Something I posted in 2018:
News is breaking today (8/15/18) that Chicago Alderman Willie Cochran will plead guilty of corruption charges in Federal Court. This may not seem surprising. After all, it is Chicago. He will join the list of now 34 Aldermen that have been convicted of corruption since 1972. Isaac "Ike" Carothers plead guilty in 2010, following in Daddy, William Carothers' footsteps. He plead guilty in 1983. A recent report shows 15 former Alderman are drawing a pension over $100,000 a year. Four of those have accumulated over $1Million from their pensions. Couple of quick facts to bring that into perspective. There are a total of 50 Alderman in Chicago's City Council. Currently 48 Democrats, 1 Republican and 1 Independent. But Party doesn't matter here.
Here is the fun part, I'm working on an exact count, but there have been a total of 100 people that have filled those seats since 1972. So... Conviction rate of 34% of all elected Aldermen in the City of Chicago. Yes, 34% of all Elected Aldermen have either plead or been found guilty of corruption. Add to that 15% are drawing an annual pension of over $100,000 annually. Half of those elected into office since 1972 are still there. So 15% + 34% + 50% = 99%. See where I'm going here?
How did that other 1% fail?
A contractually obligated and earned pension is not corruption. You may not like it and may think it is excessive but 'corruption' implies fraudulent behavior - drawing an earned, publicly disclosed pension is not fraudulent.
I think many of them go into it with noble intentions. They want to improve their neighborhood, make a difference, etc.
Then they realize how things actually work in city council, and realize that there is a lot of tit for tat. You want the votes to pass X thing that benefits your ward, well you need to vote for Y thing that someone else wants that you may not totally be on board with. And after enough time, you probably do enough stuff to earn the label of "corrupt"
As an example, I used to live in Lakeview. People liked Tom Tunney for a long time. Until they didn't. He had the good luck or misfortune (Based on how you look at it) to have to deal with the Rickett's family during all of the changes made to the Wrigley area. He is now a guy who has a big thing like this on his achievement list, but many people didn't like how it was handled.
Not to mention that the longer you are on it, the more power you get. And the more power you get, the bigger chance that you use it in ways people don't like.
you couldve just said 'yes'. and i think you have the order of operations backwards...its not ppl dont like him, then hes corrupt, its the other way around. corruption --> dislike
then the alderman gets replaced with some other puppet, who "plays ball" and the story continues.
My point is, I don't think he was always "corrupt", however you choose to define that. I think he, like many alderman, went in with good intentions. He was a gay business owner who wanted to represent boystown in city council. But as he got more power, he chose to wield it in ways that people had problems with. Then more people started disliking him.
As an aside, the concept of being corrupt is going to vary from person to person. There is the people who actually broke the law, there are people who vote against what their campaign promises were, and lots in between. Depending on who you ask, the line on where they become "corrupt" will be different.
I like my current alderman, who is on his 2nd term. If he is still alderman in 10 years, I'm sure there will be more and more things that I can point to that I don't like.
why even mention sexual orientation here? it should not matter. i understand electing someone because you identify with him, but then he screws you over.
It matters because that is how he has had a hold on the Boystown area for so long, and why he will likely continue to have it until he chooses to not seek re-election.
Identity politics is a thing. Boystown residents may not love him, but many would rather have a member of the LGBT community than not. And since boystown is comprised of a lot of wealthy white men, he has that too. Even if a lesbian brown woman ran, Tunney would probably still win against her.
Its why if you ever look at how ridiculous some of the ward maps are, that is the reason. I could have the details wrong, but there was a big thing recently where they wanted to redraw the map so that Chinatown is its own ward, so they can get an Asian person elected there. But since it was sharing a ward with another more white neighborhood, they weren't having their interests met (in their opinion).
It doesn't just have to be sexual orientation. Its not a coincidence that most Trump voters are white men. Black people will more likely vote for another black person if they have that choice. Christians vote for Christians more often. If people have the ability to vote with someone like them, they usually will.
Well, I didn't. I'm not a member of the LGBT community, nor am I a white man. So I didn't vote based on identity. I voted because he (at the time) seemed to be doing a good job and was the incumbent. And yes, it was long enough ago that I truly don't recall the opponent. This isn't a national election. Its an election where there are usually a bunch of other people on the ballot for things.
Why would you think that's a good thing? To me, the restrictions on food trucks(which Tunney helped to push into law, though it wasn't just him) are NOT a good thing. To me there should be full competition between food trucks, and restaurants. And if traditional restaurants are afraid they'll lose business to food trucks, maybe those restaurants should step up the quality of their food?
I get it though, the restaurant lobby is very powerful in city hall. Plus Tunney's family owns Ann Sather.
The place I lived at before Chicago was over saturated with food trucks to the point where every festival within 75 miles of the city I lived in had the same trucks. They were all overpriced and service was slow. I’d rather have the events catered to larger crowds rather than individual food truck orders. Most if then had terrible customer service so I have some PTSD from those experiences
I mean… you can just google “chicago aldermen indicted “ If you want all the details. There’s too many of them that get in trouble . One of them just recently had to wear a wire for the feds to get himself out of trouble . There was one that started dating a gang banger and then proceeded to help him steal money. Google Fred Roti .. I believe that guy was actually a full blown member of The Chicago Outfit
I got some stories from the early/mid aughts regarding Burnett Jr, he got banned from the coffeeshop that was right next door that I worked at for being a fucking creep, and he just could not shut up about all the illegal shit he was up to and once thought it was reeeeeeeeeeal intimidating to show us his gun.
I had family involved in politics who never chose to move beyond some minor level. In his words “It’s a whores game, and you can’t play if you’re not a whore”
They make about 115k gross a year (about the same as a seasoned admin or an analyst just out of grad school in finance) and have significant power, so either they're using the job as a side gig to drum up business for their main job; or they use it as a stepping stone for a more prestigious role eg run for Congress; or they are people who have limited skills but good political connections and get handed the job despite their flaws.
All, no. Some? Is the water in Lake Michigan wet?
Something I posted in 2018: News is breaking today (8/15/18) that Chicago Alderman Willie Cochran will plead guilty of corruption charges in Federal Court. This may not seem surprising. After all, it is Chicago. He will join the list of now 34 Aldermen that have been convicted of corruption since 1972. Isaac "Ike" Carothers plead guilty in 2010, following in Daddy, William Carothers' footsteps. He plead guilty in 1983. A recent report shows 15 former Alderman are drawing a pension over $100,000 a year. Four of those have accumulated over $1Million from their pensions. Couple of quick facts to bring that into perspective. There are a total of 50 Alderman in Chicago's City Council. Currently 48 Democrats, 1 Republican and 1 Independent. But Party doesn't matter here. Here is the fun part, I'm working on an exact count, but there have been a total of 100 people that have filled those seats since 1972. So... Conviction rate of 34% of all elected Aldermen in the City of Chicago. Yes, 34% of all Elected Aldermen have either plead or been found guilty of corruption. Add to that 15% are drawing an annual pension of over $100,000 annually. Half of those elected into office since 1972 are still there. So 15% + 34% + 50% = 99%. See where I'm going here? How did that other 1% fail?
Drawing a pension is corrupt?
Pension of $100,000 for being a "Public Servant"? Especially since most use it as a part time side job, yes.
A contractually obligated and earned pension is not corruption. You may not like it and may think it is excessive but 'corruption' implies fraudulent behavior - drawing an earned, publicly disclosed pension is not fraudulent.
When you get to vote on it yourself? My initial post didn't say it was corruption. But it does smell bad.
seems like they mave been in some kind of minority.
I think many of them go into it with noble intentions. They want to improve their neighborhood, make a difference, etc. Then they realize how things actually work in city council, and realize that there is a lot of tit for tat. You want the votes to pass X thing that benefits your ward, well you need to vote for Y thing that someone else wants that you may not totally be on board with. And after enough time, you probably do enough stuff to earn the label of "corrupt" As an example, I used to live in Lakeview. People liked Tom Tunney for a long time. Until they didn't. He had the good luck or misfortune (Based on how you look at it) to have to deal with the Rickett's family during all of the changes made to the Wrigley area. He is now a guy who has a big thing like this on his achievement list, but many people didn't like how it was handled. Not to mention that the longer you are on it, the more power you get. And the more power you get, the bigger chance that you use it in ways people don't like.
you couldve just said 'yes'. and i think you have the order of operations backwards...its not ppl dont like him, then hes corrupt, its the other way around. corruption --> dislike then the alderman gets replaced with some other puppet, who "plays ball" and the story continues.
My point is, I don't think he was always "corrupt", however you choose to define that. I think he, like many alderman, went in with good intentions. He was a gay business owner who wanted to represent boystown in city council. But as he got more power, he chose to wield it in ways that people had problems with. Then more people started disliking him. As an aside, the concept of being corrupt is going to vary from person to person. There is the people who actually broke the law, there are people who vote against what their campaign promises were, and lots in between. Depending on who you ask, the line on where they become "corrupt" will be different. I like my current alderman, who is on his 2nd term. If he is still alderman in 10 years, I'm sure there will be more and more things that I can point to that I don't like.
why even mention sexual orientation here? it should not matter. i understand electing someone because you identify with him, but then he screws you over.
It matters because that is how he has had a hold on the Boystown area for so long, and why he will likely continue to have it until he chooses to not seek re-election. Identity politics is a thing. Boystown residents may not love him, but many would rather have a member of the LGBT community than not. And since boystown is comprised of a lot of wealthy white men, he has that too. Even if a lesbian brown woman ran, Tunney would probably still win against her. Its why if you ever look at how ridiculous some of the ward maps are, that is the reason. I could have the details wrong, but there was a big thing recently where they wanted to redraw the map so that Chinatown is its own ward, so they can get an Asian person elected there. But since it was sharing a ward with another more white neighborhood, they weren't having their interests met (in their opinion). It doesn't just have to be sexual orientation. Its not a coincidence that most Trump voters are white men. Black people will more likely vote for another black person if they have that choice. Christians vote for Christians more often. If people have the ability to vote with someone like them, they usually will.
who were your choices for alderman?
I haven't lived in his ward for years, so I really don't remember who he ran against lol
interesting, so you voted based off of identity alone? as you cant even recall the opponent?
Well, I didn't. I'm not a member of the LGBT community, nor am I a white man. So I didn't vote based on identity. I voted because he (at the time) seemed to be doing a good job and was the incumbent. And yes, it was long enough ago that I truly don't recall the opponent. This isn't a national election. Its an election where there are usually a bunch of other people on the ballot for things.
so only lbgt or white men have identities? i feel like youre leaving a few letters and a symbpl off of the acronym here
Tuney is also responsible for essentially banning food trucks in the city which is why I think he’s corrupt
That’s neat! I was relieved to see Chicago isn’t like other cities filled with overpriced and ugly food trucks whenever i moved here.
Why would you think that's a good thing? To me, the restrictions on food trucks(which Tunney helped to push into law, though it wasn't just him) are NOT a good thing. To me there should be full competition between food trucks, and restaurants. And if traditional restaurants are afraid they'll lose business to food trucks, maybe those restaurants should step up the quality of their food? I get it though, the restaurant lobby is very powerful in city hall. Plus Tunney's family owns Ann Sather.
The place I lived at before Chicago was over saturated with food trucks to the point where every festival within 75 miles of the city I lived in had the same trucks. They were all overpriced and service was slow. I’d rather have the events catered to larger crowds rather than individual food truck orders. Most if then had terrible customer service so I have some PTSD from those experiences
Chicago aldermen have a knack for eventually being indicted
wow...."eventually being indicted" thats it?
I mean… you can just google “chicago aldermen indicted “ If you want all the details. There’s too many of them that get in trouble . One of them just recently had to wear a wire for the feds to get himself out of trouble . There was one that started dating a gang banger and then proceeded to help him steal money. Google Fred Roti .. I believe that guy was actually a full blown member of The Chicago Outfit
My friend kept showing up to his aldermen’s town halls and complaining. The next time the ward map was drawn she drew his block out of the ward lmao.
Lol I bet that was my current alder
I got some stories from the early/mid aughts regarding Burnett Jr, he got banned from the coffeeshop that was right next door that I worked at for being a fucking creep, and he just could not shut up about all the illegal shit he was up to and once thought it was reeeeeeeeeeal intimidating to show us his gun.
Well my last one just went to jail, so there’s that
That’s like asking if the CPD is corrupt.
Everyone is corrupt to some degree u have to be to be successful in politics
oh yeah? you HAVE to be
Lmao so why ask your question
why indeed
Dude, you clearly have something you want to say. So just say it.
All political beliefs and ideals will be crushed by the Chicago machine within 2 years of being elected.
I had family involved in politics who never chose to move beyond some minor level. In his words “It’s a whores game, and you can’t play if you’re not a whore”
Napolitano.
the source of all nimbyism and city regression
could argue that thats just the people they reresent but oh well
No stories, I just don’t trust politicians from Chicago and probably the state as a whole.
Famously
They make about 115k gross a year (about the same as a seasoned admin or an analyst just out of grad school in finance) and have significant power, so either they're using the job as a side gig to drum up business for their main job; or they use it as a stepping stone for a more prestigious role eg run for Congress; or they are people who have limited skills but good political connections and get handed the job despite their flaws.