Chicago media ignore big mayoral election issue

The Chicago media have been curiously uninterested in an issue hanging like a scimitar over the head of the city's next mayor.

Will or should the next mayor carry on the fight with United and American airlines over the expansion of O'Hare Airport? Will or should the new administration cave into the airlines and give up fighting for the completion of the multi-billion-dollar project?

One must assume, that in the absence of any candidate saying "nay" to further expansion that the city, no matter who is elected, will continue to battle the airlines in the courts to make them pay for additional runways that they don't want--at least not now.

Daley obviously is trying to nail in the final expansion phase before he leaves office in May. The mayor has invested so much energy, money and raw political clout in the project that this--more than anything else he has built--will become his legacy. At least that's my guess. So, how can he leave office with his dream hanging in doubt?

But this is far more than a personal matter for the incoming administration.


(Tribune archive photo / March 6, 2002 ) Gov. George Ryan and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley testify before a House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Aviation in Washington about expansion at O'Hare International Airport. This was after Ryan had made a firm campaign promise that he would oppose expansion.

Billions of dollars--ultimately provided by airline passengers and taxpayers--are involved. If the airlines are forced to finance what they view as unnecessary runways--raising the fees they must pay the city to use the airport to uncompetitive levels--will they take their hubs and go elsewhere, depriving Chicago of one of its biggest economic engines? How long would the new administration be willing to carry on an expensive and perhaps futile court fight, especially against one of its strongest economic partners? Is this a wise investment of the city's time and money, especially when a virtually no-cost new airport was available in the southern suburbs?

Billions of dollars are at stake. Whether Chicago will be saddled with a white elephant of an airport that its opponents and some aviation experts agree is a costly, ineffective and unsafe extravagance certainly seems, at least to me, a more substantive issue than many of the other issues (e.g. is that labor union guy anti-Semitic?) that have occupied the media.

When I was a consultant to expansion opponents some years ago, I was baffled by the media's inattention and indifference to what was designed to become the Machine's largest source of patronage, jobs and contracts. How could the Chicago media, which relishes its reputation for its hard-hitting investigative journalism, so easily accept the argument that a 1950s, 7,000-acre airport could be magically transformed into a 21st Century behemoth that would solve all its built-in problems.

Apparently, the media's indifference will continue right up to election day next Tuesday.

So, as it stands today (Thursday, Feb. 17, 2011),  "intense" negotiations between the airlines that went into the early morning hours, has produced nothing. The airlines' suit against the city, seeking to halt the second phase will proceed.

And Daley, on Thursday blasted his one-time airline allies for having the audacity to suggest that rushing to complete the mayor's self-defined "vision" is not a good idea. In a telling remark, Daley said:  "If you live in China, this airport would've been built today." Someone remind Daley that America isn't China and he's not Chinese President Hu Jintao.


Leave a comment
  • As far as I can tell, this campaign has had nothing to do with the issues. I noted on Tracy Schmidt's blog that the candidates have been saying blah blah blah about transit. Only Rahm seems roughly around the edge regarding pensions. There is a bit of a debate about the Rahm tax, but the Tribune pointed out that the proposal itself was nebulous. I've heard next to nothing about the schools.

    Meanwhile, supposedly, the real issues among the other candidates are whether one is a crackhead, immigration (over which a mayor does not have authority, and I am sure it is pandering to voters who do not want immigration control), and whether Rahm was at Freddie Mac sufficiently before all hell broke loose.

    As far as your topic of interest, unless Daley can find a judge to throw out the lawsuit real quick, and can appeal as quickly as Odelson and Emanuel, he won't be able to sell bonds until someone certifies that there is no litigation pending. Hence, you don't have to worry that Daley will be able to wind this up without the airlines' agreement, unless he can pull another Meigs. And, as I have said many times, neither you nor I have a vote in this election.

    BTW, I have to update my posts in two respects, in that I saw a Rahm ad with Tribune and N'Digo logos.

  • In reply to jack:

    Tracy Swartz. Sorry. Link

Leave a comment

  • Advertisement:
  • Advertisement:
  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Visit my new website

    I'm a freelance writer, editor and author. I can help you with a wide variety of projects. Check out my new website at

  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Like me on Facebook

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Advertisement: