EXTRA: Would anyone have dared try to ‘term limit’ a Daley out of office?

Is it really time for Rahm to leave City Hall?

It seems to be the newest tactic amongst those people who are desperate to have Anybody But Rahm to be mayor of Chicago – a term limits proposal that would knock Rahm Emanuel off the ballot altogether for the 2019 election cycle.

It seems such an effort has been under way for the past couple of years, to limit to two, four-year terms, the amount of time anyone can hold the post of Chicago mayor.

Pat Quinn thinks so!

AND YES, THE initiative is being led by former Gov. Pat Quinn – the man who previously in political life led the drive to slash the Illinois House of Representatives from 177 members to 118. On the logic that we really didn’t need so many people running around the Statehouse grounds calling themselves legislators.

So yes, Quinn is just the type who likes to do radical things that shake up the way we perceive our local government.

The “cutback” amendment seriously altered the way our state Legislature operated – and some are convinced not for the better (it did reduce the number of Chicago Republicans and rural Democrats who serve in office).

So I’m sure Quinn isn’t going to be swayed by any arguments about letting the people pick whom they want for office – rather than telling them certain people can no longer hold office.

How would Daley have reacted, ...

THE FACT THAT Richard J. Daley served into a sixth four-year term in office (it took the Grim Reaper to remove him from government) and his son wound up holding the post for just over 22 years (deciding to retire finally instead of seeking a seventh term in office) is something I’m sure Chicagoans think of as a plus.

While I know there are some who think both of those men served at City Hall far too long (and would probably dread it when the next generation of the Daley family produces a mayoral candidate), I’m also sure there are others who will be quick to dismiss those people as malcontents.

And also most likely claim that Quinn is trying to revive his political aspirations by banding together the malcontents into a sizable voter bloc.

... or his son, to anybody daring to suggest term limits

After all, if the people really were anxious to have Quinn back in office, they never would have dumped him as governor in 2014 or might have actually given him the Democratic nomination to run for Illinois attorney general come the Nov. general election.

PERSONALLY, I’M ALL for letting voters decide for themselves who they want to have in office. If the outcry against Emanuel getting a third term as mayor is really so strong, then he will fail to win in the 2019 election cycle.

If it turns out that the assortment of egomaniacal would-be politicos talking about running against Rahm next year has a legitimate mayoral contender, then that person will prevail against Emanuel in a real election.

Knocking out Emanuel by term-limiting him would seem to give us a new mayor from amongst the mediocrities that thus far have lined up to take on Emanuel.

It seems like people think the only way Emanuel can be beaten is to not have him run. Which I don’t consider a plus for the Chicago electorate.

ALTHOUGH I ALSO have to admit to being skeptical anything will become of the term limits proposal. It will take 52,000 valid signatures of support to put such a referendum on the Nov. 6 ballot – where if it passes it would then take effect for the 2019 election cycle.

Repeal term limits if Daley-Thompson ever runs for mayor?

Quinn admits he figures he’s going to need about 100,000 signatures of support to ensure the idea can successfully fight off the inevitable legal challenges that the critics will pursue.

But Quinn, according to assorted published reports, only has about 50,000 signatures, which took him two years to compile. Can he really get 50,000 more within the next couple of months – the deadline for the Nov. 6 elections?

Or would Quinn have a better chance of making himself relevant in the mayoral cycle by trying to run himself for the post against Emanuel and the others – including Paul Vallas, the man who tried to resurrect his own political aspirations by being Quinn’s running mate back in ’14?

  -30-

I doubt Rahm is quaking in his boots; he’s Hizzoner for some time to come

I find it amusing, and distorting, to hear about these new polls claiming that Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s approval ratings among Chicagoans is on the decline.

EMANUEL: Going nowhere anytime soon

As though someone is trying to create the impression that the people are ready to put Emanuel’s head on a pike in front of the Picasso statue come the 2015 election cycle.

WHICH MIGHT WELL be what the Chicago Teachers Union wants to believe. Although I suspect there are certain elements in Chicago that would love to tell the teachers union to “Stuff it!,” and would probably turn out in force to back Rahm to make that very statement.

Not that I think they’re necessarily approving of the efforts Emanuel has made with regard to the Chicago Public Schools that would involve the closing of schools in several inner-city neighborhoods.

They’re just not going to want to be seen on the same side as teachers union boss Karen Lewis – even if she is making sense on several points.

For those who think that the declining African-American support for Emanuel means a black candidate might have a chance, I'd argue that the "black" candidate in 2011 would have done much better if it had been anybody other than Carol Moseley-Braun! Which is why I seriously expect the 2015 municipal elections to be a snooze when it comes for mayor.

FOR ONE THING, those approval numbers in the Chicago Tribune-sponsored poll that is stirring up this talk aren’t deadly.

Emanuel still has significant support. Some of the people who previously were undecided about him are now saying they don’t approve. But I’m wondering if things will change in the coming two years that will put them back in the neutral column.

But most importantly, who would dare to challenge Emanuel?

Any teachers union-inspired opposition to Rahm Emanuel could be about as effective as Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., was when he made his mayoral challenge to Richard M. Daley. Photograph provided by Chicago Teachers Union

 

The sad thing about the Chicago electorate is that we seem willing to accept incumbents. We get suspicious of those people who want to “Throw the Bastards out!,” even if we’re leading the screaming.

NOBODY IS GOING to be willing to engage in a head-to-head run against Emanuel – except for some fringe-mentality candidate who is going to justify his (or her) politically-suicidal campaign on the grounds that they’re bringing up a pet issue and inspiring a debate that otherwise would not take place.

That is why the 2011 election cycle was so crucial for anyone with mayoral aspirations.

Richard M. Daley had stepped down, and the post was open. It could be a free-for-all without the risk of upsetting an incumbent. Anybody who didn’t have the nerve to take on Rahm Emanuel when he didn’t have the benefits of incumbency is likely too cowardly to even dream of taking him on two years from now.

In fact, there’s only one name I could think of that would have a chance of beating Rahm in ’15. And that name is “Daley.”

WHETHER IT WOULD be a return from retirement for Richard M., a decision by brother William that “mayor” in 2015 would make more sense that “governor” next year, or perhaps county Commissioner John (who has served on the county board as well as the Illinois Senate) that he’d like to be a part of city government.

Maybe Metropolitan Water Reclamation District board member Patrick Thompson (who counts all three Daleys among his uncles, and old man Richard J. as his grandfather) isn’t quite ready now – but he may be someday.

THOMPSON: The mayor in '27?

It’s something about that “Daley” name that just makes some Chicagoans think they belong at City Hall.

Although I’m not under the impression that any Daley is seriously thinking of running for mayor. Rich isn’t coming out of retirement, and I doubt his brothers would want to be bothered. They have different goals on their minds – although I’m not convinced that William deserves to be thought of as a serious gubernatorial candidate.

SO WHO’S GOING to be the next mayor of Chicago? Probably the same one we already have.

The man’s ambitious enough (and full of himself) to the point where he probably believes he’s benefitting the public. And nobody’s going to have the nerve to challenge him – regardless of what any stinkin’ Tribune poll has to say!

  -30-

Daley for governor? I guess it’s time in the election cycle to spew this tale

DALEY: All talk for governor

I deliberately held off on considering William Daley for a day.

For I’m not swayed by the idea that the one-time Commerce secretary and White House chief of staff is actually going to run for governor of Illinois.

EVEN THOUGH HE told a business gathering this week that he’s “thinking about it seriously,” all I can help but think is that Bill Daley ALWAYS says he’s thinking about running for governor.

He lets the idea fester about for a bit. Then, he backs away. Between the son and brother of long-time Chicago mayors and Chris Kennedy (the JFK nephew who used to run the Merchandise Mart), I’m not sure which one gets his name tossed about more in the rumor mill as a prospective candidate for high political office.

It may well be Daley, since it always seems to be political operatives who drag Kennedy’s name into such discussions – as though we need to have the Kennedy “aura” in our local political scene.

Either that, or we want to cover up the fact that Rod Blagojevich came close to starting up a familial political dynasty of sorts. Ugh!!!

THE BOTTOM LINE is that I have lost count of the number of times that I have heard Bill Daley’s name tossed into the mix for Illinois governor. I remember hearing it back when I was a part of the Illinois Statehouse scene – and I made my return from “Springpatch” more than a decade ago.

At the time, the idea had an intriguing twist. Richard M. was Chicago mayor, and John had just returned to Chicago from an Illinois Senate stint of his own to serve on the Cook County Board.

What if John were to run for county board President, and William were to become governor? We’d have Daleys all over the place.

 

Patrick Daley Thompson (left) is more likely to be the next "Daley" to rise to high political office. Photograph provided by Metropolitan Water Reclamation District

More direct political control than old man Richard J. could ever have dreamed of having! It would be the ultimate fantasy for political geeks whose view of the world doesn’t venture any further south than Beverly.

ALTHOUGH I’M SURE there would have been those politically active people in other parts of the state who would have found the concept of a Daley-fest to be atrocious.

Heck, I’m sure Michael J. Madigan would have been equally repulsed. Because the long-time Illinois House speaker’s role in the Chicago political universe is to be the guy who keeps state government in line with the city’s needs.

And having so many Daleys would have interfered with the dreams of daughter Lisa to rise to a new level of political status. Although I have to admit the idea of a Daley versus Madigan primary for governor (if both of them actually went for it in 2014 would be intriguing.

A lot of political people would be forced to take sides in a way they never envisioned. The idea of having to pick between Obama and Hillary (like they had to in 2008) would be minor by comparison.

BUT IT’S NOT going to come to that. I’m pretty sure of it. Those of you who are desperate to have a “Daley” in a position of political authority probably should be following the governmental life of Patrick Daley Thompson – he of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District who may well rise to unheard of heights.

For the key is that we’re just a month past the 2012 election cycle. We’re as far away from 2014 as we can get. Which is why it is appropriate for Bill Daley to talk this fantasy. It’s the right time.

Once things get to the point where he’d have to actually do something real to achieve the goal, he’ll come to the same realization he always does – that he has bigger priorities than hustling for a political post that may come with a mansion.

But a nice house to live in just isn’t enough to entice him into the minutia of Illinois state government. I honestly believe Lisa Madigan is a more likely person to challenge Pat Quinn for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination come the ’14 election cycle – and even she may not want to tackle a primary fight that would definitely get ugly.

SO WHERE WILL Bill Daley be come Election Day 2014?

Probably tossing out hints about how he’s “seriously considering” a run for governor in 2018!

  -30-

Happy boit’day, dear She-caw-go

Still a recognizable image, all these decades later

I am a Chicago native by birth, and one who has lived in the metropolitan area (both city and suburban) for the bulk of my life. Even those times when I have left Chicago, it has always been in my brain that I would return (and I did).

So what is it about this metropolis in Illinois (not to be confused with Metropolis, Ill., at the state’s southern tip) that makes it so appealing that I never felt I needed to move to New York in order to consider myself successful?

WHY DO I fully comprehend the idea that people from across the Midwestern U.S. feel compelled to relocate here for an adult life?

It doesn’t even have to be Midwesterners. Take our current president, a Honolulu native who saw our city as being ever so attractive to live (although I wouldn’t be surprised if someday, after the kids are grown, Barack and Michelle wound up retiring to the Hawaii islands).

To me, the appeal of Chicago has always been its variety – the fact that there really isn’t any such thing as the quintessential Chicagoan.

You can take two people who have lived here their entire lives and feel completely devoted to life lived north of 138^th Street (or south of Howard Street) who have next to nothing in common.

OTHER THAN THE fact that they can use the label of “Chicagoan.”

My point being that there is such a variety to this city. One can never have truly experienced it all. There is always something new to see or hear. It can never get dull – unless you are the kind who is inherently dull yourself.

In which case, you’d probably be bored anywhere.

Keep in mind that when I talk about a variety of types of people, I’m not thinking much of (if at all) the varied ethnic and racial beings who populate our city. Although I have always felt the fact that there is no predominant ethnic group for Chicago (no matter how much the Irish want to dream it’s them) is what makes us unique.

“WE ARE THE World” isn’t just the title of a tacky ‘80s musical number. It is an accurate description of our current composition (the 2010 Census Bureau population count for Chicago has it at 33 percent African-American, 32 percent white and 29 percent Latino, with the bulk of the remainder being Asian).

That is roughly where the nation, as a whole, is expected to be by century’s end. In Chicago, we’re leading the way. Perhaps our racial and ethnic outbursts are the nation working out the kinks of how well we behave together.

Just as a part of me wonders if the “Council Wars” of the mid-1980s was a test run for the partisanship tactics now taking place in Washington, D.C. between Obama and those who desperately want to dump him from office. Only the modern-day ideologues are less blunt in their language.

There’s also the fact that Chicago has its elements of high society and sophistication – certain aspects that can only be found here and to which the people of places like London, Paris, Tokyo or New York (just to name a few) must look toward us to experience in their ultimate form.

YET THOSE ELEMENTS don’t totally predominate our existence. Because there also are “very Chicago” places where the locals could care less about anything quite so elite or “hoity-toity” as the world-reknowned Chicago Symphony Orchestra. And anyone who would suggest doing away with those places would be missing the point.

They add to the ambiance that is Chicago. We’re better off for it. The Cubs are NOT quintessential Chicago. The tensions between White Sox and Cubs fans as they co-exist are.

Chicago wouldn’t really be Chicago if it had ever fully appreciated the literary work of Nelson Algren; which in-and-of itself is odd because Algren’s work often championed those “working classes” who wouldn’t have wanted Chicago to get too effete.

Yet we’re also not the types who are eager to linger in the muck for too long. It is a place whose people are constantly remaking themselves – except for the political people.

ONCE SOMEONE GETS elected to public office in Chicago, it seems a foregone conclusion that their grandchildren will be running for office.

Just the other day, I used my “early voting” ballot to refuse to vote for Patrick Daley Thompson – the nephew of former Mayor Richard M. Daley and grandson to former Mayor Richard J. – for a seat on the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District.

How inherently Chicago that is!

So what is inspiring this love-letter, of sorts, for my home city?

IT IS THE fact that we’re in the weekend that marks the 175^th anniversary of the signing of the articles of incorporation that made Chicago an actual municipality (population: 4,160), rather than just a trading outpost with a few cabins built nearby.

I don’t know if I’ll still be around (if I am, I’ll be 71) when Chicago hits its bicentennial. So now is the time for me to leave my mark on Chicago’s uniqueness – although no one is likely to match the Carl Sandburg poem of old.

We might not literally be the “City of the Big Shoulders” and “Hog Butcher for the world” any longer. But it’s still a sense of what we aspire to be, and I can’t think of any other city with a more noble goal for itself.

  -30-