SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
racial inequity
A Juneteenth Reflection on America’s Unfinished Business
This year, as we celebrate the end of chattel slavery in the United States, we must remember the work that Frederick Douglass called upon us all to do remains unfinished.
Jun 18, 2024
“What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July?” asked Frederick Douglass in his Fourth of July Oration in 1852. “I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty” of America.
Douglass’s speech remains among the most powerful and poignant in United States history more than a century and a half later. With the Civil War nearly a decade away, and the system of chattel slavery still going strong throughout the South and powering the economy throughout the country, Douglass pointed with undeniable clarity at the “venomous creature [that] is nursing at the tender breast of your youthful republic.”
As we celebrate Juneteenth in 2024, the work that Douglass called upon us all to do remains unfinished. The Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the Reconstruction Amendments formally put an end to the widespread practice of enslavement of Black people in this country. But the work of reconstructing our society and creating the truly equitable and free society promised in our founding documents has a long way to go.
Today we have the job of coming to grips with our history and charting a new path for those who come after us.
That is why on this Juneteenth, we should all ask: What, to us, is Juneteenth? For all of us, and especially for the Black community, it is a day of joyful celebration, marking the anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, as it has been for a century and a half. It marks the end of that “venomous creature” in the republic. To be sure, each one of us should celebrate that important day in 1865, as the Black community did so memorably in Texas that year.
But on Juneteenth, we should also remember that while the snake may have been slain, too much of its venom remains in our system. The venom still takes the form of racism, racial inequity, and the enduring power of white supremacy.
What, to each of us today, is Juneteenth? For those of us in the white community of the United States, I see it as a call to action to do our part to continue the work of reconstruction. We can and should imagine a truly equitable, multiracial America—one we have never before encountered but one which remains a real possibility. There is a fierce pushback against this work today, but this is a pushback we must resist as we continue the unfinished work of Reconstruction.
Like many white Americans whose families have been in the United States for a long time, and in fact came to these shores before the nation even existed, my family has both been involved in the business of enslaving others and has fought for the end of slavery. As Douglass pointed out in his soaring Fourth of July oration, ancestors of mine have done terrible things to others in the name of Christianity, in pursuit of money, and out of ignorance and hate. Others have valiantly fought against friends and families to create a better, fairer society.
Today we have the job of coming to grips with our history and charting a new path for those who come after us. That is why white people must join with others in the work of making our communities and institutions more diverse. Those of us who identify as white and male have a particular obligation to reflect on Juneteenth and consider how we can use what we have to be part of overcoming in the name of a brighter, more sustainable future. We have power to wield, and should wield it, in making our economies more equitable and inclusive.
In Chicago, where I live, there is a fact that I cannot shake. I can’t get it out of my head that a baby born in the predominantly Black neighborhood of Englewood is expected to live 30 years less than a baby born on the same day in the predominantly white, and more wealthy, neighborhood of Streeterville downtown. That is a difference of six miles—and 30 years.
The promise of abolition, a healed and equal society, has not yet been realized. And we can only get there by working together with friends, community, and in solidarity.
This disparity of life expectancy is a combination of a multitude of factors of which racial identity is one, but it boils down to this: a Black baby born in one part of our nation’s third largest city is less likely to enjoy as long and healthy a life as a white baby born a few miles away. There is no way to imagine that this marks an equal society. Health disparities such as this one affect Native American communities and Latin communities across America, too.
Alongside health, consider gaps in education, earnings, and wealth between racial groups in the United States, in state after state. These, in the words of Douglass, remain among our “national inconsistencies.” Black Americans consistently enjoy fewer of the fruits of the republic than those of other racial and ethnic groups. To achieve true racial healing in America, to get the venom truly out of our system, requires us to keep at the work of racial equity.
The promise of abolition, a healed and equal society, has not yet been realized. And we can only get there by working together with friends, community, and in solidarity. At the MacArthur Foundation, we put this approach into practice each day as we collectively strive to lead with a commitment to justice. The progress we have made in the past, and any progress in the future, requires collaboration between people from all kinds of backgrounds.
Juneteenth is a call to do better as a nation, to create an America in which every child born today—no matter their race, their ethnicity, their gender, their neighborhood—has an equal chance to thrive. We remain a long way from that reality. No matter our race, we should do our part on the unfinished work of creating a free and equal society.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Tax Prep Companies’ Business Model Exploits Low-Income Payers
The average parent in low-income communities is being bombarded with advertising designed to trick them into wasting their hard-earned money that could otherwise be going to groceries, gas, and other necessities.
Apr 16, 2024
How far could an extra nine hours and $150 go for you and your family? That’s how much Intuit’s TurboTax and H&R Block are taking from their average customer in low-income neighborhoods. Many of these customers don’t know that they can access these services for free—and that’s intentional. The average parent in low-income communities is being bombarded with advertising designed to trick them into wasting their hard-earned money that could otherwise be going to groceries, gas, and other necessities.
With Tax Day just passed, corporate tax prep giants are trying to extract every last dollar they can from Black communities and working-class taxpayers. A new report in partnership with Better IRS, titled Preying Preparers: How Storefront Tax Preparation Companies Target Low-Income Black and Brown Communities sounds the alarm on how exploiting low-income taxpayers is core to the business model of tax prep companies.
As it stands, 70% of taxpayers are eligible to file their taxes for free, but less than 3% have actually used the failed, corporate-backed free file service. The overwhelming majority of qualifying taxpayers are being coerced by unscrupulous corporate practices like deceptive advertising, overcharging, or hiding the free options.
Now that the IRS has made Direct File a free option, we call on the agency to expand the program.
Tax prep companies rely on and take advantage of economically disadvantaged communities. In fact, areas with the most people claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit have 75% more tax preparers for each person filing taxes compared to areas with fewer people claiming the credit. Furthermore, these major companies primarily hire what are called “unenrolled” tax preparers who lack expertise, certification, or credentials in tax rules and policy. Tax prep companies bank on their proximity, non-stop advertisement, celebrity endorsements, sweepstakes, and giveaways to legitimize their illegitimacy.
Unsurprisingly, companies like H&R Block have dismissed our report by noting the prolific number of locations, the years of experience of their preparers, and their 100% accuracy guarantee. They believe that because there are 9,000 locations across 50 states and most Americans live within five miles of one of their stores, then surely they must be helping hardworking families.
What this actually confirms is that H&R Block preys on low-income communities and communities of color by saturating the neighborhoods of targeted EITC-eligible taxpayers. Additionally, admitting unqualified preparers have been filing taxes for an average of 10 years or more is cause for concern. The predatory locations and disproportionate filing of EITC-eligible tax returns can both explain why Black taxpayers are audited at higher rates than their counterparts and why many people fail to take the deduction even though they are eligible. In this instance, correlation is causation.
These companies claim they are operating within the rules of the game—of which there are none. In 2010, the IRS tried to regulate the practice citing “an abysmal failure rate among unenrolled preparers” and pointing out that 1 in 4 of the 84,000 unenrolled preparers who took the competency exam failed, and more than 320,000 others never took it. That’s why we’re asking for accountability and for regulation of these tax preparers.
The introduction of the IRS Direct File pilot program represents a significant opportunity to dismantle economic inequality in our tax system. Direct File provides a much-needed alternative to costly tax preparation services in 12 states. This service is simple, free, readily available online, and a step in the right direction that empowers working-class people with an option to keep money in their pockets.
In the fight against corporate greed, we stand firm in our resolve. It’s time to hold these giants accountable, to empower the working class, and to build a fairer, more just system for all. Recent enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission are an important step; the public should know if they were overcharged and by how much.
With overwhelming public support for IRS modernization, including competency exams to ensure accountability and professionalism, the time for change is now. Now that the IRS has made Direct File a free option, we call on the agency to expand the program. The pursuit of an economy that works for everyone is ongoing. It starts with holding corporations accountable for their exploitative practices, advocating for policy solutions that prioritize the needs of working-class individuals, and ensuring equal access to resources and opportunities for all tax-payers.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fears Grow Over Future of Social Infrastructure in a Second Trump Term
His strategy will shift from “death by a thousand cuts” to abolish, terminate, and destroy.
Mar 11, 2024
The U.S. safety net is not easily understood. Difficult to navigate, it sprawls across numerous federal agencies and departments. Dozens of programs, ranging from free school lunch to disability insurance to unemployment protection have different eligibility criteria, application procedures, and benefit levels. While critical for millions of Americans, recipients are under continuous scrutiny: regularly castigated, accused of laziness, irresponsible behavior, fraud, and, among other chilling characterizations, undeserving. Its fragmented nature and lack of powerful allies makes it difficult to protect and leaves many of its core programs vulnerable to attack and retrenchment.
For decades, Republicans have been intent on instilling more stringent eligibility requirements for safety net programs, reducing program funding, and in some cases eliminating programs and agencies entirely. When Donald Trump entered office in 2016, he sought to strangle the American safety net using a “death by a thousand cuts” strategy that relied heavily on the administrative rule-making process and the judicial system, hence moving policy decision-making away from Congress. Many of these efforts ultimately stalled or failed because of legal challenges and administrative missteps by Trump officials.
Conservatives learned from these failures, and have worked tirelessly over the past four years to craft a sweeping set of reforms that would enable Trump to wield authority far more easily, and be far more reaching, than during his first term. Trump, according to Kevin Roberts, President of the conservative Heritage Foundation, stumbled out of the gate after winning in 2016: “Heritage and our allies in Project 2025 believe that must never be repeated.”
Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 2025, rectifies this and lays the groundwork for how to pull this off. Biblically-based in Judeo-Christian traditions and service to God, it echoes the racial resentment and discriminatory effects of equity that Trump has stoked for the past eight years. A second Trump administration, run by well-vetted right-wing loyalists, will “identify and reverse all actions taken by the Biden administration to advance progressive ideology and further equity.” “Nothing”, they profess, “is more important than deconstructing the centralized administrative state”. But, as they well know, it will be at the expense of millions who rely on its support and services to live.
How might this unfold?
Despite the fiscal challenges that Social Security and Medicare face, Trump has promised changes, yet offers no concrete plans or proposals. But his GOP allies in Congress, including House Speaker Mike Johnson have proposed benefit reductions and other changes. During his time as chair of the Republican Study Committee, Johnson proposed several reforms that advocates warned were clearly “veiled attempts” to raise the retirement age and ultimately make benefits less generous.
Trump’s attack on the safety net, however, would target programs that do not receive the coverage or political support of Social Security and Medicare. As a guide for action, the Mandate outlines numerous consequential changes for programs related to food and nutrition, shelter, and education programs for poor and low-income children and families.
The repository for all means-tested programs from all agencies and departments slated for reduction or termination will be The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Programs like SNAP, school meals programs, and meals programs for the elderly will be moved out of the Department of Agriculture into HHS so as to remove any inkling of a “welfare-based” focus. Universal free school meals will be eliminated.
Along with the elimination of the Department of Education and Head Start and learning programs that target poor communities, all federal funding will be block-granted to states; an overt response to allowing states freedom to do as they see fit with no federal oversight. Existing research shows that over time, block-granting programs ultimately leads to funding reductions and diversions.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will be reinvented and existing work requirements will be strengthened to move people toward self-sufficiency. All fair housing regulations designed to further equity and reduce discrimination will be repealed.
Across all departments and programs, racial classifications and quotas will be eliminated.
What does this mean to the millions who rely on social infrastructure programs?
Turning power over to states will have disastrous consequences for low-income children and families. Thirteen red states have already refused federal money for summer meal programs for low-income and poor children, citing philosophical objections with welfare programs and lack of control over what families might purchase with the food-only benefit. At least 21 million children, living in families with annual incomes under $46,000 (for a family of 3), will not have access to a $40 per child monthly grocery benefit. The negative impacts on child health and development in the short-term, and the long-term implications of mired adult achievement and productivity because of poor nutrition in early childhood is, however, of little concern.
The elimination of Head Start will knowingly harm nearly 1 million low-income young children a year at a pivotal stage in their educational and social development: helping them build the skills they need to be successful in school and life while taking a comprehensive approach to meeting the needs of their families. The effects will be most consequential amongst Hispanic and African-American children, dual language learners, children who are homeless or in foster care, those who qualify for free lunch, and those whose mothers didn't graduate high school. Head Start children have a higher likelihood of graduating high school, attending college, and receiving a post-secondary degree, license, or certification as well as reduced teen pregnancy and criminal engagement and increased educational attainment among their children despite Mandate claims to the contrary.
Existing research shows that housing vouchers reduce homelessness, housing instability, and improves numerous outcomes for children and families. The proposed changes at HUD will make housing assistance more difficult for low-income individuals to access, which is difficult to comprehend given how challenging it is to access these programs already. Vouchers are critical to lift people out of poverty and reduce racial inequity. The access challenges will be most heavily concentrated among people with the lowest incomes and people of color as a result of decades of housing and employment discrimination.
At the heart of this attack on America is the resolve to ensure that all intents to promote equity and preserve the dignity, freedom and well-being of individuals are squelched, especially for those not white and who have, in any number of ways, been marginalized by societal and economic injustices. Humanity, protection of those less fortunate than the power elite, civility, and rights to basic needs does not fit with the plan laid out by right-wing zealots in the Mandate.
When Donald Trump assumed the presidency in 2017, it was unclear exactly how he would govern. Many conservatives, and even some liberals, thought the institution of the presidency would constrain him. In some ways, it did. But as his grip on the presidency loosened over the course of 2020 and into 2021, the guardrails that had worked to contain his most dangerous impulses similarly began to slip away.
Trump learned several lessons from his four years in the White House: to prize loyalty above competence or governing experience, and that divisive rhetoric focused on resentment, retribution, and retaliation motivates his base more than programmatic policy positions. His future actions are now easier to predict and will be far more dangerous. As one New York Times report noted, “Forces that somewhat contained his autocratic tendencies in his first term — staff members who saw their job as sometimes restraining him, a few congressional Republicans episodically willing to criticize or oppose him, a partisan balance on the Supreme Court that occasionally ruled against him — would all be weaker.”
The war that Trump would wage on the safety net in a second term would unfortunately, be unsurprisingly cruel. In many ways, his assault on the welfare state would be a continuation of a fifty-year war that began in earnest when Ronald Reagan won the White House in 1980. It was then that the Heritage Foundation put together its original Mandate for Leadership to prepare for Reagan’s presidency, described as “a blueprint for grabbing the government by its frayed New Deal lapels and shaking out 48 years of liberal policy.” Reagan ushered in a new era of opposition to the social safety net, which has left the welfare state in a state of fragmentation, passive neglect, and perpetual inadequacy.
The GOP assault on the safety net has been a decades-long battle, and there is no indication that Trump will suddenly change the party’s positioning on social welfare programs. In fact, the available evidence indicates that if he wins a second term, his strategy will shift from “death by a thousand cuts” to abolish, terminate, and destroy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular