EXTRA: Does it take an out-of-towner to realize Chicago’s the place to be?

“We are each other’s harvest. We are each other’s business. We are each other’s magnitude and bond.”
--Gwendolyn Brooks, as quoted by new Mayor Lori Lightfoot

  -0-

LIGHTFOOT: Chicago's new mayor

I couldn’t help but note the bit Monday where newly-inaugurated Mayor Lori Lightfoot cited some words of wisdom from one-time poet laureate Gwendolyn Brooks.

The first-ever black, female to be Chicago mayor found something wise in the words of the first-ever black woman to win a Pulitzer Prize (1950, for poetry).

I FIND IT refreshing to think that we are one, and that we all ought to be working together if we’re to succeed.

Because we’re in an era where some people are way too eager to peddle the notion that everybody of any sense is fleeing Chicago, AND Illinois. Usually claiming that it’s all BECAUSE OF Chicago’s existence that they don’t want to be a part of our state any longer.

I don’t doubt that some people have such a dismal outlook on life that they’re willing to leave. Maybe they even think that places like Indiana, or somewhere down South, are better.

I’m inclined to think we’re better off without such people. We don’t need such downers dragging us all down to their level in life.

MAYBE IT’S EVEN appropriate for Lightfoot to look to Brooks. The poet was a Topeka, Kansas, native who wound up living the bulk of her life in Chicago and became as much a native as someone born and raised here.

Similar to that of Lightfoot, a native of Massillon, Ohio, who wound up coming to the University of Chicago to study and figured out that her life was here.

 

BROOKS: Providing words of wisdom

Maybe for every person with no faith in Chicago who flees for a life elsewhere, we’re attracting a higher-quality of individual who realizes just how special the Second City can be.

And now we can spend the next four years seeing whether Lightfoot is capable of upgrading our city to the point where we won’t be griping four years from now, wondering just “What was I thinking?” when we voted for her. If we can follow the advice of Brooks and realize we are “one,” perhaps we’ll all be better off.

  -30-

How much of a change-agent can Lori Lightfoot really represent for Chicago?

Come Monday, Lori Lightfoot will take the oath of office essentially promising to uphold the constitutions of the United States and Illinois while overseeing the municipal structure of the city of Chicago.

Chicago's new 'first' family, Lightfoot, wife Amy and daughter Vivian. Photo by Lightfoot for Chicago

It is one that she has engaged in quite a bit of rhetoric implying she plans to revamp everything about the city. I also don’t doubt one bit that many of the people who voted to give Lightfoot three-quarters of the vote in last month’s election have visions of sugar plums dancing about in their heads.

ALMOST AS THOUGH the coming of Lightfoot is a Christmas holiday present for Chicagoans, along with residents of any other community whose operations are impacted by the Second City – only St. Nicholas’ visit has come along with the May flowers.

But I’ll have to admit that whenever I read the reports about how Lightfoot is going to come in and make significant change and is prepared to push around anyone who tries standing in the way of her vision – well, I’m skeptical.

Mostly because I can see all those political people of experience and influence who aren’t about to let their own amount of control be reduced by some woman who’s never held a day of electoral office before in her life.

Same kind of rhetoric once was used  … 

But then again, I also have been skeptical of the whole image that has been peddled about Lightfoot, the candidate. I actually think many of her backers have created an image of Lori that bears no reality as to who she really is.

THE LIGHTFOOT I saw during the campaign cycle (I never really paid much attention to her prior to this year’s elections, as did most Chicagoans, I suspect) had her experience with the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago – along with a corporate law firm and that stint she did with the Chicago Police Board.

She may well be a prosecutorial-type who viewed city government from the perspective of trying to figure out who needs to be taken down a notch or two – and who now thinks she has the authority to do just that.

But we may well find out that the daily operations of the city may be beyond her grasp. As though she has a learning curve to go through before she can truly get a grasp on the city’s operations and trying to figure out which of its problems she can actually have influence over.

… to describe Jane Byrne's 1979 mayoral victory

Otherwise, she could find herself bogged down in the morass of the city structure. Which would result in Lightfoot finding herself four years from now having achieved nothing of lasting significance.

SHE COULD BE the woman who made it through her term as mayor having been thwarted by aldermen at everything she talked about trying to achieve, but couldn’t because aldermen weren’t about to be reduced to the level of insignificance that some of Lightfoot’s backers, I don’t doubt, dream she’s going to do.

Of course, I suspect that the number of people who were concerned about having a person of some experience in charge of city government is probably about 26 percent.

That figure is the number of voters who actually cast their ballot for Toni Preckwinkle in the run-off election back on April 2.

When you combine that percentage with the roughly two-thirds of Chicago’s registered voters who didn’t even bother to cast a ballot for mayor, you realize how embarrassing the 2019 election cycle was for the city.

'House that Rahm built' will host Lightfoot inauguration

THE REAL QUESTION may well be how much more embarrassing will it become if Chicago’s municipal government structure devolves into petty bickering by the over-bloated egos of those officials who are going to be in charge of our city – and the influence it exerts over other parts of our Midwestern society.

Now I’ll concede it’s possible that I could be underestimating Lightfoot or exaggerating the level of pettiness that the City Council will exert against her.

But then again, my years of writing about political influence in Chicago have taught me that far too many things have been wrecked by the egos of all who have managed to gain a majority of the vote in past election cycles.

So come 10 a.m., when Lightfoot takes her oath at the Wintrust Arena (a structure that likely wouldn’t exist if not for the vision of soon-to-be former Mayor Rahm Emanuel -- despised by many of Lightfoot's most vociferous backers), we’re likely to see for ourselves just how much (if any) of the political trash-talk stands a chance of becoming reality.

  -30-

Chicago finances; what a mess! Who's got a big-enough mop to clean up?

I’m not about to predict what solution our political people will ultimately come up with to resolve the financial problems our governments face these days.

EMANUEL: Does he still want 'four more years?'

In fact, I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that our officials don’t really have a clue – other than the cheap, old rhetoric they usually fall back on – as to how to resolve the problems we’re confronted with.

I CAN’T HELP but wonder if Rahm Emanuel, as he prepares to take the oath of office on Monday to serve another four-year term, is now secretly regretting that he won the municipal election runoff held last month.

He could be drifting off into the next phase of his life right about now, rather than having to have his name forevermore attached to whatever solution people try to implement. If it goes wrong, he’ll forevermore get the blame!

Which is kind of funny, since we were fed all that campaign rhetoric just a few weeks ago about how the concept of Jesus Garcia as mayor of Chicago would be an ultimate disaster! All kinds of horrible things would happen to the city if we didn’t let Rahm have a second term as mayor.

When you think about it, bad things have happened regardless. Our credit rating was reduced literally to junk by the Moody’s Investors Service. While Standard & Poor’s didn’t take the same exact action, they also downgraded the bond ratings that determine how much interest we’re going to have to repay on our debt.

WILL CHICAGO BE literally reduced to only being able to borrow money from those shifty guys who make their money off the “vig” from their loans – as in they charge exorbitant interest because their “customers” are incapable of getting a traditional loan?

CLINTON: What will he think?

Or would even the loan sharks refuse to do business with city government because we’re too bad a risk and there’s no fingers or kneecaps to break.

Unless the mayor literally has to serve as a surrogate for the city. In which case, perhaps he ought to make sure his health insurance is adequate for the pain he’ll suffer.

Now I’ll be the first to admit that I’m being a smart aleck. I’m making organized crime analogies over serious issues involving municipal finance.

BUT PERHAPS THAT is how the mayor himself is having to think of this issue these days. You almost have to have a sense of humor about the term “junk bonds” being applied to our city’s government.

As though the people who are most eager to spread this story have their own ideological hang-ups with regard to urban issues and large municipalities – particularly if they’re filled with people who aren’t exactly like themselves in every racial and ethnic way!

GARCIA: Thankful he didn't win April 7?

How do we get out of this debt and get the bond-rating agencies to boost our standing back to a higher level? While wondering why it wasn’t the state government’s bond ratings that took the hit, instead of Chicago’s?

I do find some humor in those people who suggest that this is now the motivation to approve development of that city-owned casino that some Chicago officials have been dreaming about for years.

IT’S FUNNY BECAUSE the kind of money that such a casino would create as the city (and state) share of tax revenues is so piddly and insignificant compared to the billions of dollars that would need to be produced to truly put Chicago government on fine solid financial stats.

Even more ridiculous are those people who are talking of the state’s pension funding shortfall and who now want a state Constitutional amendment to make possible the very action that the General Assembly tried enacting – only to have it found unconstitutional.

OBAMA: Will he, Rahm and Bill be future pol trio?

That would take so much time to get approved, and the whole while the financial situation would become worse and worse for city and state. This is the time for the radical solution – and not the pie in the sky fantasy!

All of which makes me wonder what will go through Emanuel’s mind as he takes his oath of office, with former President Bill Clinton watching. Dreaming of the day when he can be an ex-politico like William J. (and soon, Barack H., maybe they'll have periodic meetings at the future Obama Presidential Library and Museum) and can think high-minded thoughts about future officials trying to resolve the ongoing issues our government faces.

  -30-

New governor; same campaign rhetoric

We're now in the Rauner Era of Illinois government – as Gov. Bruce Rauner took his oath of office Monday and gave a predictable campaign speech filled with the same themes we heard all throughout last year’s electoral season.

As in the need for government to exist to bolster business interests and how he’s going to be the guy who brings to an end the problems of our state – but not necessarily in a way that the public at-large will enjoy.

PARTICULARLY IF ONE believes that government is in place to benefit the people, and that sometimes the desires of business conflict with the needs of the masses.

“To achieve (reform) will require sacrifice. Sacrifice by all of us – politicians and interest groups, business and labor, those who pay for government and those who depend on government services,” Rauner said during his inaugural address.

“Each person here today and all of those throughout the state will be called upon to share in the sacrifice so that one day we can again share in Illinois’ prosperity. We all must shake up our old ways of thinking,” the new governor said.

Now none of this should be a shock to those who were paying attention during the campaign season. Rauner went out of his way to avoid offering specifics about his intentions if he were to be chosen as governor.

BUT IT WAS clear from the big-money interests that were kicking in campaign cash to supplement the nearly $30 million of his own money that he spent that he comes from a unique mindset – one that wants government to get out of its way. Or do you believe that someone who is capable of working the next four years without a salary bears any resemblance to you and me!

Do you think those people who coughed up so much campaign cash are now going to settle for somebody as governor who doesn’t put them first? I expect they’d be the first in line demanding a refund/recount/recall if Rauner wasn’t a guy who wants to be the CEO of Illinois government.

That call for “sacrifice” could well be from the rest of us.

Particularly after I noticed the portion of his inaugural address that says he plans to issue an order calling for a thorough review of all government agency contracts issued since November – the time during which he was governor-elect and Pat Quinn was completing his term in office.

RAUNER SAYS THIS review is to, “regain our state’s good name and reputation.”

But it seems at this point more like an attempt to place blame on Quinn for everything he finds that doesn’t meet his business-oriented standards of satisfaction.

Quinn ought to become ancient history. He should have departed the governor’s office at the Thompson Center building in Chicago shortly after Noon and stepped aside from the public eye. There shouldn’t be anything about him that lingers when a new administration of the opposite political party takes control of state government.

But it seems that Rauner himself is eager to have the Quinn image remain for awhile. He wants a punching bag for use every time he turns up incapable of dealing with a problem confronting the state – “It’s Quinn’s fault!” is probably a line we’re going to hear repeated over and over in coming years.

WHICH IS WHY I wasn’t terribly offended by the fact that Quinn didn’t make the trip to Springfield for the inauguration ceremonies – it’s a new day, and living in the past does nobody any good! Although for anyone who cares, one of Quinn's final acts was to sign into law the bill concerning increased regulation of ridesharing services such as Lyft and Uber.

So excuse me if I’m not convinced by Rauner’s repeated talk of how he’s going to “shake up” the way Illinois government does things.

Because based on what I’m hearing and what I’ve seen in the past couple of months, it seems like it’s going to be a four-year term of Rauner in campaign mode; which we ought to realize amounts to four years of nonsense being spewed every which way.

  -30-

EXTRA: Inaugural concert contact w/ people, or 'Bruce can’t dance' coverup

I find myself amused by the idea of an Inauguration concert to be held Monday night in Springfield, and not just because it reduces legendary Chicago bluesman Buddy Guy to the role of a warm-up act for Oklahoma native country music singer Toby Keith.

It reminds me of when one-time professional wrestler Jesse Ventura became Minnesota governor early in 1999 and held an inaugural concert featuring bluesman Jonny Lang and Delbert McClinton, with rocker Warren Zevon also appearing.

BOTH VENTURA AND new Gov. Bruce Rauner gave nearly identical excuses for not having the traditional inaugural ball; both said they felt a concert was something that would appeal to the masses instead of overly-stuffy politicos.

They may be right about one point – as someone who covered the Inauguration ceremonies held for Jim Edgar and George Ryan, the ball in Springfield always struck me as a third-rate attempt at replicating the Inaugural Ball held in Washington for the new president.

And maybe Rauner finds appealing the thought that Keith is a one-time Democratic Party partisan whose conservative ideology has caused him to identify with Republicans in recent election cycles.

Or maybe he just wants to hear “American Soldier.” Personally, I think Illinois could have done better – although I’m inclined to think that perhaps Guy could have been the headliner. That’s just my bias.

ALTHOUGH IF I really had to guess about the motives of Monday night’s events, perhaps it is that Rauner can’t dance all that well and doesn’t want to come across as silly-looking while trying to do the foxtrot or tango?

Let’s just hope he doesn’t slap a cowboy hat on to go with his Carhartt jacket and boots from the campaign season – that would come across as more foolish!

  -30-

A sad story, but is this really what we ought to be known for these days?

Hadiya Pendleton may well be the most prominent Chicagoan in the national news these days – which is really disgusting because she didn’t do anything that ought to warrant it.

Hadiya was a 15-year-old girl who attended King College Preparatory High School on the South Side who suffered the fate of many urban individuals – she happened to be outside in a public park when she got caught in the crossfire from rival street gangs.

SADLY ENOUGH, HADIYA is dead. Locally, she made the front page of the Chicago Sun-Times both Wednesday and Thursday. The story is being picked up nationally.

It is the lone news coming out of Chicago these days for anyone in other parts of the country who is paying attention.

A young life snuffed out before she could accomplish anything lasting. Which is a shame because there was evidence that she had promise to be capable of doing great things – which is something that young people living in certain suburban communities take for granted.

Much was made of the angle that she was part of a group of students from Chicago that went to Washington, D.C., to see the inaugural celebration of Barack Obama getting a second term as president.

ABOUT ONE WEEK later, she was a corpse.

Obama himself has felt compelled to express his condolences, although I expect that is because it has been noted that the park where Hadiya was killed was less than one mile from the president’s home on the border between the Kenwood and Hyde Park neighborhoods.

It happened close to a place we’d like to think is safe, although I’m sure there are those who want to believe that all of Chicago – or perhaps all of urban life – is inherently flawed and dangerous.

So yes. The death of Hadiya Pendleton is terrible. It is tragic. We probably did lose somebody special – with the sad thing being we’ll never know what we lost because she died so young.

BUT……..

I have to confess that there’s something about this particular story and the way it is getting picked up that bothers me. Annoys me. Goes just about to the point of disgusting me.

It is that it seems to promote the concept that this death is sad and a loss, but that there are other urban deaths that just don’t matter.

As though there are somehow some people who deserve to have their lives snuffed out at a moment’s notice, and that their losses are worthy of being ignored.

BECAUSE, LET’S BE honest. If it weren’t for the fact that this particular story occurred in a place that could be described as having proximity to Barack Obama, there’s a good chance that even it would have been ignored.

There would be people who would think of the death of yet another African-American teenager as something that we ought not to get so obsessed about. After all, paying attention to each and every death is depressing. It would be such a comedown!

That is a despicable attitude. Because for just about every urban death occurring due to violence, there is somebody out there for whom it is a tragic loss. They are all human beings.

Being in the newsgathering business for the past quarter century, I have written about my share of mayhem. I also recall my old City News Bureau days when I used to have to try to document every single murder – so I know that all cases are not equal.

BUT I CAN’T get over the feeling that playing this one death up so much makes it seem like we ought to regard the other deaths that have occurred – and will occur throughout the rest of this year – as something unavoidable, if not quite deserved.

And that attitude sounds too much like surrender. It is just sick!

  -30-

Did Obama learn from 1st term?

The party’s over. It’s time to get back to work!

Literally, the inauguration that got spread over a two-day period is now complete. All of our Illinois public officials who felt the need to take a trip to the District of Columbia so they could bask in Barack Obama’s glory (including Gov. Pat Quinn and his possible 2014 challenger state Attorney General Lisa Madigan) need to return to the real world.

PRESIDENT OBAMA HIMSELF is going to have to jolt himself back to the concerns of public policy – because there are serious issues that need to be done.

Firearms seem to be a priority for everybody. For our state Legislature (or maybe even our City Council) may wind up having to take some action if it turns out that Congress is incapable of doing anything of significance.

Which will happen if Obama winds up letting himself get pushed by his ideologue opposition like he did for much of his first term in office.

For all the stupid-talk from those ideologues that Obama is some sort of subversive who stands against every ideal they want to believe this country is about, Obama’s real weakness was that he was at times too willing to make compromise with people who weren’t interested in it.

OBAMA THOUGHT HE’D be buying political good will from people who would then owe him something when serious policies came forth.

Instead, he only got those people all riled up because they took his talk of compromise and showed just how far removed it was from their ideal where they get all. And they weren’t about to credit him for anything he was willing to give that they desired in the first place.

Personally, I have always felt that Obama’s weakness is that one of his closest allies when he served in the Illinois state Senate was Kirk Dillard – the DuPage County pol with a sense of moderation on certain (but not all) social issues.

Perhaps Obama thinks that all Republicans are like the man who couldn’t even win the 2010 GOP primary for Illinois governor. Heck, not all Illinois Republicans are like that.

THIS LINE OF thought caused Obama to have to push aside certain issues and causes that were of a high priority to the people who actually voted for him in 2008 – and again last year.

Obama needs to “Praise Jesus!” that those people despised his Republican opposition so intensely in both election cycles. Because there are those who aren’t in love with the man, and are going to need to be swayed that their vote wasn’t a waste!

Such as the growing Latino population, which is going to be scrutinizing the president closely in coming months to see what he’s willing to do with immigration reform (he can’t postpone it indefinitely any longer) and with his cabinet appointees.

Since he’s now in a situation where he has no Latinos advising him in those top posts. That is a situation he’ll have to rectify – or else!!!!!

AND BACK TO firearms. I realize that the National Rifle Association is spending big bucks on its lobbying efforts to encourage political people to ignore the realities of violent outbursts in public and buy into the reality that a hunter needs to have an automatic rifle when searching for game.

I always thought the point of hunting was to show one was such a good shot that they could kill an animal with one clean shot – instead of needing all 30 rounds in the clip of an AK-47 in order to get one good shot!

But nobody wants to hear that the NRA can’t be overcome. If anything, the majority that twice has put Obama in office did so specifically because we want him to stand up to such people.

ROMNEY: Does anyone care what he did Monday?

There are so many issues like this that will confront our federal government in coming years.

FOR AS MUCH as I often rant and rage about the need for bipartisan compromise, the reality of today is that the ideologues who tried to write history so that the 2010 election cycle (all that trite Tea Party talk) was NOT the aberration that it truly is are going to have to have someone stand up to them.

You had your parties on Sunday and Monday, Mr. President. The quirk of Inauguration Day coming on a weekend gave you an extra day of celebration.

Now, it’s time to see the president and his advisors get back to work. The people are counting on it.

  -30-