Editorial 3.4, April/May 2001, by Deirdre Helfferich What the Public is Valued For The other day, listening to the radio, I heard yet another elected representative spouting about the Will of the American People, implying strongly that he was acting on their behalf and in their truest, best interest. Ha! Then he went on, in much the same vein, but now he was using the word "taxpayer," as though it was a synonym of "people." I’ve heard this kind of thing quite often, and it’s become a pet peeve of mine. At certain times, especially around elections, local to national, it gets downright obnoxious. Granted, being a politician is a thankless job, and somebody’s got to do it, but I’m always suspicious of those who pontificate in the fashion of spinmeisters about "the taxpayers." Perhaps they just need better speechwriters--but then again, perhaps it reveals their true motivation: money. Or rather, the power associated with money. During election season, we suddenly become "the voters," but most of the time we, the public, are categorized according to the money we shell out. Those who are taxed are the ones who count. Listen to the way various groups refer to themselves when they want something from politicians: they refer to their rights as taxpayers, not to their rights as citizens. Nor, more broadly, to their rights as human beings (unless, of course, we’re talking about a group like Amnesty International). If you listen a little more, you realize that certain assumptions seem to accompany this rallying on behalf of the taxpayers. It is assumed that the taxpayers here are Americans, and that these American taxpayers are the only ones who should have a say in the laws of this country, as though we do not live in a government of, by, and for the people, but of, by, and for the taxpayer. I find it offensive when my representatives in Congress make a fuss about how the taxpayers have a right to this, and the taxpayers are expecting that, and on and on ad infinitum ad nauseum. There is in this equating of taxpayers with people an element of hypocrisy. For one thing, I get the distinct feeling that foreigners, even residents of the United States married to U.S. citizens, aren’t included in that group of taxpayers that I keep hearing about. At least, I never hear these speeches include them specifically. Probably too small a group to bother with, and besides, it would put the politician on shaky ground in these patriotic times. But resident aliens are contributing to the welfare of this country’s future, too. So, for that matter, are migrant workers and illegal aliens working dirt cheap in nasty conditions. Why aren’t these people included? This issue is an interesting one to me, because my husband is an alien, a German citizen. That term, alien, is a technical term used by the Immigration and Naturalization Service for a person who is not a citizen of this country. My husband is a legal alien with permanent resident status. Makes him sound like a transplanted Venusian lawyer whose spaceship was repossessed. Related words also carry this not-fully-human connotation: alienate, to transfer (property) to another, or to make hostile where previously friendship had existed, estrange; alienist, psychiatrist, esp. one specializing in legal aspects of psychology; alienable, to transfer to the ownership of another; and of course, alien, in the sense of a bug-eyed monster from outer space. My BEM is a taxpayer, but he’s suspect, because he’s not an American. While he can’t vote, he could, on the face of it, be included in the aforementioned politician’s group of Taxpayers, and he could certainly be included in the People. But I don’t think the politician I heard on the radio was thinking of people like my husband when he was invoking the Will of the Taxpayer. The other thing that never seems to enter the minds of those jawing on about the needs and desires of the American taxpayer is the fact is that not all Americans are taxpayers. Some of them are too poor to be taxed. Some of them don’t work in income-producing jobs, like housewives. Some of them are children. Ostensibly, none of these people count. Nonsense, you say, of course they count! Sure, of course. But what the rhetoric around taxpayers reveals is that people don’t count as much as money does. Those who don’t pay taxes are disenfranchised by this kind of political language. The government owes a debt to those who give it money, but it does not owe anything to those who do not fork out the bucks. Taxpayers are only part of the populace to be represented. But some of those represented by the term taxpayer aren’t even people: large corporations shell out the moolah too, and they should not have a say in politics (although the people who run them and work for them should). I find the thought of profit-driven organizations having congressional representation especially frightening, because they don’t have hearts. While corporations can’t yet vote, they can make campaign contributions, and they certainly are taxpayers. Unfortunately, corporations often have a very large say, but that’s another editorial. John and Jane Q. Public are not easily categorizable. Some taxpayers are people, some are not. Some people are taxpayers, some are not. Some people are American, some are not. Some foreigners are taxpayers, and some are not. It’s not clear-cut. That poses a problem for the sound-bite conscious, who seem to prefer not to think about it. Or say something that might make us think about it. By using the terms people, voters, and taxpayers interchangeably, real human beings are disenfranchised, and non-human things (like dollar bills or fast-food chains) are enfranchised in the system of representation that our country has developed. But I forget: it’s the taxpayers who count, not the people. So what’s to think about--except, maybe, what our government is for? | ||
 | | |
