24 Comments - HiistoryProf - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:03 am: I’m for map reform, but not for U.S. Congress unless it happens on a national level where Republicans are wildly OVER-represented. I don’t believe in unilateral disarmament. But sure; go ahead and fix statehouse districts. Maybe we could even let wack-job BKR declare victory and go home. It’s a bargaining chip AND its the right thing to do: but as Rich points out, it ain’t gonna change much in real life. Funny the people collecting signatures don’t seem particularly outraged about the Republican gerrymander of the U.S. House. Whose ox? - Norseman - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:09 am: Gee wiz, it’s part of Rauner’s TA so it must be a panacea to all the state’s problems. - Fusion - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:10 am: Remap reform is not a cure-all. Not by any stretch. But it will help. Right now, too many of these districts are drawn so that an officeholder only needs to worry about a primary challenge, and not a general election challenge. And that creates a whole bunch of polarization and gridlock. We need officeholders that are concerned with general election challenges - that will create more bipartisan compromise. One last point: Any remap reform must ensure that minority communities still receive representation. We don’t want to solve one problem and then create another. - Conn Smythe - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:12 am: Actually, the opposite is true. Too many members who think they are targets can’t afford to vote to raise revenue, modernize pensions, or change the funding formula to be able to easily structure roll calls anymore. Good luck with a bunch of computer generated districts. You’ll get a ton of computer generated switches. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:12 am: And, for good or ill, governor is by far the most powerful office in the state. It’s not even close. - The Captain - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:13 am: Heck, the Republicans drew the legislative map in 1991 and Speaker Madigan maintained a Democratic majority for eight out of the GOP map’s ten years. And that was back when Illinois was considered a swing state nationally. - Biography - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:21 am: And by 1996 Illinois was not considered a swing state nationally. - Bogey Golfer - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:32 am: No not a cure-all, but the status quo is not good. DuPage County is in parts of four Congressional districts, resulting in a neutralization of Republican votes. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:34 am: ===Congressional districts=== This is about state legislative districts, not congressional districts. Try to keep up. - lake county democrat - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:37 am: Not a cure-all, but people do partially credit redistricting reform for California’s solving its as-bad-as-Illinois’ budget crisis https://newrepublic.com/article/112257/california-balances-its-budget-how-progressives-balanced-books California’s reform strongly resembles the Yes Maps petition proposal. - Joe Bidenopolous - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:40 am: ===resulting in a neutralization of Republican votes. === Want to talk about neutralization of votes? Republicans got 52% of the popular vote in all Congressional elections in 2014 yet ended up with 57% of the seats in the House. Their popular vote number translates to about 226 seats, yet they have 247. When the Republicans start looking at the state’s where they’ve gerrymandered, like Texas, Ohio and elsewhere, then we can start talking about Illinois. Until then, I’m perfectly fine with DuPage Republican votes getting diluted. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:40 am: ===California’s reform strongly resembles the Yes Maps petition proposal.=== They also have a governor who is a far better manager and who is committed to making much tougher budgetary choices than any we’ve had in a long while. - Huh? - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:56 am: “Not a cure-all” But will it do windows? /s - Mister Whipple - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:57 am: Please consider the source. The editorial writer for the Bloomington and Decatur papers is a true-believer. Rauner all good, Madigan all bad. No shades of gray. Thoughtful analysis on any state issue has no place on the editorial page at the Herald-Review or Pantagraph. - mokenavince - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:58 am: Lets think positive this is not the cure,but it might make the symptoms more manageable. Our present map is ludicrous. - Jojo - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 11:59 am: Lot’s of good arguments for map reform. This editorial is not one of them. - Big foot - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:13 pm: I am sorry, “Non-Partisan ” in Illinois, I don’t think so! - Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:14 pm: Uncontested districts are a sign of packing or stacking but you want to densely pack your opponents voters, not your own voters. Large numbers of uncontested Democratic incumbents suggest that the IL map is less pro-Democratic than it could be. In essence, you want the other side to win races with a margin of 70-30 or better and you want to win your races 55-45. Uncontested Democratic races means there are wasted Democratic votes. Of course IL is gerrymandered but far less so that the IL GOP claims. - Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:16 pm: I believe California also has “jungle primaries” meaning that the primary is non-partisan and the top two candidates face off in the general even if they are from the same party. I’d be good with that, for Illinois. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_14_(2010) - Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:18 pm: California Proposition 14: = = The passage of Proposition 14 changed the way that elections are conducted for all statewide offices in California (including the Governor and other executive positions, members of the State Legislature, and members of the State Board of Equalization), as well as for United States Senators and members of the United States House of Representatives. Proposition 14 does not affect the election of President and Vice-President of the United States, local offices, or non-partisan offices such as judges and the Superintendent of Public Instruction.[3] Instead of allowing each political party to hold a primary election open to just its members (and independent voters, if the party chooses to do so) to determine its candidate for the general election, Proposition 14 proposed to create a single primary ballot that would be identical for all voters. All candidates running in the primary election, regardless of their political party preference (if any), would appear on that ballot. The two candidates with the most votes would then qualify for the general election, regardless of which party they identify with (if any). = = - Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:41 pm: This remap reminds me of the pension reform. everyone so proud they passed it and no one paying attention to its legality. I doubt this survived constitutional muster. the use of municipal boundries disenfranchises minority voters w/o sufficient justification…. lot of money down the drain just because its easier to draw lines…. - State Rep Mike Fortner - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 12:45 pm: Hamlet’s Ghost - I filed HB 2719 last year. It would create a top two open primary based on the California system. It was assigned to the Executive Committee and did not get a hearing. - Chicagonk - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 1:12 pm: I’m in favor of the map amendment, but it won’t change: 1) Impossible ballot access requirements for independents and third-party candidates 2) Centralized campaign funds controlled by state leaders (The war chests of Madigan and Rauner hang like the Sword of Damocles over any legislator that strays too far from the party line). 3) Arbitrary contribution limits depending on the source of the donation (Why can individuals only give $5,400 per election when a corporation can give $10,800 per election and a PAC can give $53,900? Why is there no limit to what the party can donate to candidates during the general election?) - Mama - Tuesday, Jun 14, 16 @ 10:02 pm: Get rid of dark campaign money! Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.