Dems told to pay up for map defense
Thursday, Sep 1, 2011 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Democratic congressional delegation is being asked to pony up to defend their new map…
Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s office doesn’t feel it has the lawyers or skills it needs to defend the state’s new Democrat-drawn congressional map on its own, so three outside lawyers have been hired and the Democratic congressional delegation can raise $500,000 to pay their bill.
None of the members of Congress are named defendants in the lawsuits filed by Republican members of Congress and the League of Women voters. Those lawsuits name the State Board of Elections, challenging the maps drawn by House Speaker Mike Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton and other Democrats. Those maps eviscerated Republican congressional districts while protecting Democratic districts.
Rep. Jerry Costello (D-Belleville) explained to the rest of the Democratic congressional delegation: if they want to keep the map most favorable to them, they should each pony up a check for $10,000 and then start raising more money.
“[Lisa Madigan] is prepared to carry out her responsibilities but she’s just letting us know that: ‘If you want the most expert testimony that you can find, that’s going to require expert witnesses we don’t have,’” said Rep. Danny Davis (D-Chicago). “The budget that the state passed for her did not include money for the expert witnesses.”
…Adding… Lisa Madigan’s office hotly disputed the claim that her office doesn’t have “the lawyers or skills.” They have plenty of both, I was told this afternoon. The delegation was apparently told, however, that the State Board of Elections doesn’t have the funds to pay for expert testimony and that these sorts of cases pretty much require that. Hence, the cash for experts and additional lawyers.
* The Dems are gonna need all the money they can get. The three-judge panel that will hear the case has a Republican majority…
One development worrisome to the Democrats is that the Republican-appointed chief judge of the federal appellate court has appointed two Republican-appointed Indiana judges to round out the three-judge panel that will make substantive decisions in the case along with the Democratic-appointed judge who was assigned to the case, Joan Lefkow.
* Meawhile, the Illinois House GOP’s Kevin Artl recently shared a bit of redistricting history…
Illinois’ winner-take-all legislative redistricting process is “fundamentally flawed” and should be replaced with a less politically driven system like in Iowa and California, an Illinois House Republican political strategist said Wednesday.
Illinois law puts redistricting in the hands of a special commission if lawmakers can’t agree on a map to send the governor. But the last time the General Assembly was actually able to redistrict itself — without a commission or courts involved — was in 1955, according to Kevin Artl, political director for the House Republicans.
Great track record.
* Ohio Republicans are also pretty partisan when it comes to the remap…
This year, four of the five board members are Republicans: Gov. John Kasich, Secretary of State Jon Husted, Auditor Dave Yost, and Senate President Tom Niehaus (R., New Richmond). House Minority Leader Armond Budish (D., Beachwood) is the only Democrat.
Among the Republicans, only Mr. Husted has expressed interest in making the process less partisan. Mr. Budish proposed several rule changes designed to expand public participation and make the process more transparent and less partisan. Republicans rejected them.
But a group of good government types sponsored a contest to draw new maps that would “enhance partisan competition, split as few counties and communities as possible, and reflect the true political makeup of the state. ” The winner? An Illinois Republican…
The top-scoring map was drawn by Mike Fortner, a Republican state representative — from Illinois. His plan increases the number of competitive districts in the 99-member Ohio House from 30 to 35 and in the 33-member Senate from nine to 14.
* Related…
* ICPR: Redistricting Illinois in 2011: Politics as Usual Under a Facade of Transparency
- The Captain - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:07 pm:
This is going to be an unpopular question, but why does the congressional delegation have to pay the expenses when they weren’t even named in the suit? The suit names the board of elections and two elected officials acting in their official capacity, isn’t that what the AG’s office is supposed to handle?
- train111 - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:15 pm:
You know if I could do it all again, I would skip the EE degree and go to college to become an elections attorney. Then I could sit back and collect all the big bucks being thrown around by two self absorbed political parties, both of whom at the same time are pounding their chests claiming the facade of representing the public!!
Guess I missed my calling
train111
- Robert - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:16 pm:
apparently the AG doesn’t have enough money appropriated to handle this sort of suit. but asking the democratic congressional delegation to fund the defense seems to concede one point: that the map drawn (like maps drawn in most states with one party control) was drawn to be partisan. everyone knows this, but interesting that the AG would effectively concede that point.
- paddyrollingstone - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:16 pm:
I wouldn’t read too much into the political affiliation of the judge’s on the panel. The last time the state redistrcting case went to trial it was before Judge Phil Reinhard of Rockford, a former GOP State’s Attorney and Appellate Judge. The GOP filed in Rockford anticipating that Judge Reinhard would help them out. He didn’t.
- just sayin' - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:35 pm:
“political director for the House Republicans.”
That’s an oxymoron if ever there was one.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 2:47 pm:
What is the intrinsic value of drawing maps that “enhance partisan competition?” Would gerrymandering for that goal be acceptable?
The U.S. Constitution is silent on parties, and “enhancing partisan competition” certainly was not a goal of the document.
- lake county democrat - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 3:19 pm:
Thing is, the US Constitution wasn’t that silent - how do you reconcile Bush v. Gore Supreme Court interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause with gerrymandering (answer: you can’t, which is why the Supreme Court majority included a footnote saying the case can’t be used as precedent for anything else). And the argument “The GOP does it too” (and Lord knows they do) just furthers the status quo.
That said, with respect to Lisa Madigan, zeesh, can’t they just cut and paste their arguments from the 2000 4th Congressional District case?
- Srsly - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 3:52 pm:
Rich,
Not to change the topic too much, but this is relevant to the post yesterday regarding CEO salaries and taxes paid out…
http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/08/31/do-companies-pay-their-ceos-more-than-they-pay-in-taxes/
- Left Out - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 3:52 pm:
The new map, as pointed out before, is very partisan. If the GOP could have controlled the map making process, based on the history of past maps, it would have been just as partisan. One needs to ask if the map drawing process is done ‘for the people’ or ‘for the members of congress’. In my view it is clear that the second answer is the correct one and, at the same time, the very wrong answer.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 3:55 pm:
Srsly, that was pretty silly. The study is biased because only five companies paid federal taxes. lol
- Bill Baar - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 4:40 pm:
…the process is politicans picking their voters instead of voters picking their politicans. For Illinosians to have to pay for the defense of that would be a bit much. AG Madigan may sense that.
- shore - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 5:42 pm:
what happens if republicans actually win and what is the informed chance of that happening?
- CircularFiringSquad - Thursday, Sep 1, 11 @ 8:04 pm:
Two points
Perhaps Mr. Artl bumped his head and forgot the remap process could have undergone a major change had any House GOPer voted yes for a constitutional amendment
Could someone tell what the benefit of a “more competitive may is” ( paid political consultant who would suck up scads more may not reply)
Perhaps Capt Fax could make that QOTD
And gotta wonder if Rep Fortner used the taxpayer funded IL GOP computers to “win” in Ohio.
- Rep Mike Fortner - Friday, Sep 2, 11 @ 7:02 am:
CFC, The beauty of the Ohio contest was that the full data set for every block in Ohio was made freely available on the web. There was no need for any special equipment. Anyone can access the data at https://districtbuilder.drawthelineohio.org/
The public and media frequently ask that there be more meaningful general election races. That helps the voters exercise their will when they want a change in their legislature. Allowing for competitive districts where the two parties have equal support is one way to do that.
- the right is wrong - Friday, Sep 2, 11 @ 1:06 pm:
“Illinois’ winner-take-all legislative redistricting process is “fundamentally flawed” and should be replaced with a less politically driven system…”
I’m sure, then, that Mr. Artl will soon make the same argument about the Indiana, Texas and Wisconsin congressional remap, where GOP majorities in the resepctive legislatures drew very partisan maps approved by GOP governors?
Just to be consistent, of course…as GOPers constantly strive to be these days