|
 Illinois Democratic lawmakers passed the fourth version of their proposed
congressional district maps after they had revealed a third proposed
congressional map Oct. 26, just three days after releasing a second draft.
Map No. 2 created a second Hispanic district in response to concerns Illinois’
sizeable Hispanic community warranted representation in more than one
congressional district. The third map further consolidated Democratic power.
The first map proposal released Oct. 15 was graded as a fail by the Princeton
Gerrymandering Project’s Redistricting Report Card. It lacked partisan fairness,
lacked compactness, created excessive splitting of county lines and offered
middling competitiveness.
Democrats may have revised the original map because it didn’t give them enough
of an edge. Even though the original map was biased in favor of Democrats, it
would have created potential swing districts that would have put them in play
for Republicans in 2022.
The final map tightens Democrats’ grip on the state’s congressional seats with a
solid 14-3 advantage, taking away two seats from the current five held by the
GOP delegation. Illinois sends 13 Democrats and five Republicans to Congress at
present, but has lost one U.S. representative because of population loss,
dropping from 18 to 17.
In taking away GOP seats, the second map put Republican U.S. Reps. Adam
Kinzinger and Darin LaHood and U.S. Reps. Mary Miller and Mike Bost in the same
districts, pitting them against each other in Republican primaries. While
generally giving disproportionate partisan advantages to Illinois Democrats,
version No. 2 also put Democratic Reps. Sean Casten and Marie Newman in the same
district.
[to top of second column] |
But the third map may be even more gerrymandered. The Princeton Gerrymandering
Project gave the most recent map an even worse grade than the first map. Where
the first map was given a “C” on competitiveness, the newest map grades an “F,”
giving the state F’s across all three metrics of partisan fairness,
competitiveness and geography. The final map looks much the same, and received
similarly failing marks.
A report from the University of Illinois’ Institute for Computational
Redistricting illustrates how gerrymandered these partisan maps really are by
providing a clear computer-generated contrast. In prioritizing goals such as
compactness and balancing the number of “wasted votes” either party receives,
maps drawn by algorithms can be compared to the current proposals. None of those
proposals give Democrats such a clear and overwhelming majority as the current
plans. The partisan nature of the congressional redistricting
process could be mitigated through a well-crafted independent
redistricting commission. Though U.S. representatives in Illinois do
not draw their own districts like their state lawmaker counterparts,
the partisan nature of the process is clear.
An independent redistricting commission that requires input from
both sides of the aisle alongside representation for those who do
not align with either side would be an improvement over the status
quo. Ten states already give independent commissions authority to
draw congressional maps, according to the National Conference of
State Legislatures.
Such a commission could be established through state law without a
constitutional amendment in Illinois. The state passes congressional
maps by statute, and congressional redistricting is not currently
restricted by the state’s constitution.
Until such a reform is implemented, partisan gerrymandering in
congressional maps will be the norm despite pledges to the contrary.
Illinois can do better. |
