Happy New Year!

Since the new year is a time for reflection and forecasting, I’ve jotted down some thoughts on urban trends. Here’s part I, thinking about the elections of 2006 in the US and Canada.

2006 – elections in both Canada and the United States revealed a growing urban-rural divide, politically speaking. In Canada, the federal conservative party (center-right — similar to the left side of the US republican party) failed to win a seat in Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal yet managed to win a minority government in parliament.

In the United States, despite some inroads by democratic candidates in more suburban and rural areas, the urban-rural split continued. Residents of more densely populated cities such as Chicago, tend to vote democrat, and those living in less densely populated areas republican. The map shows blue-democratic areas from the 2004 election — note how they are smaller because of the higher density populations.

So what? I think city-dwellers tend to vote differently for several reasons.

First, cities are a place where you see the reach of “the state” in the form of city services. Because people bump up against rules and regulations as well as government services (the state) all the time, and often feel they benefit from them. People in rural areas are often there because they dislike the regulation and thick network of government services in cities.

Second, urban voters are often concerned about issues centered around what Florida would call “tolerance” – embracing, multiculturalism, immigrants, gay rights, women’s rights. They often look to “the state,” in the form of the courts, to protect these rights. The center and center-left political parties in the US and Canada (Democrats, Liberals, New Democrats and Greens) have specific policies that appeal to those with these concerns.

So we have urban voters willing to embrace a role for government in their lives and rural voters pushing back against government regulations and government-led recognition of certain minority rights.

Looking ahead to 2007 and beyond, this divide is somewhat worrying. In many ways urban and rural / suburban voters live in two different worlds. Look for some political leaders to try to re-frame the debate toward more common ground. I’m not sure what this ground will be, or if anyone will find it.

Guessing here: In the US I’d look for something regarding medical insurance or health care costs to have the potential to reach suburban and rural voters as well as urban ones. In Canada, the Conservatives are hoping tax relief aimed at families will help bridge the divide while the Liberals under new leader Stephan Dion see the Environment as the issue to unite Canadians back under a Liberal banner.