Chapter 4 Part 1 Government Policies, Institutional Racism, and Societal Values

Government Policies, Institutional Racism, and Societal Values

Now we begin the controversy. Unlike the majority of peoples that arrived in this country, the black man’s plight was different; we were brought over in chains. We did not have control of our bodies or our lives. We were at the mercy of others. All of our institutions and customs were replaced with the customs and institutions of slavery. It was under this system that the practice of marriage and the black family structure were perverted for us as a people. The practice of not allowing slaves to marry as well as the practice of breeding people as with livestock were common during this period. No one can measure the devastating effect of this on the psyche of a people. There have been many books by both blacks and whites debating the effect this has had on us as a people, as well as a number of psychological and sociological studies. To be sure, this was a major issue and despite the obstacles, a surprising number of blacks did marry in secret ceremonies during this dark period in our history. I think the more devastating policy against the black family was the later government services policies of the times, policies that prevented the male from living in a house that was receiving government payments.

These were the policies that rewarded women for having children out of wedlock and drove the black man from the family structure. The more children a woman had the more money in aid she received. This intentional racist policy elevated the black woman over the black man economically and further emasculated him. The man could not obtain employment to care for his family due to racist hiring policies, but the woman was able to obtain financial assistance without the necessity for a male presence. Institutionalizing the enmity, that God had already placed between man and woman at the fall of Adam. So not only could he not get a decent job due to racist policies and prejudice, he could not be present publicly in the household. The black man had to sneak in and out of his own home like a thief in the night. The psychological effect of this phenomenon has I think never adequately been measured or researched. For more information on this topic, I would recommend the report of former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. This report was written while he was Assistant Secretary of Labor in the Johnson Administration. The name of the report was “The Negro Family: The Case For National Action”, it discussed the connection between the loss of the family nucleus in the black community and poverty.

“Despite the overwhelming evidence of the benefits of marriage to families and society, the sad fact is that, for more than four decades, the welfare system has penalized and discouraged marriage. The U.S. welfare system is currently composed of more than 70 means-tested aid programs providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to low-income persons. Each year, over $200 billion flows through this system to families with children. While it is widely accepted that the welfare system is biased against marriage, relatively few understand how this bias operates. Many erroneously believe that welfare programs have eligibility criteria that directly exclude married couples. This is not true.

Nevertheless, welfare programs do penalize marriage and reward single parenthood because of the inherent design of all means-tested programs. In a means-tested program, benefits are reduced as non-welfare income rises. Thus, under any means-tested system, a mother will receive greater benefits if she remains single than she would if she were married to a working husband. Welfare not only serves as a substitute for a husband, but it actually penalizes marriage because a low-income couple will experience a significant drop in combined income if they marry.

For example: A typical single mother on Temporary Assistance to Needy Families receives a combined welfare package of various means-tested aid benefits worth about $14,000 per year. Suppose the father of her children has a low-wage job paying $16,000 per year. If the mother and father remain unmarried, they will have a combined income of $30,000 ($14,000 from welfare and $16,000 from earnings). However, if the couple marries, the father's earnings will be counted against the mother's welfare eligibility. Welfare benefits will be eliminated (or cut dramatically), and the couple's combined income will fall substantially. Thus, means-tested welfare programs do not penalize marriage per se but, instead, implicitly penalize marriage to an employed man with earnings. The practical effect is to significantly discourage marriage among low-income couples.

This anti-marriage discrimination is inherent in all means-tested aid programs, including TANF, food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) food program. The only way to eliminate the anti-marriage bias from welfare entirely would be to make all mothers eligible for these programs regardless of whether they are married and regardless of their husbands' earnings. Structured in this way, the welfare system would be marriage-neutral: It would neither reward nor penalize marriage.”