Question of the day
Tuesday, Sep 15, 2026 - Posted by Isabel Miller
* Governor JB Pritzker on WGN last night…
Bradley: And I just wanted to ask your view on people who run for two offices at the same time. Because in the mayor’s race, there are a couple candidates either running for Congress and also for mayor, or at the county and also for mayor, Secretary of State and also for mayor. And some might even say of you: You’re running for governor, you’re not running for anything else, but you haven’t ruled out running for something later. President, of course, I’m talking about. Does that just leave a—a bad taste when people are seeking two offices at the same time
Pritzker: I can just say that I think that if you can do your job—the job that you’re in today, that you’re running for now—if you know you can do the job and you will choose to run for another job after that, then I don’t think there’s a problem with that. I will say that I think there’s a problem in state law, where we’ve got the city of Chicago having a mayoral race so close to a general election at the state level that it makes it so that people do have to decide: Can I run for this job? Should I think about running for the other job? What do I do about that?
Bradley: Does that suppress turnout, you think?
Pritzker: I think suppresses turnout in the following—in the off-year election that is the mayoral election. Because people—I mean, it’s already hard for people to come out in a midterm election, let alone a presidential election. Now add to that, this nonpartisan mayoral election. I’m not going to go after changing the law personally. I’m just expressing to you that I think it’s problematic. I see why people have to make tough choices.
Please pardon any transcription errors.
The Question: Should the General Assembly move municipal elections to even-numbered years? Make sure to explain your answer.
- Remember the Alamo II - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:23 am:
I would totally be ok with that. It would save money on having to administer the low turnout municipal elections every odd numbered year and would allow people to focus on governing than consistently being on a campaign trail. Even if an elected official is not on the ballot during the municipal election, they are usually very much involved in these races. Making all of these races during even-numbered years will give everyone (voters, elected officials, etc.) a reprieve from having to constantly be dealing with campaigns all of the time.
- Incandenza - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:25 am:
Yes. More efficient, brings out more voters, reduces the influence of high-propensity voters who are more likely to be ideologically dedicated.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:25 am:
The municipal election is also in February in Chicago, which is not exactly going outside time. I would favor changing it. It almost seems like they designed it to suppress turnout.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:29 am:
Yes, we have far too many elections that people cannot keep track of. Reducing the number of times people vote would help as would reducing the number of offices though reducing offices is a lot tougher to pull off
- Dance Band on the Titanic - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:30 am:
No. Candidates running for local offices like municipal alderman, school or library board would find it nearly impossible be heard during the onslaught of campaign noise during the even-year elections. At least in the odd-years they get the stage to themselves. Meanwhile, voters can focus on local, versus national or statewide, issues when vetting the candidates.
- Paul Peterson - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:31 am:
Of course they should but they will have to cross the CTU and other special interests that want a low turn out election
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:33 am:
As someone who thinks that maximum voter participation is beneficial to a representative democracy, I favor moving the municipal elections. — MrJM
- Sue - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:36 am:
Yes- one need not look any further then Brandon Johnson to convince me the April local elections need to be abolished
- The Dude Abides - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:41 am:
Yes, but only if it is accompanied by significant election reform - get the dark/PAC money out, and curtail the campaign season to 6-8 weeks.
- Leatherneck - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:43 am:
No, but I would move the Local Elections to the November Election Day in odd numbered years. And return the Illinois Primary day back to the last Tuesday in June like we had in 2022–but this time for State/federal primaries in even numbered years, and local primaries/ballot questions in odd numbered years.
- fs - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:43 am:
== Yes. More efficient, brings out more voters, reduces the influence of high-propensity voters who are more likely to be ideologically dedicated.==
This times 100. A big reason for odd and off year elections, especially primaries, were to amplify the power of parties and organizations with strong gotv structures. More than ever we need systems that help encourage turnout and the voice of the moderate voter, not systems that try to muzzle it. Gerrymandering reform and election date consolidation would do a lot for that. Unfortunately, I doubt we see either any time soon.
- Remember the Alamo II - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 10:49 am:
=== curtail the campaign season to 6-8 weeks ===
How exactly can this be done? It seems like an unnecessary restriction on first amendment rights.
- Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:04 am:
Yes, streamlining anything tends to remove dead wood.
- Google is Your Friend - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:22 am:
100% yes.
People like to claim, “more people pay attention if it’s separate,” but that’s objectively false based just on voter turnout without even getting into other aspects.
Furthermore, scheduling municipal elections out of cycle with most other elections greatly distorts a community’s voter versus non-voter profile even among only registered voters (old, rich, white people dominate off-year elections). And so-called “ballot fatigue” is offset by the more representative class of voters overall and the fact that the dropoff as you go down the ballot never reaches the scale of people who don’t vote in off-year municipal elections.
https://effectivegov.uchicago.edu/primers/the-timing-of-local-elections
- Joseph M - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:24 am:
Yes. Maximize turnout. Normal Chicagoans who aren’t in politics are already confused as is. When it feels like we’re always in campaign season, voters get overwhelmed by the amount of elections, primaries, and voter registration dates they gave to keep track of.
Also, we should implement something like ranked choice voting that would eliminate the need for runoff elections. It would also open up avenues for third parties to win positions and gain broader recognition. The sooner we end the duopoly, the better.
- Amalia - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:30 am:
No. there are too many locally elected officials (that should change) so notice for those offices is harder unless the elections are held apart from the higher offices. but, the timing of local elections should be different than in Chicago.
- Mad in 13 - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:42 am:
No, but I’d support moving it into the summer/fall of odd years so it’s not 1) In the middle of an Illinois winter and 2) Gives a little more breathing room between general/midterm and municipal.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:49 am:
==objectively false based just on voter turnout==
There is no basis for conflating voter turnout with voter attention. No one likes a bed sheet ballots. As anyone who’s worked the polls on election day can tell you, many voters who show up are there for one election / one office, and adding more to that ballot won’t mean they know anything more about who else is running for any other offices.
Keep local and federal elections separate.
- Walker - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 11:50 am:
No — And I like “Mad in 13 ” idea above
- I-55 Fanatic - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 12:02 pm:
Yes, to generate higher turnout, as others have said. And canvassing in January is not fun.
Also, you wouldn’t have the Mike Quigleys of the world who are *literally* running for two offices at the same time. (Unlike a Pritzker who at least technically maintains deniability.) Quigley’s candidacy for Mayor is a non-starter for me, personally, because allowing a safe D US House seat to sit vacant is completely unacceptable.
- gc - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 12:24 pm:
Please keep them separate in most cases. The general election will crowd out all thoughtful discussion of municipal decisions. And, non-partisan or not, municipal officials will feel a stronger pull to associate themselves with parties. See Kansas where they run with little elephants on their yard signs. We don’t need it any worse.
Ranked choice voting and an election code that is much harder to game would make for a better democracy at all levels.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 12:29 pm:
=No — And I like “Mad in 13 ” idea above=
Same and same.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 1:02 pm:
No, municipal elections deserve their own attention and space, where the candidates and voters could focus on those. Keep them separate from the regular elections and the many candidates in those.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 1:07 pm:
I prefer to keep things are they are. I think the local focus would be gone. Most municipalities have non-partisan elections, which doesn’t match up with the partisan fall even year elections.
Just as the 1970 constitution moved Illinois governor elections off the presidential cycle to strengthen focus on state issues, the odd year elections keep the focus on the city or village.
- Been There - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 1:24 pm:
I agree with Friendly Bob. Also, since many of the municipalities elections have run offs, using the primary as the first round adds a huge amount of time between the first and second rounds.
- Google is Your Friend - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 2:26 pm:
==- gc - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 12:24 pm:==
==- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 1:02 pm:==
Please give an example, because the real-world examples say this is not true. You do not get an “issue-focused campaign” because you break it off to when no one is paying attention.
- The Dude Abides - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 2:35 pm:
=How exactly can this be done? It seems like an unnecessary restriction on first amendment rights.=
Ask the Brits. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/resources/resources-young-people/campaigning/campaigning-rules
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 2:41 pm:
===Ask the Brits===
The Brits don’t have a 1st Amendment.
Man, that was a weak response.
You cannot tell people not to campaign in this country. You know, the country where we all live. The country that Illinois is a part of, which is the state we talk about here.
This isn’t a sophomore dorm room. Final warning.
- Frida's Boss - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 2:41 pm:
While I can possibly agree, why not test it out by running school boards on the normal election cycles first to see if it actually improves turnout? One thing to beware of is that it’s hard enough to get people to go down the whole ballot as it is now, add in another set of multiple school board, municipal, and township elections. What type of bandwidth will local elections get when the state or federal races take all the air out of the room?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 2:44 pm:
===why not test it out by running school boards on the normal election cycles first===
That’s being done in Chicago.
===What type of bandwidth will local elections get when the state or federal races take all the air out of the room? ===
Turnout for school board races is almost microscopic. I just don’t think it can really get much worse.
- Duck Duck Goose - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 3:05 pm:
The question seems to be a different one than what many commenters answering. Pritzker was not talking about combining the Spring and Fall elections; he’s talking about moving the Spring election to even rather than odd number years. So we would have had the local elections this past April before the general election in November.
Doing this would solve the pr issue of state officials running for local office–they wouldn’t be in the position of getting elected to the state office and then leaving six months later to take a local office. But it would create the exact same problem for races going the other way–locals running for state office. And there are probably way more locals running for state office than state officials running for local office, which probably happens only with high-profile Chicago offices.
Moving the spring election at this late date would muck up the terms of office for existing local office holders. You’d have to add or subtract a year from their term of office for at least two election cycles. That seems like a lot of effort for mediocre solution to a pretty small problem.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 3:12 pm:
===Moving the spring election at this late date===
Literally nobody is suggesting that.
- Not Your Gramma - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 3:17 pm:
Only move to even numbered years if they are combined with either the March midterm or the fall general. Moving them but still having separate dates for different offices is lame. And while you’re at it, reform the way park district races are done. Make the petition dates line up with the other races that are held at the same time and don’t make the number of required signatures out of step with what their municipalities require.
- System Reboot - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 3:23 pm:
A November odd-year election would make so much more sense than this February/April nonsense. I don’t know if it would increase turnout, BUT, it’d at least somewhat prevent burnout with city elections happening right after the Midterms
- Proud Sucker - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 4:00 pm:
November of the odd years. Canvassing in October is more effective than in February. Also, if the same day, then competition for digital ads will be fierce if a County Commissioner candidate is vying against the US Senate candidate. Finally, the concern about bedsheet ballots is quite valid.
- Juvenal - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 4:08 pm:
I think it’s a bad idea.
Presidential election years are hyper-partisan.
Midterm elections are partisan.
Municipal, school board and library board elections would be poorly served by partisan elections.
An informed electorate is a great thing.
If mayors actually had anything to do with “freeing Palestine” I would be all in favor of rolling them into the partisan election cycle.
But do you really want your school board elections being decided by who posted what regarding Israel-Hamas?
Voters across Illinois largely rejected efforts by the far right to inject partisan politics into our school board elections in the last municipal elections, and I think that was wise.
Also, generally speaking, I caution the legislature against introducing legislation to address a particular problem with a particular politician, and look to see if it’s a broader problem for the people or in abstract.
The General Assembly does not exist to make life less awkward for Alexi, politically.
Nor should we say “In hindsight, Brandon Johnson was a terrible mayor. We should change the law to make sure that never happens again.”
BTW, Brandon Johnson won because the other choice was Paul Vallas. Who, BTW, ran the most Trump-adjacent campaign I can imagine. In my view, moving the Chicago mayor’s race to coincide with the governor’s race is probably going to ensure that the most liberal Democrat faces the most conservative Republican with the same result or worse. And that would be true down the line for city council.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 4:16 pm:
Yes. This says it well enough.
===A big reason for odd and off year elections, especially primaries, were to amplify the power of parties and organizations with strong gotv structures.===
- BigPicture - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 5:49 pm:
Yes - because on a whole, higher turnout is preferable and fewer elections on a more standard calendar should lead to that. However, it is important to remember that Chicago is an outlier in municipal elections. Many/most municipal, school board, park districts, etc. are non-partisan and relatively small jurisdictions. Without some elections reforms I fear negative and hyper partisanship could result in more harm than good. (I wish I knew what reforms would work - perhaps ranked choice voting and open primaries, but I defer to others).
- Ela Observer - Tuesday, Sep 15, 26 @ 6:41 pm:
NOOOO! Such confusion and chaos would follow.
Municipal elections should be moved to ODD numbered years in November. So we can have “Elections Every November” and nobody would forget that it was time to vote. If it’s November, people in Illinois are going to vote. Wouldn’t that make more sense?