Let Them In_ The Case for Open Borders - Jason L. Riley [30]
Before then, the wages of inexperienced and unskilled workers were determined by supply and demand. Because there was no federal minimum wage—and because unions typically did not organize inexperienced and unskilled workers—such individuals were able to find employment much like everyone else.
But that would change in the 1930s. The Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 established the requirement for paying prevailing (read: union) wages on public works projects. It was passed in part to stop black laborers from displacing whites by working for less money. Politicians at the time were explicit about their aim to exclude blacks from federal contracts. During the floor debate, Missouri Representative John Cochran said he had “received numerous complaints in recent months about Southern contractors employing low-paid colored mechanics getting work and bringing the employees from the South.” And Alabama Representative Clayton Allgood told the story of a “contractor from Alabama who went to New York with bootleg labor. This is a fact. That contractor has cheap colored labor that he transports, and he puts them in cabins, and it is labor of that sort that is in competition with white labor throughout the country. ”
Today, just 18 percent of construction workers are unionized, yet Democratic politicians, genuflecting to the AFL-CIO, have kept Davis-Bacon in place to protect them. Because most blacks in construction aren’t unionized, however, the law has the effect of freezing them out of jobs. It also has the effect of significantly increasing the costs of government projects, since there are fewer contractors to bid on them than there would be absent Davis-Bacon.
In 1938, Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which established a national minimum wage. Milton Friedman said he regarded “the minimum wage as one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books.” In Capitalism and Freedom, he wrote that “minimum wages laws are about as clear a case as one can find of a measure the effects of which are precisely the opposite of those intended by the men of good will who support it.” Proponents maintain that outlawing wage rates below a certain government-mandated level is an effective way of reducing poverty. In fact, such laws are much more effective at reducing employment. Younger and less-skilled workers, who tend to be minorities, are priced out of the labor market altogether. And if you can’t get an entry-level job, you can’t gain the skills and experience needed to move up the economic ladder.
The irony is that these laws so detrimental to blacks survive today with the strong support of black lawmakers. When it comes to campaign contributions, Big Labor gives generously to the Congressional Black Caucus, as well as black Democratic politicians at the state and local level. In return, the black political left, with very few exceptions, endorses the union agenda, even when it undermines the welfare of their black constituents.
The same holds true in the area of education. The U.S. economy today, more so than at any time in the past, places a premium on skills. Yet black seventeen-year-olds read on the level of white thirteen-year-olds and persistently lag far behind whites on aptitude tests. Considering that black children also watch more TV, read fewer books, and are overrepresented in the worst public schools in the country, those findings shouldn’t come as a surprise. What’s truly jarring is that so many black lawmakers, from Congressmen on down, support policies that keep black children stuck in those failing schools. In deference to the National Education Association teachers’ union, which is anathema to school choice, the black political class works diligently to block black access to vouchers and charter schools and other reforms that could facilitate a decent education. Before blaming the diminished job prospects of Jamal on Jorge, blacks would do better to address the anti-intellectualism that permeates the culture of the black