If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Breaking News)   After defeating Republican anti-gerrymandering plan, Illinois Democrats work to implement new pro-gerrymandering redistricting rules   (newsblogs.chicagotribune.com) divider line 46
    More: Obvious, Pat Quinn, expense accounts, constitutional amendments, alderman, groundbreaking, redistricting, Democrats, republicans  
•       •       •

757 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Apr 2010 at 7:43 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2010-04-29 03:52:40 PM  
The governor said that he doesn't see the proposed changes "as moving the ball forward all that much" and worries districts will be crafted to protect sitting lawmakers instead of reflecting a particular geographic area.

"It's awfully complicated," Quinn said. "I'm not sure if it's a reform or not, to be honest."


Corruption - in a Democratic machine? in Illinois?

Obviously subby hates hope.

/insinuation of racism goes here
 
2010-04-29 04:28:03 PM  
Good.
 
2010-04-29 05:07:45 PM  
Gulper Eel: The governor said that he doesn't see the proposed changes "as moving the ball forward all that much" and worries districts will be crafted to protect sitting lawmakers instead of reflecting a particular geographic area.

"It's awfully complicated," Quinn said. "I'm not sure if it's a reform or not, to be honest."


Corruption - in a Democratic machine? in Illinois?

Obviously subby hates hope.

/insinuation of racism goes here


It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.
 
2010-04-29 05:25:23 PM  
filth: Gulper Eel: The governor said that he doesn't see the proposed changes "as moving the ball forward all that much" and worries districts will be crafted to protect sitting lawmakers instead of reflecting a particular geographic area.

"It's awfully complicated," Quinn said. "I'm not sure if it's a reform or not, to be honest."


Corruption - in a Democratic machine? in Illinois?

Obviously subby hates hope.

/insinuation of racism goes here

It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.


both sides are equally bad, vote GOP
 
2010-04-29 05:40:04 PM  
filth: It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.

Tom Delay's most evil, lasting skidmark.
 
2010-04-29 05:45:50 PM  
DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: filth: It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.

Tom Delay's most evil, lasting skidmark.


Eh. He only helped perpetuate it. It certainly doesn't speak well of him, but in fairness, he was merely beating up on Democrats with the system they created.
 
2010-04-29 06:09:06 PM  
filth: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: filth: It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.

Tom Delay's most evil, lasting skidmark.

Eh. He only helped perpetuate it. It certainly doesn't speak well of him, but in fairness, he was merely beating up on Democrats with the system they created.


Naw, the mid-decade thing was his own innovation.
 
2010-04-29 06:20:33 PM  
If you think this is an Illinois-specific problem, a Democratic Party-specific problem, or a new phenomenon, you're a freaking imbecile.
 
2010-04-29 06:43:08 PM  
NuttierThanEver: filth: Gulper Eel: The governor said that he doesn't see the proposed changes "as moving the ball forward all that much" and worries districts will be crafted to protect sitting lawmakers instead of reflecting a particular geographic area.

"It's awfully complicated," Quinn said. "I'm not sure if it's a reform or not, to be honest."


Corruption - in a Democratic machine? in Illinois?

Obviously subby hates hope.

/insinuation of racism goes here

It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.

both sides are equally bad, vote GOP


both sides are equally bad, vote against the incumbent.
 
2010-04-29 06:58:26 PM  
1. Have each party on the ballot propose a districting plan.
2. Have the entire state vote on their favorite plan.
3. Profit!

/there are automated districting algorithms that work pretty well, too.
 
2010-04-29 07:45:52 PM  
DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: Tom Delay's Lee Atwater's most evil, lasting skidmark.

FTFY.

DeLay only took advantage of the playing field that Atwater set up for him after the 1990 Census. The Supreme Court ruled back in '82 or thereabouts that race-based gerrymandering was okay for the purposes of giving minorities a better shot at winning races.

Pay attention, kool-aid drinkers: this is where the law of unintended consequences comes in.

Right-wingers back then at first pissed and moaned about the ruling, but Atwater quickly figured out that there were deals to be made...so he went to the Congressional Black Caucus with the pitch that if a 50% black district was good for them, then an 80% black district would be a farking lock. And thusly were the lines redrawn after 1990, to the great benefit of whargarbly black Democrats (see Waters, Maxine) and authoritarian Republicans (see DeLay)...and any white (and especially moderate) Democrat who complained got to play 52-card-pickup with a full deck of race cards.

Go read about "Project Ratfark". (you have to fix the spelling yourself)
 
2010-04-29 07:47:24 PM  
Crosshair: both sides are equally bad, vote against the incumbent.

I wonder if that was your opinion before the Democrats controlled all three branches of government.

Of course not, what am I thinking? you're an independent!
 
2010-04-29 07:49:28 PM  
Republicans joined by government reform groups have an alternative redistricting plan, but Democrats defeated it this week. The Democratic criticism is that the Republican plan takes the map-drawing process out of the hands of lawmakers who will be impacted by it.

God knows we wouldn't want a politician to have to run in a district he didn't get to tailor to his own needs.
 
2010-04-29 07:52:23 PM  
as an Illinoisan from way back, let me point out two things:

1. Tribune = republican rag from years back

2. the Democratic machine is only in Chicago; downstate was a Republican machine for decades until the GOP gov went to prison. Will be a Republican machine again once the Democratic gov goes to prison.
 
2010-04-29 08:00:38 PM  
Crosshair: both sides are equally bad, vote against the incumbent RON PAUL!.
 
2010-04-29 08:01:12 PM  
Switch to a parliamentary system and we don't have to worry about this shiat anymore. A party gets seats proportional to how many people like them more then any other particular party. Also, it takes care of the two party system concern.


Oh, but we're special, and AMURKA!. Sorry, I forgot.
 
2010-04-29 08:30:13 PM  
Gerry's grandson, Elbridge Gerry (1813-1886), was a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Maine; his great-grandson, Peter G. Gerry, was a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives and United States Senator from Rhode Island.

In 1812 the word "gerrymander" was coined when the Massachusetts legislature redrew the boundaries of state legislative districts to favor Governor Gerry's party. The Governor's strategy was to encompass most of the state's Federalists, allowing them to win in that district while his party, the Democratic-Republicans, took control of all the other districts in the state. The term eventually became part of world political vocabulary, and the practice is still in use today.



now you know
 
2010-04-29 08:37:23 PM  
Let see if I got this straight. The party in power wants to redraw districts to benefit itself? Who's ever heard of such a thing?
 
2010-04-29 08:37:28 PM  
cptjeff: Switch to a parliamentary system and we don't have to worry about this shiat anymore. A party gets seats proportional to how many people like them more then any other particular party. Also, it takes care of the two party system concern.

I'd prefer a proxy-based system, rather than "Parties get one seat per 100,000 votes" or whatever. If candidate A gets ten times as many votes in an election as candidate B, A would have ten times as much political power, rather than have the same power split among eleven different candidates. A bill would pass if candidates wielding a majority of the proxies voted for it -- in an election of 130 million voters, that would mean you'd need candidates representing more than 65 million voters before a bill would pass.

That would pretty much remove party politics as a factor in elections and legislation -- every vote one candidate gets in the general election is one fewer vote that another gets. Few politicians would bother covering for someone just because they were of the same political belief, because he or she would be able to directly appeal to the same voters in the next election. It would also seriously limit the power of seniority, since if Candidate A mentioned above has ten times as much political power, it really doesn't matter much if Candidate B has been representing West Virginia since the Civil War.

Each person would be essentially be "A party of one" -- lots of small players representing niche beliefs or single issues, and a relative handful broadly popular to a great number of people.
 
2010-04-29 08:37:36 PM  
Elections have consequences.

Whoda thunk it?
 
2010-04-29 09:02:28 PM  
I hate Illinois Democrats...
 
2010-04-29 09:12:30 PM  
jgbrowning: Crosshair: both sides are equally bad, vote against the incumbent RON RUPAUL!.



farm3.static.flickr.com
 
2010-04-29 09:27:41 PM  
NEWS FLASH: Political parties like own gerrymandering, hate opponents' gerrymandering
 
2010-04-29 09:28:38 PM  
Gulper Eel: Right-wingers back then at first pissed and moaned about the ruling, but Atwater quickly figured out that there were deals to be made...so he went to the Congressional Black Caucus with the pitch that if a 50% black district was good for them, then an 80% black district would be a farking lock. And thusly were the lines redrawn after 1990, to the great benefit of whargarbly black Democrats (see Waters, Maxine) and authoritarian Republicans (see DeLay)...and any white (and especially moderate) Democrat who complained got to play 52-card-pickup with a full deck of race cards.

That, and by taking out black voters from other districts, most of what was left was white and Republican. It's part of why the Republicans have a lock on so many districts in the South when they didn't before.
 
2010-04-29 10:09:39 PM  
I've never heard of such phenomena in politics. Certainly not in Illinois. Heavens, what are we ever to do?
 
2010-04-29 10:17:23 PM  
filth:
It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.


It'd typically be the majority party engaging in gerrymandering, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense, would it.

"Hey, my party's in the minority, I think we should start redrawing districts."
 
2010-04-29 10:31:12 PM  
Both sides SUCK when they are in power and redistricting comes up. There has to be a better was to do that. Dartboard?
 
2010-04-29 10:36:27 PM  
There needs to be a constitutional amendment declaring all districts have to be as close to perfect squares as the state boundaries will allow.
 
2010-04-29 10:43:10 PM  
Gnomaana: There needs to be a constitutional amendment declaring all districts have to be as close to perfect squares as the state boundaries will allow.

Good luck with that!


i44.tinypic.com
 
2010-04-29 10:43:34 PM  
NewportBarGuy: Both sides SUCK when they are in power and redistricting comes up. There has to be a better was to do that. Dartboard?

They could just divide it up in rectangles, with the rectangles being sized according to the population of the given rectangle. Or coming as close to rectangles as possible.

www.commoncause.org

But stuff like this? This has to end.

Or...everybody registers as "Independent" and really farks up their data.
 
2010-04-29 10:46:37 PM  
Gnomaana: There needs to be a constitutional amendment declaring all districts have to be as close to perfect squares as the state boundaries will allow.

I dunno about that, there are some cases where squiggly lines makes sense - for example at the edge of a rural/urban divide.

Not in any way defending gerrymandering, just saying it's not as cut and dry as making everything squares.
 
2010-04-29 10:49:05 PM  
Lando Lincoln: Or...everybody registers as "Independent" and really farks up their data.

States without party registration manage to gerrymander just fine. Vote totals are reported at the precinct level, and are probably more accurate than party ID anyway.
 
2010-04-29 10:50:20 PM  
Lando Lincoln: But stuff like this? This has to end.

Remember when Tom Delay used the FAA to track down the "missing Texas State Senators"? That was fun!

It has to end, but who the fark is going to oversee it?
 
2010-04-29 10:56:26 PM  
Gunther: I wonder if that was your opinion before the Democrats controlled all three branches of government.

Why yes it was. That race card of yours is getting quite tattered. If Obama was a white guy you would have no arguments.

I have voted against the incumbent, as far as Congregational elections, since I started voting in 04. For president I voted Libertarian party in 04 and for the Constitution party in 08.

Gunther: Of course not, what am I thinking? you're an independent!

Yea, Yea, I know. I think for myself and take responsibility for my actions. You should try it sometime. It's really not that bad.
 
2010-04-29 11:05:32 PM  
Number41: Gulper Eel: Right-wingers back then at first pissed and moaned about the ruling, but Atwater quickly figured out that there were deals to be made...so he went to the Congressional Black Caucus with the pitch that if a 50% black district was good for them, then an 80% black district would be a farking lock. And thusly were the lines redrawn after 1990, to the great benefit of whargarbly black Democrats (see Waters, Maxine) and authoritarian Republicans (see DeLay)...and any white (and especially moderate) Democrat who complained got to play 52-card-pickup with a full deck of race cards.

That, and by taking out black voters from other districts, most of what was left was white and Republican. It's part of why the Republicans have a lock on so many districts in the South when they didn't before.


Yup, leave it to people trying to help minorities to end up screwing them over the most.
 
2010-04-29 11:06:52 PM  
Crosshair: Yea, Yea, I know. I think for myself and take responsibility for my actions. You should try it sometime. It's really not that bad.

FWIW you're more right-leaning, but you've consistently been your own thinker and harshly critical of stupid things from both sides of the aisle. Especially some issues during the Bush Administration which I was REALLY glad to see because so many of the Independents bought that bullshiat. This goes back at least 5 years.

Jesus, have I been here that long? God.
 
2010-04-29 11:10:16 PM  
Crosshair: Why yes it was. That race card of yours is getting quite tattered.

Wait, what? I didn't mention race at all.

I think you're far more partisan than you want to believe which is why I always find it funny when you proclaim how independent you are, but I don't think you're a racist.
 
2010-04-29 11:39:17 PM  
great

will they be tackling Texas next?

And California? Jeeze you can't dislodge a congressman without dynamite around here.
 
2010-04-29 11:50:32 PM  
Iowa just has a panel of retired judges (1/2 from each party) decide on the districts (or at least did in 2000 - hopefully they will continue the tradition).

Supposedly, it worked well and the districts were all big rectangles - like you would expect in a state shaped like Iowa.
 
2010-04-29 11:55:01 PM  
Cagey B: If you think this is an Illinois-specific problem, a Democratic Party-specific problem, or a new phenomenon, you're a freaking imbecile.

www.prisonersofthecensus.org
 
2010-04-30 01:39:01 AM  
 
2010-04-30 02:00:47 AM  
Can anybody give me a good reason that it shouldn't be done with a computer algorithm set to evenly divide a states population with the minimum boundaries possible? In the event of multiple solutions, go with the one that most equalizes the areas enclosed within those boundaries.
 
2010-04-30 02:17:49 AM  
why can't we go by county?
 
2010-04-30 05:02:19 AM  
FubarBDilligaf: Can anybody give me a good reason that it shouldn't be done with a computer algorithm set to evenly divide a states population with the minimum boundaries possible? In the event of multiple solutions, go with the one that most equalizes the areas enclosed within those boundaries.

Because no legislator would ever vote for that. It would upset too many incumbent seats and no one is going to vote away their own seat.

Oh, you meant a good reason. Never mind.
 
2010-04-30 10:13:04 AM  
DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: filth: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: filth: It's funny; here in Texas, it's the GOP preserving our pro-gerrymandering redistricting system.

Tom Delay's most evil, lasting skidmark.

Eh. He only helped perpetuate it. It certainly doesn't speak well of him, but in fairness, he was merely beating up on Democrats with the system they created.

Naw, the mid-decade thing was his own innovation.


I'm really not comfortable defending the redistricting plan, but I have to point out that it's bullshiat to blame Delay or the Texas GOP for doing it mid-decade. What the fark else were they going to do? Texas was voting almost 60% GOP at the time, but they couldn't gain any seats in the legislature because of the gerrymandered districts the Democrats had created previously.

Now, it would have been better for the citizens of Texas if they had redistricted using strong geographic criteria, and it would have been really nice if they had voted in a geographic plan for future redistricting. But as it is, they are exactly as bad as the Democrats before them and no worse.
 
2010-04-30 12:22:16 PM  
Eh. In Utah, the GOP legislature has been doing everything possible to prevent the popular citizens initiatives for ethics reform and against gerrymandering. The gerrymandering reform is (was) pretty good: an independent board composed of an equal mix of Republican, Democrats, and other parties, able to choose from a selection of various non-partisan algorithms. (The ethics reform was pretty darn good as well.) However, the legislature has passed various hurdles to make it nearly impossible to pass such an law through a citizen's initiative.

I sleep with a burning hatred of our state GOP.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report