Jenn asked me in class last week what I thought about Mayor Daley getting re-elected for a sixth--yes, sixth--term. Many casual observers believe Chicago has flourished under Daley, but their observations are usually about cosmetic improvements ("It's so much cleaner!" and "Millenium Park is so pretty!"). It's worth asking, though, who has really benefitted and who has suffered during Daley's time in office? Does "the city that works" work equally well for all?
For those who are interested, here's a clear-eyed assessment of Daley's record and where Chicago is as a city (including its schools): "He's Going to Win (and Here's Why You Should Vote Against Him Anyway)." It was written by Ben Joravsky and published a few days before the election in the Chicago Reader.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It is funny, because I just had a discussion with my brother about this the other day. It started out because we were talking about how clean Chicago was compared to New York. That really is the first thing we think about when we think of what Mayor Daley has done for the city. I think that the beautification of the city benefits everyone because as human beings we like nice aesthetics. However maybe the fact that a large part of his focus was on this was a bad thing.
Personally as a future teacher I think that Daley should have spent more time, effort and money on fixing up the school systems in the city. There is clear evidence that this is needed. So the students are being overlooked and the poor are suffering due to increased property taxes.
To touch on the idea of people being afraid to elect someone new, this goes with the whole idea of people being afraid of change. I like the line in the article, "The city slaps us in the face and we ask for more." The helpless and dependent wife syndrome like they stated in the beginning. We are afraid that the changes we make could make things worse. But does it really ever hurt to try? People just have to balance the good with the bad and step up the make a decision that would benefit the future of the city. Whether this be helping the youth, the poor or anyone else for that matter. It really is the people in the end that put themselves in the situations that they are in.
I totally agree with you about the cosmetic differences that he has done to "downtown" chicago. It seems as if people are always quick to fix things that don't really need to be fixed before they fix what needs to be fixed first. Like for instance a homeonwner remodeling their kitchen because they want to impress people but what they really should be worrying about is the roof that is about to collaspe any day now. And that is what i think mayor daley is doing. I truely do believe that he made that park for him and his family. What about fixing the "gardens" or making sure the playground in underprivilleged neighborhoods are safe? I think that he should have cleaned up what was already there then after that was taken care of create a park but not downtown. Downtown has a lot going for it already. He needs to put his focus on children and the school system not on downtown. The revenue created downtown stays downtown. It would be different if the city wasn't segregated like it is. BUt then again why should he care about public school sytems, does his family or any other governor or mayor's family have to go to public school? I think that if his children were to go to public and not private school then he would feel differently about how he is spending the city's money.
The reason I originally asked Greg the question of what he thought the implications might be from Mayor Daley being re-elected for the 6th term, was due to a conversation with my mother-in-law a few days earlier. She made the same comments that most people make, "Oh Mayor Daley has done so much for Chicago, you should have seen the city before he was mayor, it was so dirty and disgusting, we never would go downtown before. But now we go downtown and see a whole new city, it is so beautiful." It got me thinking, has the mayor just sugar-coated the city so no one would question him with what he is really doing? Well I guess it is working. It is so sad that people are blinded by Millenium Park and the lakefront and oh yeah their garbage is being picked up. I can't believe this is all people really care about. This article really was a nice wake up call and I hope more people read it to see what they just voted in again.
We live in a democracy, but people are living in fear of change. This is so sad! The last paragraph of the column sums it up. "If we elect a bum worse than the one we threw out, we can vote for someone else four years later. Democracy’s not that complicated. If we don’t start behaving like we live in one, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves for the consequences." I think that the people of Chicago need to wake up and do a inventory of what Mayor Daley has actually done and not just look at the beautification of the city.
The other point the article made is that he made the city pretty by moving the poor out. This goes along with what we were talking about in class. When he tore down all the public highrises, those people had to go somewhere. His excuse was that he wanted to provide them with better, more adequate housing, well did he? That is a good question, I don't think so, they are gone now and he does not have to deal with them. Out of sight, out of mind! Again, we are looking at the forgotten people, they are the ones that truly suffer from this. It is very sad! I do not live in Chicago, but I do have to say I am ashamed of the people for letting this reign of terror continue!
When the statement is given: Chicago is the city that works, the reply is be that works for who. The new housing developments work well for the people who can afford them and people who benefit from this profit. But what is to be said for the people who were displaced because they made the area look “dirty”? I watched a documentary about the demolishment of the Robert Taylor Homes. This video really spoke to me because I am familiar with the area because my mother’s church was right next to the Robert Taylor projects. Although the area seemed rough, residents of the development were not animals like the media and stereotypical images set them up to be. They were ordinary people who loved, laughed, and despite the harshness of their area felt a strong sense of community. Chicago Housing Authority, of course, did not care to see this. They preferred to see the value of an area on the outskirts of downtown Chicago and just like that letters were issued to the residents of the Robert Taylor homes telling them they had to find a new place to stay. They offered to assist the residents in this process, but due to circumstance (disability, incorrect utility bills, etc), many people blindly struggled through the relocation process. People who did not get vouchers on time had to move to other housing projects (some of which were vacant). Can you imagine having to move into abandon high-rise? For too many, this was a reality. Chicago Housing Authority claimed to have wanted the land to build mix income housing but the people who lived in the area prior to demolishment would not be allowed the option of living in the new developments. It was said that the new developments would only house ten percent of what the area did prior to the relocation. Not only did these residents lose their homes, but their community as well. And we wonder who the city works for.
Post a Comment