The Economist December 4, 2004
Copyright 2004 The Economist Newspapers Ltd.
A legendary operator returns to Richmond--and stages a power grab
JUMPING
from statewide elected office to city government used to be seen as a
demotion. Now it is close to fashionable. Jerry Brown, California's
trend-setting governor, has resurfaced as mayor of Oakland. Across the
bay, his old sparring partner, Willie Brown, the once-all-powerful
speaker of the California House, enjoyed a swansong as mayor of San
Francisco. Marion Barry, the once-disgraced mayor of Washington (and
the District of Columbia's de facto governor) is now back on the
capital's city council.
Now Douglas
Wilder, the Virginian grandson of slaves who became America's first
elected black governor in 1990, has reappeared as mayor of his poor,
ailing hometown, Richmond. Mr Wilder, an on-again, off-again Democrat,
has no background in local government; but the business-friendly
powerbroker is now recasting himself as an idealistic reformer.
For
nearly 60 years, Richmond's mayor has been a largely ceremonial figure,
selected by the city council from among its nine members. But in 2003
Mr Wilder persuaded Virginia lawmakers and Richmond voters to change
the office so that the mayor would be directly elected (never mind that
a decade ago he helped block the proposal apparently for fear it would
dilute black electoral hegemony).
The
pitch is that only a directly elected mayor can reform rotten Richmond.
The slightly Stalinesque tower that houses the city's government has
seen a spate of corruption scandals. But the bigger problem is racial
Balkanisation. At present, blacks control the city's politics and
whites its economy; and neither trusts the other.
Why
did Mr Wilder run? In 2003 he said he had no interest in the job, but
this summer the 73-year-old suddenly announced he would run. In order
to meet the residency requirement during the election, he had to
forsake his country mansion for a downtown flat. In the campaign, some
cynics privately muttered that Mr Wilder, having emerged from a
bruising battle with the Internal Revenue Service over a $1m political
fund from his governorship, was attracted by the money. The mayor will
be paid $125,000 a year. That didn't stop the old charmer carrying all
the districts of the city, black and white.
Running
for mayor may prove a lot easier than the job. Mr Wilder faces a long
list of problems: an escalating homicide rate attributed to the drug
trade; an expensive public-school system virtually abandoned by whites;
alarmingly high rates for sexually transmitted diseases and teenage
pregnancy; and a rising number of poor, black households without health
insurance. On the plus side, the city's old commercial district is
being restored.
Interestingly, Mr Wilder
seems to be focusing on how he will govern the city rather than what he
will do. Since his election, the smooth operator has announced that he
will replace the city manager and police chief. Now he wants to ask the
state legislature, which in Virginia parcels out power to localities,
for sweeping executive authority. This would include a line-item veto
over the city's budget, similar to that of Virginia's governor.
This
request has set off alarm bells among the city's politicians. When
voters approved the plan to elect the mayor, they were told--by Mr
Wilder as it happens--that the mayor's powers would be limited to hiring
and firing the city manager (who is responsible for day-to-day
operations). Now it seems Mr Wilder is anticipating battles with both
the city council and the directly elected school board. His solution is
to attempt to rule by executive fiat.
To
the extent Mr Wilder is ruffling the city's politicians, his power-grab
may be no bad thing; certainly voters don't mind one jot. But at some
point he will have to decide what to do with that power. That will show
whether the old pragmatist really has some serious ideas about how to
reform his hometown.