Job Corps, the largest residential training program in the country, is in jeopardy. Since 1964, centers have provided eligible 16–to 24-year-olds with an opportunity to complete their high school education and develop the vocational skills they need to enter the workforce. Enrollees received “housing, meals, basic healthcare, and a living allowance,” as well as “career transition services.” For many students, this program offered a lifeline to the support they needed to achieve their career goals. Sadly, the Department of Labor announced its plan to “pause” funding for Job Corps centers, a move that would sunset the program. Congressman Robert C “Bobby” Scott noted, “Without new contracts, these centers will cease to operate and will have to kick at-risk youth off their campuses, many of whom are homeless or in foster care, and have nowhere else to go.” This is the cruel reality for many who depend on the program.
While eliminating Job Corps will have a demonstrable impact on disadvantaged youth overall, there is outsized fallout for minorities in result to putting this particular program on the chopping block. While less explicit than removing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, the attack on critical race theory, or the criticism of “woke,” the policy shift carries racist implications. “Nearly 75 percent” of program participants were members of a racial or ethnic minority group, with “50 percent” who “identify as Black or African American." Even though the Trump administration did not cite race as a reason for its decision to eliminate funding for the program, the consequences of the policy shift are evident. Without Job Corps, fewer Black youth will have access to academic and vocational training, as well as other essential resources. Consequently, they will be less prepared to enter the workforce.
The nation’s legacy of racism makes Black youth more dependent on programs like the Job Corps than on other groups. K-12 public schools receive the majority of their funding from property taxes. Because racial redlining policies during the Jim Crow era isolated most Black families in low-income communities, Black students today are twice as likely to attend schools that are below adequate levels compared to White students, and “3.5 times more likely to be in ‘chronically underfunded’ districts.” Why does it matter how much money schools receive? Research suggests that “sustained higher spending for K-12 education leads to higher test scores, graduation rates, college attendance,” as well as “adult economic outcomes.” This racial disparity in education funding explains, in part, why Black students are more likely to drop out of high school and pursue alternative programs to finish their education. If America took a holistic approach to solving the problem, it would remedy the inequitable investment in education. Since the nation hasn’t, programs like Job Corps are essential.
Conservatives often claim that programs providing citizens with assistance are handouts. Yet, research suggests that there is a payoff for supporting young workers as they learn and hone their skills. A study published in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management investigated the long-run labor market effects of the Job Corps program. Researchers found a 4 percent increase in employment, a 40 percent reduction in disability benefit recipients, and a 10 percent increase in tax filings (Schochet, 2021). Furthermore, the results indicated that program benefits, “exceeded costs from a social perspective by about $3,200 for the 20–24-year-olds.” Contrary to the claim that such programs are a drag on taxpayers, there are long-term financial and social benefits associated with maintaining the Job Corps program. If the motivations for axing the program were purely economic, there would be no reason to do so. This suggests that ideological arguments played a greater role in their decision-making process than objective metrics, such as cost-benefit analyses. “Racial prejudice and racial resentment have been found to shape how people view policies and programs”. Who benefits from the policy, in this case, mostly racial minorities, plays a role in whether the program is preserved.
Of course, the irony isn’t lost on many Black Americans that Donald Trump signed an executive order in January that pledges to restore “merit-based opportunity.” He suggested that opportunities should be awarded solely based on ability and qualifications, while ignoring long-standing racial disparities. Black workers typically make less than white workers, even when comparing wages for individuals in the same positions. Applicants with Black-sounding names are less likely to receive a call-back or get hired, and Black workers are less likely to move up the corporate ladder. The myth of meritocracy collapses when you recognize that hard work alone is insufficient for achieving success in American society, and that identity also plays a significant role in determining one's success. Moreover, since the administration insists that opportunities should be based on merit, it seems contradictory to “pause” funding for Job Corps, a program that equips students with the academic and professional skills they need. As Rep Scott noted, “Job Corps trains young low-income people, helps them find good-paying jobs, and provides housing for a population that would otherwise be without a home.” Cutting the program fans the flames of the social problems we face.
As any gardener will tell you, you reap what you sow. If you do not invest in your plants and ensure they have enough water, sunlight, and nutrient-rich soil, your flowers and produce will never reach their full potential. Similarly, a society that fails to invest in Black and racially marginalized youth cannot expect them to compete on an even playing field with white youth who’ve benefited from a greater level of investment. When you dismantle a program that provides students with opportunities to develop skills, the assertion that opportunities should be awarded based on merit becomes disingenuous. In 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. argued, “It’s cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself up by his own bootstraps.” While he believed that “we ought to do all we can,” he highlighted the absurdity of expecting someone who never owned a pair of boots to somehow, miraculously pull themselves up by the bootstraps. Defunding Job Corps serves as yet another reminder of the nation’s failure to provide its citizens with equal opportunities. As it stands, racial equality remains an aspiration in America, one that is undermined when programs designed to extend opportunities end up on the chopping block.
This post originally appeared on Medium and is edited and republished with author's permission. Read more of Dr. Allison Gaines' work on Medium.