ON THE EDGE OF THE FINANCIAL ABYSS?

9/1/15

The Dow and the S&P are down about 3% for the day as I write this.   This drop is just the latest leg of a prolonged dive in the markets that has brought that average and that index down 12% and 10% respectively from the all time highs they reached in May.

Most of the experts are telling us not to worry.   Despite

• the problems in China and throughout the developing world,
• tanking commodities markets,
• a domestic economy that is so weak that the market doesn’t seem to think it can sustain even its halting growth if the Fed begins normalizing interest rates, and
• mountains of richly priced debt throughout the world,

there is nothing to worry about, we are told, unless one is a trader.   Why?   Because, unlike in 2007-2009, there is little to no risk of financial contagion arising from the aforementioned.   The banks are far stronger than they were in 2008 primarily due to strict regulation (Dodd-Frank, Volcker Rule, etc., etc.), wise management, and resultant stronger capitalizations.

Yours truly is not so comforted by these anodyne assurances.   

Can we be so sure that the banks are safe and that financial contagion is therefore a remote possibility?   How much exposure do these now super safe institutions have to oil and other producers?   How much exposure do they have, in one form or another, to the high yield market, which we know is heavily exposed to the energy markets?   What are the trading desks of these institutions up to?   How exposed are the other components of these organizations to the activities of those trading desks?   How much different is the current management of these mega-institutions from the 2008 management of said institutions?  If the experts’ answer is “very different,” or even “different,” why are the names of so many of the captains of said institutions the same as they were in 2008?

Yours truly is not saying that we are on the precipice, or in the early stages, of another “big one” a’la 2007-2009.   Since I am no longer in my 20s or 30s, I no longer know everything and am no longer able to make predictions about the financial markets with absolute certainty.  One supposes that if I had somehow finagled my way into a job in which I was paid astronomical sums to appear in the media and make predictions on the unpredictable, I would have retained this ability, but I was never able to obtain such employment.  Perhaps in the next life.  But, for now, the years have taught me to be very circumspect regarding my prognosticatory abilities and to avoid investing based on such talents.  

I am also reminded, as I watch those in the know opine with such great confidence on the inherently unknowable future, of a quote by the late, great Mayor Richard J. Daley, uttered in an admittedly different, yet still quite relevant, context:

“What the hell do the experts know?”

So, no, I’m not predicting that we are looking at a 50%+ drop in the markets.   But I’m not as sure as are most of the experts that we are not facing such a calamity, either.

“OKLAHOMA VS. ILLINOIS”: COMMENTS FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS SOMETHING ABOUT ILLINOIS POLITICS

11/26/13

A good friend forwarded a message to me that seems to be making its way around the internet.  The message, entitled “Illinois vs. Oklahoma,” by a Harlan Twible blames the Democrats for Illinois’ financial problems and draws an unfavorable comparison to Oklahoma, but the author’s comments on the latter center around illegal immigration rather than finances.

The piece contained one of my favorite quotes, which the author quoted but did not attribute to its source, which reportedly was Henry Ford…

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian."

Yes, Ford was both an industrial genius and a political kook.   But this is one of those instances when his political/social views were absolutely correct, if it is indeed his quote.   Including this quote was not the only area in which Mr. Twible made convincing points.  Nonetheless, those points need refinement.

I was asked by my buddy to comment on the author’s observations on Illinois’ political/financial situation.   I thought my readers might be interested in my observations.  I limited those comments to Illinois; I didn’t touch the author’s views on Oklahoma’s approach to illegal immigration:

Illinois is a mess; for all intents and purposes it is bankrupt, and if we followed the same GAAP conventions for pensions that corporations do, that would be even more obvious.  Chicago's situation is at least as perilous.  Our situation is yet another case of pols buying people's votes with other people's money; ironically, often with the people's own money, which is what Tocqueville warned us about nearly 200 years ago now.

The Detroit analogy is more on target than most people think.  We continually play a game of denial in Chicago.  We thump our chests and say, while giggling at those who make the Motown analogy, "Chicago isn't Detroit" and then go on to cite our more diversified economy while avoiding the obvious political analogy of reckless spending by pols who remain reassured by the assumption that we will always find a way to pay for their excesses...somewhere down the road.   And in the post-industrial age, the raison d' etres for places like Detroit and Chicago are similarly slim, so the diversified economy argument will weaken, and do so quickly.   Mayor Emanuel and his obsequiants in the media and in favored quarters of the “business community” seem to think that businesses are lining up to live here because they want to bask in the glow of the Mayor’s greatness.  Such is the through process of those who believe that government is everything.

Chicago is a great place.  Illinois is a great place.  I love them both.  But they are not as great as those of us who love them seem to think they are.   There are plenty of objectively nice(r) places to live and to do business in this country.   We are soon approaching a point at which people will not put up with the shenanigans of the pols just to be able to live here.

I'd take issue with just a couple things regarding Illinois in the Twible piece....

First, his chain of command in Illinois is wrong.  The real chain of command would have Mike Madigan at the top and Rahm Emanuel near the top.   The governor has nowhere near the power his office would indicate; this has been the case for a long time in Illinois.   In fact, the governor of this state, whomever he may be, only has power to the extent he can work with, and accommodate, the Democratic power base, which is located in Chicago and manifests itself in control of the legislature and the huge concentration of statewide votes in and around Chicago.  

This leads to my next point.   We have a strange breed of GOPer here in Illinois who, since s/he craves power above all else like all pols, plays a game of get-along, go-along.  (Come to think of it, perhaps our GOPers are not all that strange; most Republicans everywhere crave power above all else and hence continually play a game of get-along, go-along, but I digress.)  This has been the case since at least the '50s, when Governor Stratton played footsie with the first and real Mayor Daley.  So the Republicans in this state are far from blameless for our pension mess.  In fact, the mess had at least some  roots in the Thompson and Edgar administrations, who went along with juicy pension deals with the teachers and other public employee unions so that Messrs. Thompson and Edgar could bask in the glow of teachers' unions endorsements, or at least pats on the head.

But Twible’s major point is certainly correct; the Democratic establishment has controlled things in this state forever.  Mike Madigan has been Speaker of the House for the last thirty or so years, with a brief (I think four year) interregnum in the '90s.   Clearly, the Dems wear the jacket.  But to assume that things would get, or be, much better if the GOP took power is delusional and naive.  Even if they had the guts to attack this problem, rather than attempt to curry the favor of the public employees' unions in order to secure their newfound positions of power, we are probably too far gone to fix this mess.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

GREAT CHICAGO FIRE FEST: “CATHARTIC POWER” AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR SHAKEDOWN

10/31/13

The latest manifestation of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s Bread and Circuses approach to government is upcoming Great Chicago Fire Festival.   One wonders why the Mayor feels a sudden urgency to celebrate the Great Chicago Fire, which took place in 1871, or 143 years before the 2014 date of the Fest.   If the Fest were schedule for 2021, or 150 years after the Fire, one could perhaps understand the need to commemorate the bad rap Mr. O’Leary has suffered for the last century and a half.  But why a Chicago Fire Festival in 2014?   But I digress.

Michelle Boone, the city’s Cultural Affairs and Special Events Commissioner, explains that there will be more to the Fire Fest than a commemoration of the blaze the failed to fell yours truly’s alma mater, St. Ignatius (at the time) College.  No, sir; this will be a far deeper event, an opportunity for collective reflection and expiation of sins.   It seems that Ms. Boone and her team will be working with Redmoon Theater company on the central core of the fest, which will feature “floating sculptures” representing “the thing they (community groups) most want to be rid of in their lives” that will then be set ablaze as they float along the Chicago River in a “huge public ritual” with “cathartic power.”

Several thoughts come to mind even before I reach the major point of this post.

First, hopefully, the campaign to clean up the Chicago River is sufficiently far along that we don’t have a Chicago version of Cleveland’s Cuyahoga incident in June, 1969, in which the mighty Cuyahoga burst into flames, as it had on several occasions before then.   One would hate to see such a “cathartic event” marred by igniting pollutants that cause a repeat of the event the Fire Fest was designed to commemorate.

Second, will Mayor Emanuel be on the list of things community groups “most want to be rid of in their lives”?  How about his predecessor’s parking meter deal?

Third, those who promote and design such “huge public rituals” with such immense “cathartic power” as burning barges on a river are often the same people who tell us religion is silly, riddled with superstition and loaded with meaningless and bizarre rituals.  They do so with a straight face.

Fourth, can’t those of you who are old enough to remember the man and/or who are as intensely interested in the politics of this town as yours truly just see the expression that would appear on Richard J. Daley’s face if one of his aides were to propose such a “huge public ritual” with “cathartic power”?   

Now, for the major point of the post...

The Great Chicago Fire Fest has, according to Ms. Boone, an “operating budget” of a cool $1 million, which should be no problem for a city with so much excess cash lying around.   Perhaps cognizant of such sarcastic criticism, Ms. Boone has assured us that “only” a quarter of a million will come from the city.  The rest will be recovered from, you guessed it, “the private sector,” that perennial milk cow of Messrs. Emanuel and Daley II.

It seems like “the private sector” is constantly being shaken down by the powers that be in this town.  The “private sector” was shaken down for the Olympics that never happened, for the NATO summit, for “after school initiatives” (THE PRIVATESECTOR’S ROLE IN “MODERN” CHICAGO:  SHUT UP AND PAY, 2/20/13), for the Mayor’s “infrastructure trust,” for Millennium Park, for the tourism initiative “Choose Chicago” (CHOOSE CHICAGO…OR CHOOSE MORE POLICE OFFICERS?, 2/21/13), and, seemingly, for whatever strikes the Mayor’s fancy and/or will help him build a record on which he can fashion a run at the White House.

There are two logical ramification of the great private sector shakedown in Chicago.   The first is that businesses in this city will grow sick and tired of seeing yet another pol with his hand out at their door and of being forced to kick in “for a better Chicago” or some such drivel.  They will thus have more reason, in addition to our state and city’s miserable fiscal conditions and the inevitable tax increases that they necessitate, to locate elsewhere.  Chicago’s a great city, and Illinois is a great state.  But there are plenty of great cities and states in this country and the cost of doing business, or simply living, around here is growing less and less competitive.

The second possible ramification is that what is going on when Super Rahm taps on the “private sector”’s shoulder is not a shakedown at all, but, rather, a voluntary arrangement, a cabal of conspirators in cahoots.  The “private sector” willingly bankrolls Mr. Emanuel’s “public rituals” with “cathartic power” in exchange for a wink and a nod, a promise not of ugly consequences for not contributing but, rather, an assurance that such contributions will be repaid in the future in some form, always involving the public purse.   The Mayor and his accomplices in the connected private sector are just exchanging IOUs that will be paid by the taxpaying citizens, many of whom are businesses and business owners who are not in on the deal, who are not the types of “private sector” people that the Mayor finds useful.

Whether businesses are being shaken down or are willingly cooperating for a piece of the pie baked by you, Mr. and Ms. Taxpayer, this is no way to run a government.  If the Mayor and his minions want to spend money on feel good initiatives designed to advance the Mayor’s political career, they should spend the money from public funds and honestly tax the citizenry to raise the money.  Then the citizens can decide, or could if the City Council were not a group of trained circus seals for the Mayor, whether they want to spend money on “public rituals” with “cathartic power.”

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

ILLINOIS DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY: DALEY IS OUT; IS LISA BACK IN?

9/16/13

Now that Bill Daley has dropped out of the Democratic primary race for Illinois governor, we have to consider the ramifications of that move both for the state’s politics and for the state’s fiscal survival.

First, the politics.  We roughly six months will transpire before the March primary, so there is plenty of time for another candidate or two to enter the race.   Could one of those candidates be Attorney General Lisa Madigan?   Recall that Ms. Madigan dropped out in July claiming that her father’s remaining as House Speaker would make it difficult for her to win the race, and, if she did, to govern   She said this with a straight face as if it came as a surprise to her that her dad would not give up his job for life in order to make it easier for his daughter to take the next transitory step in a political career that the press has repeatedly assured her is heading to the very top.   See my 7/16/13 piece, LISA MADIGAN WON’TRUN FOR GOVERNOR:  WOULD YOU WANT THE JOB?

It’s easy to reflexively say “No way” when the question of Ms. Madigan’s re-entering the race comes up, but her potential re-entry deserves more thought than that.

Recall that in the aforementioned 7/16/13 piece, I gave two real reasons for Ms. Madigan’s hasty exit, or non-entrance.   First, as I explained it…

Lisa wanted a coronation, not an election.  Bill Daley made it a fight.

Whenever one is facing the incumbent office-holder in a primary, one is in for a fight.  The last person to win such a brawl in this state was Mike Howlett, the jovial but limited then Secretary of State who was able to topple Dan Walker in the Democratic gubernatorial primary in 1976, but only with the last major demonstration of the raw, dominant power of the Richard J. Daley Machine.   To say that Mike Howlett’s primary victory was Richard J. Daley’s last hurrah would not be an overstatement.  But I digress.   Daley went on to let the ever likeable Howlett hang out to dry once the bothersome Dan Walker had been dispensed with, but that is another story and another digression.  

A three way race involving the incumbent Pat Quinn (no relation), Bill Daley, and Lisa Madigan would have been tough to the point of impossibility for both of the two challengers; incumbency, even an inept incumbency, is almost always strong enough to face down two strong challengers.  Yes, Ms. Madigan had the advantage of being the only woman in the three way race and a press that simply can’t get enough of their imagined incarnation of Wonder Woman, and those factors might have been enough for her to prevail against not only the long odds against the incumbent but also Ms. Madigan’s “daddy problem,” but it would have been a long shot.  Once Daley got in, Madigan had little choice but to stay out unless she wanted something she had never experienced before…a very difficult, arduous election.

So does Daley’s leaving open a door for Lisa Madigan?   No.   Now it is not Bill Daley who is making it a tough fight; it is Pat Quinn who is making it a tough fight.  As I said only most recently in my 8/15/13 piece, PAT QUINN PUTS PAT FITZGERALD ON A VESTIGIAL COMMISSION:  IS THE GOVERNOR RUNNING THE TABLE?

Pat Quinn (no relation) may have a deserved, or otherwise, reputation as a reformer, but he is showing he didn’t get this far in Chicago and Illinois politics by spending an inordinate amount of time consulting the Marquis of Queensberry.

Pat Quinn has made some brilliant political moves which, no matter what Bill Daley says (see below), went a long way toward convincing Mr. Daley that this race was unwinnable or very close to unwinnable.  It would be equally nearly unwinnable for Lisa Madigan; she’d prefer to wait around for a coronation.

The second reason I gave in my 7/16/13 piece for Ms. Madigan not entering the race was, as I put it

The better reason is not quite as political but very simple:   Would you want to be governor of Illinois right now?   This state is in a hell of a mess, with bankruptcy looming over the fast approaching horizon.  In all likelihood, nothing will be solved before the next governor takes office.  One does not blame an ambitious pol like Ms. Madigan for not wanting to tie her dinghy to such a sinking ship.  It would be much easier, and conducive to obtaining that big job that every politician ultimately wants, to become a U.S. Senator, and that job may become available, albeit not necessarily for the asking, in 2016.

The state of Illinois is in a hell of a mess.  The daughter of the man who cannot deny a good measure of the responsibility for getting us in this mess was not the person to get us out of it.   Maybe (probably?) no one can get us out of it.  

So Lisa Madigan’s real reasons for dropping out—that it would be too difficult to win the primary and that the state is in such a fiscal mess that no sane person, and especially no sane, politically ambitious person, would want the job—remain valid.  So I don’t anticipate a dramatic Madigan re-entry into the race.   But anything can happen, and Ms. Madigan tends to believe the hagiographic press she gets.

The second aforementioned reason for Ms. Madigan not getting into the race gets us beyond the politics to the fiscal prospects for Illinois:  they stink.  Bill Daley, who, despite looking really bad for deciding to get out of the race after saying that he got into it after a great deal of thought, is no dummy.   In giving the reasons for his taking his leave, he stated

“To be honest with you, losing it wasn’t the worst of my fears. In many ways, winning it and having the commitment of five years to nine years was something I struggled with. You know, the dog catches the tire and, boom.”

A point of useful digression:   Whenever anyone uses the term “To be honest with you…” or something like it, and especially when a politician uses that term, yours truly immediately assumes that s/he is lying the rest of the time, probably all the time.  If s/he weren’t lying all the time, why would s/he have to preface anything with “To be honest with you”?  To do so is to indicate that one is not being honest when one does not use that preface.   So I believe and so I advise my students.   They need someone like me to balance this starry-eyed optimism fad.

His campaign manager, Pete Giangreco, said that Mr. Daley dropped out after considering “what it’s going to take” to dig Illinois out of its fiscal hole.

So Bill Daley, by his own words and through his campaign manager, is telling us that the state is in such bad shape that Mr. Daley can’t fix it, or at least not without an exertion of time, effort, and will that he is unable to provide.   This is coming from a man with no shortage of ego.   What does that tell you about the fiscal state of the Land of Lincoln?

 See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

BILL DALEY IS SHOCKED, SHOCKED (!) THAT PAT QUINN WOULD MAKE A PURELY POLITICAL APPOINTMENT TO THE CTA BOARD

8/9/13

More on the governor’s race, which has been neglected, until today (See today’s other post, THE MADIGANS, THE SPEAKER’S OFFICE, AND THE GOVERNOR’S RACE:  “YOU SEE,THAT’S WHERE MY ARGUMENT FALLS APART…”), since our trip (See 8/2/13’s seminal CLARK GRISWOLD, MR. PEABODY, AND ME), partially because I have been writing about more important matters (See 8/7/13’s THE NATION’S GREATEST PARTY SCHOOLS: THE I’S HAVE IT!)…

Governor Pat Quinn (no relation) has appointed Frank Zuccarelli to a spot on the board of the Chicago Transit Authority (“CTA”).  Mr. Zuccarelli does not live in Chicago; he lives in the south suburbs.  Mr. Zuccarelli is also holds the “job” of Thornton Township Supervisor, one of the many vestigial sinecures we in these parts provide our public servants.  More importantly, for purposes extending beyond the subject of this post, Mr. Zuccarelli is the Democratic Committeeman of Thornton Township, which produces more Democratic primary votes than any other township in the Cook County suburbs.

Bill Daley, Mr. Quinn’s sole, up to this point (See my 7/16/13 piece, PAT QUINN VS. BILL DALEY:  “THIS GUY DOESN’T THINK THIS IS A SHOW; HE THINKS IT’S A FIGHT!” for the reasons I think the words “up to this point” are vital.), opponent in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, is upset with Governor Quinn’s appointment of Mr. Zuccarelli to the CTA Board. 

Mr. Daley points out that Mr. Zuccarelli, while probably qualified, doesn’t live in Chicago and, after all, this is the CHICAGO Transit Authority Board to which Mr. Zuccarelli has been appointed.  This is true, though, while not being certain, I suppose that there have been, from time to time, CTA Board members from outside the confines of the city itself.

Mr. Daley also points out that holding a part time job on the CTA Board would result in Mr. Zuccarelli’s double dipping, since he already holds the job of Thornton Township Supervisor.   This is the sort of double dipping that so recently helped get former Metra Chairman Brad O’Halloran in so much trouble.  (See my 8/4/13 piece, WHO WOULD WANT TO BE ONTHE METRA BOARD?  WELL… for only my latest commentary on that sordid yet par for the course in these parts affair.)  Mr. Daley’s argument also rings true in this instance.

Mr. Daley also argues that Mr. Zuccarelli was appointed by Mr. Quinn for blatantly political reasons; i.e., to secure Mr. Zuccarelli’s very formidable support in the upcoming Democratic primary race for governor pitting, for now, Mr. Daley against Mr. Quinn.  Mr. Daley is also absolutely correct in this contention.

But so what?

Mr. Daley’s criticizing Mr. Quinn for engaging in the type of raw, nearly bare-knuckled politics that results in the likes of Mr. Zuccarelli winding up on the CTA Board is surely a case of (excuse the hackneyed metaphor) the pot calling the kettle black.   Appointing political allies to posts in which they could wield power and double dip is the type of thing the Daleys have been doing since Richard J. Daley started climbing the ladder in the ‘30s.  It is also, by the way, the type of politics that Mr. Quinn, while clearly not identified with, has not eschewed in his long career in, er, “public service.”   He may have a much vaunted reputation as a crusading reformer, but he didn’t survive, and prosper, this long in Chicago and Illinois politics by spending inordinate amounts of time at choir practice.

So, yes, Mr. Daley is right; Mr. Quinn’s appointment of Mr. Zuccarelli to the CTA Board was pretty much raw, naked, largely unabashed politics.   But, to use another hackneyed metaphor, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander…and Mr. Daley had better get used to it.  See, again, my 7/16/13 piece.

This is going to be one heck of a race.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

FAREWELL, DICK MELL…SORT OF

7/6/13

Dick Mell announced last week that he will be leaving his post as 33^rd Ward alderman after 38 years on the job.  The Chicago media, generally hostile toward guys like Dick Mell, are, predictably, falling all over themselves with accolades for the City Council’s second longest serving member and something of a living relic of a bygone era, a time depicted in my books, The Chairman and The Chairman’s Challenge.  The press’s apparent hypocrisy, though, is understandable; gentlemanliness, or gentewomanliness, is almost always to be applauded and one of its manifestations is finding something nice to say about people at such milestones in their lives.

As you might guess, yours truly has some thoughts on Dick Mell who, despite being a self-made millionaire even before entering politics and despite running one of the most effective ward machines in this most political of cities will always be known first and foremost as Rod Blagojevich’s father-in-law.  (See my 6/19/13 post MIKE MADIGAN, JOHN CULLERTON, AND PENSIONS:   SOMETIMES A CIGAR IS JUST A CIGAR? for some background on the relationship between Dick Mell and his infamous son-in-law.)

First, Mr. Mell would like his daughter Deb Mell, who is currently a state representative, to replace him.   Mayor Emanuel has instituted new procedures for selecting replacement aldermen that are made to look fair, transparent, and representative.  But one suspects that Mr. Mell would not have left without the fix being in for his daughter, so Ms. Mell will probably have no trouble ascending to the post her father has held since she was seven years old.   She does have at least nominal competition for the job, however, in the person of State Senator Iris Martinez.

Note that I used the verb “ascending” when describing a move by Deb Mell from the state legislature to the city council, and that was no mistake.  Perhaps only in Chicago would a move from state representative or state senator to alderman be considered a promotion.   But this follows a proud tradition.   For example, back in 1973, when Roman Pucinski was effectively moved from the United States Congress to alderman of the 41^st Ward, he, probably rightfully, considered it a promotion and thanked Mayor Daley, and not at all disingenuously, for moving him up the ladder.   We take our aldermen seriously in Chicago.   Sometimes one wonders why, but I digress.

Second, the Chicago Sun-Times should have been more careful in its article about Mell’s retirement (“On way out, Mell talks family ties,” 7/6/13, page 6).   Deep into the story, the Sun-Times says

Mell operated (emphasis mine) one of the strongest ward organizations in Chicago, one that relied on precinct captains even after court rulings loosened the stranglehold the Democratic Machine had on government hiring and weakened other ward organizations.

Even though he is leaving his aldermanic seat, Mr. Mell will remain Democratic committeeman of the 33^rd ward and thus will continue to operate “one of the strongest ward organizations in the city.”   The post of committeeman isn’t what it used to be for a variety of reasons, but a ward’s committeeman controls the party apparatus in that ward.  Mr. Mell is not giving that up, at least not yet.

Third, in his parting comments, Mr. Mell had a few, and one suspects as few as possible, things to say about his infamous son-in-law, to wit…

“People loved him on the campaign trail.  He was phenomenal.   But when it came to actually governing, he was a problem.”

Hear, hear, despite the understatement in the second sentence.

Mr. Mell also said that if he could do it all over again, Blagojevich

“…would have never gotten out of state rep.  He would never have went (sic) to Congress.  He would have been a state rep until he decided to quit or be a lawyer or whatever.”

That’s great sentiment in retrospect.   But you can’t tell me, or anyone remotely sentient, that Mr. Mell only discovered the deep character flaws in his son-in-law only after Blago was elected to Congress and then to the governor’s mansion, both of which would have been impossible without Dick Mell’s help.   Many of us could see what a popinjay Mr. Blagojevich was long before he got to the governor’s office.  (In a later post I will tell you of the time yours truly and then Congressman Blagojevich sparred for an hour on a talk radio program…and will especially note Blago’s parting words to yours truly.  It’s a good story, but not as good as it sounds.)  Dick Mell is no fool and he was far closer to Blago than any of us who followed Blago’s career, so he had to be aware from pretty much the get-go of the poltroonishness of his son-in-law.  Yet Mr. Mell still used all of his powers and all of his abilities to put Blago first in Congress and then in the governor’s office.  For all his hemming and hawing now, and for all his other accomplishments, Mr. Mell’s foisting his son-in-law upon the people of Illinois (And I am by no means absolving our misinformed or simply uninformed, voters; anyone who has read just about anything I’ve written knows that.) will remain his most salient “achievement.”

Fourth, Mr. Mell went out of his way to be not all that uncharacteristically sycophantic toward Mayor Emanuel:

“Of all the mayors I worked with, I really like this guy (Emanuel) because he’ll make a decision based on what he believes is right.”

Mell went on to laud the Mayor’s “courage” in reworking the parking meter deal (See RAHM EMANUEL AND THE PARKING METERS:   “GOT TO MAKE THE BEST OF…A BAD SITUATION”, 4/30/13)…

“You think if I were mayor I would have touched those parking meters?”

It could, of course, be that Mr. Mell genuinely likes Mr. Emanuel and has enjoyed working with him, or at least that he has liked working with nominal north sider Emanuel more than he liked working with south sider Rich Daley.  But one suspects that Mr. Mell is following a not so proud tradition of the supposed tough guy aldermen, committeemen, and other pols around this town:  being shameless suck-ups to whoever happens to be occupying the Fifth Floor at the time. 

Perhaps the esteemed aldermen have no choice.   Beginning with Richard I and continuing with Richard II and Rahm Emanuel, Chicago mayors have almost completely emasculated the ward organizations, so the aldermen have to beg for the crumbs that fall from the Mayor’s table.   In this case, Mr. Mell really needs something from Mr. Emanuel:  the appointment of Deb Mell to the 33^rd ward city council seat.   One wishes, however, that these Chicago pols would stop masquerading as tough guys when, in reality, they have been reduced, and more or less willingly, to lap dogs and lickspittles.

Last, readers of my books, the Chairman and the Chairman’s Challenge, liked to try to guess who Chairman Eamon DeValera Collins is in real life.  When they aren’t guessing Ed Burke, Mike Madigan, Ed Vrdolyak, Bill Banks, or Rich Daley, they are guessing Dick Mell.  People ask me frequently if Collins is one of the aforementioned gentlemen, and Mell’s name comes up a lot.   My answer is the same for Mr. Mell as it has been for any other suggestion:  Chairman Eamon DeValera Collins is nobody in Chicago politics and he is (almost) everybody in Chicago politics.  He is one man who embodies the characteristics of many men.   Collins, as Don Vito Corleone was for the New York Mob of the mid twentieth century, is an amalgam of characters in Chicago politics of the latter part of that century.   Chairman Collins, like Alderman Mell, is an intriguing, enduring character, but, unlike Dick Mell, Eamon Collins is fictional.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

MIKE AND LISA MADIGAN: WHAT’S A DAD TO DO?

6/19/13

A poll commissioned by Bill Daley’s gubernatorial campaign (See, inter alia, most recently my 6/17/13 post BILL DALEY’S GRASP OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS:   WAS I MISINFORMED? and more saliently my 6/13/13 post BILL DALEY AND THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE:   THE BROTHER ALSO RISES? and my 6/6/13 post “GOVERNOR BILL DALEY…SENATOR BILL DALEY.   THERE JUST WASN’T THE TIME…”) has shown that Lisa Madigan’s being Mike Madigan’s daughter will hurt her if (when?) she runs for governor.  

The poll showed that Lisa Madigan would defeat the only formally announced GOP candidate for governor, State Treasurer Dan Rutherford, by 11 percentage points.  However, when voters were reminded that Lisa Madigan’s dad is House Speaker Mike Madigan, the capo de cappi tuti of Illinois and Chicago politicians and were asked how they’d vote if Mr. Madigan stayed on as speaker, the race between Ms. Madigan and Mr. Rutherford becomes a dead heat.

Hmm…

Several things come to mind.

First, Bill Daley ought to look in the mirror; how does his being Rich Daley’s brother, and Dick Daley’s son, play downstate or in the ‘burbs?   The aforementioned poll did not explore this question.

Second, poll participants had to be reminded that Lisa Madigan’s dad is Mike Madigan?   And these people get to vote?   Remember this the next time someone pontificates on the wonders of democracy.

Third, let’s leave aside for a moment the near fact that if Lisa Madigan were not Mike Madigan’s daughter, she would not have served in the Illinois House and Senate, never been considered for Attorney General, and certainly not now be the governor in waiting.  Let’s instead buy blindly into the silly supposition that Ms. Madigan’s being Mr. Madigan’s daughter actually hurts her.

What could Mike Madigan do to help his daughter if his being Speaker of the House and chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party really is a disadvantage for young Lisa?

Some have suggested that Mr. Madigan could step down as Speaker but retain chairmanship of the Party, where they claim the real power lies.   But those who make this argument are stuck in the ‘60s or ‘70s.  As has long been the case, and as is illustrated, for the careful reader, in my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, the days of the power lying in the party office rather than the public office are long gone.  Rich Daley knew this when he was elected mayor in 1989 and eschewed the post of Cook County Regular Democratic Chairman, which his father held even longer than Richard J. held the mayor’s office.  Young Mr. Daley even left his post as committeeman of the 11^th Ward, giving the post to his brother John.   Rich Daley knew that, largely through the efforts of his father, power had shifted from the Party to the Fifth Floor of City Hall.   To the extent that holding a Party position, even THE Party position, might imperil holding onto the Mayor’s office, young Mr. Daley wanted no part of that party office.

If you don’t believe me, first read my books.   If that doesn’t work, ask how much power the following men, who held the office of Cook County Regular Democratic Party Chairman after Richard J. Daley, wielded.   You might even honestly ask yourself if you remember some of these names:

George Dunne

Ed Vrdolyak

Tom Lyons

Joe Berrios

Fast Eddie Vrdolyak had some power, but he would have had that power even if he weren’t Party Chairman.   A few people remember George Dunne, but largely as something of a Daley lackey or as a guy who got into a little trouble with some comely female county employees in his twilight years.   Does anyone remember Tom Lyons?  I could describe him; nondescript northwest side committeeman who wanted a job no one else wanted.  But even I had to look up his name.   Does anyone think Joe Berrios was or is nearly as powerful as Richard M. Daley or Rahm Emanuel?   Or even Ed Burke?

It’s no different at the state level; the Party is largely toothless in this media age.   Mike Madigan’s power derives not from his heading the Party but, rather, from his having been Speaker for all but a few of the last thirty years, his thus being constantly cultivated by people who know how to return favors, and his therefore having the ability to make or break virtually any Democratic member of the legislature.   Retaining the chairmanship of the Party means little or nothing; ask, if you can remember, the following gentlemen who preceded Mr. Madigan in the post:

Gary LaPaille, who was something of a Madigan lackey who stepped aside for his boss

Vince DeMuzio

Cal Sutker

Mike Madigan, being a good dad, might resign from the Speakership, or even the House, if Lisa becomes governor, and promise to do so during the campaign.   In the opinion of yours truly, however, he would be crazy to do so.   For Mike Madigan, the Speaker’s office is a permanent, lifetime job.   The governor’s office, on the other hand, holds no such employment security.   If Ms. Madigan does run and win, and both are still highly likely, she might serve for eight years; Even if she manages to match Jim Thompson’s 14 year tenure, that would leave her in power only half the time her father has been Speaker. 

Mike Madigan, even as a good father, is highly unlikely to give away the permanent job of Speaker so his daughter can be governor for a relatively few years.   I realize he’s 71 years old, but that isn’t old and I am quite sure that Mr. Madigan doesn’t consider himself old and/or anywhere near the twilight of his career.   I’m not making a prediction here; I don’t know Speaker Madigan and, even if I did, he wouldn’t tell me what he is thinking.  I am saying, however, that to give up the Speaker’s job would be silly and Mr. Madigan is not given to doing silly things; see today’s other post MIKE MADIGAN, JOHN CULLERTON, AND PENSIONS:   SOMETIMES A CIGAR IS JUST A CIGAR?

One supposes that Mr. Madigan could stay in the House but replace himself with some stooge (There is no lack of stooges in Illinois politics.) who would serve as a placeholder until Governor Lisa Madigan either loses office or moves to Washington (or possibly replaces another major Chicago political figure whose ultimate goal is moving to Washington, but I digress) in some capacity or another and Mike Madigan feels safe getting his old job back.  But stooges sometimes start to think that they aren’t so stoogish after all and get comfortable in their old jobs.   The consequences can be dire; see yesterday’s post THE LEGEND LIVES ON FROM THE TEAMSTERS ON DOWN OF THE BIG GUY THEY CALL JIMMY HOFFA.  Mr. Madigan is not likely to take such a chance.

Those who haven’t ignored the obvious in their pursuit of today’s story realize that Lisa Madigan is helped a heck of a lot more than she is hurt by her being Mike Madigan’s daughter.   Mike Madigan is highly unlikely to give up his post as Speaker so that his daughter can become governor for a few years.   Ms. Madigan’s lineage will not hurt her in a Democratic primary, especially a three-way Democratic primary.   And, given the state of the GOP in Illinois today and its, er, lack of credible candidates, her being the Speaker’s daughter might hurt Ms. Madigan, but not fatally so.  Mike Madigan’s having been Speaker more or less continuously for the last thirty years did nothing to stop him from winning a supermajority in the House in 2012, despite pathetic GOP efforts to the contrary.  Either the voters are not as appalled by Mr. Madigan as some people seem to think…or they simply don’t pay enough attention to express their disdain in the voting booth.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

ANTAGONISM BETWEEN THE DALEYS AND THE MADIGANS?

6/9/13

Now that Bill Daley looks like he might be making a run for Illinois governor (See my already seminal 6/6/13 piece, “GOVERNOR BILL DALEY…SENATOR BILL DALEY.   THERE JUST WASN’T THE TIME…”), bollixing up the plans of House Speaker Mike Madigan and his daughter, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, who both assumed the governor’s mansion was Lisa’s for the asking, much is being made among the punditocracy about the “antagonism” between the Daley and Madigan families.  

Hmm…

I’ve followed Chicago politics for a long time, longer than most of the punditocracy has been alive, and, until the last few months, I had never heard of a Daley/Madigan family feud.   Perhaps I haven’t been paying attention, being distracted by other things, but it always seemed to me that the Rich Daley worked well with Mike Madigan.   If there is any personal antagonism between the two, or between any members of the family, it is news to me, though I’m not in a position to know of such things; I know neither man, have met Rich Daley only once, and have never met Mike Madigan.

But even if there exists between the families some personal animosity, or simply professional rivalry beyond that which normally exists between ambitious families, it doesn’t matter.  Mr. Madigan and all four Daley brothers who hold or held power in one form or another in this town know how to put personal feelings aside when there is business to be done, as evidenced by the sterling, one might even say warm, professional relationship between Mr. Madigan and Rich, Bill, John, and Mike Daley.

Speaking of being able to put personal antagonism aside, it is said by elements of the media, including Monique Garcia in this morning’s (i.e., Sunday, 6/9/13’s, page 1) Chicago Tribune, that the “Daley-Madigan family antagonism,” as she puts it, dates back to the 1980 State’s Attorney’s race in which Mike Madigan backed Ed Burke in the primary against Rich Daley.  

Hmm…

The famous rivalry (antagonism might, and only might, be too strong a word) between the Burkes and the Daleys goes back to at least 1953, when Ed Burke’s father, Joe Burke, was part of the 14^th Ward cabal, that included Clarence Wagner and James McDermott, that teamed with the 19^th Ward cabal, that included John Duffy and Tom Nash, to try to deny Richard J. Daley the post of Chairman of the Cook County Regular Democratic Organization, which Dick Daley assumed was his when placeholder Joe Gill stepped down.  When Mr. Wagner died in a car crash in Minnesota, the 14^th and 19^th Ward forces faded and Dick Daley took his rightful place at the head of the Party.   Mr. Daley, like most of his fellow Irishmen, including yours truly, suffered from Irish amnesia…we forgive, but we don’t forget.   Still, Dick Daley worked well with Joe Burke, who succeeded Wagner as 14^th Ward Alderman, and served as alderman and committeeman until his death in 1968, when he was replaced by his son, Ed. 

When the Burke/Daley rivalry came to a boil again in 1980 with the State’s Attorney’s race between scions Ed and Rich, the Daleys came out on top.   Richard II  shared Richard I’s case of Irish amnesia, and probably harbored some lingering bitterness toward Ed Burke, and vice-versa (again, I’m not in a position to know; I’ve met Rich Daley only once and know Ed Burke only to say “Hi,” if that well any more).   But that didn’t stop the younger Mr. Daley and Mr. Burke from working very well together as, respectively, Mayor and Council Finance Committee Chairman and all around uber-alderman and committeeman.

Pros know how to put aside whatever personal piques that may exist.  And if the Daleys and the Burkes were able to put aside anything that may have been between them, the Daleys and the Madigans would surely be able to do the same, especially if the origins of the Daley/Madigan feud lay in the Daley/Burke feud, as Ms. Garcia suggests in today’s Tribune.

Further, the suggestion is that the Daley/Madigan “antagonism” that exists today has its roots in the Daley/Burke 1980 race for State’s Attorney.   This makes very little sense.  If the Daleys were antagonistic toward everyone who opposed Rich in the 1980 State’s Attorney primary, they’d be antagonistic toward a lot of people.  As I recall, of the 50 Democratic ward organizations in Chicago, only two, the 11^th Ward and 19^th Ward Organizations, backed Rich Daley for State’s Attorney.   If the Daleys really despised the pols that backed Ed Burke over Rich Daley for State’s Attorney, they harbored 48 grudges for a long, long time.  That’s a lot of grudges for a long time, even for an Irish clan.

I don’t know how the Daleys feel about the Madigans.  But I do know that, even if there were some “antagonism” arising out the 1980 State’s Attorney’s race, or anything else, Rich Daley, John Daley, Bill Daley, Mike Daley, and Mike Madigan were able to put it aside in the interest of doing business for a long, long time.  If both Bill Daley and Lisa Madigan run in the Democratic primary for governor in 2014, which I doubt (See, again, my seminal 6/6/13 post.), the professional rivalry between the families will arise or be resurrected.   But one, or neither, of the families’ representatives will win the primary, and both families will go back to doing business.

We Irish have our faults, but a distorted sense of priorities generally isn’t one of them, especially when money and/or power is at stake.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

REDFLEX’S EXCELLENT CHICAGO ADVENTURE: EDDY BURKE ENTER(ED) THE FRAY

3/26/13

According to yesterday’s Chicago Tribune, which has been at least as dogged on the Redflex story as yours truly (See my 3/17/13 post, REDFLEX’S EXCELLENT CHICAGO ADVENTURE:  THE STORY THAT KEEPS ON GIVING, PART ????, only my latest in a series.), suspicions about the chicanery surrounding Redflex’s red light camera contract with the city of Chicago go back to at least 2007.

Even six years ago, people knew something wasn’t right about the contract and suspected favoritism was being shown to Redflex and now, of course, we know why.   Allegedly, Mr. John Bills, a purchasing manager in the city’s Transportation Department and, probably not coincidentally, a precinct captain in House Speaker Mike Madigan’s 13^th ward Regular Democratic Organization, was on the take from Redflex.   Further, as I noted in my 3/17/13 post, Mr. Bills remained indirectly on Redflex’s pad, after leaving his job with the city, through a Redflex funded non-profit called the Traffic Safety Coalition, which was run by one Greg Goldner, a big fundraiser for and long time friend of Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

Back in 2007, one of Redflex’s major competitors for the camera contract, American Traffic Solutions (“ATS”), suspected that the scales were tipped in Redflex’s favor.  Following a proud Chicago tradition,  ATS went to an alderman, in this case, uber-alderman Ed Burke of the 14^th Ward.   (As far as we know, nobody at ATS of any note lives in the 14^th Ward, which demonstrates how things have changed in Chicago politics, but that is grist for another mill.)   ATS, as it turns out, already had plenty of clout with the city and with Mr. Burke.   One of ATS’s major subcontractors, Quantum Crossings, LLC, has as the chairman of its advisory board Mr. Tom Donovan, whose name is known to anyone who has been familiar with Chicago politics for more than the last few months or so.    Mr. Tom Donovan was once patronage chief for the real Mayor Daley (Richard J., or Richard I) and the Mayor’s immediate successor, Mike Bilandic, otherwise known as Bilandic the Bland, since we are handing out monikers to former mayors.   Mr. Donovan went on to head the Chicago Board of Trade.   While his clout certainly had something to do with his obtaining that job, it’s quite clear that Mr. Donovan was surely one of Richard I’s very bright young men.  But I digress.  Not surprisingly, Mr. Donovan and Mr. Burke have been friends for decades.

Responding to ATS’s pleas, and, doubtless, to Mr. Donovan’s presence in the ATS bidding group, Mr. Burke initiated a bout of combat by mail with the Daley Administration, and, specifically, City Corporation Counsel Mara Georges and CFO Paul Volpe, over the Redflex contract and the shenanigans surrounding it.   As Chairman of the City Council Finance Committee, Mr. Burke threatened to hold hearings about the contract in the City Council.  Supposedly, the Daley Administration relented in July, 2007 and opened the contract to competitive bidding.   Burke never held a hearing in the City Council and the whole thing died.  Redflex wound up with the exclusive contract for red light cameras in the city of Chicago.  Now that the whole issue has blown up in Redflex’s, and, apparently, Mr. Bills’, face, Mr. Burke is interested again and is holding hearings.

A few thoughts…

First, this looks like a case of one clout firm getting upset that its clout was apparently transcended by another clout firm.   ATS, one suspects, was not upset that the scales were tipped; it was upset that the scales weren’t tipped in ATS’s favor.   Of course, no one can say that definitively at this point, but ATS’s hiring of Mr. Donovan’s firm as a subcontractor and its going to Mr. Burke, the king of clout at the time, when it had a problem indicate that ATS knew its way around the block in Chicago.   And one suspects that the powers that be, and maybe even Ed Burke, were asking each other “Who’s (Redflex’s) clout?  How can it be better than our clout?”  

Again, ATS may be entirely on the up and up here, and is almost certainly on the level legally, but being around the politics of this town for a long time makes one cynical.  As Chicago political legend Ed Vrdolyak put it a few years ago “Hey, not even fishing is on the square.”

Second, as the Tribune put it, questions regarding Redflex center on whether a mid-level bureaucrat like John Bills “had the juice to single-handedly steer a $100mm contract.”   No one thinks so.  That, as I have indicated in my many posts on this issue, is the crux of the case.   John Bills didn’t make this decision.  Someone else did.  And the entire $2mm (The number keeps growing, as does the depth of the reported relationship between Mr. O’Malley and Mr. Bills.) paid to Marty O’Malley, another 13^th Ward denizen, for “consulting, didn’t wind up in Mr. O’Malley’s pocket…or in Mr. Bills’ pocket.   Where did the money go?   Who made the decision to hire Redflex over the objections of another qualified firm with plenty of its own clout?

I don’t know whether I hate or love this story, but I do know it only gets more interesting…and will continue to do so.

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

MR. SUNSHINE ON ROBIN KELLY, DEBBIE HALVORSON, AND THE ILLINOIS 2ND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT RESULTS

2/27/13

Lifelong bureaucrat and political hanger-on Robin Kelly won the Democratic primary, and effective election, in the race to succeed the disgraced Jesse Jackson, Jr. (See my 2/16/13 post, LET’S FINALLY TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT JESSE AND SANDI JACKSON)  in Illinois’ second Congressional District.  

Ms. Kelly campaigned almost exclusively on the issue of gun violence, despite the District’s other problems, including a foreclosure rate in its Chicago and suburban precincts that is the highest in the state.  Robin Kelly appears to really believe that we can “end the plague of gun violence” simply by passing more stringent gun laws.  (See my 2/24/13 post IT’S NOT GARRY McCARTHY’S FAULT.)  She won the race with the help of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s pro-gun control USA PAC, which spent $2.2 million on pro-Kelly advertising.  She apparently successfully portrayed the race as a Davidic race against the Goliathine NRA, which stayed out of the race, though its Illinois affiliate did spend a relative pittance supporting one of her opponents, Debbie Halvorson.   (More on Ms. Halvorson below.)  Ms. Kelly also had the tacit support of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.   Unlike past great Chicago mayors, like Richard J. Daley and Tony Cermak, the last two have eschewed publicly supporting candidates in primaries, preferring to sneak around and maintain plausible deniability, but I digress.  Robin Kelly also has had problems with, er, sloppiness, similar to those of her two predecessors.   Her lackadaisical approach to the rules manifested itself primarily in recordkeeping when she unsuccessfully campaigned for State Treasurer when her time sheets showed that she was working…for the State Treasurer.  Ms. Kelly evidently has no problem with being paid, by you, while she campaigns for her next spot at the public trough.  

Ms. Kelly’s big victory (52% of the vote in a very crowded field) once again confirms the wisdom of one of yours truly’s idols, H.L. Mencken, who observed

“No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”

Perhaps the low turnout (15% in Chicago and suburban Cook) limits the reach of the application of this latest example of Mr. Mencken’s acuity of mind.   Then again, the low turnout may confirm Mr. Mencken’s astuteness, but I digress again.

Clearly, there were better candidates in the race.  Newly elected State Senator Napoleon Harris, who has actually done a few things in life beyond feeding at the public mammary gland, comes immediately to mind.  But he was only a minor candidate who dropped out rather early, and even the so-called major candidates never really had a chance once Michael Bloomberg came in with his money, Mayor Emanuel starting throwing his weight around (behind the scenes, of course) and Toi Hutchinson dropped out.  See my 2/18/12 piece,  2^ND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PRIMARY IN ILLINOIS:  ROBIN KELLY-- BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE?

One of those candidates who never had a chance, though she basked in the delusion that she did, just as she basked in the delusion that she could have defeated Mr. Jackson in the 2012 primary, was former Congressperson and State Senator Debbie Halvorson, of whom I wrote extensively in my 2/18/12 post.   As a somewhat close observer of this race, I heard Ms. Halvorson speak a few times and read some of what she spoke.   If following this race did nothing else, it did explain quite a few things about Illinois politics to this long time observer of that curious and fascinating endeavor.   Ms. Halvorson was perhaps the least impressive candidate in the race, certainly the least impressive of the major candidates.   Watching Ms. Halvorson in action could almost lead one to the conclusion that the Democrats of the 2^nd District should be excused for nominating Robin Kelly, or at least were smart not to have nominated Ms. Halvorson.  Ms. Halvorson was once Majority Leader of the Illinois Senate!  O tempora, o mores!  That such an unimpressive candidate, shallow thinker, and reflexive flip-flopper could actually have been the Majority Leader of the Illinois Senate explains a lot about the sorry condition of the state of Illinois.

One final thing.  Now that Ms. Kelly has been effectively elected to Congress, we are already hearing about how a “new era” has broken out for the 2^nd District, that she will be “a breath of fresh air” and a source of “refreshing change” for the District.  

One would hope that the cheerleading media would refrains from such hagiography until we learn more about Robin Kelly, especially about how her aforementioned laxness of attitude concerning campaigning on the public dime might manifest itself once she gets to Washington.   Why?   Because we heard the same things about Jesse Jackson, Jr. when he replaced Mel Reynolds and we heard the same things about Mel Reynolds when he replaced Gus Savage in 1993.   Though Mr. Jackson did not share Mr. Reynolds weakness for pubescent girls, and Mr. Reynolds did not share Mr. Savage’s apparent anti-Semitism and strong distaste for those who did not share his racial background, Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Jackson were both moral pygmies who brought disgrace to their district, their city, their state, their country, and their families.   The initial breathless adulation did not pan out, and the hosanna choruses in the press that greeted both gentlemen wound up looking worse than foolish.  One would think the media cheerleaders would have the decency, or at least the good sense, to go easy on the bowing before Ms. Kelly until things develop a bit.  

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics.