Zohran Mamdani’s historic victory in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary last week spurred an avalanche of political, aesthetic, and ideological takes.
It also in passing references a difference between the NYC and Chicago mayoral positions: the Chicago one is on paper more of a "weak-mayor" role (in the terminology of my old poly-sci professors). As rookie Chicago mayors keep discovering they actually can't change all that much just on their own statutory authority. To succeed they have to be skilled persuaders and/or bullies with the city council and with county/state electeds.
I take this as good news for NYC while emphasizing the fact that Chicagoans (and by implication) all Illinoisans are fucked by the Pritzker-Johnson fiscal catastrophe.
Conor: Sure, it’s this: “In other words, New York City’s governance structure is strong enough to withstand any one mayor’s agenda.”
Chicago’s structure is totally inadequate to prevent an idiot like Johnson who is completely in the pocket of the Chicago Teachers Union from destroying the city’s finances and driving out its most productive citizens.
Ok but can you explain how that is? What makes NYC so much more resilient? Cause I dont really see it. If anything, the state have more control over the city limits the damage any one mayor can do, but it just tosses the problem to an uncaring governor. See the MTA and Cuomo as an example of this
Conor: You just explained it. Accept that state oversight (even if you don’t like the governor) works for NYC and the lack of it is destroying Chicago.
This new piece from Yglesias is worth the read:
https://substack.com/inbox/post/166797548
It also in passing references a difference between the NYC and Chicago mayoral positions: the Chicago one is on paper more of a "weak-mayor" role (in the terminology of my old poly-sci professors). As rookie Chicago mayors keep discovering they actually can't change all that much just on their own statutory authority. To succeed they have to be skilled persuaders and/or bullies with the city council and with county/state electeds.
I take this as good news for NYC while emphasizing the fact that Chicagoans (and by implication) all Illinoisans are fucked by the Pritzker-Johnson fiscal catastrophe.
Could you explain more?
Conor: Sure, it’s this: “In other words, New York City’s governance structure is strong enough to withstand any one mayor’s agenda.”
Chicago’s structure is totally inadequate to prevent an idiot like Johnson who is completely in the pocket of the Chicago Teachers Union from destroying the city’s finances and driving out its most productive citizens.
Ok but can you explain how that is? What makes NYC so much more resilient? Cause I dont really see it. If anything, the state have more control over the city limits the damage any one mayor can do, but it just tosses the problem to an uncaring governor. See the MTA and Cuomo as an example of this
Conor: You just explained it. Accept that state oversight (even if you don’t like the governor) works for NYC and the lack of it is destroying Chicago.