| Popis: |
In May 2002, a contentious election was held with two Newark mayoral candidates who had two contrasting views of urban politics. Sharpe James, a local civil rights activist and shrewd incumbent mayor, faced a strong challenger, Cory Booker, a 32-year-old neophyte lawyer and city councilmember.1 As the New York Observer pointed out, “Mr. Booker’s candidacy has a storybook quality, pitting a young reformer against an aging, entrenched incumbent.”2 Interestingly, Booker’s and James’ campaign volunteers reflected their politics and demographics. James depended on a “largely African-American cadre of city employees, union operatives and opinionated retirees who consider the four-term mayor a reliable provider and something of an adopted son,” while Booker’s camp was composed of “a starry-eyed collection of grad students, homemakers and fiery tenant leaders.” Even their campaign headquarters’ locations stated something about their politics. James’ was across the street from City Hall and boasted campaign signs, whereas Booker’s team worked out of a ramshackle plastic-bag factory on the city’s industrial fringe with no outdoor campaign signs.3 Ultimately, Newark residents faced two significant challenges: (1) to restore the city’s reputation, leaving its image of urban riots behind them, and (2) to incorporate urban revitalization into political policies. James and Booker differed radically in their approaches to these concerns. While James believed that the best policy incentives related to private sector incentives (mostly in downtown, airport, and port projects), Booker believed that the focus of community development should be on revitalizing areas beyond downtown, especially Newark’s neighborhoods. |
