Johnson Administration: Urban Policy

The nation's cities were the primary battleground of President Lyndon Johnson's domestic policy making. Legislation enacting Johnson's Great Society not only expanded on Fair Deal and New Frontier urban programming, but also initiated new community development approaches to city betterment. These approaches went beyond traditional bricks-and-mortar rebuilding efforts, investing in cities' human capital and social [Page 398]structures. The Equal Opportunity Act of 1964, implementing legislation for the War on Poverty, engaged members of underserved communities in urban policy decisions. The Housing Acts of 1964, 1965, and 1968 significantly expanded the nation's commitment to public and low-income housing and to traditional urban renewal, and it established a Cabinet-level Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Model Cities Act of 1966 attempted an ambitious integration of federal social programming efforts on behalf of cities. The complexity of these programs' design, along with the fact that the federal fiscal commitment failed to match the boldness of program goals, presented often insurmountable challenges to their implementers. Nonetheless, the impact of Johnson era urban policy making is still felt, especially in the increased participation of poor and minority communities in the political processes shaping cities.

Implementation of the Great Society urban programs was influenced by several conditioning factors, including the burden of the Vietnam War and the explosive American racial politics of the era. The war in Southeast Asia monopolized fiscal resources and helped fragment traditional Democratic Party constituencies. The treatment of black Americans was the most prominent social justice issue of the period, and social programming in the areas of poverty and the cities soon came to be viewed as special programming for the black community. At a time when the interracial Civil Rights Movement was being transformed into strident, separatist calls for “Black Power,” this misperception about the aims of Great Society programming undercut its support.