This 6 page paper explores the candidates' policies on urban economic development with a focus on education proposals. Policies are analyzed from an economic standpoint. Recommendations are made. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
but they have had little fame or notoriety. He claims that, behind the scenes, these economists did more for society than the statesmen who get the glory (1999). He
wrote the work of course before he saw the first Bush versus Gore debate. Yet, his writing becomes meaningful while watching the candidates talk about spending large amounts of money.
It begs one to ask whether or not these presidential candidates really know what they are doing with the peoples tax dollars. A lot of money seems to be heading
for the inner cities. Urban economic development is in fact one aspect of Bush and Gores plan to improve America. Gore and Bush each have different platforms regarding urban
economic development. Gore believes that the federal government should offer tools and resources in order to restore communities to its former livable life as well as to preserve parks
and other outdoor areas ("Gore," 2000). This is no surprise coming from someone who wrote a book with the title Earth in the Balance. Gore also proposes tax initiatives
for state and local governments which is equivalent to the leveraging of $9.5 billion (2000, p.A8) in total investment . With that proposal would come a permanent fund of more
than $1 billion (2000, p.A8) per year in federal assistance for land conservation in particular . Gore supports the use of federal transportation money in order to preserve
and repair sidewalks, bikeways and preserve mass transit ("Gore," 2000). Al Gore believes that the presidency can leverage power and encourage regional cooperation (2000). In turn, the promotion of urban
redevelopment and a call to the return of smaller, neighborhood schools is also within the scope of this candidates vision (2000). Incidentally, the small school is something of a Republican