The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Democrats have not made cities safer or more livable

- Walter E. Williams He writes for Creators Syndicate.

In 1976, Gerald Ford won 15 percent of the black vote. That’s the most of any recent Republican presidenti­al candidate. In most elections, blacks give Democrats over 90 percent of their votes. It’s not unreasonab­le to ask what have blacks gained from such unquestion­ing loyalty to the Democratic Party. After all, the absolute worst public safety conditions and other urban amenities for blacks are in cities that have been controlled by Democrats for decades. Let’s look at it.

In 2017, St. Louis had the nation’s highest murder rate, at 66.1 homicides per 100,000 residents. Baltimore came in second, with 55.8 murders per 100,000 people. Detroit was third, with 39.8 murders per 100,000 people. Other cities with high murder rates included New Orleans; Kansas City, Missouri; Cleveland; Memphis, Tennessee; and Newark, New Jersey. With 24.1 murders per 100,000 residents, Chicago ranked ninth in the nation. It was followed by Cincinnati and Philadelph­ia, and Washington, D.C., was 17th.

Now here’s the kicker. Of the 20 most dangerous major cities, all but one had a Democratic mayor. In many of these cities, the Democratic Party has ruled for a half-century or more. Only Tulsa, Oklahoma, with 17.3 murders per 100,000 residents, had a Republican mayor.

I am not suggesting that Democratic control causes murder and mayhem. What I am saying is that murder, mayhem and other violent crime are not reduced by the election of black or white Democrats to run our cities. That means one cannot dismiss out of hand a question then-candidate Donald Trump asked black Americans in a 2016 campaign speech in Michigan: “What do you have to lose by trying something new like Trump? ... What the hell do you have to lose?”

Violent crime is not the only problem for blacks in our major cities. Because of high crime, poor schools and a less pleasant environmen­t, cities are losing their economic base and their most productive people in droves. When World War II ended, Washington, D.C.’s population was about 900,000; today it’s about 694,000. In 1950, Baltimore’s population was almost 950,000; today it’s around 612,000. Detroit’s 1950 population was close to 1.85 million; today it’s down to 673,000. Camden, New Jersey’s 1950 population was nearly 125,000; today it has fallen to 75,000. St. Louis’ 1950 population was more than 856,000; today it’s less than 309,000. A similar story of population decline can be found in most of our formerly large and prosperous cities. In some cities, the population decline since 1950 is well over 50 percent. In addition to Detroit and St. Louis, those would include Cleveland and Pittsburgh.

During the 1960s and ’70s, academic liberals, civil rights advocates and others blamed the exodus on racism — “white flight” to the suburbs to avoid blacks. However, since the ’70s, blacks have been fleeing some cities at higher rates than whites. The five cities whose suburbs have the fastest-growing black population­s are Miami, Dallas, Washington, Houston and Atlanta. It turns out — and reasonably so — that blacks, like whites, want better and safer schools for their kids and don’t like to be mugged or have their property vandalized. And just like the case with white people, if they have the means, black people can’t wait to leave troubled cities.

It’s unwise to be a oneparty people in a twoparty system.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States