Redistrict revamp could give state a map for reform

Chuck Sweeny
Rockford Register Star
June 20, 2010

Illinois has so many political high-wire acts going on at once -- we're a three-ring circus worthy of P.T. Barnum -- that the topic of redistricting doesn't get much traction.

But it must, as I learned last week in a conference sponsored by the Citizen Advocacy Center, the Illinois Press Association Foundation, Midwest Democracy Network and Community Media Workshop. Called "Reading Between the Lines: Unraveling Illinois Redistricting ," the two-day session was a roller-coaster ride through the world of redistricting -related high jinks.

Illinois started redrawing legislative districts after the U.S. Supreme Court's Baker vs. Carr decision of 1962. It mandated one-person, one-vote districts. Ever since, Illinois' politicians have used partisan politics as the main criterion to redistrict the Legislature every 10 years after the census.

Before Baker vs. Carr, Illinois had not redrawn legislative districts since the early 1900s, when migration from rural areas to cities was just starting. So, for the majority of the 20th century, rural areas were overrepresented in Springfield.

The first post-Baker remap effort failed. In 1964 all legislative candidates ran at large on the infamous "bedsheet ballot." (That's when Zeke Giorgi was first elected to the House.)

Normally, Republicans and Democrats can't agree on a new legislative map, because each wants to draw districts that maximize chances of obtaining or maintaining a majority. So, the job usually gets punted to a commission with four from each party. But they can't agree either, so a ninth member is picked from two names placed in Abe Lincoln's hat or another container by the secretary of state. The winning name, either a Republican or a Democrat, tilts the commission to a 5-4 majority, and that's how the map is picked.

So, why pay attention to reform efforts now, when there's so much else to worry about? Simple. Illinois' culture of political cynicism and corruption is hitting us in our pocketbooks. We really do have to get serious about scrubbing our grimy political culture, and that starts with a fair map that puts as many districts "in play" as possible. Currently, nearly all incumbents win because they've been put in safe districts.

Attempts at reforming the redistricting process failed in the General Assembly in the spring. Also, reformers failed to get enough signatures to place a "fair map" amendment on the November ballot.

But all is not lost -- if enough people pressure their legislators to do the right thing. That's a tall order. I'm a realist: You can make legislators do the right thing, but only if you convince them they'll be punished at the polls if they don't.

New software will empower advocacy groups and average citizens to draw maps that are compact, contiguous and complying with the Voting Rights Act to ensure minorities are treated fairly. Those citizen-drawn maps can't be forced upon the politicians, but they could be very helpful to reformers challenging the incumbent protection society that thinks it owns the redistricting process.

The fun will begin as soon as the 2010 census results are in and must be done before the 2012 election cycle begins. Don't let them draw maps in secret this time. Demand hearings. Demand an open process.

As one of the conference speakers said, "Voters should get to pick their representatives; representatives should not get to pick their voters.