• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 1110 0

people, to go over the heads of party and other intermediaries. But since television was expensive, candidates grew beholden not to local party bosses but to fatcat contributors, media magicians and unions with few community ties. These new bosses were rarely neighborhood-oriented. They demanded not fixed traffic lights but zoning changes, fees, leases or public works which often transformed neighborhoods. Union leaders insisted on more spending for less work. Television allowed citizens to communicate directly. Instead of visiting or writing party or local officials, citizens learned a much more effective means of being heard. They learned how to make “news.” Because the media, particularly television, often defined news as something that was new or entertaining, conflict was at a premium. Citizens came to understand that few paid attention to a civilized press conference or letter. The media paid attention when you “sat in” or dumped your garbage in front of City Hall, joined in a “stall-in” on the Grand Central Parkway, made loud threats. Citizens became actors, vying to make it on the 6:00 news. Actors became broadcasters, mindlessly vying to sharpen the conflict. Voters became fickle critics, determining the ratings.

And elected officials became trapped. Their first principle—political survival—often clashed with their good judgment. Responsiveness to constituents came to be viewed as more important than fiscal responsibility. City Hall was bombarded by demands from constituent groups, each crowding the time and attention of city officials. Mayors and their administration were constantly called upon to extinguish fires, leaving them little time to think, to plan, to exercise calm judgment. Unavoidably, policy makers’ present political needs clashed with the city’s long-term needs. Former city Housing Administrator Roger Starr, now a Times editorial writer, described one such clash: “I must plead guilty to having a sense of panic and to doing what I think all of us do in city government when we feel the ground slipping away beneath us—we do things we cannot afford, and we do them more desperately than ever.” So, Starr lamented, an earlier city and state administration approved construction of a vast middle-income housing complex, Co-op City in the Bronx, siphoning middle-income residents from the Bronx’s still viable Grand Concourse. And Co-op City was built without due consideration for the need of a transportation system to serve the 65,000 people who would live there. The same short-term considerations were followed in sculpting city budgets. Rather than anger groups by slicing the budget or tempering its growth, City Hall tricked its budget or borrowed. Because it could freely do so, a sense of responsibility broke down. Normal budget and borrowing constraints did not apply. Today’s problems were ameliorated, interest groups appeased, by mortgaging the future. Besides, elected officials could rationalize, wasn’t it their responsibility to satisfy citizens? To maintain order? To do good things, didn’t they have to get reelected?

New York’s leaders failed Publius’ test. They worried more about the next election than the next generation. Too often, they ignored the common good, the broader public interest. But citizens also failed Publius’ test. They were selfish, demanding more for ME. Unlike the civil rights movement, which helped legitimize direct citizen action, the goal, too frequently, was not a more just society but a bigger piece of the pie. The larger community—the future, the “dream”—was often overlooked. A neighborhood, a great city, a nation, is not just a collection of competing special interests, all clashing and vying for favor. If there is no sense of community, no shared goals or ties that bind people together, then there is no neighborhood, no city, no nation. As in Salvador Dali’s poignant painting “Premonition of Civil War,” a body is pulled apart.

The delicate local system of checks and balances also broke apart. Specific demands for more spending by special-interest groups were not countered