nick053109

On the homepage

Scanners

Full-body scanners headed for MSP

Out There

Gas lines

10 years later, same fire, anger

Club Outdoors

The poor are an easy target, or are they?

Gov. Tim Pawlenty stakes his future, and ours, on the myth of the welfare free-rider.

By NICK COLEMAN, Star Tribune

Last update: May 31, 2009 - 8:27 AM

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

There are good reasons to be disappointed by the 2009 Minnesota Legislative session that hung fire in a Three-Card Monte con game involving all sides in the process -- the impotence of the Democratic majority, the reckless refuseniks of the Republican minority and the weirdly detached leadership of Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

But there is no good reason, in the midst of present hardship and future uncertainty, to return to scapegoating the poor for the state's budget problems.

Unfortunately, that's where Pawlenty went as soon as the session ended, putting his cross hairs squarely on those with the least resources to resist his budget ax.

"There's increasing concern about people coming from other parts of the country for our welfare system," he said. "They're not coming for the weather."

Wow. In a single, calculated statement, he gave new life to two stereotypes Minnesotans have long tried to shuck: the first, that we are a haven for people who know how to work the welfare system; the second, that our weather is so abysmal no one worth their salt wants to live here. (Memo to Chamber of Commerce: Cancel that bouquet for the governor).

Our weather, in truth, is challenging. But our political climate is getting even uglier. Pawlenty, who behaves like a strangely chipper chopper as he approaches the self-appointed task of cutting $1 billion or more from the budget, seems to be relishing the opportunity to make his bones with the extreme right by demonizing, once again, the poor.

It is a measure of our familiarity with this tiresome act that there isn't more outrage. Oh, well. There he goes again. And he's wrong again.

The state demographer's office has attempted since the 1980s to determine whether there is statistical evidence to substantiate the belief that Minnesota's social safety net makes us suckers for freeloaders. Many continue to believe it, but most smart people, including the governor, know it falls into the category of urban myth.

"We've never been able to demonstrate that Minnesota is 'a welfare magnet,'" Demographer Tom Gillaspy says.

The last survey, released a year ago, did not show a significant difference between the numbers of arrivals who received public assistance and the numbers of people on assistance who moved out of Minnesota. It was a wash, and the result was consistent with previous findings, although the deep recession, which began in late 2007, could affect the picture (results of a new survey, based on last year's data, should be available this fall).

According to Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung, the Department of Human Services says almost 14 percent of public assistance seekers were from outside Minnesota in 2007. But that number, without knowing how many public assistance clients left Minnesota, does not make us Welfare Shangri-La.

Here's another thing the governor's retro welfare-bashing overlooks: If the number of Minnesotans on assistance grows, it won't be because the poor are moving here. It will more likely be because an increasing number of Minnesotans -- the unemployed, the underemployed, the foreclosed-upon -- are sinking into poverty.

"We have met the enemy," my favorite comic strip possum, Walt Kelly's Pogo, used to say. "And he is us." Well, we have met the people who need assistance. And they could well be us, too.

The important question of how society -- the public and private sectors, the churches and charities -- should respond to the growing ranks of the poor should not be obscured by debunked canards, whatever value they have as red meat for conservative voters.

"The poor don't vote, and they don't contribute," notes the Rev. John Estrem, the CEO of Catholic Charities of St. Paul and Minneapolis, a major player in the fight against poverty and its effects. "So the poor are an easy group to take a swing at. But cutting the budget on the poor just shifts the cost, does damage to people and doesn't work."

The ambitious Pawlenty seems to be trying hard to impress audiences outside Minnesota. But it's hard to climb to national attention and stay there without demonstrating an independent philosophy that is as open to reality as to rhetoric. At the moment, Pawlenty has painted himself into a tight corner, with his old mentors Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, just at a time when Republican realists like Colin Powell are trying to keep the GOP from obsolescence.

His political future is the governor's lookout. But I don't believe that cutting services to the poorest and reviving discredited stereotypes will help him in the long run, at home or in Washington.

Tim Pawlenty knows better. Minnesota deserves better.

Nick Coleman is a senior fellow at the Eugene J. McCarthy Center for Public Policy & Civic Engagement at the College of St. Benedict/St. John's University. He can be reached at nickcolemanonline@gmail.com.

Recent Commentary stories

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - May 31, 2009

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - Google may not win its fight against the Chinese government, but bless it for trying. More

Comment on this story | Read all 132 comments | Hide reader comments

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS