Nonpartisan Campaign Seeks to Reform Illinois Redistricting

[jimrtex]

I suspect Muon2's fingerprints are all over this puppy behind the curtain. He is not focused like a laser beam on his little redistricting algorithms as a mere hobby. Now if I can just get him to put erosity issues at the top of the list, life would be beautiful. And I hereby give him permission to use my beautiful non partisan Illinois map as to what might have been in a world without partisan hacks at the wheel, for agitprop purposes.

Compactness is not one of the criteria.

The criteria are:

(0) substantial population equality;
(1) the district plan shall not dilute or diminish the ability of a racial or language minority community to elect the candidates of its choice, including when voting in concert with other persons;
(2) districts shall respect the geographic integrity of units of local government;
(3) districts shall respect the geographic integrity of communities sharing common social and economic interests, which do not include relationships with political parties or candidates for office; and
(4) the district plan shall not either purposefully or significantly discriminate against or favor any political party or group.

The criteria are sufficiently in conflict and ambiguous to ensure that the plan will end up being reviewed, and possibly revised by the courts.  The purpose for transparency is simply to build a record for the plaintiffs; and to serve as a mechanism to coerce the commissions decisions.

The selection method could produce a situation like in Arizona.  Illinois does not register by party.  A voter may affiliate with a party at the primary.  Is an unaffiliated voter someone who doesn't vote in primaries, or someone who claims to pick based on the particular races in play each year.

[jimrtex]

Is there a way to add it to the Constitution without going through the legislature?

No. Public initiatives to amend the IL constitution can only affect the legislative article of constitution, and then it must affect both structural and procedural aspects of the legislature.

Are there court decisions interpreting Article XIV.3 that way? (i.e. requiring an amendment to affecting both structural and procedural aspects.)

I would interpret a limit to mean that an initiative could not affect matters that are not procedural or structural.

That senators and representatives are elected from districts is structural.  That representative districts are nested inside senatorial districts is structural.  The manner in which senatorial districts are delineated is structural.

What XIV.3 is preventing an initiative from affecting the content of legislation.  Article IV in broad terms describes how the legislature is constituted or structured (Sections 1-4) and how it legislates or procedures (Section 5-14).

I doubt that removing matters from legislative authority, such as congressional redistricting, and vesting it in a separate body would qualify as either a structural or procedural change.

In addition, the power of congressional districting is vested in the legislature by the US Constitution, and the Illinois Constitution does not make the broad claims of the People being the ultimate source of legislative authority that the constitutions of Florida, Arizona, and California do.

[jimrtex]

No. Public initiatives to amend the IL constitution can only affect the legislative article of constitution, and then it must affect both structural and procedural aspects of the legislature.

Are there court decisions interpreting Article XIV.3 that way? (i.e. requiring an amendment to affecting both structural and procedural aspects.)

I would interpret a limit to mean that an initiative could not affect matters that are not procedural or structural.

That senators and representatives are elected from districts is structural.  That representative districts are nested inside senatorial districts is structural.  The manner in which senatorial districts are delineated is structural.

What XIV.3 is preventing an initiative from affecting the content of legislation.  Article IV in broad terms describes how the legislature is constituted or structured (Sections 1-4) and how it legislates or procedures (Section 5-14).

I doubt that removing matters from legislative authority, such as congressional redistricting, and vesting it in a separate body would qualify as either a structural or procedural change.

In addition, the power of congressional districting is vested in the legislature by the US Constitution, and the Illinois Constitution does not make the broad claims of the People being the ultimate source of legislative authority that the constitutions of Florida, Arizona, and California do.

There was a court decision shortly after the 1970 Constitution was adopted that interpreted the word and to require both. Legislative redistricting reform that de-nests districts and changes the legislature's role in its own mapping is considered by most analysts to meet that two-prong requirement.

You wouldn't happen to know where a copy of the opinion is would you?

You're suggesting that it would be unconstitutional to change the number of senators and representatives to 58 and 116, because that is only a structural change; and it wouldn't be constitutional to change the threshold for acceptance of a gubernatorial-rewrite to 3/5 since that is only a procedural change.  But if I gratuitously combined the two changes, it would satisfy the constitution.

Does the current proposal de-nest districts?   A previous version was ambiguous, since it referred to two plans, and used the term "senatorial districts".  This version goes back to the term "legislative district" and refers to a single plan.