Last Word on ’11 Mayoral Election

By Andy Shaw, BGA President & CEO

Photo courtesy Paul Newton/The Southern

Went to hair stylist extraordinaire Jeananne for a trim on Election Day so I’d look presentable for TV analysis that night. She’s a Mount Greenwood girl whose dad was a fireman so it’s no surprise that she liked Gery Chico in the Chicago mayor’s race. That’s the demographic. But she hadn’t voted that day and didn’t plan to. Forgot to register at her new address and couldn’t get enough time off work to make it back to her polling place. So Gery lost that vote. It didn’t affect the outcome, but it did send a message about a missing piece of this messy political system we call democracy.

The turnout in Chicago on February 22, the first contested mayor’s race in two decades in a city mired in multiple crises, was just over 40 percent. By way of comparison, 80 percent of the city’s voters raced to the polls for 1983′s historic election of Chicago’s first African-American mayor, Harold Washington.

You’ve seen and heard all the explanations for the abysmally low turnout in this latest “important and historic” election. The media created a sense of inevitability for Rahm Emanuel, so there was no suspense. He had enough money for endless TV ads highlighting super-star supporters like President Obama and former President Clinton. The black community never warmed up to gaffe-prone “consensus” candidate Carol Moseley Braun. Chico and Miguel del Valle split up the Latino vote. And the February weather was cold and snowy. Back in 1983 there was “real” history unfolding in front of us as Washington, a journeyman congressman and long shot underdog at the outset, built a once-in-a-lifetime “movement” that included most of the city’s Blacks, Latinos and progressive whites—just enough voters to defeat incumbent mayor Jane Byrne and then state’s attorney Richard M. Daley.

Tahrir Square, Egypt (Jonathan Rashad/Flickr)

The elections were, in fact, very different, even though both were labeled “historic.” 1983 was obviously more exciting. But not more important. And that’s why the relatively low turnout on February 22 is so disappointing. We’ve been riveted for a month by the unbelievably dramatic stories about the democratic push that is sweeping across much of the Arab world like a California wildfire—from Tunisia to Egypt to Yemen to Libya and beyond. Hundreds of thousands of people, oppressed for decades by authoritarian regimes, risking their lives by marching and demonstrating. The spirit of colonial America circa 1776 prevails as rulers step down and puppet governments pledge to unbuckle the political straight jackets so their people can breathe in the sweet scent of freedom and democracy—scents we’ve been inhaling for more than two centuries.

Government in the United States is in crisis at all levels. Massive budget deficits, bloated bureaucracies and unsustainable retiree health and pension obligations. Not enough cops on the streets, good teachers in the schools, efficient services or best practices to mimic. All of this applies to Chicago and should have been motivation enough for a big voter-turnout, regardless of the mitigating circumstances.

But only four out of every 10 registered voters made it out to the polls. Maybe that means that only four out of every 10 Chicagoans earned the right to gripe if they don’t like the way Rahm Emanuel goes about cleaning up the mess.

Emanuel said the “election was about reform,” and he’s made a lot of encouraging promises. The BGA will be watching closely, shining a bright light on his government and holding him accountable. And so will the hundreds of “citizen watchdogs” we’ve been training in sessions around the city and suburbs. We headed out to Joliet for a training session this week, with a follow-up one next week. Fifty motivated people who care about their government showed up. They understand, like we do, that our hard-earned tax dollars have to be spent on us, not the politicians. They will be watching the Joliet mayor and city council and the Will County board. But it’s likely they’ll also be paying close attention to Chicago because it’s the big dog in the eyes of the media, and with a high-profile, one-name mayor-elect, the stories will be irresistible—or at least unavoidable.

Jeananne will be watching the same stories. And when it comes time to grade Emanuel’s performance in a re-election campaign, if there is one, she’ll hopefully be registered to vote in her new neighborhood so she can weigh in on the job he’s done. That’ll mean she understands her obligation as an engaged citizen.

We need an army of engaged citizens to advocate for better government alongside reform groups like the BGA. Better government is a right and a responsibility, and we can make it a reality if we’re all in this together. That’s the dizzying dance of democracy. And the ticket to the dance floor is a receipt from the polling place on election day.

Protesting in Egypt (lucy like whoa/Flickr)

Vox Populi: Regular Folks Respond To BGA Chicago Mayoral Questionnaire

No more parking meter deals without representation! Or at least a financial audit!

That’s a rallying cry the next mayor of Chicago should heed before attempting to spin off any major public assets, such as Midway Airport or the city’s water system, to private investors, according to members of the general public who responded to the 2011 BGA Chicago Mayoral Questionnaire.

In addition, responses to the questionnaire indicate the public craves a tighter, leaner and more accountable city government. But a slim majority doesn’t want to reduce costs by chopping away at the medical and retirement benefits of current city workers.

A total of 32 people responded to the BGA questionnaire. Their reactions come after all six mayoral hopefuls participated in the questionnaire and their answers were posted Jan. 26 on the BGA website. At that time, the BGA invited the general public to take the questionnaire and have their responses posted online.

Admittedly, this is not a scientific poll but rather a means of gauging the candidates’ views and comparing them to a sampling of a broader public response. Here are some highlights:

Selling city assets

A solid 100 percent of the general audience said public hearings and greater financial accountability should be required before any public assets are spun off to private buyers. That answer coincides with all the mayoral hopefuls, who agreed that such basic measures are necessary before the city enters any new privatization deals such as the controversial parking meter deal.

Free Forum: Feb. 9 @ 8 p.m.

The BGA will explore privatization at the Feb. 9 forum, “Privatizing Chicago: The New Chicago Way?” at Columbia College, 618 S. Michigan Ave. at 8 P.M.
>> CLICK HERE for details.

Expanding the Inspector General’s reach

Of those responding to the questionnaire, 94 percent say the Inspector General should have the right to go beyond city agencies and investigate the legislative branch of city government. All six mayoral candidates said they favor this proposal.

Reducing the size of the City Council

Of those responding to the questionnaire, 75 percent want to cut the size of the City Council. Of the six mayoral candidates, Gery Chico and William Walls III said “yes”; Miguel del Valle, Carol Moseley Braun and Patricia Van Pelt-Watkins said “no”; and Rahm Emanuel did not respond within the questionnaire’s parameters.

Reducing the salary of mayor and aldermen

Of those responding to the questionnaire, 91 percent said go for it. Of the six mayoral candidates, Emanuel, del Valle, Chico and Walls agreed to consider it; Moseley Braun and Van Pelt-Watkins said “no” to that possibility.

Merging, streamlining or eliminating departments

Of those responding to the questionnaire, 94 percent said there are places to cut. All the candidates agreed.

Cutting medical, pension benefits for city workers

Of those responding to the questionnaire, nearly 55 percent said “no.” Five of the candidates also said “no” to such cutbacks and Emanuel did not respond within the questionnaire’s parameters.

Police and public safety

Of those responding to the questionnaire, 78 percent said they favor realigning police beats to improve public safety and cut costs. Del Valle, Moseley Braun, Van Pelt-Watkins and Walls said “yes”; Emanuel and Chico said “no.”

Meanwhile, 65 percent said the next Chicago police chief should come from the ranks of the city’s police department. Four of the candidates—del Valle, Moseley Braun, Chico and Walls agreed and said “yes.” Van Pelt-Watkins said “no” and Emanuel did not respond within the questionnaire’s parameters.

Personal Finances

Finally, the candidates’ personal finances are of interest to a large majority of those responding to the questionnaire; 87 percent think a mayoral aspirant should reveal his or her tax returns before the Feb. 22 election. Five of the six candidates agreed while Walls said “no.”

This blog entry was reported and written by Robert Reed, the BGA’s director of programming. Contact us with tips, suggestions and complaints at (312) 821-9030, or email our investigative team at rherguth@bettergov.org.