Strange Bedfellows: A Call for Reordering National Priorities from Three Social Justice Perspectives

Abstract

The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet military threat have presented a historic opportunity to address long-neglected domestic needs and to revive the U.S. economy. A coalition of more than 100 human services, education, arms control, civil rights, justice, religious, environmental, and municipal and state government organizations, called the Invest in America Working Group, joined together to urge Congress and the administration to reorder the nation's fiscal priorities. The participation of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) in this coalition is based on the association's official policy on peace and social justice, approved in August 1993 by its Delegate Assembly. The policy is based on a commitment to disarmament and economic conversion and calls on U.S. leaders to its military budget substantially over the next 10 years and to divert most of the savings to respond to the mounting social needs in our nation (NASW, 1993, p. 203). At the heart of the concern about the appropriate balance of public expenditures for domestic versus military programs are social justice questions about the proportionate distribution of common goods. This article addresses issues of fairness in the distribution of resources and the justice of claims and demands made for them. It interprets the Invest in America policy from the perspectives of three justice theories: libertarianism, utilitarianism, and egalitarianism. Support for the policy can be garnered from all three perspectives, and it is important for social workers to form coalitions with people of diverse perspectives to promote social change. A Proposal for Redirecting Federal Resources Goals The goals of Invest in America are to reduce defense spending; fund human services; and revive a stagnant economy by revising current budget, tax, and appropriations policies. To that end, in 1991 the coalition urged Congress and the president to adopt three basic principles (Invest in America, 1991): 1. reduce defense expenditures in fiscal year (FY) 1993 significantly below the levels projected in the president's FY 1992 five-year plan and use these savings for needed public investment that can redress unmet domestic needs, build human capital, and promote long-term economic growth 2. allow for the transfer of funds from defense to domestic discretionary spending programs in FY 1993 while maintaining the overall deficit reduction goals set forth in the budget agreement 3. not use defense savings or other discretionary funds for cutting taxes; instead, finance any personal income tax relief package by shifting the tax burden to upper-income taxpayers. Justice Claim Human Needs, Legal Right, and Fairness. The justice claim raised by the Invest in America position is that all citizens have a valid claim for a share of the resources needed to ensure the provision of adequate food, clothing, and shelter. This claim is grounded in human needs, which are defined by Braybrooke (1987) as provisions that, if not provided with appropriate frequency, would reduce functioning so drastically that the result would be a shortening of one's life. Gewirth (1978) purported that humans have a generic right to well-being that includes access to essential basic goods, resources to plan for the future, and additional goods to fulfill one's purpose and capabilities. Beverly and McSweeney (1987) explicated a justice principle that places priority on the basic needs that are required for being human. The claim raised by the call to redirect federal expenditures is that human needs are not being met because military expenditures are draining the resources of society (Bluestone & Harrison, 1982; Children's Defense Fund, 1986; Iatridis, 1988; Mahoney, 1982; Sivard, 1991). The social work profession's concern about and commitment to people who do not have adequate resources to meet their basic human needs are based on a set of values that includes the worth and dignity of each person and the egalitarian as well as the intuitive notion that people should at least have the basics (Rawls, 1971). …