Urban government and politics

Name

Course

Date

The book, “Place Matters: Metro politics for the Twenty-First Century,” by Peter Dreier, John Mollenkopf and Todd Swantrom are an overall view of various issues faced by a majority of modern American cities. This includes commercial and social aspects inequalities. The book also puts emphasis on the role played by these inequalities (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005). Among the emphasis, are their role in segregation of areas which led to the social classification as either “rich” or “poor” and its aftermath in the eventual disintegration of the cities’. Apart from this, book also shows the relationship between this situation and the political mechanisms involved. This connection, the author argues, plays a crucial role in either improvement of the cities’ or deterioration. The authors also present proposals on how to stop the deterioration and transform them for the better (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005).

This paper tries to assess the arguments presented by the authors in tackling the problem. This evaluation is based on the description of the authors’ proposal and its feasibility to various cities in the U.S. This petition will try to prove that indeed no matter how “radical” an idea is, its feasibility would be meaningless without a practical application.

Moreover, the book tackles continued disparity among the rich and poor and the relevance places hold in determining where the two classes reside within a city. The state of amenities in various parts within the city is easily associated with the social class residing in it. Not only the physical attributes of buildings in the area, but also other facilities come into play in determining the standards of living, and people living within a place. These factors include surrounding environment, where the affected area is located. People living in areas where better schools, industries, health facilities and recreation facilities are located, are considered more fortunate than the rest. Other factors that arise include governance and race within a place (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005).

An area usually reflects class difference, which is usually, an indication of a gap in a situation of a place compared to other places. There is usually less interaction between these two groups, wherein, one group (“richer”) lack the urgency to communicate with the other (“poor”), and hence each group limiting the chances to learn from the other. In such a situation, lower class residents tend to lose more as they are the ones who stand a greater chance of gaining from such interactions. In many instances, the lower class citizens work for the upper class citizens. In such a situation, the rich stand to gain more and the “poor” add to their misery, thus limiting their chances for development. This has been one of the main reasons why poor regions remain isolated even in modern American cities’ (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005).

Politics and politicians cannot be ignored when it come to present situation of American cities. Given that modern cities are governed by politicians, it is hard to rule out political alignment (democrats and republicans) as a factor contributing to the difference in development among regions. For example, a Democratic governor is may tend to concentrate development in areas where the party enjoys majority support. This may result to areas considered as political enemies being sidelined and as a result lagging behind in development. Majority of the leaders plays into this in a bid to secure votes and to avoid getting unpopular among their party members. As a result, politics is dragged into non political policies thus creating regional imbalance. Such issues as political biases lead to migration of people in these areas, living other areas neglected.

Continuous migration of populations widens the gap between more developed regions (due to the selective implementation of programs by the government) and those areas given less attention (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005). This political inconsistency eventually results to overall degradation of some places while others continued to benefit from improved infrastructure, health and recreation.

The environment around a region is also demonstrated as having considerable influence on the way people view that the region. The environment profoundly affects the way people live. Living in a place with limited economic opportunities usually lender people fewer chances to develop and in some cases lead people to areas where they can make a better living. This can be defined as relocation to areas where there are more opportunities, thus exposing the areas they left behind neglected since people will be less interested in residing in these areas. Another perspective relating to the environment is the way people utilize the resources available for their daily life. It can be easily observed that people in areas with limited resources (natural and artificial) are less wealthy than those people living in areas of adequate (abundant resources) (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005). According to the author, people living in areas of inadequate resources usually result to small, casual jobs that pay less and thus lack the economic power to invest for development. Vices are also associated with such regions due to poverty and frustrations especially among the youth. This includes petty crimes and insecurity in general. Such scenarios are associated people living in underdeveloped areas: poor and in some cases, desperate to do anything just to survive the day (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005).

In changing the situation, various changes need to be effected. This should range from political, educational, administrative and economic changes. Politicians need to learn and embrace the society and citizens in general without regards to political alignment. Most of these solutions will revolve around political solutions, given that they are usually in charge of almost every department involved in developmental issues. In having this political solution, officials in the cities should be aware of the true situation and at the same time realize the power they hold and utilize it to change these cities.

Political changes should begin by developing and implementing programs that will benefit more people in the city, regardless of race, gender or ethnicity. Changing the focus of peoples welfare, will result in the uplifting of the peoples living standard, which will, as a result, lead to more areas in the city being developed. Also, minimizing bias to a section or part of the city will also result to more areas being given a chance to grow. “Re-ordering” the practice and process of the administration in running the city, will not only shake the established process to the better, but will also give new perspectives into consideration and being applied that will benefit more than the usual (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005).

In relation to this, interaction between the local and federal government is essential in making sure the slide of a city into disintegration does not take place. The local governments’ inability on their own to provide funding (the essential ingredient in any project to work), which is usually, caused by underdevelopment of the area and the ineffectiveness of set mechanisms (political social) usually results in the failure of their programs. Support from the federal government will eventually jump-start these programs; this will give way to the proper functioning of the essential mechanisms that will run the development of the city. Aside from the funding, support from the various federal agencies (energy, health and human services, transportation etc.) will help these cities’ (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005). For example, programs by these agencies in developing an area into “economic areas” with priority being given more to the inhabitants of the area will help them develop their areas.

It is a common notion that there will always be inequality, especially in areas where there are more resources than the other. This aspect is usually the problem in many areas where the challenge of surviving in limited resources is always present. Being aware of these inequalities can be the first step in helping close the gap. Having this awareness also means that one is conversant with his or her current status, given the place where he is residing. For people who reside in resourceful areas, their awareness will help them identify ways on helping those who are less fortunate (Dreier, Mollenkopf & Swantrom, 2005). Not only in providing dole-outs but also giving people in these areas opportunities to access resources will help in their daily living. Aside from this, investments in these areas will give its inhabitants an opportunity to make their place develop. In the long run, even if there are still inequalities between the two areas, the once “poorer” areas are now able to provide the needed mechanisms and resources to become self-sufficient. Its people, in turn, do not posses same status as those on the “other side,” they can claim to have advanced economically than before.

Regardless of any programs that uplift the growth of an area, politics and political considerations will not only compromise these programs but can also lead to mixed results. However, this does not imply that the government and politicians have no role to play. They remain an integral part of the administration. Proper administration, that is, an unbiased evaluation and study of the issues concerning the people and the community, and the implementation of ample, correct and feasible solutions to these issues (regardless of any bias) will at the end lead to development of the area, and the satisfaction of all the people that resides in it.

References

Dreier P., Mollenkopf J & Swantrom T. ( 2005). Place Matters: Metro politics for the Twenty-

First Century. Kansas City: University of Kansas.