Why did Newark produce Cory Booker, and Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick?

[English]

I asked this question in the latest thread about Kwame's federal troubles: where is our Cory Booker? Cory Booker is the mayor of Newark. His story is inspiring [[featured in the documentaries Street Fight and Brick City), and not only is he educated, he walked the talk.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Booker

Across the country, Kwame Kilpatrick's generation of post-Civil Rights leaders of color has made strides beyond the same old tired back and forth about race, black vs. white, us vs. them. There's Cory Booker in Newark, Adrian Fenty in D.C., and more controversially, Deval Patrick in MD and Harold Ford, formerly of Tennessee [[snicker). These politicians seem to have more in common with their Generation X peers and aren't nearly as concerned with black nationalism and the rhetoric of the 1960s and 1970s as Kwame and his administration were.

What happened in Detroit? Why hasn't our city produced a Cory Booker? The people of Newark seem lucky indeed.

[Bearinabox]

Part of the answer may be that Newark didn't produce Cory Booker. He wasn't born into the city's political establishment the way Kilpatrick was here, and never actually lived in the city until he was an adult. I'm not saying Detroit can't be turned around by native Detroiters, but I do think our political culture is far too insular to be healthy.

[detbest]

English, my take is part of the reason why a Corey Booker came about in Newark was due to the previous mayor Sharpe James. James had a lot of corruption and ethical clouds hanging over him when in office. Booker had a lot of the qualities that James appeared to be lacking as these were qualities that the voters put a premium on.

I think this reflects voters tendency to seek qualities in a successor that the most recent office holder lacked. For instance in Detroit, we went from Coleman Young to Dennis Archer. Part of Archer's appeal was that he was so different than Coleman. We then went from Archer to Kilpatrick, again two very different types of mayors. After Kilpatrick you have Bing who possessed a lot of qualities that Kwame didn't have.

In answering your question, following a Dennis Archer, Detroit voters did not place a premium on ethical qualities because these largely were not an issue under Archer and became less of a concern with the voters. In electing Kilpatrick voters placed a premium on other issues. That obviously changed with the voters experiencing the Kilpatrick years and Bing's election. While in Newark, these concerns about ethics and corruption were a prime reason for Booker getting elected due to the problems stemming from the previous mayor.

[Patrick]

Maybe Detroit's extreme racial divide has somethomg to do with it? Maybe it fosters a certain extreme way of thinking not found in any other American city?

[McIPor]

It looks more and more that Kwame was a continuation of the political cronyism of his father and mothers generations than a break from it. In contrast, Booker ran against the same problem in Newark and won.

It helped that Booker was a Stanford grad, Rhodes scholar, Yale law grad, community organizer and inspiring induvidual.

Interesting he was criticised as a "carpet bagger", "not black enough", and "suburbanite" when he first ran. Detroit needs to stop focusing on the past, city and suburbs, and race, and focus on what can be done now and in the future.

[Bearinabox]

English, my take is part of the reason why a Corey Booker came about in Newark was due to the previous mayor Sharpe James. James had a lot of corruption and ethical clouds hanging over him when in office. Booker had a lot of the qualities that James appeared to be lacking as these were qualities that the voters put a premium on.

I think this reflects voters tendency to seek qualities in a successor that the most recent office holder lacked. For instance in Detroit, we went from Coleman Young to Dennis Archer. Part of Archer's appeal was that he was so different than Coleman. We then went from Archer to Kilpatrick, again two very different types of mayors. After Kilpatrick you have Bing who possessed a lot of qualities that Kwame didn't have.

In answering your question, following a Dennis Archer, Detroit voters did not place a premium on ethical qualities because these largely were not an issue under Archer and became less of a concern with the voters. In electing Kilpatrick voters placed a premium on other issues. That obviously changed with the voters experiencing the Kilpatrick years and Bing's election. While in Newark, these concerns about ethics and corruption were a prime reason for Booker getting elected due to the problems stemming from the previous mayor.

Well, the question of whether Detroit voters would elect a Cory Booker type is entirely hypothetical, because nobody like that has ever run for office here. I think the problem here lies more with the candidate pool than with the voters.

[English]

Thanks everyone for the responses! I honestly don't know why this is the case, as Jersey is certainly no racial paradise.

Well, the question of whether Detroit voters would elect a Cory Booker type is entirely hypothetical, because nobody like that has ever run for office here. I think the problem here lies more with the candidate pool than with the voters.

This is exactly what I'm thinking, Bearinabox. My theory is that Detroit has produced Cory Bookers, but you couldn't pay them to return to the city. As I've said ad nauseam, my youngest uncle is a Stanford grad. He hasn't lived in the city since he was 18 years old and packed a suitcase for Palo Alto in 1984.

From what I saw as a student at Renaissance, and as a teacher at Cass Tech, there are a fair number of potential Bookers that we've produced. But the economic and especially the social milieu of Detroit doesn't give them much hope that their efforts will be successful. Why? The poorest residents of Newark and the poorest residents of Detroit came from the same places in the South, right? They arose from the same historical context, right?

So why is Detroit so different?

[detbest]

Well, the question of whether Detroit voters would elect a Cory Booker type is entirely hypothetical, because nobody like that has ever run for office here. I think the problem here lies more with the candidate pool than with the voters.

I think Dennis Archer was very similar to Booker. The major difference being their age at the time Archer was first elected. Many of the same criticisms raised against Booker were similar to the ones raised against Archer when he first ran for office.

[pffft]

An important factor is that KK, as the son of Carolyn Cheeks-Kilpatrick and Bernard, has been told from the cradle that he's entitled, he's a king among men...way over the top. No wonder a normal house isn't good enough for him in Houston...never will be. That's for the little people...

[lilpup]

I think Dennis Archer was very similar to Booker. The major difference being their age at the time Archer was first elected. Many of the same criticisms raised against Booker were similar to the ones raised against Archer when he first ran for office.

Agreed.

If someone ethical like Archer had followed him there would have been a good chance to break the back of corruption in city government. Instead an ultimate con man got the job and not only revitalized but grew the culture of corruption while in office.

The first thing I thought of today when I saw the headline was KK's racist and race-baiting rant at his last State of the City speech. That tactic seems to have largely stopped working now in the wake of his disaster trail.

[mwilbert]

One mayor is chance--as was mentioned, Sharpe James was nothing to write home about. Booker is an outlier on the positive side, Kilpatrick was one on the negative.

On the other hand Coleman Young was re-elected four times while the city collapsed around him. I'm not saying that was all on him, just as I don't blame our current but not overly successful governor for Michigan's problems, but you have to think at some point in there someone else might have been given a shot. But I'd point out that Sharpe James served five terms as well. So I'm not really sure there is a significant difference between Detroit and Newark in those terms.

I did find it scary is that Kilpatrick was re-elected--what on earth were people thinking? At least it was fairly close. I think he wouldn't have gotten a third term. I hope.

[Bearinabox]

An important factor is that KK, as the son of Carolyn Cheeks-Kilpatrick and Bernard, has been told from the cradle that he's entitled, he's a king among men...way over the top. No wonder a normal house isn't good enough for him in Houston...never will be. That's for the little people...

One of Booker's biggest strengths, IMO, is his willingness to go out in the streets and interact with ordinary people, address their concerns, and find out what makes them tick. Kilpatrick spent a lot of time talking at his constituents, but I don't know that he ever really listened to them, and Dave Bing seems entirely indifferent to their existence.

Booker knows a good publicity stunt when he sees one. Take this example from the Wikipedia page:

Booker made news when on December 31, 2009, a constituent used Twitter to ask the mayor to send someone to her father's house to shovel his driveway because her father, who was 65 years old, was going to attempt to do it himself. Booker responded by tweeting; "I will do it myself where does he live?" Other people volunteered, including one person who offered his help on Twitter and 20 minutes later the mayor and some volunteers showed up and shoveled the man's driveway.

I mean, how can you not love a mayor who does that? Can you see Dave Bing personally shoveling somebody's driveway? Kwame? Hell, Ken Cockrel? Me neither.

[McIPor]

Its the corruption, cronyism and pay to play that have been feeding the brain drain, and flight from the city for years. Educated people have come and tried to make a difference and left over and over. Reasonable, ethical people don't fit into a system where you're rewarded based on where you live, who you know, the color of your skin, or how much you'll pay rather than qualifications, and experience. Its actually often the opposite.

[lilpup]

One of Booker's biggest strengths, IMO, is his willingness to go out in the streets and interact with ordinary people, address their concerns, and find out what makes them tick. Kilpatrick spent a lot of time talking at his constituents, but I don't know that he ever really listened to them, and Dave Bing seems entirely indifferent to their existence.

Booker knows a good publicity stunt when he sees one. Take this example from the Wikipedia page: I mean, how can you not love a mayor who does that? Can you see Dave Bing personally shoveling somebody's driveway? Kwame? Hell, Ken Cockrel? Me neither.

Don't you think Detroit has had enough publicity stunts and would like ethical, productive governance for a change instead?

Kwame, Cockrell, and Bing could shovel every driveway in the city but it still wouldn't solve the city's problems.

[English]

One mayor is chance--as was mentioned, Sharpe James was nothing to write home about. Booker is an outlier on the positive side, Kilpatrick was one on the negative.

On the other hand Coleman Young was re-elected four times while the city collapsed around him. I'm not saying that was all on him, just as I don't blame our current but not overly successful governor for Michigan's problems, but you have to think at some point in there someone else might have been given a shot. But I'd point out that Sharpe James served five terms as well. So I'm not really sure there is a significant difference between Detroit and Newark in those terms.

I did find it scary is that Kilpatrick was re-elected--what on earth were people thinking? At least it was fairly close.

I thought that Hendrix was going to win in 2005 myself. However, for some reason, Detroiters just don't like him. They had the chance to select him over Bing, and didn't.

Understood re: Coleman Young. I didn't get the hype, but my grandparents held him up as sacred. I think he could have been a symbol for black progress but maybe he should have been more like Andrew Young in Atlanta and other mayors who didn't seem out for revenge. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind... just because others treated us pretty badly for centuries, we are not justified in putting the middle finger up the second we won't get lynched for doing so. It was always a stupid strategy. Kingian nonviolence served us better than the black nationalists' threat of violence.

I thought Archer was pretty good. I met him a few times as an honors student at Renaissance, and was hugely disappointed when popular opinion of him went south while I was in undergrad. By the time I got back home, he'd decided not to run again.

I think that Archer and Bing are comparable. The majority of the Detroit establishment that remains haven't embraced them, but view them as outsiders. The problem with growing decent folks out of Detroit soil is that the social milieu of postmodern metropolitan Detroit has selected for certain personality factors that are incompatible with the development of 21st century socialization skills. I say that without malice, but from the bottom of my heart, because I was raised here myself. However, our tunnel vision [[both inside and outside of the city) doesn't make for very good politicians.

Maybe that's it. We are a city and a region of pragmatists, yet what we need are visionaries.

[Bearinabox]

Don't you think Detroit has had enough publicity stunts and would like ethical, productive governance for a change instead?

Kwame, Cockrell, and Bing could shovel every driveway in the city but it still wouldn't solve the city's problems.

If you want to solve problems, you need political capital. Bing is limited in his ability to bring about change because a lot of people still see him as an out-of-touch carpetbagger, and the people who want to protect the status quo can capitalize on that to help block his initiatives. It's not about shoveling a driveway per se, it's about giving people the sense that you understand their problems and you care what they think. Bing seems to be a reasonably good executive, but he is terrible at interacting with his constituents.

[Hermod]

Don't you think Detroit has had enough publicity stunts and would like ethical, productive governance for a change instead?

Kwame, Cockrell, and Bing could shovel every driveway in the city but it still wouldn't solve the city's problems.

No, but it sets the tone that the government is to help the people not to use the people.

[Mackinaw]

Detroit will need a little more time, and some good luck. Surely there are talented idealists, mostly from the younger generations [[but not necessarily) living in Detroit. There is a transcendent figure out there, he/she just needs to 1) step up, and 2) be received favorably. Bing is the new Archer, bringing stability and credibility [[but not necessarily Kilpatrick's energy or Archer's judicious aplomb). Following him will, hopefully, be a Booker-- one with broad vision but acute awareness of the particular social problems that are the real core of any city's problems [[and hopefully some eloquence on top of that). Booker, while a Godsent for Newark in particular, also articulates a vision of the role of cities in our country, describing a broad-based agenda for change offered in stark contrast to the poor decisions and mistreatment of cities over the last several decades. In that way, his rhetoric and his programs [[both within city government and within his own non-profit, Newark Now) should be of use to many other cities like Detroit. Newark needs him for another term or two, but after that he would be a desirable candidate for national office because of what he could do for cities [[schools, transit, violence reduction, family and community development...) He's up for re-election this year, and many of his former foes on city council have switched sides to be on his ticket. Only the oldest of the old guard [[Newark's version of the Kilpatricks, say), a few randoms that he has rubbed the wrong way, and the gangsters, oppose him. Interesting account here: http://www.politickernj.com/max/3672...ear-state-city

PM me if you're interested in more info on Booker/Newark from someone who splits time between the two cities at hand.

[Motor City Sam]

If you want to solve problems, you need political capital. Bing is limited in his ability to bring about change because a lot of people still see him as an out-of-touch carpetbagger, and the people who want to protect the status quo can capitalize on that to help block his initiatives. It's not about shoveling a driveway per se, it's about giving people the sense that you understand their problems and you care what they think. Bing seems to be a reasonably good executive, but he is terrible at interacting with his constituents.

I know of many Detroiters, including myself, who are not happy with Bing, but it's not because he's seen as a carpet bagger. It's because he's seen as an extension of the policies and practices Kwame Kilpatrick. He gave raises to his high level appointees and increased his own staff, while demanding wage cuts from the rank and file. He wants to cut into the deficit by slashing employee benefits packages yet his six figure paid appointees continue to receive car allowances. He promised during the campaign to retain Chief Barren, who was popular with police officers and citizens, and replaced him with his buddy Evans. And of course, he retained many of those who were on hand for the Kilpatrick incompetence, including Norm White, Charles Beckham, and others. He's also resisted the idea of a forensic audit of City departments, which could possible uncover some of the waste and outright theft prevalent in City government.

As far as the point of this thread, I think our City does produce it's share of Cory Bookers, it's just that without the backing of the entrenched political machine, it's hard for an honest man to achieve power in politics. I know several Detroit men and women who would make excellent council membes, but have neither the backing or cash to make a serious run. That's one of the reasons I like the idea of Council by districts.

[Bearinabox]

\As far as the point of this thread, I think our City does produce it's share of Cory Bookers, it's just that without the backing of the entrenched political machine, it's hard for an honest man to achieve power in politics.

Booker had exactly the same problem when he was first running for office. Part of being "a Cory Booker," if that's what you want to call it, is being able to overcome the entrenched interests through political tact and plain old-fashioned stubbornness. Just having a vision isn't enough.

[Motor City Sam]

Booker had exactly the same problem when he was first running for office. Part of being "a Cory Booker," if that's what you want to call it, is being able to overcome the entrenched interests through political tact and plain old-fashioned stubbornness. Just having a vision isn't enough.

That's a good point, Bear, and my comment was not meant to belittle Booker's accomplishment.

I believe Newark has Council by district, however, which certainly makes it easier to win a political election as an outsider.

[EastsideAl]

My theory is that Detroit has produced Cory Bookers, but you couldn't pay them to return to the city. As I've said ad nauseam, my youngest uncle is a Stanford grad. He hasn't lived in the city since he was 18 years old and packed a suitcase for Palo Alto in 1984.

So why is Detroit so different?

Newark has the enormous advantage of its proximity to the relatively active, diverse, and healthy economies of NYC and northern NJ. Detroit is at the heart of an increasingly poor and shrinking region tied largely to a single industry that has been dying a slow death for decades and is producing few, if any, jobs. There are almost no reasons for a young person with any resources, economic or intellectual, to stay here or come here from somewhere else.

[Mackinaw]

Good point, Bearinabox.

It took two tries for Booker to become mayor. Despite moving straight to the city's worst neighborhood right after law school and living there for a decade, his detractors, mostly from the previous generation of urban/black 'leadership,' concertedly painted him as too much of an outsider, too elitist, too white/Jewish [[because apparently this is what happens if you get a chance to go to good universities). It took a ton of stubbornness to overcome that intensely demeaning negativity.

I still think there are people in Detroit that are able to take on a similar task.

[cloud_wall]

Along with stubbornness and extraordinary talent, Booker got a lot of help from powerful networks outside Newark. I had a conservative law professor [[Booker is a Dem) who donated money to his campaign because they were friends from Yale.

A lot of people see Booker as a future national candidate [[although he says he doesn't), which added incentive for his friends outside Newark to contribute to his efforts.

Hopefully we get a candidate with similar talents, dedication, and ethics; hopefully he or she can run a serious campaign; and hopefully they get elected and embraced by the people of Detroit.

[pffft]

Has everybody been to Newark? I don't think the young people staying there, are doing so because of the nearby "diverse" economies of Philadelphia and New York -- or they'd move there. The people in Newark are poor and under-employed or unemployed, much like Detroit.