Harry Hopkins replies to Herbert Hoover

(Above: Harry Hopkins, head of the WPA)

                                                   

(Above: Herbert Hoover, 31st president of  the United States)     

Herbert Hoover thought the New Deal was leading America towards fascism (the same type of absurd claim that is made today, when President Obama or the Democrats try to create a policy designed to help the non-wealthy).

Harry Hopkins--head of the WPA--responded: "Is it dictatorship to try to operate a government for all the people and not just a few? Is it dictatorship to guarantee the deposits of small depositors, and keep phony stocks and bonds off the market? Is it dictatorship to save millions of homes from foreclosure? Is it dictatorship to give a measure of protection to millions who are economically insecure and jobs to other millions who can't find work? Is it dictatorship to try to put a floor under wages and a ceiling over working hours?"

(From: "Hopkins denies relief waste in reply to Hoover on fascism," Washington Post, May 9, 1938. Hopkins image courtesy of the Social Security Administration; Hoover image courtesy of the National Park Service)

Jobs vs. Punishment

During the New Deal the nation focused on providing jobs and training to those Americans who the private sector did not want, by directly employing them in programs like the WPA & CCC, and by offering them a variety of free courses.

Today, the situation is quite different. During one of the worst economic periods in American history, and during a time when many Republicans claim that Obama is ruining the economy and not producing enough jobs, many Republican legislators are pushing to reduce the amount of help available to the unemployed. Federal aid for job training is under threat (see, e.g., here). Federally-funded extensions of unemployment benefits are a constant battle (see, e.g., here). A bill for a new WPA collects dust in committee, garners few co-sponsors, and eventually dies (where were the Democrats on this?) (see here). Legislation for a new CCC-type program for unemployed vets is blocked by Senate Republicans (see here). And the list of punishments goes on and on.

Even states are getting in on the punishment game by reducing benefits, as well as drug testing people who are laid off from their jobs. For example, the North Carolina General Assembly is on the verge of reducing its unemployment benefits from 26 to "as few as 12," and reducing its "maximum weekly benefit from $530 to $350 per person" (see here).

As if all this were not bad enough, multi-national corporations continue to send good-paying American jobs to cheap foreign labor markets. This is done to increase executive compensation packages, and to increase investor returns. But, in doing so, middle-class people and families are destroyed.

Question: If unemployment is still high, and federal funding for job training is being reduced, and unemployment benefits are being scaled back, and American jobs continue to be exported, and there is not going to be a new WPA or CCC, what is left for unemployed Americans besides occasionally landing a service sector job with low-pay, stingy benefits, little security, and no future?

This is the American Dream? To get laid-off, drug tested, cut off from assistance, and pray you get a minimum wage job? Wow. Sounds more like a nightmare than a dream.

(Image above is a WPA poster, courtesy of the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)

Rodeos, courtesy of the WPA

The WPA built, repaired, or improved 337 fairgrounds & rodeo grounds. (Image above is a WPA poster, courtesy of the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)

How long will it be before unemployment is a crime?

Some conservative-led legislatures have decided to (or are contemplating) drug tests for unemployed people seeking unemployment benefits or job training. See Arthur Delaney's article "Georgia's Drug-Testing Scheme Nabs Just One Person" for an example.

The idea behind these laws seems to be that the unemployed are jobless because they're "druggies" seeking a free ride on the backs of taxpayers. Some conservative politicians probably want to be viewed as tough-on-the-"takers." But it seems to me that they are casting a pretty wide net. A person could work at a company for 20 years, have his/her job sent overseas to increase corporate profits, become unemployed, and suddenly be forced to urinate in a cup so the state can examine what he/she has been up to.

And why are the unemployed being singled out? Why not drug test people requesting the mortgage interest deduction on their tax returns? Shouldn't we be sure that we are not subsidizing the drug habits of some homeowners? Why not drug test people who use public roads? Shouldn't we be sure that people driving on publicly-funded roads are not on drugs? I would suggest that we're doing this to the unemployed because they're easy to bully. Few unemployed people can afford attorneys to fight for their rights & privacy. Hence, the unemployed make easy targets/victims for politicians trying to market their "tough guy" or "tough gal" image to the broader public.

And how long will it be before we start to criminalize some aspects of unemployment? For those of us who follow the news and/or legal developments, we know that many aspects of homelessness and panhandling have been criminalized. Is it such a stretch--given the push for drug-testing the jobless--that one day some aspects of joblessness will be criminalized? Indeed, some people have gone to jail for failing to pay child support after losing their job/income. What will the next law do? And the one after that?

During the Great Depression we gave the unemployed job opportunities. They created thousands of sites & structures that we still use today (and, of course, we use them almost completely oblivious to their origin). But today we watch the unemployed with suspicion & condemnation, humiliating them by making them pee in a cup if they need help--even if they have been good workers all their lives with no criminal history. Shame on those who humiliate their fellow citizens because they've lost their job.

(Image above was created by "Vectorportal," at http://www.everystockphoto.com/photo.php?imageId=10831160, used under the license highlighted on that web page)

Fishing & Swimming, Courtesy of the CCC

The CCC improved the lake at New Germany State Park, in Garrett County, Maryland, by clearing out submerged logs, "building a new earthen breast works for the dam," and adding a spillway (from an information plaque at the park).

After the CCC's improvements, fishing and swimming became popular at the lake; and these activities  continue to be popular today.  Another example of how yesteryear's government investment is still benefiting us today.

(Photo by Brent McKee)

One Third of a State, One Third of a Nation

On January 16, 2013, the Huffington Post reported that "Chicago-based human rights advocacy group Heartland Alliance released data from its annual study that suggests 33 percent of Illinoisans are living in poverty or near it..." (see article here).

What's the ol' saying?  "The more things change, the more..."

But actually, after the New Deal was implemented, and after World War II, we started making some progress, yes?  A strong and growing middle-class?  Lots of opportunities?  The American Dream?  What happened?

(Image above is a WPA poster, courtesy of the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)  

Winter Sports

Another cool (pun intended) WPA poster (image courtesy of the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division).