Can Rahm Emanuel Fix Chicago’s Problems?

THE NEW MAN ON FIVE: In his first few months as mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel has moved at breakneck speed to tackle long-neglected problems and drag a torpid bureaucracy into the 21st century. But the biggest battles lie ahead. Does he have what it takes to save the city?

(page 3 of 4)



Photo Gallery: The First 100 Days
The first 100 days

Behind the Scenes at the Photo Shoot

From August, on the roof of City Hall

Our 1992 profile of Emanuel, then Bill Clinton’s finance director

By now almost everybody who follows Chicago politics knows at least a bit of Emanuel’s political backstory. Here’s the Twitter-length version (actually, 357 characters): The nine-and-a-half-fingered ballet dancer becomes a dead-fish-sending political operative and Daley moneyman, a top Clinton adviser, and then a millionaire investment banker, wins Blago’s old House seat, leads Dems back into the majority in Congress in ’06, sets sights on becoming the first Jewish Speaker but leaves the Hill to be Obama’s chief of staff.

But while his curriculum vitae is widely known, Rahm Israel Emanuel—the man—remains something of an enigma. So well established is the caricature of him that many Chicagoans know only the cartoonish Rahmbo, the hyperaggressive, hyperprofane, and hypertempermental political operator with an instinct for the jugular.

Emanuel says the media gets too hung up on his personality and personal style, political and otherwise (i.e., stories about dead fish and the like). “You guys ask the same fucking five questions all the time,” he tells me. Once, when he was in Congress, he recalls, a journalist wrote a piece knocking him for wearing pants with pleats. “My God, who cares?” he exclaims.

Ideologically, Emanuel is an intensely partisan dyed-in-the-wool Democrat—he calls himself a “progressive”—in a Democratic town. But so far in office, he has pushed a political agenda that resembles the Republican view of the world: cutting spending and the size of government, promoting private enterprise at the expense of unions, resisting tax increases, and reinforcing law and order. He has had no choice, really, given all of the city’s problems.

Even so, he has shown flashes of his liberal side. For instance, he has made eliminating so-called food deserts a top priority—pledging to fast-track permits, zoning, and licensing for grocers who open up stores in neighborhoods where fresh meat and produce are hard to find. He opened the city’s first protected bike lane. And despite the humongous budget deficit, he changed the city’s employee leave policies in July to offer paid maternity leave.

As a manager, Emanuel has brought in mostly professional technocrats, not party bureaucrats. And while Mayor Daley was notorious for pitting commissioners and cabinet officials against one another—it spurred competitiveness, he felt, which, in turn, resulted in harder work (but often just led to backstabbing)—Emanuel prefers cooperation to confrontation, aides say, and so far his team has coalesced nicely. Emanuel says he encourages vigorous debate, even dissent, but once he makes a decision, usually quickly—he’s impatient, remember?—he expects his lieutenants to rally around it 100 percent, just as he did in the White House, even when he disagreed with what was decided. He despises leaks. “When I make a decision, I don’t need to have it relitigated somewhere else,” he tells me one day in his conference room, next door to his office. “The litigation room is here,” he says, rapping his finger sternly on the conference table.

And his trademark persona? Well, Emanuel says, that’s here to stay—style points be damned.

Besides being unapologetically profane, Emanuel is blunt. He once called a group of liberal detractors “fucking retarded.” On another occasion, he reportedly told a stammering male staffer at the White House, “Take your fucking tampon out and tell me what you have to say.”

He often starts sentences with “Look” or “Here’s the deal,” and he just as often concludes them with a terse “OK?”—as if to say, in a slightly patronizing way, “You get it?” He speaks machine-gun fast and has a habit of not finishing one sentence before launching into the next. His thin, reedy voice can reach high decibels when he’s angry.

Howard Tullman, a prominent businessman and an old friend of Emanuel’s, recalls that someone asked him shortly before the mayoral election whether he even liked Emanuel. (At the time, Emanuel was living in Tullman’s West Loop loft while the infamous Renter Who Refused to Leave occupied the Emanuel family’s Ravenswood home.) Tullman said that, yes, he did like Emanuel. The questioner then reminded him that, years earlier, he had called Emanuel an asshole. To which Tullman replied: “Of course he’s an asshole. So what else is new? He’s my asshole.”

But Tullman and others interviewed for this article are also quick to note that Emanuel can be incredibly gracious, sensitive even. For instance, Emanuel says he calls every parent who loses an innocent child to violence in the city. (In one of our interviews, his voice cracks when he talks about those calls.) He even paid a condolence call on a reporter whose dog died. And when civil unions for same-sex couples were legalized in Illinois in June, Emanuel officiated the union of David Spielfogel, his policy chief. Spielfogel says Emanuel had heavily lobbied state lawmakers during the campaign to pass the civil unions bill, and after it became law in January, Emanuel told Spielfogel that he wanted to preside over his ceremony at City Hall once the law went into effect. “That meant a lot,” says Spielfogel. “He drives us very, very hard but, at the same time, treats us like family.”

By all accounts, Emanuel has kept his hot temper mostly in check—many Chicagoans may be wondering if he’s on tranquilizers—and he has dialed down much of the salty language. He has been careful, particularly in public, not to let the old Rahm emerge. But sometimes he can’t help it.

“He’s still very pushy, treats everybody like a second-class citizen,” one alderman told me at a City Council meeting in early July. “He always has an agenda in his head—his to-do list: ‘I need you to do this.’”

Emanuel, the alderman continues, often punctuates his words with some sort of physical contact, usually a touch or a grab of the arm. It’s a tactic that he uses to implore, not necessarily to bully, but it can come across as menacing. The alderman demonstrates on me, grabbing my arm firmly. “It’s not just a touch. He grips, LBJ-style.”

That is, in the style of Lyndon Baines Johnson, or the famed Johnson Treatment—the way the masterful Texas political wheeler-dealer used close contact, among other tactics, to bend others to his will.

“Does it work?” I ask.

“I guess it works on some people.”

* * *

Emanuel has quickly shown the city Council who’s the boss. Just days after he won a resounding victory in February’s mayoral primary, political circles here were abuzz with talk that the mayor-elect was putting the aldermen, particularly the old-timers, on notice: He had his eye on them, and he wasn’t going to put up with any shenanigans—especially of the dishonest sort—that his predecessor may have tolerated.

During Emanuel’s transition, some City Hall watchers predicted that the aldermen—many of whom don’t like or trust Emanuel and who, for years, grumbled privately about Daley’s authoritarian hand—would try to exert more independence under the new mayor and tip the pendulum of power back their way. So far that hasn’t happened. Instead, the council, with nary a peep or even much debate, has rubber-stamped everything that Emanuel’s office has put in front of it, including new tougher ethics rules and a reorganization plan that cut the number of council committees from 19 to 16, the fewest in 50 years. (The mayor has also floated the idea of cutting the size of the council in half, to 25 aldermen.) Emanuel even stripped away some power from Edward Burke, the long-serving dean of the City Council, who, as the chairman of the finance committee, controls much of the city’s most important legislation.

Even Emanuel’s first nonunanimous vote was virtually without dissent. In late July, the council voted the mayor’s way, 45 to 3, to award a major contract for redeveloping and running the concessions at O’Hare’s international terminal to an out-of-state concessionaire, replacing a local clout-heavy firm that included one of Daley’s closest associates, Jeremiah Joyce.

Several aldermen I spoke with vowed that the new mayor is likely to see more closely contested votes after his honeymoon ends. “We’re waiting for the right issue and the right moment to launch a rebellion,” says the alderman I spoke to in July. “The moment of truth will soon be here.”

They can certainly try, but negotiating—both tactile diplomacy and the hostile arm-twisting variety—is Emanuel’s hallmark. Few can rival him. “He’s very persuasive,” says Mark Angelson, the deputy mayor. Recently, seated at his desk in a corner office down the hall from the mayor’s, Angelson, the former chief executive of RR Donnelley, tells me how Emanuel recruited him. Shortly after the election, Angelson, who left Donnelley in 2007, says he was talking to Emanuel about wanting to do more philanthropic work, and Emanuel said to him: “Well, you have to do this.” Angelson was thinking more along the lines of volunteering for a charity, donating money, and the like, not starting a government job. But Emanuel, he says, was insistent, talking to him about the job regularly over a period of several weeks. Despite the coaxing, Angelson kept demurring. Finally, Emanuel put it like this: “This is an opportunity for you to help millions of people with a problem that is denominated in billions of dollars. If anybody else is offering you that opportunity, great, go do it.” Angelson gave in. He earns a salary of a dollar a year.

This aggressive bonhomie is very much Emanuel’s style; it was highly effective in Washington and has been here so far too. Before leaders of the powerful public employee unions could even say “honeymoon,” Emanuel confronted them with a challenge to come up with salary concessions and work-rule changes to fill a $31 million gap in this year’s budget. And if they failed to act, he warned, he would lay off 625 city employees to balance the budget. Emanuel gave them a deadline, and when they missed it, he sent out the layoff notices.

The gambit paid off. Emanuel’s tough stance forced reluctant union leaders to give him detailed ways to save money, and although they didn’t meet the mayor’s deadline, they eventually delivered a lengthy report highlighting ways to cut $242 million from the city budget—at the very least a conversation starter for the even bigger showdown between the two sides that is expected in the fall to close the $635 million deficit in the 2012 budget.

Emanuel has been equally adept in Springfield. During the spring legislative session, the new mayor lobbied hard for a landmark education package that would lengthen the school day, allow school districts more freedom to fire bad teachers, and make it harder for city teachers to go on strike. He also put on a full-court press for the expansion of gambling, including a megacasino in Chicago that could be a badly needed financial windfall for his administration. And he weighed in vocally in favor of a workers’ compensation overhaul and the so-called Illinois DREAM Act, a college scholarship program for the children of undocumented immigrants.

Jack Franks, a Democratic state representative from Woodstock, credits Emanuel with being the difference maker in the last legislative session, particularly for his efforts lining up votes for the gaming legislation. “It wouldn’t have passed without Rahm,” says Franks. It was a remarkable feat, he adds, considering that gaming expansion of any type has not found consensus in years.

Emanuel’s hands-on style could not be more different from Daley’s. The former mayor avoided Springfield like the plague—going to the capitol perhaps once or twice a year and rarely, if ever, personally lobbying lawmakers. When I ask Emanuel why he is so personally involved in Springfield business when Daley wasn’t, he replies, “I’m the new mayor.

“It’s not a judgment about what he did,” he continues. “It’s about what I need to do for our future. Given that our relationship is tied to what Springfield will do—or not do—I can no longer afford to ignore it. So, on behalf of the city, not on behalf of me, I will be aggressive.” Then, imitating a child’s whiny voice, he adds, “I can’t say, ‘Well, geez, that’s in Springfield. Boy, that’s going to be hard.’ No! I gotta get it done.”

But by being aggressive, the rookie mayor risked invoking the ire of the Springfield establishment, in particular the mercurial Michael Madigan, Speaker of the House, who has ruled the General Assembly for decades. This time around, Emanuel and Madigan were largely on the same page, and the mayor became a valuable wingman to the Speaker to cajole, prod, and play rough, if necessary, to whip up the votes they needed.

One story that raced through local political circles a few months back has it that Emanuel went ballistic on Greg Harris, a Democratic state representative from the North Side. The mayor called Harris to lobby him to vote for a contentious amendment on pensions to the workers’ compensation bill, introduced by the House Republican leader Tom Cross, that would cut future retirement benefits for current state employees. Harris told Emanuel he couldn’t support it. He felt it was too unfair to the public work force.

As the prominent political insider, who got the story secondhand, retells it, a furious Emanuel went off on Harris: “You better support it, you motherfucker, or I’ll burn your house down!” Afterward, the insider says, Harris jokingly called the local firefighters’ association to see if they’d have his back if Emanuel torched his home. (The pension amendment, by the way, didn’t pass—a rare instance in which Emanuel did not get what he wanted.)

Harris confirms the gist of the anecdote but calls the story “exaggerated.” He won’t offer specific details about the exchange, saying only that Emanuel “is an aggressive guy, always has been, always will be” and that the mayor “was trying really hard to be persuasive.” The three-term representative adds that he hasn’t met anyone in politics who doesn’t have a temper: “There are tough decisions, and there’s going to be a lot of arguing. To say we can all smile and the world is full of happy puppies and smiling kittens—that’s not reality.”

Sara Feigenholtz, another Democratic state representative who was on the receiving end of an Emanuel tirade in the frenzied final days of the session, says that while his style has ruffled some feathers, it has not caused widespread rancor. “I’m sure there are members who like a different style, but frankly, I warmly welcome it,” the Chicago legislator tells me. “I like knowing what he’s thinking. It wasn’t always easy to read the tea leaves in the prior administration.”

* * *


3 years ago
Posted by KChicago

TARP was signed into law by President BUSH on October 3, 2008. You should probably correct this error in your article. Maybe you're thinking of the stimulus, or maybe the auto industry bailout? But Emanuel clearly was not working to get TARP funded, since that occurred prior to President Obama taking office.

3 years ago
Posted by Chicago Magazine

EDITOR'S NOTE: TARP was signed into law by President Bush and continued by President Obama.

3 years ago
Posted by Another reader

[[In late July, for instance, when Emanuel released his administration’s report on the financial health of Chicago—a highly damning analysis of the city’s fiscal stewardship over the previous ten years—James Warren, a columnist for the Chicago News Cooperative, described the report as “the equivalent of a superficially alluring velvet shiv” stuck into Daley’s back.]]

Well, Warren and all the other cronies of Lipinski should know a thing or two about stabbing people in the back.

3 years ago
Posted by Another reader

[[Several aldermen I spoke with vowed that the new mayor is likely to see more closely contested votes after his honeymoon ends. “We’re waiting for the right issue and the right moment to launch a rebellion,” says the alderman I spoke to in July. “The moment of truth will soon be here.”]]

Of course, this alderman lacks the testicular virility to speak on the record and was probably one of the sheep who voted for the parking meter fiasco.

3 years ago
Posted by JimH

Because of this asshole Chicago is a shooting gallery for the criminals because lawbiding citizens cant cary protection.

3 years ago
Posted by JimH

Cicago is very safe for the criminal to have open season and year round target practice on innocent people that abide by the law and don't cary. Poor chicago people don't have the right to cary protection.

Emanuel and Quinn need to go.

3 years ago
Posted by The Straight Dope

This story has so many outrageous statements that it's hard to know where to begin. In no particular order: First, Rahm is not bordering on cocky -- he's one of the most arrogant persons on earth and if you don't agree, just wait -- you'll see (he also says the "f" word so frequently, it's frankly embarrissing). Second, Rahm's staff is totally overwhelmed and trying to live up to the bar set by Daley's staff (of course they will never admit that publicly, but since the author of this article relies on private conversations and unnamed sources, I cite to the same in making this statement). Third, since Rahm's own Budget Director (Alex Holt) was a Deputy Director in Daley's budget office AND the top protege of former Daley Budget Director Bill Abolt during a good portion of the past 10 years, it is pretty ironic and funny that Rahm and his budget staff speaks about how Daley's budget has been unsound and based on smoke and mirrors for the past ten years. Fourth, since the author of this article never even set foot in Mayor Daley's office, it is pretty disingenuous and a flat out lie for him to say Daley's staff has been asleep while Rahm's office is buzzing. Fifth, please -- Chicago is hardly a "damsel in distress" compared to other cities. Has the author ever bothered to visit other cities in the country?? I could go on and on and on.

3 years ago
Posted by finleyrc

Lot of good information & background here. One quibble(?). No broadband access in the mayor's office? There wasn't a single ethernet jack or wifi hotspot connecting to a network (& the internet) in all of the mayor's office suite? I doubt it. Think somebody is trying to make a point about old administration being old fashioned & over-reaching. I mean - come on - worse case - he could have hopped on the free public wifi that's been active down on Daley Plaza for the last couple of years. ;)

3 years ago
Posted by Free The PRC

Rahm wants to be a "Superhero".

In short, he soes not want to empower the citizens of Chicago but wants them to be depoendent upon him.

This is the kind of mentality that is perpetuated by 3rd world dictatorships and not the kind of thinking that should prevail in the United States of America.

To Rahm and his ilk, the people of the People's Republic of Chicago need to be sheeple so that he and his can continue to rule.

3 years ago
Posted by moe

The city is EXTREMELY VIOLENT and the mayor and police cheif DO NOT have a control on crime. I've never been to any other city where open air gangs sell drugs on every corner on the west side.

Here's a response from the Chicago Tribune that a cop posted. How's this for morale of the city.,0,2327466.story

written at 3:30 PM October 9, 2011

I live on the west side about 4 blocks from the deadly location and we barely see the police in our neighborhood. We've pleaded to Commander Eric Washington and he continues to ignor our calls for safety. Whatever Garry McCarthy is doing to realign officers is certainly not working in K-town. We have many hardworking people in these areas that have lived here for decades and worked to pay off our homes. We cannot afford to leave.

The State of Illinois needs to build more prisons. Or the the private sector should do so because the west side alone can fill them to capacity. Almost every person who commits a crime in Chicago comes from the west side or the south side of the city. It doesn't matter what neighborhood, they'll travel to yours.

We need to find out which judges are letting these urban terrorist back onto the streets after being arrested 3,4,5,15,30 times. These judges are just as criminal as the convicted animals and they should not be getting elected or appointed. Until the laws are changed, Chicago will always suffer from these animals on the loose.



cpd765 at 5:52 PM October 9, 2011

You can call all you want, nobody is going to come. I work in 011 and you know those open air drug markets you see all up and down the block, they are there because us beat cars don't even get the jobs. Thats right, when you call 911 to report narcotic sales our supervisors tell the zone 10 dispatchers to read them out and 19p them per the sarge. We are not held down to investigate the report, its put in our stacking than coded. The media, mayor and CPD bosses are all lying to the public about the crime stats and our over mission.

Us patrolman have been beaten down so much that we really are just doing it for the 1st and 16th. Why would any cop go the extra mile to help someone and than get it shoved right up and broken off by this liberal city? I drive by and just put the blinders on because Im not doing anything thats going to put my family in the poor house. What about the foot post we had at Pulaski/Polk????? We were told by the citizens and street corner REV's that we shouldnt be there because we scare the community, hahah get real. You cant have it both ways, and now since 99.9% of officers feel like this good luck with your problems because we are not trying to solve any of them.

Submit your comment