This book was influenced by statements from two eminent political scientists who have shaped my approach to the study of urban politics. The first statement is Paul Peterson's preface to City Limits (1981), in particular its first five paragraphs. Although it was not a statement made specifically to me–I was only to meet Peterson years later–it spoke to me quite directly. Therein, Peterson submits a trenchant indictment of the “loss of intellectual vitality” in the study of urban politics. He had the courage to say what most knew then and all must surely realize by now, namely, that while urban politics as a field of human endeavor remains exciting, fascinating, and central to modern life, urban politics as a field of academic study is an intellectual backwater. The reason, according to Peterson, is that urban scholars have stopped asking questions of first-order importance. Ironically, his accusation is vindicated most powerfully by the fact that City Limits remains the only book on urban politics written in the past 30 years that is still widely read by nonspecialists.

The second statement was made to me by Ken Shepsle over drinks in Harvard Square, just as I was beginning to form the ideas that became my dissertation and ultimately this book. I had met Ken at a conference the summer before, and we stayed in touch as a result of his generosity in mentoring a young student who had taken an interest in some of his work.