Not Two P's in a Pod

As we get closer to the closely watched democratic primary in Pennsylvania, with pundits trying to figure out how the voters will decide between Clinton and Obama, it is inevitable that the Philly-Pittsburgh comparisons will be made.

I spent 10 years in Pittsburgh before I moved to Philly (where I've now lived for over 20 years), so the contrasts between the two cities are of interest to me. Tom Infield of the Inquirer writes about the differences in Pa. race may be a tale of two cities:

Steelers or Eagles? Pro-football loyalties are not the only differences that divide Pennsylvania's two big cities.

In Democratic politics, the contrasts between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are so sharp that they might decide the outcome of the state's presidential primary April 22.

The Pittsburgh area, according to polls and politicos-in-the-know, is Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton territory.

The Philadelphia area is the Keystone State's biggest stronghold for Sen. Barack Obama.

The differences that 300 miles can make stem mainly from one thing: demographics.

"Look at who Barack Obama appeals to," said John Brabender, a Republican consultant from Pittsburgh who is tracking the Democratic race from the sidelines.

Brabender ticked off the list: younger voters, better-educated voters, more-affluent voters - and black voters.

Percentage-wise, Philadelphia has more of all of these.

Neither of the state's big metropolitan areas - Philadelphia ranks fourth nationally; Pittsburgh, 21st - is anywhere near the most youthful, the trendiest, or the fastest-growing.

But compared at least with Pittsburgh, the Philadelphia area, including its four suburban counties, is young and booming.

I recall that Pittsburgh used to be called the Gateway to the Midwest, which described it perfectly. Although they considered themselves a city from an eastern state, they were definitely more Midwestern in their manners & mindset (not that that is a bad thing). Pittsburgh also has a major chip on the proverbial shoulder about Philly. Always reminded me of the second child's jealousy of the older sibling. Infield captures that sentiment:

The greater rootedness of the Pittsburgh area has led to a greater conservatism, even among Democrats.

"Many of the Democrats are probably more Republican than the Republicans in the east," Brabender said.

It was there, in 1980, that the term Reagan Democrat was applied. It referred to mill workers in the hills and hollows around Pittsburgh - many of them Catholics with roots in Eastern Europe - who believed in the liberal economics of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal but were with Ronald Reagan on social issues such as guns and abortion.

"A bunch of pointy-headed liberals - that's how Philadelphia looks to the rest of the state," said Bill Green, a Pittsburgh-area consultant who had worked with both major parties.

"They see Philadelphia as an elitist, white-collar kind of place," Green said.

* * * *

"Some people say Pittsburgh is more Midwest whereas Philadelphia is more East Coast," he said. ". . . The experiences of the two areas are different."

What was even more interesting was the related article describing the changing demographics of the state, Shift in Pa. population has a liberal, urban edge. Written from the Poconos, the piece notes:

Slowly but surely, Pennsylvania is tilting southeastward.

As the population shrinks in western Pennsylvania and grows in eastern Pennsylvania, the politically pivotal state is becoming more suburban, more Democratic, more eastern. It is becoming more like New Jersey and less like Ohio.

Since 1970, the 16 westernmost counties have lost about 400,000 people, according to census data. Meanwhile, the 15 easternmost and southeasternmost counties have gained about 900,000.

Here in Monroe County, in the heart of the Poconos, the population grew by nearly 30,000 - 20 percent - between 2000 and 2006 as former residents of New Jersey and New York continued to move in, attracted by lower housing costs and lower taxes. To the north, neighboring Pike County gained 26 percent, and in adjacent Northampton County, to the south, population was up 9 percent in the same period.

* * * *

The gains in the south and east, despite big population losses in Philadelphia, have increased the influence of the state's younger, more affluent, more urban residents. Politically, the shift has made the state less conservative, though it remains less liberal than New Jersey and New York.

Even in Chester County, a Republican bastion, Democratic registrations are creeping up and GOP registrations slipping, though Republicans still hold a registration edge of 48 percent to 37 percent.

We owned a home in the Poconos in the 80s and 90s, and the change in "complexion" of the Poconos during our vacation there last summer was striking. The area, once lily white, is now quite diverse, with the influx of people from New York and New Jersey. But the changes are occurring elsewhere as well:

"Pennsylvania has always had a dual personality," said James Cowhey, executive director of the planning commission of Lancaster County, where the population has grown by 56 percent since 1970. "When you get on the other side of Cumberland County, you can sense the Midwestern nature of the place.

"There's always been that dual personality, but the state used to be in much better balance economically. That's not the case now."

Of the 19 counties with a median household income of more than $45,000, only one - Butler County - is in Western Pennsylvania, according to census data.

And the effect can be seen on voter registration.

New arrivals from urban areas "are going to bring with them more cosmopolitan attitudes," said Jensen, the Penn State demographer. "What are the implications of that in voting for one party or another?"

In the last 10 years, the percentage of Democratic voters has increased in most eastern and southern counties, while the percentage of Republican voters has declined. Statewide, Democrats now hold an advantage of 50 percent to 39 percent, up from 48 percent to 42 percent in 1998.

Based upon these changes, I suppose it's not surprising that Obama is making inroads into Clinton's

And finally, as a somewhat ironic postscript to the "bitter" controversy over Obama's remarks about Pennsylvania voters, I'll Have Some Bitters With My Coffee, are the comments of Tom Infield about some of the labor officials at a Clinton event:

At a Clinton campaign appearance last week on Pittsburgh's South Side, two of the 400 people in her audience were burly officials from the Alliance for American Manufacturing, a coalition of labor unions and steel companies.

They complained bitterly about the free-trade pact with China that in this decade has opened up the American market to billions of dollars in low-cost Chinese goods - and has led to the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs. (Emphasis added)

Supporters of Clinton? Bitter? Say it ain't so, Hillary.