Mondays with Mike: Don't be afraid

Come on Chicago. We can do this. There’s precedent.

For most of my lifetime, Chicagoans have voted for mayors who could be described as domineering and dictatorial and most often named Daley. Why they have is hard to figure. A friend offered the notion that the electorate is like the victim in an abusive relationship who keeps going back. Another friend offered that it’s like Stockholm Syndrome.

It sure doesn’t make sense, especially given that the one break in the chain of strong-arm mayors in my lifetime was an unqualified success. Harold Washington’s term as mayor showed Chicagoans that city government could work for everybody, and it didn’t have to be a zero-sum game pitting neighborhood against neighborhood for resources. It also provided a short-lived window of city government transparency, and it made inroads on the pay-to-play cronyism that once again is malignant in Chicago.

Washington won partly because two white candidates, one a Daley, split the white vote. The requirement that a candidate get at least 50 percent of the vote—which forced the runoff election tomorrow was adopted to prevent any such “horror” from happening again. That requirement is why current mayor Rahm Emanuel is in a race with insurgent candidate Chuy Garcia.

A lot has changed since Washington ran, but a lot hasn’t. During that campaign a lot of people (well, mostly they were white people) were scared to death. The folks who lived in neighborhoods that had been favored by the old political machine expected reprisals. In general, a lot of white voters feared some racial payback. Other skeptics condescended that someone like Washington couldn’t deal with difficult financial and political decisions. And that there would be an exodus of businesses on the scale of the residential white flight that had already occurred.

Washington’s reign proved the fears were unfounded. But I hear a lot of the same kind of stuff being said about Chuy Garcia as the election approaches and it’s become clear he has a real chance. With some people there is an implication that unless you’re an absolutely ruthless bastard like Emanuel, you can’t be up to the job. That only the ruthless likes of Emanuel or Daley can run this city. That they get done what others can’t precisely because they are dictatorial, make backroom deals with buddies, and are not particularly democratic. That democracy and clean government are too messy to bother with.

In reality, the second Daley has been exposed as a horrible manager incapable of responsible fiscal oversight. (It was actually clear in real time, but Chicagoans looked away.) Just ask Rahm about the mess Daley left him.

But here’s the thing: Rahm has been no better. He has arguably been worse. He’s swapped Daley’s group of cronies–who donate money in exchange city business, contracts and influence–with his own. It used to be more of a shot-and-beer club of insiders, now it’s wine sippers.

People have expressed doubt that Garcia is up to addressing Chicago’s substantial financial challenges. That he doesn’t tell us how he’ll solve problems. (In fact, if you’re willing to work harder than the Chicago press, you can find detailed positions and plans at his web site.)

But here’s the thing: The incumbent has had four years and I still don’t know how he’ll solve those problems. No one does. He has been no better and probably worse than his predecessor in terms of pay-to-play corruption. If you have any doubt about that, I implore you to read these two pieces:

• The Case against Rahm outlines in great detail the long sting of corrupt deals and bad financial management Chicagoans have suffered on the Emanuel administration. It also makes a persuasive case that Emanuel is no better than Rod Blogojevich.
• The Moral Bankruptcy of Chicago Elites painstakingly connects the pay-to-play dots under Emanuel’s administration.

Read them—and don’t worry, they’re not ideological screeds. They’re just cold looks at how bad Chicago’s politics are.

At the end of the day, though, whatever we think about the elected officials, Chicagoans need to find some backbone. In the past, voters have spent four years bemoaning a crooked city government, and the very real corruption tax we all pay as a result. And then they go to the polls and say, “Hey, let’s do this again.”

They somehow allow themselves to be brainwashed that without the backroom deals and the cronyism, Chicago would be in trouble.

Wake up! What is great about Chicago has been accomplished in spite of our series of dictator mayors, not because of them. Decades of Daleys and now Rahm have seen a steady shrinking of the city—it’s down from 3.6 million residents to 2.7. These guys have not delivered. Period.

They and their corrupt practices are in fact a drag on the rest of us. Don’t be afraid of democratic (small “d” emphasized) process that allows—that requires—more of us to participate. I’ve lived in places like that—let me tell you, it’s possible and it works.

Four years ago we had the opportunity to vote for a very solid candidate who understood what needed (and still needs) to change.

But Miguel del Valle came in a disappointing third.

We’ve got another chance. Let’s not blow it again. Don’t be afraid. Vote for Garcia Tuesday.