This past August, the presidential candidates and Congressional leaders of the Democratic Party met in San Francisco for the summer meeting of the Democratic National Committee. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) laid out her bold legislative agenda, while candidates vying for the nomination shared their own progressive policy platforms. They spoke of the need to transition to a universal health care system and advocated for the rights of marginalized communities. They pushed for reform of a society that, to them, is heavily skewed toward the wealthy and touted the importance of a more progressive tax code and other measures to promote greater equality.
San Francisco, in particular, seems like a fitting place for this convention. Part of Pelosi’s district, San Francisco has developed a reputation as one of the liberal hubs of the country. The city last had a Republican mayor in 1964 and has voted for the Democratic candidate in every presidential election since 1956. This Democratic dominance was evident in 2016, as Hillary Clinton received 85 percent of the vote in San Francisco County compared to the 9 percent that went to President Donald Trump.
However, outside the walls of the Hilton Hotel in Union Square, where the DNC meeting was held, the ugly reality of living conditions in San Francisco becomes apparent. Even in the tourism center of the city, some of the nearly 10,000 homeless residents of San Francisco dwell on the streets. Despite being one of the most liberal cities in America, San Francisco has fallen victim to the growing socio-economic inequality that is strongly condemned by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Housing prices have become too expensive for working people to afford, forcing them to reside on the sidewalks. The result is a city that functions only for the wealthy — the antithesis of the progressive agenda.
This disconnect, however, is not limited to San Francisco. Other traditionally liberal cities, such as New York and Boston, have also been unable to contain the accelerating divide between the very rich and the very poor. While inequality continues to impact the underprivileged communities of these cities, local governments have made efforts to make their cities more inclusive, just, and reflective of progressive values. With these contrasting perspectives, the question remains: Just how progressive are America’s cities?
History of Urban Politics
San Francisco is a prominent example, but most of America’s urban centers have liberal political tendencies. Major coastal cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Boston, and Philadelphia all generally support Democratic candidates and progressive policies. The urban-rural political divide has been exacerbated in recent years, particularly in the 2016 presidential election and the 2018 midterm elections. In 2016, Clinton decisively won metro areas with over one million residents, while Trump took all other metro areas with smaller populations. In 2018, the Democrats obliterated the Republicans in urban areas but found little success in the conservative strongholds in rural regions.
Democrats also have overwhelming success in the local politics of cities, as 15 of the 20 biggest American cities currently have Democratic mayors. This trend has been the urban reality for much of the latter half of the 20th century. Since the 1960s, Boston, New York, and San Francisco combined have elected just three Republican mayors, two of whom switched their party affiliation during their mayorship.
Still, the histories of these urban areas are not one long list of progressive victories, and one significant deviation can be found in New York. Rudy Giulani, the former mayor of New York City, instituted a controversial tough-on-crime approach aimed at decreasing violent crime by placing a heavy emphasis on petty crimes as well. His “stop and frisk” policy, which allowed police to stop and search pedestrians if they had “reasonable suspicion” of a crime, was particularly contentious and was recently rolled back by the current mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio.
The Problem of Inequality
The most serious problem afflicting many of the country’s biggest cities is the rampant inequality between affluent areas and neighborhoods that are predominantly populated by minority and low-income residents. In San Francisco, this divide is especially evident. Coupled with incredible wealth, San Francisco also suffers from a staggering level of poverty and poor living conditions. As more start-ups and innovative tech companies set up shop in the city, bringing high paying jobs and educated young people, real estate prices continue to skyrocket. The incredible growth has come with a significant cost to working people who cannot afford to pay astronomically high rents or purchase houses in the city with the highest national median housing cost.
The clearest consequence of this inequality is the growth of the homeless population. In just the past two years, San Francisco has seen a breathtaking 30 percent increase in its homeless population. The Bay Area now has the highest number of unsheltered homeless people per capita in America, while also having the highest number of billionaires per capita in the world. In response to this problem, a 2018 U.N. report condemned the living conditions of the homeless population as “inhumane” and a “violation of multiple human rights.” The situation has reached such a troubling point that San Francisco established a “poop patrol” last year to clean the alarming amount of human feces on the streets.
People are now forced to leave San Francisco in search of more affordable housing. The city has transformed into a largely homogeneous area, predominantly white, wealthy, and relatively old, as San Francisco has the lowest percentage of people under 18 of any major American city.
New York and Boston, two of the prominent progressive hubs on the East Coast, suffer from similar problems of inequality. Manhattan, an area of incredible wealth and the most expensive place to live in the country, bears little similarity to the lower-income inner city of Brooklyn.
In an interview with the HPR, Alissa Quart, author and executive editor of the Economic Hardship Reporting Project, spoke of the decline of the middle class in America: “[The middle class] once was synonymous with stability, and now it gets the instability that the working class and poorer classes have long dealt with. It’s looking like other classes now.”
Boston has also been plagued by significant inequity in the public education system and the socio-economic makeup of neighborhoods. Boston schools are more racially segregated today than they were two decades ago, exacerbating the lack of equal opportunity provided by the educational system and the achievement gap between white students and students of color.
Boston neighborhoods have suffered from a similar trend, as areas of the city have significant inequality. Communities primarily composed of minorities, such as Roxbury and Mattapan, have significantly lower average household incomes than neighborhoods just a short drive away.
For these underprivileged communities, inequality can be most clearly seen through the lens of the criminal justice system.
Adam Foss, former prosecutor and executive director of the nonprofit Prosecutor Impact, spoke to the HPR about the connections between the criminal justice system and other drivers of inequality: “[The main ways local government has failed to create a just criminal justice system are] number one, access to stable housing. They need to create systems of housing that can keep people there even when they mess up … Number two is all about behavioral health and understanding and recognizing trauma. Every person who is working or connecting with people living in poverty need to be adept at dealing with people who are struggling with trauma. [The] last thing is access to education from early childhood education to college.”
It is no secret that mass incarceration and injustice in the criminal justice system have had devastating effects on these inner-city communities. Giulani’s policing tactics are just one example of an unjust policy that disproportionately impacts low-income individuals and people of color. The War on Drugs, started by the Reagan administration and still present in urban criminal justice policy, continues to ravage communities in cities across America. Policies such as these have perpetuated the cycle of poverty that keeps these communities in an unequal position.
Progressive Solutions
The problems plaguing the country’s urban hubs are well documented, but fortunately, some local governments have made strides to make their cities more just, inclusive, and progressive.
In San Francisco, the election of Mayor London Breed in 2018 spurred hope that solutions to the city’s inequality could be found, as she has emphasized affordable housing and combatting homelessness in her campaign and during her time as mayor. While it is still too early to see how effective her policies will be in the long term, she has undertaken efforts to address these issues, investing in housing units, temporary shelters, and street-cleaning measures.
To address educational inequity, Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York created a universal pre-kindergarten program, the first of its kind in the nation. The program has been overwhelmingly well-received and successful to this point. In 2013, de Blasio’s first year in office, 19,000 kids were enrolled in pre-K education, but now approximately 70,000 kids are enrolled due to de Blasio’s program. According to an evaluative scale developed by education experts, 94 percent of the city’s pre-K programs predict positive outcomes for the students. New York is now looking to create a similar universal education program for three-year-olds.
Similarly, in Boston, City Council President Andrea Campbell recently unveiled a plan to combat educational inequity and the racial achievement gap that pervades Boston public schools.
In an interview with the HPR, Campbell said, “As the city councilor representing Mattapan and Dorchester, families are still struggling to find a school that they think can be excellent to serve the needs of their family.” She added, “I wanted to put forth a plan that would move the system forward to deliver more quality education for our students.”
Strides have also been made to reform the criminal justice system. In Boston, the election of District Attorney Rachael Rollins represented a significant shift in the city’s attitude toward criminal justice policy, as Rollins campaigned heavily on the need for reform. Among Rollins’s cornerstone policies is her decision not to bring criminal charges for many nonviolent crimes, instead opting for a system that prioritizes addressing root causes such as poverty, addiction, and mental illness. Rollins also has established a protocol that calls for an independent investigation into any police officer-involved shooting.
Foss told the HPR, “The most efficient and quickest lever to create change and sustain it is changing the culture within DAs’ offices.” With the election of progressive DAs such as Rollins and Larry Krasner in Philadelphia, it seems as if the movement to alter the culture for prosecutors is beginning to take shape.
Finally, many cities have also implemented progressive immigration policies, often contradicting the rhetoric and policy handed down by the White House.
Campbell told the HPR, “My job as councilor is to make sure that we maintain the trust we have built with the people in the immigrant community in my district, documented or undocumented.” Campbell’s sentiments ring true for many of America’s biggest cities. Boston, New York, and San Francisco, among others, are all sanctuary cities and refuse to comply with federal directives that would impose harsher regulations on immigraiton. This defiance toward the federal government has drawn Trump’s ire of on multiple occasions, as he has attempted, but failed, to cut federal funding for all sanctuary cities.
The Verdict
So how progressive are American cities? The problems of inequality are still far too prevalent and are not able to be solved quickly or easily. City life still predominantly caters to the wealthy, far from a progressive ideal. Still, the progressive strides being made in certain cities suggest a concerted effort to correct these major issues. The elections of more progressive, reform-minded public officials implies a trend toward a more equitable future in these cities.
However, the current situation for underprivileged communities in these cities cannot be overlooked. Until the housing crises can be resolved, the criminal justice system reformed, and educational and socio-economic inequality reduced, American cities fall short of their progressive standards.
Looking forward, politicians must address the root causes of these issues if the big cities are to live up to their progressive reputations. Problems such as educational and socio-economic inequality cannot be addressed with a single piece of legislation, so public officials must find long-term, sustainable solutions that can make a real impact for underprivileged families. These issues are often results of fundamental, systemic flaws in political institutions, and only bold, direct action can effectively solve them.
Image Credit: Upsplash/Ferdinand Stohr
