It always catches my eye when an outlet with national distribution produces an editorial about Chicago and this Wall Street Journal editorial on the outcome of the mayoral primary election was no exception. Here’s the relevant passage:

Paul Vallas, the former schools superintendent, was the big winner on Tuesday with 33.8%, and his success shows how much voter priorities have changed. Chicago is a progressive city, and when things are going well voters have the luxury of picking candidates who massage their values. In 2019 Mr. Vallas was an also-ran in the mayor’s race, while Ms. Lightfoot went over well at Lincoln Park cocktail parties.

This year Mr. Vallas’s vow to stop the city-wide crime wave and fix broken schools resonated with voters. In 2022 Chicago’s homicide rate was five times higher than New York City’s and two and a half times higher than in Los Angeles. Those numbers don’t include the other felonies such as carjacking and theft that now plague the city’s streets.

On schools, Chicago voters are waking up to the damage from the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) that has become a political colossus focused on wielding progressive power instead of improving outcomes in city schools. About four-fifths of high-school students in Chicago Public Schools are not performing at grade level, but the system keeps graduating them. The union resists reform while using the threat of walkouts and strikes to extort higher salaries and bigger pensions. It resisted reopening schools for months during the pandemic—despite pleas from Ms. Lightfoot. No wonder Chicago has seen public-school enrollment fall by more than 80,000 students in the last decade.

Mr. Vallas will square off in April against second-place finisher (20.3% as of Wednesday) Brandon Johnson, a former union organizer who promised higher taxes and even more money for teachers and failing schools. It’s no exaggeration to say he is a wholly owned subsidiary of the CTU. The teachers current labor contract expires in 2024, and if Mr. Johnson wins the union will be on both sides of the negotiating table.

Mr. Johnson has received $931,308 from the CTU, as well as $1,557,846 from the Illinois Federation of Teachers and the American Federation of Teachers, according to the Illinois Policy Institute. Other unions gave him $1.3 million, but the total of all his non-union contributions is less than $200,000.

The emphasis is mine. IMO “Chicago is a progressive city” is either an exaggeration or a misconception. Chicago is unquestionably a Democratic city but “Democratic” and “progressive” are not synonymous any more than “Republican” and “conservative” are. According to Pew Research 52% of Democrats are moderate, conservative, or very conservative. I would say that most Chicago politicians are plain, old-fashioned “bring home the bacon” machine pols. I’m not sure where that places them on the political spectrum. Probably anywhere that gets them re-elected or puts a dollar in their pockets. Yes, there are some actual committed progressives and, importantly, I believe that those punch above their weight. But Chicago isn’t progressive in the sense that New York, San Francisco, Portland, or Seattle are. Probably not even in the sense that Boston is.

I don’t know who will be elected in April. I know that I will vote for Vallas because he’s the only real chance that Chicago has. I don’t know who his primary contributors are but, if past campaigns are any gauge, they aren’t public employees unions as Brandon Johnson’s very obviously are based on that last paragraph quoted above.

Let’s not lose track of the reality that political contributions made by public employees unions are an inherently corrupt proposition. Their source is tax dollars. When those are recycled into political contributions they create pressure for higher taxes which produces more tax dollars to be recycled into political contributions. IMO there are only two remedies for that:

1. Ban public employees unions
2. Ban political contributions including in kind contributions made by public employees unions

Since I think there are good reasons for public employees to engage in collective bargaining, I support the second. If Brandon Johnson is elected mayor, he will owe the public employees unions that contributed to his primary and general election campaigns and we should expect him to pay off. That will not help Chicago. Neither will defunding the police.

BTW Paul Vallas’s promise to increase the number of police officers probably won’t help Chicago, either, for two reasons. First, Chicago already has more police officers relative to its population than other major cities and, second, the empirical evidence that more police officers translates into less crime is weak.

My own view is that although more bad mayors can drive additional nails into Chicago’s coffin if the city is to be saved rescue will need to come from Springfield or Washington.

Update

I neglected to mention that in the previous mayoral primary, the one that ultimately led to Lori Lightfoot being elected mayor, she did not get the plurality of votes of black Chicagoans. The plurality of black Chicagoans voted for the most conservative candidate running at that time.

Here’s an interesting development. A team in California and Japan has developed a design for a fusion reactor using hydrogen and boron rather than the coonventional dueterium and tritium that have been in use. Darius Snieckius reports at Recharge:

An innovative nuclear fusion technology that uses no radioactive materials and is calculated capable of “powering the planet for more than 100,000 years”, has been successfully piloted by a US-Japanese team of researchers.

California-based TAE Technologies, working with Japan’s National Institute for Fusion Science (NIFS), have completed first tests of a hydrogen-boron fuel cycle in magnetically-confined plasma, which could generate cleaner, lower cost energy that that produced by the more common deuterium-tritium (D-T) fusion process.

“This experiment offers us a wealth of data to work with and shows that hydrogen-boron has a place in utility-scale fusion power. We know we can solve the physics challenge at hand and deliver a transformational new form of carbon-free energy to the world that relies on this non-radioactive, abundant fuel,” said Michl Binderbauer, CEO of TAE Technologies.

A spokesperson for NIFS, which formed its partnership with TAE in 2021, noted: “Hydrogen-boron… enables the concept of cleaner fusion reactors – this achievement is a big first step towards the realisation of a fusion reactor using advanced fusion fuel.”

The experiments were carried out in NIFS’ large helical device, known as a stellarator, but TAE is developing a so-called field-reversed configuration reactor that promises “a variety of benefits over stellarator and tokamak reactors, including having a compact footprint and more efficient magnetic confinement that will yield up to 100 times more power output, according to the scientists, who published their findings today in the journal Nature.

This new design doesn’t solve the problems that are holding back practical fusion but once those problems are solved it should allow the resultant reactors to be cleaner and safer.

Jason L. Riley devotes his Wall Street Journal column to an explanation of why you can’t blame crime on poverty:

The belief that poverty is the root cause of crime may be popular, but it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. For starters, most poor people aren’t criminals. In a previous era, when Americans were significantly poorer than they are today, crime rates were significantly lower. Crime during the Great Depression was lower than during the 1960s, a decade of tremendous economic growth and prosperity. In 1960 the black male homicide rate was 45 per 100,000. By 1990 it had climbed by more than 200% to 140 per 100,000, even though black average incomes by then were much higher, and the black poverty rate much lower, than 30 years earlier.

In a recently published book about criminal-justice reform, “Criminal (In)justice,” Rafael Mangual notes that this disconnect between crime and poverty continues today. Mr. Mangual writes that between 1990 and 2018, murders in New York City declined by 87%, a period during which the city’s poverty rate increased slightly. Black residents today “experience poverty at a lower rate (19.2 percent) than their Hispanic (23.9 percent) and Asian (24.1 percent) counterparts, who account for much smaller shares of the city’s gun violence.”

I would phrase it a little differently: I don’t think that poverty is the sole cause of crime and maybe not its most important cause. What is?

Some of the crime statistics lower than Chicago’s enjoyed by major cities like New York and Los Angeles can be explained by those cities smaller percentages of black population. Maybe there is a “critical mass” for street gangs analogous to what was found in the Bakke decision. That would explain a 20% difference in homicide rates between Chicago and New York but not a 500% difference.

I think that Chicago’s political corruption and a far too cozy relationship between black gangs and Chicago politicians are a major cause. That corruption extends right to the police department. The implications of that are unsettling. It means there is no quick and easy fix and in particular not one that will be effected by Chicago politicians. They can’t even be solved at the ballot box, not with voter turnouts as long as we’re seeing Chicago’s crime problems need solutions from Springfield and Washington.

I am not an expert on China and I don’t pretend to be one on TV. That said I’m probably more an expert on China than 97% of Americans. I wanted to call attention to this op-ed at the Washington Post by Nicholas Eberstadt:

China is in the midst of a quiet but stunning nationwide collapse of birthrates. This is the deeper, still largely overlooked, significance of the country’s 2022 population decline, announced by Chinese authorities last month.

As recently as 2019, demographers at the U.S. Census Bureau and the United Nations were not expecting China’s population to start dropping until the early 2030s. But they did not anticipate today’s wholesale plunge in childbearing.

Considerable attention has been devoted to likely consequences of China’s coming depopulation: economic, political, strategic. But the causes of last year’s population drop deserve much closer examination.

China’s nosedive in childbearing is a silent alarm. It signals deep disaffection with the bleak future the regime is engineering for its subjects. In this land without democracy, the birth collapse can be read as a landslide vote of no confidence in President Xi Jinping’s rule.

My immediate reaction to the piece was “now do the United States”. Here’s the U. S. birthrate:

and the U. S. marriage rate:

The statistics for the native born are actually somewhat worse than that—the birthrates of immigrants are slightly higher than for the native born.

If declining birth and marriage rates signal pessimism and a loss of confidence in the government in China, what do they signal here in the United States?

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has made history again. She is the first Chicago mayor in 40 years to fail to be re-elected. Now Paul Vallas will face Brandon Johnson in the runoff to be held in April. That will be a contest between the anointed candidate of the Fraternal Order of Police and the candidate endorsed by the Chicago Teachers Union who has run on a platform of defunding the police. We’ll see.

Lori Lightfoot was elected four years ago largely on the basis of not being Toni Preckwinkle. She is still not Toni Preckwinkle but that wasn’t enough to be re-elected—she needed to be an effective mayor and has not succeeded at that. In addition to not being Toni Preckwinkle she prevailed in the primarily election last time by getting votes from the Northwest Side. She forgot the old dictum, “Dance with the one what brung you”.

Update

At the Sun-Times Fran Spielman quotes Joe Ferguson’s reasonable take on what happened:

“At the front end, she did not govern the way she ran. And at the back end, she ran the way she governed,” Ferguson said, apparently referring to Lightfoot’s recent warning that any South Side vote for “somebody not named Lightfoot is a vote for Chuy Garcia or Paul Vallas.” At that same campaign stop, she declared: “If you want them controlling your fate and your destiny, then stay home. Then don’t vote.”

“Her greater interest was in holding the power in a transactional way,” Ferguson said, “and not governing as the times called for and that she promised she would.”

Pressed for specifics, Ferguson pointed to Lightfoot’s own campaign themes and 2019 transition report. He argued the “vast majority” of promises made in that report “never got implemented and, in critical areas, she did the opposite of what she said she would do.”

Exhibit “A” was reforming the police department. It was supposed to be Lightfoot’s greatest strength. She served as Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s Police Board president. She co-chaired the Task Force on Police Accountability, which championed a series of reforms laying the groundwork for a federal consent decree in the furor following the shooting of Laquan McDonald by Chicago police.

“She brought in, as the interim [police superintendent], the person in the United States who had successfully transformed a big-city police department under terms of a consent decree,” Ferguson said, referring to Charlie Beck, the retired Los Angeles police chief.

But then, “she brought in a permanent superintendent who undid all of that in a matter of two weeks, then never held him to account,” Ferguson added, referring to CPD Supt. David Brown, whom Lightfoot lured from Dallas.

All of Mayor Lightfoot’s opponents in the primary vowed to remove that permanent superintendent.

Update 2

Chicago Police Department Superintendent David Brown has residnged, effective March 16. ABC 7 Chicago reports:

CHICAGO (WLS) — Chicago Police Superintendent David Brown will resign his position on March 16.

Lightfoot made the announcement in a statement Wednesday afternoon, saying Brown informed her of his resignation today.

“I accepted his resignation and want to commend him for his accomplishments not just for the department but the entire city, including setting a record number of illegal gun recoveries for two consecutive years; leading a double digit reduction in violent crime in 2022; significant, consistent progress on the consent decree; standing up a full time recruitment team that yielded over 950 new hires last year; significantly expanding the resources for officer wellness; and promoting more women to the senior exempt ranks than ever before in the history of the department,” the statement read. “I personally want to thank him for his service to our city.”

Brown said in a statement he has accepted a job as COO of Loncar Lyon Jenkins, a personal injury law firm in Texas.

“It has been an honor and a privilege to work alongside the brave men and women of the Chicago Police Department. I will continue to pray that all officers return home to their families safe at the end of their shift. May the Good Lord bless the city of Chicago and the men and women who serve and protect this great city,” Brown said in a statement.

I’m not sure which cliche desribex his action best: the hand writing on the wall, getting out while the getting is good, or the rats leaving the sinking ship. Both Paul Vallas and Brandon Johnson had said that if elected they would fire Supt. Brown and one of them will, indeed, be elected.

While I was puttering around on RAND’s site, I came across this document which I found interesting: “Russian Grand Strategy: Rhetoric and Reality”. I materially agree with their findings. Here is a summary of those findings:

• Russia’s actions are materially aligned with what they have declared as their grand strategy. The alignment is not perfect but largely perfect.
• The Russians believe that the global order is in transition. The “unipolar” world with the United States a the sole superpower has failed and it collapsing and will be replaced by a multipolar world. Imagine the U. S. as a “soft empire”. Several rebellious provinces of which Russia is one are seceding from that empire.
• Russia sees itself as major power.
• Russia should be recognized as a major power.
• Russia sees itself as the natural leader of the Eurasian region, essentially a bridge between Europe and the Far East.
• Russia intends to forge partnerships with other “rebellious provinces”, the “new centers of power”. Those include China, India, and Brazil among others.
• Russia is open to selective cooperation with the West.
• Threats to Russia include NATO force posture enhancements, Western use of non-military measures to promote instability, terrorism, cyberattacks, etc.

By “agree with their findings” mean that I agree that’s what the Russians think rather than I think that what the Russians believe is necessarily true.

It should be noted that their observation about Russia, to the effect that Russia’s words are consistent with its pursuit of its grand strategy, places Russia in stark contrast with the U. S. We have a grand strategy but it is an emergent strategy. Consequently, the statements of our political leaders may or may not be aligned with that strategy. Shorter: you can’t place too much weight on what we say. We don’t do what we say.

When I started doing the election judge thing, thirty some-odd years ago, the turnout in our precinct for elections including primary elections was around 90%. Citywide the turnout was 70% or higher. In this year’s mayoral primary the total turnout including early voting, mail-in votes, and voting in person appears to be around 30%. Why so low? Here are some possibilities:

1. Fatigue
2. Disinterest
3. Despair
4. It wasn’t actually that high years ago but deceased voters don’t vote as regularly as they used to
5. It isn’t actually that low—a lot of the voters presently registered don’t exist, i.e. died, moved away, etc.
6. The people who’ve moved to Chicago come from places where they just aren’t accustomed to voting

I’m guessing some combination with a heavy emphasis on despair.

BTW the turnout among voters aged 18-24 is estimated at less than 3%.

The primary election for Chicago mayor is today. Nine candidates are vying for the job including the incumbent. Unfortunately, the top two finishers today will go on to the run-off.

I was reading a piece at Vox.com and one sentence jumped out at me:

The CFPB, however, is unusual in that its funding first passes through a different federal agency, the Federal Reserve.

What’s wrong with that sentence?

Answer (highlight to view)

The Federal Reserve is not a federal agency. It receives no money appropriated by Congress.