Morning Answer

Working families have been neglected for far too long. In Illinois, we did something about it: Lowered costs. Expanded health care. Raised wages. That’s what Democrats are supposed to do. Let’s start acting like it.

PETE BUTTIGIEG: "What if we selected our President by letting the person who got the most votes take the office, instead of the Electoral College?"

Every time you fill up your tank, you’re paying for Trump’s war. $21.7 billion more — and counting. Darren Bailey backs Trump, supports his tariffs, and stays silent while costs go up. Illinois families deserve better.

Today's Supreme Court decision on race-based redistricting is bigger than people even realize. I've watched this play out for two decades, mostly in Chicago. The argument for race-based districts was always that they protect minority representation. What they've actually done is inflame segregation, and not just for voters but also for the elected officials. When, say, ~90% of one racial category dominates a legislative district, the lawmaker representing it is incentivized against interacting with the world beyond it. They don't have to find common ground because there is simply no coalition to build. Alienation is a requirement of the job. Now imagine a Chicago aldermanic map drawn for compactness rather than identity: a 65/20/15 district. You literally would not be able to win a seat on city council by pandering to one single group. You'd actually have to go talk to people about how they actually live and things they care about: schools, safety, jobs, taxes. Working-class voters of every background want roughly the same things. Identity-based districts function to paper over that. But a blended district would necessitate it. The superficial grievance model of left-wing politics relies on the existence of racially sorted districts. Today's ruling makes that sorting harder. That's what matters here.