Urban America Is Still America

Am I Donald Trump’s constituent? In the most literal sense, yes. But I am opposed to most, if not all of his policies, and there’s not much he could do that would change my mind about him.

The same goes for most of the people I know. Hillary Clinton won 80 percent of New York City’s votes. It makes sense that the desires and interests of fellow New Yorkers would not be the first priority of this administration. But the administration’s attitude toward urban dwellers has reached an antipathy that is having an unprecedented impact on policy.

The Trump administration has a systematic agenda to hinder projects in urban areas, hurting the lives of many, if not most, Americans. In the last federal census, 80.7 percent of Americans were counted as living in urban areas. Many of these people voted for President Trump—they are his constituents. It is both morally and politically in President Trump’s interest to meet their needs

The easiest place to see this bias against urban areas is in federal funding for transit projects. In the most recent federal appropriations bill signed into law by President Trump in March 2018, $1.4 billion was designated to be given out by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). So far, none of this money has been given out despite specific directions from Congress for the use of this money. Before the Trump administration, the disbursement of these funds was routine and reliable. The longer the FTA waits, the more local leaders lose political capital, the cost of these projects increase, and citizens are denied of vital transportation projects.

Many of the projects that have not received federal funding are in states President Trump won, such as Texas, Florida, and Arizona. To make matters even worse, the FTA has not given reasons for the delay in funding for many of these projects. An article in The Wall Street Journal quantified this shift in federal policy. A program known as the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery program (TIGER) that provides funds for highway and other transit projects gave rural areas 21 percent of the total funds in the program. This past year, 64 percent of funds went to rural areas. A grossly disproportionate allocation of federal funds to rural areas can only mean that the Trump administration is delivering a form of retribution to the areas that did not vote for it.

Ironically, the federal department that has ‘urban’ in its name—the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)—has announced plans to reverse a rule instituted during the Obama administration that prohibits racially discriminatory policies even if the policies themselves are not explicitly discriminatory. An example of this would be a housing development having a disproportionately low amount of people of color—something Donald Trump was accused of in 1973. HUD also plans to raise rents on low-income families and institute work requirements in order to receive aid. This contravenes HUD’s stated mission of protecting those who are most vulnerable to housing discrimination.

Perhaps the most egregious effort to suppress the interests of urban areas by the Trump administration is the effort to include a question on citizenship. This would lead to a drastically reduced response rate from undocumented immigrants who are counted in the Census. By having counts that are lower than they are supposed to be, areas where these immigrants live will receive less representation in Congress. This will dilute the voting power of the residents of states, meaning they will have less votes in the Electoral College. Areas where non-citizens live tend to be Democratic strongholds. This action could literally impact presidential elections. The Commerce Department, which administers the Census, has given inconsistent and irrational explanations for this decision, first saying the Justice Department had asked for the question to be placed on the Census before saying his aides had asked the Justice Department to request that the question be included. The only explanation for these differing rationales is that there’s no legitimate reason to include this question on the Census.

Previous administrations, Democratic and Republican, carried out programs that didn’t necessarily align with their political beliefs. The EPA under former President George Bush tried to limit the effects of climate change, and the FTA disbursed funds even though urban areas were mostly opposed to former President Bush. The actions being taken by this administration against a certain constituency are extraordinary in their breadth and depth.

The Trump administration doesn’t have to be the best friend to urban areas and work to achieve all of their priorities. No administration can do that; there are many constituencies in this country and, sometimes, their interests conflict. However, the federal government is completely ignoring the interests of urban areas in ways that sometimes veer into illegal territory. A government should try to serve all of their constituents and the Trump administration has made no effort at doing this. When it comes to such a large portion of the United States, the administration needs to do better.