The Last Call for Civil Rights: Toward Economic Equality

• Jurisdiction: United States,Federal
• Publication year: 2021
• Citation: Vol. 37 No. 4

The Last Call for Civil Rights: Toward Economic Equality

Steve Lee
Georgia State University College of Law, ylee116@gsu.edu

[Page 1265]

THE LAST CALL FOR CIVIL RIGHTS: TOWARD ECONOMIC EQUALITY

Yong-Shik Lee^*

Abstract

Over six decades have passed since the civil rights movement began in the mid-1950s, but American society has not yet fully realized the promise of the civil rights movement, which at its core embodies the protection and promotion of equity and dignity of all people. Despite the historic improvements that accord the legal protection of equal rights among different races, genders, and ethnic groups, significant economic disparity among racial and regional lines persists. The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. declared, "Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality." However, the pursuit of economic equality has not been successful. Growing racial and regional economic disparities create serious social, economic, and political problems in American society and pull America away from the ideals of the civil rights movement. Structural economic problems in the United States, such as persistent income and wealth disparities along racial lines and chronic poverty prevailing in many regions, have exacerbated the inequality that divides the country. This challenge requires a fundamental paradigm change. Racial and regional economic disparities can no longer be overcome solely by individual efforts and self-reliance. The federal government must address racial and regional economic disparities by facilitating economic development for minorities and economically depressed areas in close cooperation and coordination with state and local governments, as well as the private sector. Before America can fully

[Page 1266]

meet the objectives of the civil rights movement, this country must achieve successful economic development that bridges racial and regional economic disparities.

[Page 1267]

CONTENTS

Introduction..............................................................................1268

I. Growing Economic Inequality..........................................1271

A. Racial Divide....................................................................1271
B. Regional Economic Disparity...........................................1275

II. Lessons from the Asian American Experience................1279

III. Regional Economic Problems: A "Carbondale Story". 1289

IV. Call for a New Paradigm...................................................1293

A. Racial Disparity................................................................1294
B. Regional Economic Disparity ........................................... 1298

Conclusion.................................................................................1301

[Page 1268]

Introduction

This Article discusses the importance of economic equality in the context of civil rights.¹ There are growing economic disparities in the united States along racial and regional lines across the country.

A disproportionately higher rate of poverty has existed among racial minorities and economically depressed regions for decades and creates serious social problems for regional communities, states, and the nation.² This economic inequality pulls America away from achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement, which at its core embodies the protection and promotion of equity and dignity for all people. The civil rights movement, owing to the heroic sacrifices of numerous individuals under the leadership of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., has substantially improved the status of the united States to a nation in which there is a legal protection of equal rights among all races, genders, and ethnic groups.³ Despite this achievement, however, persistent economic inequality, resulting in significant poverty among racial minorities and economically depressed regions, detracts from the ideals of the civil rights movement in the United States. Dr. King, acknowledging this problem, declared, "Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality," in one of his last speeches before his assassination.⁴

In the United States, the pursuit of economic well-being has been left more or less to each individual based on this nation's respect for individual autonomy and self-reliance, without extensive social support as found in Europe and elsewhere. The traditional American

[Page 1269]

creed, which favors individual autonomy and self-reliance, is admirable in its spirit and has set the mental foundation for this great nation but is no longer sufficient to lift those in need from poverty and reduce the existing economic gaps. Current structural problems, such as systemic racism embedded in society (which causes economic inequality among minorities), and the industrial weakness prevailing in economically depressed regions cannot be overcome by individual effort alone and thus require a fundamental paradigm change.⁵ In other words, there is a need for the federal government, with the greatest resources among all governments in the world, to play a more active role in the economy, facilitating economic development for racial minorities and economically depressed regions in close cooperation with state and local governments and with the private sector.

The current structural problems require active participation from the federal government, just like the problems with protection of political rights of minorities through legislation and enforcement.⁶ With pro-development legislation and institutional frameworks, as well as systematic engagement, the government can promote economic development for minorities and economically depressed regions. The

[Page 1270]

governmental promotion of economic development is justified because economic development for minorities and economically depressed regions will be essential to realize the goals of the civil rights movement, including the protection and promotion of equality and dignity for all people. Governmental promotion of economic development for minorities and economically depressed regions does not mean that the government should overtake the role of the market and the private sector; rather, it encourages the federal government to identify the causes of economic disparity along racial and regional lines, develop policies, and implement measures that will reduce the existing gaps in close cooperation and coordination with state and local governments and with the private sector.

The Article is organized as follows. Part I discusses the growing economic inequality in the united states along racial and regional lines. Part II studies the Asian American experience in the United States and draws lessons from their economic success. Part III turns to the issues of regional economic disparity and examines the case of Carbondale, Illinois, a local economy suffering from stagnant economic development, to illustrate the regional economic problem.⁷ Finally, Part IV proposes a new legal and institutional approach (law and development approach) in which the federal government plays an active role for economic development by enacting pro-development legislation and setting up pro-development institutional frameworks.

[Page 1271]

I. Growing Economic Inequality⁸

A. Racial Divide

There is significant economic disparity along racial lines in the United States. Legal discrimination against racial minorities in the United States may have been removed since the civil rights movement, but the elimination of legal discrimination has not bridged economic gaps among races. The following graph illustrates significant income disparities along racial lines.

Figure 1: Real Median Household Income by Race and Hispanic Origin⁹

[Page 1272]

	All Races	White	White, Not Hispanic	Black	Hispanic (All races)	Asian
2019	$68,703	$72,204	$76,057	$45,438	$56,113	$98,174
2009	$59,458	$61,947	$65,053	$38,921	$45,437	$78,201
1999	$62,641	$65,149	$67,969	$42,960	$47,326	$78,440
1989	$57,705	$60,699	$62,005	$36,099	$43,761	$72,070
1979	$54,222	$56,851	$57,651	$33,378	$42,960	N/A
1969	$51,863	$54,126	N/A	$32,717	N/A	N/A
1959	$41,70810	$43,448	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Table 1: Real Median Household Income by Race and Hispanic Origin (2019 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)¹¹

The median household incomes of Black minorities and of Hispanics and Latinos (Hispanics) are 40% and 26% lower than the white majority, respectively. The gap is indeed serious: the 2019 real median household incomes of Blacks ($45,438) and Hispanics ($56,113) were close to the income level of whites six decades ago (1959: $43,448) and four decades ago (1979: $56,851), respectively.¹² According to a study, the income gap between Black and white households remains roughly the same as it was in the 1960s.¹³ Unemployment rates are also higher for minorities: as of October 2019, the unemployment rates for Blacks and Hispanics were 5.4% and 4.1%, respectively, whereas the unemployment rate for whites was 3.2%.¹⁴ Asians reported a 2.9% unemployment rate.¹⁵ COVID-19 exacerbated unemployment rates for minorities: in the third quarter of 2020: unemployment rates were as high as 13.2% for Blacks, 11.2% for Hispanics, and 10.6% for Asians, compared to 7.9% for whites.¹⁶

[Page 1273]

These significant discrepancies in income and employment status have also resulted in large gaps in household wealth among races, which have not narrowed since the passage of the Civil Rights Act.¹⁷ According to a 2019 survey, whites had a median household wealth of $188,200, compared to $24,100 for Black households and $36,100 for Hispanic households.¹⁸ The median wealth of Black households was still less than 15% of the median wealth of white households.¹⁹ Asians had a median household wealth of $157,400 (as of 2017).²⁰ The median ratio of household debt against...