One week ago, I wrote about how the welfare state creates high implicit marginal tax rates, thus making it difficult for low-income people to climb out of poverty and dependence.
But that’s not the only way that poor people are victimized by big government.
Another very serious problem is the way local and state governments impose a plethora of fees, fines and charges that can wreck the lives of the less fortunate.
In a column for the New York Times, Professor Bernadette Atahuene of the Chicago-Kent College of Law opines on the problem of greedy local governments.
I coined the term “predatory cities” to describe urban areas where public officials systematically take property from residents and transfer it to public coffers… Ferguson, Mo., is one well-known predatory city.
As a 2015 Department of Justice report showed, the police in Ferguson systematically targeted African-Americans and subjected them to excessive fines and fees. …local courts issued arrest warrants for unpaid fines and fees… Minor offenses, like parking infractions, resulted in jail time… The Ferguson Police Department and courts prioritized revenue raising over public safety, transforming Ferguson into a predatory city.
Professor Atahuene cites the pernicious policies of New Orleans and Washington, D.C. (and note that asset forfeiture is one of the problems).
New Orleans is another. …Orleans Parish Criminal District Court’s primary source of funding was the fines and fees it collected. This created a structural incentive for judges to aggressively and erroneously pursue payment from those with no ability to pay, turning New Orleans into a predatory city. Washington, D.C., is yet another predatory city. While civil asset forfeiture laws allow the police to seize property that they suspect was involved in a crime, in Washington, D.C., property owners had to post bonds of up to $2,500 in order to challenge the seizure. If the owner could not raise money in time, the D.C. Police Department sold the property, and the money went into its annual budget. In a two-year period, the Police Department made $4.8 million in profit by seizing money from over 8,500 people as well as seizing 339 vehicles.
Every decent human being should get upset about the grotesque way that politicians are mistreating their residents.
Especially since poor people are being disproportionately victimized.
By the way, it appears that Professor Atahuene is not a libertarian. She wants Congress to approve a big bailout, based on the theory that state and local politicians will be less likely to engage in what I’ve called “rapacious revenue-raising tactics” if they get big buckets of money from Uncle Sam.
Needless to say, I think that would be a mistake.
But I don’t think someone needs to agree with me on everything, or even most things, if we can periodically find common ground on proposals that would improve the lives of people (not just on the need to curtail greedy local governments, but also on issues such as over-criminalization and police unions).
P.S. I wonder if there would be fewer petty fines, fees, and charges if they were levied on the ability to pay, thus making higher-income people more sensitive to the problem?
[…] that have a disproportionately negative impact on poor people. Everything from Social Security to revenue policing, but don’t forget government lotteries, licensing laws, and nanny state protections […]
[…] should not use law enforcement as a means of generating extra revenue. That approach leads to terrible outcomes(and understandable […]
[…] should not use law enforcement as a means of generating extra revenue. That approach leads to terrible outcomes (and understandable […]
[…] Civil asset forfeiture is an example of predatory government (and I cheer people who find novel ways of fighting […]
[…] Seattle should be considered the worst-governed city in the country. Though there’s lots of competition for that honor from places like San Francisco, Detroit, New York City, and Chicago. And John […]
[…] very effectively captures how greedy local governments breed resentment and create conflict by using the law to fleece residents (and it definitely will […]
[…] But let’s not overlook Minneapolis. I wrote two months ago about that city’s hostility to capitalism, but the problems go well beyond run-of-the-mill government greed. […]
[…] there’s lots of competition for that honor from places like San Francisco, Detroit, New York City, and Chicago. And John […]
[…] all bad city governments are alike. In places like Chicago, local politicians generally impose bad policy because […]
[…] what it’s worth, I’m guessing Seattle bureaucrats intend to retroactively collect taxes and take other steps to make sure there is no long-run reduction in the burden of government for […]
[…] Poor People and Minorities Are Victimized by “Predatory Cities” […]
Good article.
Brings to mind the problem of the problem of trying to fix problems that disappear when our providers aren’t protected by law to use guns, extortion, kangaroo courts, and theft to enforce their self-proclaimed privileges.
As more people discover how Individual Freedom works and why governments do not, have never, and never will work for equal beneficial opportunities and the right to say “No!” to POO> (Power Over Others).
Governments work fine for those with Political POO> while pretending to work equally for everyone. That’s not possible. You can’t take from some for the benefit of others. Political POO always operates from “Might Makes Right.”
As long as we are manipulated to focus on patching bald tires, we will never get around to replacing POO provided monopoly products and services with Free Market Alternatives.
Don Winfield with TheFreedomPlot.com
The main thing that makes a city predatory is that it gets most of its revenue from fines and/or forfeiture of property, rather than taxes. In most of the US, the best way to protect against this is to put language in state constitutions, either limiting the percentage of a city’s revenue that can come from penalties or simply directing that fine and forfeiture revenue goes to some state fund or charity which doesn’t benefit the city government that levied it.
“She wants Congress to approve a big bailout, based on the theory that state and local politicians will be less likely to engage in what I’ve called ‘rapacious revenue-raising tactics’”
Wouldn’t that give other cities an incentive to begin employing “rapacious revenue-raising tactics” to get in on the gravy train?
[…] https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2020/06/11/poor-people-and-minorities-are-victimized-by-predat… […]
Great Piece Daniel; sure wish the policy wonks in DC would read your blog . . . and act on it.