Chicago Sun-Times political expert Lynn Sweet called Kaszak’s crashing the press conference “a high-stakes strategy that would take nerves of steel to execute.” Not only did it create an awkward moment; it risked alienating members of Kaszak’s Polish American base.41
The Emanuel camp’s original plan for the day had been to announce his endorsement by SEIU Local 1, the large and powerful union representing janitors, security guards, and other workers hired by private companies at city buildings. The planned endorsement statement by union president Tom Balanoff, a legendary Chicago labor leader, got drowned out by the excitement around the anti-Semitic remarks. A decade later Balanoff would become one of Emanuel’s prime adversaries, spearheading a campaign to brand him a “job killer.”
Kaszak ultimately lost by a wide margin, with the anti-Semitic remarks possibly playing a significant role, compounded by the impact of Emanuel’s copious campaign funds and hardball tactics. Emanuel took 50 percent of the vote in the field of six, compared to Kaszak’s 39 percent.42 Emanuel’s strongest showings came in two wards where his father had long practiced as a well-liked pediatrician—some voters had surely been treated by him in their childhood. Kaszak won in the most heavily Polish areas, but Emanuel beat her among Catholics as a whole and among Italian Americans and Irish Americans.43 In other words, a Jewish candidate framed as an elitist outsider nonetheless won over the heart of ethnic middle-class Chicago.
The Fifth District is heavily Democratic, so after the primary the general election’s outcome was nearly a foregone conclusion.44 Emanuel got 69.3 percent of the final vote, compared to 26.3 percent for Republican candidate Mark Augusti, a bank executive and tax reform activist.45
Clout Counted
A few years later, details emerged about some of the “volunteers” who had helped Emanuel defeat Kaszak. In 2005 federal prosecutors indicted more than thirty city employees on fraud and corruption charges in a scandal dubbed “Hired Truck.” Federal prosecutors alleged that city officials had taken bribes to steer city business to private trucking firms, which often did very little work, and that city officials had violated a longstanding court order known as the Shakman Decree, which barred patronage hiring—essentially the doling out of jobs for political reasons.46
Emanuel’s name came up numerous times in the proceedings: many city workers allegedly spent time campaigning for him, in anticipation of raises, promotions, or other rewards, or simply to keep their jobs. Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass referred to an “illegal patronage army of hundreds of workers” pounding the pavement for Emanuel, many of them led by water department top deputy Donald Tomczak, who pleaded guilty to bribery charges in the investigation.47 Kass coined a new nickname for Emanuel: “U.S. Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-Tomczak).”48
The Tribune quoted a retired Streets and Sanitation worker saying, “Daley made [Emanuel] a personal project. . . . Up until that time, I had never heard of Rahm Emanuel, but the Daley forces at City Hall said, ‘We are going to support him,’ so we did.”49
Daniel Katalinic, the deputy Streets and Sanitation commissioner, told prosecutors that he organized a “white ethnic” patronage army of hundreds to work on campaigns for Emanuel and other candidates backed by Daley; and that he had met with patronage director Robert Sorich at Emanuel’s campaign headquarters to set up work squads.50 Names of workers who had volunteered for Emanuel’s 2006 congressional reelection campaign also came up on a secret “clout list” of city employees earmarked for promotions and raises.51
Emanuel said that he had never met Katalinic and had no idea anything illegal was going on amid the thousands of people who had volunteered for his campaign.52 Prosecutors never said Emanuel himself had done anything wrong. But the investigation highlighted that although his image was more Washington than Bridgeport, more pinstripes than patronage, Emanuel was still firmly entrenched in the Chicago Democratic Machine.
A DLC Democrat
The congressional seat was Emanuel’s first elected position, even after more than a decade as a top politico. He was a consummate example of the “new Democrat,” or “DLC Democrat.” The acronym refers to the Democratic Leadership Council, a nonprofit organization founded in 1985 to move the Democratic Party away from its populist, left-leaning stances of the 1960s and ’70s. The most prominent DLC chairman was Bill Clinton himself, who took the helm in 1990. And President Clinton’s anti-crime, welfare reform and free trade initiatives—undertaken with Emanuel’s help—epitomized the DLC political philosophy.53
In a January 1, 2001, document, the DLC described its “New Democrat Credo”:
In keeping with our party’s grand tradition, we reaffirm Jefferson’s belief in individual liberty and capacity for self-government. We endorse Jackson’s credo of equal opportunity for all, special privileges for none. We embrace Roosevelt’s thirst for innovation and Kennedy’s summons to civic duty. And we intend to carry on Clinton’s insistence upon new means to achieve progressive ideals. We believe that the promise of America is equal opportunity for all and special privilege for none. We believe that economic growth generated in the private sector is the prerequisite for opportunity, and that government’s role is to promote growth and to equip Americans with the tools they need to prosper in the New Economy.54
Reading between the lines, the DLC philosophy supported scaling back the role of government while emphasizing the principles of personal responsibility, liberty, and self-help. It proposed the private sector as key to helping people break their dependence on the government and pull themselves out of need and poverty. And it strongly advocated for charter schools and free trade agreements.55 The DLC dissolved in 2011 after a failed attempt to recast itself as more of a think tank.56 It had been struggling with identity and influence issues going back at least to the mid-2000s, when more liberal influences, including the “net-roots” movement Moveon.org, battled for power with the party’s free-market moderates.57
But even after the council’s demise, DLC philosophies would live on. Emanuel would be joined by other politicians with close links to the DLC in the Obama administration: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, among others.58
Emanuel would also carry the DLC philosophical torch into Chicago City Hall.
Lakes, Vets, and Victims
Even as a quintessential DLC Democrat, Emanuel sponsored many bills in Congress that were attractive by progressive or liberal standards. The Billionaire’s Loophole Elimination Act made it harder for wealthy people in bankruptcy proceedings to hide their assets. Another bill funded electronic monitoring of adult sex offenders. The Great Lakes Restoration Act, hailed by environmental groups, provided a comprehensive framework for reducing pollution, combating invasive species, restoring degraded areas, and increasing community access to the lakes. One bill facilitated health insurance coverage for kids; another reined in unscrupulous life insurance agents targeting members of the military. The Welcome Home G.I. bill extended educational benefits for military members. Another bill allowed victims of Hurricane Katrina to get Earned Income Tax Credit payments earlier than usual. And yet another bill increased the tax credit for alternative fuel vehicles assembled in the United States.59
The nonpartisan project Govtrack.us, which tracks legislative data and trends online, described Emanuel as a “rank-and-file Democrat” based on his voting record. The website ranks legislators on leadership and ideology, in high-to-low and liberal-to-conservative continuums, respectively. Emanuel came in almost dead center among Democrats on ideology, and he ranked in the upper quarter on leadership compared to legislators of both parties. The leadership mark is based on rates of mutual bill cosponsorship—“It’s a little like if you scratch my back will I scratch yours?” explains the group’s website.60 In other words, Emanuel was willing to play ball to get what he wanted.
The website OnTheIssues.org compiles highlights of legislators’ voting records and scorecards from various