1995_03 Insight March 1995

              Editorial
MARCH 1,1995
GUEST COLUMN
A different welfare
reform policy: Fair Pay
By Susan Bianch-Sand
NATIONAL FORUM
At a recent conference on "family-friendly" policies, I listened intently to an-executive from a
very popular and profitable hotel chain describe
results from an employee survey. In part, it revealed that many full-time workers earned wages
so low they qualified for public assistance programs, such as day
care subsidies, food stamps and fuel assistance.
The corporate response was to set up a referral program so workers could easily sign up for these government-sponsored subsidies. When asked if the company had considered raising wages
so the workers would not have to depend on the government to
make ends meet, the answer was a defensive "no."
This situation illustrates an all-too-common, yet overlooked,
problem within our nation's economy and remains a major reason why a culture of welfare dependency has arisen.
Many jobs simply do not pay enough for workers to support
themselves and their families. The welfare system, in effect, subsidizes corporations, allowing them to pay workers less because
they can make up the shortfall in earnings by collecting from
Uncle Sam.
Everyone talks about welfare reform as a balm for soothing the
troubled taxpayer and cutting back on wasteful government
spending. Yet, first we need to recognize why so many people
become dependent on public assistance — the lack of decent
paying jobs with solid benefits and supportive family policies.
The majority of welfare recipients are not lazy, unambitious
freeloaders. In fact, as many as 40 percent of single mothers in
thc Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program
already work outside the home.
Thc public assistance programs help merely lo provide shelter,
clothing and food for their families. Unfortunately for many
people, paid work does not provide all the money needed to keep
a family afloat.
We must set up training programs, supportive networks and educational opportunities for welfare recipients. But, most importantly, we must demand that businesses begin paying decent
wages to workers at all levels of employment, particularly to
women and minorities, who are always clustered in the lowest
paying jobs. Women's average earnings arc 28 percent less than
men's— the wage gap is evident in nearly every occupation and
across all educational levels.
Women are paid less, not because their work is any less important or valuable than men's, not because they are any less experienced or skilled, but simply because they are women and have
always been paid less.
A lack of decent paying job opportunities forces many to turn
to public assistance for help. For countless others, it kills all desire to achieve.
One real incentive that can inspire workers is to make them feel
their work is worth something. If women were to receive appropriate pay equity raises from their employers, fewer would need
public assistance to survive. Pay equity can actually be part of
the solution to welfare reform.
One recent study found that increasing women's pay by 9 percent lifted nearly 40 percent of women in poverty above the official poverty line.
Overall, pay equity programs make a significant difference in
income for the individuals affected, yet cost relatively little for
businesses to implement. The average cost to businesses amounts
to less than 4 percent of hourly payroll costs.
When businesses undervalue and underpay workers, they are
actively contributing to the conditions that lead to thc welfare
state. In essence, welfare dollars only help to fill in the "wage
gap" that should be paid by businesses.
We all agree that moving people off welfare and into jobs is
sound economic policy. Now we must begin a dialogue that acknowledges how thc lack of meaningful, decent paying jobs has
contributed to dependency on the welfare system. It is time for
all of us to take responsibility, including those who sit in shareholder seats and those who write thc checks every payday.
Insight
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FRESNO
Executive Editor    Samantha K. Pease
Managing Editor
Deputy Managing Editor
Chief Copy Editor
News Editor
Photo Editor
Jacqueline Tucker
Jefferson Beavers
Sheryl Logue
Rachel Rosemire
Kori Rianda
Graphics Editor    Kimberly Darling
Lifestyle Editor    Marianne Chrisman
Sports Editor    Robbie Miner
Circulation Manager    Yi Ping Ho
Design Coordinator    Marga Kellogg
Advertising Account Manager
Deborah Smith
Advertising Production Manager
Lorena Campbell
Advertising Line: 278-3934
m    Production Assistants:
Adrienne Boman, Stacey Dipple, Laurie Gibson, Dan Helmbold,
Dawn Henley, Ju Chen Hsieh, Lilian Meza, Christine Mirigian,
Abel Torre*, Kimberly Williams and Robert Williamson.
st.ff Write™ Adviser
Students of pau| Adams
MQ 102W U 103 *m AMm
Advrrthing Staff
Students of
MCJ 143
people criticizing and pointing fingers
without thinking first.
If a player steals a car, it's not coach
Sweeney's fault. If a player shoplifts,
it's not Fresno State's fault. It's a person committing a crime; let's leave it
at lhai and punish these people accordingly.
Keith King
I would like to see the temperature
H
Football fumbles
make front page news
Why is it thai every time a person who is affiliated with the
Fresno State football team gets in
trouble, it is front page headline
news'.' I understand that some of
the things that have happened over
the last year aren't right. I think if
should be punished for it. I don't
think our athletic programs (football in particular) need to be questioned. If a football player does
something wrong, we suddenly
have a learn full of convicts. When
you are dealing with IOC) people
like a football team, things are
going to happen. If three or four
people gel arrested over the course
of a few years,.the community
thinks the whole team is involved.
Thai happens to be only 3 or 4 percent of ihe learn. I think in society
alone, more than 3 or 4 percent of
the population commits crimes.
If these guys get in trouble, let
them face the consequences. I'm
not saying anyone deserves preferential treatment, but don'l defame the school name. I happen lo
be proud of this school and our athletic programs. I don't like to see
Library temperature
heats up
in the library lowered. It is too hot in
there. It is a proven fact that being in
a warm room makes you tired. Every
time I go in the library to study. I fall
asleep. I feel lhat keeping the temperature at a lower degree will not only
provide a belter place to study, but will
also help in lowering the PG&K bill.
Darlene Garcia
INSIGHT welcomes all
letters to the editor.
We reserve the right to
edit for brevity. Every
effort will be made to
preserve the writer's
point of view.
MAIL IT
E-MAIL IT
On Campus:
Type "Insight"
(no quote marks)
Mondrian prompt
FAX IT
VfiinF IT
Managing Editor
Insight
2225 E. San Ramon Ave
Fresno, CA
9374M010
Managing Editor, Insight     Call 278-2892
Mass Comm. 4 Journalism      any time
FAX (209) 278-4995
Leave a message on
Insight Voice Mail
SPEAK YOUR MIND
Would you ever get a tattoo? Why? Why not?
Robert t'aid-senior Trlna Rodriguez-junior
"Yeah. I might get a tattoo ... "Yeah. I would get one. some-
maybe something comical. My thing that would symbolize me."
cousin has one on his thigh where
Jonathan Grabowski-scnior
"Probably not. I don't know if I
want something on my body for
another 50 years."
Dave Morgan-junior
"Yeah, probably because
fraternity and everyone
getting them."
I'm in
Stacey Green-senior
"No. I would never get a tattoo
because 1 can't think of anything
I want permanently affixed to
my body."
Ernie Partada-junior
would get one ... something
I would symbolize mc."
From the Editor's Desk...
On page 5 of the Feb. 15 issue we
incorrectly referred to the Rev. Sergio
Negro as "pastor of the St. Paul
Newman Center." He has been Vicar
General of the Fresno Catholic diocese
since September 1994. Father Perry
Kavookjian has been pastor at the center
since June 1994.
I
On page 1 of the Feb. 22 issue we
misspelled Dr. J. Richard Amdt's
name. In addition, we misattributed
a quotation. Dr. Vincent Bloom is
credited with saying. "When you
cheat yourself, we all lose."
.  Executive Editor
OPINION
Don't call us
slackers:
Generation X
fights back
You've heard it all before. Generation X
is the generation of
slackers. But these
slackers are fighting
back.
It is called Lead ... Or Leave, and
it's the largest nonpartisan political
group in America. Those born between 1961 and
1981 are getting
on thc bandwagon to combat
the stereotype
that they're "a
generation of
apathetic,
directionless
youth who watch
"Beavisand Butt-
head.' act like
Bart Simpsorvand
drink Pepsi be- PEASE
cause
according to Rob
Nelson and Jon Cowan, co-founders of
Lead... Or Leave.
Faced with perhaps the most dismal
social and economic future in the history of America, the members of Generation X have their work cut out for
them.
However, these "directionless
youth" are virtually powerless against
the problem at hand: a spiraling $4.5
trillion national debt, wage and benefit cuts, an unsustainable environment, a failing education system and
a social security system that threatens no returns.
Coupled with the mismanagement of
government as well as the effects of
businesses downsizing and
globalization, the future of America is
in trouble. And who do we have to face
these problems? The slacker generation, no less. Those who don't vote and
who expect to gel more for doing less.
This rhetoric is not new. Ii hits close
to home. Wc go to college in pursuit
of good paying jobs and live happily
ever after...
But something has gone seriously
wrong. Members of Generation X are
not expected to do better than their
parents, at least economically. In fact,
just sustaining their childhood
lifestyle may be a dream. The era of
entitlement is over.
However, this economic and social
reality is not the result of characteristics inherent in this generation. It is
the result of thc accumulation of economic and social actions of years past.
It is bigger than you. than me, than
us. So where does that leave us?
In their book, Revolution X, Nelson
and Cowan suggest ten ways for
members of Generation X to save
their future:
10. Lcam about the issues
9. Volunteer your time to help others
8. Take positive action (i.e. advertise your opinion on a T-shirt)
7. Join an organization
6. Vote
5. Get hooked up with a computer
network
4. Voice your opinion
3. Call Congress
2. Participate in a rally
1. Advance an agenda
Although the calls for action are
noble, a structural problem cannot be
entirely corrected by individual
means — much less by advertising
your opinion on a T-shirt!
Generation X certainly has a hefty
agenda set for themselves — creating good paying jobs, controlling
crime, protecting the planet, cutting
America's budget and the list goes on.
However, the generations of yesterday had their problems too. Just because Generation X's problems are
defined in modern terms does not
make them more salient than the challenges of yesteryear.
We must break the stereotype of
misdirected whiners.
So, hey, slackers. Cut some slack!
It certainly won't be long before the
next generation becomes of intellectual age to blame you for their generational problems.