I dream'd a dream

Now that the GOP's convention in New York City is over, the biz pages are sporting stories like this, about how much of an economic boost the convention may have provided the city:

Mayor Bloomberg declared the Republican National Convention an "extraordinary" economic boon yesterday and said it generated $255 million in economic activity, a figure some merchants found dubious.

These things are difficult to measure. Bloomberg's figure, for instance, does not include the potential cost of the tax-free week that may be awarded to downtown merchants as partial compensation for their loss of business due to convention security last week. And while $225 million sounds like a lot of money, in New York City, over the course of a week, it really isn't.

Yet I'm still willing to accept the premise that the arrival of 2,500 delegates and thousands more from the media for a weeklong expense-account spending spree is probably a net gain for the host city of any political convention.

Hosting a convention not only brings in money, it also brings in national attention and media focus.

So here's my suggestion: Let's have our political conventions in cities that really need this infusion of cash and, even more, attention. Four years from now, I propose that the parties hold their conventions in Camden, N.J., and Chester, Pa.

These are two once-great American cities that today, to be blunt, are post-industrial wastelands. They have failing schools, few or no employment opportunities, crime, blight. Each is cleft into two unsustainable parts by a superhighway that takes travelers through and past, but never to, the city itself.

For the delegates of both parties -- and even more so for the corps of media elites who trail along to both conventions -- a week in either of these cities would provide a healthy dose of perspective and of reality. It is possible to construct a party platform in Boston while pretending Dorchester does not exist. And it is possible to compose a platform in Manhattan while pretending the South Bronx does not exist. But in Camden or Chester, the platform committee would have nowhere to hide.

I've picked Camden and Chester because these are the cities nearest me, but they are not unique. America is riddled with such places. Rural America too. Their situation is intolerable, unacceptable -- yet they are ignored by the party establishments and by the national media. Maybe if these power-brokers were forced to spend a few days in such places every four years their problems would find a toehold on the agenda of those in government or the media.

Imagine the reaction of party and media delegates to the news that they would be spending four days in Camden, N.J. Imagine the jokes that would be told, the expressions of disbelief and distaste. Imagine the desperate race to book hotel rooms in Philadelphia or Cherry Hill or anywhere that would help them to avoid seeing or experiencing the reality of the city itself.

That's why this really ought to be done.

Comments

[animus]

If New York City escort agencies were shipping in interstate talent for the Republican convention, how on Earth would Camden or Chester cope? Did you ever think of that? Huh?

[David Weisman]

That would be great. Except the media would stop covering the conventions. Reporters would say "We have to stay there? The whole thing is a publicity stunt anyhow."

[Cryptic Ned]

Those places are too close to Philadelphia's four-star restaurants, hotels, and major-league sports. The industrial northeast has plenty of better options for witnessing economic reality, with nowhere for delegates to hide.

-Albany
-Elmira
-Lowell
-Wilkes-Barre
-York
-Akron
-Youngstown
-Erie
etc.

[Brandon]

If we're making suggestions, I'd love to offer a few myself:

Hammtramack, Michigan (A city within a city--surrounded by lovely Detroit)
Gary, Indiana
Butte, Montana (even less lovely than the name would imply)
Oooohh, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan...just think of the tourism boon.

[Brandon]

If we're making suggestions, I'd love to offer a few myself:

Hammtramack, Michigan (A city within a city--surrounded by lovely Detroit)
Gary, Indiana
Butte, Montana (even less lovely than the name would imply)
Oooohh, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan...just think of the tourism boon.

[Jim]

Typical East Coast elitist bias in the comments so far. Don't let the West be left out consideration for urban hells to host the 2008 conventions!

Compton, CA
Fresno, CA
Stockton, CA
Rural OR, in general
Rural WA, in general
Wyoming, as a whole
Idaho, as a whole
Montana, as a whole
Nevada, esp. the parts still harboring the half-life residue of the A-bomb tests

etc.

[Beth]

As a New Yorker, all I can say is, take our convention, please. I just hope it doesn't break you. I hope your your citizens won't mind staying indoors for the duration of the convention. (The "Green Zone" around Madison Square Garden, was probably as big as many towns -- in population if not in area, and those who were there during the event were politely asked to avoid leaving their homes.) Maybe the can put all the residents into a football stadium like they did that town in Africa that Bush visited. I hope your town is made up mostly of hotel workers, prostitutes and restaranteurs, because those are the only people who will benefit. The rest will have to contend with lost wages due to not being able to get to your businesses during the convention and higher taxes to pay for the police overtime and building costs it will entail.