Simple yes, but a recipe for failure as is most of Quinn’s ideas.
GOP will be concerned about always being in the minority on the commission. Odds of Dems picking off a GOP member to vote for Dem map slim. There is no mechanism to deal with impasse (which is the in thing here in IL).
So he responds to a decision saying a referendum can’t add to the roles of officials outside Article 4 by adding to the role of the Illinois Supreme Court, in Article 6? Sure, let’s go through this whole exercise again just to have them come back with that ruling.
Also, letting the Illinois Supreme Court decide the Commission makeup? Oh, that should take the politics out of it. *eyeroll*
Maybe. Not sure. The majority opinion noted that the reform plan “inserts” the Auditor General “for the first time.” The Supremes are already part of the process.
- thechampaignlife - Tuesday, Aug 30, 16 @ 11:11 am:
I like the requirement for 6/5 party split and 7 votes to pass. However, given the political nature of the Supreme Court and no detail as to how the SC picks the commissioners (unanimous? majority?), how confident can we be that a true representative of a party is chosen and not just a D/RINO? Maybe the 2 major parties could each nominate 12 candidates for the SC to choose from. Rinse & repeat if plan is not approved within 3 months. Bar previously nominated folks for each additional round until a plan is reached.
An elected Supreme Court will never approve a mapping change. Neither party wants it. And, the language just doesn’t matter. While some partisans on the winning side place blame on the language, common sense suggests that all seven judges could have easily ruled for the most recent attempt. The party in power chose not to. It would had been no different had the other party have been in charge. Face it. When it comes to matters of this sort, Illinois is a state of low expectations.
Quinn has no credibility on this issue. He had the chance to do something about creating a fair map when he was Governor, and chose to do Madigan/Cullerton’s bidding instead. Now that it is politically convenient to be in favor of a fair map he has changed his mind.
If Quinn really cared about redistricting reform, why didn’t he veto the Madigan gerrymander when it crossed his desk as Governor? He could have demanded an independent redistricting map, and he would have been a hero. But no, when in office he had to kowtow to Madigan like everyone else. More than a little hypocrisy now.
To be fair, Quinn’s Cutback Amendment is the only binding citizen initiative that has gotten on the ballot under the 1970 constitution. That suggests he knows something about how to qualify an iniative for the ballot. By contrast, the independent map people have blown it twice in a row.