March 29, 2017
Page 7
Opinion articles do not necessarily represent the views of the
Portland Observer. We welcome reader essays, photos and
story ideas. Submit to news@portlandobserver.com.
O PINION
No Cash Reserves to Get Through Hard Times
You’re not alone in
trying to stay afloat
C huCk C oLLins
Are you or a loved
one having trou-
ble staying afloat?
You’re truly not
alone.
While the media
reports low unem-
ployment and a rising stock market, the
reality is that almost 20 percent of the
country lives in “Underwater Nation,”
with zero or even negative net worth.
And more still have almost no cash re-
verses to get them through hard times.
This is a source of enormous stress
for many low and middle-income fam-
ilies.
Savings and wealth are vital life pre-
servers for people faced with job loss,
illness, divorce, or even car trouble.
Yet an estimated 15 to 20 percent of
families have no savings at all, or owe
more than they own.
They’re disproportionately rural, fe-
male, renters, and people without a col-
lege degree. But the underwater ranks
by
also include a large number of people
who appear to be in the stable middle
class. Health challenges are a major
cause of savings depletion for these
people, both in medical bills and lost
wages.
Plenty more Americans could be
vulnerable.
A financial planner will advise you
to put aside three months of living
expenses in financial reserves, just in
case. So if your living expenses are
$2,000 a month, you should try to have
$6,000 in “liquidity” — money you
can easily get to in an emergency.
But 44 percent of households don’t
have enough funds to tide themselves
over for three months, even if they
lived at the poverty level, according to
the Assets and Opportunity Scorecard.
Even having a positive net worth
doesn’t mean you can always tap these
funds, especially if wealth takes the
form of home equity or owning a car.
A Bankrate survey found that 63
percent of U.S. households lack the
cash or savings to meet a $1,000 emer-
gency expense. They’d have to borrow
from a friend or family, or put costs on
a credit card.
Seven percent of U.S. homeown-
ers are underwater homeowners, with
mortgage debt higher than the value of
their homes. And more and more peo-
ple have taken on credit card debt to
pay the bills. Meanwhile, student debt
is rising rapidly and is projected to be-
come one of the biggest factors in neg-
ative wealth.
Conservative scolds will blame
individuals for “living beyond their
means” and being financially irrespon-
sible. And individual behavior is im-
portant. But the financial stresses fac-
ing millions of families are more likely
the result of four decades of stagnant
incomes.
Half the workers in this country ha-
ven’t shared in the economic gains that
have mostly gone to the rich. Their real
wages have stayed flat while health
care, housing, and other expenses con-
tinue to rise.
So not everyone is on the edge at this
time of dizzying inequality, after all.
The 400 wealthiest billionaires in the
U.S. have as much wealth together as
the bottom 62 percent of the population.
This is only possible because of the
expanding ranks of drowning Ameri-
cans.
Some politicians will scapegoat im-
migrants or other vulnerable people
for this suffering. When this happens,
hold on tight to your purse or wallet.
They’re trying to distract you from the
rich and powerful elites who are rig-
ging the rules to get more wealth and
power.
They want to deflect your attention
away from the reality that your eco-
nomic pain is the result of deliberate
government rules that give more tax
cuts to the super-rich and global corpo-
rations, keep wages down, push up tu-
ition costs, and let corporations nickel
and dime you for all you’re worth.
Congress and the Trump administra-
tion are proposing to cut health care,
pass more tax cuts for the rich, and
give global corporations even more
power over you. They promise benefits
will “trickle down.”
Unless we speak up, the only trickle
will be the expansion of Underwater
Nation.
Chuck Collins is a senior scholar at
the Institute for Policy Studies and a
co-editor of Inequality.org. Distribut-
ed by OtherWords.org.
Why We Can’t Support Supreme Court Nominee
Gorsuch falls short
on civil rights
by
m arC h. m oriaL
“Based upon our
review of Judge Gor-
such’s record, we have
concerns that he has a
narrow view of rights
that are protected by
the Constitution, as
well as a skeptical view about the im-
portance of protecting those rights in
the courtroom. In short, Judge Gor-
such’s record does not allow us to sup-
port his nomination for the Supreme
Court at this time.” – Lawyer’s Com-
mittee on Civil Rights.
The importance of a Supreme Court
Justice’s commitment to protecting
civil rights cannot be overstated. Much
of the progress this nation has made on
issues of equal opportunity are due to
Supreme Court rulings such as Brown
v. Board of Education, Loving v. Vir-
ginia, Obergefell v. Hodges and Texas
Department of Housing and Commu-
nity Affairs v. The Inclusive Commu-
nities Project, Inc.
The Supreme Court has also re-
gressed on civil rights, as with Shelby
County v. Holder, which struck down
a key provision of the Voting Rights
Act and led to a proliferation of racial-
ly-motivated voter suppression laws
throughout the nation.
More than most other communities,
the future of African Americans’ rights
and opportunities hang on the confir-
mation of a Supreme Court justice.
civil rights laws based on a large body
of civil rights opinions or comparable
information from statements and activ-
ities other than service on the bench.”
We see no such respect demonstrat-
ed by Judge Gorsuch.
As I have maintained since the an-
nouncement of his nomination, what
I find most troubling in the record of
jected his opinion that a school district
complies with the law so long as they
provide educational benefits that “must
merely be ‘more than de minimis.’” In
other words, according to Judge Gor-
such, a school district can meet its ob-
ligation to disabled students with little
more than nothing.
Of course, no serious discussion of
As I have maintained since the announcement of his
nomination, what I find most troubling in the record of Judge
Gorsuch is his apparent criticism of those who have sought
advancement of individual rights through the courts.
That’s why the National Urban
League cannot support the nomination
of Judge Neill Gorsuch.
Beyond the level of scholarship and
judicial experience required of a Jus-
tice, which Judge Gorsuch does appear
to meet, a Supreme Court Justice must
have demonstrated what the Lawyers’
Committee for Civil Rights called “a
profound respect for the importance
of protecting the civil rights afforded
by the Constitution and the nation’s
Judge Gorsuch is his apparent criticism
of those who have sought advancement
of individual rights through the courts.
He consistently has ruled against the
rights of workers and consumers who
were harmed by employers and corpo-
rations, and against disabled students
pursuing their right to a meaningful
education.
In fact, even as he sat before the
Senate Judiciary Committee last week,
the Supreme Court overwhelmingly re-
Judge Gorsuch’s confirmation can ignore
the fact that his nomination was the result
of an egregious dereliction of duty by the
Senate, who refused to give President
Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, the
hearing he was due. The Senate’s failure
with regard to that nomination does not
bode well for its ability to keep partisan-
ship from tainting the process.
Marc H. Morial is president and
chief executive officer of the National
Urban League.