Tuesday, November 29, 2011


States and Regions

Culturally and economically, Buffalo is closer to Toledo than to New York City. But Buffalo is part of New York State, and its legal and political realities reflect that.

New York is an extreme case of a state in which a single city overshadows the rest of the state. It’s easy to come up with other examples, of course: Atlanta isn’t typical of Georgia, Baltimore isn’t typical of Maryland, and so on. (New Jersey has the unique distinction of being dominated by not one, but two, cities outside of its own borders.)

I was reminded of these intrastate imbalances in looking at Richard Florida’s recent series in The Atlantic about interstate mobility. Florida compares rates of native birth in various states, and notes correlations to economic class, physical health, religiosity, and the like. Broadly, folks in states with relatively little in-migration tend to be more religious, more extroverted, and less open to new experiences than folks in states with higher interstate migration rates. In a sense, he’s mapping the creative class/blue collar divide onto the states.

I have to concede his point as he made it, yet it doesn’t describe much of my daily reality. That’s because I’ve spent much of my life living in regions that tend to get overshadowed by major cities. Politically and economically, they get treated as afterthoughts.

When you’re in the Uticas or Rockfords of the world, it’s easy to regard statewide policies as stalking horses for the agendas of, say, the Manhattans or Chicagos. (I’d guess that many of my non-Northeastern readers would have an easier time identifying the mayor of New York City than the governor of New York State.) That gets even more true as the major metros experience significant in-migration, and the outlying cities don’t. Over time, it’s easy for policymakers -- both offficial and unofficial -- to conflate the large cities with the state as a whole. But what makes sense for Seattle may not make sense for Richland.

That can have real consequences for the overshadowed regions. Just because insurance is huge in Omaha doesn’t mean that it can be duplicated in Hastings, which presumably has needs of its own. Whatever efficiencies centralization might promise could easily be overwhelmed by deadweight losses caused by blindness to local conditions.

Even the folkways are different. I’ve found that it’s harder to break into social circles in areas with lots of people who were born there than it is in higher-turnover areas, just because people in the more settled areas already have what they need. They already have well-developed networks, so they aren’t particularly looking to expand them. That’s not meanness, even if it can sometimes come off as chilly; it’s just satiety.

Politics in the more settled areas tend to be much harder to shift, too. This year’s battles carry echoes of last year’s, which, in turn, were proxies for battles fought a decade before. When the same ruts get run year after year, they get pretty deep and hard to break. That can look like stabilty, or it can look like stasis. Worse, a sort of provincial chauvinism can arise as a defensive response to feeling overshadowed. That kind of insularity -- even if well-intended -- is actually a handmaiden of decline. Breaking that pattern is no small feat, but it’s a necessity if the overshadowed regions hope to rise anew.

Community colleges straddle an awkward divide in places like these. Most community college students intend to stay local after graduation and, in fact, most do. But in the afterthought regions, opportunities tend to be pretty limited; often the only way to move up is to move out. The afterthought regions often export their most talented young people to the metro cities, simply because the metros can offer things other places can’t. That “springboard” function serves a real social purpose, and I’m glad for it, but it can lead to some awkward political moments locally.

Statewide policies written with a single dominant metro in mind can do real damage to the rest of the state. Rochester isn’t just a smaller version of New York City; it’s an entirely different animal. It would be lovely if state lines matched economic and social lines, but they don’t. (Practically, they couldn’t; the economic and social lines move too often.) As long as they don’t, I just hope that the lure of economies of scale won’t tempt states to mistake single -- albeit important -- parts for the whole. Some of us live out here.

That must be interesting to study in places like Nevada where sudden growth shifted power from Reno to Las Vegas in the 1950s.

Is there anything similar going on at your CC? Is your faculty dominated by graduates of one or two large regional universities? I have seen hints in the past that your faculty might be entrenched both in terms of breadth of background as well as little turnover for decades.
Interesting perspective. We face some of the same realities given that we are much closer to a city (mall, restaurants, movies) that is across the state line. Only recently did the state level authorities authorize our institution to offer "in-state" credit to those living 7 miles from campus. A historical study would probably prove a huge impact over time dependent on tuition rates.
Interesting, because in a lot of states, the "outside" exerts disproportionate power relative to the big city where the people and money actually is. Chicago (which some downstate Illinois legislators just proposed should be made its own state so as not to sully Illinois with its *shudder*progressivism*shudder*) would do a lot of things on its own it can't do as part of Illinois.
Interesting, because in a lot of states, the "outside" exerts disproportionate power relative to the big city where the people and money actually is. Chicago (which some downstate Illinois legislators just proposed should be made its own state so as not to sully Illinois with its *shudder*progressivism*shudder*) would do a lot of things on its own it can't do as part of Illinois.
This is especially true on the national level.

State politics can make this even worse. Look at CA with its 2/3 requirement to pass budgets. Small rural districts exert way too much power relative to population size to the detriment of the state. Typically this favors whites over non-whites.
About 60-65% of Arizona's population is in the Phoenix metro, but I'm not sure it dominates the state so much because of the rapid in-migration. Our CC does tend to draw faculty and staff from one local university (guess), though, and that can be stultifying. In my discipline, they all seem to have the same orientation, and an "outsider" feels, well, like an outsider.

I think areas that are close to other states' borders, whether they're urban or rural, have a better sense of there being more than one way of doing things.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?