This is an interesting post, as it speculates that Illinois will lose another Congressional district after the 2012 Census.
After the 2000 Census, Illinois dropped from 20 to 19 Congressional districts, and Rep. David Phelps, a Democrat from the southern tip of Illinois, got the shaft, as his district was carved up between three different Congressional districts (the ones represented by Reps. Costello, Shimkus and our own Tim Johnson).
In Illinois, in 2002, immediately after redistricting, there was only one competitive Congressional District. It was the 19th in southern and central Illinois, where two incumbents, Representative John Shimkus and Representative David Phelps, were thrown together in a consolidated district. It was a district which by mutual agreement between the leaders of the congressional delegation of the two parties, favored the Republicans and Shimkus won handily, as expected.
According to most of the stories I've heard, Phelps was singled out because, among the other members of the Illinois delegation, he was the least "collegial." The other incumbents basically kicked out the "unpopular" kid, agreeing to map that protected themselves by giving most of Phelps' old district to Costello (12th District) and Shimkus (19th District), but which put Phelps' residence into Johnson's 15th district.
The new 15th District, for instance, covers a wide swath of central Illinois’ rich farmland, from Livingston County south through U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson’s home base in Urbana. It then hugs the eastern border of the state, hooking south just enough to capture U.S. Rep. David Phelp’s home in Eldorado at the northeast corner of Saline County...
Known throughout the vast rural stretches of his southern Illinois congressional district as a gospel performer, Phelps was singing a different tune last May. As negotiators struck a rare bipartisan deal on new district boundary lines, the socially conservative Democrat from a mining enclave at the edge of Saline County discovered the blues: He’d been chosen as the sacrificial lamb in the plan to cut the size of the delegation.
“The goal was to create districts that no one would have to lose,” says GOP remap point man Mike Stokke, a top aide to Hastert.
Phelps ran in 2002 against Shimkus and lost, and now works in the Blagojevich administration.
I assume that in 2012, the incumbent Congressmen of both parties will again come to some sort of agreement to protect themselves at the expense of one of their own. If there's an open seat due to retirement in 2012, it will be fairly painless to eliminate that district. But if not, I wonder which member/district will get the shaft.
It all depends on whether the Republicans can regain either chamber or hold the mansion after the 2010 Election.
It may not matter even if the Republicans take back one or both of the legislative chambers. Under Illinois law, if the legislature can't agree on a new map - and it hasn't the last three times - the issue goes to a bipartisan commission with four members from each party. If they deadlock, as they most assuredly will, the name of a ninth member is drawn from a hat who breaks the tie. According to the following website, the Democrats won the draw in 1981 and 2001 while the Republicans won in 1991. Assuming the same set of circumstances happens this time around, the choice of which party gets to draw the lines will be decided by a random-chance draw - which could be the deciding factor for which U.S. Representative gets drawn out.
http://www.fairvote.org/redistricting/reports/remanual/il.htm
Regardless of which party/seats it was designed to protect, that map is an embarrassment. The 17th sweeps down from the Quad Cities, picks up Quincy, then comes east with a claw around Christian county that cuts right thru the middle of Sangamon county. The 15th and the 11th are feature long narrow southern hooks. Why bother with even requiring that the entire district is contiguous? We as voters are not best served by Reps coming from such stretched districts.
Compact districts could be assured by requiring that their maps meet an area to legth of perimeter approaching, not too closely, that of a circle. Don't hold your breath until any such rule isl actually be instituted. Ralph Langenheim
Please keep several points in mind. Illinois has lost at least one Congressional seat in every decade since the 1952 re-apportionment. While our state has grown in population, it has not grown as quickly as fast growth states of Arizona, California, Georgia, etc. Check an old Illinois Blue Book but I think that in 1952, Illinois had 27 or 29 electoral votes.
Congressman Tom Ewing's (1991-2001) 15th district had 11 fairly compact counties in it. Congressman Tim Johnson's (2001 - present) 15th district has 22 counties (South Streator and Eldorado have little in common.)
The only reason the 2002 re-apportionment process was fairly event (10 GOP & 9 Dem's) was because of U.S. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. Former Congressman Bill Lipinksi (the Dem's point man), cut a deal with Hastert to make it a 10/9 map. (Phil Crane lost his seat to Melissa Bean to switch to 9/10). The Speaker has been very good for the city of Chicago and the Dem's wanted to keep this relationship going. However, keep in mind the General Assembly votes on the map. Without Illinois having Denny, I would have hated to see the 2002 map authored by Mike Madigan.
As pointed out already, David Phelps was thrown under the bus, by his own party and lost to John Skimkus in 2002. However, former Congressman Terry Bruce was the odd man out when he lost his primary race against former Congressman Glen Poshard in 1992. Further research could point out what Members lost seats in 1982, 1972, 1962, and 1952.
The main point is that Chicago Congressional districts will get bigger, suburban districts much smaller, and downstate district will get much bigger. The days of numerous downstate Members of Congress like Bob Michael, Ed Madigan, Tom Ewing, Terry Bruce, Paul Simon, Bill Springer, Glenn Poshard, David Phelps, Melvin Price, Les Arends, and so on will be more numbered. The 2012 map will be decided by the powers to be in six years.
Lane Evans. They will probably approach him and get him to retire.
Been there since 1982.
Matt,
Your analysis is accurate for state legislative and representative district maps, but not for the Congressional redistricting process. The state constitution governs the redistricting of the General Assembly, but Congressional redistricting is handled in bill form like any other legislative matter - house, senate, governor, veto, override, etc. In 2002, Jesse White pulled Mike Bilandic's name out of a hat and we ended up with the Currie II Map, which gave the Dems control of the Senate. The Congressional delegation, led by Speaker Hastert and Lipinski the Elder cut a deal that put Johnson and Phelps in the same district. The reason the map is somewhat favorable, or was somewhat favorable to the GOP, was because the Republicans controlled 2 (Mansion, Senate) out of the 3 components of the redistricting process and a compromise map was preferable to whatever a federal court might have invented (see the Texas remap debacle).
So, at least as far at the Congressional redistricting goes, the GOP needs to win something to have a seat at the table. Winning a chamber or the mansion at least creates the possibility of a Republican map for the General Assembly, but unless something really really weird happens, the Secretary of State elected in 2010 is going to pull a name out of a hat, a glass bowl, or flip a coin.
I think that the very notion of a "Republican map" or a "Democratic map" is repugnant. The districts should either be drawn mechanically (by a computer, preferably taking advantage of county, ward or other municipal boundaries wherever possible) or by a truly neutral party without regard for incumbency or benefits to either party. The partisan composition of the legislature should be determined at the ballot box, not at the drafting table.
As long as the Republicans are going to redistrict Texas and Georgia between censuses for their own political gain, I favor the Democrats doing the same thing in Illinois. Nine Republicans in Congress from this blue state strikes me as four or five too many.
What people keep missing about the Texas mess is that the Texas Legislature never approved a map in 2001 -- the federal court imposed one because the legislature didn't act. The "DeLay" map is the only map to have been passed by Texas legislature during this redistricting cycle. I'm not familiar with what happened in Georgia, but the Republicans won outright control of both Georgia chambers on a map drawn by the Democrats. The federal courts had to keep intervening in Georgia during the 1980s and 1990s because the Democrats repeatedly adopted racial gerrymandering schemes designed to minimize minority representation.
The 2001 map was a bipartisan compromise and despite how ugly it looks, it does reflect the political breakdown of the state. Considering that Blagojevich won with about 52% of the vote and Gore beat Bush with about 54 %, a 10D-9R Congressional delegation is just about right.
Cartographer-
Thanks for the information. I thought the Congressional redistricting process worked the same way as all other redistricting in the state. My apologies, and thank you for letting me know otherwise.
Happy to help. It would make a lot of sense if they did everything the same way, especially if it didn't involved pulling a rabbit...I mean a name out of a hat. Whatever happens in 2011 though, I am sure both sides aren't going to be as friendly about the Congressional map as they were in 2001.
True, that in Illinois that we do things by pulling a name out of the hat. Like in 2002, the GOP did control the mansion and state senate. However, Mike Madigan, if he wished to control the Congressional map could have stalled acceptance of a new re-map. If the legislature and the Governor cannot come up with a map, it goes to the state Supreme Court which is still controlled by the Dem's.
Looks like the Southern Districts keep getting cut.
However, the current map is drawn so many Republicans could easily carve up Evan's district and move away from more liberal Chicago areas. The 15th district would likely add more of Decatur and some southern counties, but no more of B/N to prevent competition with C/U.
It'll be interesting to see where Speaker Hastert's replacement (2008?) will reside and how that will affect the redraw.
Mr Lewis,
You have to be kidding when you say that IL should have 4 or 5 less Rep seats. This state is Democratic, but it is not that Democratic....outside of some wards in Chicago.
To Blind Ignorance:
The Mansion is D, the Senate is D, the House is D, both US Senators are D. Ass-whippin' D.
Yet you think Illinois is not "that Democratic"?
Odd. You must truly be blind, or ignorant.
Maybe more Alan Keyes types will enhance the republican party. Maybe just Obie or Raushie will do it for the Rs.
Some have called George Ryan a RINO, and some feel Edgar was, too, they just won't diss a (still) beloved former politico. Neo-cons are losers, "RINOS" are winners. So long as the neo-cons continue to drive out the RINOS and centrists, the republican party will continue to lose ground.
JL,
Let's be realistic here: Blago didn't win in a landslide, he was the first Democrat Governor in 30 years. At the rate he is going, he might be the last. That the Senate is D and the House is AS D as it is is entirely a result of the Currie II map. It was a political gerrymander -- not that the Republicans wouldn't have done the same thing if Justice Miller's name had gotten drawn out of the hat -- and it paid off for the Dems. Draw the lines differently where you didn't have multiple incumbent Republican senators in the same district and you have a different result. The Keyes candidacy was a joke and it's not as if Senator Obama was a product of the Illinois Democratic Party establishment. If they had their way Dan Hynes would have been the nominee. Anyone could have beaten Alan Keyes and no one could have beaten Obama in just about any competitive state in the country.
Illinois is no more "that Democratic" today than it was "that Republican" during the 1990s. It's a competitive state that at the moment has more Democrat incumbents than Republicans.
15th,
Chances are that a legal challenge to any Congressional redistricting plan will end up in federal court regardless of where the suit started. Federal redistricting necessarily involves legal questions arising under the US Constitution or federal law, which gives the federal courts subject matter jurisdiction over the cases. The Illinois Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction in matters concerning redistricting of the General Assembly, but not those concerning Congressional redistricting.
Hypothetically, if there was a challenge to the 2011 map, and the proponents of the lawsuit were Republicans, they'd file in federal court to avoid the state court system entirely. If the challengers were Democrats, strategically, they'd probably file in the (potentially democratic leaning) state courts and hope the Attorney General wouldn't seek to remove the case to the possibily more conservative, or potentially less partisan, federal judiciary which hear redistricting cases in three judge panels.
So, basically, it's pretty hard not to wind up with a challenge to a Congressional Map before a federal court.
There are little things that can be done to tinker with the existing map and add a few more Democratic seats. Shimkus' 19th, Weller's 11th, and possibly Johnson's 15th can be slightly altered to carve Democratic seats.
Hey IP,
Isn't the next census in 2010, not 2012?
Squire,
Yes, the next Census is in 2010, but the new districts won't be drawn until 2011 and won't take effect until 2012.
Ironically, the drafters of the state constitution never intended the random drawing to be used regularly to decide the map. It was supposed to be an unthinkable absurdity that would force the different parties to work together. No one thought rational politicians would risk everything on a coin toss, but in practice, Illinois pols have consistently chosen the winner-take-all gamble over compromise.
There won't be a need for a random drawing in 2011 if Dems keep control of both houses and the Guv's mansion. (Assuming Dems can agree amongst themselves on a plan -- no guarantee, for sure!) In previous years, the random drawing was needed because the state had divided government at the time -- in both 1991 and 2001 House Dems couldn't agree on a map with Repubs in the Senate and Guv's Mansion. If both chambers agree with the Governor, then there's no need for a drawing to break any deadlock.
While the map certainly is important, it's not the only thing that matters. Republicans drew a pro-GOP map in 1992. While it allowed them to hold the Senate for a decade, the GOP map couldn't secure them the House -- Republicans held the House majority for just 2 years out of 10 under their own map.
One of the biggest jokes in professional politics is the governor of our great state, not to mention the state GOP. Let's face facts here: the Democrats have "made" this a "blue state" because of the bungling, boondoggle of an operation the state GOP runs. The real lithmus test for political affiliation in this state will come during the midterms. This state is crying out for a Republican governor. A 36% percent approval rating and he still has yet to publically reannounce his campaign for re-election? If the GOP can capitalize on that, I think the "blue-ness" of Illinois might turn more purple in 2008. After all, Kerry carried (no pun there) this state with 9% of the vote, I believe. That's not exactly solid blue to me. Get a moderate GOP candidate and this state goes "red" in 2008.
[...] -Will Illinois lose another seat in Congress? That’s the talk at IlliniPundit. [...]
I'd be strongly in favor of extending the "hat technique" to all elections, without even allowing for the nomination of candidates. All we need is a hat that can hold 250-300 million names.
If the Reoublicans are in control of the statehouses, and if Danny Davis gets appointed Cook Co Bd President, I believe the 7th could be carved out of existence. Give the Austin/Oak Park/Proviso areas to Duckworth/Bean if they hang on (Emanuel if they don't), the west loop to the 4th (by then no longer Gutierrez), downtown to Emanuel/Schakowsky and the bronzeville area to JJJ. Bobby Rush's 2nd CD could also be carved out, through a merger with Lipinski's 3rd and in parts to a decidedly more south side Mex (as opposed to the sideways headphones) 4th CD. the 4th could also be recast as a "yuppie" district that just "happens" to have a Latino alderman (Manny Flores, are you listening?). The loss of African-American population in the South/West and suburban Cook relative to the rest of the NE Ill region (Will Co in particular) and the southern US is a phenomenom that in itself should cast some doubt on the "protectness" of the 3 "black" CDs in Illinois. Much depends on if Lane Evans will have a Dem successor by then. If not then I expect the 17th to be absorbed off of the map-much easier map work.
If the Dems retain the statehouses, then I expect Hastert, Weller, and Manzullo to be forced to play musical seats. Weller gets the southern half of the 14th, Manzullo the north Half. Remains go to a new Dem collar city "hood" district (Elgin-Aurora-Joliet/Plainfield/Romeoville/Bolingbrook). Rush or Davis still bow out.
With regards to Congressional Redistricting in Illinios
Democrats will retain the Governorship and the State legislature.
If Bean and Kirk are still in Congress- Create a Purple Lake County based district plus a New Democratic Leaning District in Northern Cook County. Bean's base in McHenry goes to Manzullo..
Weller's District will be prime for elimination- Weller's Distirct will go to Hastert,(Northern Base) Biggert(Will County),and Johnson.(southern)
Neal P. -
When Mark Kirk becomes an ambasador, cabinet member, US Senator, or even VP, his district will default to the Democrats. No need to monkey around in Lake County when there are opportunities to consolidate Dem-leaning pockets in the west/southwest subburbs. Besides Hastert, Biggert, and Manzullo are all pushing 70 and might just decide to retire soon.
My reason for targeting Kirk is to help Bean have a safer District. Bean's district includes Parts of McHenry-which is a red County, Lake County- Purple County and Cook County. We can give Bean(IL-8) all of Lake County. Give McHenry to Manzullo. and Cook County to Kirk. Which will be a North Chicago Suburban- Cook County District.
Neal,
Upon further review your logic is sound, though I think Jan Schakowski would have to retire, which is not out of the question given her advanced age. Essentially, it sounds like you want the NW Cook and Lake portions of the 10th and 8th CDs split on an east-west axis (Maybe Dundee Rd or Lake Cook Rd?) as ooposed to the N-S axis that the 8th and 10th seem to border on. Given that this debate is driven by loss of population and shifting of remaining population to W and SW collar counties, both of our ideas could be implemented by a Dem statehouse. Why?
1) Schakowski's district will be at a net loss given the graying of and .movement of families from the Evanston and Near North suburban areas. Kirk would recieve the Lion's share of these areas. I think the Danny Davis 7th CD could be recesitated by adding a narrow corridor along Lake Shore Drive north from downtown to Rogers Park and into SW Evanston and Skokie to capture the black population in that area. His heir apparent could be anyone from any ethnicity.
2) Rush would grab most of the Davis' south side area and maybe make further incursions into JJJ's territory. JJJ would then maybe get some of Wellers' eastern Will Co area and proably also Kankakee.
3) Be willing to split the 4th district, sorry, but I'd rather earn a district and possibly two districts with the voters and not with a goofy gerrymander. The 5ths would shift eastward to take in the north half of the current 4th. The south Mexican half would be added to the 3rd which puts Dan Lipinski in peril of competitive democratic primaries. Its entirely likely that a hispanic could still win, albeit a less radical one.
4) Outlying parts of the 3rd CD would then be Judy Biggerts (13th); a possible Irish Dem pickup.
5) If the 5th CD shifts east into the "Rican" side of the 4th, that frees Franklin and Melrose Park/Stone Park for absorption into the 6th CD -another dem pickup.
6) If Mc Henry C. is freed from the 8th, it gets added to Manzullo (16th) and keeps him in play, provided the 17th doesnt pick up inner city Rockford to remain Dem. If so that sets the stage for Weller's dissolution, as Manzullo will need Weller's north central Illinois' counties.
7) Weller will be OMO - there will be pressure from Hastert to add Joliet, Manzullo to add the IM canal I 80 area, JJJ to add Crete-Monee/Kankakee, and downstate to pick up the scraps.
I think your plan is better at reallocating Dem voters into existing districts and thus easier to implement. Mine depends on identifying likely Dems in collar counties and hoping they dont become conservative in their thinking being away from the city, Stroger, and the HDO. Ex-Chicagoans are turning Wisconsin from blue to red (kenosha/pleasant prairie) and keeping Indiana red (schererville/lowell).
OOps - still need a new 9th CD ....that could be the "hood" collar city district I spoke of earlier.
Esoj
Looking at the Illinois C.D Maps.
1) We can give Bean-(IL-8) the entire Lake County Area. Cook County will then be added to IL-6(Duckworth/Roskam). Mc Henry gets added to IL-16(Manzullo).
2) Combine The western Part of IL-9(Shawkowsky)- Park Ridge and the Southern Part of IL-10(Kirk) Northern Chicago Suburbs -Cook County
3) Combine the Eastern Part of IL-9(Shawkosky)-Evanston and the Eastern Part of IL-5(Emanuel)-(Interstate 90 Area. Northeast Chicago.
4)Move IL-5(Emanuel) out west to DuPage County- covering the southern Part of IL-6(Duckworth/Roskam). Assuming Roskam wins in 2006- most of his DuPage County Base will be placed in Emanuel' IL-5 District.
We have created two New Districts in the Northern Cook County Area. One in NorthWest Cook County-(IL-6-Duckworth/Roskam) and another one in Northern Chicago Suburbs(IL-10-Kirk).
5) Dismantle the IL-13(Biggert) into three seperate District. Cook County will be added to Rush's IL-1. DuPage County will be added to Lipinski's IL-3. and Will County will be added to Weller's IL-11. Create a new district consisting the Northern Part of IL-1(Rush) and Southern Part of IL-3(Lipinski).
6) Take away Livingston, Woodford and McLean County from IL-11(Weller). and give it to either LaHood (IL-18) and Johnson(IL-15). We can also add Putnam County to IL-11(Weller).
7)Hasterts IL-14 will be prime for elimination. - We can add Henry,Whiteside,and Bureau and DeKalb County to Weller's IL-11. and Lee,Kane,Kendell,and DuPage County to Manzullo's IL-16.
My Illinois Redistricting proposal is the following
1)Place all of Lake County in Melissa Bean's IL-8 District. including Waukegan, North Chicago and Highland Park.- which is currently in the IL-10(Kirk). Bean loses McHenry which will go to the IL-16(Manzullo) and North West Cook County- which will go to IL-6(Hyde). except for Palatine and Rolling Meadow- which will be added to IL-10(Kirk).
2) Give Kirk(IL-10)- the western part of IL-9(Shakowsky)- Areas west of Rte 14. which includes Niles, Park Ridge and Des Plaines. The eastern part of IL-9(Shakowsky)- moves covering the eastern part of the IL-5(Emanuel). which will be East of Interstate 94.
IL-5(Emanuel) moves west to Northern DuPage County- covering areas East of Interstate 355- which includes. Addison, Elmhurst and Lombard.
3) Emanuel,Kirk,and Schakowsky will be out of districts.
a) Kirk will run against Bean IL-8 in a new swing District that is less Democratic than the current IL-10 and less Republican than the current IL-8.
b)- Shakowksy's IL-9 home is located in Evanston. -which is the eastern part of Chicago. Shakowsky's IL-9 runs in a district east of Interstate 94 and Rte 41.
c)- Emanuel's IL-5 home is located in North Center Chicago. which is located east of Interstate 94. - Emanuel can run for a District West of Interstate 94/ Rte 41 which includes the NorthEastern Part of DuPage County.
We will then have an open seat in the Northern Central Part of the Chicago Suburbs. It will be a Democratic Leaning District.
4)- Next target will be Biggert(IL-13). Biggert' District has three Counties- Southern DuPage County, Northern Will County and South West Cook County. We can disolve IL-13(Biggert) by giving Southern DuPage County to IL-3(Lipinski), South West Cook County to IL-1(Rush) and Northern Will County to IL-11(Weller). Create a new Democratic Districting consisiting the Northern Part of IL-1(Rush) and the Southern Part of IL-3(Lipinski).
5) with regards to Weller(IL-11)- we can get rid of Livingston, Woodford and McLean County and give it to Johnson(IL-15) and LaHood.(IL-18).
Neal-
Using Lake County as your cornerstone is sound geographically and also because Lake Co at about 700,000 persons in 2010 is likely the average size of a US Congressional District. Also you seem to use the E-W layer cake redistricting strategy that the Dems used to rid themselves of SW Cook Co Republicans in the state house back in '02 - stretching districts to have a large black vote in their eastern section and including white suburban areas anchored by sts such as 79th, 95th, 127th Streets.
It all sounds good; you will end up with Daniel Burke or George Cardenas as Rep. for the new district.
What downstate Rep will lose his seat.
My guess is Shimkus- his Springfield Base goes to Costello and his Rural Base will go to Johnson.
I just want to say that i think that the people who voted for this smoking band shoul move to venzaula and team up with chaveze.I will respect people who wish not to have smoke around thembut i will not tolerate my goverment telling me when you people take alot of tax money for the cigs.You people are out of control.I own my home and pay my taxs and anytime i have to deal with a state branch its nothing but a hasel.No wonder people want to move away.You people remember,You work for us.I WILL NOT ABIDE BY YOUR COMUNIST DECISIONS.If that lands my in jail so be it then you idiots can just set back and make me a criminal.the f.o.i.d card this new law.You people are out of control.I will not tolerate this.This is my country and my state and you polaticions need to leave.go and create a socialist state or country.Sounds like south america is calling you.Do you see whats going on in venezuala.You just did the same in my State.I will not alow you people to act like royalty.Your not.I will do everything possiable to get people elected who beleive in a free country.You can take that to the bank.This is my State.and im free. You people need to leave.STEVEN BAILEY.219 e harmon st Olney il 62450.