77 Comments - bman - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 10:55 am: the remap process is unfair because it doesn’t allow realistic representaion of population and geographic groups. Yeah its unfair to republicans but that is the least of my concerns. - Anon - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 10:56 am: No, this is what the people of the state elected, Democrats in all three branches of government. I think there should be a bit of input by the Republicans, but in the end the Democrats should get the map they want. - Not It - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 10:59 am: The process isn’t fair because politicans get to draw their own districts, but also because those politicians don’t have to listen to the public or the minority party. Anytime the minority party is excluded from anything it guarantees the outcome is unfair. The minority party doesn’t have to be given a seat at the table, but they should always be given a voice and have their ideas at least considered. Nobody is right 100% of the time, and looking at the past decade, the Democrats aren’t even right 50% of the time. - Plutocrat03 - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:03 am: The process is unfair, but not unexpected. The bizarre shapes of the districts are a result of trying to amplify some constituencies while suppressing others. How that meets constitutional muster is beyond me. - Aldyth - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:04 am: Yes, it is unfair. Whichever side has control will draw the map to their advantage. Business as usual. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:05 am: It becomes a dictatorship of the majority, which is apparently what Illinois voters are comfortable with, so the re-map process is as fair as any other non-violent political activity. - zatoichi - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:08 am: Of course it is unfair. The Dems won the seats and the Repubs did not. Switch it around and it will still be unfair. Will some Repubs be drawn out of office. No doubt. The Repubs would do the exact same thing if they were in charge. Will some districts look like a long skinny worm? Sure. How do you change it? Win enough elections to control part of the process. - olddog - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:11 am: “Unfair,” not because I’m particularly bothered by this year’s redistricting but because gerrymandering is built into any partisan redistricting process. What we need is a system like Iowa’s, where a nonpartisan body draws the map and the the legislature votes it up or down. Not that we’ll ever get it in Illinois, though. - just sayin' - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:11 am: It’s just as fair as it was in 1991 when the GOP did its best to run the table. Both sides knew the rules and the stakes going in. No Republican is upset about “unfairness.” Republicans are only upset they aren’t in the position the Dems are now. It’s pure jealousy. Everyone needs to grow up. - train111 - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:11 am: Is is unfair because the Republicans are not included? No, it is not. Despite all the self -righteous chest thumping on their parts, if the tables were turned and they controlled all three branches of government, we’d be getting the exact same dog and pony show from the other side. Is the process unfair? Yes–not because the GOP isn’t included however. We need to take the whole process out of the hands of the politicians who have a stake in the outcome and turn it over to a non-partisan body. I think that a computer with only census data entered would do the best job. And for those who complain that it wouldn’t take into consideration minority issues: (Iowa uses this system and is 95% white) all one would need to do is enter the ethnic census data and have the districts drawn in such a way to comply with minority representation–irregardless of the incumbent politicians. train111 - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:13 am: No it’s not unfair to the GOP. They helped devise the current system. They knew the possible risks and rewards. - Bill Baar - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:14 am: It’s unfair to the citzens of Illinois. One only needs to look at the outcome with these maps to see why. - D.P. Gumby - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:15 am: “Fair” or “unfair” isn’t really the standard that applies. Is it representative of the population? Do the votes count? There is no constitutional standard that requires districts be drawn to accommodate political partisanship. And as Madigan demonstrated when Repubs drew the map when they won the draw back in the day, purported partisan lines ain’t all they promise to be. So the whole question of a “seat at the table” and “fairness” because one party is “drawing the lines” or “politicians are picking their voters” is more myth than fact. - Shore - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:16 am: elections have consequences. the end. - Esquire - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:16 am: It is fair under the rules. Let the Republicans file a lawsuit if the map is gerrymandered. The Democrats threaten to litigate legislative maps all of the time. Take it to Federal Court. - Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:16 am: It’s an unfair process in general, it just happens to be unfair to Republicans this time. The whole idea that control of this process can come down to a random draw out of a hat when technology exists today to draw compact, fair maps that keep communities together is just ludicrous. Other states let the computers draw the maps without political influence, but Illinois of course isn’t ready for reform. - NIref - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:22 am: If the question is to be interpreted as written, then no, the Republican exclusion does not cause the remap to be unfair. For other reasons, which have been exhausted by Rich before, the remap process is sleazy at best. - Springfield Skeptic - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:24 am: Of course it’s unfair. Democrats or Republicans in control does not alter that fact. Iowa’s model is probably as close as any state will ever get to “fair”. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:32 am: It is not unfair, and I am a republican. As it has been pointed out, it wasn’t unfair in 1991, and Madigan lost the Gavel for only one term, and Pate has his majorities, but the democrats made Pate fight every cycle, and the map tried to, but didn’t succeed in giving Pate a resting cycle, even with the staggered 4-2-2, 2-4-2, 2-2-4 terms to TRY to get a resting cycle! That being said, it is also fair, in my opinion, because we republicans have dopes running the show in the House, and just inept leadership in the Senate, which leads to cycles with money being spent on races with no shot of winning, poor candidates in districts where there are chances, and free passes in too many distrcts in both chambers and EVEN for some statewide races, giving monetary donors no reason to assist Cross or Radogno or the state party. This was a quote I had heard on election nite, “Did you see some of the ‘recruited’ candidates for House and Senate races? What about the free passes Lisa and Jesse got? I think I should keep my powder dry and see what they come up with next before I donate again.” It all mushrooms to perpetual minorities, and those in the seats … being perpetual Mushrooms in BOTH chambers. Is it fair…Abosolutely. Get some leadership and see if things change. It was NO accident Michael J. Madigan beat Lee A. Daniels and Daniel’s map 4 out of 5 races. It is also NO accident that Lee A. Daniels and Tom Cross have yet to beat MJM in a map against the HGOP. One Word - Leadership. Also, if you in the ILGOP, and you are not a fan of Bill Brady, but he is the last stop-gap against getting bulldozed in a democratic-controlled map … you should have helped the guy out. Yea! You stopped that crazy Bill Brady in our party. Boo! You stopped a possible fight for the remap from happening. The ILGOP has no one to blame but themselves, and I am not too happy about it, nor pleased to admit my party has dopes running the party and have no answers, even now, to correct it. Yea, ILGOP! - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:38 am: Nope, the GOP had a decade to prepare, it’s their own fault they couldn’t get a piece of the action this time around. - Throwing Stones - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:43 am: Nope! The people have voted. - Palatine - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:43 am: I don’t think it’s unfair. Spoils to the victor. - Tom B. - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:50 am: Looks like the majority of your blog readers are Republicans Rich. Unfair is winning 52-48. As to whether the process is fair or not, I think it’s as fair as it should be, but that is largely beside the point. If it was perfectly fair, there would still be endless griping about politicians drawing their own districts because somebody will always lose something in any process that changes things. To all you “non-partisan, computer drawn maps” advocates on the blog, do you really think that is going to make everything hunky dory? If you want to give people like me more work, I won’t stop you, but I guarantee you that there won’t be more civility, compromise, or less kicking the can down the road because there are more competitive elections. There probably will be less of that. - train111 - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 11:52 am: The political insiders get stacking, cracking, racking and stacking. While the Citizens of Illinois all get a shellacking!! train111 - Angry Republican - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:04 pm: I second what Oswego Willy said. The best thing that can happen to the IL-GOP is to lose every congressional seat in 2012, then maybe just maybe the party will get some new leadership. - Ghost - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:13 pm: It is fair. The voters of the State decided they wanted an all Dem house, sentae and executive. it would be going against the voters to give the successful party greater power then provided them from the election. - Logic not emotion - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:15 pm: I favor the computer drawn, compact, contiguous, third party drawn districts like some other states. An outsider could likely tell a lot about Illinois politics by simply looking at the shape of Illinois districts - and it wouldn’t be positive. - just sayin' - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:21 pm: It’s the same old thing. The GOP in this state has no problem with what the Democrats DO, they just want what the Democrats HAVE. But the Republicans in charge don’t have the first clue how to get there. - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:24 pm: The people voted last year and Republicans were elected to five seats in the U.S. Congress, while Republicans were losing State Rep and State Senate seats in those same districts. The reason? Gerrymandering of the Illinois legislature seats. Post 10th Congressional election, all the Democrats in this area keep chirping “wait until the remap,” having been frustrated by 5 consecutive losses to Kirk and Dold. The voters in the 10th have spoken five times in what Democrats claim to be a Democratic district. Moving a few lines around and presto! The will of the electorate will be thwarted in the 10th! So the politicians get to pick their constituents. The constitution calls for constituents to pick their politicians. Case in point. My Lake Forest/Lake Bluff area was carved up so four individuals represent it in Springfield. All of them are Democrats as the lines were drawn into heavily Democratic areas including Cook County (in one instance all the way down to Palatine!). Lake Foresters and Lake Bluff citizens opposed the midnight lame duck income tax increases. They opposed the abolition of the death penalty. They opposed gay marriage provisions. They oppose consolidation of school districts. The list goes on and on. Their “representatives” thanks to the gerrymandering? Consistently vote against the interests and desires of their constituents. their “representatives” consistently lose elections within both city limits. Every taxpayer, citizen and voter has the right to have their voice heard and to be REPRESENTED in Springfield. The dog and pony show in Waukegan yesterday, a hearing about maps without showing any maps, was exactly that. A dog and pony show. Yes, next election, every voter will have a “choice” and a “voice.” But in a gerrymandered district, those “choices’ and “voices” never get heard. - DRB - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:26 pm: Districts should be mostly rectangular or square in nature and not resemble the 17th in any way. Districts should follow generally accepted boundaries such as county lines, municipal lines, rivers, etc. - just sayin' - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:28 pm: No one cares Louis. Because everyone knows you would be singing a different tune if by some miracle the GOP was in the Dems’ position right now. But go ahead and fill a river with the crocodile tears if it makes you feel better. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:31 pm: It’s interesting that many who have been posting are answering a question not asked. The question is: “Is Illinois’ remap process unfair because Republicans are excluded?” Please note that the question doesn’t ask if the process is unfair to the GOP, it asks if the process is unfair. Period. I understand that the remap process could be done a few different ways. I know some have proposed to do what Iowa did but that doesn’t account for the different demographics involved in a state w/a large metropolitan center (Chicago) whereas Iowa doesn’t have one (Des Moines?). However, it would be better for the discussion if folks actually answered the question asked rather than the one they want to answer. BTW - unfair (to the voters, all of them) - Ray del Camino - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:32 pm: Is it “unfair” that the Illinois Republicans didn’t win one of the three levers of power? No. If the process is “unfair,” it is because it lets the legislators pick their voters rather than vice versa. We need to have nonpartisan expert panels draw our boundaries; then the candidates need to have the cojones to run in districts drawn in a “fair” manner. The Republicans are definitely not “winning,” but “whining.” - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:34 pm: - Louis G. Atsaves, You DO know that MJM won against a map that favored the HGOP 4 out of 5 times, right? I will give you that the Senate districts were a bit stronger than the House districts drawn in the 1991 Map, however, when the South Suburbs fell in the House distrcts in that map, and the Senate districts were still strong, what do you attribute that to? Canidates? Caucus Leadership? … Your case is “compelling”, until you realize you are working against MJM. I heard this analogy the other day about MJM that rings so true. MJM is Like Bear Bryant of Alabama - Bryant can beat “yours” with “his”, and then the next day, Bryant beat you with “yours” against “his” …Bryant and MJM are just THAT good. The Point? Maps, issues, candidates, pick any if you want, the ILGOP can not beat MJM, and when they had him on the ropes, they never could come close to finishing him, they only got him angrier … That is what is going on. - mokenavince - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:38 pm: Unfair!Unfair!I can see it now a Disrtict, starting at Zion then to Rockford, then a angle to Matton and a left turn ending at Carbondale. Just another Square deal for the folks who brought you our last map. A Lepoard don’t change his spots. - Thoughts... - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:44 pm: DRB- You say that districts should be rectangular or square but then say that they should follow county lines, muni lines and rivers. Putting aside the question of counties and cities that are bi-sected by rivers, do you really believe county lines, municipal borders and rivers generate squares and rectangles? Because if so, you need to go back to pre-K and learn a little. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:45 pm: = “If the process is “unfair,” it is because it lets the legislators pick their voters rather than vice versa” = Bingo - Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:48 pm: I’ll get more to the point: Republicans are excluded from the remap by choice. For the past eight years, the state has been wrestling with a structural budget deficit that was largely created when Republicans controlled the governor’s mansion. Republicans for the past eight years have largely refused to be a part of solving the structural budget deficit they helped to create. Not only on new revenue. They have largely failed to provide tangible, workable ideas for cuts as well. IF they wanted to be a constructive part of state government, the time to show up was when there was heavy lifting to be done. Not when its time to divide the rewards of leadership. It like a guy showing up at your new house AFTER all of the boxes have been unloaded from the moving van just to drink your beer. Lawmakers on the Republican side of the aisle who were worried about the remap should have thought of that when Madigan and the Democrats were looking for 12 votes for a tax hike. - Thoughts... - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:50 pm: DuPage Dan- As you rightly point out, the question is, “Is Illinois’ remap process unfair because Republicans are excluded?” Then you truncate the question to “Is the remap process unfair?” leaving out the qualifier. The qualifier of “because Republicans are excluded” is essential to the question. Call it semantics, but you answered the latter, not the former. To the question, the remap process is not unfair because Republicans are excluded any more than determining who heads state agencies, who gets appointed to commissions, and what policies are put into place are unfair because Republicans are excluded. You can argue all day that the process is itself unfair - that’s a different argument - but to suggest it’s unfair simply because Rs are excluded is simply wrong. They knew the game and they had their chances. As self-identified R Oswego Willy put it, they have substandard leadership and until they recognize that, they will be a permanent minority in the state. Why the House and Senate Rs didn’t toss their leaders after their disastrous showing in ‘10 is beyond me. To the victor goes the spoils. Don’t like it? Go get signatures and change the Constitution. If it is such an unpopular, unfair process, that should be no problem, right? - wndycty - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 12:52 pm: Will the Republicans in Illinois who feel it is unfair take their protests to states with Republican Governors and Republican legislators who are doing the same thing? If they don’t they have no credibility. - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:00 pm: Thanks four your usual “drive by” there “just sayin.” So the politicians get to pick their constituents. The constitution calls for constituents to pick their politicians. We complain about voters not caring, not showing up to the polls, yet many voters feel the system is rigged against them, so “why bother?” Those voters, sadly, are right. - Irish - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:05 pm: No it’s not unfair because it excludes Republicans. It’s unfair because - As others have said it is because it lets the legislators pick their voters rather than vice versa. It’s drawn to give special/unique groups their areas where they have little competition so they may elect a representitive for that group. In a society where we should all be working towards things that benefit all of us and for an equality for everyone do we want a representitive for every special group? If we draw lines that allow representation from one district that is all farms; and another district that is just urban, do we ever get those two groups together to work towards a common goal? Or do we get two districts that constantly butt heads and end up accomplishing nothing. The other problem with having lines drawn to “catch” as many as possible of special interest/unique groups is that once that representitive is elected, they face little opposition since they are the chosen one for that group. They then don’t need to work as hard on statewide issues, just the ones that keep their special group happy. The districts should be drawn as geometricly(?) similar as possible with equal populations. Then whatever groups are inside those boundaries work to elect someone who will represent the needs of their constituents as a whole. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:07 pm: - Louis G. Atsaves, Thanks for the Marching Orders; “Attention, attention. Attention all Illinois Voters, but especially GOP voters for the next 10 years: The political system is rigged against you. Ignore that the GOP had the map in the 1990’s, but the system is rigged. DO NOT VOTE. Hide. Ignore Elections, they do not matter, unless your Michale J Madigan who ran against a GOP map and wonn 4 times. All Is Lost. The Process hates you, puppies, bunnies, and all things deem ‘cute’ or ‘cuddly’ Give Up GOP, Louis G. Atsaves has told us the Process is rigged for all voters, especially the GOP. Thank You.” That about right? - Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:12 pm: And for Pete’s sake, let’s stop talking about how a computer program is going to radically transform state government. All the data is out there, and anyone who wants to can draw their own computer-generated map. But let me be the first to warn you that computers aren’t inherently more fair or better. And they are only as impartial as the programmer who programs them. Which is “not at all.” Frankly, as a partisan, I’m torn on the issue, because I have absolutely no doubt that the result would be an increase in the number of safe Democratic seats. And one of the most radically altered districts would be Tom Cross’s, who would lose moderates in Will County and would most likely have to run in a three-way primary against Kay Hatcher and a TEA Party Conservative. On the other hand, as a question of public policy I think the General Assembly would be much worse off with a map-drawing process designed to intensify partisan and parochial interests, which is what the “computer model” does. There are undeniable public policy benefits to having lawmakers represent both Chicago and its suburbs, both suburban Cook and collar counties, portions of downstate urban centers like Joliet as well as rural areas. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:21 pm: “It’s unfair because as others have said it is because it lets the legislators pick their voters rather than vice versa.” I’m tired of hearing this “the chicken came before the egg” argument. The lawmakers who are “picking their voters” were “picked by the voters” to do so. Moreover, if voters don’t like the lawmakers whose district they end up in, they have the right and the ability to vote them out of office. Finally, as a practical matter, lawmakers try to draw the map so that a majority of the voters in their district share their views and will re-elect them. So while you can argue that the lawmakers “pick their voters,” the reality is that its the voters’ views and political preferences that dictate how boundaries are drawn, not the lawmakers who somehow dictate that individual voters will be more Democratic through the map drawing process. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:25 pm: @Thoughts 12:50pm, Did you even read my post? It is clear you didn’t since your post isn’t even a response. I didn’t truncate any question. I printed it in its’ entirety. I also answered it in it’s entirety. It is clear the question asks if the remap process is unfair - it doesn’t however, specifically ask if the remap process is unfair to the GOP - it asks if the remap process is unfair “because the republicans are excluded. While you may think the unfairness is only towards the GOP, I believe that the unfairness is to all the citizens of this state. It was unfair when the GOP held sway and it is unfair now. Because it provides for the party in power to choose the districts in a manner that makes it easier to win re-election. That doesn’t sound like a benefit to Joe and Jane Voter to me. Just sayin’ - Thoughts... - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:34 pm: DD- I read it and I still think you’re wrong in your interpretation. You’re right that the question didn’t ask if it was unfair “to” Republicans. But, it also didn’t ask simply is it unfair. It asked if the process was unfair for a specific reason - “because Republicans were excluded.” That’s an inherently different question that simply asking if it’s unfair. For the record - the question wasn’t “is the process unfair to Joe and Jane Voter” either. Again, you can call it semantics if you want, but you’re just trying to spin your argument. Done - Ben - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:48 pm: Those who wish to draw their own maps can draw them here: http://www.gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/launchapp.html See if you can draw a “fair” map. With regards to the question, I support an Iowa-style plan, but bear in mind that Iowa doesn’t have to deal with VRA considerations when the computer draws the map. We are a diverse state and the maps are going to look funny to a certain degree because of it. With that said, there is no complaining by Republicans about PA, OH, TX, and other states where they control the remapping process, so until that happens I’m all for Democratic control of the process. - PoHuff - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:58 pm: This Jeremy Rose? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/28/jeremy-rose-resigns-cook_n_662270.html - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 1:59 pm: === The lawmakers who are “picking their voters” were “picked by the voters” to do so. = = = A nice circular argument there Dog. Your comment would lead the naive to conclude that Murphy will pick his future voters, Dold will pick his boundaries, Duffy will pick his boundaries, etc. etc. etc. We know THAT will never happen! - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:02 pm: Willy, even if I were to agree with your constant droning about how Republicans in Illinois are stupid, leaderless, etc. etc., does that mean that you disagree or agree with my position that representatives should not pick their voters, the voters should pick their representatives? Somehow you skipped over that during your little “drive by.” - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:16 pm: - Louis G. Atsaves, Nope, actually I addressed your droning on and on about how awful it is in the 10th district and how politicians pick their voters by posting that a GOP map should have kept out the dems up there, but guess what? The GOP leaders lost seats in those areas to dems (MJM) because although you would think a GOP House seat should be up there, and the way the GOP handled Geo Karis at the end … you don’t have much …and THAT is not addressing the voters? If you are inept, you don’t win. Yes, Louis G. Atsaves, I did address it. I addressed it, and maybe you need to be able to understand how Madigan wins your House Seats, and by not handling the Geo Karis situation far better than what was happening at that time, maybe, just maybe, you wouldn’t have sour grapes … “Oh woe is it up here, the voter … the voter!” The Party blew it, HGOP has blown it, and the SenGOP has blown it …and you wouldn’t have a Karen May, for example, if they hadn’t … Is that a drive-by, pointing out facts? - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:28 pm: Yes, it’s perfectly fair and it’s written into the Constitution. So it’s as fair as our flat tax and other Constitutionally mandated items (judicial appointments, pension guarantees, etc). If the shoe was on the other foot, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. When Texas Republicans redrew their map mid-decade, the Democrats cried there too. Didn’t matter. But like a lot of things, it is OK to gerrymander partisan districts when the Republicans do it, but not when Democrats do it. There’s no crying in politics. - reformer - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:40 pm: Fairness is in the eyes of the beholder. In red states where Republicans control the remap process, I’ll bet they consider the process as fair as can be.”Elections have consequences,” our Republican friends repeatedly reminded us after Gov. Scott Walker and his GOP majority stripped collective bargaining rights from public employees. Yes, indeed, elections have consequences in the Land of Lincoln, too. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:53 pm: Louis G. Atsaves, === The lawmakers who are “picking their voters” were “picked by the voters” to do so. = = = ===A nice circular argument there Dog. Your comment would lead the naive to conclude that Murphy will pick his future voters, Dold will pick his boundaries, Duffy will pick his boundaries, etc. etc. etc. We know THAT will never happen!=== Actually …Louis G. Atsaves … the last time the Congressional map was drawn, Speaker Hastert made sure all the Congress-Critters got a “say” in their district, and made sure as many as possible were safe/happy … and I think Shimkus was the victor in the only “disputed” seat … Is this a drive-by? I want to make sure I know what that entails … - Bill F. - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 2:59 pm: “The voters in the 10th have spoken five times in what Democrats claim to be a Democratic district. Moving a few lines around and presto! The will of the electorate will be thwarted in the 10th!” Ah, yes. Those hard core GOPers int he 10th who voted for Gore, Kerry and Obama. Would you allow the possibility that Kirk and Dold pander? Maybe a little? “(in one instance all the way down to Palatine!).” All the way to Palatine!? OMG! OMG! It’s Cook County, so it must be flamingly liberal, right? Except it isn’t. Last time I checked, Tom Morrison and Matt Murphy had R’s next to their names. And it was always the Cook Co. portion of the 10th that was a thorn for Seals. I’m confident you know this already but were working to demagogue the issue. “Lake Foresters and Lake Bluff citizens opposed the midnight lame duck income tax increases. They opposed the abolition of the death penalty. They opposed gay marriage provisions. They oppose consolidation of school districts. The list goes on and on.” Or at least the ones with whom you’ve personally spoken, right? Elections have consequences. Not to belabor the point, but a so-called “fair” map would have its own set of problems. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 3:10 pm: –All the way to Palatine!?– Louis, as a Lake Forest guy, in the midst of Passover, you must know that’s the North Shore Dream: “Next year, in Palatine.” - Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 3:42 pm: Redistricting is a job best left to machines (not Skynet) used by the voters in a competition (see Ohio) with the winners (top 3 maybe?) sent to the legislature (ala Iowa) for an up or down vote. Then let the chips fall where they may. One of the sticking points many will point out is that this may exclude minorities. Two points. They are indeed minorities and we are a democratic republic. Secondly, it is arrogant to presume that black (or hispanic or martian) leaders cannot appeal to whites, and vice versa. I do not deny there is some discrimination among voters, but I think it is less than anecdotally accepted, and discrimination can never be eliminated, especially if we continue a system of carve-outs and special treatments among our citizens. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:00 pm: Is that a yes or a no Cinci? This is, after all, a QOTD, not a seminar on redistricting. It’s nice that Ohio has a game show approach to its reapportionment, and swell that Iowa uses a computer. But unless you can magically alter the Illinois Constitution overnight, how other states do this is irrelevant. I’m going to go ahead and assume you voted yes. - Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:11 pm: 47th, I think the question is the thing that is not really fair, or as others have pointed out, at least confusing. The system is not unfair because Republicans are excluded, the system is unfair because it is inherently unfair. Apparently you choose to not look at possible improvements to the status quo simply because the Constitution says this is how it is now. You slight the Ohio approach because it can potentially take the process out of the hands the elites you seem to support, and instead relies on the good and fair sense of the citizens on the state to determine redistricting. What you say is a “game show” I say is a competition to get the best result in the most transparent process possible. Oh, now I see why you prefer the status quo… The Iowa plan is nothing more than a rigorous set of redistricting guidelines that are used in as close to a non-partisan manner as possible and requires the legislature to accept the plan, up or down, without tinkering. Again, you seem to think that the tinkering done by the Illinois GA is acceptable. Many would disagree, but then again, you must support those elite insiders who know better than the common folk. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:26 pm: Cincinnatus - ===I think the question is the thing that is not really fair, or as others have pointed out, at least confusing. The system is not unfair because Republicans are excluded, the system is unfair because it is inherently unfair.=== We in Illinois call it the “the Golden Rule” by which, whoever has the Gold makes the rules …or the “Let Them Eat Cake” system, reminding us all, if you are not “in”, then you are “out”. We seem to like it, until we are not on the Winning side, so we should just leave all the grandeous ways to draw maps to others, thanks. - Ahoy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:29 pm: I think it would be unfair even if the Republican’s were involved. I am opposed to legislators drawing their own districts. - Shore - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:34 pm: wordslinger-that was very good, although lake forest is not a jewish enclave. - jake - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:40 pm: The Iowa plan is the best one out there now. Of course it will not solve all problems, human nature being what it is, but when you draw districts according to the Iowa guidelines, you wind up with a larger fraction of the districts being competitive, and fewer districts being either overwhelmingly Democratic or overwhelmingly Republican. You also wind up with the voters and their representatives being closer to each other geographically. It seems logical that both of these factors would lead to greater accountability of the representatives and less extremism in the positions that carry the day, which in my mind would be to the good. Just so everybody knows what they are, here are the Iowa criteria and the process: ————————– The legislature has the final responsibility for enacting both congressional and state legislative district plans, but the nonpartisan Legislative Services Bureau has initial responsibility. It must develop up to three plans that can be accepted or rejected by the legislature. The plans are criteria-driven, meaning that the bureau draws districts based on clear, measurable criteria. The four criteria, in descending order of importance are: 1) population equality; 2) contiguity; 3) unity of counties and cities (maintaining county lines and ìnestingî house districts within senate districts and senate districts within congressional districts); and 4) compactness. A five-member commission consisting of four civilian members chosen by each caucus in the legislature, and a fifth chairperson chosen by the commission, is responsible for advising the bureau, but only upon their request. If the legislature does not approve the first three plans by the bureau, it must itself approve a plan by September 1st, or the state supreme court will take responsibility for the state districts. The Governor has veto power over both plans. - 42nd Ward - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:41 pm: I don’t recall the GOP installing a “fairer” system when last in the majority. No cause for whining now. - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:47 pm: Wordslinger, LOL! I wouldn’t call Lake Forest a Jewish enclave though! In my Township, with 26 precincts in Highland Park . . . YES! - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:49 pm: - jake, Neither side of the Powers That Be want the system changed … the current system is the best sytem to ensure the “I don’t care what happens, as long as I get to keep MY seat” system works, which, in fact, IS working for a majority of both sides. It’s also an opportunity to get rid of Trouble-Makers, Wave-Makers, and True-Believers of both parties, while blaming the map for it. Hard for members of the Powers That Be, to argue when both sides can clean house of “problem” members with one map. In that way, the “system” works perfectly! - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 4:53 pm: Thanks Cinci. Still no answer from you. Redistrcting is as old as the Republic. The 1970 Illinois Constitution laid out the process for our redistricting. I fully expect that Illinois lawmakers will follow that process to the letter. It is therefore inherently fair. If you prefer Iowa’s system, feel free to circulate some petitions. I might even sign one. But until then, stop with the whining and best practices lecture. PS: Why is it that conservatives think calling others “elitists” is somehow a negative thing? I think it’s a compliment. - jake - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 6:05 pm: Oswego Willy, You are absolutely right about why the folks in power, whether Republicans or Democrats, will not support changing the system. But it is worth keeping the idea of a better system alive, because at some point we will have some combination of an even balance of power and people in leadership and positions of influence who have a more far-reaching vision than the next election. Maybe. Or maybe not, but if a vision of something better dies altogether, then there is no hope. - Yes ma'am - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 7:41 pm: Yes this is that Jeremy Rose. PoHuff. Real nice guy. - Park - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 7:50 pm: No. Illinois voters chose the government that’s put us in this position, and they deserve to get it good and hard. - Precinct Captain - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 7:51 pm: The GOP could have won elections. Its “unfair” because the rules of the game left them on the short end of the stick this time. If it was the other way around I’m sure the GOP wouldn’t be able to “imagine it any other way.” - Anonymous - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 8:05 pm: PoHuff and Yes ma’am tapping their mikes: “Phft.Phft…Is this thing on?” - Cal Skinner - Wednesday, Apr 20, 11 @ 8:35 pm: McHenry County has 309,000 people. Three districts will be just a couple of thousand over that. Want to bet that McHenry County won’t dominate three districts. Currie II runs Mike Tryon’s through Bull Valley into the poorest part of Carpentersville. In the 1970’s under three-member districts, I represented all of this area, but, if community interests are to have any weight, that part of C’ville would not be put in with the rest of the district. - Jim - Thursday, Apr 21, 11 @ 9:51 am: It’s not unfair because the GOP is excluded. It’s unfair because the public interest is not just excluded, but disdained. How can a process that is designed to guarantee results, the permanent majority of either party, be considered appropriate? - WRMNpolitics - Thursday, Apr 21, 11 @ 10:14 am: The entire system is geared to produce a political map which favors the majority political party for the next 10 years. Both political parties are becoming smaller with more voters identifying themselves as independents. The system should be changed to remove as much “politics” from the drawing of districts as possible while taking into account minority representation. The technology exists to do this. - Robert Enriquez - Thursday, Apr 21, 11 @ 10:46 am: Unfortunately, we need the democrats to carve out more latino districts so that latinos like myself can get elected. White republicans won’t vote for me soley because I’m a latino, but latinos will vote for me soley because I’m a latino. “It is important that we (Hispanics) realize that no Party has done us (Hispanics) any tremendous favors. Always vote….but vote for the Hispanic!” — Robert Enriquez http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=102298796505059&set=o.137982886231414&theater Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.