Does anyone else think suburban sprawl is a problem?

[Critters2]

I've been given a dilemma. I read a statement in the Chicago Tribune from the Green Party gubernatorial candidate. He opposes the airport in Peotone, because it will contribute to suburban sprawl. I happen to think this is an issue that needs to be addressed (and opposed), but both major parties are silent about it (because they benefit from it). I've visited the Green Party homepage, and am impressed that ecological wisdom and sustainable development are platform planks.

I don't feel particularly strongly about Blagojevich. If I vote for him, it will be out of party loyalty, not real support for him as a candidate.

And now that I know that the Greens feel as I do about sprawl, I'm left struggling with party loyalty vs. shared values. So, what is the Illinois Democratic organization's position on environmental issues and sprawl in particular? The state party website (which is beyond disappointing, btw) has not a word about this or other issues. Thanks for any help.

[mopinko]

1. i think you have to keep your eye on the ball.

i think that sprawl is a problem. but voting for a green is throwing your vote away. i would like to see a viable green party. i am sick of the corporate appeasers in the democratic party. but there is no doubt who is the greener of jbt and blago. and i think blago is less of a corporate sell out than many.
he inherited a mess. that is the way it works. i think that the dems would be hailed as the greatest thing since sliced bread if it weren't for the fact that they are always cleaning up the mess that the frat boys leave behind.
he loves his job. he is a wonk. i think sometimes he is a klutz with people. but i think he is basically a decent honest guy, working hard for the paople of illinois. i wish superman was on the ballot, but he is not. i have no problem voting for rod.

[Critters2]

3. Part of the problem is that I used to live in Peotone

I know the damage the airport will do to the community and the environment. This isn't theory for me.

In the end, I'll probably vote Green in this one instance. I don't know how to ge the Dems to pay attention to these issues, except by making them see that not doing so costs votes. Again, if it were any other candidate, I might feel differently. But i have trouble voting for a guy who disses downstateers every chance he gets, and has had his own set of ethics problems.

And I really think sprawl is destructive. I keep hoping the Dems will address this, but nothing...

Saddens me, but I need a candidate who is with me on the issues.

The last time I voted in an Illinois gubernatorial election--well, I didn't vote, because the choices were George Ryan or Glenn Poshard! Are there no strong, decent Dems in this state?!

[Radical Activist]

9. Throwing your vote away is when

you vote for someone you don't believe in. Go ahead and argue for Blagojevich as the best candidate, but I think that argument about Whitney is an insulting, defeatist one. Besides, even a 6% result for Whitney would result in an established Green Party in the state which could lead to potentially big changes down the road. In that way, a vote for Whitney might have a larger impact on the political system than a vote for Blagojevich. That isn't a wasted vote.

[Critters2]

12. I keep hoping (in vain, I fear) that votes for Greens

will force the Dems to wake up to the need to be a REAL progressive voice. Nonetheless, I wouldn't vote Green in a race where I could support the Dem candidate. But I can't get excited about Blago.

[greatauntoftriplets]

2. Remember that the alternative to Blago is this.

:scared:

[never cry wolf]

4. Sprawl is a HUGE problem... and Peotone is a boondoggle

maybe it's a HUGH problem??? Sprawl is not only chicagocentric... It was spawned by the GI Bill and the Greatest Generation, inner city and rural, who fought the good fight returning and wanting the house with the white picket fence, 2 kids, a station wagon and a dog... and good schools and in the mindset of the time, away from the darkies....

I am NOT casting aspersions on any of that, I am a child of it. It was a noble goal (cept for the no darkies part...)

Look at the history of the development of the sprawl. Alot of the extremities of the City used to be the inner ring of burbs, more of less concentric. The next ring was as well, for the most part. All still pretty much an easy commute to downtown...

The next ring didn't really happen til the 50's and followed the train lines soon to be followed by sprawl surrounding the interstates.... Then the boomers had cars and families....

[Critters2]

5. And unless someone takes a stand, there'll be sprawl from

Lake Michigan to the Mississippi. But no one in the major parties even talks about it.

[greatauntoftriplets]

6. Blagoevich is at 47 %, Topinka is at 39 %.

And she has done virtually no advertising. Blago has done much. His polling numbers are at a standstill.

Do you want this as governor?

[Critters2]

7. Why are his numbers at a standstill?

Again, I won't vote for someone just for reasons of party loyalty. I need a reason to support a candidate. Apparently, I'm not the only one having trouble finding that with Blago.

[greatauntoftriplets]

8. I have no clue....

Maybe Judy appeals to a lot of people in this state. We had Republican governors for 20-odd years before Blagoevich was elected. Maybe we will return to that. Not that I will have any part of that process.

[Radical Activist]

10. Yes, sprawl is a problem.

Even if there is a defined Democratic Party position on the issue, different candidates are going to have different positions on sprawl. You'll have to find individual Democrats who support doing something about sprawl because the party as an organization isn't going to touch the issue.

[Critters2]

11. Why won't the party touch the issue

The Greens have a position. Why can't the Dems?

[Radical Activist]

13. The Democratic Party

isn't really about taking positions on issues. The Party exists to elect Democrats. That's what any political party exists to do and the Greens would do better if they accepted that. It may be possible to put sprawl into the Democratic platform but that doesn't bind individual Democrats to follow it.