EXTRA: Gov. Gridlock? It doesn’t have the same panache as “Gov. No.”

To listen to the communications director for Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Gov. Bruce Rauner is now “Gov. Gridlock.”
 

Rauner as 'Gov. Gridlock'...

The Chicago Sun-Times reported Monday how Adam Collins has coined the new nickname for the governor, in response to Rauner saying he will veto a measure the Illinois Legislature approved to try to salvage two city worker pension programs.

NOT THAT RAUNER’S reaction ought to be surprising. He’s willing to play politics with the measure desired by many city officials who see the need for state assistance with regards to the pension issue.

 

... falls behind Jim Edgar's 'Gov. No'

Then again, coming up with that kind of nickname surely shows the willingness of Chicago Dems to take on some partisanship of their own.

It reminds me of the days of old some two decades ago, back when the idea of city and state officials feuding meant Richard M. Daley taking on Jim Edgar – who got the nickname “Gov. No.” In response to the notion that Edgar’s automatic reaction to anything desired by the city was “No.”

Although it also brought up the James Bond-ian image of Dr. No – the evil villain who plotted to undermine the Project Mercury program into space, only to be saved by British agent 007 himself.

NOT THAT I ever thought of Edgar as being reminiscent of the evil villain portrayed by actor Joseph Wiseman. Or Daley as anyway like a British intelligence agent – unless you mean like in an Austin Powers-type world of ridiculous parody.

But it did have a punchiness to the nickname; a certain ring to it.

Rauner's nickname doesn't bring to mind cinematic images

To where I must confess that my first reaction to learning that Rauner now had a nickname was to compare it to that of Edgar – whom I suspect would resent being compared to Rauner on every level.

Because Edgar was a lifelong state government person to whom getting a chance to put together the state budget was the whole point of the job – and not just an excuse to play political games.

  -30-

Byrne joines Ryan, Ford as transport tributees -- will 'Looie" be next?

Put Jane Byrne on the list of people whom future generations of Chicagoans will regard as a mere road.


Forget the humanity that ever existed. People will forget the fact that Byrne was once mayor of Chicago, or that she was the first (and thus far, only) woman to hold that post.\


BECAUSE HOW MANY people do you really think remember that Dan Ryan, Jr., was once a Cook County Board president. Or that the Bishop L.H. Ford was once a significant leader of the Church of God in Christ?


Instead, we hear the daily traffic reports about how backed up traffic was on the "Ryan" for those people working their way into the heart of the city.


We even hear exotic reports about this "Ford Freeway" that always seems absurdly backed up headed north in the morning, and south in the evening -- but that many people living in the metropolitan area never go anywhere near.


Admittedly, Byrne's name will get more prominence because she's getting the Circle Interchange named after her. That's the point where all the expressways that head downtown converge.


IT'S THAT POINT where many motorists from all over Chicago and surrounding suburbs converge. It is a place with much potential for auto accidents of all sorts.


Which makes me wonder if we're destined to hear of so many people being killed or maimed at the Byrne Interchange that her name will take on an even more negative connotation now than it had for some people back when she was mayor and interfering with their efforts to push yet another concocted scheme through City Hall?


One significant difference; Byrne was still alive last week when ceremonies were held to mark the official renaming of the interchange.


Unlike Ryan and Ford, who had already passed on by the time the expressways that took their identities became a part of the daily commutes that occur in Chicago.


ALTHOUGH CONSIDERING HOW long it took for Byrne to get anything of significance named in her honor, I can't help but wonder if some political people were preferring that she be deceased before they had to get around to doing anything.


Even Harold Washington got his namesake tribute (a public library building) so many years ago that I wonder how many people are losing track of the man.


We now have Ryan, Ford and Byrne, to go along with former Governor and U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson and former presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy as the namesakes of Chicago's major expressways.


Ronald Reagan has his own expressway up in the far northwestern suburbs; which I suspect makes his ideologue backers happy. His road doesn't stretch into the city, because his political programs and ideas often ignored the concerns of urban America.


ALTHOUGH LOOKING AT the non presidential types who get a Chicago expressway, I can't help but notice some odd sense of balance -- although I believe it is unintentional.


A white Irish type in Ryan, an African-American preacher in Ford and a woman in Byrne. Does this mean we're going to someday need a Latino of sorts to provide another sense of balance?


Which makes me wonder if the day is going to come when we're going to get a significant road named for Rep. Luis Gutierrez? I'm not sure which road it will be. For all I know of the "Chicago Way," it's likely that someone will want to build a new road (and get rich off the awarding of the construction contracts) just so that the congressman's name will have a place to go.


And someday, the outspoken congressman will become nothing more than a place where winter icy conditions caused a series of fender-bender accidents.


  -30-

Are we, the people, best off with more, or less, from our political officials?

Watching the Cook County Board at work on Wednesday made me wonder if we’re better off with more, or less, of their presence.


County wishes us 'happy holiday.' Do we like their present?

The issue at stake was the county board approving a schedule for their meetings for 2014. Under the measure that finally got approval, the county board next year will hold one meeting per month – with the exception of August.

THAT’S THEIR SUMMER break. No one is going to take that break away from them. It’s sacred!

But that is a change from past years. Until recently, the county board made a point of meeting twice per month (with the exception of August). This year, they made a point of meeting every three weeks. Which meant some months had two meetings and others had only one.

They’re now going to be down to one session per month for them to quibble over issues, while also spending endless hours pontificating over symbolic resolutions in which they praise each other’s friends.

It can get so mind-numbing that I have to confess, a sheriff’s deputy had to nudge me at one point Wednesday because I had fallen asleep.

SO THE FACT that there will be fewer such meetings? That could be interpreted as a good thing, or a bad thing.

Believe it or not, that was the issue at stake as county board members argued amongst themselves Wednesday (the final vote was 10-6, in favor of having fewer meetings).

County Commissioner Bridget Gainer, D-Chicago, may well have hit what many non-political people will consider the key question – she said that the county board members will continue to get the same salaries, even though they’re now expected to show up for fewer meetings.

Agreeing was county Commissioner Timothy Schneider, R- , who said, “The perception will be that we’re doing less work.”

A LOT OF people won’t want to have to take into account that an elective office is not some job where one punches a time card and gets paid by the hour, AND that it’s a post where one is basically on call at all times. Attending the meetings alone aren’t what the job consists of.

Take commissioners John Daley and Deborah Sims, both D-Chicago, along with Joan Patricia Murphy, D-Crestwood, who all used the word “efficiencies” over and over – as in the county board now works more “efficiently” and therefore does not have to meet as often.

Murphy literally went so far as to argue that she could better use time in her suburban office so as to deal with all the people who call her, claiming to have problems with government.

She also argued that the county board will be meeting about as often as the City Council – a fact that county board President Toni Preckwinkle (the former 5^th Ward alderman) confirmed.

“I DON’T KNOW why we have to put in more time downtown than the city does,” she said.

As for government meetings, they often are scripted to a heavy degree. Often, the times when officials spout off and criticize each other are the only impromptu moments So the idea that government officials get paid for their work at meetings?

Nonsense!

If that were it, then we ought to demand a repayment of their salaries. What they do there isn’t worth it.

WATCHING THIS DISPUTE on Wednesday actually brought an odd image to my mind – that of one-time Illinois Senate President James “Pate” Philip.

PHILIP: Was he right?

Some people remember the DuPage politico for his blunt-spoken ways. But I remember him for the fact that he was the motivation behind the General Assembly cutting the month of June off its schedule – ending its spring session business around Memorial Day instead of the old traditional June 30.

Philip often gave the impression that he viewed excess government meetings as merely an excuse for government officials to do something stupid or otherwise harmful to the public interest.

Watching the county board at work on Wednesday made me wonder if perhaps he was right!

  -30-