Chicagoan Donna More says that she is running to be the Democratic nominee for Cook County state's attorney because she believes in "a culture of justice before jail."
Moore, a former prosecutor at both the state and federal levels, has for many years been a lawyer in the gaming industry. She maintains that current state's attorney Anita Alvarez has destabilized the office, and is too narrowly focused on maintaining conviction rates above all else. Moore also says that fellow challenger Kim Foxx will be too beholden to Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle.
So Moore has promised that, if elected, she'll "clean up the office"—acting independently of the Democratic machine and within a span of eight-years; she's imposed a two-term limit on herself. She wants to develop a court focused on gun crimes, and put into place a community alliance that she says will foster better relationships between law enforcement and the community at large.
Windy City Times: Why would you make a better state's attorney than Alvarez or Foxx?
Donna More: I think this job comes down to qualifications. The important qualifications are that I have been both a state and federal prosecutor. Everybody calls for federal oversight—well, I know what that is. And I'm independent. You have to know who you're accountable to. I'm accountable to the voters of Cook County who put me in office. I'm not accountable to Mike Madigan, Ed Burke, Joe Berrios or Toni Preckwinkle. I think what we've seen is, when you make decisions based on political influence as opposed to evidence and facts, you get bad decisions. If you owe your whole political career to Toni Preckwinkle, as Kim Foxx does—she has an undistinguished political career, and no ability to raise money—when that person calls you and wants you do something, what do you do? For me, it's all about independence.
Anita has been there for seven years. We're in worse shape now than we were seven years ago. We've seen what she has done to put our county on the edge of destabilization. Kim talks about how bad things are, but she spent five of her years in the office under Anita in juvenile court and did nothing in terms of reform.
This is a job that you need to roll up your sleeves and figure out solutions. I've put out gun policies on how I'm going to more effectively prosecute gun crimes. I've put out how we're going to handle police shootings. Early this week, I did an outline of a mental health care program where we can deal with defendants who have mental addiction problems at point of arrest. As good as those things are, what I really want to do is be an activist. I want to be out in the communities, helping the people not to commit a crime to begin with. To me that's that's the differentiating factor.
WCT: What are your plans to curb gun violence in Cook County?
DM: With gun violence, about 90 percent of guns used in violent crimes are illegal. Gun violence, just the medical side of it, costs the county about $160 million a year. I think we need to do three things. We need a centralized gun court, both in the city and then there are five suburban districts. Guns are no different than drugs. There's a gun trade, so you've got to understand what that food chain looks like. You've got gun cases going in 20 different courtrooms. You don't know what you're doing, and I don't know what I'm doing. I don't know that John Doe is the one who supplied your defendant and my defendant. So we put it in one place. The prosecutors learn the gun trade and the judges learn the gun trade. I know that it was a shop-owner who protected themselves if they were getting robbed versus if it was a career criminal or a gang member, and the judges know that too.
The second tier is the grand jury. In the U.S. attorney's office, we used grand juries all the time. We don't in the state. They indict cases and that's it. [Federal prosecutors] use grand juries as an investigative tool. That's what I'd like to bring to the state's attorney's office. We could start to figure out what the hierarchy looks like. You could probably flip somebody at the low-end, give them immunity or whatever you need to do. You put them in the grand jury, compel testimony and people start to talk.
WCT: Coming in as state's attorney, could you just go in and implement that change in the office?
DM: It's something I could do all on my own. We're allowed to have six grand juries empanelled at any given time and generally always have one, which is the one they go to to indict.
The third piece is that I want to create a neighborhood safety alliance. Gangs fractionalized once the feds took down the leaders. What that means is, to a large extent, we're going block by block. It takes a community to help the response. I want police, prosecutors, parents, grandparents, principals, clergy, alderman. I want them all at a table and say, "Look you tell me. You're all on the front lines. Let's figure out some responses. We'll take it into the grand jury. We're going to properly try your case. We're going to try your case promptly."
WCT: How do you see your work in the gaming industry as it relates to the state's attorney's office?
DM: I was in the U.S. attorney's office and got the call to see if I was interested in going to the gaming board, to be the first chief counsel because I had the reputation of being a good prosecutor because what they wanted was to sell to the public that the industry was clean. It was a creative job for a lawyer, because there was nothing there. What it helped me to do was to understand what the board, appointed by the governor, wanted. At the time, there was only Nevada and New Jersey. So we had to create a set of regulations to keep the industry clean. You had to learn your subject matter, because I'd never played cards before, but we created a pretty tough set of regulations which are still in place. People may say they like or don't like gambling, but they can't say we don't have good regulations here, and they've kept the industry clean. ...It was a legal job I'm very proud of. The only people who've ever been indicted have been gubernatorial appointees, and I didn't write the rules for them.
WCT: You've taken flack for having donated to Governor Rauner. Is that something you regret? How do you think the state has been faring under his administration?
DM: As I like to say, I donated and raised money for Toni Preckwinkle, and she ran on a platform of not raising my taxes and she did. So I regret that contribution too. The majority of my giving has always been to Democratic candidates. ... So I'm disappointed. I don't like the cuts in mental health. I didn't like the infighting that was going on in Springfield when Quinn was there. It was no better between Quinn, Madigan and Cullerton. What I'm looking for is for people to do their jobs. I don't care if they like each other. I didn't elect them to go for coffee; I elected them to do a job. So I'm disappointed in a lot of our elected officials.
WCT: What kind of experiences have you had engaging with the LGBT community?
DM: On a personal level, I've engaged with it. I believe in equal rights for everybody. I'm not sure why we have such a hard time accepting that as a community and a country. It's not just about the gay community, it's about every community getting justice, fairness, consistency and transparency. If we need legislation, so be it. Hate crimes in particular, whether against the LGBT community, the Jewish community or whomever—those are things you have to be on top of. They're very insidious now. ... For me, it's about being able to protect communities, because they are at risk, because of bias and hate. It's also about making sure a community is protected, and that we understand the needs of a particular community.
In particular, with the LGBT community, we have to make sure that our [assistant state's attorneys] are sensitive to those needs, but that our police officers are sensitive to those needs too. There's been a bit of a disconnect.
WCT: Would you commit to trainings for assistant state's attorneys and staff?
DM: I would. I was at the Equality Illinois gala and I know that Anita has fairly good approval in the gay community, but to me it's a bigger issue. We still have a violence issue, county-wide, that isn't good. That ultimately spills over into all our communities. If those larger issues are fairness, transparency and independent thinking, that affects everybody. We have to go more "global" about how we look at the job she's done.
WCT: Are there any other issues pertaining to the LGBT community the office would be watchful of?
DM: Lakeview had three armed robberies. People are up in arms. Not just gay people, a lot of people in the neighborhood. For me it's about going into these communities and working with them and figuring out what to do. This community alliance thing—it's not just for Englewood and Austin.
[The job] is also about being supportive of legislation I think promotes fairness. The role of the state's attorney has such awesome power to it. You have the ability to take away people's freedom. But it's also a role you can use for good, with things that may or may not relate to criminal justice. So that means supporting legislation that supports fairness—those are the kinds of things for which the office can be at the forefront. ... My job is to use the office in the ways that promote good. It's about enforcing the law and promoting good, but it's about going into communities, having an open-door policy and saying, "What can I help you with?"
For more information, see www.voteformore.com .
