Race for Governor of Illinois

March 20, 2018 is our date for primary elections!  Illinoisans will be selecting their party candidates for governor, attorney general, Congress, the Illinois General Assembly, and others.  Perhaps the biggest question, though, is "Which Democrat will be running against Bruce Rauner for governor of Illinois?"  

You might think it's too early to be worrying about this, but first impressions are everything, as they say, and the inevitable hoary, smeary, weary campaign advertisement blitz is now imminent.  Why not get informed first (in a single article!) so you know what those silly, biased ads are actually talking about.  

So!  To spare you the trouble of wading through a morass of news articles and campaign websites, I've made this handy-dandy comparison chart of where the major candidates stand on various issues.  It is coded as follows:

• Italics – a goal that all three candidates have in common
• Bold – a goal that is unique to that candidate
• Regular font – some overlap between candidates on this goal

If the chart looks too daunting, you can just skip down to my analysis of the race.  Or if you're not in the mood for analysis, you can just skip to the end where I tell you which candidate I like best. :) 

Seriously, though, I hope everyone will find this article helpful and informative, no matter who you vote for!

	Daniel Biss	Chris Kennedy	J.B. Pritzker
Professional Bio	Legislator and mathematician: Illinois State Senator and former U. Chicago professor	Businessman: Real estate developer and former president of Merchandise Mart	Businessman: Venture capitalist and founder of 1871 (a digital startup center); also an attorney
Tax Reform	·  Replace Illinois’s constitutionally mandated flat income tax with a progressive income tax ·  Close the “Wall Street” (carried interest) loophole	·  Replace Illinois’s constitutionally mandated flat income tax with a progressive income tax	·  Replace Illinois’s constitutionally mandated flat income tax with a progressive income tax
Labor & Jobs	·  Pro-union ·  Raise minimum wage to $15 ·  Paid family leave ·  Cut red tape for businesses ·  Support secure retirement for seniors (like the Secure Choice Program) ·  Strengthen the Illinois Equal Pay Act to close the pay gap between men and women	·  Pro-union (hired only union workers at the Mart) ·  Raise minimum wage to $15 ·  Paid family leave	·  Pro-union ·  Raise minimum wage ·  Jump-start manufacturing ·  Support Illinois agriculture ·  Expand availability of micro-loans ·  Restore and expand small business development centers
Campaign Finance & Elections	· Enact term limits ·  Redistricting reform ·  Small-donor matching program to help non-wealthy candidates run for office ·  Local government consolidation	·  Enact term limits ·  Redistricting reform ·  Ban elected officials from serving as property tax appeals lawyers	·  Maybe enact term limits? ·  Redistricting reform
Education	·  Increase funding for public K-12 schools ·  Change public school funding formulas so more money goes to low-income schools ·  Free community college for Illinois residents ·  Already sponsored “Student Loan Bill of Rights,” which will go into effect in Dec. 2018, to protect students from unfair loan practices	·  Increase funding for public K-12 schools ·  Change public school funding formulas so more money goes to low-income schools ·  Minimum 2 years free tuition for low-/middle-income students at community college or trade school ·  Support research and entrepreneurship at universities ·  Expand MAP grant program	·  Increase funding for public K-12 schools and add more teachers to classrooms ·  Change public school funding formulas so more money goes to low-income schools ·  Focus on early childhood education; i.e. universal pre-school for 3 and 4 year olds ·  Support university-based startups ·  Expand youth apprenticeship programs between high schools and trade unions/companies
Health Care	·  Medicare for all (single-payer) ·  Paid family leave ·  Expand Medicaid ·  Improve medical care for seniors (at-home care and nursing homes) ·  Introduced bill to expand SNAP eligibility ·  Treat drug addiction as a health issue instead of a criminal issue ·  Legalize marijuana	·  Move towards a single-payer system (aka. Medicare for all) & create a public option ·  Paid family leave ·  More support for the disabled ·  Increase funding, early intervention, and community care for mental illness and keep the mentally ill out of prison ·  Decriminalize marijuana (and consider full legalization after further research)	·  Create a public option ·  Expand Medicaid via a Medicaid buy-in option ·  Combat the opioid epidemic ·  Work with criminal justice systems to promote treatment instead of incarceration for drug use ·  Legalize marijuana
Energy & Environment	·  Invest in clean energy research ·  Cut carbon emissions in half by 2030 ·  Already sponsored bill to ban electronics from landfills	·  Invest in clean energy research	·  Invest in renewable energy ·  Pursue private investments in technology and innovation
Crime	·  Invest in social services and violence prevention programs ·  Revitalize economies of communities most afflicted by crime ·  Require all gun dealers to be licensed ·  Increase police force in Illinois ·  Reduce recidivism by banning discrimination against former convicts ·  Provide inmates with training for careers (not low-level jobs)   ·  Promote rehabilitation and re-entry instead of punishment    ·  Reform pre-trial detention practice so that poor people don't have to sit in jail just because they can't afford bail	·  Invest in social services and violence prevention programs ·  Revitalize economies of communities most afflicted by crime ·  Strengthen oversight of illegal gun access and create a gun tracing program ·  Community policing (recruiting police candidates from the communities they will serve) ·  Rehabilitation programs that help convicts become productive citizens	·  Invest in social services and violence prevention programs ·  Revitalize economies of communities most afflicted by crime ·  Implement universal background checks for gun sales ·  Treat gun violence as a public health epidemic ·  Use rehabilitation programs rather than incarceration for convicted youth   ·  Work with criminal justice systems to promote treatment instead of incarceration for drug use

What’s so special about these guys, anyways?

There is a lot that Biss, Kennedy, and Pritzker have in common.  All three candidates support unions, gay rights, women’s reproductive rights, immigrant rights, and more equitable funding for K-12 schools; all three want to institute a progressive income tax, invest in clean energy, and upgrade Illinois’ infrastructure.  

However, each of them also have certain priorities that make them unique:

For Biss, it unquestionably his crusade for electoral and government reform.  This includes taking steps to counter and limit the effects of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which allowed companies to donate limitless dollars to any campaign they want.  Biss is the only candidate advocating for a small-donor matching program to help non-wealthy candidates run for office, and he is the only one talking about the consolidation of Illinois’ labyrinthine layers of local government.  (Fun Fact: Illinois has more local governments and “special districts” than any other state—“over 2,000 more than the runner-up, Pennsylvania”—and they all have administrators that need to be paid out of taxpayers’ pockets).  Not only that, but, as Adam Andrzejewki wrote in Forbes, “[i]n Illinois, 72 small-town city and village managers out-earn every governor of the 50 states.”  Wow.  Why is Biss the only one talking about this? 

Kennedy, for his part, shows a notable concern for health issues.  Out of sixteen “issues” listed on his website, three are explicit health issues (“disability rights,” “mental health,” and “health care”) while several more are health-related (i.e. “marijuana” and “women’s rights”).  In interviews and on TV, however, Kennedy frequently zeroes in on property taxes.  No one doubts that Illinois’ property tax system is in dire need of reform, but Kennedy seems especially keen on this issue, and he wants to ban elected officials from serving as property tax appeals lawyers—a dual career option that has been earning Mike Madigan a lot of money.  Plus, it’s good to hear Kennedy emphasize how our property tax system has major, negative consequences for our local, public schools. 

Pritzker’s platform is both broad and thorough, but his biggest campaign refrain is supporting business and saving money in Illinois.  Even his plans for education, health, and crime tend to emphasize the economic aspects, such as preparing children for the work force, cutting health care costs, and revitalizing the economy of crime-ridden areas.  It is also noteworthy that Pritzker is the sole candidate who frequently mentions down-state Illinois; he explicitly discusses agriculture, for example, as well as creating infrastructure and increasing high-speed internet access specifically for the down-state areas.  Pritzker also has some unique priorities in education, emphasizing both early childhood education and vocational/apprenticeship training. 

Between the three of them, Pritzker seems to be the odd man out in several ways.  His website says nothing about campaign finance reform, gerrymandering, or term limits.  In an interview with the Belleville News-Democrat back in July, he said that he was “in favor of independently drawn maps and opposed to term limits,” but a few months later, in a contentious debate about Mike Madigan, he seemed to endorse term limits.

The most important differences about Pritzker, however, are his money and his endorsements.  Pritzker has more money by far than either Kennedy or Biss, which allowed him to launch a blitz of campaign ads much earlier than the others.  “During the third quarter [of this year], Pritzker spent nearly $6.9 million on TV ads, $1.2 million for consulting and more than $620,000 on campaign payroll,” according to the Chicago Tribune.  Meanwhile, Kennedy and Biss each spent just over half a million dollars in the same period.  Perhaps not coincidentally, numerous trade unions endorsed Pritzker very, very early in the race, including the prominent AFL-CIO.  The hasty rush of endorsements for Pritzker was met with suspicion by other candidates; Biss and Kennedy both contended that some questionable back-room deals may have taken place.  The Chicago Tribune reported:

“Pritzker's endorsement did not come without some internal divisions. It was engineered by trade labor unions, which make up the bulk of the AFL-CIO's board and which endorsed Pritzker early last month. Those unions are allied with House Speaker Michael Madigan, who also chairs the state Democratic Party.

“Pritzker's vow to use his own money for the campaign would free up union dollars for Madigan — Rauner's chief political nemesis — to try to keep control of the House. But the other contenders for governor say Democrats shouldn't back a candidate merely because of money and the ability to counter former private equity specialist Rauner dollar-for-dollar.”

Representatives of three other major unions “argued there is a standard vetting procedure to evaluate candidates that had yet to get in gear and expressed concern about making an endorsement early while the Democratic primary race has yet to totally unfold.”

The endorsements have kept coming, however.  Pritzker has since been endorsed by the Cook County Democrats, by a number of state-level Democrats (such as Andy Manar), and, most recently, by Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth. 

The big debates

There are several particularly contentious issues in the Democratic race, and Pritzker, as the odd-man-out and front-runner, is caught in the cross-hairs.  First, there is Cook County Assessor Joe Berrios, who is accused of assessing property taxes in a systematically unfair way that also happens to make Mr. Berrios a lot of money.  This controversy has gotten so big that even the Economist (a major British news magazine) wrote a detailed article about it.  There is ample reason to believe that Berrios has been wantonly abusing the system, so Biss and Kennedy have argued that Berrios should resign, and Kennedy wants to change the law so that such abuse cannot continue.  But Pritzker has equivocated: “Attacking Democrats isn’t something that we should be doing,” he said (NBC video, minute 1:10). 

Joe Berrios is closely tied to Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan, who also profits from the current property tax system.  Politico recently published an excellent article on the relationship between Pritzker and the Democratic machine, in which they reported:

“Both Biss and Kennedy contend that Pritzker is vulnerable in a run against Rauner because of his ties to Madigan, a controversial figure from whom they have distanced themselves since running for governor. Yet they have their exposure on the issue: Biss, as a state representative, voted for Madigan as speaker. Last year, Biss ran a super PAC that benefited from Madigan money. For his part, the underfunded Kennedy had met with Madigan and sought his support for a governor’s bid at the outset of the campaign.”

Another big debate is over the disclosure of taxes.  Both Kennedy and Pritzker recently released only partial tax returns (Chicago Tonight, Politifact) prompting questions about whether these rich and super-rich men have something to hide, while Biss has fully released his taxes for the previous five years.  Biss complained about the lack of transparency, painting Pritzker as a hypocrite for previously demanding the release of Trump’s tax returns and, now, failing to disclose his own.  Kennedy openly accused Pritzker of taking advantage of unfair property tax laws, but Pritzker shot back that Kennedy had also hired a law firm to reduce taxes on his own property and business projects.

The man for the job

Political mudslinging aside, Democratic voters have three pretty decent choices this election.  These platforms all address some big problems that need to be dealt with, and all three candidates agree on some vital issues—like instituting a progressive income tax, school funding, and redistricting reform.  All three have long histories as leaders with public track records that we can examine.  But I think only one of them has the background and the priorities that Illinois really needs.  That man is Daniel Biss.

First of all, Biss is the only candidate with government experience.  I know that understanding business is important, too, but I am tired of businessmen who just wake up one morning and decide that they should be in charge of the government.  Granted, Pritzker is an attorney, and Kennedy is from a political family, so neither of them are politically ignorant, but they haven’t worked within the political machine, and I think that network and that experience are important.  Biss’s time as a legislator could be vital to helping him get things done in Springfield. 

Second, Biss is the only middle-class man on the ballot.  This might sound like empty, class-war rhetoric, but I think it actually matters.  Billionaires and elite political families winning elections is par for course.  Biss is something different, and he owes neither fame nor fortune to the system as it currently stands.  Kennedy and Pritzker want reform, but how far will they really go?  How much can Pritzker shake up Springfield when he’s so close to Madigan, who’s been the top dog in Springfield for decades?  Will he really weed out corrupt property tax practices if he won’t even denounce the corrupt Mr. Berrios?  And Kennedy may want property tax reform, but he has expressed no interest (that I know of) in campaign finance reform.  Biss’s rallying cry of “Elections, Not Auctions” could not be truly convincing coming from any other candidate.  

Also, Biss is the only candidate without a questionable tax history, which will be very significant come the general election.  Kennedy and Pritzker will be under intense scrutiny and suspicion for only releasing partial tax returns, and the similarities between them and Rauner—rich men trying to jump straight into the upper echelons of government—will become only too apparent after the primaries.  In fact, it’s already a problem:

Rauner is already accusing Pritzker of hiding money in offshore accounts—and, what’s worse, Pritzker is already dissembling about it.  Last week, in response to Rauner's accusation, Pritzker claimed that he had “released way more [tax] information than Bruce Rauner has,” a statement that Politifact evaluated and labeled as patently “False.”

This is what the general campaign will look like if Pritzker wins.  This is probably what it will look like if Kennedy wins, unless he discloses his tax returns.  Do we really want to sit through eight months of a general-election smear campaign that’s all about who is more unscrupulous with their millions or billions of dollars?  Or do we want to pit Rauner against his true opposite, someone irreproachable, who can spend his campaign focusing on the issues that matter most?

Perhaps the most compelling argument for Biss was (inadvertently) delivered by Cook County Clerk David Orr, as reported by Chicago Tonight:

David Orr, who is not running for re-election, says the vast amount of money spent on campaigning is the single most important issue in politics today.

Orr says that while Illinois has done a commendable job of passing laws that make it easier for citizens to vote, including automatic voter registration, Election Day voter registration and extended early voting windows, “we’re losing people because of the money in politics.”  [...]

“The billionaires, no offense to either one of them, can start campaigning 15 months ahead, 18 months ahead and that is very undemocratic. It also ties people to big funders, discourages good candidates, turns off the public,” Orr said, as he warned that the feel-good, “fuzzy” ads will undoubtedly turn negative after the start of the new year. He says it’s hard for the public to discern the truth of those ads, and that wreaks havoc on democracy.

There will be lots of negative ads in the coming months, by all candidates.  But Daniel Biss is running on a platform of campaign finance and government reform that can change Illinois, permanently and for the better, by making sure we get elections worth having.