While emailing with friends this morning, I realized that at this time last year, when 2009 was still young and at least half of the country still believed in ‘hope and change’, we were working hard campaigning in Chicago’s 5th Congressional District. Chicago was holding a special election to fill the House seat left empty by Rahm Emanuel, then newly elected President Obama’s incoming Chief of Staff. And, I was a part of a team working to get a conservative candidate, Greg Bedell, in that seat.

Like many other conservatives, the 2008 election inspired me to do more than follow politics from the sidelines. I wanted to get involved, and before I found my niche blogging, I began to get involved with various conservative organizations in the area — such as the Chicago Young Republicans and the Chicago Republican Women’s Network.

After doing my own research on each of the conservative candidates running in the primary, I lent my support and my time to Greg. Greg is a fellow attorney who was new to the political scene. Having spent time living in France, he knew what it was like to live under a socialized system of health care and had experienced the problems with that type of system first-hand. He understood that those problems are widespread; they don’t just end with health care.

My focus during the campaign was to research and analyze the critical issues of the election and hone in on the most effective ways of getting our conservative message out in a tough, partisan environment. Many Chicagoans have no idea what conservatives stand for; they just know it’s not what they want. We had quite a long road ahead of us.

From the start, I personally did not see any of the other candidates as serious contenders. Aside from Greg, there was only one other candidate that I could see giving the Democrats a run for their money. I’m all for citizen activists getting involved in politics, but many of the other candidates just didn’t do their homework, weren’t well versed in the facts and pandered to whatever audience was in front of them.

In February of last year, our hard work was recognized when the Chicago Tribune endorsed Greg. The other city paper, the Chicago Sun-Times, didn’t bother endorsing a candidate with conservative leanings — writing us out of the election off the bat.

Working on the campaign itself was a wonderful experience. Interacting with Chicagoans was satisfying, especially when people opened up and actually gave us a chance to relate our positions to them — something that unfortunately, didn’t happen often enough. At other times, it was disheartening to witness hard-working people, even veterans, who spent their lives paying into a system that has done nothing for them, shut us out completely. Instead, they chose to endorse the same life-long politicians, the same party, whose policies had left Illinois with an $11.5 billion budget, who caused Illinois to be ranked the 48th state in terms of economic growth by the Illinois Policy Institute, only doing better than Michigan and Ohio.

Of course, being the political geek that I am, the candidate forums were a blast. Finding flaws or misinformation in opponents’ answers, noting our candidates’ (and conservatives’ general) strengths and weaknesses and watching citizens participate in the political process — what could be better?

But, even on a small, local level, I also witnessed the dark side to political parties and the positioning and kowtowing that comes with it. Until I participated in campaigning, I didn’t fully realize the extent to which parties care more about the initial following politicians’ name, than they do their positions, background, qualifications or morals. The local party leaders put a big emphasis on having the different campaigns come together at the end of the primary to support whichever ‘R’ won. But not all ‘Rs’ are created equal. And there was at least one in particular, that not only fell short of being a serious candidate, but whose positions and the way she articulated them, were offensive.

I kept asking myself, is this really the Republican party that these leaders want to showcase? We had taken enough of a beating in the 2008 elections. Having some of those candidates represent conservatives in this heavily Democrat area, would only serve to further cement that the Republican party in the city of Chicago would become extinct.

The night that Greg lost the primary, I found myself sneaking out of the venue where all the Republican candidates had gathered, avoiding conversing with those people to whom the future of the party was far more important than the future of our city, state, country. When Greg’s race was done, I was done. There was no way I could support the candidate that won the primary.

Of course, when it came down to my personal vote, I would vote for the candidate whose votes would align with my views the most. But, voting for the lesser of two evils and actively working to get them elected are very different.

It was after the campaign that I started writing. The satisfaction I got from writing along with the experiences I had campaigning, made me realize that I like engaging in politics on a different level. I’d rather spend my time understanding and analyzing the facts than playing the game and jumping through the hoops it requires to campaign or work in government.

Unfortunately, as I saw firsthand, those that stand up to their party risk losing the support they need to get their message out. In a way, this was what 2009 was about, with everyday Americans who lean conservative joining the tea parties and starting a movement with no allegiance to any one political party. In 2010, with the mid-term elections coming up, we’ll begin to see what effects this new wave of activists will have on our political system. And maybe a year from now, we’ll look back on 2010 as a year of real ‘hope and change.’

This week, Chicago is buzzing with news of the forthcoming IOC decision on its Olympic bid. The national media is focused on the President’s trip to Copenhagen and his desire to shine the spotlight on his hometown. What the media is missing is the adverse reaction with which this endeavor has been met by Chicagoans who are concerned with the city and state’s deep-rooted problems with violence, failing schools and massive deficits — just a few of the countless problems facing the Midwestern city.

Yesterday, I wrote about a woman who was interviewed on a local TV station in the aftermath of the death last week of Derrion Albert, a sixteen-year old Chicago resident and honor roll student who was beaten to death outside of his high school last week. She very pointedly looked into the camera and pled with officials to help Chicago’s broken communities and to stop being so concerned with the Olympics.

Ten Chicago residents were killed last weekend, ranging in age from 17 to 29. Violence, broken communities and schools, a city facing a deficit somewhere in the range of $200 to $250 million (some estimate it’s now pushing $300 million), a ballooning state deficit of $11.5 billion — this is the reality in Chicago.

So whether you look at it from the grieving woman’s point of view, that any precious tax dollars spent should be put toward cleaning up the city’s problems, or from a purely fiscal point of view, questioning the logic of bringing the Olympics to a city with such vast financial problems, not to mention extensive corruption, the effort to bring the Olympics to Chicago is not only irresponsible, it is the height of delusion. It ignores the reality the city, state and its residents face, in the name of undertaking to put on a production, a show for the rest of the world, in the hopes that it will either fail to notice or overlook the unstable city that is at the center of it all.

Yesterday, I wrote:

“While the President and First Lady travel to Copenhagen to appeal to the IOC on behalf of their hometown, their full-fledged support for staging the Olympics in Chicago may put them in the minority. A local station, WGNTV News, points out that Chicagoans are already on the hook for $250 million, and84% of Chicagoans are against financing any part of the Olympics. Mayor Daley, the biggest proponent of Chicago’s bid, “is rocking a 35% approval rating”. Tomorrow, organizations are coming together to hold a rally voicing their opposition to the Olympics.

Under the contract Mayor Daley will sign if Chicago is picked to host the Olympics, Chicagoans would backstop any Olympic losses the city faces. Mayor Daley has insisted that the risks taxpayers face is small. He points to the surpluses other cities have enjoyed after hosting the Olympics. He chooses not to highlight the fact that it took Montreal twenty years to pay off its debts after the 1976 Olympics. Or the fact that there are already accusations of Daley insiders with schemes in place to pad their pockets with sweet real estate deals and other financial interests in bringing the Olympics to home sweet home Chicago.”

With unemployment at 9.7%, the highest level since June of 1983, unemployment on the rise in 27 states, and states already worrying about budget shortfalls when stimulus funds run out, Chicago’s bid is a continuation of the kind of overstretched spending and impudent policies that got it into the mess it’s in to begin with. What was that saying that gained so much notoriety during the election about putting lipstick on a pig? That is exactly what the Olympic effort is like, putting lipstick on a city with clearly discernible blemishes; when all is said and done, you’re still stuck with a pig.

*Originally published September 29, 2009 on the American Issues Project Blog, here.

As the IOC deadline for picking the 2016 Olympics winner approaches, the dialogue over whether the Olympics will be gladly welcomed or accepted begrudgingly by Chicagoans is getting heated.

Last week, ten Chicagoans were killed in a string of violent attacks — all of them young victims ranging from 17 to 29 years old. Tyrone Williams, 19, and Percy Day, 17, both college students, were shot and killed outside of their family’s home on the city’s South Side.

Derrion Albert was just 16 years old when he was beaten to death outside the high school he attended on the city’s South Side, where he was an honor roll student.

Yesterday, I was watching the local news, saddened and disheartened by these stories, when the reporter focused on a grieving woman, who suggested that the city needs to stop focusing on the Olympics and start fixing its communities.

In some ways, the debate is that simple. Simultaneously, there are a whole other host of concerns with the city’s bid. First, there is unease about the corruption just waiting to happen by bringing the Olympics to a state where three former governors have gone to prison in the last thirty-five years with a fourth well on his way. Then, there’s the fear that Chicagoans will be forced to bear staggering costs. Many believe that with the city facing a deficit between $200 and $250 million, and the state drowning in an $11.5 billion deficit, building $366 million stadiums and forcing citizens to subsidize an overall price tag in the billions is the height of irresponsibility and that any money spent should be used in ways that benefit the city, state and its communities for more than just a few weeks.

While the President and First Lady travel to Copenhagen to appeal to the IOC on behalf of their hometown, their full-fledged support for staging the Olympics in Chicago may put them in the minority. A local station, WGNTV News, points out that Chicagoans are already on the hook for $250 million, and 84% of Chicagoans are against financing any part of the Olympics. Mayor Daley, the biggest proponent of Chicago’s bid, “is rocking a 35% approval rating”. Tomorrow, organizations are coming together to hold a rally voicing their opposition to the Olympics.

Tom Tresser, Communications Director for No Games Chicago, said:

“We think the Games will go over budget and it would potentially lead to the city’s bankruptcy. The entire financial system in America and the planet is fragile and Chicago and Illinois are broke right now, running billions of dollars of deficit. So, this is not a risk we can afford to take.”

Holly Krig, lead organizer for the Northside Action for Justice, a non-profit organization that protests the Olympics, said, “We really want to let as many people who are going to make this decision, in particularly politicians, [know] that the people of Chicago do not want the Olympics, that Mayor [Richard] Daley does not represent the people of Chicago, particularly low income people and struggling families. We have much better uses for public money, and it seems very clear that public money will be used for this project.”

Tresser said there are four major reasons why Chicago shouldn’t host the games including: financial ruin, disruption in transportation, displacement of people and the construction in local parks that could endanger the environment.

“The estimates for construction in the bid book are just that, they’re estimates, we don’t have any working plans,” Tresser said. “Chicago, typically, has a terrible record in managing its construction projects.” Krig said many other cities that have hosted the Olympics in the past have surpassed their proposed budgets by doubling and even tripling the initial numbers.

“Within Chicago itself, we know from experience that where Mayor Daley falls short of private funding, he reaches into public coffers and we saw that happen with Millennium Park,” Krig said. “So there is no reason to think that that’s going to be any different in Chicago, given that we have a history of that here.”

A City Council vote on Sept. 9 proved that is exactly what would happen, after aldermen voted unanimously for public funding to be used if there are any cost overruns.

Jay Stone, a community activist and Civil Rights Award winner, said, “It was 85 percent against the public funding the Olympics, and yet the vote in city council was 49 to 0. What does that tell you? That the politicians can ignore the will and the opinion of the people.”

Tresser said taxpayers in Chicago have been abandoned because no one is listening to their opinion.”

Under the contract Mayor Daley will sign if Chicago is picked to host the Olympics, Chicagoans would backstop any Olympic losses the city faces. Mayor Daley has insisted that the risks taxpayers face is small. He points to the surpluses other cities have enjoyed after hosting the Olympics. He chooses not to highlight the fact that it took Montreal twenty years to pay off its debts after the 1976 Olympics. Or the fact that there are already accusations of Daley insiders with schemes in place to pad their pockets with sweet real estate deals and other financial interests in bringing the Olympics to home sweet home Chicago.

On the other side of the debate, those who advocate the city’s bid look to this as an opportunity for Chicago to rebrand itself, not just as the city of Al Capone and Michael Jordan, but as a world-class city with much to offer — a unique, diverse culture and history as well as a town full of top-notch restaurants, shows and other events. The Obamas fall into this group, wanting to showcase their city.

At first glance, this seems like a lovely idea, to give a city its time in the limelight. As a city-dweller myself, I agree wholeheartedly that this uniquely Midwestern city has much to offer visitors.

But, this reasoning falls short of overcoming the very formidable arguments against bringing the Olympics here. This brings me back to the woman grieving over Derrion Albert’s death. Her overwhelming emotions over Derrion’s tragic, violent death caused her to speak very candidly, incisively recognizing that a city so troubled, facing a myriad of problems, needs to look inward and fix its own problems before embarking on new, expensive adventures — no matter how enticing or historic they may be.

“Transparent government is good government, and good government has nothing to hide from the taxpayers who fund it.”

So said Joe Calomino, Illinois State Director for Americans for Prosperity, in response to the Illinois legislature passing House Bill 35 last week, also known as the Illinois Transparency and Accountability Portal (ITAP).

In a state plagued by endemic corruption, this little bit of sunshine is long overdue. ITAP, which is now on its way to Gov. Pat Quinn for signature, will require state agencies to maintain a central database that provides easy access to information regarding state spending, state contracts, employee salaries and tax credits.

Lawmakers hope that this measure will put a stop to wasteful spending and corrupt pay-to-play scandals.

Illinois currently faces an $11.5 billion deficit. And the cost of living in Illinois is only increasing. Individual and corporate tax rates are on the rise, and Chicago residents pay the highest sales tax in the country at 10.25%.

Illinois is widely known for its corrupt politicians and its one-party rule. Its progressive policies have created a high tax, anti-business environment. It is no surprise that a recent study by the Illinois Chamber of Commerce found that “too many state and local taxes, an anti-business image and lack of available incentives are driving businesses out of Illinois”.

With this new transparency, come new responsibilities for the citizens of Illinois. Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s antics recently put Illinois in the national spotlight for its inept and double-dealing leaders. If signed by Gov. Quinn, the new system is expected to be in place in less than a year. Some of the information that will be aggregated into one centralized database was already available to citizens via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests prior to ITAP being passed. However, the creation and maintenance of an electronic database will provide citizens with greater ability to sift through information and, hopefully, to hold politicians in Illinois accountable.

ITAP alone cannot make up for 10 straight years of governors accused or convicted of corruption or for the anti-growth and anti-business policies that have been put in place in Illinois. But with knowledge comes power, and the implementation of ITAP will arm concerned citizens with the facts so that they can fight out of control spending and duplicitous Illinois bureaucrats who put their interest ahead of their constituents’.

*Originally published May 19, 2009 on the American Issues Project Blog, here.