Is the American Dream Over? The Disappearing Middle Class

By Wiha Powell

America: a country founded on liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the ideals of life. The notion of the American middle class is centered on four pillars: a chance to retire at age 65, a chance to send their children to college, work in order to afford a comfortable lifestyle, and access to good medical care. However, the current financial and economic crisis, and the constant increase in unemployment are causing millions of middle class families to lose their homes or become jobless. As a result, this crisis is steadily chipping away at the four pillars that built the American middle class, which eventually will cause it to sway and sooner or later come to an end.

Can you imagine America without its middle class?

The American middle class is slowly being wiped out. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2010 there were 46.2 million Americans living below the poverty line – an increase from 43.6 million in 2009 (a poverty rate of 15.1% in 2010, an increase from 14.3% in 2009). Moreover, the Census reported that the current 2010 poverty rate of 15.1% is the highest rate in 52 years.

As of today, there are 13.9 million Americans unemployed or underemployed. There are millions of individuals and families who cannot afford to make the minimum payment on their credit cards; there are also millions who have now defaulted on their mortgages or facing foreclosure. Presently, a record number of people are currently receiving food stamps and thousands of Americans are filing for bankruptcy every month. Furthermore, the devastating economy is wiping out billions of dollar in pension and savings funds, leaving millions of middle class families struggling to make ends meet, and this, is only a few of the misfortunes facing the current middle class.

This slow, but undoubted depletion of the American middle class started in or around 1970, where there was a rise in productivity, but the average wages for full-time employees remained stagnant. Currently, the household median income is at a measly $49,455, and with the price of household expenses inflating daily, middle class families are now spending twice as much on their mortgages, food, daycare and health insurances causing them to struggle in order to keep their heads above water. Even in two-income households, the constant increase of essential goods and services is suffocating; as a result, there is hardly any money to save for a ‘rainy day’.

Presently, it is not only extremely expensive to live a middle class lifestyle, but it is also quite costly to get there. Moreover, the notion that a college education is the meal ticket for higher wages and a better lifestyle is no longer true, not with the increasing cost of education and the substantial amount of people with college degrees being underemployed.

In the midst of the burden facing the middle class, the American Dream is experiencing a dramatic change. Fewer people are buying homes causing more young people to postpone their independent lives since there are no jobs available for college graduates. If the younger generation is unable to get their feet off the ground, this poses extreme challenges for the middle class and the economy in the future.

With today’s expenses on the rise, setting aside money for children’s college fund or even putting away money for retirement has now become a distant dream for many middle class families. This ongoing economic and financial crisis of America is forcing millions of once secure and affluent middle class families to live from paycheck to paycheck, while watching their debts increase. The result: millions of middle class families worrying that they too will soon be getting a pink slip or a health scare that will send them over the economic precipice.

So, can you imagine America without its strong middle class?

The once sturdy and sound foundation of the American middle class is now shaky, thus the middle class is slowly dying, and once it is gone, it is extremely hard to restore.

Better Customer Service Calls With the Public

By Justin Mosebach

Technology continues to grow and with it comes the expectation of a quick response from business and government agencies. People want answers to their questions, and their problems solved immediately. In addition, they also want to be treated well.

Here are a few ideas for helping to keep your citizens happy when they reach out to you for help:

Accessibility

First, when do you receive the highest volume of support calls? Try to have a live person available to answer them. If citizens are constantly calling after normal business hours, have an employee start later in the day and work later to cover that need. Make adjustments as necessary.

Second, make sure there are enough people to answer the phone. If a citizen continually gets a recorded message, they could get more frustrated with the issue. This could carry over to the phone conversation once they finally get a hold of you.

Third, if possible, provide them with alternative ways of completing a task.

For example: If they need to fill out a form, make the form readily available. Provide it to your customer online or via e-mail rather than making them search for the form.

Manners

This sounds obvious, but here are some things you might not have thought about:

• Try to keep the phone background noise to a minimum. This might not always be possible, but it helps the citizen to have a better chance of understanding what you’re saying and not be as distracted.
• Smile while you’re talking on the phone – it comes across.
• Don’t talk too fast. This is especially helpful to people who are hard of hearing or possibly have a language barrier.
• Don’t demand. Say please. It will go a long way.
• Finally: Listen!

Remember

The citizen is the customer. Be patient with them and think of what it’s like when you call a customer support line for a large company – what are your expectations?

Have fair expectations. Citizens don’t think about local government all of the time. They might not know what your process is for applying for something and it might be unfair of you to expect that from them. This may be the first time that they’ve ever contacted you. Maybe they’re new to the area. Give them some benefit of the doubt.

What are some of your suggestions? Let us know in the comments below!

When Government Can’t Get Along

By Lisa Beutler

This week the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) moved to join federal litigation challenging an Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) policy on the removal of vegetation on flood control levees.

Streams and river banks are riparian areas.  Riparian vegetation serves many functions including bank stabilization and water quality protection, food chain support, thermal cover, flood control, fish habitat, and wildlife habitat.

DFG will join plaintiffs in a pending case including Friends of the River, Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity who have loudly questioned the facts leading to the Corps decision.  The Corps vegetation policy is also unpopular with California farmers and other water users.

The case challenges the Corps adoption of a national policy that requires removing virtually all trees and shrubs on federal levees.  The dispute has been brewing for several years.  DFG, along with many other local, state and federal agencies, has been in facilitated dialogue to find a resolution without success.  When asked about the move to litigation, DFG Director Charlton H. Bonham explained. “It’s unfortunate that the discussions haven’t led to a more agreeable outcome, but if adhered to, the policy will do incredible damage to California’s remaining riparian and adjacent riverine ecosystem, especially in the Central Valley.”

The breakdown highlights some classic public administration dilemmas.  Public managers are increasingly being asked to address issues in complex and stressed systems.  Agencies that were elegantly designed to be experts in delivering specific services must now consider the missions of other agencies in their decision process.  Even so, they remain directly accountable for delivering their own mission.

A second dilemma relates to a desire for standardization in policies.  In general, standardization leads to better quality control and service delivery.  From the perspective of decision makers and their publics, standardization creates fairness and predictability.  Yet, in increasingly complex systems, one size often does not fit all.   The process of managing exceptions and variances can be an administrator’s slippery slope.

In this case the Corps has previously collaborated with state and federal agencies in developing levee design approaches intended to benefit federal- and state-listed threatened and endangered species.  The new edict is not fully consistent with those past actions.

This shift is understandable.  In the aftermath of recent Midwest flooding, the Corps has been publically challenged to focus on delivery of a fail proof flood control system.  If flooding happens and the Corps has not been diligent about moving water as quickly as possible from one place to another safer place, they are equally likely to be sued by someone that has experienced flooding.

Adding to the dispute are mixed findings related to the impact of vegetation on levees and in waterways.  In general, vegetation can create maintenance problems for levees and clog waterways.  However, some studies of California levees show there are benefits or at least few or no concerns with properly managed vegetation.  One study showed that some trees assisted in strengthening the levees.   These facts, along with the benefits of vegetation to the ecosystem are what have led California to stand its ground in fighting the policy.

We do know that fixing one problem can lead to many more.  The California agencies in dispute with the Corps’ estimate the new federal policy could cost up to $7.5 billion and divert funds away from more significant levee deficiencies like seepage and erosion.

Legally, the most likely way to resolve the dispute will be through the court system.  Until public administrators are able to find ways to resolve the dilemmas of single mission agencies managing complex issues and ways to balance standardization with the need for exceptions, the courts will be the referee of last resort.  We need to find a better way.

Crony Capitalism – A Dirty Game

By Wiha Powell

Photo by Mario Tama, Getty Image

Spreading across America like a wildfire, the ‘Occupied Wall Street Movement,’ which has been protesting for several weeks, has now sparked a worldwide movement. Their motto: “we the 99% are fed-up with the greed and corruption of the 1%”. Their goal: “restoring the balance of democracy within the U.S.”

Question, what is fueling this movement? Corporations are ruling and influencing the government, with the government providing bailouts, tax breaks, and other harmful and detrimental governmental policies alongside the corruption of the Federal Reserve.

Chanting the slogan – similar to that of the Tea Party – but undeniably for different reasons, “The banks got bailed out, I got sold out,” the Movement appears to be anti-capitalist, believing that bank profits reflect the exploitation of the 99%. However, the problem Americans are facing is not totally ‘capitalism’, which is an economic system where private individuals or corporations own production and distribution. Rather, the problem stems from ‘crony-capitalism’, which is the portrayal of a capitalist society but is based on the close affiliation between private individuals or corporations and the government.

As a result, the success of the economy is determined by the success of the corporations, instead of basing it upon the free market and the law. The success of these corporations is solely reliant upon the favoritism shown by the ruling governmental party, which comes in the form of tax breaks, government grants and other incentives.

In 2008, under the Bush Administration, the Senate passed a Bill that gave a $700 billion bailout to financial institutions. The ulterior  motive of the Bush Administration was to buy up $700 billion in troubled assets, which was mostly mortgage-related that caused a crisis in the financial market. Their goal was to free up the banks to start lending again.

In July 2010, a year and a half later, Congress under the Obama Administration passed another bill relocating the financial market’s power back into the hands of the government and taking it away from Wall Street in order to prevent future financial crisis. Afterward, the Obama Administration poured billions into automobile companies, i.e., General Motors and Chrysler, to keep their head above water. Then to make matters worst, the President created an Auto Task Force headed by Steven Rattner, a Wall Street investor, to supervise the auto companies. Note, Rattner has no automotive experience but has plenty in raising campaign money.

This reform, according to critics, did not repair; it only created a stronger relationship between private corporations and the government in turn, inviting big banks that have enough capital to influence legislation and the agenda of centralizing power in Washington. This is a clear-cut example of the government rewarding bad decisions made by Wall Street while putting taxpayers at risk.

With the government reforming and bailing out private corporations, it has proven to be harmful to small businesses and consumers who do not have the capital or government connections to navigate the rules and bureaucracy to influence any legislation that is being proposed by the Congress. It is apparent that the continuation of crony capitalism has allowed private corporations to roam freely without any regulations and has brought about the current financial and economic crisis that the U.S. faces today.

Instead of playing favoritism, i.e., crony capitalism, the federal government has a significant role to play in ensuring that the financial markets are fair and transparent and holding those accountable who violate the rules. The purpose of a reform is to restore and repair the markets’ principles, which will ensure the freedom to participate, continued attachment to risk, and the sense of responsibility that guarantees that those who seek to reap the gains also bear the full risks of losses.

Presently, there are millions of Americans who are still feeling the pain and who still are being affected from the last financial crisis. Undoubtedly the financial sector needs a major reform but with private corporations having too close of an affiliation with the government, the current reforms are making matters worst, creating a new wave of crony capitalism within the American economic and financial landscape.

 Furthermore, with new life bred into crony capitalism, there is now a rise in the conflict of interest between private corporations and the government. Inevitably, what were once economic decisions are now becoming political decisions. Moreover, the constant dismissal of market principles and regulations of the U.S. profit-and-loss free market system, has resulted in the involvement of government bureaucrats and private corporations determining the winners and losers of the economy. So, in the words of the Wall Street Movement, “we the 99% are fed-up with the greed and corruption of the 1%”.

The views expressed in the blogs are those of the authors, not the American Society of Public Administration.