Chicago Will Have a Black Woman Mayor for the First Time Ever

The two progressives will face off in April.

Chicago mayoral candidate Lori Lightfoot addresses the crowd at her election night party as she leads in the polls on February 26, 2019. Tyler LaRiviere/Chicago Sun-Times/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A progressive black woman will soon be in charge of the nation’s third-largest city. Lori Lightfoot, a former federal prosecutor, and Toni Preckwinkle, Cook County Board president, are headed to a runoff in April to become Chicago’s next mayor. This will be the first time the city has had a black woman mayor. 

The election, which took place Tuesday and began after embattled Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced in September he wouldn’t seek reelection, featured an incredibly crowded field of 14 candidates. They included seasoned politicians like Bill Daley, a former chief of staff in the Obama administration, and newcomers like Amara Enyia, a community organizer with support from musicians Kanye West and Chance the Rapper. The abundance of candidates virtually ensured that the election would go to a runoff. Lightfoot received 17.5 percent of the vote and Preckwinkle received 16.1 percent; Daley, the son of former Mayor Richard Daley, got third place with 14.7 percent. 

Despite Lightfoot and Preckwinkle’s apparent similarities—they are both black women who have portrayed themselves as progressives interested in reforming the city’s troubled police department—they sought to highlight their differences immediately after the election Tuesday, according to the Chicago Tribune. While Lightfoot “was taking multiple appointments in the Daley and Emanuel administrations,” Preckwinkle said, “I fought the power elite who have been trying to hold this city back.” Lightfoot was chair of the police department’s accountability task force and also served as president of the Chicago Police Board. Her campaign focused on police reform following high-profile shootings of black men by police, including the 2014 murder of black teenager Laquan McDonald. As my former colleague Brandon Patterson wrote about Lightfoot:

Lightfoot, the youngest of four siblings, was raised in a predominately white section of a segregated Ohio steel town in the 1960s and 1970s. Her parents worked low-wage jobs to support the family. Her father always held two or three, she says. She was the only black student in her elementary school, she told me, and her early experiences with racism and sexism imbued in her a desire to fight for equality. Things didn’t get any easier when she began to grapple with her sexuality in high school and college. “People said things. I got denied opportunities solely on the basis of my race or my gender. Overt racism was still very much on the table,” she says. “I had in me from an early age the need and a desire for fairness and for justice.” 

During the 1980s, Lightfoot worked her way through the University of Michigan. She later attended law school at the University of Chicago and remained in the city, where she now lives with her wife and their 10-year-old daughter. After several years in private practice, Lightfoot served a stint as a federal prosecutor before going to work in city government. She ran the Chicago Police Department’s Office of Professional Standards, a civilian unit that investigates complaints of police misconduct. Later, she served as chief of staff and as general counsel at the Office of Emergency Management and Communications, which runs Chicago’s 911 call center. Richard M. Daley, Emanuel’s predecessor, tapped her to head the city’s Department of Procurement Services and revamp its minority- and women-owned business program. She ultimately returned to the law firm Mayer Brown, where she is a partner. 

Preckwinkle, meanwhile, has touted her work as Cook County Board president to stop charter school expansions and advocate affordable housing. Preckwinkle is also chair of the county Democratic Party. However, Preckwinkle’s strong political ties received flak during the campaign, when she was criticized for the fundraising support she received from Edward Burke, an alderman who was arrested by the FBI on corruption charges. 

Lightfoot was a frontrunner early in the campaign, and it was unclear what kind of challenge more well-known figures like Preckwinkle might mount. Apparently, that competition wasn’t enough to knock her out of the race. The runoff election will be held April 2. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate