Judging by the blasts of hot air whooshing around in the final days of this campaign season, the Cubs can expect a warm day for their home opener on Tuesday, April 4. That, coincidentally, is election day, and as it approaches the city seems to be getting hotter and windier.
While political crystal balls are even less reliable than those hurled by the average Cub relief pitcher, there does appear to be a pattern in the Daley and Evans campaigns that portends a real difference between the two, and thus posits a fundamental question for voters to decide on Tuesday. Simply put: Will the box-seat season ticket holders regain the upper hand at City Hall? Or will those who can barely afford bleacher seats–whose interests rarely predominate even in the best of administrations–continue to get at least a fair shake?
Very effective for the purpose of terrorizing taxpayers. But not very effective for boosting Daley’s campaign credibility. Calling Evans a Big Spender doesn’t make him one.
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Evans not only shepherded Washington’s balanced budgets through the City Council, he also cut his own Finance Committee staff and budget. When he took over as committee chairman in 1987, he reduced the committee’s number of employees from 67 to 43, while trimming its budget by one-third. In 1988 he cut the committee budget by an additional $132,000.
To hold down costs, Evans promised to beef up the Productivity Assessment Unit within the Budget Department, and “to experiment with joint management-worker teams to improve productivity and redesign various work processes.”
The Centers for Disease Control do estimate that in the next five years 25,000-30,000 Chicagoans will have developed AIDS or AIDS-related illnesses. Assuming that this projection is the number Daley had in mind, the more basic flaw in his arithmetic is that Evans has not promised to spend $20,000 of city money per AIDS victim or anywhere near that.
Funding would also come from expected expansion in federal programs. AIDS cases are increasing not only locally but nationally; federal funding has been growing and is likely, of necessity, to continue growing.
