Why isn't Chicago a shiny Democratic success?

[DaveJ]

Please, allow me to muse. If it appears I'm writing anything offensive please take it with a grain of salt, and I want to offer my pre-apology, if necessary, for deviating from this category's usual theme that is dedicated to Democratic campaigns. If I'm offending anyone it certainly isn't my intent.

I have hypotheses with regard to why Chicago is not a shiny example of the perfect democratic city. Chicago Public school students have a college graduation of what, 6.5% these days? The job situation isn't great. Wal-mart in Evergreen Park had 25,000 applications. I don’t think there is much fairness in hiring -- it's still mainly an issue of who you know and not what you know. And many neighborhoods are in aesthetic disarray, typical of urban areas, but more troubling is the prevalent complaints of gang problems which I haven't experienced but apparently the problem is there. Okay, that's not good.

My first hypothesis is that whereas Chicago's government is run with a Democratic spirit in mind, non Democrats and non liberals at heart are still in control. As they say, a few spoiled apples spoil the bunch. Liberals tend to have a trusting attitude. We are happy when our people get elected but assume that the story ends there. But in fact neoconservative fascists take advantage of our trust and easily manage to obtain control and corporative power.

Another problem is, who is running our schools? Sure if we have elected Democrats in power that's great but what about the school administrators? I've talked to a couple and they hardly seemed like great academics, but more like cockroaches who clawed their way into their lofty positions. Take this incident as an example: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.education/browse_thread/thread/5f770cb1b7669305/3a77e614f29e5998. Of course, how can we control the quality of our public school when everyone who is able takes their kids out of the public schools and puts them in suburban or private schools? How liberal is that??

Moreover, whereas Chicago may be Democratic politically, it is hardly Democratic economically. I work with hundreds of people who have no ability whatsoever to advance. I mean, it's like people are pre-assigned to particular socioeconomic status and there’s nothing they can do about it.

I don't think there's much need for me to expound. If you know Chicago you either agree or disagree with me at this point. I'm but one lowly man able to do little by myself, but I will do my best to change things as I advance in the future. In the meantime, I hope that I have acknowledgement and at least a nod of support from others.

[mopinko]

1. your analysis is so shallow

that i can hardly respond. but i will start by saying that i think you have not even started to prove your premise that there is something wrong with chicago.

[Critters2]

2. Well said

That 6.5% graduation rate is especially troubling. A city can't build a future on such a foundation.

[mopinko]

3. let me take this opportunity to point out

that the original sponsors of the impeachment bill are from chicago and suburbs. 10 of the 17 cosponsors so far are from chicago.
i believe all of the us congressman whose districts go through chicago voted to reject the ohio electors in '04.
take a drive through downtown, and tell me how much more shiny you would like it to be.

[Gary Kleppe]

4. Maybe so, but...

...Chicago is also the home of Dick Daley, who likes to send armies of cops to harrass, intimidate, and arrest peaceful protesters, and Rahm Emanuel, who wants the Democratic Party to run Republicans for Congress. So I'd say our own house could indeed use a little cleaning.

[Rich Hunt]

17. The 'house-cleaning' has been under way...

for at least the past fifteen years. We've made a lot of progress. Political observers have noted that the power of the council has grown in relation to the mayor. They've passed much good legislation.

Change takes time. And situations like education and economics are not the sole responsibility of the city - we can only do so much and have to rely on changes in the state and country and the economy in general.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

5. mo, one question re:

the congressmen/women whose districts go through Chicago and the Ohio electors in Jan. 05?

Can you or anyone on the forum help me find out if my illustrious Congresscritter Dan Lipinski voted for or against this???

Secondly, downtown might be "shiny" but what about the neighborhoods?

I don't think anyone who lives in Englewood would say "shiny" in any way describes their part of the city..

[Gary Kleppe]

6. Votes

I believe mo is referring to the bill in the state legislature.

The federal bill, HR 635, has two co-sponsors from Illinois: Davis and Schakowsky. Lipinski won't actually vote on it unless it gets out of committee, which hasn't a snowball's chance of happening as long as the Republicans are in charge.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

7. Gary, the question I asked is about

January 6, 2005 in the US House of Representatives regarding the acceptance of the votes from the Ohio electors in the 2004 Presidential election.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the impeachment resolution that is currently pending in the Illinois House of Representatives.

BTW, even if by some miracle HR 635 is ever allowed out of committee, Lipinski will vote against it. He's a DINO, pure and simple.

[mopinko]

10. electoral college-

schakowsky, evans, danny davis, jesse jr. out of 31 votes.
and working on jeffersons resolution to impeach.

[Southsideirish]

8. Good analysis - the Chicago Democrats aren't "Democrats" at all

they just own that party here. The old man was much more of a "Democrat" than his son/mayor boy.

I'll never forget how he went out to O'Hare to greet Sen. McGovern while stopping here during his ill-fated presidential run.

I doubt if he had much use for him, personally, but as a Democrat and still a powerhouse and king maker, he extended himself in a very public way to welcome the Democratic candidate to Chicago even though most party members were ducking him like mad as his campaign was totally in the "terlet" at that point. The son is more rethuglican than Democrat.

The old man was far from perfect but he had tremendous political instincts - I wish we had him now.

[Inland]

9. Well, seriously, Chicago *should* be a shining example of a Dem city.

1. Chicago isn't a shining example of a democratic city because americans, including a fair number of democrats, don't like cities. They just don't. Chicago is a place to make money and put up bigger than fuck buildings to make more money. It straddles rivers of water and metaphorical rivers of money. Its universities, hospitals, and seminaries churn out ideas that are controversial or arcane. People can't even figure out what the Board of Trade does or how it does it. It is full of immigrants and scrapers and enormously rich types and streets and defined neighborhoods where inhabitants know ever brick. Most americans don't like that shit one bit, and don't think it's got anything to do with their lives. There hasn't been a city built with a centralized urban core since San Francisco was rebuilt after the earthquake, and the large majority don't value them. They like Las Vegas's faux New York and something Kunstler would criticize.

2. Cities have all those intractable problems that politicians and parties don't like dealing with. Education, crime, drugs, etc. National politicians aren't like Daley, who runs the nuts and bolts of local government on the front lines. If they noticed what we were doing that was good, then they might be cornered into helping. So good news gets ignored along with the bad.

3. The particular problem you picked out, public schools, is a problem that everyone acknowledges, and advances have been made. But to put a point on it, it's a statewide problem of taxes and the amount it takes to support schools. Crap public schools are found everywhere poor kids exist. That's a fact.

[mopinko]

11. here's some shiny for ya.

will any big city ever be perfect? fuck no. that's waht is so good about them.

but, stats aside, chicago public schools do a better job with what they get, both in funding and in students, that a lot of these suburbans schools. they get mostly good students, and turn out mostly good legacies. big whoop. and ritchie daley went out and brought this burden onto himself. when he took over, schools were crumbling, over crowded, and crashing.
since he took over schools all over have had their deferred maintenance caught up, new schools have been built, math and science academies opened, and families actually staying in the city. no, i ain't got numbers. just a neighborhood with a good elementary school, which is only barely crowded, after years of classes in broom closets.
did he build a lot of fancy schools for rich kids? yes he did. it's called stemming white flight. it's called maintaining your tax base.

he has made it his mission to complete daniel burnham's plan. take a walk on the lakefront. have you ever been to a city that gave public access to such a valuable asset?
a downtown that rolled up it's sidewalks at 6 pm is now alive. the arts have been a crucial part of the economic plan, with theaters, gallery 37, all kinds of support of the arts. and in the neighborhoods, live work spaces for artists.
bicycle are now a major part of the transportation plan, with bike paths, bike lanes, bike racks on buses, bike cars on trains.
when com ed's license was up for renewal, they were forced to invest in alternative energy. there are green roofs, windmills, and solar panels on public buildings.
domestic partners of city employees now get insurance benefits.
the housing market is booming. and it is booming ALL across the city. and some of the most infamous public housing in the country is now rubble.
and those universities and hospitals that inland is dissing are major economic generators that supply good jobs with good benefits, even to entry level employees. city measures to support this industry were a major component in revitalizing the downtown.

i remember this city when i moved here. it was shabby, scary, crumbling. the shrubbery was stripped out of the parks, out of fear of rapists. white flight was in full gallop. it's a different city today. your results may vary, but it looks pretty fucking shiny to me. what the hell would be good enough for you people?

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

12. mo, like I said earlier, ask the people in Englewood, West Lawn,

or Ashburn if they think their part of the city is "shiny"? I don't think they share your optimism..

[mopinko]

13. shiny as compared to what?

i have not been to those neighborhoods, so i cannot say. but i can say that i drive around the city quite a bit, and it is booming everywhere that i have been, compared to before ritchie got in. here is one more for you- back in the day when you had to explain to most people this new concept of condo, developers were tearing down bungalows, and building three story concrete boxes in their place. if you knew the right person, you could build what you wanted, how you wanted it. that is no longer the case AT ALL. new construction must be attractive, must fit in with the neighborhood. shit gets inspected. and citizens are pretty successful in down zoning existing properties if enough of them want to be.

are you not happy until things are perfect? shiny to me is better every year. new building, new infrastructure (btw, crumbling sewers that he inherited are being repaired.) and high wage, high value jobs created through sound economic planning. like the universities and hospitals.
the city will never be perfect. we will never be perfect. if we were, it would stop being a place of opportunity. room to fail would be gone. the grit would be gone.
what would be shiny to you?

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

14. You just answered my question..

"i have not been to those neighborhoods, so i cannot say. but i can say that i drive around the city quite a bit, and it is booming everywhere that i have been."

I'd suggest that maybe a visit to these areas might open your eyes a bit..

Maybe the next time you go to a Sox game, before you get to Comiskey Park, sorry I won't call the edifice on 35th Street by its other name; you take a ride down 63rd Street or 79th Street from Halsted to Western Avenue and see for yourself...It might just take off your North Side blinders.....

[mopinko]

15. now why are such words being thrown around by fellow dems.

your attitude is completely uncalled for. and you are not answering the questions that i put to you either.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

16. mo, don't take this sooo personally....

You yourself said that you had never been to Englewood, Ashburn or West Lawn.

Granted many neighborhoods in the City have had a boom since "Lil Richie" got elected, but I was just trying to point out that these particular areas haven't. It seems from my "South Side" viewpoint that most of the "goodies" have gone to areas "north" of downtown.

Now I will grant that Bridgeport, Bronzeville, etc have had investment and reconstruction in the past 10-11 years, but no one ever wants to talk about the other areas on the South Side of "shiny" Chicago that haven't been included.

As for the "north side blinders" remark, get over it!!! Where's your sense of humor????

[mopinko]

18. i've been to lots of neighborhoods.

i've been to pilsen, austin, burnham park, kenwood, back of the yards, bronzeville, and more. i am not blind. i take it personally that you insinuate that i am blind to people's misery.
the question was about the application of democratic principles to the running of the city. my answer is that they have been- better schools, investment in the arts, and the sciences, better parks, equal benefits for city workers, energy conservation, architectural excellence, fairness, i could go on. these things are at work in this city, and they are making it a better place.
the question is not 'is chicago perfect' it never will be, i don't want it to be. i don't see that as a useful goal. the question is, are democratic principles working in chicago. the answer, imho, is a resounding yes.
i think you do a disservice to your party to slam a decent mayor, and a good dem. sorry, it just drives me crazy to hear someone who can't support a dem until the last tear is dry.
how many neighborhoods have you driven through lately?

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

19. mo, sorry I do not agree with your assessment of Richard M. Daley..

In my opinion, he's a DINO...

Enough said and do yourself a favor.. chill out when someone disagrees with your POV. Your act is getting really old....

[mopinko]

20. who's takin' what too seriously, now.

chill yourself. i mean that seriously. i don't want hurt feelings here. i just wish you would bother to do more than call names. you didn't address a single thing that i pointed to. just pointed out that slums still exist. i would honestly be interested in a more serious discussion of this issue. i am honestly interested in why people dislike him so. i honestly don't get it.

[jeffrey_X]

21. U.S. History down?

You do realize that African Americans were prohibited from living anywhere EXCEPT for the south side until the late 60's. You do realize the that African Americans were shoved into high-rise public housing that created some of the worst environments in the history of this country. Things have changed, but you are talking about unraveling decades of oppression and segregation. It doesn't happen over night and it doesn't even happen over the course of a few decades. This was 200 years of hate and oppression that you are talking about undoing here. This has happened in every big city across the nation even in small towns such as Cleveland and Indianapolis.

That being said, I do share a little of the disappointment here when I travel to other cities like DC or Atlanta. I think they are much more integrated than Chicago.

It's hard being a shining democracy when you are smack dab in the middle of the midwest.

[mopinko]

22. segregation is a thorny issue

from where i sit, i know i do not see it so much. i chose the neighborhood that i live in because it is integrated. but i am not an ostrich. i am well aware of how ingrained it is in many neighborhoods.
i was a huge supporter of harold washington. i loved having him for a mayor. but he had a hell of a time getting anything done. had we not lost him when we did, we would have pounded out a lot more of these difficulties.
but he did set us on the right track in a lot of ways. "fairer than fair" was ingrained into the budget process, and aldermen from "black wards" now expect to see the same number of miles of streets and sewers in all 50 wards. it just was not like this back in the day. development might not be happening in every single neighborhood, but it is incredibly more wide spread than it was when i moved here.
the history of the black belt, and how those high rises came to be are a sad chapter. but to me, what makes this a "shiny city" is the distance from that past that we have traveled. and how we have done it. fairly.


a couple of other reasons that i support daley-

one- he has pretty much decriminalized pot in this city. i suspect if he could, he would toss all the drug laws out the window. hell, he would probably like to have a hashish cafe on michigan avenue.

two- i respect the way that he stepped up to the plate, and grabbed responsibility for the schools. i am particularly sorry about no child left behind, because i think that without it, he would have been able to put his stamp on education in this city, and i think he would have done a great job. if he had more control, and more money, we would have universal preschool, and we would also have summer programs in the arts and sports. we would also be meeting more of the child care needs with afterschool programs.

he is a smart, practical man. he is as worried about the soul of the city as he is about the sewers. and i, for one, appreciate the trees and the flowers and the works of art that he has brought. imho, you cannot take that shine away.

[jeffrey_X]

23. good points...

Always respect your insight and perspective.

[mopinko]

24. thanks

i needed that.