Who is the We in American Public Education?

In 2006 Dave Eggers published a powerful non-fiction novel called What is the What? based on the difficult path of one of the “lost boys” dislocated during the second Sudanese civil war. With respect to the difficult path of many boys and girls in American public education, now and in the future, another question comes to mind: ‘who is the we?’

There are four factors to consider.

First, our students. Data compiled by the U.S. Department of Education recently led the department to project that for the first time most children attending the nation’s public schools this year are non-white. Moreover, the Southern Education Foundation, employing state-level data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics, issued a report in January stating that in 2013 a majority of students enrolled in America’s public schools were classified as low income. More specifically, the report found that the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs in 2013 had risen to 51 percent  (from 42 percent in 2006 and 48 percent in 2011). The rise in recent years was in part the result of a broadening of eligibility standards, but most reasonable people would consider the students covered under the new criteria to be “low income” and therefore deserving of aid. After all, granting free lunches to students residing in households whose income is less than 135 percent of the poverty threshold, and reduced-price meals for those residing in households within 185 percent of the poverty threshold hardly seems profligate.

Secondly, some data relating to aggregate population and wealth-holding patterns. As the nation’s   public schools become darker and poorer, the U.S. as a whole is becoming older, with older age cohorts in the U.S. much whiter than younger cohorts. Moreover, studies of household wealth-holding patterns in the U.S. have demonstrated that median household wealth rises with age of householders in the U.S. at least through the ages of 65-69, before beginning to decline a bit (though remaining, even after 75. far higher than households in all cohorts under 65). They also show that median wealth levels of white households are significantly higher in all age cohorts than those for Black and Hispanic households, with the racial gap widening as households age.

Thirdly, findings regarding age-specific and race-specific voting behavior. In the U.S., participation in elections by cohorts comprised of middle-aged and senior voters is consistently higher than levels for younger voting cohorts. As for race, blacks—at least in the last two presidential elections—have voted at about the same rate as whites (actually at a slightly higher rate in 2012), with both groups voting at much higher rates than Hispanics.

Fourthly, patterns relating to social spending. Several takeaways from UC-Davis economist Peter Lindert’s landmark 2-volume comparative study Growing Public: Social Spending and  Growth Since the Eighteenth Century (2004), are relevant, two positive and another, not so much. Lindert’s main finding, broadly speaking, is that the efficiency costs of investment in education and social welfare, contrary to the assumptions of many neo-classically oriented economists, historically have been small.

Regarding investment in public education per se, Lindert found that prior to the 20th century the U.S. and Germany were the leaders, largely because of widespread voting rights and the fact that both places were characterized by local control of schools. What about the situation in the US today? Despite some recent efforts to constrain voting rights, such rights are still relatively widespread and, despite federal inroads, local districts still exercise considerable sway over their schools.

One other finding by Lindert, however, offers less support to those supportive of social spending. He found that since World War II the countries that have invested most robustly in education and social welfare have been pretty homogenous—Scandinavia in particular. In other words, taxpayers around the world generally like their taxes to go for programs helping people like themselves, and historically have voted accordingly.

To return to my opening question, will the older cohorts of the US population — whiter and wealthier than the population as a whole — vote into office people who will support robust investment in education and other forms of human capital (health and social welfare) for darker and poorer populations?

There are plenty of reasons (selfless and selfish) for investing in education and social welfare, according to recent observers (from Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam to Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell). One can point to lofty Rawlsian notions of fairness and social justice or to matters more material: but unless today’s young get decently educated, they aren’t going to be in position to keep the U.S. economy operating at a high level, much less to contribute to the needs of retirees.

Polls have shown that a large majority of Americans say they believe in equality of opportunity, though not of outcome. People interpret equality of opportunity in different ways, either narrowly and formally, or broadly and substantively. In the former case, non-discrimination is the goal; in the latter, what counts is rendering more equal the conditions in which people start out in life. Investment in education, including pre-school education, is one of the best ways to narrow gaps relating to birth. Which way will we have it, America, and who is the we?

Peter A. Coclanis is Albert R. Newsome Distinguished Professor of History, and Director of the Global Research Institute at UNC-Chapel Hill.

This article appears in the excellent Le Monde Diplomatique, whose English language edition can be found at mondediplo.com. This full text appears by agreement with Le Monde Diplomatique. CounterPunch features two or three articles from LMD every month.

More articles by:

Peter A. Coclanis teaches at UNC-Chapel Hill. He does not speak for the university.

March 21, 2018
Paul Street
Time is Running Out: Who Will Protect Our Wrecked Democracy from the American Oligarchy?
Mel Goodman
The Great Myth of the So-Called “Adults in the Room”
Chris Floyd
Stumbling Blocks: Tim Kaine and the Bipartisan Abettors of Atrocity
Eric Draitser
The Political Repression of the Radical Left in Crimea
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan Threatens Wider War Against the Kurds
John Steppling
It is Us
Thomas Knapp
Death Penalty for Drug Dealers? Be Careful What You Wish for, President Trump
Manuel García, Jr.
Why I Am Leftist (Vietnam War)
Isaac Christiansen
A Left Critique of Russiagate
Howard Gregory
The Unemployment Rate is an Inadequate Reporter of U.S. Economic Health
Ramzy Baroud
Who Wants to Kill Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah?
Roy Morrison
Trouble Ahead: The Trump Administration at Home and Abroad
Roger Hayden
Too Many Dead Grizzlies
George Wuerthner
The Lessons of the Battle to Save the Ancient Forests of French Pete
Binoy Kampmark
Fictional Free Trade and Permanent Protectionism: Donald Trump’s Economic Orthodoxy
Rivera Sun
Think Outside the Protest Box
March 20, 2018
Jonathan Cook
US Smooths Israel’s Path to Annexing West Bank
Jeffrey St. Clair
How They Sold the Iraq War
Chris Busby
Cancer, George Monbiot and Nuclear Weapons Test Fallout
Nick Alexandrov
Washington’s Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen
David Mattson
Wyoming Plans to Slaughter Grizzly Bears
Paul Edwards
My Lai and the Bad Apples Scam
Julian Vigo
The Privatization of Water and the Impoverishment of the Global South
Mir Alikhan
Trump and Pompeo on Three Issues: Paris, Iran and North Korea
Seiji Yamada
Preparing For Nuclear War is Useless
Gary Leupp
Brennan, Venality and Turpitude
Martha Rosenberg
Why There’s a Boycott of Ben & Jerry’s on World Water Day, March 22
March 19, 2018
Henry Heller
The Moment of Trump
John Davis
Pristine Buildings, Tarnished Architect
Uri Avnery
The Fake Enemy
Patrick Cockburn
The Fall of Afrin and the Next Phase of the Syrian War
Nick Pemberton
The Democrats Can’t Save Us
Nomi Prins 
Jared Kushner, RIP: a Political Obituary for the President’s Son-in-Law
Georgina Downs
The Double Standards and Hypocrisy of the UK Government Over the ‘Nerve Agent’ Spy Poisoning
Dean Baker
Trump and the Federal Reserve
Colin Todhunter
The Strategy of Tension Towards Russia and the Push to Nuclear War
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
US Empire on Decline
Ralph Nader
Ahoy America, Give Trump a Taste of His Own Medicine Starting on Trump Imitation Day
Robert Dodge
Eliminate Nuclear Weapons by Divesting from Them
Laura Finley
Shame on You, Katy Perry
Weekend Edition
March 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Michael Uhl
The Tip of the Iceberg: My Lai Fifty Years On
Bruce E. Levine
School Shootings: Who to Listen to Instead of Mainstream Shrinks
Mel Goodman
Caveat Emptor: MSNBC and CNN Use CIA Apologists for False Commentary
Paul Street
The Obama Presidency Gets Some Early High Historiography
Kathy Deacon
Me, My Parents and Red Scares Long Gone