I'm not just pulling the political connections to the race out my own hat. The article itself touches on the undeniable political implications of the growth of the suburbs.
The effects of the spread are far-reaching. Thousands of abandoned homes and dozens of empty churches dot urban landscapes. Political power is growing in the suburbs, and it's becoming increasingly Democratic. The family farm is disappearing. Fuel and energy consumption have increased. The roads are more crowded than ever.
There are a number of examples of towns in the Capital Region that have lost their long-held Republican stronghold status as one of the results of suburbanization. The best example of working for Democratic change alongside this generational demographic shift is best set forth while keeping in mind the extent of the growth and its epicenter:
A Times Union analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data shows that, in 1940, two out of three people in the Capital Region lived in Albany, Troy, Schenectady and other cities along the Hudson and Mohawk rivers. By 2006, that had dropped to just one of three.
The cities of Albany, Schenectady and Troy each reached their peak populations in 1950, and have since lost more than 95,000 residents combined. Though the region's population slowly grew during the period, the Saratoga County towns of Clifton Park, Halfmoon and Malta added 62,000 people from 1950 to 2006. In Albany County, Colonie alone gained 50,000 in the same period.
The Town of Colonie lies right in the middle of all three major cities. Not only is the best example of the population growth in the suburbs, but it is also one of those previous Republican strongholds going Democratic. The town had no Democratic representative for a century until 1999, when Phil Steck won a seat in the Albany County Legislature. He went on to become the Democratic Party Town Chair, and lead the way to last fall's triumph of the local Democrats in winning the Town Supervisor's post and a majority on the town board.
The ramifications of this can be seen the the Times Union's extensive recent coverage of how the Democrats are now trying to make up for decades of Republican fiscal irresponsibility. But they can also be seen by the simple fact that Phil Steck, one of the local Democratic leaders most responsible for this local change, is now running for Congress.
By the several points raised by addressing the change brought about by suburbanization, Phil Steck's candidacy thus makes perfect sense at the perfect place at the perfect time. As a first point, I see no coincidence in the concurrent examination of the effects the suburbs have brought, culturally and politically, coming for the first time in 50 years at the same time we will decide our next Congressman through the most competitive and open primary in 50 years as well.
We will examine how and why the region changed over the last 50 years. We'll analyze the costs and benefits of those changes. We'll envision how the region might look in 50 years, and how the development choices we make today will determine our collective future.
Fate, it seems, has conspired to come through for us, opening the opportunity to elect someone to represent these massive changes right when their effects put us a crossroads. To have someone in the race who has been a leader on this very issue cements that opportunity, and at the very least gives good reason to give Phil Steck's candidacy for Congress a look. This primary is just one of the development choices.
The second point is that Phil Steck's candidacy itself proves the political shift away from the cities and to the suburbs. The endorsement of Phil Steck by the Albany County Democratic Committee was the latest in a string of endorsement fights in which the growing suburban coalition clashed with the rotting city establishment. This points to the political undertones of statements throughout the article such as this:
But there's also little doubt that suburbanization diminished the regional importance of Albany and other cities in the area.
There are many opinions of the endorsement's aftermath, but one thing is certain: there is no surer place to witness the effects of Democratic growth in the suburbs than in the contested primary for Congress in the 21st, and Phil Steck is the candidate closest to that movement. Indeed, Steck's strongest supporters will say he has spearheaded that movement very successfully.
Finally, as the questions of the effects and future of suburbanization are raised, they are essentially the questions that Phil Steck has been answering as a representative of the suburbs for the past decade. Steck has made answering many of these questions raised by the article central to his campaign for Congress.
But has the rising cost of energy made suburban life become untenable? Will the graying of the population, particularly the baby boom generation, increase demand for walkable neighborhoods close to stores and lessen demand for housing on the fringes?
Nearly every candidate in the race has made alternative energy a cornerstone of their campaign. Yet Phil Steck's position as a suburban representative gives him a unique insight to the issue, and he's been hearing voters' concerns on the issue for years. Mentioning the "graying of the population" touches on another issue not really explored in this installment: the rising cost of health care. It's no coincidence either that Phil Steck has made universal health-care another campaign focus and has racked up the endorsements of more medical professionals than any other candidate in the race. And he began speaking out about the high percentage of property taxes going to fund Medicare very early on in the race.
Times Union editor Rex Smith weighed in on the new series himself that points to the appropriateness of the timing of his paper's report:
Perhaps a good effect of this difficult time is that it may give our communities a chance to take a breath and step back - to assess what has happened to our cities, towns and rural areas and to figure out what we want the Capital Region to be like a half-century from now. Perhaps, in fact, we are at a crossroads, where we can choose a course for our future.
And we are at that crossroads, presented in the form of the most competitive and wide-open primary to select the area's next Congressman. Technically, we stand at that cross-roads every two years; but in reality, it's actually not that often. But today, new changes are being addressed, new change agents are looking for votes, and people are adding their voices. Today, the TU's opinion pages featured excerpts from comments on the paper's new Crossroads blog, moving the voice of the people from the net and into print.
Some of the things the people said made very similar points - people voting with their feet, the Times Union finally waking up to the suburbs impact, the need to "put the brakes" on developers, and even a well-thought appeal for public transportation. The one that jumped out at me the most:
Maybe we'll wake up and elect folks who will actually impart some change rather than clamor to maintain the status quo.
In this primary, we have the chance to do just that because that is exactly the type of campaign Phil Steck is running. And that's not to say that the other three Democrats in the race would be the same; Paul Tonko, Tracey Brooks, and Darius Shahinfar have all taken similar positions on the major issues of green energy, the war, health care, taxes, etc. All four are competing strongly to be a more progressive successor to Mike McNulty, who was known to be a more conservative Democrat.
However...in campaigns where the candidates are so similar in their positions, the questions stops being "Who's right on all the issues?" and becomes "Who best represents the district?"
Clearly, with the Capital Region reeling from 50 years of suburban growth and now faced with the big question of what to do next, there is only one candidate who has actually experienced the growth first-hand and has gone on to represent the citizens living with it. By this measure, Phil Steck is uniquely qualified to represent the people of the Capital Region in Congress. |
