Promise To Rid Chicago of Cameras Should Make Jesus Chuy Garcia Mayor

Promise To Rid Chicago of Cameras Should Make Jesus Chuy Garcia Mayor

The Promise To Rid Chicago of Cameras Should Make Jesus Chuy Garcia Mayor.

That is if the people of Chicago are really as incensed about them as they claim to be. Especially those people who live in areas where Red Light and Speed Cameras quietly wait for unsuspecting motorists where schools and/or parks are non-existent such as on West Peterson Avenue East of Cicero Avenue.

After all wasn't safety the key motivation for placement of all these cameras in the first place?

Look I have zero issue with doing what you say you are going to do when it comes to protecting the welfare and safety of our most precious commodity - the children and young adults of Chicago. Unfortunately, the proliferation of cameras during Rahm Emanuel's Administration has been nothing more than a very slick and cruel trick to disguise the fact that they wanted to generate another Revenue Stream.

So lets call it what it has always been shall we? It is  just another "hidden tax or fee" designed to avoid raising the Cook County Property Tax.

However, if Rahm Emanuel had ever been the sort of politician who "hears you," as claimed in his latest barrage of phoney baloney Television Ads, he would have done that when he first assumed office. People were vehemently opposed to the use of Red Light and Speed Cameras as a means to pad the City Coffers. And just as most people feared - people who could least afford to pay those fines are the ones who have been hit the hardest.

Matter of fact, Rahm Emanuel not only has had the benefit of some major change being generated day in and day out from those cameras, he and Ed Burke have capitalized mightily on an inequitable property tax scheme that currently exists throughout Cook County.

So if there were one reason to give Jesus Chuy Garcia the benefit of a doubt with your vote, at least for one term, then this has to be it!

Besides, Rahm and Company have consistently ignored the pleas of Chicagoans for a more transparent city government and will continue to do so should he be re-elected.

And that would just continue the trend of bad government around here.

So do yourselves a big favor on Tuesday April 7th, 2015 Vote for Jesus "Chuy' Garcia in the Chicago Mayoral Election.

He has earned it at this point.


The Election aftermath:


Leave a comment
  • Just because the anti-camera crown is vocal and loud doesn't mean Chicagoans are opposed to the cameras. The cameras are helping to make the roads safer, slow down drivers and get them to follow the law. This benefits pedestrians, children seniors, handicapped and all other sharing the public way.
    Chuy's opposition to the cameras and his threat to remove them is a good reason to vote against him.

  • In reply to SweetOldBob:

    Sweet, all the statistics cited by the Tribune indicate that they do not aid safety, but create more rear end accidents, even if they reduce Tbone ones. Why don't you link to something that supports your assertion? I bet you can't. Now you believe Rahm that he is going to put countdown signs at each intersection?

    If nothing else, the expose that the yellow traffic lights do not meet federal standards, the administrative hearing officers have been throwing out tickets for that reason, but Rahm claimed he could do nothing about it shows it was all a sham.

  • In reply to jack:

    Rear-end collisions are cause by following to closely, not the cameras. Keep a safe distance between cars. T-bone accidents cause far more physical injury.

  • In reply to SweetOldBob:

    Platitude, not statistic, Bob. Besides that, don't tell me that someone slamming on the brakes doesn't run a bigger risk of being rear ended. We aren't talking about I-72 in downstate Illinois.

    I asked for a source, not your opinion of proximate cause.

  • In reply to SweetOldBob:

    Normally I would agree with you if it were say somewhere other than Chicago. However, the numerous studies and empirical data collected thus far (for Chicago's Spiderweb Network of Cash Cameras) belie your assertion SweetOldBob.

  • I pretty much summed up my view on Berkowitz. The choice is between someone nobody likes who doesn't listen to anyone, admits that he doesn't, but doesn't care, vs. someone who doesn't have a plan and probably doesn't have a clue.

    Kass seemed to skirt around it until he finally concluded that it will be Detroit financial condition either way this election turns out.

    The only thing that is definite is that if Rahm wins, he won't listen to anyone else for another 3 years and 9 months.

  • In reply to jack:

    Probably right but I don't quite see Detroit either. As for the plan - well all I have seen is one of enrichment since the early 1960's - so maybe it is time to pull a Minnesota thing and vote in a knucklehead to prove a point? Eventually half their legislature was cleansed and things have improved overall. Just another means to a method.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    But to get to my response to Peter 20 hours ago, electing Chuy isn't going to change the City Council. This isn't Minnesota. Whatever can be said about the lack of imagination in this round of commercials, if Chuy voted for anything in the City Council in 1986, he is an old line political hack, too. I don't recall him cleaning up anything at the County Board, and he isn't running as that.

    The only distinction is that he would have the conflict of interest of being beholden to CTU, with respect to the next time they threaten a strike. Most of their already announced demands are not considered subjects of collective bargaining.

  • In reply to jack:

    Don't disagree with you Jack so far as nothing changing the City Council. Still a Minnesota kind of thunderbolt of some kind - whatever that means even if that happens to be electing one political hack over another can be a good thing - that's all. The more unexpected embarrassments the better! And it may even be a slow process but something has to give with this shit kind of government we are given.

    Then again Chicago Voters don't seem to care given the turnout today so perhaps all this is a mute point.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Apparently, they cared enough to dump some aldercreatures in close races, but as I noted in response to Peter Bella, it was the "Progressive Caucus" vs. Rahm's PACs. For instance, Pope might be out by 7 votes (but there are undoubtedly more absentee ballots out there), but Sanchez was supported by CTU.

    What makes one scratch one's head is that in the 7th the voters threw out someone put there in a supposedly open internet process, but in the first round they only had minimal problems reinstalling King Mell II of the Thoity Thoid,* whose appointment by Rahm was obviously a political payoff.

    The final point raises the issue that with such things as letters to industries in Hammond to move to Chicago because of the religious rights bill (subsequently amended), how much of Rahm's strategy was paying off the LGBT community with free giveaways.

    *After King Bushwick the Thoity Thoid in Rocky and Bullwinkle.

  • In reply to jack:

    There were some odd results for sure Jack; i.e. O'Conner's loss to Napaltano was a bit of a surprise given the "family strength" in that ward. Matter of fact, reviewing the vote distribution map in the Sun-Times for the outlying Wards near O'Hare were surprising given the "noise issue" and Rahm's DC influence vs an alderman's impotency with what I see as more of a Federal Issue than a local one. Oh well - you learn something each and every time I guess.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Even if a federal issue, maybe the neighbors thought they needed a more forceful advocate. At least it explains that when I dropped someone off for a doctor's appointment in Edgebrook a couple of months ago, I saw a lot of lawn signs, but I don't think for O'Conner.

    Next door, Garrido's ads made him look like he was the reformer, but later reporting indicates that he was not.

    Also, I got 10th Ward Hispanic names confused, it was Garza, although the name Sadlowski-Garza indicates she is from an old Steelworkers' family.

  • In reply to jack:

    Probably right Jack. My wife and I both noticed the same O'Conner and Garrido sign anomalies while driving back from my doctor appointment. Of course we also concluded that so many people in those wards have a had a high number of patronage army workers that that wasn't all that unusual. I mean I remember growing up in Anthony C. Laurino's Ward and we actually knew who supported who by a "lack of yard sign support." As for the Hispanic Wards - yeah I get confused too these days - will have to pay more attention I guess lol.

  • Single issue voters are ignorant voters. There are way more important issues than silly cameras. But, hey, it is your vote. Stay ignorant my friends. Chuy is just another machine hack. All you will get is a nicer guy doing the same thing Rahm did. Oh, and if you voted to reelect your alderman, you should win the Ignorance of the Year Award. Not one of those poltroons earned reelection. If you really wanted change, you should have changed the city council.

  • In reply to Peter Bella:

    On your last point, though, the alternatives (where there were any, since nobody ran against Ed Burke and many others) were essentially other Chuys, ideology wise, although some had blonde hair.

    City council knows where its bread is buttered--Burke was anti-Rahm last time, for his this time, Fioretti, who has almost as little respect for legal restraints on local government as Joe Moore demonstrated on this blog, got a small percentage of the vote, and then belatedly endorsed Rahm. What it would take would be the south and west sides to elect about 18 aldermen with the background of Willie Wilson, but such persons would not need the graft, which seems to be the main motivation of most candidates for city council (or so many of them would not have ended up in federal prison).

  • In reply to jack:

    First and foremost - thanks for all the comments everyone. And as always pretty much a 50/50 proposition and the main reason no election in Illinois will ever yield change; either we buy the soap opera on safety and ignore the graft associated with the Camera Firms or we actually believe one of these yokel candidates will actually do what they say. But here is the proposition I bring forth - we already gave Rahm his chance and he lied - so move on over and vote for the next guy to see if they have the balls to keep theirs? Then - Repeat Process until one of them does! In the meantime we at least dilute a long term legacy left behind by the Daley Clown's.

  • In reply to Peter Bella:

    Couldn't agree more Peter and I even said there are other issues - such as lack of transparency. But my last trip down Peterson Avenue kinda of said it all as these silly cameras were mounted in areas where no schools or parks were located. And that my friend is just the tip of the iceberg with Rahmbo if you bothered to read the link I added for good measure. But hey I agree - you want change - get rid of the City Council, Illinois Legislature and Congress. The man on top is just the masthead for bad policy anyhow.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Please do your research on where schools are located before you make erroneous statements. CPS Sauganash elementary school is located on Kilpatrick, just a 1/2 block north of Peterson. Families who live on the south side of Peterson need to cross Peterson to get to the school and most people ignore the speed limit (20), the crosswalks, and signs alerting them of cameras. I don't necessarily agree that red lights are the way to get people to slow down. A stop sign - and maybe a crossing guard - would be more effective.

  • In reply to JP1312:

    JP I have been driving that stretch of road for 30+ years and the 30MPH Speed Zone has been sufficient besides these cameras were to be put BY THE SCHOOLS. So if we want to split hairs - move the cameras on to Kilpatrick. p.s. last week while driving by there was also a Crossing Guard stationed there. The real problem with Sauganash [and this goes back to my childhood] is the lack of having any real Police presence there. But back to "research" maybe you need to check what the original criteria was for their placement? Can't deny that Rahm has gone ape shit on that score! p.s. have no problem with cameras where they are supposed to be instead of imagined.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    I moved to that neighborhood only 2 years ago so I don't have 30+ years to compare it to. I didn't say I agree with the red light cameras. I can only "imagine" that the camera is there bc of the school being less than a 1/2 block away - if you drive by slowly you can see the school from Peterson. I wasn't about to do research on how they determined where to put them to comment on your blog post. Have a nice day.

  • In reply to JP1312:

    First JP, I appreciate every comment whether it be pro or con to any issue I put forth so thank you. As for this issue? Well it is tricky one especially being a parent myself. So I am not totally opposed to cameras - but what I am opposed to is the proliferation of them city-wide. Compounding the issue has been the placement i.e. the ones at Gompers Park for instance were obviously put in as a means of entrapment and wrote about it a while back.

    Judges all across this great country of ours have been questioning the legality of them with more than a few of them calling them unconstitutional in some pretty "progressive" states like Ohio and I am inclined to agree. But at the end of the day we must still weigh their usefulness vs the safety of our children and there can be no denying there are many ignorant drivers out there putting them, and others, in jeopardy.

    Still, Sauganash has always been something of a gray area for "policing" due to its proximity to where their precincts are and have too long relied on other departments from Lincolnwood to Niles to due their diligence for them. And that bothers me for a long, long time. I would prefer to see more of a physical presence if the truth be told but hey - I get it too. It is a juggling act - but if you take a harder look at where all these different kinds of cameras are I think you will somewhat agree that this is more about racking up $$ as opposed to safety. But I do believe there is room for compromise on this one and hopefully it will come to that one day. Besides if I am going to get a ticket (which I haven't in a number of decades) I would like it to be with a smile on the face of the officer - you know like Harwood Heights used to do religiously.

    Anyhow - I do appreciate your comments as opposing points of view are crucial on this sort of blog and something I have encouraged from day one as I am not perfect, and have been known to miss a thing or two the older I get. p.s. I will check out the location of the school vs the cameras (and crossing guard(s)) the next I am rolling down Peterson Avenue. Thanks - Good Day to you as well.

  • fb_avatar

    I've worked in municipal government. Without question, red light cameras, etc., do very little to improve traffic safety. They are simply a tool for unimaginative politicians to generate revenue.

  • In reply to Aggravated Battery:

    Finally the truth! Thanks for comment Aggravated.

Leave a comment