Diversity

Nothing new in the inequalities of New Orleans

by Elizabeth Henderson

Tuesday February 7, 2006

The American public has a very bad case of historical amnesia. The oppression of select groups through U.S. legislation is nothing new, yet Americans were shocked by the disparities between blacks and whites that were exposed during and after Hurricane Katrina.

These present inequalities between blacks and whites are an inevitable result of U.S. policies that have benefited whites at the cost of African-Americans. Similar scenes of injustice have played out over the course of America’s history–the New Deal, Social Security Act and GI Bill, though supposedly intended to benefit all U.S. citizens, only succeeded in disproportionately assisting more whites than blacks through social programs. This disparity in aid established a gap between blacks and whites that has yet to be closed.

This continuous pattern of inequality will be maintained through the rebuilding efforts in the aftermath of Katrina. The suspension of the Davis Bacon Act, which requires government contractors to pay workers a living wage, and the reconstruction’s dependence upon cheap immigrant labor, will only benefit corporate and government, rather than citizen, interests.

As Jodi Wilgoren pointed out in a Sept. 5 New York Times article, statistics tell the story of disparity between blacks and whites in New Orleans all too well. Nearly one in four of New Orlean’s 445,000 residents live in poverty. Sixty-nine percent of the city is black, and the median household income is $31,369. To the West in Metairie, fewer than one in 10 residents are poor.

Eighty-seven percent of Metairie’s 145,000 residents are white and the median income is $41, 265, just below the national average. Wilgoren’s article focuses on the experiences of two families, the Porrettos of Metairie, La. and the Jacksons of New Orleans, in the aftermath of Katrina.

The Porrettos had many resources that allowed them to evacuate and find a new home: multiple cars, an American Express card to cover hotel expenses, cell phones and connections in city government and churches. As Gaynell Porretto and her extended family unpacked their keepsakes and ham for sandwiches at their new homestead, the Jacksons, hot and tired, waited in line at the New Orleans airport. The Jacksons, having lost their $2,000 cash savings in a post-flood fire in their apartment, did not have many options.

Immediate evacuation was not a choice for the Jacksons, Ms. Jackson did not know how to drive. The Jacksons were left with the clothes on their backs and a blue plastic bin filled with supplies given to them by other refugees and aid workers: three rolls of toilet paper, a box of Teddy Grahams, a toddler’s pair of blue plastic sandals, two apples and a gallon of milk. The article concluded with the Rev. Jesse Jackson arriving at the airport with three buses, and the Jacksons climbing aboard and filling the last row in one of the air-conditioned vehicles.

As the story of the Jacksons and the Porrettos shows, the relief efforts so far, while supplying aid to tens of thousands, have done little to ameliorate the persistent inequalities in New Orleans. However, it should not be expected that relief groups will solve this problem–the malady is systemic, not topical, and requires an institutional solution.

In order to encourage this degree of change, and ensure that the relief efforts are not a hopeless reiteration of scenes of the past, we must educate ourselves about how the inequalities of the present have been created by the governmental policies of the past and present.

There are three major American social policies that merit examination: The New Deal of 1932, the Social Security Act of 1935 and the GI Bill of 1943.

The New Deal, which created modern unions, minimum wage and hour requirements for workers and social security, offered these opportunities mostly to whites. According to Ira Katznelson’s When Affirmative Action was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth-Century America, this government attempt at the creation of a welfare state excluded 60 to 75 percent of the black population. This exclusion was effectively implemented by a congress that was dominated by southern democrats that wanted to maintain the low-wage economy of the south.

The Social Security Act, while changing the short-term assistance provided by the New Deal into a lasting set of laws and structures for social welfare, increased the disparity between blacks and whites by excluding farm and domestic workers from benefits, occupations largely filled by blacks. Katznelson states in his book that this decision excluded 65 percent of the blacks in America, with the rate of exclusion in the South soaring to 70 to 80 percent.

Thus, the government denied the overwhelming majority of the black population security against the economic hazards of old age, insurance against unemployment and other social welfare programs that worked toward ending poverty. This exclusion created two separate social systems–one which created a privileged white welfare state and another that oppressed and marginalized blacks, forcing them to live as second-class citizens on the outskirts of society.

The GI Bill was conceived as a plan to break down the barriers of entry to this privileged society. Created to help WWII veterans rejoin American society, the bill was the country’s first color-blind legislation. Anyone who had served for 90 days of active duty and had received other than an honorable discharge was eligible for benefits under the bill.

But over one million black veterans were denied assistance through the bill due to the local and southern control over determining who was worthy of aid and who was not. They were unable to take advantage of the most wide-ranging set of social benefits ever offered by the federal government in a single initiative.

The bill enabled veterans to purchase their own homes, attend college or a vocational school and receive government loans for their own businesses–enabling veterans to gain entry into the middle class.

Affirmative action was designed to finally smooth over the inequalities between blacks and whites in America. The term, as well as the concept behind it, was first introduced by Lyndon Johnson in a 1965 speech at Howard University.

In his speech, "To Fulfill These Rights," Johnson told the audience, "Freedom is not enough. You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘You are free to compete with all others’ and still justly believe you have been completely fair." Intended to further correct the inequalities produced by slavery and Jim Crow laws, under Johnson affirmative action was a compensatory approach to racial justice.

Though the stringency with which affirmative action has been applied has varied throughout presidencies–from positive deeds to combat racial discrimination under John F. Kennedy to providing "that little extra start" under Richard Nixon through programs like the Philadelphia Plan–the goal of creating a more level playing field has remained the same.

The temporary suspension of the Davis Bacon Act by Bush, however, indicates that making things more equal is not one of the administration’s goals. Rather, with the suspension of the act, Bush had the interests of big business in mind and chose to benefit corporations at the price of injuring American workers who need a living wage.

With the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to temporarily refrain sanctioning employers who hire workers who cannot document their citizenship, Latino immigrants, legal and illegal alike, will benefit as well. The aftereffects of Hurricane Andrew in Florida provide some insight into the future of New Orleans.

The 1992 storm displaced 250,000 residents in southeastern Florida, giving way to a surge in construction that drew large numbers of Latin American immigrants. In towns such as Homestead, where Latino immigrants were key members of the rebuilding efforts, the Latino population has now increased by 50 percent.

According to President Bush, rebuilding New Orleans will be "one of the largest reconstruction efforts the world has ever seen."