---

The state of Minnesota's "99 percent"

by Melanie Ford
Zenith City Weekly

he Occupy Wall Street movement, which began September 17 in lower Manhattan and spread to cities throughout the world, including Duluth, is challenging powers—allowed and even facilitated by our government—that result in overwhelming wealth for one percent of the nation and a loss of voice for everyone else.

The Occupiers have an opportunity to weave an agenda of racial justice into their message. As they frame their policy requests, they should keep in mind that people of color are overrepresented at the bottom of the 99 percent.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, White median wealth nationally is now 44.5 times higher than Black median wealth. In America, wealth determines social status and the way we are seen and judged by others, which affects our ability to perform in school and at work.

According to the U.S. Census American Community Survey for Minnesota in 2010, household incomes dropped five percent. Black households experienced a 16 percent drop and American Indian households, 22 percent.

In Minnesota, 17.8 percent of Asians, 24.4 percent of Latinos, 39.5 percent of American Indians, and 37.2 percent of Blacks live in poverty. These rates are up significantly from 2007.

The poverty rate among White Minnesotans is lower than the national average, but significantly higher than the national average among people of color.

The Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED) is a think tank on asset development and economic opportunity, focused on the belief that income is necessary for families to get by, but assets are crucial to get ahead.

CFED finds that 25.9 percent of households nationwide are in "asset poverty," meaning they do not have enough savings or wealth to meet their basic needs in the event of a job loss or other emergency.

While 20.7 percent of all Minnesota households are asset poor, among Minnesotans of color the data is much more grim: 58.5 percent of Blacks, 42 percent of Latinos, 21.7 percent of Asians, and 43.3 percent of American Indians in Minnesota are asset poor.

The CFED believes our nation’s approach to asset building is "upside down" because the greatest support for asset building is enjoyed by those with the highest incomes already, primarily through the tax code.

In 2009, the federal government provided an average of $95,820 to support asset building by households with incomes over $1 million, yet only an average of $4 to households with incomes of $10,000 to $15,000.

Income disparities create a whole host of larger problems, according to Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett. In their book, The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger (Bloomsbury Press, 2010), they compare 23 rich countries and each of the 50 United States.

They found that the greater the difference in national or state income, the more citizens are plagued by societal ills, such poor physical and mental health, drug use, low life expectancy, obesity, poor educational performance, teen births, violence, high imprisonment rates, strict punishment, and less social mobility.

Wilkinson and Pickett also found that problems affecting children, such as educational performance, infant mortality, and obesity, are related to inequality. When parents experience the strain of living in poverty, family life and children suffer. Of the countries they studied, the U.S. ranked highest in income disparity and among the worst in societal ills.

The authors conclude that fair policies must be developed to close these income differences. This proves the old adage, "We all do better when we all do better."

It is not laziness, lack of intelligence, or cultural differences that have kept people of color from achieving the same levels of wealth as White people. Institutional practices and government regulations cause the asset divide.

Our nation was built on slave labor and stolen land. Systemic racism in home loans, education, public assistance, banking, and private lending kept many non–Whites from getting ahead at the same rate as Whites.

All people should be represented at Occupy assemblies. This is an opportunity to be inclusive, build trust, and open dialogue. Sometimes that requires moving out of your comfort zone.

I will consider the Occupy movement successful only if the policies and laws that are enacted as a result ensure that people of color have equal access to and control over institutions that facilitate asset building.

It doesn’t come easily, but if there is going to be any real improvement in our society, we must be intentional in developing a post–corporate system of government. Even if the Occupy movement does not succeed in its mission, all citizens should continue to pressure policy makers to consider the consequences of racial, social, and economic disparities.

Melanie Ford is a lawyer in Duluth. She is on the Board of Directors of Clayton Jackson McGhie Memorial, Inc., which works to eliminate racism and the disparate impact of political, social, and governmental policies on people of color.

---