Shamelessly Symbolic

Frank Gallagher, in the T.V. series Shameless, is the stereotypical welfare abuser. He’s a drunk, with too many kids, and convenient injuries that allow him to abuse worker’s compensation. He’s lied about everything from his identity to cancer just to catch an extra dime. These stereotypes of the American welfare program could be the reason for many state’s strict regulation of the programs according to Calavita’s ideology on symbolic political action. As Calavita proposes in her article, some enacted measures are motivated by more than just policy change.

Calavita speaks out about Proposition 187, a California policy that limits public benefits for immigrants. Rather than voting according to immigration beliefs, the author claims that voters “use the ballot to ‘express discontents'” (285). When immigrants are seen as a scapegoat for unbalanced budgets, it’s no surprise they become the ones limited. She describes Proposition 187 as “not simply a policy statement designed to limit undocumented immigration or reduce state spending; instead, it was a political statement, supported primarily to send a symbolic message” (Calavita 297).

The symbolic message is one hurtful towards the immigrants, as they are unfairly blamed for economic struggles. Shameless’s depiction of Frank’s welfare use is just another discriminatory example that encourages strict, unreasonable regulation of a government program. The discrimination correlates to the electorate confirming that “illegal immigrants over-burden government services and contribute to the fiscal crisis” (298). Overall, when aspects other than the actual policies are impactful upon voters during referendums, they can become more symbolic than useful. This seems to be the case in California’s Proposition 187 and more than possible in other programs, such as welfare.