Viewpoint

Aliceann Wolhbruck, Executive Director, NADO Research Foundation

For the past two years, rural advocates across the country have been abuzz about the Red and Blue map. This is the famous illustration that clearly demonstrates President George W. Bush won the 2000 presidential election because of rural voters. Unwisely, rural citizens have relied too heavily on the map alone to justify positions, needs and demands.

In late November 2002, state and local officials representing six national public interest groups met. They took an important first step toward building the organizational infrastructure, policy framework and, most importantly, political will needed to advance a modern, comprehensive federal rural development policy agenda.

During the meeting, which was funded by the Kellogg Foundation, participants covered the spectrum of policy issues facing our nation’s small towns and rural communities. We know the laundry list of challenges, from health care to education to infrastructure development. These issues are debated, and studies by federal agencies, universities and think tanks are recycled.

National Organizations Lead Way for Rural Voice Council of State Governments National Association of Counties National Association of Development Organizations National Association of Towns and Townships National Conference of State Legislatures National League of Cities

This convening was different in one important aspect. The participants, who are in leadership positions in their respective organizations, outlined and agreed to an action plan designed to raise the national dialogue on rural policy. Among the first items is urging the White House to host a National Conference on Rural America and to appoint the members of the new 14-member National Board on Rural America, which was created in the 2002 farm bill as part of the Rural Strategic Investment Program.

Conferences, boards and federal initiatives alone cannot solve the complex and long-standing challenges facing thousands of our nation’s rural communities. But collectively they offer a desperately needed forum for political, private sector, philanthropic, academic and community leaders to explore a new vision for our nation’s federal rural development policy. At a time when the federal government is facing a $200 billion deficit and state officials are dealing with aggregate budget losses approaching $65 billion, the rural voice must re-emerge from the local level.

December 2002/January 2003 Index | Previous Page