Rolling Out the Blue Carpet

The Democratic Party’s decision to hold its 2004 national convention here in Boston promises to bring great benefits for both the city and the party. Democrats need to focus their political vision, and there is no better place to do that than Boston—the heart of American patriotism and democracy, yet a city that has never hosted a modern national political convention.

Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino and Sen. Edward M. “Ted” Kennedy ’54-’56 (D-Mass.) deserve much credit for this victory. Their lobbying efforts successfully convinced Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe that Boston had the right package of political might and fiscal firmness—an important issue after Los Angeles came up $11 million short in 2000, forcing McAuliffe to do last minute marathon fund raising. This year, the city of New York had intensely lobbied both the Democrats and Republicans for the honor of simultaneously hosting both conventions—even pledging the DNC $22 million more than Boston, but McAuliffe told The New York Times that Boston was chosen because “we have to do something unique with our convention in 2004.”

Indeed, Boston will lend an important spirit to the next convention. The ideological base of the Democratic Party is most prominent here; this nation’s patriotic roots originate in Old North Church, the Freedom Trail, Lexington and Concord. Perhaps some of that revolutionary feeling will rub off on a party currently starving for focus—especially if they hope to beat an immensely popular wartime president.

Boston is also significant politically because Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who virtually declared his candidacy for the presidency last week, could be the Democratic nominee. If this popular Massachusetts senator wins the nomination, there could be no better site to kick off his presidential campaign than the city that has supported him for years.

Boston also stands to gain significantly from the media spotlight and influx of visitors. Boston officials estimate the convention will pump $150 million into the city’s economy, bring 50,000 visitors and create roughly 5,000 jobs. Philadelphia, the site of the Republican National Convention in 2000, estimates the direct economic impact of that convention at $170 million. But Philadelphia’s Mayor Edward Rendell, a Democrat who this month was elected Governor of Pennsylvania, claims the direct benefit is only one-fiftieth of what the city gained indirectly—benefits stemming from public works projects financed in connection with the convention.

Additionally, favorable national attention helped establish Philadelphia’s image as an economically vibrant comeback city. Boston stands to profit similarly: the Big Dig will be well on its way to completion, and the Hub of the Universe will be able to display its rich culture heritage and position itself as a cutting-edge, 21st-century city.

Certain challenges associated with hosting the convention remain to be met, although city officials should be applauded for promptly addressing the great amount of work that lies ahead. Security in the wake of Sept. 11, for instance, will significantly increase municipal costs. Furthermore, the city must brace for thousands of protesters who will inundate Boston as they did Los Angeles and Philadelphia in 2000. Boston’s convention planners have already secured $20 million of the roughly $50 million in estimated expenses. Another $12.5 million is expected to come from private donations. The remaining $17.5 million must come from a combination of city, state and federal coffers.

Governor-elect W. Mitt Romney has expressed a degree of skepticism about contributing to convention expenses in light of next year’s projected $2 million state budget shortfall. Last week, in reference to contributions, Romney said, “I don’t believe in corporate welfare. I certainly don’t believe in political welfare either.” He vowed to examine whether the state would fully recoup whatever investments it pledges for the convention. We hope that Romney’s skepticism is not politically motivated, and that he will negotiate fairly with the city in the coming months for the state’s share of costs.

The Democratic Party has seemed unfortunately adrift of late. Its decision to set sail from Boston Harbor in 2004 might just provide the party with the anchor and compass it needs to navigate its way to victory.