* 4:17 pm - Mark Doyle has withdrawn from the treasurer’s race. This isn’t much of a surprise to subscribers. As I told them earlier this week, Doyle, a Democratic campaign operative, had serious petition problems.

Doyle’s withdrawal leaves Robin Kelly and Justin Oberman in the Democratic primary.

UPDATE: Doyle’s withdrawal was posted on the Illinois State Board of Elections’ website. It has since disappeared. I’ll get back to you.

UPDATE 2: The board’s “Latest withdrawn” page no longer displays Doyle’s withdrawal, but when you look at Doyle’s individual page (nothing directly linkable because the ISBoE’s website completely sucks) you see this…

UPDATE 3: I was able to reach Doyle, who confirmed that he had, indeed, withdrawn. “I have neither the resources nor the money” to keep up the fight, Doyle said.

[ *** End of Updates *** ]

Also, Sen. Don Harmon has withdrawn from the 7th Congressional District Democratic Committeeman’s race. The incumbent there is Congressman Danny Davis. Joseph Sneed and Thomas Simmons have also withdrawn, leaving Davis, Brian Henderson and Edward James as the remaining candidates to date.

* In other news, state Rep. Julie Hamos announced the endorsement of Teamsters Joint Council 25 in her 10th Congressional District race and the Illinois Painters District Council #30 and the Sprinkler Fitters Local 281 today endorsed Raja Krishnamoorthi for Comptroller.

Also…

A coalition of political reform groups today launched an uphill effort to change the way legislative districts are drawn in Illinois, suggesting that power be taken away from political bosses and giving it to an independent board.

Dubbed the “Illinois Fair Map Amendment,” the would-be reformers are attempting to change the Illinois Constitution to establish a 9-person board to draw districts. The idea is to make the process more transparent and to prevent political leaders from carving out portions of the state to sway partisan leanings of districts.

Under the proposal, the panel that draws the maps will be required to release the plans for public viewing before they are voted on by the legislature. If approved, the legislature would have to approve maps by a 2/3rds margin, but if they rejected them more than twice the board would have the power to chose one of the proposed maps to automatically become law.

Further, the proposal attempts to prevent gerrymandering by requiring districts to follow geographic and municipal boundaries as much as possible. Further, area voting history cannot be taken into consideration when creating boundaries.

Click here for the proposal’s language and click here for the fact sheet. [Fixed links.]

       

17 Comments - Pat collins - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 4:35 pm: The links don’t work for me But how can they enforce that area voting history cannot be taken into consideration? I mean, how can you know what they were thinking? I make the map the night before, show up at the meeting and “gosh, I am SO surpised it came out that way”. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 4:48 pm: Try again. Sorry. - CircularFiringSquad - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 4:56 pm: Huh (6) The plan shall not be drawn to purposefully or significantly favor or discriminate against any political party or group. Party registration, voting history data and incumbency shall not be considered in the mapping process, except to evaluate compliance with the criteria listed in subsections (b)(1) and (b)(6). The Commission shall establish definitions where applicable for each of the criteria listed You can’t discriminate, but you can’t use voting history…..nice double talk Back to the drawing boards - The Doc - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 5:01 pm: CFS, I’m not following your logic - aren’t discrimination and voting history mutually exclusive? And couldn’t both (or either) be used to gerrymander districts? - Pat collins - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 5:03 pm: I like it much less now that I’ve read it. “Consider the diversity of our state”. Political? Geographical? I also wonder about the 14 year ban on being elected (4 before, 10 after). But my real objection is this: It will likely come down to a special master, who chooses or creats his own plan, and I don’t see that being much different that pulling a name out of Abe’s hat. I just do not see how you get the nine member commission to vote on a plan, and given how wide the ban is on those who can serve(I’m not eligible!!) I wonder if we wont end up getting out of state people to serve? - wordslinger - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 6:01 pm: Any step to removing the egregious conflict of interest in incumbents drawing their own districts would be welcome. Given one man one vote, I imagine the Supremes would have the final world on any map. - walter sobchak - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 6:57 pm: Doyle is out because a phalanx of Oberman attorneys descended on Springfield to challenge his petitions. Democracy at work, and another of the kind of guy who should run for office thwarted by the cynical powers that be. Did I mention Dick Mell’s fell hand in this as well? Be sure to remember this as you cross party lines to vote for Dan Rutherford. - Levois - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 7:17 pm: Who is this Doyle character? LOL - Old Milwaukee - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 9:22 pm: I think I could be for any plan that stops Mike Madigan from drawing his own district. - Professor Chaos - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 9:30 pm: CFS makes perfect sense. How can you draw a district unfavorable to Republicans if you can’t determine it’s packed with Dems? These “reform groups” remind me of the kid who changes the rules of a game as he goes along to make sure he always wins. They may as well call this the “Republicans’ Last Hope Amendment.” Think the GOP will be screaming as loudly as they are now for redistricting reform if they take back the mansion in 2010 and have a chance at winning the draw for the tie-breaking commission member? - John Bambenek - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 9:32 pm: Two points. 1) It’s unconstitutional per Art 14 Sec 3 (it’s procedural, not structural). Chicago Bar Assoc v State Board of Elections in 1992, Coalition I, Coalition II, all struck down similar efforts. 2) The court appointed special master IS NOT BOUND by the anti-gerrymandering provisions the way this is written. - Old Milwaukee - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 9:49 pm: I think I’d rather have out of state people create the lines that any of the people currently in office in this state. Why would we let them make any more decisions, especially decisions as important as their own map? - bill - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 10:51 pm: i am curious how its referred to as an idea from independent reform groups when the house republican chief of staff is making telephone calls to solicit support…. - sangamo better blues - Thursday, Dec 3, 09 @ 11:37 pm: It’s a shame about Doyle, but I think he had an uphill battle no matter what getting in the race so late. I had a chance to meet him and thought he had some potential and would have fit the office of Treasurer fairly well. Hopefully next time he’ll lay some better groundwork… - Old Milwaukee - Friday, Dec 4, 09 @ 7:48 am: Bill, It looks like the idea came from the Collins Commission. Did you expect the Democrats to be calling around in support? Are you in support, or do like what we have? - Ghost - Friday, Dec 4, 09 @ 8:25 am: So there were not enought votes for a onstitutional convention…. but this group thinks they can get the GA to vote in a constitutional ammendment which would take away one of the major spoils of the majority. Is this group headed by Don Quioxte? - wordslinger - Friday, Dec 4, 09 @ 8:33 am: If the redistrict folks want to sell their idea, they need to show egregious examples of gerrymandering. Talking about it doesn’t cut it. Show the map. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.