American Urban Policy From Roosevelt to Obama

A Look at the Economics and Politics of Urban Policy History by Presidential Administrations

Roosevelt and Truman, the Keynsians

The first true urban programs at the federal level came under the Roosevelt administration during the great depression, and consisted of a set of Keynesian policies designed to stimulate a dying economy in very dire times. Specifically these were public works programs, work relief programs, and social security initiatives, and were responsible for modest levels of improvement while setting up a base for American economic policy known as “Egalitarian Liberalism” Roosevelt, and later Truman would strongly rely on Keynesian principles throughout their administrations, setting up a standard for American urban policy. Many of the policies enacted by Roosevelt and Truman still exist today, and much of our national infrastructure was set up during this time. However, before most cities could fully adept to the new economic paradigm set up by Roosevelt, Truman and the Egalitarian Liberals, a regime change came putting a new president, Dwight D. Eisenhower into the Oval Office.

Eisenhower

Eisenhower stepped into office in the early 1950s, during a period of immense economic growth and took the American economy in a new direction. He left Egalitarian Liberalism for a more Classical Liberal approach to garnish votes for his Republican Party agenda. It was during his time that two of the most unsuccessful urban policies in American history were initiated, two policies that today still work to undermine urban areas. The Interstate Highway System is to this day, the single, most destructive urban policy ever designed in the United States. Before these highways were built to facilitate white flight and segregate our urban areas, cities were a true melting pot, a gathering of all ethnicities, and a chance for citizens to work, live and enjoy themselves all within the urban center. However the Interstate Highway System favored the privileged, those with automobiles who no longer wanted to live in the melting pot, and favored the all-white suburbs instead. This policy destroyed inner city tax base, removed employment, and segregated our cities to the state that they are currently in today. Eisenhower’s second anti-urban policy, another about-face program in comparison to those of his predecessors, Roosevelt and Truman, is known as “Urban Renewal”. Urban Renewal declined to focus on restoring urban fabric and rebuilding cities the way they worked best but rather to bulldoze everything that wasn’t modern and replace it with what planning elites deemed best. Many urban neighborhoods were destroyed and segregated, and have not been able to recover since.

Kennedy and Johnson

John F. Kennedy ran as an urban president, one who would fix problems the way Roosevelt had, and in hopes to change most of Eisenhower's policies. However it was too late, and very few of his policies were the least bit successful. Kennedy and later Lyndon Johnson may have had the right goals in mind, but the “Great Society” of the 1960s was a resource lacking, poor imitation of Roosevelt’s “New Deal” program of the 1930s. Johnson set up an entanglement of programs in the 1960s that required high levels of funding that he suspected the next president, if a Republican would not continue to support. Again, political issues and regime change would undermine the American city. Even Johnson’s successful programs, ones focusing on income support, community development, and housing were not continued throughout the 1970s.

Nixon, Ford and Carter

The 1970s ushered in a new era of failing federal policies, this time dubbed “New Federalism” by President Richard Nixon. Nixon, and later Gerald Ford, believed that the federal government could no longer fix urban programs and started to delegate more and more power to the state and local levels. They had brief successes with General Revenue Sharing, Community Development Block Grants and job training, but many more failures in other places. New Federalism was simply a word for non-intervention, and a justification for the federal government to leave dying cities out on their own. Nixon began the dismantling of the barely formed HUD agency by financially strapping it, and froze monies that Johnson had previously designated for anti-poverty urban programs. The Democrats then regained the White House in 1977 with President Jimmy Carter, but looked past urban problems to focus on other areas. Carter’s biggest failures in the urban area were because of his reluctance to try anything daring the way Roosevelt or Johnson had, and simply tweak the bad policies of Nixon and Ford. However, after Carter’s one term, which was very insignificant to say the least, American urban federal policy finally gained consistency. Whether or not this consistency is positive though is still debatable.

Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and W Bush, the Neoliberals

The election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 set forth for nearly three decades of consistent urban policies; championed by neoliberals in both the reublican and democratic party. President Reagan, working in the neoliberal economic mold of Alan Frieidman (who became the most influential economist for U.S. domestic policy since Keynes) led an ideological revolution of hands-off government in nearly all his domestic areas. George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush would all then became neoliberals in the Reagan mold. Although the U.S. finally had agreed on consistent policy, their neoliberal agenda has not been successful for urban areas. Hands-off government resulted in the near dismantling of HUD the end of public housing, massive welfare change, and more programs that benefitted the suburbs. In fact from 1988 to 2008, none of these presidents even sought a true urban agenda, because by the time of George H.W. Bush’s election in 1988 the inner cities were no longer electorally important. Without needing votes form cities, these presidents merely let them fight their own problems. Even democrat Bill Clinton did little for urban areas outside of his Enterprize Zones and brownfield reinvestment policies. By the end of the 20th century the "Egalitarian Liberalism" of Keynes and Roosevelt had been sufficiently replaced with the "Neo-Liberalism" of Friedman and Reagan.

Obama and an attempt to return to Keynesian Economics

Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 and his famous "stimulus" bill the following year offered the largest piece of keynesian legislation in decades. Especially in the field of urban policies, liberals hoped that Obama's history of working in community planning and his eagerness to re-adopt "Egalitarian Liberalism" would make him the first president to succeed in making great policy strides for urban America. So far he has already made some strides doing this, injecting much needed funds from his stimulus bill into urban areas for infrastructure upgrades and other job creating measures. However, Obama's strong ambitions are matched by a strong willed Congress seeking to fight his every move in domestic policy. Obama's attempts at restoring Keynesian policies have not fully succeeded, and will not unless he can create a sweeping wave of measures equal to what Roosevelt did in the area of public works programs, work relief programs, and most important of all; creating sustainable jobs in the inner cities. Obama will have to create jobs by the end of his time in office in order for his economic policies to be deemed successful.

Obama's first term is not over yet, so it is too early to evaluate his successes/failures in Urban policy. While he is attempting to return to the Keynes led approach of egalitarian liberalism he has only taken us so far from our neoliberal paradigm. The November election will tell a great deal for the inner cities, as Obama will likely be looking to continue Keynesian policies in American urban areas where his Republican opponent will likely be seeking a return to neoliberalism.

Note: My next Hub will go much greater in detail about the different economic policies of Kenyes/Friedman and other influential economists. If any of this hub needed further detail the following one should help answer those questions.