professor of English at the University of Maryland, examined in his book, The Cultures of American Film, that during the Red Scare, Hollywood was purged of left-leaning political sympathizers. Innocent men and women were harmed in the process due to accusations made against certain Hollywood players.

These largely false accusations wreaked havoc on the nation’s psyche. Blacklisted individuals were kept from working in the industry, their voices and political ideologies silenced and withheld from the American populace. By silencing the artists, right-winged beliefs of self-reliance and rugged individualism flourished unchecked. Narratives were filled with these messages, then broadcast to the masses in theaters across the land, effectively manipulating generations of American citizens into being anti-government and anti-social welfare, both key standards of the left.

Kolker illustrated this by examining the growth of the Western, a form of narrative that was immensely popular during the 1950s. Films such as The Searchers fed audiences with fantasies about living in the untamed west, where the ideals of rugged self-reliance and extreme individualism flourished. These pictures gave right-wing Hollywood figures the ability to con Americans into believing government programs lead to many of the troubles that plagued the nation.

Furthermore, conservatives were able to exterminate leftist interests from policy-making in Washington, made possible due to their stranglehold over the American mind. Landon R.Y. Storrs, professor of history at the University of Iowa, further noted that the Second Red Scare stunted the development of the American welfare state. In the 1940s and 1950s, conservatives in and out of government used concerns about Soviet espionage to remove from public service many officials who advocated regulatory and redistributive policies intended to strengthen democracy. 

Since conservatives had convinced the public that the left was the enemy to the American way, made possible by their monopoly on narrative creation, no one cared if leftists were forced from influential positions of power. Disappointingly, the left of the political spectrum was tarnished; conservatives had effectively laid siege against the American conscious.   

Ronald Reagan — a consequential president — began his crusade against social welfare while still a star in Hollywood. Revered worldwide for being staunchly anti-communist, he became an instrumental player in ridding Hollywood of men and women who favored government welfare programs. He used his pulpit as President of the Screen Actors Guild, a labor union comprised of film and television actors, to severely hamper what influence the left could have on shaping U.S. economic policy.

Peter Schweizer, conservative political commentator and investigative journalist remarked, “On September 16th Reagan pushed a resolution that declared that no Communist Party member could be an officer of the Guild.”

By ensuring the left had no voice, Reagan’s conservatism reigned victorious in Hollywood, unfortunately leading Americans into believing that government was the enemy of the people. When Reagan decided to mount a bid for the White House in 1980 against incumbent Democrat Jimmy Carter, the public was ready.

The website American History from Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond, offered this reflection on the times surrounding Reagan’s election:

“Conservatives, long out of power at the national level, were well positioned to exploit this new mood. It was a time when many Americans were receptive to their message of limited government, strong national defense and the protection of traditional values against what was seen as the encroachments of a permissive and often chaotic modern society (“Conservatism and the Rise.”)”

The populace had grown weary of big government, largely due to wage stagnation, economic downturn and the social turbulence of the era, with women’s empowerment and growth in rights for African Americans. Examples of such concerns for voters would include the feminist movement that gained prevalence during the 1960s and 1970s. Voice’s like that of Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem emboldened women, leading to the push for the Equal Rights Amendment.

Also causing a backlash from voters was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which led to the unprecedented enfranchisement of African Americans. The public found tremendous trust in the Great Communicator, electing him to quell their fears. Reagan’s rhetoric, which he had been spewing for decades, resonated across the land. The sheeple listened to their shepherd, following his words blindly. By electing Reagan, the populace turned their backs on social programs that are core foundations for continued economic improvement.  

Once Reagan reached the White House, the reckoning began. Conservatives worked to dismantle decades of government growth; capitalism and selfish individualism became status quo.

Frances Fox Piven, professor of political science and sociology, along with her husband, Richard Cloward, acclaimed sociologist, further elaborated on the Reagan administration’s dastardly deeds:

“In the aftermath of the election of 1980, the Reagan administration and its big-business allies declared a new class war on the unemployed, the unemployable, and the working poor. By the summer of 1981, congressional approval had been obtained to slash $140 billion from social programs over the years 1982-1984, more than half of it from the income maintenance programs that provide low-income people with cash, food, health care and low-cost housing.”

These cuts were explained to citizens as a way to reduce the fat of the bureaucracy, something that many Americans had come to want. When in actuality, according to Piven and Cloward, it was nothing more than an attempt to weaken the clout of working-class Americans. Cuts were used to help justify the massive redistribution of wealth that the Reagan administration is to thank for. Both authors argued that “Taxes and government programs are to blame for the deep-rooted problems in the economy is a way of attempting to make this redistribution of wealth palatable to the American people.”

Simultaneously, while government programs shrank, taxes were slashed for big businesses and the wealthiest Americans.

Piven and Cloward also noted, “The slashing of social programs is a crucial part of this strategy. If the tax cuts redistribute funds to business and the wealthy, reductions in the income-maintenance programs ensure that these funds will be taken from the incomes of the poor and the working class.”

By forcefully striping poverty-stricken Americans of what little protections they had, government officials effectively made them slaves to their overseers. 

Large corporations and the wealthy have basically robbed average Americans of their government programs.

Sheldon Danziger, former director of the National Poverty Center at the University of Michigan, together with economist Robert Haveman, elaborated on the repercussions of Reagan era downsizing, explaining how rollbacks on social programs actually increased poverty:

“It was estimated by the University of Chicago’s Center for the Study of Welfare Policy that the typical AFDC [Aid to Families with Dependent Children, a now retired program that gave financial assistance to children whose families have low or no income] a mother who worked would experience a 20% to 30 % decline in her monthly income.”

Unsurprisingly, by rolling back programs designed to lift people from the clutches of poverty, the administration elected to walk away, leaving millions in its wake to suffer. Social programs, unfortunately, left damaged, by the mindset of conservatives in positions of power. Conservatives that played into the interests of selfish and greedy corporations that desired to cripple the power of the poor, padding their pockets along the way.   

Social welfare — long the target of conservative frustration — actually has been proven to be extremely beneficial. For example, Social Security, the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Program, has resulted in a massive reduction in poverty among the elderly. Bruce D. Meyer,  professor of economics at the University of Chicago, together with Derek Wu, a graduate student at the Harris School of Public Policy, discovered that “Social Security single-handedly slashes poverty by 75%.”

Astonishingly, the program has given millions of elderly citizens the ability to afford the necessities of life, and without this safety net, many would face daunting life and death decisions. This can be corroborated by Christine, an individual dependent on Social Security benefits. She lives with a life-threatening condition that limits her movements and has left her bound to a wheelchair. She expands on the importance of her benefits in her testimony to the Social Security Administration, explaining how without her benefits she wouldn’t have a place to live or food to eat.

Positive results are not just limited to people like Christine. Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward further argued that social welfare programs increase the bargaining power of workers. These programs have grown to a point in which they infringe upon the power of business elites.

For example, with AFDC, the program gives low-income earners a larger slice of the pie by basically subsidizing and assisting individuals that don’t earn a decent wage. Social welfare is essentially a tool which workers are able to use to fight against the powers of all-powerful businesses. These businesses want nothing more than to exploit working labor at the cheapest cost in order to maximize profits. Overall, the benefits cannot be overstated. Remarkably, poverty is reduced and the bargaining power of workers is emboldened. 

After decades of deregulation, our nation faces daunting decisions. Conservatives specifically have worked to privatize health care and education, thus leading to spiraling costs that many individuals are unable to afford. The solution to these troubles lies within social welfare. Programs like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare are proven to help reduce poverty, and it would be safe to assume that if we invested in education and in health care, people wouldn’t be crippled by incomprehensible amounts of debt. This nation as a whole must shake the mind set that government is the enemy.

The federal government is a system of, by, and for the people. Private corporations work to ensure profits, not prosperity. In order to achieve a more caring and engaging community, we must learn from our history, no more deregulating the safety nets. Instead, we must stay vigilant, for, without social welfare, we are nothing but slaves to the greed of big business. Without social welfare, we set our society up for damnation. It’s time to accept the vitality of community, developed by social welfare.