Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Unconventional Dart asks for new power to help inmates get out of jail
Next Post: Rauner forms “Competitiveness Council”
Posted in:
* From the Independent Voter Project…
Illinois may demonstrate that the current process of partisans drawing districts produces uncompetitive elections.
Of Illinois’ 18 congressional districts, only the 10th is certain to be competitive. In that North Shore district, Republican incumbent Robert Dold faces Democrat Brad Schneider for the third consecutive time. The candidates have alternated electoral victories since 2012.
Democrat Tammy Duckworth vacated her seat to run for U.S. Senate, making the 8th district the only open seat in the state. Although an open seat theoretically could be competitive, the northwest Chicago district still leans Democratic. According to the latest reports at OpenSecrets.org, Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi is outspending Republican Pete DiCianni nearly 100 to 1.
Four districts feature candidates running unopposed. Democrats held a monopoly drawing districts after the 2010 U.S. Census. However, two of those districts are held by the GOP. Republican John Shimkus, for instance, is running unopposed and his seat covers one of the larger geographic areas in the country.
Um, actually the Republicans currently hold two congressional seats that were drawn for Democrats (Rodney Davis and Mike Bost). So, it can be done.
And those four unopposed incumbents are Lipinski, Gutierrez, Shimkus and Kinzinger.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 12:11 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Unconventional Dart asks for new power to help inmates get out of jail
Next Post: Rauner forms “Competitiveness Council”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Gutierrez holds one of the most egregiously gerrymandered districts in the USA. It has been challenged all the way to the US Supreme Court, but a local judge refused to remap the district despite being encouraged to do so by SCOTUS.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 12:15 pm
Seems to me that I can recall a time when the proposed district boundaries within Collinsville were redrawn by several blocks so that Shimkus would still live in his District and would not have to run against another incumbent.
Comment by illini Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 12:20 pm
The 17th CD was held by a Repub for two years as well.
Comment by 360 Degree Turnaround Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 12:32 pm
===egregiously gerrymandered districts in the USA===
Constitutional because it assures Latino representation.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 12:38 pm
== Gutierrez holds one of the most egregiously gerrymandered districts in the USA. ==
PA, OH, MI, VA & NC are all more egregiously gerrymandered than IL, at least for the U.S. House of Representatives.
Comment by Hamlet's Ghost Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:05 pm
==Constitutional because it assures Latino representation.
The key to representation is that communities get representation. The thing is communities don’t always follow simple lines. And in this case the Latino corridor is there because of historic discrimination which encouraged the pattern we see.
The idea of gerrymandering being bad is when you break up communities to reduce political power so while it might look weird, the district isn’t designed to hurt anyone. If you were to split it up, the overall partisan balance would likely not change either.
Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:10 pm
Rich is correct about the constitutionality of the 4th. It’s not the same as Republican-led efforts in other states to stuff as many minority voters into one districts, like NC’s 12th, which has been ordered redrawn by courts: https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/nc_12th_over_time2_crop-1024×567.jpg
While the last remap employed some of the principles of the Republicans’ REDMAP efforts after 2010, only in reverse, it also produced two districts ranked even by Cook’s Partisan Voting Index. That didn’t happen in GOP-controlled states like Pennsylvania and North Carolina. NC has no district lower than +8 either way.
I highly recommend David Daley of Salon’s book on the post-2010 remap effort. Very informative read on redistricting issues.
Comment by John Gregory (ex-IRN) Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:17 pm
“Constitutional because it assures Latino representation.”
And that makes it Constitutional? WOW! What a standard for other court decisions on all types of issues!
Comment by Federalist Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:33 pm
==And that makes it Constitutional? ==
That’s how it works. The Supreme Court makes a ruling. They say it’s Constitutional so it’s Constitutional. Whether you think it is or not is irrelevant.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:37 pm
While the last remap used some of the same strategies employed by the GOP’s REDMAP effort, only in reverse, Illinois has two districts ranked as even by the Cook Partisan Voting Index. NC, for example, has nothing below a +8 either way, and two of its districts were ordered to be redrawn by the courts.
Illinois certainly can be used as an example of how both parties have used gerrymandering to their own advantage (and it bolsters the argument that both parties should consider a mutual disarmament), but it’s not the same as the GOP remaps when it comes to congressional districts.
As for the 8th district, its PVI is D+8. Dold’s district is also D+8, so in a midterm election with lower Dem turnout, perhaps the 8th is in play for the right Republican. And several Dem-held districts match or fall below that same PVI–Bustos (D+7), Lipinski (D+5), and Foster (D+8), though that doesn’t guarantee they’ll be competitive.
I don’t understand why he brings up the 15th. That’s R+14 (Shimkus’ old 19th district from 03-13 was R+9). Of course that would discourage a Dem from running.
Comment by John Gregory (ex-IRN) Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:37 pm
Whoops. Ignore my doubled up comments.
Comment by John Gregory (ex-IRN) Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 1:38 pm
4th Congressional District flashback: a local US District Court judge held the 4th District boundaries to be constitutional. On appeal to the SCOTUS, the justices remanded the case with instructions to the US District Court and recommended that the presiding judge reexamine his decision in light of a prior SCOTUS decision on gerrymandering. On remand, the Chicago based judge reaffirmed his earlier decision as correct.
My memory may be failing, but I believe that the plaintiffs threw up their hands and dropped the lawsuit and did not appeal back to SCOTUS.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 2:09 pm
==And that makes it Constitutional? ==
That’s how it works. The Supreme Court makes a ruling. They say it’s Constitutional so it’s Constitutional. Whether you think it is or not is irrelevant.
No doubt about it. The fix is in. ASs Humpty Dumpty said: ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ Authoritarians like it that way- as long as it suits their purposes.
Comment by Federalist Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 2:22 pm
The 13th makes for an interesting political science experiment this year. I believe it’s PVI flat, and Wicklund seems like a “generic” Democratic, Davis has disavowed Trump. So we’ll see how much straight party ID gets Wicklund. A strong D might have given Davis a run for his money.
Comment by LeftofCenter Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 3:20 pm
It is constitutional because it complies with the votin’ rights act — a small point the “reformers” usually fail to mention.
Didn’t DeadbeatJoe hold that D district in the burbs that Tammy is leavin’
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 3:25 pm
Where we must have single member districts, I would like us to go to wide open primaries wirh the top 3 on the ballot, subject to #3 getting at least 5 percent of the vote.
I hate seeing people run unopposed.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 3:33 pm
“It is constitutional because it complies with the votin’ rights act — a small point the “reformers” usually fail to mention.
Didn’t DeadbeatJoe hold that D district in the burbs that Tammy is leavin’”
While the 8th had been mostly D, I would consider the 2010 wave and Walsh an outlier. After redistricting, that just only solidified Duckworth’s victory.
Yes, it can be done, but it sure is an uphill battle (for both sides)
Comment by Clark Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 4:35 pm
==- Federalist - Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 2:22 pm:==
You can’t be this dumb.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 5:01 pm
Though Bost’s district was always going to be hard for any Dem not named Costello to hold it. The way politics is polarizing, I’m not convinced Costello could have held it indefinitely.
Comment by ZC Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 5:44 pm
The 8th was not a ‘D’ district until the remap and the 2012 election which was the first election after it.
Comment by Michael Westen Monday, Oct 17, 16 @ 7:22 pm