Democratic Politics within Philadelphia
Philadelphia, has been well known for its political standing as a Democratic city. The 2020 Presidential Election is a recent example of this, in which Joe Biden won the city by eighty-one percent, compared to Donald Trump’s seventeen percent. Or even the fact that Philadelphia has had a Democratic mayor lead the city since 1951, directly establishing its reputation as a Democrat-run city. What has remained an inconstant variable of such a safely blue city is the varying range of which each administration has been moderate to more progressive. From moderate politicians like former mayor Ed Rendell (1992-2000), to progressive-leaning mayor Jim Kenney (2016-2023). Philadelphia has been playing a perpetual game of tug of war in regard to the progressive-ness of well-established Democratic policy platforms. One law in particular exemplifies this ever-changing dynamic: Stop-and-Frisk.
What is Stop-and-Frisk?
Stop and frisk describes a policing practice through which law enforcement officers temporarily detain, question, and, if deemed necessary, search individuals for weapons or contraband (hence, stopping and frisking). This is typically based on a reasonable suspicion that the person might be involved in criminal activity. Also, as defined by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Pennsylvania, Stop and Frisk “means that a police officer can detain on the spot any person that a police officer suspects to be engaged in illegal behavior and then ‘frisk’ or pat down that person if the officer believes the person is armed.” In particular, in the city of Philadelphia, Stop and Frisk has remained a controversial policy point that many politicians once supported but have dissociated themselves from.
However, in practice, the policy has been associated with the mass increase of racial profiling and civil rights violations from law enforcement to innocent individuals, especially people of color nationwide. In Philadelphia specifically, the law’s implementation—and, with it, a massive upsurge of police stops—occurred at the same time as a progressive decrease in homicides, according to WHYY and the Philadelphia Police Department.
While sometimes seen as an effective platform of public safety, the policy has long divided Democratic moderates and progressives, creating an apparent conflict along inter-party lines in recent years. In Philadelphia, this truth has been perceived through the past three mayoral administrations, as the policy’s role within the city’s ever-growing need for greater safety and regulation remains integral. Through an insightful inquiry of the past three mayors, Micheal Nutter, Jim Kenney, and Cherelle Parker, this divide along the same political lines with regard to public safety reflects the moderate politics that have defined and established Philadelphia as a moderate democratic city.
The Relative Priorities of the Democratic Party in Philadelphia
Micheal Nutter’s Administration (2008 – 2016)
Michael Nutter, a democrat who served on Philadelphia City Council for 14 years prior to becoming the Mayor of Philadelphia from 2008 – 2016, made Stop and Frisk a pivotal platform during his 2007 campaign. His platform aimed to reduce the insurgence of crime and lack of regulation within Philadelphia, as a direct response to the actions taken by the previous administration. Nutter’s platform reflected a commonly inherited moderate stance that combined certain progressive values with many financial and public safety policies that many democrats and republicans could agree with. This approval was reflected through his election results. Nutter won his first Democratic primary with 37% of the vote and his second with 75% of the vote. Within Nutter’s first couple of years in mayoral office, his implementation and supplementation of public safety initiatives such as Stop and Frisk, led to homicides decreasing by “roughly 22%, according to the Philadelphia Police Department. By the end of his term in 2016, the number of homicides reached 277 compared to the 323 in 2007, with the number of stops reaching highs of 400k+.”
Nutter’s policies established him as a successful yet politically moderate Democrat. While his governance was effective in some respects, it highlighted growing divisions within the Democratic Party. These divisions separated leaders like Nutter from a younger, more vocal base of voters who criticized his approach, citing concerns over civil rights abuses and the neglect of marginalized communities.
Jim Kenney’s Administration (2016 – 2024)
The rise and election of Jim Kenney, known as a relatively progressive candidate, was a direct result of the discrimination, inequity, and police abuse stemming from the multitude of moderate administrations and policies prior to his time as Mayor. Kenney was elected with 55% of the vote in 2015 and 66% of the vote within the Democratic Primaries. Running on a “relatively” progressive platform Kenney advocated for raising the minimum wage and ending stop and frisk.
During Kenneys’ administration from 2016 to 2023, the pull back of Stop and Frisk led to a sharp increase in homicide rates; from 277 homicides in 2016 compared to 562 homicides by 2021. Although external variables may have exacerbated the increase in homicides, the observed association prompted many to conclude that the emphasis on social equity and the absence of intrusive enforcement measures was misguided. Thus, highlighting and foreshadowing the response of the moderate voter base within Philadelphia. Moderate politics that prioritizes safety over equity in many situations.
Cherelle Parker’s Administration (2024 – Present)
Cherelle Parker’s rise as the 100th Mayor of Philadelphia was a direct reflection of the state of politics in Philadelphia. Parker’s platform centered around public safety, crime, social equity, and economic vitality. All standard platforms of the current center-left establishment of the national democratic party today. Even proclaiming she would hire “300 more beat cops to patrol every neighborhood and acquaint themselves with the residents.” Parker won as one of the most moderate candidates in the election, beating out other candidates such as Helen Gym, a nationally backed progressive by solid margins, ultimately winning with 32% of the vote.
Parker ran on the platform of reviving Philadelphia’s Stop and Frisk policy, advocating for increased public safety through strengthening and supporting police. However, she has not made any concrete moves to establish such a policy. However, her role as mayor of Philadelphia reflects an establishment of more than just support for public safety, but the moderate values of the democratic parties intertwining with the fabric of Philadelphia Politics. By endorsing initiatives like 76Place (a proposed arena in Philadelphia intended to be the new home for the NBA’s Philadelphia 76ers) and others, Mayor Parker and her Democratic colleagues in Philadelphia have focused on long-term stability over the immediate priorities of many progressive Democrats within the city.
Conclusion
This tough on crime nature of the democratic party within Philadelphia has served as a medium of depicting the political divide between democrats and republicans within the City of Philadelphia. Highlighting how connected the moderate beliefs of the democratic party to the roots of Philadelphia’s electorate. Yet, the real question is whether these center-left beliefs have hindered Philadelphia’s progression as a city or has it been the catalyst for Philadelphia’s success. The ongoing debate over “Stop and Frisk” policy and the balance between public safety and civil rights continues to shape the political landscape of Philadelphia.
Written by: Brad Ferdinand Edited by: Xintong Li