Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: A look inside MJM’s operation
Next Post: Fitch reacts to Pritzker budget proposal
Posted in:
* My Crain’s Chicago Business column…
After trying and failing to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot, activists hoping to reform the state’s legislative and congressional redistricting process have given up on that tack and are instead hoping to convince three-fifths majorities in both chambers of the Illinois General Assembly to put it on the ballot.
To say the well-meaning and sincere proponents are facing an uphill battle is perhaps the understatement of the year. Lots of legislators, particularly in the majority party, prefer the status quo of their leaders drawing the maps to make sure they’re all re-elected with as little effort as possible.
It’s just human nature. If you worked at a private company that issued new personnel rules designed to put your job in jeopardy, you’d be wary, too. On top of that, what if your company said you might also have to sell your house and move a few blocks away because your territory had been changed, and, by the way, there will be no help with your expenses?
Even though the proponents appear to be doomed, they should still try because this is hugely important. But what they’re doing so far doesn’t impress me.
For starters, they should
Click here to read the rest before commenting, please. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:03 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: A look inside MJM’s operation
Next Post: Fitch reacts to Pritzker budget proposal
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Thanks for writing about this. This has long been one of my concerns regarding redistricting based on county and municipal boundaries and other simplified/automated redistricting ideas - addressing the rights of multiple minority groups who have populations sufficient to trigger the requirements of the Voting Rights Act (and who may not choose to populate discrete, compact shapes).
Comment by Monadnock Pigeon Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:27 am
Can’t read the article without a Crain’s subscription. Does the new language follow the road map set out by the Illinois Supreme
court regarding what is acceptable to the Court?
Comment by Froganon Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:40 am
Froganon - the Supreme Court decisions have been about petition-driven amendments. The Legislature isn’t constrained in the same way.
Comment by Rasselas Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:46 am
Great article Rich! Highlighting the very real, just cause of redistricting, and the current status of affairs….one observation though…
Illinois D’s had a focus for a long time to build up to the Fair Tax Amendment question this year. Redistricting reform may very well become a center stage, superstar issue for many voters following the census. Just thinking…
Comment by northerwatersports Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:46 am
Interesting point but it might be hard for FairMappers to make much progress when they are being led by Durkie & NoTaxBill, tired academics and assorted reformers once tied to the Griffins. All had little voter suppression on their resumes. But it will be interesting to watch the twists and turns
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 9:53 am
==Listening is more important than preaching.==
The “reformers” don’t even seem to take cues from the best practices in other states.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 10:00 am
@Rasselas Thank you.
Comment by Froganon Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 10:47 am
Rich -
Great practical advice that I am sure they will ignore.
Another important point is the “reformers” slavish view that municipal and to a lesser degree county boundaries should define legislative boundaries.
Illinois has a long history of de jure and de facto housing segregation that often followed municipal boundaries. Communities with sunset laws dating back before WW II. Communities created after WW II with public dollars that prohibited black homeownership. Communities with covenants that prohibited selling your home to a black buyer.
Those injustices of our history are still visible in our housing patterns today. They are tainted building blocks.
Comment by Thomas Paine Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:00 am
The Constitution requires that all districts are roughly the same population - can someone show an example of how a fair map would significantly effect minority representation? Also, the US Congressional 4th district is a good example of how guaranteeing (all but) a Latino representative is done at the cost of political power: instead of being an absolute power broker voting block in two districts, Hispanics were cobbled into one. The effect is minimized because there are currently no issues on the Dem side that this makes a significant difference, but it shows how speculative this effect is.
Finally, California opponents of fair maps raised the same fears - to the best of my knowledge they didn’t materialize.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:06 am
Without JB giving this a push it’s not going anywhere
Comment by Oak Parker Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:09 am
A lot of minority representation difficulties are inherent to winner-take-all & reformers should talk to concerned minority lawmakers about something more proportionate, such as proportional representation in the Senate mixed with district races in the House to best ensure both ethnic & regional representation.
Comment by Blake Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:17 am
Would Madigan and Harmon be capable of a relatively fair process? Especially if the Governor insists he’d veto an unfair map.
Comment by anon2 Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:21 am
Lake County :
1) Only trolls expect everyone else to do their research for them.
2) Congressman Chuy Garcia disagrees with you.
3) “Illinois is not California” is embossed in marble in the stat Capitol rotunda. “It worked in California” is never a winning argument. Show us how it worked in New York, Missouri, Michigan, Indiana….
Comment by Charlie Brown Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:26 am
Lake County - perhaps you didn’t have a chance to read the post before yours, but Thomas Paine points out one of the problems. Blacks, and to a lesser degree, Hispanics, have been compacted into profoundly segregated communities. Drawing districts using those ‘natural’ boundaries would result in what in redistricting is known as ‘compacting & diluting’. Let me use a slightly unrealistic example for a highly segregated city. Imagine you had a city with 5 districts and Blacks totaled 40% of the population. By rights, you’d expect the City Council to be split 3-2, white/Black. But if your City was highly segregated and you drew wards so that one ward was 100% Black, and drew the other wards to be 75-25%, white/black, the City Council split would be 4-1. By compacting the Black voters, you have diluted their impact. Because communities around Chicago are highly segregated, slavishly respecting municipal and neighborhood boundaries could have the same impact.
Comment by Rasselas Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:39 am
Rasselas - thanks for the thoughtful response. As you say, “could have the same impact” - what I’m arguing is that because of the Constitutional limitation, it sure can’t get any worse: the congressional limitation means that even if “compacted” a district would have to be split. Also, has the effect of gerrymandering to protect African-American alderman positions on the City Council been at the expense of white reps or Hispanics? My recollection is the criticism of the last map was the latter. Finally, per the last argument I raised, are we concerned with what race the council/state rep/etc. elected person is or the ultimate effects? If, say, a predominantly African-American district is split such that some voters go to a more conservative district but that district produces a more moderate rep as a result, is that a win, loss, or undetermined?
Charlie - I’m not the one making the assertion, so I think it’s fair to demand those making it show their work. Similarly, ok, show me a state where anti-gerrymandering laws haven’t worked.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 11:53 am
The US Supreme Court has interpreted the Voting Rights Act to require a district where the minority can elect a candidate of choice when they constitute a majority of the population in an area. They have also opined that as long as a a minority is given the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in a number of districts roughly proportional to their share of the population, the state need not provide the minority with more districts even when possible. It’s that last part that worries minorities, especially blacks in Illinois.
For example, after Illinois loses another congressional seat, there’s no VRA guarantee that three seats are drawn to elect blacks. However the court has said that it may draw extra seats that allow minorities to elect their candidates if it chooses. The fear from some groups is that a neutral body may not provide those extra opportunities beyond the VRA mandate.
Comment by muon Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 12:36 pm
It would be nice if voting districts were not gerrymandered for race or any other reason.
They should be of equal population, ‘compact and contiguous’ with partisan and racial fairness.
Not holding my breath. Regardless of SCOTUS decisions it is a very politically partisan game and I don’t see that changing in Illinois.
Comment by OpentoDiscusssion Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 12:38 pm
===It would be nice if voting districts were not gerrymandered for race===
Nice?
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 12:53 pm
=== It would be nice if voting districts were not gerrymandered for race or any other reason.===
The 1950’s called…
Those protections, just because the GOP can’t compete, choose not to complete, complain about not being able to compete, are important to democracy.
It’s not me saying that, although I agree with the protections… but it’s important all the same
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 12:56 pm
“If, say, a predominantly African-American district is split such that some voters go to a more conservative district…”
Comment by h'okay Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 2:54 pm
hmm, it cut off the rest of my comment, but that’s generally called “cracking” the minority vote, and there’s plenty of SCOTUS opinions on that.
Comment by h'okay Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 2:55 pm
==The proponents just don’t seem equipped to overcome legitimate fears that the very real gains people of color have made in the General Assembly will be preserved under remap reform.==
Fair enough. Another way to look at it is that legislators want this to fail, but they need an excuse that isn’t entirely self-centered.
So they profess concern about the racial impact, when they’re really concerned about the impact on themselves or their buddies.
Other diverse states have passed remap reform.
Comment by Anonanonsir Monday, Mar 2, 20 @ 8:21 pm