In his memoir “Still Burning: Half a Century of Chicago, from the Streets to the Corridors of Power; A Memoir,” former 19th Ward alderman and state senator Jeremiah Joyce reflects on the challenges of Chicago politics, particularly regarding race relations. Joyce recalls how former Mayor Richard J. Daley, who passed away in 1976, founded his governance strategy on the principle of shifting the financial burden to other entities such as the state, county, or federal government.
This historical sidestepping of fiscal responsibility remains evident today, especially with recent comments from Chicago Teachers Union President Stacy Davis Gates. Gates issued a sharp critique of Governor JB Pritzker and the Democratic legislative majorities regarding their funding approach to the city’s public schools. Responding to Gates’ demand for $1.6 billion in additional state funding, Pritzker stated, “that’s just not going to happen,” emphasizing the fiscal constraints at the state level.
While Pritzker acknowledged the need for increased funding and reiterated efforts made during his tenure—such as a $2.5 billion boost in education funding—he primarily attributed current funding difficulties to policies enacted during President Donald Trump’s administration. Pritzker claimed that the previous federal administration’s stance had detrimental effects on education funding across the country, restricting the financial resources available to state governments.
In light of Pritzker’s observations, Gates countered with strong rhetoric, arguing that if Trump’s policies were indeed defunding public education, it should prompt a Democratic state to fully support its largest district, Chicago. Her statement criticized the state’s prioritization of corporate tax breaks over funding for marginalized communities, specifically Black and Brown children in Chicago schools.
Gates’ assertion regarding the “$10 billion in tax breaks” has raised eyebrows. A CTU representative clarified that this sum predominantly encompasses nearly $6 billion from proposed corporate tax hikes and an additional $4.5 billion from the failure to implement a state surcharge on high-income earners.
The reality, however, is that generating $10 billion in new state revenues is far more complex than what is suggested. Labor unions, particularly those in the trades, would likely contest many of the proposals aiding corporate tax reform or imposing new taxes.
Despite these challenges, Gates painted a stark picture of the educational environment, questioning the lack of resources for schools. She asked poignant questions: “Why do students at Carver Elementary have to go without their flag football team? Why are educators being told to conserve toilet tissue and paper towels?” These inquiries encapsulate the frustration felt by many in the educational community, accentuating the disjuncture between state politics and the needs of local schools.
The conversation about education funding in Chicago has not changed dramatically since the days of the first Mayor Daley. Joyce’s reflections serve as a reminder that the city’s leaders have historically grappled with structural issues that often leave schools underfunded. The stakes remain high, not just for educators but for the future of students who rely on adequate educational resources to thrive.
As this narrative continues to unfold, it becomes increasingly apparent that the challenges faced by Chicago’s educational institutions echo a longstanding pattern of struggle against a backdrop of political maneuvering. The discourse surrounding funding remains a divisive and pressing issue, demonstrating that the relationship between local needs and state action is fraught with tension.
Rich Miller, who contributes to this narrative, also publishes Capitol Fax—a daily political newsletter with insights on Illinois government and politics. The ongoing dialogue about education funding will undoubtedly shape city policy and reflect broader trends within Illinois governance.
image source from：chicago
