Writing at City Journal Aaron Renn summarizes Rahm Emanuel’s tenure in office as mayor of Chicago:
Emanuel’s leadership style came with fatal flaws. A political streetfighter by inclination, he lacks an operational orientation. He didn’t appear to grasp the scope of the city’s financial problems until four years after he was first elected, when Chicago’s bond rating was cut to junk. His infrastructure trust fizzled. The schools went from bad to worse, with his first CPS leader forced out and his second pleading guilty to corruption. He didn’t get it that Chicago’s police department hadn’t been fundamentally reformed the way New York’s and Los Angeles’s had been.
Emanuel’s governing style has been all tactics, no strategy. He’ll pick up the phone to twist the arm of a CEO or fight to win the day’s media cycle. But what’s his vision for the city?
That’s what happens when public service become entirely about the personal ambitions and goals of the office holders. You get lots of virtue-signalling, big dreams, and major initiatives but, without “operational orientation” no problem-solving.
There’s got to be some third alternative—something other than ideology or personal aggrandizement as motivators for office holders.
What I don’t think that Mr. Renn grasped about Rahm Emanuel when he voted for him in 2011 is that Emanuel has migrated from sinecure to sincecure, buoyed by his success as a fund-raiser which in turn was undergirded by being a partisan firebrand. That doesn’t work in Chicago. There is no other party to blame here. Just Democrats.
Here’s the tl;dr version:
…
As for the rest, that’s all been easily predictable. Our political process rewards those who can get elected, which means people that are good at advertising and fund-raising. No other skills needed, so no other skills are developed.
This is the reason I’ve been predicting for several years now that whoever the next President is, that person is practically a lock to make Barry Obama, the worst leader of a major country since at least Kaiser Wilhelm II, look like Dwight David Eisenhower. And Obama managed to make W. look better by comparison.
Oh, and hey, the Administration has now admitted that every single policy they’ve had concerning Syria has been completely wrong, now that Kerry has said that Assad doesn’t have to go. I’ve never seen a sitting Secretary of State publicly call his own President’s policies stupid before, so that’s a new thing.
I’ll be interested in seeing what the effect of that is. Maybe it indicates that the influence of “the girls” is waning. Maybe Kerry was just talking out of turn.
“That’s what happens when public service become entirely about the personal ambitions and goals of the office holders. You get lots of virtue-signalling, big dreams, and major initiatives but, without “operational orientation†no problem-solving.”
Heh. There must be more than “hope and change,” a smooth delivery and a proper crease in your pants? Interestingly, our favorite author has made the point numerous times that electability is the prime required trait. Well….
I always thought Bill Clinton was smarter than average, and fond of policy analysis and debate. It was never clear to me that he wanted more than to “be” president. With Hillary any such doubt is ludicrous. With Obama, it’s just a mish-mash of ideologically driven executive orders and non-treaties, enforceable treaties, flowery speeches….. But given the times, he was electable.
But more seriously, when we interview potential CEOs the core of the discussion is what is your assessment of the situation, what is your strategy, what resources do you need, and how will you execute? Who, what and how.
I realize the political arena is not the private corporate arena, but isn’t that one of the major problems? The hiring body isn’t the board, it’s a poorly informed electorate. The issue isn’t resources or execution, it’s how much free beer for me. And at times the decision seems just this side of “easy to dance to.”
I have to confess that the Rahm outrage exceeds what I originally anticipated. I still maintain that a dogged national press is the only thing that will take this to its conclusion. I’m seeing signs it’s fading already into a local issue. More important fish to fry: protect Obama and elect Hillary. A corrupt element in the police force and black lives be damned.
Maybe Kerry was just talking out of turn.
Kerry does seem to be the last person on the entire planet to know the Administration’s foreign policy positions. I remember how he kept getting pole-axed by the President a couple of years back on the WMD stuff.
Harold Ford, Jr., friend of Rahm, said last week that his friend is a good guy, with an acerbic style, but that he knows how to get things done, and now that this issue has emerged, he will focus on it and fix it. As they cut to break from a Morning Joe roundtable that didn’t seem to know much about Chicago and was utterly dismissive of the protesters, the thought occurred that maybe this isn’t the most important thing to fix.
He cannot raise the dead. He cannot conduct the investigation. He cannot fire the State’s Attorney. He cannot change things required by collective bargaining agreements. He could implement a broader transparency policy within 30 days IMHO. He could take on a broader culture of corruption and machine politics that would envelope the rest of his term. And the City has other problems.
I always thought Bill Clinton was smarter than average, and fond of policy analysis and debate. It was never clear to me that he wanted more than to “be†president.
It seems to me that the last four Presidents have wanted the office just to show that Junior is better than Daddy. I imagine we’ve had Presidents like that before, but I can’t think of any off the top of my head. Twenty-eight straight years of men with daddy issues….
Well, let’s see. The members of the Chicago Teachers’ Union just took a strike vote. Nearly 90% of the membership authorized a strike. Its president, Karen Lewis, hates his guts. The CTU is already lost to him. The membership have been bitching about Chicago’s low credit rating and blaming it on Rahm (they don’t realize that’s what they’re complaining about but that’s it).
If he pushes too hard on the FOP, he’ll lose them, too. He can’t lose both the CTU and the FOP and have no constituency and hold onto his job. Talking tough is not the same thing as being in a position of strength.
The City Council has woken from their slumber and is beginning to worry about losing their own jobs. The mayor has a lot on his plate and very little of it is under his control, as PD pointed out.