Bring Home Chicago will arrive in a casket
Poor messaging and imagery doomed the housing measure
The uber-controversial referendum aimed at creating a cash cow for Chicago’s homeless population, including migrants, is likely to suffer an ugly death next Tuesday when voters head to the polls. The Bring Home Chicago ballot question since its announcement last year has been fraught with issues-primarily language problems and messaging. Before finally being submitted to election officials to be put on the ballot, the wording underwent at least three substantial language revisions to clarify what a successful outcome would look like. Even then, it faced legal challenges. The most recent one was only decided a week or two ago.
An informal poll among friends who pay close attention to these kinds of matters tell me I am off the mark.
My counter to them is multi-faceted including the reality that because of his abysmally low approval rating Mayor Brandon Johnson could not be the face of one of his hallmark campaign issues. No doubt BCH backers figured there is no need to remind voters of his seriously flawed track record, which includes:
walking back “defund the police” comments
promising to visit the Texas/Mexico border, then ducking out
postponing a gathering of suburban mayors he was supposed to host
attempting to build a base camp after the state clearly said no to helping financially which meant he threw away $1 million of city money
Opponents of the referendum removed a lot of steam from the mayor’s side by hammering the point that the language that voters will see is vague, and shows that if the measure passes, the money won’t necessarily go to assist migrants or the homeless. The rhetoric of Chicago is facing a humanitarian crisis, which was used when the asylum-seekers began arriving, likely would have blunted some of the pushback against the referendum.
There’s a growing buzz that Johnson’s benefactors and puppet masters- the Chicago Teachers Union-will make a push for the dollars to go toward housing assistance for the teachers living in Chicago. Based on the referendum, Johnson could funnel the money to city’s general fund. Without a repudiation of that charge, Johnson gives the impression the opponents aren’t off base. The anti-BCH crowd undoubtedly struck a chord with thousands of voters when they pushed the notion that a yes vote brings increased rents. Even if that is not true, it is a message that sends the panic opponents are hoping for.
CTU leaders and staffers unabashedly take the position they are responsible for getting Johnson elected-and they are correct. The millions of dollars they poured into his campaign coffers, and tens of thousands of hours of door-knocking propelled the little-known county commissioner to the fifth floor of city hall. He definitely will incur their ire if he doesn’t support them.
Months ago, Johnson went on record saying he would not recuse himself from participating in negotiations with CTU when their contract expires in June. That is when the housing assistance ask is expected to formally surface.
Team Johnson also came up short in clarifying how the money from the referendum would be used; while his opposition hammered home, while simultaneously bludgeoning the public, especially with television ads, touting a yes vote would mean higher taxes. They wrapped that around the city’s crime rate and asked whether the mayor is trustworthy.
Granted, the pro-BCH cohort implemented an impressive ground game; but it didn’t measure up to the onslaught of television commercials which explained the opponents’ side. It looks as though it is back to the drawing board for raising money for the homeless.