Read on Twitter
A couple months ago, I was quoted in a NYT story on the racial disparities in Unemployment Insurance benefits, alongside @DarrickHamilton @WSpriggs @econjared.
Shortly afterwards, I was accused of virtue signaling my wokeness and making claims that had no evidence base.
1/
Shortly afterwards, I was accused of virtue signaling my wokeness and making claims that had no evidence base.
1/
This stung. To start, it implies that Black Lives Matter and the movement for racial equity are a fad, as opposed to a legitimate social movement. And of course, it says outright that I'm making up or exaggerating problems in Unemployment Insurance.
2/
2/
But I got other comments too, many variants of "it's just the South": the South has lower cost of living and therefore lower benefits. It's just because Black people live in the South that it looks like they get low benefits, but actually it's fine.
3/
3/
I also got variants of "what'd you expect": Black workers earn less so they get less, or are less likely to be eligible. UI doesn't cover everyone, and it happens that those uncovered are more likely to be black, but that doesn't make it racist.
4/
4/
As sore as I was over the virtue signalling comment, you can't confuse style with substance. For many, the idea that federal public program could be racist is far-fetched.
So I wrote another op-ed for the people who had that reaction. It was published in the LA Times.
5/
So I wrote another op-ed for the people who had that reaction. It was published in the LA Times.
5/
It's a lesson for me to see the forest for the trees when people disagree with you. Respond to the concern, not the comment.
If you want the tweet version, stay on thread, otherwise op-ed is here:
6/
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-10-03/racial-disparities-unemployment-benefits
https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/10/holes-just-big-enough-unemployments-history-with-black.html
If you want the tweet version, stay on thread, otherwise op-ed is here:
6/
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-10-03/racial-disparities-unemployment-benefits
https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/10/holes-just-big-enough-unemployments-history-with-black.html
Unemployment Insurance was created by the Social Security Act of 1935. This legislation excluded farmworkers and domestic workers, which made 2/3 of the Black workers at the time ineligible.
7/
Source:
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v70n4/v70n4p49.html
7/
Source:
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v70n4/v70n4p49.html
There is deep disagreement about whether this exclusion was racist. They fall into two camps: administrative and political.
8/
8/
The administrative camp argues that the federal government didn't have the means of enrolling these workers, and most countries didn't cover them in their unemployment programs. It was incidental exclusion.
9/
Good reference: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-science-history/article/left-out-policy-diffusion-and-the-exclusion-of-black-workers-from-unemployment-insurance/BB47A78FB42748203E43CBDF1AABE8F2/core-reader
9/
Good reference: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-science-history/article/left-out-policy-diffusion-and-the-exclusion-of-black-workers-from-unemployment-insurance/BB47A78FB42748203E43CBDF1AABE8F2/core-reader
The political camp argues that there was a devil's bargain among Northern and Southern Democrats. Southerners would only vote for the bill if they had a means of excluding Black people from benefiting from it.
10/
References:
https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=facpubs
https://wwnorton.com/books/When-Affirmative-Action-Was-White/
10/
References:
https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=facpubs
https://wwnorton.com/books/When-Affirmative-Action-Was-White/
So who is right? Was it administrative (not racist!) or political (racist!) to exclude Black people?
^This is the wrong question. It's equating racism with directed animosity, and keeps judgement of UI dependent on interpreting the motivations of legislators 85 years ago.
11/
^This is the wrong question. It's equating racism with directed animosity, and keeps judgement of UI dependent on interpreting the motivations of legislators 85 years ago.
11/
It's also sets up a straw man: racism is about what white people feel, not what black people experience.
12/
12/
Charles Houston of the NAACP and George Haynes (who founded the National Urban League) testified before the Senate when the legislation was being crafted in 1935.
Houston's testimony:
https://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35houston.pdf
Haynes's testimony:
https://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35haynes.pdf
13/
Houston's testimony:
https://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35houston.pdf
Haynes's testimony:
https://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35haynes.pdf
13/
They both said that the bill would leave out Black workers because of their occupations and that the state administration of benefits would open the door for discrimination at states’ discretion.
14/
14/
UI was racist at enactment because it did not treat White and Black workers equally. Whatever the reason or excuse, the outcome was exclusion.
15/
15/
Today, Black workers receive are less likely to get benefits, wait longer for them, and receive less.
We still have reasons and we still have excuses, but what is the outcome we want?
/n
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/26766/412462-Unemployment-Insurance-and-the-Great-Recession.PDF
https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/07/the-racial-disparity-in-unemployment-benefits.html
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/08/13/the-covid-19-public-health-and-economic-crises-leave-vulnerable-populations-exposed/
We still have reasons and we still have excuses, but what is the outcome we want?
/n
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/26766/412462-Unemployment-Insurance-and-the-Great-Recession.PDF
https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/07/the-racial-disparity-in-unemployment-benefits.html
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/08/13/the-covid-19-public-health-and-economic-crises-leave-vulnerable-populations-exposed/
