A radical idea

 

A Plan to Make Reparations for Slavery in America

 

            Slavery was practiced in the territory which is now the United States from 1619 until 1865.  The abolition of slavery in 1865 made millions of Africans and/or their descendants into American citizens.  The former slaves rejoiced to gain freedom, but most of them were treated as second class citizens.  Segregated housing, discrimination in education, employment discrimination, “separate but equal” exclusionary laws, exploitive lending practices, discriminatory housing policies, race-based voting restrictions, and other factors made life in America after the Civil War much harder for blacks than whites.

            No one can reasonably dispute these facts.  America’s foundational political rhetoric (“all men are created equal”) does not change the facts.  Nor can we hide from the results of our history.  Though we have made real progress against racism, there remains a wide gap of inequality between white and black Americans.  The lingering effects of slavery, segregation, and discrimination show up in a variety of ways, such as incarceration rates, teenage pregnancy rates, differential access to medical care, family disintegration, and overall wealth.

            Let’s look at that last indicator, wealth.  According to a Brookings study, in 2016 the typical white family in America had a net worth of $171,000 while the typical black family had $17,150.  If those numbers seem surprisingly low, remember we are talking about median wealth, the middle of the range.  The average wealth of white families is much higher—about $1 million and the average wealth of black families is about $138.000—because the wealth of very rich people greatly increases the average.  Either way, whether comparing median wealth or average wealth, white families have much, much more wealth; seven to ten times as much.  And since wealth is passed from one generation to the next, disparities of wealth persist over time.  Further, since richer people tend to invest more of their wealth, the wealth gap between the top and the bottom tends to grow over time.   Even if we could guarantee equal income for whites and blacks beginning tomorrow (impossible, given education disparities and other factors relevant to income), the inequality of wealth would continue for generations.

            Given these facts, some people have raised the question of reparations.  The argument is fairly straightforward: Since the government of the United States and the governments of the various states contributed to this vast wealth gap by overt, unjust, and discriminatory policies, those governments ought now to try to repair the gap.

            Reparations proposals are controversial, to put it mildly.  I am not going to address the many arguments and counterarguments in this debate.  I will point out that the U.S. did adopt a reparations policy for Japanese Americans who were unjustly imprisoned in internment camps during World War 2. 

            American injustices inflicted on African Americans present a vastly greater problem than the internment camps, which lasted only four years and affected roughly 120,000 persons rather than millions.  It is the enormous scale of the damage inflicted by slavery and generations of discrimination that makes reparations to black Americans hard to imagine.  How can we “pay back” such an incalculable debt?  Would a symbolic repayment merely insult the memory of past generations?

I have a suggestion to make.  First, though, a little background.

Consider the U.S. treatment of Native Americans.  Without recounting history extensively, I think we can agree that European Americans treated First Nations people as abominably as we treated African Americans.  U.S. policy toward Native Americans was to take their land, kill any who resisted the theft of their land, and try to civilize them by forcing them to adopt European culture, language and government.  In the last decades of the 20^th century, U.S. policy moved away from cultural imperialism.  Our courts have ruled that by law we must treat native tribes as real nations; after all, the U.S. government agreed to treaty after treaty with them. 

Thus, native tribes have an advantage, when compared to the descendants of slaves: official recognition as independent tribal entities.  And in many states this has conferred a practical advantage to the tribes in regard to gambling.  Most states legally prohibit or restrict casino style gambling.  (Nevada is an obvious exception; that state has long used gambling to create its unique tourist industry.)  Since the tribes have independent status, they are able to authorize casino gambling even in states that prohibit or restrict gambling.  In recent decades tribal casinos have become a familiar aspect of American life; there are more than 500 such operations.

Just to be clear: I disapprove of gambling.  There is good evidence that gambling is addictive.  Gambling straightforwardly encourages greed.  Gambling, like other addictions, harms families and children.  Gambling exacerbates problems of poverty.  Nevertheless, I submit that tribal casinos have actually benefited native tribes.  In effect, tribal casinos transfer wealth from their customers (mostly white Americans) to the tribal governments that sponsor them.  In a rough and ready way, tribal casinos make reparations to the tribes.  Native tribes document which persons are actual members of the tribes, so the financial benefits of the casinos are shared primarily with those who suffer from the historical injustice of American Indian policy.  It’s possible that tribal casinos also confer a psychological benefit to Native Americans, in that tribal governments control the casinos.  “That (the casino) belongs to us.”

Another clarification: I am not expressing approval of any particular casino or its management.  I have no inside knowledge, but I would not be surprised if there were disputes between tribal officials and casino operators; there may well be disputes over casino policies between tribal members and their officials.

            Now, with tribal casino gambling as a model, I propose a way for the U.S. government to make reparations to African Americans who suffer the enduring effects of slavery.  It starts with some facts about Major League Baseball.

            First, Major League Baseball (hereafter, MLB) is a unique industry in America.  Due to a 1922 Supreme Court decision, which was reaffirmed in the 1950s and again in 1972, MLB is not subject to most anti-trust legislation.  I’m leaving out lots of legal details here, but the result been that MLB enjoys legal advantages unknown in any other business.

            Second, in recent decades, MLB has proven to be wildly successful financially.  This is shown by the market value of the various MLB franchises more than their annual profit/loss statements.  In 2019 Forbes Magazine estimated the value of the New York Yankees at $5 billion, with the value of the other 29 teams somewhere below the Yankees.  Further, the value of these franchises has been increasing rapidly over the last three decades.  George Steinbrenner bought the Yankees in 1973 for $8.7 million; the value of the franchise has increased almost 1000 times in less than 50 years.  The growth in value reflects national and regional television contracts and many subsidiary businesses.  This year, 2021, MLB announced that if it expands to two new cities (such an expansion has been publicly rumored for years, and there are active would-be ownership groups in multiple cities), the new teams would each have to pay $2.2 billion to the league as an expansion fee.  Any new team (in Portland, some of us hope) will instantly have a market value over $3 billion.  In most cases, MLB franchises also benefit from city and county governments that use tax money to pay for state of the art baseball stadiums, a practice which greatly increases the value of MLB teams.

            Here’s my proposal.  The U.S. government should nationalize Major League Baseball and transform the various franchises (32 of them, after expansion) in semi-private corporations.  Ownership rights would be given, in equal shares, to American citizens descended from persons enslaved in the U.S. before 1865.

1.     Cost?  The U.S. would pay current ownership a fair rate.  Let’s say each franchise was worth $5 billion.  32 franchises = $160 billion price tag.  Compared to COVID-19 stimulus legislation, this is not much.

2.     Semi-private corporations?  Undoubtedly, each team would need a management team.  The owners would elect directors, similar to the way stockholders of publicly traded corporations elect board members and officers.  The legislation to nationalize MLB would establish rules and goals for the 32 new corporations.

3.     The owners of the teams would be Americans who can show they descended from slaves.  Some black Americans would not be eligible to be MLB owners; for example, Barack Obama would not qualify, since his African father immigrated to the U.S. long after 1865.  Just as Native American tribes do not acknowledge every person who claims to belong to the tribe, the stockholders in the new corporations would want to good evidence before granting voting rights to applicants.

4.     Numbers?  There are approximately 42 million African Americans in the U.S.  Some of them, like Mr. Obama, would not qualify as stockholders in MLB.  Others may not apply for shares; perhaps they don’t trust the government or they hate baseball or they would rather get direct payments or . . .  Let’s say 32 million black Americans stepped forward to claim stock.  That’s one million stockholders for each franchise.  The nationalizing legislation might limit the number of shares for each franchise to one million.

5.     White owners?  I’m sure there are Americans who are direct descendants of slaves who look white and identify as white.  (If you go back 4 generations, you have 16 great-great grandparents.  If one was a slave, you’re a direct descendant of a slave.)  I suspect that the owners of the MLB franchises will adopt rules to give preference to African Americans who have a higher percentage of slave ancestry. 

 

I do NOT offer this proposal as “solution” to the vast wealth gap between black and white Americans.  At best it is a partial solution, a tool.

I’m confident my proposal has weaknesses, and I can’t fix them, because I don’t know what they are.  You, dear reader, can help with that.  How would you improve my proposal?