Patronage and the Proposed Budget for 2010

Yesterday I sat in the packed County Board room as President Todd Stroger presented his 4th budget proposal to the Cook County Board. As if oblivious to the near-depression that our nation and county are living in, probably for a while to come, he submitted a proposal that actually showed an increase in spending from what he called a "mere $80 million" dollars up to a now $3 billion dollar budget.

And while he tried to brag about how he was holding the line on any new taxes with this budget and cutting some 700 county employees, his words rang hollow.

Particularly worth noting is that his proposed budget increase is several times the rate of inflation. Factually, given the 700 cut jobs (probably worth about $45 million in savings) and the actual rate of inflation for Chicago (which is forecast to be less than 1% by the U.S. Department of Labor for calendar year 2009), the budget should have been flat at worst or actually gone down by about $15 million. With a headcount savings of $45 million minus inflationary increases of $30 million, this should equal a net savings of minus $15 million going into calendar year 2010. Hence, even in the face of reduced headcount and minimal increases in goods and services, he is proposing a 2.7% budget increase, to what unknown end. A year after demanding the disastrous sales tax increase, this increase in spending seems unconscionable.

The 700-plus jobs he is taking credit for cutting are mostly coming from the good work of the new independent professional hospital board that has begun to try to cut many of the patronage make-work jobs in Cook County health care systems. President Stroger has opposed much of the work of this board but is now taking credit for its cuts. It is important to note that there aren't any deep cuts in any other offices under his control.

The reason Stroger did not have to ask for a tax increase is because he already has done that -- last year -- making Cook County the highest-taxing place to live in the United States. If he could increase spending while not raising taxes, then he could instead just cut the taxes, especially because we are seeing clear data that businesses in the 14th District are losing sales to lower-taxing neighboring counties.

And while I am not automatically always "anti-tax" (taxes are sometimes necessary, and I am willing to pay them for important services and quality of life), I absolutely demand that every penny of the revenues be managed with the highest ethical standards of accountability, efficiency, transparency, and necessity. I know my fellow residents of the 14th District feel the same way because almost every conversation I have out here on the campaign trail echoes those very sentiments.

So why are Cook County taxes so much higher than other urban areas? It isn't just because we are big. Other counties have large populations and serious issues too.

Sadly, it's much more basic. Cook County and Chicago have long been built on a strong political engine called patronage that, in its very structure, takes care of itself.

Patronage means that jobs are given out for loyalty, not to those who are necessarily the best qualified. And often it means that there are jobs that are actually created unnecessarily so that more people are beholden to the politician who creates the job. Those patronage workers in turn work to keep that elected official in power, and with the taxpayer footing the bill, the elected official and the patronage workers are kept entrenched and comfortable.

But there is a real problem with this engine -- it is not a sustainable practice. And most certainly it is not sustainable in the belt-tightening era in which we currently live. With some economic forecasters warning that the worst may be yet to come for our nation's economy, we should be moving in an entirely different direction.

Since I have already been supporting zero-based budgets on the campaign trail (a process by which we would start from scratch with each budget to justify every county expense), my intention upon becoming the new Cook County Commissioner from the 14th District is to immediately begin a serious strategic overhaul examination into what it is exactly that county government must do. After a virtual "triage" list is created, separating what we must do from what we would merely like to do but can live without, we will find that there is much that can be consolidated and some that can be reduced or even eliminated.

Why do other counties have a single office that we have split in two -- the Recorder of Deeds and Assessor? Why does the County Board have separate departments for a Clerk of the Board and a Secretary of the Board? Why does one person get a $110,000 salary for simply going around the county encouraging men to have prostate exams? And the list goes on.

Former lauded and reforming Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley, now in Congress, laid out some excellent reduction and efficiency proposals. Most of his proposals have not been implemented, and while President Stroger keeps his hold on county government through the required devotion of those dependent on his patronage, nothing will change.

It is patronage itself - the corrupt hiring practices - that has to go.

And this will be a real fight between the entrenched forces of the status quo and the forces of economic discipline. This is not a battle between Republican and Democrat, Liberal versus Conservative. We must take a stand for our very survival. We can't do the good and important work that Cook County services provide, not only to those in dire need but to all its residents, if we cannot sustain the system.

Because so many residents of the 14th District have told me that they want to see a full house-cleaning in county government, I would not be surprised to see the 2010 elections as a "throw the bums out" year.

And while there are some good Commissioners on the Cook County Board who try to do the right thing, there aren't enough of them. A good standard by which to decide how to vote for or against an incumbent in this race is one that examines those who have been in office for a long time, casting votes supporting a system laden with patronage, but who have not been the driving force behind one single major systemic overhaul. In the 14th District, that choice is clear.

UPDATE: July 2010
The Chicago Sun Times ran a story that documents some disturbing facts about Cook County's corrupt hiring system - Patronage -and the "Shakman-exempt" employee problem:

Lisa Donovan writes: "One out of 10 managers surveyed in Cook County government say they didn’t discipline underlings because they simply didn’t know how to — a revelation that leaves the county vulnerable to expensive litigation and low employee morale, according to a report issued today by county Inspector General Patrick Blanchard. And at least a few bosses aren’t certain they can mete out discipline to some politically-connected employees, according to the report compiled from a survey of 104 county managers in charge of enforcing discipline in their departments. One boss even commented on an anonymous questionnaire that 'department and management employees must have the authority to manage Shakman-exempt employees. We must be able to treat them the same as non-Shakman employees.' So-called Shakman-exempt employees aren’t subject to the ban on political hiring in the county, but all employees are required to abide by the rules and policies of the county, officials say. Inspector General Patrick Blanchard told the Sun-Times the misunderstanding — even by a small number of bosses — underscores a need to offer ongoing training. The county should consider offering online courses for managers about the responsibilities of enforcing rules and policies in their departments, he said. 'The breakdown results in inefficiencies, leaves the county open to litigation and employment claims and morale issues, which affects the effectiveness of the workforce,’ Blanchard said."