Obama’s Father’s Day Speech Revisited
June 19, 2008 13 Comments
One of our friends, Dididonsmommy, left this comment about my post on Obama’s Father’s Day speech. I was extremely impressed (and a bit intimidated) by the intelligence of her reply and I think it is worth a more ‘public’ viewing, so I am posting it here. Enjoy. (I will reply to her in the comments and allow her to sit in the driver’s seat for a bit. She has earned it.)
i’m a history grad with one-class-needed to be an anthro minor. i also have a masters in sociology, with a focus on quantitative methods. to draw a direct connection between democratic mayors in chicago and the failure of southside housing projects to improve the plight of poor blacks is bold … and wrong.
first, local politics in chicago are historically peculiar … and by “peculiar,” i largely mean “corrupt.” it’s a nutty place, to say the least. i don’t think that is solely a function of some inherent flaw in the democratic party … also, chicago is a little tricky to compare to wisconsin, just on population density and ethnic heterogeneity alone.
second, chicago wasn’t the only place housing projects failed, but i think it is also important to look at the other social factors that led to their rise: the massive northern migration of southern blacks in the early 20th century and certainly post-wwII … the white populace that was already moving into the suburbs, and definitely with more rapidity once the blacks starting landing in urban centers … housing projects offered northern cities a convenient opportunity for containment of a very scary influx … and that’s not liberal or conservative …
it was, however, a liberal move to require that the government not completely IGNORE those ghettos.
i’m not going to deny that welfare policies likely contributed significantly to the entrenchment of a culture of poverty, but they aren’t the only cause.
(incidentally, there was a terrific article in the _new york review of books_ last year discussing poverty and effective social programs to treat it … it discussed how men and women handle poverty and benefits differently between gender, but similarly across cultures … i.e., men view their poverty in a similar way across cultures but in a different way than their wives … i just tried to find the article in some old issues, and of course, i cannot. i will keep looking. it is very interesting.)
bottom line: causation is extraordinarily difficult to establish in all things human, even in the most controlled experiments. you make some big leaps in going from obama’s speech to an inevitable expansion of failed welfare programs.
remember that the biggest single overhaul of welfare came under a democratic president with a bipartisan bill.
also remember that social welfare consumes very little of the entire welfare pie … much larger pieces being consumed by corporate welfare … tax breaks, subsidies, industry bail-outs for oil companies, airlines, agribusiness …
finally, i would like to hear some progressive republican plans for helping poor families remain intact and able to sustain themselves healthfully. i’ll make it easy: how about a relative rather than absolute assessment of the poverty level … how about subsidized child care … how about universal health care …
the only thing i’ve heard from republicans in the last eight years was a half-hearted push to establish a “let’s get married” education program.
I think you’re trying to dodge the premise a bit by saying Chicago’s corruption makes it an unfit example. If it makes you feel any better take any other large northern city with a huge poor population. They are all dominated by Democrats and liberal policies.
You do a good job of outlining the initial factors that contributed to the creation of urban ghettos here:
But I’m not sure what you mean here:
By ‘not completely IGNORE’ do you mean that Uncle Sam threw a lot of the money at the problem (welfare) without actually working to eliminate some of the causes (geographically concentrated and socially institutionalized poverty)? That sounds very much like a liberal solution to me. You seem to make my case for me here:
Of course they aren’t the ‘only cause’ but as you say, they
contributed significantly.
I don’t think it is a big leap. Obama refuses to address some of the leading factors in the problem of urban poverty and his Blueprint for Change outlines a host of new social programs that simply build on the old.
Those changes were pushed heavily by the Republican congress and Clinton only signed reluctantly. Ironically, it is probably the best legislation passed in his eight years.
* I’m going to address your request for progressive conservative solutions to the problem in another post.
holy cow! thanks. i was going to make an additional comment about teen pregnancy rates, but i think i’ll just bask for awhile. (though, protect me from any not-nice comments.)
and i knew you’d get me on the clinton thing; though, the wrangling doesn’t matter … all that matters is the check in the “w” column for a dem president ; )
(truthfully, i haven’t looked at obama’s _blueprint_ … i will., but now we are going to go sign-up for mommy-and-me swimming lessons.)
cheers!
“i’m not going to deny that welfare policies likely contributed significantly to the entrenchment of a culture of poverty, but they aren’t the only cause.”
It is also worth noting that at least 1/3rd of urban black long term welfare recipients were former sharecroppers or their descendants. I say that because that specific subsection of that particular population is one of the few in America whose lives taught them that a hard days work got you next to nothing. So a few of the roots that of the culture of poverty preceded welfare policy.
Didionsmommy is well known to be cool
. A good idea to post awesome comments. I think I shall steal the idea.
Do I get royalties?
i assumed my intent was clear: housing projects don’t work, but their establishment and their failure is not solely the responsibility of liberal politicians. your original post says chicago housing projects failed. chicago has been run by democrats. democrats oversaw the projects. therefore, democrats are responsible for the failure.
interestingly, here are some excerpts from eisenhower’s 1956 state of the union address:
*************************
Under the 1954 Amendments to the old-age and survivors’ insurance program, protection was extended to some 10 million additional workers and benefits were increased. The system now helps protect 9 out of 10 American workers and their families against loss of income in old age or on the death of the breadwinner. The system is sound. It must be kept so. In developing improvements in the system, we must give the most careful consideration to population and social trends, and to fiscal requirements. With these considerations in mind, the Administration will present its recommendations for further expansion of coverage and other steps which can be taken wisely at this time.
Other needs in the area of social welfare include increased child welfare services, extension of the program of aid to dependent children, intensified attack on juvenile delinquency, and special attention to the problems of mentally retarded children. The training of more skilled workers for these fields and the quest for new knowledge through research in social welfare are essential. Similarly the problems of our aged people need our attention.
….
Finally, we must aid in cushioning the heavy and rising costs of illness and hospitalization to individuals and families. Provision should be made, by Federal reinsurance or otherwise, to foster extension of voluntary health insurance coverage to many more persons, especially older persons and those in rural areas. Plans should be evolved to improve protection against the costs of prolonged or severe illness. These measures will help reduce the dollar barrier between many Americans and the benefits of modern medical care. The Administration health program will be submitted to the Congress in detail.
….
We must also carry forward the job of improving the wage-hour law. Last year I requested the Congress to broaden the coverage of the minimum wage.
….
For the housing program, most of the legislative authority already exists. However, a firm program of public housing is essential until the private building industry has found ways to provide more adequate housing for low-income families. The Administration will propose authority to contract for 35 thousand additional public housing units in each of the next 2 fiscal years for communities which will participate in an integrated attack on slums and blight.
******************************
the point is: we have failed as a society to effectively address poverty and income inequality. (the latter, by the way is increasing in scary ways … like the chasm between the upper and middle classes is widening while the space between the lower and middles classes is narrowing.)
but our knowledge was imperfect, and while there is still a lot to learn, social research has come A LONG way since the early 20th century … heck, even since the 80s … we know a lot more about the effects of institutionalized racism … we know even how to identify it … we know about the importance of educational attainment (especially among mothers) for the overall health of the family (ANY family: rich, poor; black, white) …
obama’s rhetoric might imply an extension of existing programs … i don’t know … i still haven’t read it …
but i think if we are really going to be ***progressive*** about attacking poverty, we need to look at the establishment of and investment in universal-benefits programs … i think that tactic is more fruitful than simply saying liberals threw money at a miserably failed program and what we really need is to get back to basic traditions …
oh, and dyre! that is a terrific point you make about lessons learned in the south by migrating blacks. and frankly, i can’t blame them one bit.
i wanted to add one more thing … i think it is important for blacks in power to call the black community to task for lax assumption of personal and parental responsibility.
i also think the black-leadership establishment has squandered myriad opportunities to help their communities over the last four decades, especially in the manner in which they have responded to controversial issues and through some unfortunate instances of corruption, and now their power of influence has atrophied to a laughable degree.
it also makes me so damn mad when people like bill cosby get blasted by this same impotent establishment when giving speeches or publishing research that assigns some of the responsibility for the plight of poor black communities to the communities themselves.
i wanted to add one more thing … i think it is important for blacks in power to call the black community to task for lax assumption of personal and parental responsibility.
i also think the black-leadership establishment has squandered myriad opportunities to help their communities over the last four decades, especially in the manner in which they have responded to controversial issues and through some unfortunate instances of corruption, and now their power of influence has atrophied to a laughable degree.
it also makes me so damn mad when people like bill cosby get blasted by this same impotent establishment when giving speeches or publishing research that assigns some of the responsibility for the plight of poor black communities to the communities themselves.
Whoohoo! Work that soapbox!
I agree 10,000,000%
yikes!
i totally DON’T want to be THAT person … the one who’s always saying,
“… and another thing …”
but i think if we are really going to be ***progressive*** about attacking poverty, we need to look at the establishment of and investment in universal-benefits programs … i think that tactic is more fruitful than simply saying liberals threw money at a miserably failed program and what we really need is to get back to basic traditions …
I don’t follow what you mean by ‘universal benifits programs’.
I got lost in all of that.
I just want to say that housing projects, in fact do work, provided they are effectively governed by specific (read: unforgiving) rules.
The best case (and most justifiable) that I can think of is housing for seniors.
@PT
I just want to say that housing projects, in fact do work, provided they are effectively governed by specific (read: unforgiving) rules.
I am not necessarily down on public housing per se. I just don’t like a ton of it all in one place. As Didionsmommy points out, it was used by most cities as a way to segregate the poor / minority population. If we are going to offer public housing, I would like to see it spread out.
It is also worth noting that at least 1/3rd of urban black long term welfare recipients were former sharecroppers or their descendants. I say that because that specific subsection of that particular population is one of the few in America whose lives taught them that a hard days work got you next to nothing. So a few of the roots that of the culture of poverty preceded welfare policy.
I don’t know that I can buy the premise that a culture of poverty came from share-cropping. It seems like migrating north was an attempt by many to break that cycle. Granted, some were forced to leave by technological improvements in farming.