CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events
 

I don't know why a thread like this doesn't exist yet. We keep getting on OT discussions all over the place about Chicago political events. Let's dump all those discussions and articles here.


This should be entertaining:

Now Fioretti is Pandering to the Entire City! I guess he's hoping to turn the red light cameras into the Bilandic Blizzard or Daley Meter Deal of Rahm's career.

With Karen Lewis out of the running for Mayor, Rahm is almost a shoe in for mayor, which means that we will likely see a doubling down on some of Rahm's favorite pet projects such as:

Bike sharing
Bike lane expansions
Ashland BRT as well as other BRT projects citywide
?Red Line extension
Red light cameras
Perhaps more school closings?
McCormick hotel/Depaul stadium/Motor row environs stuff
Headquarters snatching

awesome, hopefully also the destruction of the teacher union...:notacrook:

joking aside, Rahm is prob the best person to get Chicago out of the ditch...I sorta wished we had Bloomberg but Rahm is a good second best choice

Thanks for starting this one. I'd been thinking for a while that we should have this thread.


First - just to carry over a little from the econ thread (of course you have to say this first). Get better to Karen Lewis and I hope her prognosis is good.

I actually think it's a real shame that she is not in the race (or apparently any other serious contender now), despite my opinion that she would not have been a good mayer and 99%+ sure would not have gotten my vote. Most important is that Chicago needs to have a real democracy. Its citizens deserve credible contenders and real debate about important issues. That is of primary importance. Keeping corporations and the already wealthy and powerful with bouyant confidence over the next handful of months that they'll have government and political continuity in this city, perhaps along with no radical change in direction or priorities is decidedly of less importance..........

Anyway, an interesting question now is how low turnout will be this election.......I can't remember exactly what it was in 2011, but of course in Daley's last couple elections it was disgustingly, embarrassingly low....

I really hope we see a new CTA Rail Line funded in the next decade with transfer stations to other lines (*Circle Line*). Something.... anything to connect Pilsen and Humboldt Park. I truly believe it would create a wave of population growth and increase the coffers with property tax revenue.

I love the Bloomingdale Trail project, but I wish that ROW was used for a new CTA line running through the western Portion of Lincoln Park (North/Clybourn area) and Humbolt Park.

People are getting excited about the office park growing in Goose Island, but it is an awful location for anyone living in the South Loop or many northside neighborhoods along the Red, Brown and Blue Lines. It only makes sense for people that are an easy bus route away.

One wonders what effect, if any, the Karen Lewis news will have on the larger State races in particular the dead heat between Quinn and Rauner. It certainly hurts Quinn to a degree since Karen Lewis was excellent at energizing the progressive, Democrat base. The Republicans downstate and in the burbs are rallying around Rauner and will have an easy route to the executive post if Quinn's liberal Chicago base does not turn in big numbers. A heated Lewis-Rahm race might not result in a Lewis victory, but it could have resulted in huge progressive turn out in Chicago and a large number of votes against Rauner.

From this prospective Rahm and Rauner are in the same camp and, not surprisingly, they share a lot of common donors like Ken Griffin. An uncompetitive race in Chicago means no extra stoking of the base for Quinn and hurts his chances. I'm sure Quinn would love nothing more than a progressive firebrand like Lewis touring the South Side and firing up the union machine.

Rahm and Rauner is a dream team for going after unions, pension obligations, and pillaging other states for jobs (or at least fighting back!).

^ Great points LVDW. Rauner has a very good shot at winning this thing.

Sam, in regards to your comments, Crains just had a piece lamenting this very issue. The reality is, we need two viable parties but the GOP just gave up on Chicago a long, long time ago. It's really unfortunate, because Chicago is ruled by whoever can cobble together enough money, and right now it is Rahm. Obviously Fioretti is not going to be a serious challenger.

However, does this mean that we lose Fioretti as an Alderman and keep Rahm as mayor? That's not an altogether bad situation

I am a complete Rahm man but when it comes to the gubernatorial race, I am still not sure. I lean Rauner simply because Quinn supports two dumbass projects, Iliana and Peotone.

Would a Rauner governorship impede Rahm's momentum in continuing to make improvements to the city or would there be a pro-business synergy there?

Or do I simply have to accept Quinn and his Peotone/Iliana madness because he would actually work with Rahm to keep the city moving forward?

If I had to place my vote in the next 10 minutes, it would go Rauner but I know I am missing some key points in comparing these two.

^. Nope, your instincts are right. Quinn sucks.

Uh, the gubernatorial election is in November while the mayoral election isn't until February. I don't think there is much interplay between the two races.

Fioretti has not even started to campaign in earnest, and probably he won't until the November elections are done and they stop drowning him out .. What has he done to reach me, the average city voter? I can barely tell he was running, except I saw one bumper sticker in logan square.

Rauner and Rahm are a match made in heaven, seriously. They're both neoliberals who are pretty agnostic on major social issues, both are pro business, etc.

It's hard to know how Rauner would govern, he basically doesn't have a platform other than lowering taxes, and his entire campaign is based around smearing Quinn instead of promoting fresh ideas. If he is a technocrat, I haven't seen the policy ideas to back it up.

On the other hand, it's hard to see Rauner doing anything that seriously harms the vitality of Chicago. Rauner is a lifelong resident of the city and suburbs and he surely understands that the city is the lifeblood of Illinois' economy. His natural constituency is wealthy white professionals in gentrified city neighborhoods and posh suburbs. His claims to represent the middle class are laughable. But I am sure Rauner will support improved transit service, highway reconstruction/widening, etc

Looks like all 3 of Chicago's major periodicals (Tribune, Sun-Times, Crains) have endorsed Rauner for Governor

I don't know, a heated banter between Rahm and Lewis between now and the gubernatorial race could have resulted in a significantly more energized base in the Chicago area. If the unions are all riled up, then you are going to get a lot more people turning out for Quinn. If you have a strong black political candidate like Lewis telling people to get out to the polls, they will get to the polls.


Fioretti has been trying to do the grassroots thing and even showed up at a neighborhood group meeting in my area. The problem is no one cares what he has to say and he doesn't have anything to attack Rahm with other than "he closed schools" which I think most Chicagoans know was the right decision whether they say they like it or not.

donkeys and elephants both make stinky farts.

Then say goodbye to:

- Collective bargaining for tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of hardworking union members (if you and others really think Unions are a bad thing, then please move to Texas)

- Clean drinking water, not to mention possible severe relaxation of federal/EPA environmental rules. Oh yeah, enjoy having Lake Michigan inundated with Asian carp (even though you Steely have said in other threads in the forum that that damn fish poses no threat).

- Dissolution of film tax credits (I personally know dozens of folks who work in film/tv/commercial production, among thousands in the state who will see their jobs going to Atlanta or NC or even Canada if Rauner wins - believe it)

- (necessary) stalling of in-state hydraulic fracturing, both downstate and closer to Chicagoland, which as we've seen in Oklahoma and TX works wonder for the environment, and doesn't cause any earthquake problems, whatsoever.

- Any possibility for resolving the state pension crisis, unless you don't mind the unemployment rate going up above 9-10% again, within the next 2 years.

- the dream of hiking the state minimum wage to a decent living wage for those who desperately need it most.

Among many other issues that I'm sure you and I will all be affected by.

If turncoat voters such as yourself really think a bitter, ultra-wealthy corporate raider really gives a s**t about you or any of the other 12.8 million of us in Illinois, you're in for a world of hurt the next 4 years if Rauner wins.

Quinn is by no means a saint, but at least he's not painting himself as the Second coming. And if you thought Springfield was gridlocked before Rauner with King Madigan on the throne, grab some popcorn and watch what's sure to be an amazing s**tshow.

like really, really stinky farts.

I get what you're saying, but I disagree about Quinn driving the state into the ground, when the vast majority of the damage was already enacted by Thompson, Edgar, Ryan, and Blago. Also, 'temporary pain' could last years, and dramatically alter the economic and employment landscape for many years after that.

Is the current state of the State that messed up (than say, even 6 years ago) to where a complete shift in political ideology is necessary to make things 'better'? Other than the pension f*ckup, which is a state Constitutional issue and not up to just up to a governor to fix (Quinn tried a number of months ago, and was shot down in court, remember?), what is Quinn doing so so wrong or poorly that Rauner could ever possibly fix?

I am curious, why do people think business people, and in Rauner's case, private equity guy, are good public office leaders? I am serious. I don't get why people are on board for Rauner. I am sure he is a perfectly nice gentleman, but what has he offered except cut taxes. Where are the plans? Quinn was dealth a shit hand and is working dilligently and relatively admirably.

Plus, what is Rauner going to do with a Democratic party controlled legislature run by Madigan??

I will say that Rauner is opportunistic and will say anything, so maybe he is a good politician.

Man, I really hate stinky farts.

^^Got it.
Still voting for Quinn, but I understand your logic.

I can affirmatively vote for Durbin, because I do think he is a good Senator. Plus, as you note, Oberweis is just this side of the worst. As for Madigan. I throw my hands up in despair. I think he is the worst thing the state. I just....ugh.

I'm not sure if you are aware that Illinois massive governing problems are almost exclusively a result of the union-democrat circle jerk that has been going on for a century. Unions elect democrats who pay the unions back with ridiculous legislative rewards and public sector contracts.

Is being like Texas with a 5% unemployment rate, 4% GDP growth, and an economy that is creating jobs faster than just about any other state such a bad thing?

I'm sure a state governor can override the Federal Government (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers. Too bad the governor can't do anything of the sorts...

How is he going to do that with the legislature in the hands of the Democrats?

Honestly? Who cares? The "earthquakes" created by Fracking are essentially undetectable to humans in all but the rarest cases. Quarry blasting causes much more noticeable shockwaves yet I don't see you advocating a concrete ban...

Oh yes, I'm sure addressing the problem that is threatening impending ECONOMIC DOOM will cause the economy to crash. The pension problem here is orders of magnitude worse than anywhere else in the country and, based upon the fat check I just had to send in when I filed my extensions last week, it certainly is not a result of low taxation. That leaves only one cause: the pensions themselves. If the economy is harmed by knocking our pensions back into line with the rest of the country then that's a price we are going to have to pay regardless of who is governing. That's the price we have to pay for living an economic lie for decades.

Yes, hiking the minimum wage will attract countless employers to Illinois. We will be unstoppable then since we are already known as a business paradise... /SARCASM




The fact is that the Democrat-union alliance has been driving Illinois into the ground for decades now and it's time for a change. Whether we like it or not, we are now completely surrounded by right to work states with 21st century employment policies. The days of high wage manufacturing jobs are over and it has nothing to do with China or corporations. Labor is obsolete and the age of automation is upon us. We can choose to ignore those facts or we can adapt to them. Believe me, I'd love to have the Hawthorne Works and Brach's Candy Plant back running at full steam, but to believe anything even remotely close to that will happen ever again is flat out delusional. The same delusions have led to the pension crisis because we have a political alliance between a certain party and a certain special interest group.

This alliance has burdened Illinois long enough and it's time we snap out of it. This isn't about "the 99%" or "corporate raiders" or any of that nonsense. This is about reality and the cold hard fact is that Illinois state government has been living a lie for longer than I've been alive. Every generation (Mayor Daley for a Chicago example) has been playing hot potato with this hand grenade, but I'd like to release the handle (the pin was long ago pulled) and give it a heave before it explodes in our hands. I'm young, I'd rather deal with a decade long depression now than be enslaved to an economic farce for the remainder of my life.

Rauner can't solve everything, but he's a step towards reality. Now if only we could give him a supermajority in both houses like our neighbors to the north.

I'm sorry you don't seem to get it, LVDW. Rauner doesn't care about you, me or anyone or anything in Illinois, that's really what it boils down to.

Quinn isn't great, but then you have sh*t like this about Rauner that should really upset you; and if it doesn't, oh well....

http://davemckinney123.wordpress.com...22/why-i-left/

^. That's disturbing. However, I'm so used to politicians being egotistical slime balls that I just don't care any more. Look at Madigan. Look at Blago.

Bottom line, it's time to upset one party rule in Illinois. Something needs to be done.

This isn't Chicago we're talking about where there hasn't been a Republican in the mayors office since the great depression. The last Republican governor was WAY back in.... 2002, and he just got out of jail. The pension problem has existed since the 40's and really accelerated in the 90's-00's (part of that when republicans controlled all branches). Illinois has been screwed over by politicians of every denomination. Vote for whomever you want, for whatever reasons you want, but let's not act like this is a one party problem.

We need alot of change in Illinois. Voting for Quinn will be a stamp of approval to continue the business as usual. You all say you want to save union jobs and then go out and buy Toyota's and Hyundai's, two companies that are known to be anti union. Put your money where your mouth is.

This pretty much sums up what I was not able to do - thank you.

I agree on the part of this story as it relates to Rauner's involvement - in fact, I think that would have been standard operating procedure for most political candidates.


However, what is potentially extremely disturbing is the Sun-Times' actions. This could be absolutely devastating to that newspaper.

if illinois can elect a moderate, union tolerant republican as governor, that would be great. it's a rare species. i have always held out hope that the republican party could pull itself together enough to field some moderate canidates so that the democrat party would also get it's shit together, and not take it's base for granted.

Union tolerant or not if the jobs don't come to the state because they think it has a strong union presence thats a no win(I am not pro or anti union, but I want manufacturing businesses to have better workable solutions in Illinois). Quinn helped Illinois be one of the slowest states to recover. He rose taxes for business, property and individuals. He also has not even begun to fix the main problem that caused Illinois to be downgraded so sharply. Can we afford 4 more years of that?? I know if Quinn were to get indicted tomorrow for killing baby seals he would still win most of the Democrat votes in Illinois:slob:.

fk it


:~(

Happy to hear that Illiniois is not yet so beholden to one party rule that we can't sometimes elect a Republican to the big office from time to time.

Lets hope that he shakes things up a bit. What we badly need is for business to have confidence in our State again

There was a republican governor in Illinois from 1977-2003. The last one served 6 years in jail. So yes Illinois does sometimes elect republican governors. Maybe you are thinking of the Mayor of Chicago.

^ I'm aware of that, but 11 years is still a long time.

We needed to flip the switch. I don't think one party staying in power for too long is a good thing.

Union tolerant is exactly what we don't need. The problem the GOP has had in Illinois is that they love to nominate ultra socially conservative whack jobs who are completely out of touch with Chicago. Rauner at least knows and appreciates the city and isn't a Chicago vs Downstate partisan. He also is much more temperate when it comes to absurd socially conservative rhetoric.

I think we have a good situation now in Springfield. Rauner doesn't have all that much power backing him up (i.e. no control over the legislature) so he will be forced to work with, rather than against, the democrats. Hopefully he will be able to rally the Democrats (many of whom also recognize the toxic pension issue) to more aggressively address some of the festering long term issues Illinois government is facing.

I am also similarly optimistic in the inverse about Federal politics not that Obama has no legislative power. I don't think it is a problem to have the executive branch split from the legislative branch, but it is an issue to have the House divided from the Senate.

Perhaps Rauner and Rahm can now work out a deal for a Chicago casino. Quinn certainly did not advance the idea one iota.

Good point, this is exactly the kind of deal that is possible under Rauner.

If you thought the huge video billboards along the Kennedy were obnoxious and corporatist, you ain't seen nothing yet.

^ what "huge video billboards"?

There's like barely any friggin visual clutter along the Kennedy. Spend some time in an Asian city.

Several went up in the last few weeks. There's one at Armitage, Foster, etc. Rahm cut a deal with JCDecaux for $15 million.

They're actually not that bad - the glare is kept to a minimum and they are pretty high-res. They do distract from the sublime view of the skyline from the Kennedy though.

I can only hope that what you mean with your Federal analogy is that the republican congress will be forced to work with the president, and not vice versa).....

I ultimately ageed with this - that this one-party domination and super-majority situation was not a good thing. There was/is a shake-up needed, some competition among ideas, and someone who can get some reform done.

(also someone who hopefully can help kill this ridiculous Iliana and Peotone nonsense!)

Well, we certainly do not need someone who is union intolerant, let's put it that way. We desparately need some good-faith discussions and bargaining at the table all-around. One obvious thing that needs to be put in place asap is that new public employees get defined contribution retirement plans........that's just a quick no-brainer of course....

Mayoral Race
 

Now that we got that (imo it actually turned out to be a little bit of a snoozer in some respects) gubernatorial race out of the way, we'll start to pivot to the February Mayoral and Pandermanic races.

If Emanuel had any real competition (at present it certainly doesn't appear that he actually does), don't kid yourselves - he'd be very much at risk. Don't underestimate the depths of his unpopularity with the populace of this city. It's fairly wide and certainly pretty deep (I mean, he is truly hated out in many of da wards). So, although it could get quite interesting, again I have to stress that it's hard to see any real, credible competition from those that have already decleared themselves in the ring......

^ I guess I like Rahm for the very reason he is unpopular among 'Chicawgoans'. To be honest, the more he pisses off the vested interest groups, the more I like the guy.

My father in law visited Chicago with us a few weeks ago and was curious why there are so many people employed to direct traffic at intersections downtown, when we already have traffic lights. I couldn't answer it. Interestingly, 100% of them are African American. Something kinda fishy about that.

Vested interests, people, on the public dime...

forgive me for sounding crass, but karen lewis' brain tumor is the biggest early-hanukkah present that rahm will ever receive in his entire life.

karen might still have lost against rahm's monumental war chest, but she would have made it extremely interesting.

we'll have to see if the opposition can coalesce around garcia or, heaven forbid, panderhack extraordinaire fioretti.

Maybe Rauner can set a new record, for being indicted without even being sworn in first.

http://www.businessinsider.com/illin...e-rule-2014-11

It should be noted ex mayor Jane Byrne passed away today.

Rauner's team will argue, rightly, that state money is invested in a myriad of different firms and it would be unreasonable for him to reject all donations from the financial sector.

Anyway, shouldn't the penalties fall on the donors here and not the recipient?

Well, the courts have ruled that the Illinois Pension Reform is unconstitutional.

Onto the Supreme Court? Or should we just amend the Constitution?

I guess we'll find out if the Illinois Constitution is a suicide pact.