The Outstater
‘The Mamdani Effect’ (Part II)
“We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve and no concern too small for it to care about.” — Zohrnan Mamdani
I READ that many cities are ready to make bids for businesses fleeing Zohran Mamdani’s New York. I assume that Indiana metropolises will be among them. The question, though, is in what way does the leadership here disagree with Mamdani.
It is not clear to me that they it does disagree, or at least not emphatically, and certainly not outspokenly. Fort Wayne, for instance, proudly helps fund a government grocery store. The Indianapolis polity includes Islamists in numbers sufficient to nominate a mayor — and its Democrat Party, led by a Muslim U.S. Representative, seems fine with that.
Crime? Indianapolis ranks among the highest in the U.S. for both violent and property crimes. The overall crime rate now stands at 47 incidents per 1,000 residents, giving residents a 1-in-21 chance of becoming a victim — 89 percent higher than the national average. Indianapolis is safer than only 3 percent of U.S. cities. Will we be bragging about that?
Immigration? Fort Wayne is under investigation by the state Attorney General for its energetic pursuit of “Certified Welcoming” status from Welcoming America, an refugee-incentivizing nonprofit with the motto “Everyone Belongs.” The city likes to talk about increasing in population but thanks to Catholic Charities and related groups a good part of that increase is 24,000 first-generation immigrants or 9 percent of the city’s total population. More about that later.
Media? Both Fort Wayne and Indianapolis have daily newspapers enthusiastic about the Mamdani approach, even if not by name. I may have missed an editorial or two, but I have read nothing in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette or the Indianapolis Star that Zohran couldn’t have written himself. That is on topics such as rent regulation, expanded child-care services, city-owned groceries, equity tax reform, softer policing, immigrant protection, investment in homelessness services, more money for public education and investment in green jobs.
Heck, the Journal Gazette recently described the municipal budget as a “moral statement,” that is, a sort of suggestion of noble intentions.
Nor do I have a good feeling about how the ruling class of our cities treats private property. Reuven Brenner, writing in the Wall Street Journal, addresses that concern. He warns that in a typical metropolis, real estate and personal taxes contribute the elephantine share of a city’s revenue. His point:
“The biggest risk to political platforms promising increased taxes in a city drawing such sources of revenues is that all these are mobile. Real estate — or, as the French call it, immobilier — seems to be an exception. But while immobility is the characteristic material feature of land, it is financially mobile, in that its value can rise and fall. Politicians often make the mistake of ignoring this distinction when they tax it.”
Brenner also cites the work of the historian Arnold Toynbee on the the role of immigration across 60 some civilizations: “(Toynbee) notes that the cultural impact of such an influx can be far-reaching, and that ‘a melting-pot can easily turn into a powder-keg.’ That happens when unskilled immigrants are unable to join the occupations that offer social mobility.”
In their pitch for New York companies, Indiana cities cannot easily discount any of that. Let’s hope that promotional photographs of our corn fields, barns and main streets (while they last) will fool the fleeing investors long enough to consider us as a safe haven. — tcl
Comments...