Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2: Gutierrez blasts Rahm idea, Quinn responds *** Daley gets a pass and Emanuel talks about a mayoral run
Next Post: The harsh reality of tomorrow’s big rally
Posted in:
* The League of Women Voters finally acknowledged yesterday what many have known for a while. Their “Fair Map” petition drive to change the redistricting process is coming up way short…
More than 120,000 people have signed petitions to get the proposed citizen initiative on the ballot, but that’s less than 50 percent of the 288,000 needed. Amendment supporters had hoped to finish the petition drive by April 1.
The coalition behind the amendment, which includes the League of Women Voters, said the fight is not yet over.
“It’s two weeks before we have to file,” said Jan Czarnik of the League of Women Voters. “If we do fall short, it’s only because we haven’t had enough people circulating petitions in such a short amount of time.”
The League remained upbeat and defiant in Springfield yesterday, even though its original goal was 500,000 signatures by April 1st, to ensure that it had enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot…
“We’re not having so much trouble; it’s two weeks before we have to file,” Jan Czarnik with the League of Women Voters said… “This is the easiest public education campaign (the League has) ever undertaken,” she said. “Our petition circulators get as far as saying ‘Hello, did you know that the members of the General Assembly draw the districts for which they run for reelection’–the voters are appalled by this and angered by this.”
* But a southern Illinois League leader was far more realistic…
Roughly 1,100 signatures were collected from Southern Illinois by the League of Women Voters of Jackson County, who took the lead on gathering petitions earlier this year.
League representative Dorcy Prosser of Carbondale said it was simply difficult to get people passionate about something as esoteric as legislative districts, and the fact Republicans began supporting the Fair Map amendment put a political spin on things that repelled others.
“I certainly hope we can get it on the ballot, but obviously it’s looking questionable,” Prosser said.
That’s pretty much the exact opposite of what Czarnik told Springfield-based reporters yesterday.
* The controversial League alliance with the Republicans mentioned by Ms. Prosser was also the subject of a press release issued this morning by State Sen. Marty Sandoval (D-Chicago). Sandoval demanded that people not sign the petitions…
Dozens of Republican operatives and a few self-styled reformers are asking Illinois citizens to sign a petition. This petition, called the Fair Map Initiative, would create very unfair representation of the largest minority group in Illinois: Hispanics. Even though Hispanics are responsible for all the population growth in llinois over the last decade (and thus due for a major increase in representation in local, county, state and federal levels with new maps drawn after the census), if the Fair Map Initiative is implemented, Hispanics will not see a proportionate and fair increase in Hispanic-majority districts.
I joined with my Democratic colleagues in the Illinois Senate to improve the transparency of the map-making process while my Republican colleagues voted against our proposal, preferring a process that would put a lid of Latino representation. Now they are hoping to build another wall between Hispanics and our government with the “Fair Map Initiative.”
Republicans will be on the streets until early May asking for your signature on the petition. If you are approached, I suggest you take the advice of one of the country’s most beloved Republicans, former First Lady Nancy Reagan: Just Say No!
The League has until May 3rd to turn in its signatures. Two years ago, the League opposed a constitutional convention, partly on the grounds that changes could be made to the existing constitution via the amendment process. They’re finding now that it isn’t so easy.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:03 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2: Gutierrez blasts Rahm idea, Quinn responds *** Daley gets a pass and Emanuel talks about a mayoral run
Next Post: The harsh reality of tomorrow’s big rally
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Illinois ain’t ready for reform.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:16 am
Are the tea-partiers on this? If they really want to shake things up, it would seem to be a constructive use of their time.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:20 am
I bet they are. I bet there are dozens of tea partiers in the League, even more collecting signatures, and even more signing the petitions.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:25 am
I don’t understand Sandoval’s comments. It seems to me that the Hispanics would be better represented with the Illinois Fair Map Amendemnt. Can someone explain?
Comment by Ahoy Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:31 am
This whole Fair Map thing never smelled right to me.
Fair Map advocates made one major claim when selling the proposal to progressives.
Under the current system Speaker Madigan and the rest of the Four Tops could remove “independents” from their caucuses through redistricting.
But the proposal doesn’t really change this. It merely requires there be collusion between the Four Tops to get rid of all independents.
Another goal pitched by Czarnik and the insiders was that this would force Democrats and Republicans to work together. This must have sounded like a better idea when all the insiders were talking to each other.
Rich has identified a key weakness in the LWV’s argument. If redistricting issues weren’t a big enough issue to cause the LWV to favor the Con-Con then what makes it a big deal now?
Next time the “professional reformers” decide on a big project, they might want to engage grassroots activists earlier in the process. There is a huge generation gap between the people who cut their teeth in the 70s and 80s and the people who have gotten active after Bush.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:37 am
–I bet there are dozens of tea partiers in the League,–
That’s pretty funny.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:42 am
I watch Illinois government pretty closely. The amount of race baiting done by Latino and African American legislators makes me sick. Only someone who thinks about race ‘first’ would find a way to call Fair Map racist. Gimme a break. If you don’t have a fair idea of your own then stay quiet. Don’t just come up with a way to deride something that someone is actually trying to do as racist so you don’t have to offer a solution of your own.
Comment by So. Ill Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:46 am
The racial oncerns about wateriing donw minority votes I think is a valid talking point.
its ok to suggest that represenational governemnt represent minorities.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:49 am
You never know who is one of them. Be very afraid!
“Are you now or have you ever seen a member of the Tea Pary of the United States?”
“Are you now or have you ever been a tea drinker?”
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:50 am
===If you don’t have a fair idea of your own then stay quiet.===
The Senate passed a bill that Sandoval supported.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:53 am
as a former local LWV President, I can vouch that there are no tea baggers in my local league-
VM: watch the gross generalizations…
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:56 am
I said a “fair” idea. I think we could argue the merits of what a “fair” plan is. I also think opponents can argue the merits of the fair map amendment without race baiting.
Comment by So. Ill Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 9:58 am
VM new monicor, Very Mccarthy
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:08 am
SI, if you read my newspaper column this week you’ll see that the League admitted last week that its proposal fell short in this regard and said they were preparing an amendment. However, that amendment is too late for the ballot initiative.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:09 am
So there you have it, wordslinger.
I believe Loop Lady.
Nope - the LWV are doing it the old fashioned way, without the biggest political movement of the year’s assistance.
That kind of thinking is why this needed amendment won’t be on the ballot. They needed to have taken advantage of their commonalities and ran with it.
Why do you think this happened, Madam Loop Lady? One would think the tea ladies of rural and suburban Illinois would be a natural fit. What is it about the tea ladies that you believe is a problem for the LWV? According to polls, the tea ladies are well educated, middle class and diverse. Why was the LWV unable to accommodate the tea ladies?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:25 am
Wordslinger et al-
With few exceptions the Tea Party is opposed to Fair Map. Largely because they know it is unconstitutional and would be thrown off the ballot and hence, a waste of time. It also remarkably changes very little. Instead of legislative leaders drawing maps, people who are dependent, by definition, on legislative leaders (to get their appointments) will draw the maps.
Some are co-circulating Fair Map and Put-Back, but by and large, none of them took the bair on Fair Map.
There was a right way to write an amendment and a wrong way… and Fair Map didn’t listen to the experts (it was expected that they’d ignore me, but they ignored people fair more informed on this issue too).
Hopefully next cycle we can craft something that will stay on the ballot and work together.
They should know where to find me.
Comment by John Bambenek Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:31 am
John, who are the tea party leaders who told you they were opposed to Fair Map? Or, how did you contact these people? Is this movement at a point where there are public spokespeople from which to represent Illinois tea partiers?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:36 am
The IL Fair Map campaign was doomed from the start. As a passionate reformer myself, one of my biggest frustrations is naivete which is rampant among reformers. The League is certainly the biggest offender in this area, but by no means the only one.
Same thing is happening with Claypool. I just love when people (media, naive reformers, etc.) who have never collected a single signature explain how easy it is to collect 25,000 valid signatures. As we know, double that amount is needed and it’s a HUGE challenge.
Of course the real sin here is the system which is designed to thwart reformers by making the requirement sky high. But that’s fundamentally the problem with Illinois. The deck is stacked.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:37 am
VMan, to my knowledge, there was no effort by the League to engage the tea partiers. Move along, please.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:37 am
Ok, after this I will stop posting. Rich, I did read your column this week just like I do every week.
In a day and age where any characterization of being racist can be blown up immediately by a breathless, hyper-reative media, of course the League caved and admitted there were weaknesses. That admission helped keep some of the foam in the proverbial mouth of those who use race as their primary basis for arguing for or against anything that any one tries to do.
I would respectfully argue that the framers of this citizens initiative did not intentionally devise a plan to weaken the influence of Latinos and African Americans in Illinois politics. Instead, the purpose of the Fair Map Amendment is to weaken the power of elected officials of EVERY gender, race, religion, color, and political party.
I can say with certainty there would be little sympathy for Republicans or Democrats that came out and said, “I don’t like Fair Map because it unfairly targets (insert party name here)”.
The Fair Map initiative is an affront to Illinois’ entire political establishment, not just Illinois’ Latino, or African American, or white political establishment.
Comment by So. Ill Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:40 am
The problem was that the LWV aligned themselves with the Republicans, and in Northern IL, this was akin to deep sixing it, with it’s majority Democratic electorate…The Dems wouldn’t touch Fair Map with a ten foot pole,(they are in the majority, no need) and without their organization (read: foot soldiers) there was no way the League could succeed in gathering the number of sigs required…normally, the League’s positions are more closely aligned with Dem policy, not Republican…
Additionally, the Dems are being extremely deferential to minorities, especially Latinos, in order not to alienate them at the voting booth this November…Fair Map has been repeatedly called anti minority by spokesperson Sen. Raoul…the Dems can be thick in the head, but even they can see the forest for the trees on this one…this is part of the reason I think ideas of Republican sweeps of elective office have ben grossly overestimated this year in IL…we shall see…
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:43 am
===the framers of this citizens initiative did not intentionally devise a plan to weaken the influence of Latinos and African Americans===
What they did do, intentionally or not, was absolutely fail to bring in experts from different minority communities to help them draft their proposal. That was a huge error of judgment.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:43 am
VanillaMan-
There are over 50 local coordinators last I checked. I talk to some more than others, but there is a weekly conference call, monthly statewide meetings and several other points where there is communication.
As far as spokespeople, each local coordinator (or coordinators) are the spokespersons for their own group. You can find lists at illinoistea.com and there are various ad hoc groups around. As far as statewide coordinators, Denise Cattoni is it for the Illinois Tea Party Patriots. Tim Kraulidis represents another faction of Tea Parties.
I do know a few local tea party groups were approached by the League or the ILGOP, those discussions were not particularly fruitful.
Comment by John Bambenek Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:50 am
They could have brought in all the various minority groups to write an amendment to ensure race-based gerrymandering, sure. And you would have had just as much opposition. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling indicates there is a shelf-life to the Voting Rights Act, I would say anything that goes far beyond the Voting Rights Act would face problems in federal court.
Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I think voters should be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
Comment by John Bambenek Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 10:53 am
Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I think voters should be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
I think that’s back in fashion again.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 11:00 am
I’ve worked a campaign to do a redistricting initiative, and it’s a very difficult rap/sell for folks… and that was with a paid canvass crew, which the LWV didn’t have (and probably should have considering their half-million-signature goal).
Also, as a long-time supporter of the LWV, I have to say that even I got suspicious (and suspicions confirmed with their own amendment suggestion) when the Republicans threw their weight behind the initiative.
Comment by BethB Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 11:30 am
=== What they did do, intentionally or not, was absolutely fail to bring in experts from different minority communities to help them draft their proposal. That was a huge error of judgment. ===
I’ll take it a step further. Their proposal could have just as easily been drafted by the Tribune editorial board and the GOP.
Its telltale that a group heading a ballot initiative that was supposed to help disenfranchised voters never reached out to the largest groups of disenfranchised voters in the state: latinos, blacks, Green Party, Reform Party, and other third party groups.
Instead, they act as if the Republican Party are the ones that are disenfranchised. Gimme a break.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 12:36 pm
This shows the strength, or lack thereof, of the House and Senate Republican organizations that tried to organize this effort behind the scenes.
Comment by 4 percent Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 4:24 pm
The problem is an “independent” committee will be appointed by politicians, so instead of a completely unbiased coin flip, we end up with more politics and who wants that except politicians?
Why not have computers draw the maps using the smallest perimeter, but respecting city and county boundaries as much as possible?
Having more than two political views might advance our public debates beyond simplistic, dualistic thinking that results when only two political parties are allowed to compete. A duopoly is only one step better than a monopoly, yet politicians tell us competition is good…except in politics apparently.
So, why not have proportional representation, where 10 percent of votes earns 10 percent of seats? That should eliminate the need to gerrymander for minorities and probably increase representation of minority views, especially women. Wouldn’t that be better for ensuring everyone’s voice is at least heard at the decision table?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Apr 20, 10 @ 7:23 pm
==Two years ago, the League opposed a constitutional convention, partly on the grounds that changes could be made to the existing constitution via the amendment process. They’re finding now that it isn’t so easy.==
It’s darn near impossible.
==What they did do, intentionally or not, was absolutely fail to bring in experts from different minority communities to help them draft their proposal. That was a huge error of judgment.==
I’m not convinced that this wasn’t intentional. Democrats and Republicans both seem to be all about voting and majority rule, without much consideration for consensus and minority opinion in the process (unless it helps them achieve a majority, of course.)
==Why not have computers draw the maps using the smallest perimeter, but respecting city and county boundaries as much as possible?==
Bingo. Create a fair formula and let the computer do it in a semi-randomized fashion without giving anyone the opportunity to make adjustments and gerrymander.
==Having more than two political views might advance our public debates beyond simplistic, dualistic thinking that results when only two political parties are allowed to compete. A duopoly is only one step better than a monopoly, yet politicians tell us competition is good…except in politics apparently.==
I like to say that if the Democratic and Republican parties were competing in the marketplace, rather than the marketplace of ideas, they would both be guilty of anticompetitive practices.
Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Apr 21, 10 @ 1:28 am
The League has become so partisan my feelings were that it wasn’t worth signing their petition. They, like so many others, have their own agenda and are not, as they imply, a totally independent group
Comment by Sueann Wednesday, Apr 21, 10 @ 7:17 am