Film review: "1946: The Mistranslation That Shifted Culture"

Coming soon: Day by day reports from the Congress for the New Urbanism. Check back often... don't miss a paragraph!

Source: lgbtq.yale.edu

1946, a documentary film made in 2022 by Sharon "Rocky" Roggio, refers to the fateful decision by the committee producing the Revised Standard Version of the Bible to render two Greek words in I Corinthians 6:9 as the single word "homosexuals," thus including gays and lesbians with "the immoral, nor idolators, nor adulterers" and others as the "unrighteous [who] will not inherit the kingdom of God." I saw her film at St. Stephen's Lutheran Church in Cedar Rapids.

Watching "1946" at St. Stephen's Cburch

1946 is not about the translation itself, the origins of which remain mysterious even in the committee's archives at Yale University, but about those of us who live in its aftermath. We meet Roggio herself, a lesbian who struggles to maintain her family relationship even as her father becomes a prominent anti-gay preacher; Kathy Baldock, whose dogged research provides the basis for the film's argument; Ed Oxford, a gay theology scholar who works with her; and Davis S., whose 1959 letter documented the committee's error, prior to a long career as a pastor in the United Church of Canada. Each suffers some impacts from the dominant theological interpretation.

Their inquiries are supported throughout the film by a number of biblical scholars, most memorably Rabbi Steven Greenberg, author of Wrestling with God and Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition (Wisconsin, 2004), whose reflection on the phrase "Fuck you" I will be pondering for a long time.

By the time (1969) the RSV committee, spurred by Davis S.'s criticism, voted to change their translation from "homosexuals" to "sexual perverts," the horse was out of the barn. Other versions of the Bible, like the New International Version and the Living Bible, continued to follow the RSV's use of "homosexuals," and today are in much wider use than the RSV and its successor versions. In fact, according to the film, the Living Bible added five more references to "homosexuals" that don't appear in the RSV.

My third grade presentation Bible, Revised Standard Version

The scholars walk us through the context that is often lost when people quote other Biblical passages that have been used to condemn homosexuality: the destruction of Sodom in Genesis 19 with its echo in Judges 19, a series of verses in Leviticus 18 and 20 known as "the clobber verses," Romans 1:26-27. They argue that the verses condemn sexual exploitation and/or decadent living, not to same-sex relationships.

The personal focus of the film, even as it works through the minutiae of biblical translation and interpretation, is essential. As I wrote concerning Pope Francis a few days ago, so much changes when we make the subject people rather than rules. 1946 clearly shows the damage done by biblical interpretation that casts out gays and lesbians. I don't know, however, that they make the case that the committee "shifted culture" with their decision. As another viewer at St. Stephen's--it was Jonathan Ice, in case you happen to know him--noted, "Homophobia was not invented in 1946." 

But the committee's chosen language was certainly handy in the 1970s when the burgeoning gay rights movement met with backlash. It was 1972, for example, when the United Methodist Church added a statement that homosexuality was "incompatible" with Christian teaching to its Book of Discipline. The 1970s saw the emergence of the Moral Majority, Christian Broadcasting Network, National Christian Action Coalition, and other organizations that the Republican Party led by Ronald Reagan skillfully wove into its electoral coalition. They had the RSV language to draw on, but orthodox Christians and political opportunists probably could have made just as much hay with previous constructions.

I don't know, either, how many minds will be changed by 1946. Textual criticism of the Bible has been suspect in a lot of believers' eyes since its emergence in the latter half of the 19th century. However, I think Sharon Roggio's careful presentation provides a path to reconciliation for those who are increasingly troubled by what they've been taught the Bible says. It surely provides assurance to Christians, like young Sharon and young Ed Oxford, who feel cast out of the presence of God by their sexuality.

So, what did English-language Bibles say before 1946? Fortunately, I have a small collection of my family's pre-RSV Bibles. Here's how they render I Corinthians 6:9-10.

Both my mom and my mother-in-law received presentation Bibles in the King James Version:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

My dad received the Standard American edition of the Revised Version (1901), which varied only slightly from the original King James Version but with possible significance:

Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men...

My copy of The Bible: An American Translation (1935) was formerly owned by my Uncle Ralph and Aunt Margaret:

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not have any share in God's kingdom? Do not let anyone mislead you. People who are immoral or idolaters or adulterers or sensual or given to unnatural vice or thieves or greedy--drunkards, abusive people, robbers--will not have any share in God's kingdom.

The oldest non-KJV translation I found at my church's library was A New Translation by James Moffatt (1935 edition):

What! Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the Realm of God? Make no mistake about it, neither the immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor catamites nor sodomites nor thieves nor the lustful nor the drunken nor the abusive nor robbers will inherit the Realm of God.

"Catamites" are, it turns out, the victims of homosexual pedophiles. Based on the scholarship in 1946, that is a worse translation of the Greek than the RSV.  

Whatever the translation you're consulting, if you want to find the whole population of gays and lesbians on those lists, you'll find them, however uncharitable your quest. As for the "clobber verses," Leviticus spends at least as much time on menstruating women than it arguably does on homosexual men (not lesbians, interestingly). "If a man lies with a woman during her period, and uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow, and she has laid bare her flow of blood; both of them shall be cut off from their people" (Lev. 20:18, NRSV). Any attempt to make that the foundation of a doctrinal schism, such as the United Methodists lately have experienced, would be ridiculous. If we as a society can get used to the idea that some of us menstruate, we can get used to the idea of same-sex relationships.

SEE ALSO: "Film Review: Stonewall Uprising," 28 June 2015

"1946" official website: 1946 | The Mistranslation that Shifted a Culture

Movie trailer (1:22):

Iowa's physician shortage

 

Zach Kucharski of the Gazette introduces the panel

Iowa is last in the nation in obstetricians per capita, which is felt most acutely in rural areas where fewer hospitals are offering obstetrics or even pediatric services. Iowa is also third-lowest in the US in retention of physicians. Those are only two data points in an overall shortage of physicians in the Hawkeye State, which was the subject of the latest Gazette Business Breakfast earlier this week. 

Two days later, Iowa earned the infamous distinction of being the first state in the U.S. to shrink its civil rights ordinance by removing gender identity from protection. The action was justified by the legislature's earlier attempts at punishing transgendered people being struck down by the courts as running afoul of this ordinance. Without the pesky civil rights ordinance, our government is free to take whatever potshots at transgendered people that it feels like taking. What an expression of our state's official hostility to difference!

At first glance, these are two different topics. Is it possible, though, that they are connected?

Unity Point Medical District, where your humble blogger gets his doctorin'
(Google Earth screenshot)

At the Gazette event, panelists Dr. Fadi Yacoub (Linn County Medical Society), Dr. Timothy Quinn (Mercy Medical Center), and Dr. Dustin Arnold (Unity Point Health) were interviewed by the Gazette's Zach Kucharski. They referenced two main strategies for improving Iowa's physician retention: improving the doctors' bottom lines, and incentives for Iowa students to do their medical education in Iowa.

Despite Iowa's reputation for low cost of living, Quinn noted physician salaries are not keeping up with increasing levels of medical school debt, and insurance payments relative to cost of living are are comparatively low. Arnold suggested the state should see positive effects of "tort reform," which means the legislature has capped damages for medical malpractice suits. Current legislation (HSB 191) before the Iowa legislature would offer student loan repayment programs for rural doctors, and commission a study of the effects of cutting medical school from four years to three (cf. Murphy and Barton 2025). On the other hand, would-be budget cutters in Washington are looking at Medicaid, which is "essential to medical care in Iowa" (Quinn's phrase) due to the directed payment program.

The legislature is also hoping to improve retention by keeping Iowa residents in the state, creating preferences in medical school admissions. (The University of Iowa, though, is 78 percent Iowan, already near the 80 percent target for schools.) The thought is that people who are close to family and already appreciate the wonders of Iowa will want to stay here. "We don't have pro sports, we don't have concerts, but" Iowa is a state you love, said Yacoub, noting he was "preaching to the choir here." Arnold of Unity Point added Cedar Rapids is a great place to live, "once you're here you want to stay." This may or may not be true, given the state's (not the city's) regressive political culture, but even if we retain 90 percent of Iowa-based doctors the gap between working age doctors and our aging population will continue to increase.

When we take on faith that Iowa is so great you could confuse it with heaven ("Field of Dreams" reference), it precludes serious discussion of our future. When we take on faith that the most important considerations are low taxes, we miss the thousand things that make for quality of life (some of which are paid for with taxes). I'm an urbanist, not a physician, and tend to see things through an urbanist lens. As such I'm probably missing important dimensions of this specific problem. But we want more physicians to move here, so we need to think about how to make it an attractive place, which means attractive for everybody.

Iowa's physician shortage exists in a national context. Quinn noted at the start medical schools nationwide have not kept up with demand, so the whole country must rely on immigration to make up the gap. (Yacoub, who came to the United States in 1989, is one example.) Later he noted the shortage of doctors extends to nurses and support staff as well. 

But it also exists amidst a sociopolitical context in our state that is becoming increasingly hostile to difference. As Richard Florida noted two decades ago, it is openness, not turning inward, that welcomes a variety of people with varieties of talents. Iowa, except for a few larger counties, is shedding population like no one's business. We have managed to combine the worst of northern weather and southern politics: Our policies and public statements are openly hostile to poor people, immigrants, the transgendered, and city dwellers, just for starters. What message does that send to anyone else who might be or feel a little different? 

The physician shortage is making working conditions for current physicians worse. As scheduling gets tighter, there is less space in a physician's life for continuing education or even lunch. I wonder how else working in Iowa might affect a physician's desire to be here? No one mentioned COVID at all, but I remember patients stacking up at hospital emergency rooms at the same time (early 2021) Governor Kim Reynolds was declaring the pandemic over. Evidence of the negative health effects of data centers (Criddle and Stacey 2025) and corn sweeteners is accumulating, but they are the darlings of our economic plans. Meanwhile, Iowa has the fastest-growing cancer rate in the country. It can't be easy to practice medicine in an environment that consistently chooses corporate bottom lines over public health, and hostility to vulnerable minorities over building prosperous and inclusive communities.

I can't say with any precision whether Iowa's official penchant for nostalgia and resentment is exacerbating our shortage of physicians. Some early-career physicians may prefer the Politics of Yesterday, while others may be indifferent. But overall it is unlikely to lure the talent we need.

SEE ALSO: "Iowa: You're on the Menu," 9 May 2023

Don't blame trans people for Dems' loss

 

Dr. William Barber is one of the premier prophetic voices in America today
(Source: breachrepairers.org)

Having said my peace on this year's elections, I was anticipating a return to issues affecting our local communities. But a disturbing trend has emerged in the frustrated post-election expressions by Democrats and their liberal allies that I think needs addressing.

To start with, the 2024 election results were, despite all the weirdness of the campaign, rather "normal," in the sense that a typical electoral response to stressful times is to vote the other party in. It happened after World War II in a number of countries including the United States and Britain, and happened again this year after worldwide struggles with the coronavirus pandemic and the attendant economic dislocation. As in 1945-46, Britain and the United States changed legislative majorities, with the British going from right to left, and the Americans going from left to right. Go figure.

That said, many on the left criticize the Biden administration and the Harris campaign for ignoring the economic concerns of working people. There's a lot to be said for that argument, given that the decades-long trend towards greater concentration of wealth continues to gallop along. On the other hand, Biden proved adept as a crisis manager, and his deficiencies certainly don't explain why the answer was to turn the government over to a self-absorbed chaos agent with an actual policy record that promotes that greater concentration of wealth. Again, go figure. Maybe the explanations tentatively offered in my last post can help explain that.

Two commentators I greatly respect, Nicholas Kristof and Fareed Zakaria, take that critique farther to argue that Democrats in the Biden years lost working class support because they prioritized other issues. Kristof, who has written movingly of the struggles of his small Oregon town, has trouble explaining what could have been done to reverse its condition:

I think Democrats have far better policies for working class Americans than Republicans do. It was Democrats who backed labor unions, who raised minimum wages, and who under President Biden crafted a strategy to create manufacturing jobs and slash child poverty. Trump talks a good game about manufacturing, bui... Biden so far has seen an increase of 700,000 manufacturing jobs. (Kristof 2024)

So what's the problem? "Democrats increasingly are the party of university-educated elites, and they have an unfortunate knack for coming across as remote and patronizing scolds" (Ibid). What?!? This barely qualifies as analysis. (I scolded.)

Zakaria goes farther to blame the administration's failures on immigration, and a penchant for identity politics. This too is unsatisfying. Immigration is hard, and Trump was different less on outcomes than on the retributive excess of his approach. Zakaria's examples of identity politics are use of the term "Latinx"--by the administration? I'm not remember that)--and support for the transgendered. "One of Trump's most effective ads," he notes, "on trans issues, ended with the tagline: Kamala is for they/them; President Trump is for you" (Zakaria 2024). Aside from the fact that the ad itself is a flagrant example of identity politics, Zakaria is suggesting that transgendered people, like Mexican immigrants, are too unsympathetic to merit attention from a campaign that wants to win an election. (And has Zakaria forgotten that Biden lost a bipartisan immigration bill in Congress this year when Trump told Republicans to nix it?)

Look, I know plenty of people who agree with me on issues, but are so insufferable about their politics that I almost wish they didn't. And I find quarrels over terminology to be baffling and distracting. But that's no reason to treat anyone as less than fully human. We can't let everyone in the country who wants to come, and we can't give everyone everything they want, but we can treat everyone with human dignity. Kristof dings liberals for disdaining religion, but fundamental to the major religions of the Western world is the idea that we are all children of God. I'm not seeing that in the Trump immigration-mass expulsion policy.

Thankfully, we have with us one of the most passionate and cogent advocates of common life, the Rev. William Barber, who among many other things is co-director of the Poor People's Campaign. Barber too argues that Democrats in the administration and presidential campaign failed to address fundamental injustices in the American economy, and attributes the election loss precisely to that (cf. Goodman 2024). Yet he also sees a unity across issues, as he told a class he teaches at Yale University:

When people sit down across the lines that have tended to divide us – race, geography, sexuality – and then take an honest look at the politics of extremism,” he says, “they figure out that the same people who are voting against people because they are gay are also blocking living wages. ("Meet the Religious Leaders" 2024)

He concludes:

What are the major tenets of religion as it relates to the public square?” he asks. His answer is a litany his repeats often: “Love, truth, justice, mercy, grace, the least of these, the poor, the sick, the imprisoned. Look at this piece of legislation. How are these policies affecting people? How is it affecting their living and their dying? (Ibid.)

We don't have to dump the imprisoned in order to help the sick. Common life is not easily arranged, and Democrats have a diverse and fractious coalition, whose members compete for scarce resources and issue space. But as we push forward, or in the direction we hope is forward, we should remember the quotation attributed to Benjamin Franklin: "We must hang together, or assuredly we will hang separately."

10th Anniversary Post: The Gentrification Conundrum Revisited

Census tract 27: Row houses built in 2017 with appraised
values of $400,000+

Ten years ago this month, Holy Mountain looked at gentrification, the value of diversity, minimum wage laws, the city's new strategic plan Envision CR, as well as Indian Creek Nature Center's annual Maple Syrup Festival--which happens again in a couple weeks! We will be there to cover every sticky bite, of course.

The piece on gentrification, driven by the middle class's return to cities, surveyed an array of literature both pro and anti. (For other surveys of that array, see Cortright 2014a, Cortright 2014b, and Kaplan 2015.) It also introduced me to Chicago artist Theora Kvitka, whose cartoon I got permission to use at the top of the post.

Gentrification at its worst involves under-invested urban neighborhoods receiving a sudden influx of middle class residents that dislocate the people already living there, who are often working class people of color. (In Alyssa Cole's novel When No One is Watching [Temple Hill, 2020], the newly-arrived whites in a New York City neighborhood not only displace the black residents and yuppify their stores, they capture the blacks and use them for scientific experiments.) But as Joe Cortright has argued, the alternative to gentrification for most neighborhoods has not been humble stability but concentrated high poverty. So, the goal for policy makers should be to encourage investment without blowing up places where people are already living.

I wrote in 2014:

For the older neighborhoods in Cedar Rapids, such as Wellington Heights and the Taylor Area, I've advocated "gentle gentrification," of which I'll admit I have only the very vaguest concept. But this much is certain: We don't build diverse communities by pricing people out of the homes they own. It's difficult enough to overcome habits of class prejudice and segregation without adding a financial hit.

Cedar Rapids is not New York City or D.C. or Denver, but we too have seen changes. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Communities Survey bear out some of those impressions, and although it's not clear how much of these changes are due to movement in and out, there are new poor areas developing at the edges of town.

Several census tracts exist mostly in core neighborhoods, although they do not correspond exactly to neighborhood boundaries.

Census tracts in the center of Cedar Rapids
(Sources: census.gov)

Data are from the 2000 U.S. Census, and the American Community Survey's five-year estimates published in 2014 and 2022 (so the data center on 2012 and 2020). See table at bottom of post for raw numbers. Note that none of these tracts became whiter between 2000 and 2020.

HARD HIT: Population DOWN, Income DOWN, Poverty UP

Census tract 19: Downtown, with portions of Mound View and Wellington Heights

Population -22.5%, Median Family Income +6.9%, Poverty Rate +69.3%

There's been some condo development downtown, with more under construction, which may account for the jump in income since 2010 (though to keep pace with inflation since 2000, median income would have to be about $47000). There are also some rooming houses in the MedQuarter, and some older housing stock in the neighborhoods in areas that remain poor. The low poverty rate from 2000 relative to today surprises me, because what housing stock we've lost was rickety (around Coe College, for example).

Of the six tracts studied here, this tract has diversified the most, going from 80.2 percent white (not Hispanic or Latino) in 2000 to 62.7 percent in 2018-22.

GENTRIFICATION COMING? Population DOWN, Income STEADY, Poverty UP or DOWN

Census tract 12: including Time-Check

Population -46.7%, Median Family Income +84.7%, Poverty Rate +114.9%

Census tract 26: including Czech Village 

Population -30.2%, Median Family Income +171.4%, Poverty Rate -33.8%

These areas lost much of their housing after the flood, with the city buying out property owners and leveling the houses between C Street SW/Ellis Boulevard NW and the Cedar River. Now that flood protection is being built on the west side of the river, expect construction to begin in earnest. It will be interesting to watch this over the next several years. Note the contrast with nearby tract #22 to the north in terms of economics away from the river.

 

These were the two whitest tracts in 2000, with over 92 percent white (not Hispanic or Latino). Tract #12 remains 87.5 percent white, while tract #26 has diversified somewhat to 77.8 percent white.

GENTRIFICATION STARTED? Population and Income STEADY, Poverty UP

Census tract 22: most of the Taylor Area including Kingston

Population -6.2%, Median Family Income +35.4%, Poverty Rate +124.1%

Coming to tract #22: apartment/condo development at Kingston Yard

This area has almost made back the population lost to flood displacement. The jump in income results from burgeoning condo development near the Cedar River, which before the flood was mostly older shops with some housing. (Note, however, incomes still lag inflation, which was +50 percent nationally from 2000-2020.) Because of the flood, this area was mostly vacant in 2010-14, so any displacement had already happened before the new residents arrived. The high poverty rate is probably located in the blocks farther from the river; its persistence is striking, suggesting that area has not shared in the prosperity brought by recent development. Why it is so much higher than 2000, I do not know.

Census tract #22 has diversified considerably, from 86.5 percent white (not Hispanic or Latino) in 2000 to 63.6 percent in 2018-2022.

LOOKS LIKE GENTRIFICATION: Population STEADY, Incomes UP, Poverty DOWN

Census tract 17: including most of Wellington Heights

Population -3.4%, Median Family Income +107.3%, Poverty Rate -45.0%

Census tract 27: most of Oak Hill Jackson including New Bohemia

Population +5.8%, Median Family Income +113.9%, Poverty Rate -10.6%

Wellington Heights, largely untouched by the 2008 flood, has seen some housing investment since 2010, but I still can't explain that phenomenal jump in income or decline in poverty. The eastern border of Wellington Heights is 19th Street SE, but the census tract extends another half-mile farther to Forest Drive, taking in a considerable portion of a well-to-do area (including the home base of Holy Mountain). Maybe that explains the numbers, or maybe it is indeed an indicator of gentrification of the older area.

Oak Hill Jackson has made back the population lost to flood displacement, and a little extra, though the U.S. as a whole gained nearly 18 percent during this period. The surge in income results both from burgeoning condo development near the Cedar River and middle class influx into the working class area farther in. Of the four neighborhoods this looks the most like stereotypical displacement accompanying gentrification, although the poverty rate remains high so not all the poor have been displaced. 

Census tract #27 was the most racially diverse of the six tracts in both 2000 (65.9 percent white not Hispanic or Latino) and 2020 (59.8 percent white). Tract #17 has diversified from 78.6 percent to 67.7 percent white.

Kristen Jeffers (from theblackurbanist.com)

Planner Kristen Jeffers, who blogs at The Black Urbanist, just produced an hour-long video called "Six Ways to Defy Gentrification." She describes gentrification, with decidedly negative connotations, as both an economic process ("typically accompanied by displacement") and a cultural process by which neighborhoods become more "respectable" (because previous residents were considered "unwealthy or unworthy" or both). Three of the six pieces of advice, directed at those experiencing gentrification from a less powerful perspective, are:

1. have faith in yourself (30:00): "you are worthy, you are valid, no matter what your rent is"
2. ground yourself by cultivating your art (32:00), particularly cultures and folkways like music, fabric or other visual art, gardening, teaching, &c., as well as cultivating your community and your resources
   
3. ground yourself through finding every way to make life convenient for yourself (33:45) by inhabiting your neighborhood: walking to the local grocery store, doctor's office, school, &c.

For gentrifiers, she commends:

1. care about the people around you (41:00), "be that person" who contributes to a diverse community by working and playing together
2. infrastructure (42:55), including public transportation and pedestrian plazas, but particularly housing that is affordable/accessible for everyone
3. access (46:15) for people with mobility needs, including everyone in those conversations
   

Cedar Rapids is growing slowly enough that we ought to be able to manage gentle gentrification, increasing investments in core neighborhoods without dislocating existing residents. I think everybody ought to live as close to the city center as they can, and that services ought to be available within a reasonable distance that makes walking, wheeling, cycling, and public transit viable alternatives. I also think there should be room for everyone, and that the fate of those with fewer resources and/or socially marginalized is the concern of everyone. I see things we're doing right--two-way streets, park development, zoning reform, a flurry of apartment and condo construction in the core--and things we're doing wrong--drive-to urbanism and big "game-changer" projects that don't serve everyday needs or leave room for everyday lives. Could we be doing all this better?

SEE ALSO: 

Pete Saunders, "Rethinking the Affordable Housing Crisis, Part III," The Corner Side Yard, 6 March 2024

Steven Thomson, "As 'Gentrification' Turns 50, Tracing Its Nebulous History," Curbed, 5 November 2014

DATA:

POPULATION

TRACT          2000          2012         2020      00-20 12TimeCh 3215 1362 1715 -46.70% 17Wellingtn 7137 6598 6891 -3.40% 19Downtwn 3359 2850 2603 -22.50% 22Kingston 2779 2259 2606 -6.20% 26CzechV 3012 2725 2101 -30.20% 27OHJ 1797 1591 1902 5.80% POVERTY        TRACT         2000         2012         2020     00-20 12TimeCh 0.087 0.179 0.187 114.90% 17Wellingtn 0.149 0.103 0.082 -45% 19Downtwn 0.225 0.375 0.381 69.30% 22Kingston 0.116 0.293 0.26 124.10% 26CzechV 0.154 0.174 0.102 -33.80% 27OHJ 0.282 0.368 0.252 -10.60%

MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME

TRACT                   2000        2012            2020            00-20 12TimeCh            40451        38365          74722          84.7% 17Wellingtn          55613        72639        115293        107.3% 19Downtwn          31182        28188          33333            6.9% 22Kingston           37946        33304          51364          35.4% 26CzechV             42703        58100          73185          71.4% 27OHJ                  27115        40543          58004        113.9%

The age/race gap in Iowa

 

Iowa politicians sell nostalgia and homogeneity to their large white majority
(campaign ad screen capture... see video at foxnews.com)
(you could spend a semester unpacking this ad)

The times they are a-changin'--BOB DYLAN

America is getting older, but there's more to it than that, according to William H. Frey, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution (Frey 2023). The oldest Americans are predominantly white, while the younger generations are far more racially diverse. According to data from the 2020 U.S. Census, whites are a minority among those under age 18, and less than 55 percent of those aged 18-44 (see Frey's Table D).

Americans 65-plus were 27.5 percentage points whiter in 2020 than those under 18. This age/race gap increased from 22.7 points in the 2000 census. Frey argues this has amplified generational cultural divides, as seen in responses to the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action and state policies limiting diversity in public school curricula. (See also Frey 2018.) 

William H. Frey (from brookings.edu)

The same age/race pattern appears in each state and metropolitan area: the older the group, the more white, and the younger the group, the more nonwhite. States differ in how strong that effect is, but it's present everywhere (see maps 1a and 1b in Frey 2023). 

Compared to the states that surround us, Iowa is somewhat older and whiter, and has a smaller age/race gap than of our neighbors except Missouri. We're pretty similar to most of them on the metrics used in Frey's article, with the exception of Illinois, which is more diverse among all age groups, and has had a steep decline in the proportion of under-18s of any race.

The largest gap is in Arizona, where the oldest group is 77.9 percent white and the youngest is 37.2 percent white, a gap of 40.7 percentage points; that may account for that state's notoriously riven racial politics over the years featuring the likes of Evan Mecham, Jan Brewer, and Sheriff Joe Arapaio. Nevada, New Mexico, Delaware, Rhode Island, Florida, and Oklahoma are the next six. The age/race gap may account for the scorched-earth toxicity of, say, Florida governor Ron DeSantis; but it's noteworthy that not all states with a large age/race gap experience the same political expressions.

Older white Arizonans have had to get used to diversity
(Source: cronkitenews.asu.edu)

The age/race gap is smallest among states that remain predominantly white. These states also tend to have small and declining populations, because with a few exceptions (Idaho, North Dakota, Utah) the white birth rate is low everywhere. Seven of the ten smallest gaps--West Virginia (#1), Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Wyoming and Montana--are in states who are also among the ten whitest states in America. On the other hand, the District of Columbia (#2) and Hawaii (#5) are so diverse even their oldest age groups are not that white. 

Iowa is the sixth whitest state according to the 2020 Census, with 82.7 percent of Iowans identifying as white (mixed-race not included). Iowa's age/race gap is 21.1 points, 35th highest (a.k.a. 16th lowest). Iowa is 15th in percentage for both over 65 and under 18. That's an explanation, but only a partial one, for why we Iowans have been far more receptive to the white nationalist politics championed by Donald Trump than are Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Perhaps, like North and South Dakota (and Wyoming?), our age/race gap may be small by national standards, but it's gotten large enough to alarm the traditional establishment.

Iowa's approach to public education--which old-timers will tell you was once a source of state pride--is not unique but is an outlier even for states with aging, predominantly white populations. As the current school year approaches, the state is shifting substantial funds to private education through vouchers, as well as sending ominous but vague directives to remove books deemed offensive from classrooms and libraries. This is after the state's per-pupil education funding change from 2016 to 2021 trailed all neighboring states except Nebraska, not to mention all five states that have whiter populations.

At the county level, the four Iowa counties that favored Deirdre De Jear in the 2022 gubernatorial election tend to be younger and more racially diverse than the state as a whole, particularly Johnson (home to the University of Iowa) and Polk (home to the state capital). These are the counties Governor Kim Reynolds excluded from "the real Iowa," and while her statement was hateful, on some level she was also correct. Johnson, Polk, and a very few other counties are neither as white nor as old as the whole state.

(Note that I wasn't able to replicate Frey's data at the county level with 2020 census data, so I used data from the 2021 American Community Survey. To keep the age categories consistent with the original presentation, I split those aged 35-44 in half. Even American Community Survey data were not available for all counties.)

The larger age/race gaps in Johnson and Polk are also more typical of the country as a whole than the State of Iowa. Another relatively diverse Iowa county had an even higher age/race gap: Woodbury (Sioux City), 80% white, had 34.6 points (93.1-58.5), which is getting towards Arizona-level difference. Black Hawk (Waterloo), 82.9% white, had 23.9 points (90.5-66.6). 

Demography is certainly not political destiny--not every nonwhite person is down with The Squad, cares deeply about immigration policy, or even guaranteed to vote Democratic. But it does point to changes in the way of doing things (see Arizona and Georgia in recent years) and the difficulty of maintaining a sense of common life in the face of that change. 

Whether to change is not a choice. It happens everywhere, even in Iowa, though certainly not as much or as fast as in the United States as a whole. Every community does have a choice whether and how to accommodate that change. That choice is not between white prosperity and inclusive prosperity--it's between successfully managing diversification and irrelevance. Not only our souls, but our future is at stake.

First principles, the Supreme Court, and our common life

 

Justice George Sutherland

Peter S. Canellos, The Great Dissenter: The Story of John Marshall Harlan, America's Judicial Hero (Simon & Schuster, 2021), 624 pp.

Isabel Wilkerson, Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents (Random House, 2020), xvii + 496 pp.

In writing the 1926 Euclid v. Ambler decision upholding local government zoning powers, U.S. Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland justified excluding multifamily housing because it harmed single-family homeowners:

Very often the apartment house is a mere parasite, constructed in order to take advantage of the open spaces and attractive surroundings created by the residential character of the district. Moreover, the coming of one apartment house is followed by others, interfering by their height and bulk with the free circulation of air and monopolizing the rays of the sun which otherwise would fall upon the smaller homes, and bringing, as their necessary accompaniments, the disturbing noises incident to increased traffic and business, and the occupation, by means of moving and parked automobiles, of larger portions of the streets, thus detracting from their safety and depriving children of the privilege of quiet and open spaces for play... (272 U.S. 394)

People, it seemed, had the right to have government protect them from nuisances, and for Justice Sutherland apartment buildings clearly fell into that category. Never mind that he was shamelessly stereotyping in place of research, the regulations made it more difficult for potential residents of those buildings, who were also people, to find housing, or that, in the words of Michael Kubartler, "one wonders... whether Justice Sutherland knew children were raised in apartment buildings" (quoted at Jacobsen 2012: 229). Did he know at all what he was talking about, or was getting to the decision good enough?

Zoning map (creative commons via Cvillepedia)

Euclidean zoning, and its legacy of ill effects (Gray 2022), was enabled from the start by an argument from first principles, in this case that people have a right to be protected from any "nuisances" that negatively affect the value of their property or their quality of life. Sometimes a first principle is all you've got ("We hold these principles to be self-evident..."), but the weaknesses in this style of argument are evident in the Euclid decision: single-minded pursuit of a single principle admits no countervailing claims, it is used to justify a conclusion the writer already prefers (hence the selective application), and worst of all the real-world effects of the principle or its application are not considered. Did Justice Sutherland know some children also live in apartment buildings? And what might those children have the right to be protected from?

The use and abuse of first principles play a major role in two books I read this summer. It is mere coincidence that I read them back-to-back, and another coincidence that I read them while, nearly 100 years after Euclid, the Supreme Court was again holding fast to first principles while oblivious to the reality around them. 

Justice John Marshall Harlan

The journalist Peter S. Canellos's most recent book is a biography of Supreme Court justice John Marshall Harlan. Harlan is remembered for a number of prominent lone dissents from around the turn of the last century; he forcefully poked holes in the rigid arguments of bipartisan Court majorities, whether they were arguing for the power of government to segregate people by race (Plessy v. Ferguson) or prohibitions on government power to protect black citizens (The Civil Rights Cases), consumers (U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co.) or industrial workers (Lochner v. New York). Eleven years separated Harlan's and Sutherland's service on the Court, but Harlan had plenty of Sutherlands to deal with in his day. 

Canellos credits Harlan's way-ahead-of-his-time perspective to his relationship with his black half-brother Robert Harlan, which gave the justice insight into how black people were really living. Harlan's arguments would in time be well-received, as Canellos details in part three of the book, but as he wrote them the Court majority was clinging to first principles about government power, sometimes those that favored it, sometimes those that proscribed it, and about racial characteristics. In the end their arguments always managed to serve the interests of the powerful.

Harlan famously said, "But in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here." That, however, is not how it has worked out; as Isabel Wilkerson argued in her best-selling book from a few years ago, long after the end of slavery and generations after the Civil Rights Act was passed, America retains "a caste system that is central to its operation as are the studs and joists that we cannot see in the physical buildings we call home... the shape-shifting, unspoken, race-based caste pyramid in the United States" (2020: 17). 

Isabel Wilkerson 
(Source: isabelwilkerson.com)

Wilkerson uses the psychology of social rank to explain historical and contemporary American social behavior. In a chapter entitled "The Urgent Necessity of a Bottom Rung," Wilkerson describes the ongoing efforts since 1865 to bar blacks from education and entrepreneurial opportunities, enforce racial codes, and highlight the most pathological black behavior. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compiled an even more exhaustive recitation in her dissent in SFFA v. University of North Carolina, discussed below. Even if such efforts were stopped completely--which they have not been--it wouldn't make race suddenly and magically irrelevant. They have combined to produce the world inherited by today's minorities, in which today's black children must make their way. 

March for Our Lives, Washington 2018

The U.S. Supreme Court, though, continues to insist that race is indeed irrelevant in today's society, only invoked by racial liberals with one of their legally impermissible remedies. Last month, a prominent pair of cases barred the use of affirmative action in admissions by a state university (Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina) and a private university that receives government money (Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College). 

Affirmative action comes in more than 57 varieties, but all are generally intended to compensate for the effects of past injustices and/or ensure a demographically diverse group. But the literal wording of the 14th amendment and the 1964 Civil Rights Act both require equal treatment without regard to race. "Equal treatment" can only be "the same," however, if the races are similarly situated. As Wilkerson and others have shown, the races are not similarly situated, because of a long series of very intentional actions by white people, often using the authority of government. Willful naivete may get us to an easy answer to affirmative action, but they leave us with no available remedy to arguably the wickedest problem our society faces.

A different first principle enabled the Court to support the appeal of a Colorado website designer who was sued under that state's civil rights law for refusing to design a website for a gay couple's wedding, explicitly because she doesn't approve of gay marriage (303 Creative LLC v. Elenis). Here individual freedom, not non-discrimination, is the banner flown by the majority.  "Tolerance, not coercion, is our Nation's answer," wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch. Again, we are called by the Court to exercise virtue by not stopping the abuse of power. (So intent were the majority on getting to their desired conclusion that they overlooked the facts that Lorie Smith does not actually design wedding websites, and that the 2016 letter that started this case is quite clearly a forgery. See sources at Katz 2023.)

Never mind, apparently, that if enough actual web designers and bakers refuse to work for queer people, queer people can hardly be full members of society. Never mind that, like any controversy, "This case cannot be understood outside of the context in which it arises," as Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in her dissent from the bench. To the Court's current majority view individual choice is all about tolerance for the choice, not about context or the real-world effects of those choices. Unless you're choosing to address racial caste, or the choice to have an abortion...

Habitat, flood control, carbon sink, but
not protected by the Clean Water Act
(Creative Commons by Wikipedia)

We can see similar rigidity on the Court's narrow reading of the Clean Water Act as it applies to wetlands, and lower court rulings on antitrust and social media regulation. The ruling on President Biden's student loan order is harder to argue with, but it's worth wondering how presidents are supposed to handle public problems if Congress is too dysfunctional to pass laws.

The U.S. Constitution surely is doomed if it requires us to be oblivious to the fundamental social realities of our time. If our life in this country is going to be anything remotely close to common, constitutional law, and politics writ large, has to be more than using handy first principles to require that the socially-advantaged retain their advantages. Sotomayor again: "In a society where opportunity is dispensed along racial lines, equality cannot be attained through race blindness." Naively or willfully, the Court majority has chosen to ignore that, in order once again to comfort the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor

For reviews of the Court's 2022-23 session, see Liptak and Murray 2023, Barnes 2023.

SEE ALSO:

"Religious Freedom for Whom?" 15 December 2020

"Green Book and Wedding Cakes," 5 February 2019

"Color Blindness vs. Opportunity," 21 January 2019

Economic development--how cities differ

 

(Source: fpccr.org. Used without permission.)

I

Are there moral imperatives in local economic development policy? In August I will be speaking to First Presbyterian Church about this very topic. First Presbyterian has also asked presenters in this series to consider the question: "What role does economic inequality play in causing positive changes?"  I could, I suppose, stick to summarizing some of the issues and policy options, and let the Presbyterians make their own moral connections, but where would be the sport in that?

As I wrote in 2013, the Bible, particularly the Christian Bible (a.k.a. the New Testament), has very little to say about the city as an institution. The earliest Christians were far from the seats of power, and neither Jesus nor Paul nor any of their comrades have much to say on the subject of social, political or economic arrangements. Though the fellowship of the earliest Christians is intriguing to ponder (see Acts 2:42-47), probably the best New Testament description of a fully-fledged city is the New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation:

Then he said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life. Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God, and they will be my children. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, the sexually immoral, the sorcerers, the idolaters, and all liars, their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death. (Rev 21:6-8, NRSV)

Darveza Gas Crater, Turkmenistan
(Wikipedia Creative Commons)

It is difficult to find lessons for today's earthly city in John's post-apocalyptic vision, particularly if the city's infrastructure does not include a lake that burns with fire and sulfur. If God provides for all immediate material and emotional needs, while anyone who doesn't fit in--that's quite the list, is it not?--is sent off to second death, it definitely simplifies much of the planner's job. The everyday citizen would need to be watching every step, though! The implications for city building of verse 8 (and, indeed, the vaster part of the preceding 20 chapters) are alarming. The Book of Revelation has its devoted following, but I am not among them. 

So for spiritual guidance on urban matters I find myself turning to the Hebrew Bible. The people of Israel were self-governing for most of the time period it covers. And God has some things to say about governing in the course of these 39 books, including this version of the New Jerusalem spoken by the prophet Zechariah:

Thus says the Lord: I will return to Zion and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem; Jerusalem shall be called the faithful city, and the mountain of the Lord of hosts shall be called the holy mountain. Thus says the Lord of hosts: Old men and old women shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each with staff in hand because of their great age. And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets. Thus says the Lord of hosts: Even though it seems impossible to the remnant of this people in these days, should it also seem impossible to me, says the Lord of hosts? Thus says the Lord of hosts: I will save my people from the east country and from the west country, and I will bring them to live in Jerusalem. They shall be my people and I will be their God, in faithfulness and in righteousness. (Zech 8:2-8, NRSV)

Boys and girls playing in the streets: Mississauga School Streets Project
(Swiped from 880cities.org. Used without permission.)

As I read this, Zechariah sounds a lot like Guillermo Penalosa. Gathering people together, with particular concern for 80-year-old "old men and old women" and 8-year-old "boys and girls"--and in other parts of the Scriptures, for widows, orphans, day-laborers, and refugees--it is fair to argue that God cares about both the material well-being of God's people and their opportunities to enjoy life, and is particularly concerned about the weakest and most vulnerable. (See also Isaiah 1-12 esp 1:17, 5:8, and the condemnation of bad use of power in 10:1-4.) To the extent we urbanist-believers have influence in our city we ought to seek to make it prosperous, safe and inclusive. (See the discussion of human thriving, environmental stewardship, and justice in Jacobson 2012: 215-238.)

II

Today cities face age-old questions of how to arrange common social, economic and political life, but while dealing with a novel historical context, including rapid economic change, climate change, uncertain government finances, and huge sunk costs in unproductive suburban development.

Development pattern:

• After World War II a huge wave of residential and commercial development in suburban areas drew white residents and retailers away from central cities. Central city populations became on average older, poorer, and more nonwhite, with lower educational attainment.
• In an auto-centric world, with people and destinations increasingly spread out, it has been difficult to resolve traffic congestion, keep streets in good repair, or supply alternatives like mass transit. Meanwhile, much potentially-productive land in the center of town has been given over to surface parking lots.

Parking crater, Charlotte city center, June 2023

Economy/jobs:

• The industrial era of the American economy ended rather abruptly in the 1970s, with employment shifts away from manufacturing to the broad service sector. Service includes well-remunerated STEM jobs, of course, but also retail and hospitality positions that pay much less well than factory work did. Economic inequality within and between places is as large as it's been in a century (see Piketty 2014).
• Technology has allowed industry and commerce to cross state and national lines to an increasing degree (globalization), offering more choice to consumers, but also creating a winner-take-all economy in which workers and firms and towns have to tread water faster to keep from drowning. 
• The mechanization of agriculture has drastically reduced the need for farm labor, which had formed the basis of many small towns. This has led in most cases to shrinking and aging populations while decimating local economies.
• Small business starts, despite encouraging recent data, have been impeded by single-use zoning, development patterns, the difficulty of attaining start-up capital, and the structure of health care and retirement systems.

16th Avenue SW, 2018:
Obsolete big box retail spaces, like industrial sites, blight the landscape

Other social policy challenges:

• Climate change has brought a variety of weather-related crises, with the threat of more and worse in the future, leading to exponentially increasing refugee flows. 
• Housing is in short supply everywhere, especially but not limited to booming metros like Atlanta and Charlotte. Increasing the supply is politically difficult because it threatens the value of existing housing for many families, and is perceived to threaten their quality of life as well.
• Though violent crime decreased dramatically across America between 1990 and 2015, it has since flared up in some places. Police relations with poor and minority populations have been strained by a series of incidents like the 1992 beating of Rodney King and the 2020 strangulation of George Floyd.
• The resurgence of some central cities since 2005 has provided an influx of people and resources in under-invested areas (gentrification), but the benefits have not been widely shared and relations between newer and longtime residents are often strained.
• The COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in our settlement patterns, health care systems, and office-service-based downtown economies. (See Loh 2023, Anderson 2023.)

Civil rights protest, Cedar Rapids, 2020

Political context:

• Misfortunes and mistakes have left most cities' finances vulnerable, and older cities in particular are dealing with huge repair bills for aging infrastructure. (See Marohn 2020.) 
• In the American federal system, city policy choices are constrained by state governments, particularly in states like Iowa where the state legislative majority perceives cities to be alien places. (See Riverstone-Newell 2017, Daigneau 2017.) 
• In particular, the national and state governments have preempted revenue from income and sales taxes, leaving most towns unable to capitalize on economic activity in their places.
• Traditional American cultural cynicism towards government has become more ingrained and affects local as well as national government.

Cedar Rapids Washington High School, 2016:
Proposed sidewalk draws outrage

III

The reasons for the existence of towns--economic opportunity, quality of life, and security for all its citizens--haven't changed since the days of Isaiah and Zechariah and Aristotle. Cities have always had to respond to economic challenges. In the 20th century, economic change to improve the lives of all individuals seemed more possible, but today, in the face of these recent trends, towns' capacities to achieve their goals is uncertain.

In a 2016 post, I reviewed a number of ways American cities were trying to change their economic fortunes. Now we can revisit that set of policy options, with these criteria for what it means for those policies to "work." 

Local economic policies can be sorted several ways:

• Supply-side policies seek to improve areas' attractiveness to investors by reducing costs; demand-side policies seek to improve existing qualities of the area, or better communicate what's already there.
• Narrow benefits target resources at a small number of recipients, anticipating that their actions will in turn result in better outcomes for all. Broad benefits are less targeted, but more people have access to the program's benefits. Typically programs with broad benefits are less dramatic and maybe even less visible, but they also can be more resilient in the face of economic, environmental or political changes. (See this site plugging broadly-based "economic gardening.")
• Scalability, like resilience, are criteria for long-term success. If the program succeeds, can it be repeated or expanded? Once the program is implemented, will there be additional ongoing maintenance costs? What happens if some of the assumptions behind the program are mistaken? 

It's worth noting that nothing works or fails to work everywhere, so the takeaway from this post is going to be complicated. But if you've been reading this blog for any length of time, it will come as no surprise that I'm plugging demand-side policies with broad benefits and demonstrable scalability and resilience. Those are the ones that are best suited to benefit all members of the community, and best adaptable to financial and environmental stress.

Supply-side policies, narrow benefits

(1) Financial incentives. Since the peak of the industrial age towns have pursued large firms with tax benefits, subsidies, and land grants. The poster child for this is the circus engineered a few years ago by Amazon's search for a secondary headquarters. The idea is that large employers bring a pile of jobs, and potentially increase quality of life for residents (more interesting recreational choices, better infrastructure, e.g.). However, sad stories have become common, when businesses fail to achieve the promised outcomes, or to make a long-term commitment to the community. Pennsylvania invested $90 million in the 1970s to lure a Volkswagen plant that closed in ten years; three decades later Ohio provided $123 million to Amazon distribution centers where wages were so low 10 percent of employees qualified for food stamps (Preuss 2021: 33-37). The advocacy group Good Jobs First estimates state and local incentives average $456,000 per job created. Not resilient, not scalable, not inclusive. (See also Cortright 2016, Badger 2014, Zimmerman 2011, Swenson and Eathington 2002.)

Supply-side policies, potentially broad benefits

(2) Regulatory relief. Towns can also pursue firms by reducing the amount of regulations businesses must follow. The logic is the same--make your place more attractive by lowering the cost of doing business--but in this case there are efficiencies to be gained that can facilitate economic activity more broadly. Zoning restrictions (Gray 2022), parking minima (Grabar 2023), and licensing requirements can inhibit the development of walkable neighborhoods and inhibit the restoration of historic buildings. A presentation at the last Congress for the New Urbanism highlighted the use of pre-approved housing plan packages in Spokane, Washington, which are intended to streamline the development process (cf. Steuteville 2023). [P.S. Another article on pre-approved housing plans adopted by Groveland, Florida has appeared on Strong Towns (Abramson 2023).]

All regulations have reasons for existing, so the benefits and costs of deregulation ought to be carefully considered, but sometimes deregulation is a good course of action. Can be resilient, scalable, and inclusive.

Demand-side policies, narrow benefits

(3) Big attractions. The attraction of "game-changing" big amenities like casinos, stadiums, and convention centers is easy to understand but difficult to justify. With exceptions of hotels in existing tourist towns like Las Vegas and Orlando, cities rarely make back their initial investment, and benefits don't reach most people. Where people are displaced, as with the removal of housing to create the sports complex in downtown Washington, people who lack political power are directly harmed. Not resilient, questionably scalable, inclusive only if you like gaming or sports or conventions.

Hotel and concert socialism? the City of Cedar Rapids retains ownership
of the Doubletree Hotel and Alliant Energy Power House

(Museums would go here, too, but the research is more mixed on their effects.)

(4) Eds and meds. The benefits to the city of higher education institutions and major health care centers are clearer. (See Mallach and Brachman 2013, Abel and Deltz 2009.)   Both are labor-intensive (cf. Dorsey 2016), have sunk costs in their campuses, and universities can produce spinoff businesses and spur development of adjacent areas. In contrast to a tech company or auto manufacturer, they are unlikely to decamp for happier shores. Not everyone can be a doctor or professor, of course, and higher education is going through some changes right now; although flagship universities seem exempt, it seems likely that both markets can become saturated at the regional level. Impact is uncertain: Cleveland and Baltimore are national health care centers but still struggling as cities. 

(5) Cultural openness to diversity. Richard Florida in particular [Who's Your City, Basic Books 2008] has argued that an open social culture attracts the "creative class," his term for the knowledge workers who make the economy go in the 21st century. You could argue that an open culture provides broad benefits, because people in marginalized groups could benefit even if they're not creative types. Resilient and scaleable, arguably inclusive.

Demand-side policies, broad benefits

(6) Place marketing. Cities can identify advantages they already have, develop them, and amplify them through place branding and place marketing. (See the profusely-illustrated Ward 1998.) These can include accidents of history--why is Charlotte a transportation and financial center and Seattle a tech hub?--natural attractions like mountains and lakes, thick labor markets (many employers and workers of diverse types), and nationwide reputation. This is going to be easier for a successful city than a struggling place like Baltimore, St. Louis, or rural Iowa.

Cedar Rapids will have a new, magnet high school
with a downtown location starting fall 2023

(7) Educated work force. Cities can seek to improve education, of a technical nature as well as K-12 education, as a means of improving the attractiveness and potential of their work forces. (See Naik et al. 2015.) Richard Florida, again, this time from a speech in Michigan last month (Saunders 2023): 

This once-in-a-century transformation is both an enormous opportunity and an existential challenge for the state as it faces growing competition in these critical new technologies from high-tech hubs across the United States and the world. To ensure the long-run prosperity of its industries, communities, and people, Michigan must focus its economic development strategy on bolstering and aligning the capabilities of its leading corporations, universities, and startups in critical transformational technologies. As importantly, if not more so, the state must enhance its strategies for generating, retaining, and attracting the talent required to compete in this new economic environment.”

(8) Neighborhood development. Cities can support viable core neighborhoods (Mallach and Brachman 2013: 24-29). Walkable core neighborhoods seem to be in great demand, with condo prices in Cedar Rapids fetching higher price than my house on the toney southeast side. Done wrong, this can funnel money to developers and firms that don't need the help viz. the Opportunity Zones created by the 2017 tax bill (Preuss 2021: 38-42), displace vulnerable residents through gentrification, and/or build redundant retail space that goes unused (Loh 2023, Preuss 2021: 44-47). My reading of the Loh article is that we a country have built too much retail and not enough housing, and the sudden change in office habits comes on top of this. (For an argument that missing middle housing, often prevented by zoning codes, is often the "sweet spot" for new construction that is both affordable and profitable, see Herriges 2023.)

Still vacant, seven years later:
1115 6th St SE, 2016

Done right, neighborhood development can improve quality of life for all, preserve open spaces, and preclude unproductive sprawl, while allowing the city to ride out whatever work changes are happening (cf. Gehl 2010). Downtowns that are heavily focused on offices can maybe pivot to more residential, though for a variety of reasons (Badger 2023, Abramson 2023) that's not easily done, as some of the bold conversions in our downtown are showing. Boston is trying to facilitate such conversions with massive tax breaks (Woodhouse and Albright 2023).

(9) Local business development. Cities can provide support for local/small businesses as an alternative to looking for a game-changing deal with a big firm. In Stacy Mitchell's 2016 annotated bibliography she concludes:

local and dispersed business ownership strengthens the middle class.... Locally owned businesses employ more people per unit of sales, and retain more employees during economic downturns.... Locally owned businesses are linked to higher income growth and lower levels of poverty.... 

The Institute for Local Self-Reliance lists an array of pro-local business policies, as well as examples of cities where they have succeeded (Mitchell 2017, Donahue Mitchell and LaVecchia 2018; see also LaVecchia 2016 on managing rent surges.) Ilana Preuss (2021: 68-70) commends attention to small-scale manufacturing (of whatever can be packaged and sold e.g. hardware, handbags, hot sauce), typically an existing local asset that is not being leveraged, which can create a sense of place while providing inclusive employment.

Metro trails network is fun and soon to be fully functional

(10) Physical improvements can make a place more functional for everyone as well as more attractive to investors, employers, and potential residents. These can include improvements to streets, transit lines (Higashide 2019), telecommunications, plenteous public realm like parks and squares (Garvin 2019, Rose 2016 ch. 7), street trees, and pedestrian/cycling infrastructure (Speck 2012 esp steps 5-8). Return-on-investment should be rigorously questioned; a lot of these projects have visual appeal for politicians but streets in particular have long-term environmental and financial impacts (Marohn 2020) that are easy to overlook in the initial euphoria. Streets should be built or rebuilt inclusively, i.e. with the safety of all users in mind, not merely as a conduit for motor vehicles (Marohn 2021, Schmitt 2020).

Framed this way, the prescription is for a series of small-scale policies with broadly-distributed benefits i.e. that aim to improve opportunities for the most vulnerable citizens, and to improve the climate for small business starts and growth.

IV

Thomas Piketty

By now the patience of the hardiest reader is exhausted, and we still have yet to consider the church's question "What role does economic inequality play in causing positive changes?" I'll settle for referring you to my 2014 review of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Belknap/Harvard, 2014), which amounts to an extended musing on the other side of the coin i.e. at what point is inequality a problem? Some degree of inequality is probably inevitable; even the most idealistic example in this chart has 30 percent of the wealth owned by 10 percent of the population. Inequality may even be functional, as a reward for initiative or socially valuable work, and as a pool for investment or philanthropy. 

Inequality becomes problematic when the wealthy are able to buy political power to sustain their advantages, to skew production to luxury goods for the over necessities, and to preclude the opportunity for the rest of the population to advance; arguably the U.S. is at that point now, at least it seems so to me.

SOURCES WITHOUT LINKS

Eric O. Jacobsen, The Space Between: A Christian Engagement with the Built Environment (Baker Academic, 2012)

Ilana Preuss, Recast Your City: How to Save Your Downtown with Small-Scale Manufacturing (Island, 2021)

Jonathan F.P. Rose, The Well-Tempered City: What Modern Science, Ancient Civilizations, and Human Nature Tell Us About the Future of Urban Life (HarperWave, 2016)

Jeff Speck, Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2012)

Stephen V. Ward, Selling Places: The Marketing and Promotion of Towns and Cities, 1850-2000 (E & FN Spon, 1998)