Republican ethos on entitlements erroneous

Shane Wade
Opinion Editor

Last week, a man attempted to revitalize the dead Occupy Wall Street movement, and in doing so, ignited a vigorous, bipartisan condemnation and possibly cost a Republican presidential candidate their campaign. This one individual has done more to construct the electoral narrative than any combination of social issues or anti-Romney ads.
That man?
Mitt Romney.
There are three courses of action that we can take in interpreting his comments that 47 percent of Americans “…are dependent upon government” and “believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing:” We can write him off as an elitist, pandering for votes; we can insist on promoting the background context of the remarks; or we can use his comments as a discussion point to evaluate a larger implication prominent among Romney’s base of conservatives and Republicans.
What Romney said was no gaffe. It was the pure, unfiltered opinion of a corporate politician. In Romney’s America and within the Republican ethos, 47 percent of Americans are unworthy of government assistance for a variety of completely illegitimate reasons, including that those don’t pay income taxes.
The Tax Policy Center found that the “47 percent” (which is actually 46 percent) of non-income tax payers breaks down as follows: 23 percent don’t pay because of low income; 17 percent make up elderly, working poor and children: and 6 percent don’t pay because of itemized deductions, tax credits and income tax exemptions.
These aren’t freeloaders or “welfare queens.” They are the least among us and the most afflicted by the economic disparities perpetrated by a consumer-heavy, disaster-based capitalist system that rewards massive failures with golden parachutes.
These poor people are the same people that Romney believes are “unwilling to take personal responsibility for their lives.” For them, entitlements and government assistance are their golden parachutes; they have no fallback, no trust funds, no plan B. The safety net constructed by Franklin Roosevelt more than a century ago built up America’s middle class and provided those without with the means and ways to lift themselves out of their circumstances. That’s what thousands of immigrants, including Romney’s father, did.
Romney wants to burn that net.
There’s a passive and pervasive ignorance surrounding entitlements in America that the Republican base plays into annually; that those who become unemployed and require government assistance aren’t being incentivized to work. To that, let them to live off however little unemployment checks provide and call that “easy living.”
With 63.7 million Americans receiving government support, according to a 2012 index by the Heritage Foundation – whether in the form of Social Security, Pell Grants, or welfare – we shouldn’t be trying to find ways to cut spending to that safety net; we should be finding ways to bolster it and create sustainable, long-term jobs for Americans. By investing in an America that doesn’t abandon its poor and struggling to the streets, and instead provides job retraining, skill-building courses, and living essentials, we’re helping to provide the mechanisms which the poor can us to re-build their lives and return to economic stability.
Unfortunately for the Romney campaign, there was never an “It’s the economy, stupid” moment. There was never a “This is the United States of America” moment. There was never a promise to reunite the country. Even before we learned of his position toward the 47 percent, his campaign consistently preached a message of division.
From “Corporations are people, my friend” to his objections to releasing his tax information, Romney has perpetuated himself as an inflexible individual above public scrutiny.