Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Celebrating a return to a semblance of normalcy
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Fundraiser list
Posted in:
* Several newspapers editorialized over the weekend in favor of a Fair Maps constitutional amendment. Here’s the Dispatch-Argus…
A whopping 70 percent of Illinois residents support independent maps, according to the Paul Simon Public Policy institute. But poll numbers are no substitute for the combined voices of Illinoisans demanding action. It was, after all, a citizen call-in campaign that convinced state leaders to end the record budget impasse.
Many Quad-Citians who joined that effort are part of a cadre of volunteers who helped collect nearly 600,000 signatures to put independent maps on the ballot in 2014. Only the Illinois Supreme Court stood in the way of a vote.
Now reformers are back with a new amendment designed to survive a court challenge and put an end to politicians’ “incumbency-protection racket.” But time is running out to keep it alive. The deadline to get the measure on the Nov. 3, 2020 ballot, is May 3. If it doesn’t make it, voters could be condemned to contend for another decade under the old, unfair and broken system.
1) A “citizen call-in campaign” ended the impasse? Huh?
2) The Supreme Court was just following precedent and pretty clear constitutional language. Proponents had devised yet another Rube Goldberg machine that couldn’t pass muster.
3) The deadline to get the proposal on the 2020 ballot is next spring, not next month.
* SJ-R…
We’re disappointed that Cullerton, typically the grown-up in the room on important issues, hasn’t assigned the proposal to a committee, a step that would allow hearings to begin. It has overwhelming support in his chamber: 36 senators from both parties, including Andy Manar, D-Bunker Hill, and Steve McClure, R-Springfield, have signed on as co-sponsors. That’s the necessary three-fifths support it would need to pass. The House version so far is supported only by Republicans.
Cullerton loves almost nothing more than the remap process. He lives for it, even.
* Sun-Times…
Gerrymandering has not skewed fair representation in Illinois as much as it has in some other states. For example, Democratic candidates for the Illinois House got 58 percent of the vote in November, and the party wound up with 60 percent of the seats.
But as long as gerrymandering remains the political norm — red state or blue state — democracy is under attack.
Politicians shouldn’t choose their voters. Period. But convincing Cullerton and Madigan to pass a constitutional amendment is just not in the cards. They are who they are. Gov. Pritzker has pledged to veto a 2021 remap bill that isn’t drawn using Fair Map principles. That’s pretty much our only hope to get something done.
* Meanwhile, back to the SJ-R…
Pritzker wants approval this year of a proposed amendment to change the state’s income tax from a flat rate to graduated rates that would require wealthy Illinoisans to pay more. He argues that a graduated tax is needed to raise the billions necessary to solve the state’s many fiscal woes. His long-term plans for the state hinge on this change. But voters can’t weigh in on that until November 2020, either.
Illinois legislators historically have not been great stewards of taxpayer money, yet Pritzker is asking us to trust them with even more of it. How’s this for a deal? Pritzker wins legislative approval of the income tax amendment and throws his weight behind an amendment that would create an independent commission to redraw legislative maps. We call that a win-win.
* But David Greising, the president of the Better Government Association, has a different idea…
The rules governing the creation of electoral maps should be fixed. But the one that bears the most direct correlation to Pritzker’s progressive tax amendment is this: the clause that has protected pensions from any meaningful reforms for decades now.
The Illinois Constitution’s best-known codicil is the one that declares pensions are a contract that can never be “diminished or impaired.” Those words have stood in the way of several fair-minded reform plans, including one passed by the Democratic-led Legislature in 2013 that the Illinois Supreme Court later killed.
Adding a change to the pension clause, alongside the plan for reform of the tax system, would constitute a classic negotiating strategy: The progressive tax appeals to liberals and the pension fix to more fiscally conservative voters.
This is so easy to say from a tall ivory tower, but wake me when Mr. Griesling can identify the 71 House members and 36 Senators willing to do such a thing. I mean, they don’t yet even have enough votes for the progressive income tax proposal.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 10:50 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Celebrating a return to a semblance of normalcy
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Fundraiser list
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“Hey bro, we’re watchdogs not workdogs. Now give us money.” Greising, presumably.
Comment by Leon Durham Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:07 am
Kudos to the BGA for identifying another heavy lift to add to the first heavy lift. Since Republicans have said they’re a firm no to any tax amendment, Greising is out of luck on his strategy.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:07 am
My money is that if Pritzker wants his vote on progressive income tax, Cullerton and Madigan are going to hold it hostage for a commitment to not veto their maps.
Comment by Just another Anon Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:08 am
==Those words have stood in the way of several fair-minded reform plans,==
I agree, Tier II was not particularly “fair-minded.”/s
Comment by G'Kar Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:11 am
If the BGA can come to Pritzker with half a dozen or more firm commitments from Republicans that they would vote in favor of that type of compromise without losing an equal or greater number of Dem votes, then he has a plan worth talking about. Until then, not so much.
Comment by Montrose Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:15 am
“Democratic candidates for the Illinois House got 58 percent of the vote in November, and the party wound up with 60 percent of the seats.”
Doesn’t that mean it’s working?
Comment by Steve Rogers Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:19 am
=== “diminished or impaired.” Those words have stood in the way of several fair-minded reform plans===
What exactly is the “reform” Greisling is looking for that placing ex-post-facto language in the Illinois constitution would allow? Funny, he doesn’t say in the article. Maybe someone should ask him.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:19 am
So, blue states like Illinois unilaterally disarm while red states the country over continue their gerrymandering ways?
Must be so nice to be a goo goo, sitting on that moral high horse, believing you are fighting for the little guy and all that’s right when in fact you couldn’t be any better serving wealth and power.
If they actually cared about addressing the issue in a morally and intellectually honest fashion, and the people paying their salaries did, they’d be pushing for a national solution, not one-offs for blue states.
Comment by Moe Berg Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:20 am
@Just another Anon:
A lot of folks in “swing” districts are edgy about re-election after a fair tax vote.
But even a Democrat in a “safe” seat is not safe if their district boundaries are radically redrawn by a computer.
The “fair maps” really does undermine the “fair tax”.
Comment by Fast Eddie Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:21 am
Been years since I looked this up, but Iowa doesn’t have gerrymandered state legislative districts. I’m not entirely familiar with the process however Illinois is a diverse state and whatever process they use to insure a fair map could it ever work in this state?
Comment by Levois Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:22 am
All changing the pension clause would do is change things for new employees going forward, something that can mostly be done now without a CA.
Changing the pension clause won’t eliminate the pension debt … which is the problem.
The real solution would be a CA that completely removed the annual 5 pension funds appropriation’s from the legislative process and mandate the Comptroller make those payments first every fiscal year … even before bond payments.
Yes, I know it would might be found unconsitutional because it would obligate future GA’s … but current law obligates future bond payments, so it should be possible to structure a statue that would withstand scrutiny … especially since it would be the voters removing that appropriation authority from the General Assembly and reassigning it to the Comptroller.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:26 am
when legislators in Texas, Alabama and other Ruby Red states do the same, I’ll back it. Last fall voters overwhelmingly across Illinois chose Democrats. Absent some nationwide agreement, legislators on the Dem side should not surrender this.
Comment by low level Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:27 am
===Changing the pension clause won’t eliminate the pension debt … which is the problem.===
While I agree with that statement, RNUG, it’s more of a problem that people don’t realize that funding the debt is the only way out of the problem. As long as the BGA and others keep posting their drivel about stiffing retirees out of their earned pensions, or as Greisling would call it, “fair pension ‘reform’”, they won’t get serious about the debt, and that is the real problem.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:32 am
Whether the topic is pension “reform” or “fair” maps the advocates for change always fail to tell us their vision of Illinois after they get their masterplan in place.
Pension debt will still be there. Eliminating the clause does does not vaporisze the debt.
And the remap brainstormers almost always ignore compliance with state and federal voting rights act. What do they expect from the lawmakers from the new “fair” map.
OK now lets work on how any counties we give IN to satisfy the bigo — opps separatists>
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:43 am
@ Fast Eddie
“The “fair maps” really does undermine the “fair tax”.”
Only taking into account individual politicians personal desire. If someone is really dedicated to serving the people, not just themselves, then they need to take the hard votes that are against their personal self interest. The concept you just espoused is the foundation of the problem.
Comment by Just another Anon Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:43 am
@JoA -
If it does not or should not matter what the electorate thinks, then what is the purpose of a Fair Maps amendment?
You want “voters to pick their representatives, and not the other way around” so that the reps can go ahead and do something wildly unpopular that their constituents disagree with?
If that is the goal, why bother having elections with a large and unwieldy legislature of 177 members at all?
Why not just have the governor appoint 7 people that will always just “do the right thing?”
Comment by Fast Eddie Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:57 am
==Those words have stood in the way of several fair-minded reform plans==
When Greising says ‘pension fix’, I suspect he’s talking about neutering.
Comment by Jocko Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 11:58 am
I highly doubt that it’s realistic for Pritzker to ask Dem GA members to do the heavy lifting on minimum wage, legal weed, and a graduated income tax, while getting all tough on them about the map.
Is that how politics works? You stick it to those who are with you on the tough votes and then reward those who are never with you on anything?
Not on this planet. Not ever. Not anywhere.
I suspect that Pritzker will say “the Madigan/Cullerton map looks fair to me, take it to the courts if you disagree and see what they say.”
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:13 pm
Agree with Moe Berg.
Comment by Illinois Resident Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:21 pm
One thing needs to be made clear about the Illinois Supreme Court - they did not *just* strike the last petition. For the second time, the Dem majority refused to address the question of whether *any* remap proposal, Rube Goldbergesque or not, passed Constitutional muster. In other words, they saved their silver bullet, taunting opponents to spend millions to try another petition drive. It was a true moment of shame.
As long as Madigan has his supermajority, a Prtizker veto will just be part of the kabuki.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:22 pm
Hey Moe and Low Level - gerrymandering doesn’t only affect Democrats v. Republicans. It also effects the type of representative coming out of the district. In any event, your argument is the equivalent of “I’ll stop sinning as soon as the rest of the world stops.”
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:33 pm
Love it when the best argument is, “but everyone else is doing it so we want to also.” It’s that kind of reasoning that has led the Democrats to help lead this state to fiscal ruin. The tortuous legislative maps only serve to keep the party in power in power. Really, this is not a difficult issue. Anyone with any amount of integrity knows this system is massively unfair and needs to be changed but power rarely gives up power willingly so I don’t expect any change until the supreme court develops a backbone on this issue.
Comment by NeverPoliticallyCorrect Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:50 pm
@Lake County Democrat
Lori Lightfoot was just elected mayor of Chicago, and socialists now hold 10 percent of seats there.
Casten. Underwood.
Please stop blaming everything on the map.
Comment by Juvenal Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 12:51 pm
It’s sweeps week for goo-goo groups and this is their fundraising push. If they actually cared about results, they would employ better tactics. This is all show biz to gin up their donors.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 1:08 pm
“Anyone with any amount of integrity knows this system is massively unfair and needs to be changed but power rarely gives up power willingly so I don’t expect any change until the supreme court develops a backbone on this issue.”
Democrats got 58% of the vote and hold 60% of the seats. Which part of that is massively unfair? Sincere question.
Comment by Sideline Watcher Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 1:45 pm
–The tortuous legislative maps only serve to keep the party in power in power. –
Maps don’t explain Casten, Underwood, Schneider, Raja, Foster and Lipinski. Zero GOP reps. in solidly suburban districts.
Maps also don’t explain how a Nazi was the GOP nominee vs. Lipinski.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 2:41 pm
@ lake county democrat. Courts can only rule on what is before them. Even if the majority of the Illinois Supreme Court justices have a personal opinion about what kind of statute would be constitutional, they are not supposed to express it because they are not ruling on an issue before them. It not their job to tell the legislature how to do its job with regard to possible future legislation.
Comment by Bourbon Street Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 2:51 pm
–Anyone with any amount of integrity knows this system is massively unfair..–
Must be a heavy load to speak for everyone who has any amount of integrity. How’d you get that gig? Adds to your cred, right?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 3:08 pm
===until the supreme court develops a backbone===
The Constitution is pretty clear.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 3:15 pm
@word
Statewide PVI is +7 D
The party breakdown of those districts:
Raja +8 D
Casten +2 R
Schneider +10 D
Foster +9 D
Underwood +5 R
Lipinski +6 D
To call these districts solidly suburban is correct, which is of course why you used that language. To call these districts solidly Republican would be inaccurate. These districts are much more likely to lean democratic than republican. Moreover, the districts have been drawn in such a fashion as to make any republican lead very small (excepting certain central IL districts like IL 15 and IL 18 which were compacted to protect Bustos and bring Bost into play for Dems. Similarly, Bobby Rush in the 1st is designed to protect Lipinski in the 3rd and Foster in the 11th by soaking up suburban R votes.
Comment by Just another Anon Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 4:06 pm
===Moreover, the districts have been drawn in such a fashion as to make any republican lead very small===
100 percent wrong.
Casten and Underwood districts were deliberately packed with as many Republican voters as the Democrats could find in 2011.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 4:12 pm
–To call these districts solidly suburban is correct, which is of course why you used that language. To call these districts solidly Republican would be inaccurate.–
Dude, that’s my point. The map ain’t the problem, the GOP brand in the suburbs is.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 4:23 pm
There are two separate issues. One is the maps for the Illinois House and Senate. The other is the map for Congress. “Fair maps” could include all of them, or it could just apply to the Illinois House and Senate. The former would probably be an easier case to make.
The reporting seems mostly on the mark. “Partisan” maps in Illinois don’t really help the Dems overall. They do cement the power of Madigan and Cullerton, who get to dole out rewards and punishments — pols choosing the voters.
Comment by Anonanonsir Monday, Apr 8, 19 @ 5:32 pm