Obama’s Street Cred

Watching the Democratic National Convention last night, I was struck by one of the most significant but rarely discussed aspects of a potential Obama presidency.  Barack Obama would be the first president in memory - to my knowledge the first since Teddy Roosevelt - to come from an urban background.  He grew up in Honolulu and has spent time in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Boston.  This isn’t merely a biographical curiosity.  It contributes to an unprecedented focus on urban policy for a major national politician.

America’s cities are stereotyped either as enclaves of effete, intellectual socialists or as concrete wastelands packed tight with welfare-dependent leeches.  Authentic American individualism and entrepreneurship comes from the midwest, right?  Not so much.  The reality is that our cities provide massive subsidies to rural America.  This is perhaps best illustrated by a report from the Tax Foundation showing a breakdown of which states receive the most federal aid compared to their tax contribution and which receive the least.  (If you’re feeling feisty, check out this hilarious but informative rant from the day after the 2004 election.)

Over the coming years, America’s dependence on its cities is only going to grow, and our cities are going to play a bigger and more important role in the 21st century economy than they have in decades.  Mainstream policymakers are finally starting to understand the creative economy - which is inextricably linked to urban environments - and its potency as an engine for economic development.  Cities are hotbeds of creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship.  At the same time, rising fuel costs and environmental consciousness highlight the benefits of mass transit and population density.

Yet the myth of rural/suburban authenticity and urban sloth is so entrenched that politicians with ambitions to national office wind up tripping over each other in an effort to see who can most shamelessly pander to the farm lobby.

All of this goes to show why it’s significant that Barack Obama has quietly made urban policy a centerpiece of his campaign platform.  His urban policy plan contains some of his most detailed prescriptions, including symbolic steps such as the creation of a White House Office on Urban Policy and major investments in things like public-private business incubators.

The Obama campaign has published an arts platform as well, but I believe its ultimate potential impact on the arts community would not be as great as that of a more broad-based investment in America’s cities.

Cities provide the social context for so much of our collective artistic output.  Yet rising real estate prices, deteriorating infrastructure, and a host of other problems are driving artists from cities like New York in droves.  Some are landing in places like Philadelphia that are savvier and more progressive regarding urban cultural policy.  But many others are bidding farewell to the US altogether and heading for foreign cultural hotspots like Berlin.

Retaining a vibrant arts and cultural sector in American cities won’t require massive public subsidies or a huge increase in the NEA’s budget.  Artists are experts at making do with very little and generally rise to the challenge when given a chance to prove their worth through merit-based processes.  What we need is a proverbial level playing field.  In part, that means paying our cities even a fraction of the attention we’ve historically paid to rural America.

P.S. - Mainly out of genuine curiosity but also in the interest of fairness I did some research on John McCain’s urban policy and arts policy positions.  Alas, it turns out that he doesn’t have either (at least not published by the campaign).  The only comments I could find from McCain on urban issues were, uh, a bit scary.