Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: Baseball open thread
Posted in:
* One of the lead attorneys behind the League of Women Voters’ lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the state and federal remaps explained his position to the State Journal-Register…
[Tom Geoghegan] said the redistricting process in Illinois is like being told you have to move because of your political views.
“Suppose you were living in Springfield and the state government came by and knocked on the door and said, ‘You know, we have too many Democrats in Springfield and we’ve determined that you’re a Democrat and we don’t have enough over in Peoria and so we’re going to ask you to move,’” Geoghegan said. “You would say, ‘What! That’s a violation of my First Amendment rights.’ And you’d be right. The same thing happens when without moving your house, they move the district line to put you over here instead of over there.”
So, an admittedly blatantly partisan redistricting process is akin to forced mass relocations?
They might want to find a better analogy when they go before an actual judge. Just sayin…
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 4:31 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: Baseball open thread
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Apparently ole Tom did not listen to all the reform blow hards who wanted a system that did not look at where ncumbents lived?
Thus the current plan.
Gotta wonder if that is the best theory the League could finds three months after the new remap LAW was passed.
Fire, Aim, Ready
Comment by CircularfiringSquad Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 6:07 am
I would expect more from a guy with two Harvard degrees.
Comment by Nice kid Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 7:31 am
The LWV obviously is running with any good lawyer’s strategy for mounting a weak case.
That strategy is: “Nail nine pieces of Jell-O to a wall. If one sticks, you win.”
To his credit, Geoghegan has conjured up a marginally plausible argument out of nothing. Which is precisely what any zealous attorney is supposed to do for a client who is intent on taking a long shot.
In other words — a freedom-of-association claim can yield a passable batch of Jell-O.
I don’t think he has much of a chance, but hey, I’ll hand Tom a hammer and some nails.
Comment by Dooley Dudright Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 8:13 am
This arguement is senseless. He seems to be saying that incumbants should be protected. Also, this impacts more than state maps, it would impact redistricting at the local level. My county district changes because of population shifts. They need a better arguement. How would they propose a map where your district would never change? Senseless.
Comment by I wonder.... Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 8:19 am
He might make a better argument; at least to the people, about how the maps have grouped some people together as opposed to segregated them apart. Using Springfield and Peoria as examples may not be the best option either.
In the past the gerry mandered 4th congressional district; connected the Mexican American community with the Peurto Rican community in Chicago by a thread running across the Eisenhower Expressway.
This “all you people are alike” strategy gave them an opportunity to elect someone that “looks like them”. It also gave the Mexican American community, a generation of Louis Guttierez, for goodness sakes.
For the privilege this FALN terrorist sympathizer may well be on the precipice of a visit from the U.S. Attorney and the FBI for some of his real estate “investments”. The Mexican American commuinity may come to recognize that their congressman, whos is not really “one of their own” may be no different than a lot of others in that his primary goal in seeking the office was to represent himself.
Comment by Quinn T. Sential Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 8:31 am
Well I think the lawyer is just a small cog in this. His job was just to file SOMETHING.
The bigger strategy was the Republican brainiacs behind this whole nonsense just wanted the franchise value/goodwill that goes along with the name “League of Women Voters.” So someone went to the nice, mostly older ladies of that organization and convinced them to throw away a reputation that’s been built over a century or whatever and to join this blatantly partisan, desperate, frivolous litigation.
The IL GOP gets to claim another “independent” group is onboard with the litigation when talking with gullible reporters (obviously other than CapitolFax). And maybe the nice, mostly older ladies at the League get some nice donations for their group from some wealthy Republicans who “have always loved the outstanding work the League of Women Voters has done over the years.”
Someone can tell me I’m wrong.
Point is, what the League’s lawyer put in the filing is mostly irrelvant. If they find a judge who buys the “argument,” that’s great. But getting the League to basically lease its name to the Republicans for purposes of the main lawsuit is all the Republicans care about.
By the way, I think most Republican voters are embarrassed by this lawsuit and think it’s silly. Whiny. This is purely about incombents trying to keep their jobs that they haven’t been very good at.
Comment by just sayin' Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 8:37 am
Sometimes, a good lawyer has to tell his client that he simply has no case.
Comment by Son of a Centrist Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 8:45 am
{Sometimes, a good lawyer has to tell his client that he simply has no case.}
This step comes just about the time that the client’s ability to pay their fees is exhausted, but certainly not much before then.
Comment by Quinn T. Sential Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:06 am
I don’t know if the lawsuit has merit or not but what does is the argument that the way we redistrict in Illinois is a joke. Doesn’t matter who draws the districts. The way so e districts are drawn has nothing to do with the legal requirements. We all lose when a election is determined years ahead of time. No one runs against incumbents because it’s unwinnable or a certain district is red or blue no matter what.
Comment by Fed up Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:08 am
- They might want to find a better analogy when they go before an actual judge. Just sayin… -
No kidding. What’s next, Godwin’s law? I’ll be glad when all of the whining about the remap is over.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:16 am
Ahhhh. The angry, condescending just sayin’ is back. Ripping Republicans and belittling the nice ladies of the League of Women Voters. Good to see that summer is over and things are getting back to normal.
Comment by Old Milwaukee Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:24 am
I have not read the complaint and I am not familiar with the arguments being raised, but I wanted to point out that the attorney – Tom Geoghegan – is a serious person with well-articulated views on the democratic system and civic participation. (A list of his books is here: http://tomgeoghegan.com/books/) The wisdom and merits of this lawsuit may be debatable, but it is not accurate to depict him as a hack brought in to pursue a partisan agenda.
Comment by davidh60010 Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:33 am
Old Swill -
The League of Women Voters has been getting played by the IL GOP for about three years now.
You get into bed with a dog, you get fleas.
If you don’t want to tarnish your sterling reputation as a non-partisan group, you don’t coordinate petition drives with a political party.
As for Geoghegan’s argument — “The reason that folks choose to live in Springfield is because they love Raymond Poe” — well, there’s nothing to prevent Poe from running as a Democrat. He’d probably win.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrats Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:37 am
Doubtful that this is the legal argument,but it’s a good way of pitching the absurdity of the “redistricting” to the media.
Comment by don Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:38 am
Sound like a iron clad lead pipe lock of a case to me. I am sure it has the democratic leadership all a flutter.
Comment by John A Logan Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:44 am
Can’t voting be unbias and not based on race or ethnicity. The social engineering we do is nuts.
All men are created equal until our polictians get into the act. We are bankrupt for leadership.
Give us a map that is not gerrymandered to death.
If Iowa can do it how come we can’t?
Comment by mokenavince Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:57 am
“We all lose when a election is determined years ahead of time.”
Go tell that to Phil Crane or Melissa Bean or Phil Hare or Pat Welch or …
Turns out voters do in fact have the final say.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 10:06 am
Among the flaws in the LWV/Geoghagen argument (as summarized) is that it presumes voters were more happy with their past representation than with their new representation.
If you buy into single-member districts, some people are gonna be happy with the person who gets elected, some people are going to be unhappy.
Again, I’d like to see a list of the LWV of IL large contributors.
The LWV of IL seems to have aligned itself with the Republican Party on the issue of redistricting. I suspect LWV of IL is getting some big checks from donors who are partisan Republican contributors.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 10:22 am
Ya know, this is not too far from the argument Pate Phillip made is suing to have the Ill SC Cook Cty Justice elected from three districts rather than at large. The argument was that the non-Chicago Republicans were disenfanchised and denied their const rights. They went down in flames. I don’t remember how vigorously the 1st Amend was argued.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 10:23 am
The League of Women Voters are for a fair redistricting process. It just happens that this time around that works in the Republicans’ favor.
The League is far, far from a group that favors Republicans. They aren’t getting played. Those claims are how Democrats who like the current map try to scare off the League from standing up for what they believe and how hacks try to discredit an independent organization’s sincere efforts for reform.
I’m glad the League is strong enough to stand up for what they believe and doesn’t allow themselves to be bullied by the Democrats.
Comment by Old Milwaukee Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 10:46 am
Guess we should go back to the way the congressional map was done 10 yrs ago when Denny Hastert (R) and old man Lipinksi (D) just got together in a room and agreed to gerrymander the map to protect all the incumbents. Some of Denny’s favorites like Mark Kirk got a little extra help with some additional favorable R territory put into his district.
Anyone who says the current map isn’t AT LEAST as ridiculously gerrymandered as the new map, just isn’t honest. Look at the messy lines around Springfield for example. They are almost impossible to decipher.
With the loss of one seat 10 yrs ago too, only one kinda competitive race was set up. Shimkus prevailed in that one, then went on a few yrs later to break the term limit pledge he made to voters the first time he was elected.
Now Denny Hastert and the surviving Republicans he protected via gerrymander 10 yrs ago are suing (except for a more principled Johnson).
The hypocrisy and sense of entitlement are out of control on this thing. The Republican incumbents are acting like the whiny liberals they constantly complain about.
Comment by just sayin' Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 11:09 am
The Illinois GOP is now paying the price for not supporting the Fair Map proposal a couple of years back. If they were bold enough to officially endorse the proposal now, they would at least have a nominal amount of credibility it their complaints this time around.
Comment by Cincinnatus Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 11:39 am
===The Illinois GOP is now paying the price for not supporting the Fair Map proposal a couple of years back.===
Yes, Cinci, I agree with you 100%.
Of course, the reason they didn’t back the Fair Map proposal was because they still had a chance to draw their own map. Now that they’ve been shut out, their claims of “it’s partisan and unfair” ring absolutley hollow. The GOP was never interested in a “fair map” before it became clear they couldn’t draw their own partisan map.
Your comment itself is an indictment of the frivolous lawsuit the GOP filed against the maps. Your side made its bed, now it gets to lie in it for another decade. Enjoy.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 11:44 am
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Hopefully, the ILGOP will take a stand for Fair Map and make it an issue in 2012. However, I do not agree with your assessment on the future of the GOP in this state. While they will probably be trounced in 2012, I think there is a huge opportunity to field competitive candidates in the out-year elections, especially 2014. If you think I blame the Democrats too much now, wait until another two years pass with them in control of the GA. I do believe the next Governor will not be Quinn. If the Democrats field a different candidate, their chances of holding the Governorship in 2014 is better, but if Quinn runs, I’m betting a Republican is the next Governor.
Comment by Cincinnatus Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 12:20 pm
Cinci
I agree with you about the GOP dropping the ball. I also agree the GOP should win the next gubernatorial election, but they should’ve won the last one, too. Don’t underestimate their ability to nominate another Brady.
Comment by reformer Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 1:13 pm
Well, give it points for creativity.
I think a better analogy they should have used, is it’s kind of like a public airport, where you can’t artificially exclude one group from pamphleting or being able to “speak” - if you let in one group, you should let in others.
If a district is a “public forum,” then arguably I suppose you are structuring it only to favor the “speech rights” of Democrats, and not Republicans.
But three things: 1) I’m not aware voting =is= the equivalent of speech - I mean, there isn’t even a crystal-clear federal constitutional guarantee that all people =have= the right to vote; 2) A right to speak doesn’t imply a right to be heard, or to guarantee your speech is acted upon, so even if Republicans in a gerrymandered district aren’t getting “heard,” so what, they still did get to “speak”; 3) Plenty of normally drawn districts, would have a similar disenfranchising effect, on the “speech rights” of citizenry. If you drew more compact districts centering on Chicago proper, say, then arguably wouldn’t that also be stripping Chicago Republicans of their right to a free “public forum”?
It’s kind of fun, though, as an academic exercise. I reaally don’t see the courts going for it, as I understand the strategy from this article. Ditto those who note Geoghegan is a smart guy, though. I’m sure he’d have responses for all the above.
Comment by ZC Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 2:30 pm
So the question is, is the ILGOP more closely aligned with the LWV or Glenn Beck? Because if they’ve both Glenn Beck and the ILDems unhappy, maybe they really are bipartisan.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,602023,00.html
Comment by lakeview Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 5:07 pm
“So the question is, is the ILGOP more closely aligned with the LWV or Glenn Beck?”
===
em·i·nence - Fame or recognized superiority, esp. within a particular sphere or profession
===
That’s a good question, lakeview, with Kirk now being touted as the “lead dog” of the party.
What happened in the 8th, isn’t surprising. Both Ds and Rs in the area are pretty “patriotic”…or “American” if you will. And with unemployment going up, and everything else that’s going on, they’re raising the flag even higher.
In the meantime, Kirk is running around pandering to ethnic groups, which is probably going to tee off the “party faithful”, which I’d argue are the Moderates. (Conservatives have been, and probably will always be, more critical of the Party.)
Articles like the one that just came out in News India Times, reporting that Kirk was attending an event just this Sunday, where “Speakers…paid glowing tributes to…India’s…march toward global economic eminence” are not going to sit well with either Moderates and Conservatives as unemployment rises because so many jobs are being off-shored to Kirk’s friends at Accenture Mumbai and Wipro.
The ILGOP is going probably headed for alot of trouble with this boy at the helm, especially as we get closer to 2012.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:31 pm
And the question in many minds now is becoming “WHY is he doing this?”. He’s in office for another five years, so he’s not pandering for votes. So why is he fragmenting Americans into ethnic groups and why is he promoting and strengthening overseas manufacturing businesses like Russian Pointe, rather than our own?
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:36 pm
While I like Paul Ryan, you really have to wonder what’s going on in the GOP when people are pressuring a “kid” like Ryan to run for Prez and bypassing Kirk–with all of his “experience”–completely.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:42 pm
Wouldn’t it be “intriguing” if Kirk somehow manages to deliver Illinois to the GOP for the Presidential election, and sinks his own ship in the meantime?
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 17, 11 @ 9:54 pm