The Chicago Sun-Times’ Abdon Pallasch has a tough job. On a shrinking newsroom budget and with marginal print space, he has to find a way to cover all the candidates in the 5th Congressional District primary election. But his policy wrap-up from Sunday’s paper is not his best effort:
Maybe it’s the lack of ideological differences among the 12 Democrats running to replace U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel that has led them to attack each other over which of them might have been too close to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich or to Cook County Board President Todd Stroger.
Crain’s Greg Hinz makes a similar point in his column today (which also includes an uneducated comparison between Tom Geoghegan and Rep. Dennis Kucinich).
Meanwhile, Pallasch quoted John Fritchey trying to play down the policy differences as well:
“On the major issues, the positions of the leading candidates are all essentially similar,” said state Rep. John Fritchey. “That’s probably part of the reason why there have been so many distractions about irrelevant minutiae.”
While it’s obvious that candidates vying for a primary win in this heavily-Democratic district are going to share some common values and positions, to claim there is a “lack of ideological differences” between them is inaccurate and lazy.
Check out our recent examination of the policy positions put forward by Fritchey, Geoghegan, Sara Feigenholtz, Mike Quigley, and Charlie Wheelan. We developed it by reviewing each candidate’s endorsement questionnaires, campaign websites, and comments at public forums. By actually taking some time to analyze these statements, we found a wealth of discrepancies.
Let’s take the issue of taxes. Fritchey is in favor of preserving the estate tax; Feigenholtz, Fritchey, and Quigley all want to let the Bush tax cuts expire; Quigley adds that will not vote for any tax increase during a recession; Wheelan supports phasing out payroll, income, and corporate taxes in favor of a carbon tax; and Geoghegan wants marginal tax rates raised to 1950s levels. Given the immense need for investment nationwide and the country’s growing deficit, how the government creates revenue matters greatly. These are not in any way similar proposals.
What about Social Security? This is a crucial issue for all voters in the district—particularly the elderly—and deserves scrutiny. Wheelan has said he is open to reducing benefits for future retirees; Feigenholtz and Fritchey would consider lifting or adjusting the cap on payroll taxes; Quigley wants to leave it alone for the time being, noting that Medicare is in greater trouble; and Geoghegan wants to increase benefits and turn it into a more robust public pension program. Again, these subtleties are not “irrelevant minutiae”—they are stark and important. And in a field so crowded, they could turn the race.
Pallasch is stuck between a rock and a hard place. And we should give him credit for at least attempting to deal substantively with the policy positions of the candidates, something the Tribune has yet to do. But if this is the most substantive print reporting on the race, who can blame voters for tuning out?
Full Disclosure: The SEIU Illinois Council -- which is the sole sponsor of Progress Illinois -- has endorsed Sara Feigenholtz in the 5th Congressional District race.
Comments
Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 11:46
You have a lot of nerve labeling another reporter as being lazy. Take a look in the mirror when you say that. You have a clear bias in the race (SIEU is the sole proprietor of progressillinois.com and SIEU has endorsed one of the local machine candidates). You have also failed to provide anything close to equal coverage for all candidates. Is it just possible that your own limited coverage of the race is at all responsible for some perceived lack of voter interest? How much support would you get from SIEU in the future if you actually took the time to report on all the candidates, including the other "only woman in the race", Jan Donatelli. Of course, Sara would not like that much, would she. If the voters are not fairly shown all the choices, and all the choices they are shown are all machine local politicians, why should anyone be interested. I suppose that's what passes for progress in Illinois.
Sandra Verthein (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 12:07
Anonymous -- you have got to be kidding. Progress Illinois has had the most in-depth, consistent reporting on this race of any news source out there. Anyone who doubts this just has to scroll through their past posts to see dozens and dozens of articles covering numerous aspects of the race. And yes, SEIU endorsed Feigenholtz, but this blog has continued to provided even, high-quality coverage of the race since that endorsement, which I find amazing and which I am so grateful for. AND they have disclosed the relationship and endorsement numerous times -- it has not been a secret. As far as not covering all campaigns equally -- you might find fault with that but it is a choice that has been made by every single news organization.
Progress Illinois has been an extremely valuable addition to the progressive dialog in this state; I am so often thankful for their reporting on numerous issues that otherwise would get scant attention, and that did get scant attention prior to their existence. So yes, Progress Illinois IS progress, progress I have been glad to see.
Josh Kalven on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 11:57
Anon 11:46 --
Remember that we're a three-person operation -- not a major newspaper. In order to exhaustively examine the candidates' policy positions in a 12-candidate race -- something no other outlet even attempted to do -- we had to create some threshold for viability.
So we decided to look at the five candidates who have raised the most money (independent of any self-funding). On that list were Tom Geoghegan and Charlie Wheelan -- neither of whom are "local politicians."
It's not a perfect system, admittedly. However, if Donatelli had raised more, we would have happily included her.
Ramsin (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 12:37
It is really unfair to attack Progress Illinois for not being the Sun-Times. PI is under no obligation to provide equal coverage in the first place. Whatever their bias may or may not be, they provide a disclosure and it is up to the reader how to consume that information.
Ramsin (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 12:40
Oh--and also, of course, PI has provided great coverage of stuff that is otherwise completely ignored by other media outlets. Frankly, I could care less about who wins this Congressional race, but the effects of TIFs and issues like school closures or the Republic workers occupation, for example, are issues of much greater practical importance. PI's got a friend in me.
MaryAnn (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 12:46
I have to agree with anonymous...I love progressillinois.com but I was really unhappy that you picked which five candidates progressives should look at. Really guys...there are lots of candidates in the race and Donatelli is just one of them. Did anyone hear her on Progressive Radio yesterday?
If we really want progressive candidates to succeed we need to let people take a look at all the choices. Get it together.
Thanks
Josh Kalven on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 13:31
MaryAnn,
The candidates we included in the comparison weren't the ones we thought "progressives should look at." They were those five who had raised the most money -- one of the only concrete measures of viability available to us (though some readers have convincingly argued that it's not an accurate predictor in a race like this).
Anyway, I appreciate your input and understand your frustration. This was the first primary we've ever covered and we've learned a lot about what works and what doesn't.
Laborguy (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 14:20
I think PI has done a spectacular job covering this race. They have provided in-depth analysis from a progressive perspective and done it well. It is unfortunate that PI could only cover a handful of candidates in the detail that all readers would like, but it would have been a great disservice to provide valuable coverage to marginal, albeit progressive, candidates at the expense of the most viable candidates. Remember, it is not Progress Illinois' job to communicate each campaigns' message for them. That is the job of each candidate and their respective campaigns. PI's job is to cover the NEWS from a progressive perspective and they have done that job admirably.
Pedro (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 15:59
I agree PI has done a great job of covering this race, but MaryAnn is right about Jan Donatelli! I heard her on Chicago Progressive Radio yesterday and was really impressed by her candor and straightforward answers...
Sadly, because she's a newcomer she hasn't gotten as much press as she deserves, but it's that newcomer status that makes her such an amazing candidate and exactly what the 5th needs!
Laborguy (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 16:39
Hey Pedro for President,
Donatelli may be the greatest candidate to ever emerge from a Chicago congressional primary but it isn't PI's responsibility to get her message out. PI covers the news. Donatelli hasn't made any news therefore she doesn't get any coverage. It is a simple fact of campaign coverage. PI covers the news from a progressive perspective. It is simple stuff. Make no news, get no coverage. I think PI has been extremely fair in its coverage. I don't know what more they could have done.
Pedro (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 17:31
Laborguy,
Settle down there buddy... I wasn't blaming PI... I said it was unfortunate... in a general context...
btw... Pedro is actually my name... it wasn't a Napoleon Dynamite reference... but thanks for trying to be witty :)
leo (not verified) on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 18:10
Anon @ 11:46: "You have a lot of nerve labeling another reporter as being lazy"
Wow, some people just get up on the wrong side of bed.
Post new comment
Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
We will not publish comments that we consider:
Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.