African-Americans oppose "big box," plus interesting editing
Crossposted on Marathon Pundit. And don't forget about my radio appearance on Thursday!
Fran Spielman writes about Chicago's "big box" ordinance, and notes something that even supporters of "living wages" agree on. African Americans oppose this bill:
Dr. Leon Finney of the Metropolitan Apostolic Community Church said recent polls commissioned by black ministers show voters in African-American wards oppose the big-box ordinance by 70-to-80 percent margins.
Finney scoffed at the threat by union leaders to finance candidates against incumbent aldermen who oppose the ordinance.
"Since when do we know that the labor unions have been able to elect anybody to office? . . . If an alderman decides to vote the interests of their people, they should be punished?'' Finney said.
Spielman's article was picked up by the affiliated Daily Southtown. Here's that first excerpted paragraph from the Southtown:
Leon Finney of the Metropolitan Apostolic Community Church said recent polls commissioned by black ministers show that voters in majority black wards overwhelmingly oppose the big-box ordinance.
Maybe I'm being a bit picky, but since the Sun-Times version of that paragraph is--at least to me--more effective in communicating the strong opposition of blacks to the "big box" ordinance, was the person who edited Spielman's Daily Southtown version of her article trying to diminish the punchiness of Fran's point?
More details on opposition to "big box" in the African American community in this May Marathon Pundit post, Chicago's "big box" anti-jobs ordinance.
24 comments:
This one's amazing... after years of watching Madison and Pulaski, and 63rd and Halstead decline as retail powerhouses; we finally get some national retailers interested in investing in the City and these yokels want to drive them away.
It's Union labor that will build these stores... Teamsters who will devliver the goods... and people with zilch other employment options who will staff them.
How anyone can call themselves progressive and turn away this investment in neigborhoods is beyond me.
I do hope that some more white guys chime in and let us all know what is best for the African-American community in Chicago.
For instance, a white fella telling us how *any* minimum wage laws hold African-Americans down would certainly fit the theme.
Please explain what you mean by,"even supporters of "living wages" agree on. African Americans oppose this bill."
No media has reported on the quality, sample size, or question of the black ministers' poll.
They have reported on the poll by Lake Research Partners that found that "90 percent support from African Americans."
In fact, Finney and his Wal-Mart proxies had to trick people into attending their rallies:
Meanwhile, residents at the Harold Ickes Homes on the city's South Side said organizers opposing the ordinance tricked them last week into attending a rally of about 1,200 people, heavily covered by the media, by saying that jobs at Wal-Mart awaited them there.
Austin,
Take a drive down Augusta, Chicago, Washington, Madison, or Jackson from Ashland to Austin sometime.
Count the number of stores. Count the number of Gas Stations. Then count the number of help wanted signs over at Danada Square or in Naperville in all those stores.
It'll speak for itself.
These are classic union busting tactics, something Wal-Mart has gotten very good at. Essentially, these are all efforts to change the subject from the main question here, which is how are you supposed to raise a family on $5.15 an hour? And, what will happen to the bussiness in the area when the big box moves in?
They're not busting the building trades who'll build the stores; or the Teamsters who will deliver....
...and if the Unions cared all that much about African Americans, maybe they'd return to Washburne.
The unions began to leave Washburne to operate their own schools as early as 1968, as the construction boom in the suburbs pulled building trades away from the city.
In 1975, state Sen. Richard Newhouse persuaded the Illinois State Board of Education to cut off funds until school officials met a federal goal for minority enrollment.
The move did little to stop the union exodus. Throughout the 1970s, apprentice programs such as those for plumbers, iron workers, cement masons and glaziers relocated.
In 1979, Washburne met federal enrollment standards and the funds were restored. But eight unions had left and the construction industry was mired in a recession, with unemployment reaching 22.3 percent by 1982.
The controversy continued after the 1980 federal decree to desegregate the public schools. A Chicago Board of Education demand in 1986 that enrollment mirror the city's population prompted the carpenters, pipe fitters and electricians unions to leave.
Thomas Nayder, then-president of the Chicago Building Trades Council, was quoted as saying: "I get the feeling that they (the unions) think, 'Who needs all this hassle?'"
Bill,
Funny you would bring this back to the 1980s.
I was young, but I have some recollection of that time.
One of my recollections is the place that Ronald Reagan chose to start his campaign.
Where did he start that campaign, Bill? What message did that send?
If you are going to talk about racism, remember the facts. Remember Republican hero Ronald Reagan.
You'll have to tell us what Reagan's message sent.
The Building Trades message on desgregation in 1986 was they didn't need the hassle.
Ruberry -
Gimme a break. A poll commissioned by black ministers? How about a poll paid for by WalMart in the name of black ministers? I bet the poll sounded alot like the phonecall I got from the poll being conducted on behalf of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce the other day:
"Members of the Chicago City Council want to stop new retail stores from opening in the city because the union bosses don't want the competition. These new stores would create thousands of new jobs in underdeveloped neighborhoods. Here's our question: Do you want to see retail development and thousands of new jobs in Chicago's underdeveloped neighborhoods?"
That's a real useful poll. Can't believe Jerry Roper had the nerve to tell Crain's that wasn't a push poll. Ha!
YDD...You need to visit Moore's Taj Majal of retail...
http://capitalfax.blogspot.com/2006/07/ald-joe-moore-retail-genius.html
ruberry -
Why is it whenever people can't argue against an issue on it's merits, they insist on attacking the issue's proponents?
You can argue that Joe Moore doesn't know much about retail, unionists are racist, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
These ad hominem attacks don't change the fact that in America, people who work hard and play by the rules deserve a chance to get ahead. And as much as I blame Gov. Blagojevich for the fact that the state is $3.1 billion in arrears when it comes to paying it's medical bills, I have to wonder how many of those folks on Medicaid are Wal-Mart employees? And why in God's name does it make sense as a matter of public policy for my hard-earned tax dollars as an individual and a small businessman to support the mega profits of the world's largest retailer and the second most profitable company in America? Can you answer that, John?
I agree with Mayor Daley and Alderman Natarus that I would love to see the living wage apply to every worker. If they think it's such a dandy idea, the Mayor should call up his good friend George W. Bush and ask him to push through such a measure. In the mean time, Alderman Natarus can call his good friend Rod Blagojevich -- whom he supported over Paul Vallas -- and ask him to make the living wage statewide.
Clearly, the grassroots movement being organized by the coalition of faith-based, civil rights, and worker's right groups doesn't have the muscle of Mayor Daley and ALderman Natarus, and I'm sure they'd welcome the help.
In the meantime, tomorrow there will be a vote on taking one step forward. I'm betting it passes, is held up in court, and Chicago benefits as a result.
Long ago, the charge was retailers over priced African Americans.
That the same stores charged more in the city neigborhoods then in the suburbs.
Activists would actually go shopping for like items and compare the receipts.
Now we've got progressives arguing that the cost of doing business should be higher in African American stores then in the burbs.
Retailers just past this through folks. We've got a progressive coalition out there saying, bottomline, that it should be more expensive by law in the city then the burbs... That African Americans should have to pay some social tax that the burbs avoid...
...that's just nuts. It sure isn't liberal or progressive. Or it that's progressive, then it sure dumps on folks without cars stuck at Madison and Pulaski.
Baar,
Bad news. Unlike you I'm read some history.
Your friend Reagan chose Philadelphia, Miss to kick off his campaign.
Please tell me you know the significance of that place, and the message that it sent.
Sheesh...I'm talking about Moore's failure of a shopping plaza called Gateway...
It's a failure...and he wants have the rest of the city follow his example?
Ruberry,
President Bush ran about three oil companies into the ground.
Did you vote for him?
Big difference...Bush favors expandng business opps, whereas Moore wants to limit them...
What's the name of that Kansas City haberdasher, who had to declare bankruptcy?
Skeeter, you are so wrong on that Philly, MS story, although on Huff Post and DU stuff like that is accepted as fact. Yes, he did have a controversial campaign appearance there in 1980, but he didn't kick off his campaign there.
That he appeared there makes him a racist the same way Jimmy Carter's "ethnic purity" comment in his 1976 DNC acceptance speech made Jimmah a bigot.
John,
Enlighten me.
Why did Reagan, who was definitely a mover in the infamous Southern Strategy, go to Philly, Miss?
Why does that matter? The Great President died in '04, and Reagan won that election. Before '80, Goldwater and Nixon did well in the South.
Reagan's '76 campaign, which never really ended, began in Tampico, IL. His '79 announcement for '80 was made in NYC.
Your source for that Philly story was Alternet. Ugh!
John, Why don't you bring up the fact that anti-living wage factions are tricking the very same people (black folks) you cynically promote to further your own conservative agenda?
As Rich Miller quoted yesterday, "Meanwhile, residents at the Harold Ickes Homes on the city’s South Side said organizers opposing the ordinance tricked them last week into attending a rally of about 1,200 people, heavily covered by the media, by saying that jobs at Wal-Mart awaited them there."
Here's the Trib article on the Wal*Mart side's tomfoolery.
PS, John spews, "Your source for that Philly story was Alternet. Ugh!"
...And how many times have you ever gotten your "news" from World Net Daily, Human Events Online, FOX, or the like?
Why are conservative-leaning "news" organizations ok for the right, but liberal-leaning news groups aren't ok for the left?
Bill Baar and John Ruberry, you guys left Chicago. Your words are cheap. Instead of sitting on the sidelines, why don't you move back and work to make the ciy's neighborhoods better places to live. Something tells me you wouldn't know where to begin.
Well, Bill and I can split rent on one of the many empty storefronts in Joe Moore's masterpiece, the Gateway Shopping Center.
John,
I've never heard of "alternet." I'm not sure what that is. It was not my source.
The 1980 campaign matters because the issue became the conduct of Democrats in the 1980s. When Ronald Reagan was your guy, race cannot be your issue.
Philly, Miss. was on purpose. It was a matter of policy. We both know that.
By the way -- you mentioned Goldwater. How many votes did he get?
Post a Comment