André Vasquez, who was elected to Chicago’s City Council last year as a socialist, has voted in favor of the mayor’s budget. The Chicago DSA has censured him. This raises a big question: How can a socialist organization make its elected representatives accountable?
Here is an interview where he justifies it. His central argument is lesser-evilism. He thought he was voting against an even worse budget, because allegedly the other budget option being discussed involved cutting 350-1000 city jobs, largely union. Now I don't know what those jobs are - they very well may have been Police or police adjacent jobs, which I mean, GOOD. But that's his argument.
idk anything about the votes they had but sometimes theres a possibility that people are voting no because some think theres too much austerity and no because some think theres not enough austerity. in nyc for the police budget a lot of people voted no because they didnt want to "cut $1b" but progressives insisted on voting no because the "cut" was just moving money around and didnt actually cut anything. the budget passed and it didn't cut shit. I know this chicago budget passed by a small margin, and idk if for the second budget they might have actually had votes to pass an even worse budget. I mean if all the dsa candidates were voting no id assume that wouldnt be the case tho i have no idea on the details
What was Vasquez's motivation for voting that way?
https://www.wbez.org/stories/alderman-andre-vasquez-censured-by-chicago-democratic-socialists/b73021ed-ece0-4fcc-99a6-817684023cbb?player=open
Here is an interview where he justifies it. His central argument is lesser-evilism. He thought he was voting against an even worse budget, because allegedly the other budget option being discussed involved cutting 350-1000 city jobs, largely union. Now I don't know what those jobs are - they very well may have been Police or police adjacent jobs, which I mean, GOOD. But that's his argument.
Vote no on both lmao
idk anything about the votes they had but sometimes theres a possibility that people are voting no because some think theres too much austerity and no because some think theres not enough austerity. in nyc for the police budget a lot of people voted no because they didnt want to "cut $1b" but progressives insisted on voting no because the "cut" was just moving money around and didnt actually cut anything. the budget passed and it didn't cut shit. I know this chicago budget passed by a small margin, and idk if for the second budget they might have actually had votes to pass an even worse budget. I mean if all the dsa candidates were voting no id assume that wouldnt be the case tho i have no idea on the details
deleted by creator