Editor’s note: This commentary is by Mark Hughes, of Montpelier, who is executive director of Justice for All.
[I]n our public discourse and debate there are a lot of well-intended discussions around corporate responsibility and the term “corporate welfare” seems to be being thrown around rather frequently. Lately I have seen that the objective of the use of references like “corporate welfare” has been to shame corporations into ensuring that they are paying their employees livable wages. The truth is that corporations should be held accountable for much more than just providing livable wages but that is another conversation. I just want to tell you why using the term “corporate welfare” is a bad idea.
We have to revisit history to get at why the use of the term “corporate welfare” is a bad strategy. First it is important to say that the term “welfare” SHOULD be a term that we as progressives reclaim. This nation was founded on the premise of caring for the citizenry and the preamble to our constitution makes the “promoting the general welfare” a clear intention of the Constitution. The New Deal (though intended for whites but so was the Constitution) sought to swing the pendulum of priorities back to the “welfare” of the people. As the civil rights movement advanced the Southern Strategy emerged in 1964 and matured in 1968.
The (former party of the abolitionists then turned party of the white man) Republican Party political strategists stoked the flames of the race by inciting contempt for and fear of blacks. With a high percentage being on “welfare,” blacks were placed at the root of our national economic struggle, although more whites receive welfare in number. The false narrative of scarcity exacerbated the racial animus both consciously and subconsciously and white people took their fears to the polls. Small government, competition and individualism, amalgamated with racism once again turned us away from being a nation of people and moved us to being a nation of corporations. Nixon and Reagan added fuel to the fire to make sure that America understood that “welfare” was a bad word and it was the black folks fault.
As a nation we still have a responsibility to care for one another in times of need. “Welfare” is as important as ever to ensure that those who are not of able body, sound mind or good fortune are not left destitute or oppressed. It is for us to reclaim the word “welfare” and contextualize it properly in our society as a nation, not play into the dog whistles that rest on our history of racism. When we call corporations out by using terms like “welfare,” we feed into the false narrative that “welfare” is somehow a bad thing. We add credence to ongoing efforts being made to deny people of the help that they desperately need. We also fan the flames of hatred with race baiting language that continues to incite fear, which folks in turn carry to the polls. Finally, this results in us once again placing folks in office who create policies designed to hurt black and brown folks and as usual in numbers whites are always affected more.
The bottom line is that it is insensitive and politically irresponsible to publicly link the nation’s constitutional duty and moral obligation to support the dispossessed to anything external to that responsibility. I can’t help but add that I am a product of “welfare” (my entire childhood), and this public shaming of corporations makes me feel like the people are a thing and the government’s responsibility to care for people is resented. In short, please don’t play politics with incendiary rhetoric (that causes more harm than good) telling the world that you expect to be reimbursed the money that you gave out of commitment to your constitutional and moral obligation.
There is no doubt that corporations AND the rich must pay their fare share. Perhaps it might be a better approach to create a social responsibility regulatory assessment for corporations that lives at the crossroads of compliance, taxes and offsets. This would ensure that corporations are held accountable for social, racial, environmental and economic justice. Corporations are corporations. We need more than reckless political rhetoric to hold corporations accountable and it must all be tied to their bottom line because that is the only thing that they understand. As for people, politicians must have the intestinal fortitude and political will to say the words, regardless of the perceived anticipated outcome. We must raise taxes on the rich.
And still she calls, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Is welfare a good thing or bad thing?
