Money, connections and 2015 Chicago aldermanic elections
This was originally going to be part of the previous post, but I figured it deserved to be posted on its own.
In Monday's post, I didn't really talking about potential run-offs in aldermanic races. Unlike mayoral runoffs, they have some precedent. Plus, while some runoffs were pretty much guaranteed to happen, the rest were much less certain, so I decided to hold off commenting on them until we get actual run-off.
And it's a good thing I did - because there were more of them then I expected. There are 19 run-offs, more than at any point since the 1940s
I would've been surprised if incumbent aldermen John Arena (45th) and John Cappleman (46th) didn't wind up in a run-off. With others, like Ald. Michelle Smith (43rd) or Toni Foulkes (15th), run-offs didn't seem assured, but I'm not that surprised that they happened. But we also got run-offs in wards I didn't expect.
Ald. Deb Mell (33rd) was appointed in 2013 to fill a seat left vacant when her father, the powerful Ald. Richard Mell, decided to retire. You'd figure that Richard Mell, who's still a Democratic Committeeman of 33rd Ward (a position that lets him control the ward's political apparatus) and still has plenty of connections on city government, would be able to ensure his daughter gets elected with a decent margin. She got freaking 39.8%, so she's facing a runoff.
Ald Nicholas Sposato defied the odds during the last election, winning a seat in Old Guard 36th Ward. He paid a heavy political price for it - the city went over his head when he followed his constituents wishes and refused to accommodate a politically connected charter school, and he was remapped out of 36th Ward during the 2011 ward remap. Most of the old 36th Ward (including Sposato's house) was added to 38th Ward, which was run by Cullerton family for as long as that section of the Northwest Side was part of Chicago. When incumbent John Cullerton decided to break tradition and not run, Sposato decided to run in the 37th Ward. The Cullertons endorsed candidate Heather Sattler.
Sposato won, getting 53% of the vote. Sattler came in second, getting.... a mere 16%.
Ald John Pope (10th), a long-time Old Guard alderman of the Lake Calumet region, is facing a run-off. Patrick Daley Thomas, grandson of Mayor Richard J Daley and nephew of Richard M Daley, ran for an open seat in the 11th ward, the historic heart of Chicago's Democratic Machine - he's facing a run-off.
Outside the Old Guard, you got several long-time incumbents who were loyal to both Richard M Daley and Emanuel, candidates that I thought for sure wouldn't face any serious challenges, facing run-offs. Ald Howard Brookins (21st), Ald Emma Mitts (33rd), Ald Willie Cochran (20th), Ald Lona Lane (18th)...
AS every single media source in Chicago pointed out by this point, there's a pattern behind the run-offs. During the election, Emanuel campaign created Chicago Forward Super PAC, which provided funding to 32 incumbent aldermen who supported Emanuel's policies (either pretty much all the time or most of the times that mattered) and two candidates running for open seats (Patrick Daley Thomas and 17th Ward candidate Glenda Franklin). Out of those incumbents, two were defeated outright, one died of heart failure during the campaign, 13 are facing run-offs and 18 won.
Now, 18 winning, 2 losing and 13 to-be-determined doesn't seem so bad. But, as Chicago Sun-Times columnist Dan Mihalopoulos pointed out, most of the money went toward candidates that are now facing runoffs. Of the amount that Chicago Forward spent on allies, 64 percent went to candidates now in runoffs, 31 percent went to winners and 5 percent went to two losers - Franklin and 35th Ward Ald. Rey Colon.
Or, to put it another way, out of 19 run-offs, 13 involve candidates that got money from Chicago Forward. And 12 of those 13 candidates are incumbents.
In fairness As Mihalouplolis pointed out, it wasn't like the challengers who are now facing incumbents in run-offs were completely penniless. A majority of them were backed by Chicago Teachers Union and Service Employee International Union, which spent more money in total than Chicago Forward did. But here's the thing. Many candidates are incumbents who managed to survive for several terms, in large part, by outspending the opposition and having more resources than the opposition. They get lots of money through fundraising and having backers with deep pockets. So it isn't entirely clear how much the incumbents spent in total versus how much the challengers spent in total.
(I could look through disclosure forms and add up the totals, but that would take hours, and I'd rather leave that people who actually get paid to write about these races)
One thing that is clear is that a lot of seats that once seemed secure aren't secure anymore - and Emanuel campaign's help wasn't enough to make them more secure.
It would be interesting to see what's going to happen now. How much money Chicago Forward, CTU and SEIU would spend on their respective candidates? And voter outreach is going to be pretty damn important. As I said in the previous post, voter turnout was miserably low, and there's plenty of room for all candidates to woo supporters.
A surprisingly angry Chicago Sun-Times editorial castigated voters, basically saying that most candidates facing run-offs have what it takes to address Chicago's financial woes and "tell [voters] the truth." As opposed to their opponents, whom the editorial describes as wishy-washy and lacking backbone.
But the editorial misses the point. By a mile.
Most aldermen - including the 30 aldermen Chicago Forward supported - vote for most of the mayor's initiatives without question or second-guessing. Budgets that adversely affect services. Tax incentives for large corporations. Laws that add restrictions on public marches/protests and increase penalties related to violations of those restrictions. Funding cuts to public services. Red light cameras those safety value is dubious, at best. The majority of the City Council approved all that, and more.
This is the city council where any proposal that the mayor doesn't like get stalled in committees headed by aldermen loyal to him. This is a city council where aldermen who raise questions about proposals get belittled, and their motivations are questioned.
And more and more Chicagoans are getting sick of it.
If twelve of Chicago Forward supported incumbents lose their seats... Well, it wouldn't necessarily change the council that much. During the last election, we had plenty of aldermen who ran as a reformers only to mostly vote with the Emanuel Ald (Ameya Pawar (47th) is one of the more prominent examples). But at least, the very fact that we reached this point gives me hope that the old way of running Chicago, the Machine way, will continue to erode.
Ald Sposato managed to win outright despite setbacks, against significant odds. A good man, a good alderman, won, becoming the first independent, progressive alderman of the part of Chicago that has rarely seen either.
I really hope that, by the time April 8 comes around, we will see more of that.
---
In Monday's post, I didn't really talking about potential run-offs in aldermanic races. Unlike mayoral runoffs, they have some precedent. Plus, while some runoffs were pretty much guaranteed to happen, the rest were much less certain, so I decided to hold off commenting on them until we get actual run-off.
And it's a good thing I did - because there were more of them then I expected. There are 19 run-offs, more than at any point since the 1940s
I would've been surprised if incumbent aldermen John Arena (45th) and John Cappleman (46th) didn't wind up in a run-off. With others, like Ald. Michelle Smith (43rd) or Toni Foulkes (15th), run-offs didn't seem assured, but I'm not that surprised that they happened. But we also got run-offs in wards I didn't expect.
Ald. Deb Mell (33rd) was appointed in 2013 to fill a seat left vacant when her father, the powerful Ald. Richard Mell, decided to retire. You'd figure that Richard Mell, who's still a Democratic Committeeman of 33rd Ward (a position that lets him control the ward's political apparatus) and still has plenty of connections on city government, would be able to ensure his daughter gets elected with a decent margin. She got freaking 39.8%, so she's facing a runoff.
Ald Nicholas Sposato defied the odds during the last election, winning a seat in Old Guard 36th Ward. He paid a heavy political price for it - the city went over his head when he followed his constituents wishes and refused to accommodate a politically connected charter school, and he was remapped out of 36th Ward during the 2011 ward remap. Most of the old 36th Ward (including Sposato's house) was added to 38th Ward, which was run by Cullerton family for as long as that section of the Northwest Side was part of Chicago. When incumbent John Cullerton decided to break tradition and not run, Sposato decided to run in the 37th Ward. The Cullertons endorsed candidate Heather Sattler.
Sposato won, getting 53% of the vote. Sattler came in second, getting.... a mere 16%.
Ald John Pope (10th), a long-time Old Guard alderman of the Lake Calumet region, is facing a run-off. Patrick Daley Thomas, grandson of Mayor Richard J Daley and nephew of Richard M Daley, ran for an open seat in the 11th ward, the historic heart of Chicago's Democratic Machine - he's facing a run-off.
Outside the Old Guard, you got several long-time incumbents who were loyal to both Richard M Daley and Emanuel, candidates that I thought for sure wouldn't face any serious challenges, facing run-offs. Ald Howard Brookins (21st), Ald Emma Mitts (33rd), Ald Willie Cochran (20th), Ald Lona Lane (18th)...
AS every single media source in Chicago pointed out by this point, there's a pattern behind the run-offs. During the election, Emanuel campaign created Chicago Forward Super PAC, which provided funding to 32 incumbent aldermen who supported Emanuel's policies (either pretty much all the time or most of the times that mattered) and two candidates running for open seats (Patrick Daley Thomas and 17th Ward candidate Glenda Franklin). Out of those incumbents, two were defeated outright, one died of heart failure during the campaign, 13 are facing run-offs and 18 won.
Now, 18 winning, 2 losing and 13 to-be-determined doesn't seem so bad. But, as Chicago Sun-Times columnist Dan Mihalopoulos pointed out, most of the money went toward candidates that are now facing runoffs. Of the amount that Chicago Forward spent on allies, 64 percent went to candidates now in runoffs, 31 percent went to winners and 5 percent went to two losers - Franklin and 35th Ward Ald. Rey Colon.
Or, to put it another way, out of 19 run-offs, 13 involve candidates that got money from Chicago Forward. And 12 of those 13 candidates are incumbents.
In fairness As Mihalouplolis pointed out, it wasn't like the challengers who are now facing incumbents in run-offs were completely penniless. A majority of them were backed by Chicago Teachers Union and Service Employee International Union, which spent more money in total than Chicago Forward did. But here's the thing. Many candidates are incumbents who managed to survive for several terms, in large part, by outspending the opposition and having more resources than the opposition. They get lots of money through fundraising and having backers with deep pockets. So it isn't entirely clear how much the incumbents spent in total versus how much the challengers spent in total.
(I could look through disclosure forms and add up the totals, but that would take hours, and I'd rather leave that people who actually get paid to write about these races)
One thing that is clear is that a lot of seats that once seemed secure aren't secure anymore - and Emanuel campaign's help wasn't enough to make them more secure.
It would be interesting to see what's going to happen now. How much money Chicago Forward, CTU and SEIU would spend on their respective candidates? And voter outreach is going to be pretty damn important. As I said in the previous post, voter turnout was miserably low, and there's plenty of room for all candidates to woo supporters.
A surprisingly angry Chicago Sun-Times editorial castigated voters, basically saying that most candidates facing run-offs have what it takes to address Chicago's financial woes and "tell [voters] the truth." As opposed to their opponents, whom the editorial describes as wishy-washy and lacking backbone.
But the editorial misses the point. By a mile.
Most aldermen - including the 30 aldermen Chicago Forward supported - vote for most of the mayor's initiatives without question or second-guessing. Budgets that adversely affect services. Tax incentives for large corporations. Laws that add restrictions on public marches/protests and increase penalties related to violations of those restrictions. Funding cuts to public services. Red light cameras those safety value is dubious, at best. The majority of the City Council approved all that, and more.
This is the city council where any proposal that the mayor doesn't like get stalled in committees headed by aldermen loyal to him. This is a city council where aldermen who raise questions about proposals get belittled, and their motivations are questioned.
And more and more Chicagoans are getting sick of it.
If twelve of Chicago Forward supported incumbents lose their seats... Well, it wouldn't necessarily change the council that much. During the last election, we had plenty of aldermen who ran as a reformers only to mostly vote with the Emanuel Ald (Ameya Pawar (47th) is one of the more prominent examples). But at least, the very fact that we reached this point gives me hope that the old way of running Chicago, the Machine way, will continue to erode.
Ald Sposato managed to win outright despite setbacks, against significant odds. A good man, a good alderman, won, becoming the first independent, progressive alderman of the part of Chicago that has rarely seen either.
I really hope that, by the time April 8 comes around, we will see more of that.
---