My Thoughts on the Democrats' Illinois Gubernatorial Candidates
After spending most of my Sunday reviewing the candidates' forums, "debate" performances, some literature on them and various endorsements, I'll share my succinct thoughts: I'm not particularly impressed with any of the highest-polling candidates. That's not to say I'm in love with any of the lower-polling candidates, although I have enjoyed moments when Robert Marshall has emphatically pointed to his proposal to divide Illinois into three separate states. It amazes me how a libertarian-like Republican finds himself in this race. Then again, it should be amazing that a billionaire generationally wealthy venture capitalist should lead the field in a Democratic Primary.
But that's where Illinoisans find themselves with one JB Pritzker. To me, Pritzker is out for a number of reasons: his refusal to release his full tax information, dodging questions about his overseas holdings, his tacit-at-best criticism of Michael Madigan, spending over $60 million so far basically to buy the election, et cetera. He has the backing of so much of the establishment that it's hard to imagine him as anything but part of the Illinois political machine. His wiretapped calls with Rod Blagojevich reinforce that sentiment. Illinois needs serious change, and while Pritzker has masterfully adopted the language of progressives, I'm not convinced he will bring bold change to the state, even if his supporters tout his forward-thinking business persona and work at 1871.
That leaves us with Daniel Biss and Chris Kennedy. Biss, an intelligent State Senator, has less wealth than Pritzker or Kennedy, and paired with adopting much of the language and policy stances of progressives, he's running as the leftmost candidate and the middle class candidate. While I don't doubt that a majority of his policy proposals are genuine, I cannot say with certainty that he's not a center-left pragmatist dressed in a hard left idealist's clothes: as a State Senator, he has voted to cut pensions and supported charter schools and their funding. Now, he supports a moratorium on charter schools and supports keeping pensions fully funded. Several years ago, his AFL-CIO voting score was poor, but it has gotten better over the last few years. Ultimately, one must ask: which Biss will we get if he becomes governor?
Kennedy has made education and fighting corruption central to his plan to improve Illinois' economy, and I agree with those choices. At the same time, I don't understand Kennedy's stance that we need time to research cannabis use and that we shouldn't allow lobbyists and special interests to sway the decision. It's an odd angle to take given that the lobbyists with the money from the medical sector advocate for continued prohibition. This seems like a clumsy excuse to impede progress on this issue. And unlike Biss, I'm not sure he sees legalization as a gateway to address laws that disproportionately impact minorities. Moreover, Kennedy is a wealthy businessman from a wealthy family like Pritzker. There is great risk involved when expecting wealthy bosses to understand and advocate effectively for workers.
As I see it, we are seeing the benefit and downside of a growing realization by establishment Democrats that progressive policies are popular and can win elections. On the plus side, all three of these candidates claim to share similar policy goals such as raising the state minimum wage and implementing a progressive income tax. However, we have reason to believe that any or all of these candidates may be cynically using the language of progressivism to get votes and that, once elected, they will abandon those principles.
I'm on the fence. If you live in Illinois and want to share your knowledge and thoughts, feel free to share!
