Reick’s Take on Redistricting

From State Rep. Stece Reick:

Redistricting Update:

This spring we saw a partisan map-making process play out in a backroom behind a locked door using inaccurate and incomplete data that produced flawed maps drawn by politicians.

The majority party did not allow Republicans to provide input in the process. As we warned, these maps, which Governor Pritzker promised during his campaign he would not sign, were signed by him in spite of that promise.  

We received the official decennial census counts released by the U.S. Census Bureau on August 12, and we have now had a chance to review the new accurate information compared with the data used in the first map. It shows that the Democrats’ maps seriously exceed the “safe harbor” limitations which guarantee equal representation and are, in our opinion, in conflict with the U.S. Constitution, federal law, and comparable provisions of the Illinois Constitution.

It’s our position that there was therefore no lawful redistricting plan effective on June 30, 2021 and in this situation, Illinois’ Constitution is clear. If no lawful redistricting plan is effective by June 30, responsibility for drawing maps shifts to the bipartisan Legislative Redistricting Commission.

The Federal court responded with great skepticism to claims by Illinois Democrats that a partisan, pre-Census redistricting map passed in May meets federal requirements for constitutionality. 

Under federal case law, all electoral districts – including districts for members of the Illinois House and the Illinois Senate – have to be substantially equal in residential population, aka “One Person, One Vote.” 

Furthermore, these districts must comply with the federal Voting Rights Act, a statute that enumerates several identity groups for districting scrutiny. 

Any map drawn to represent a population that has a substantial number of African-Americans or Hispanics, must prioritize the representation of these groups. 

Instead of starting work together in this bipartisan commission, Democrats repeated the process that played out this spring.

The Speaker called a Special Session that was held on August 31st after the Federal Judge confirmed that the June 30 maps had serious issues, the sole purpose of which was to vote on another hastily made map drawn without bi-partisan support and with no actual input from the community.


It should come as no surprise that the Democrats rammed through a revised map that went through several revisions over the course of 2 days and which was dropped at 10:18 a.m. on Tuesday.

A committee hearing was held 27 minutes later to rubber stamp them.

The maps made it to the House floor that evening and were adopted unanimously by the Democrat majority, with all Republican members voting against.

The intent of the new maps can be summed up in the language from House Resolution 443, describing the changes made to House District 63, which I represent, describing the process from the standpoint of the Democrat majority:

Steve Reick’s new State Rep district.

“This district was drawn for political purposes to assist with increasing the political advantage of this district, as well as to impact the political composition of neighboring districts.”

Steve Reick’s current district has much territory he has not represented before.

“To the victor goes the spoils” as the old saying goes, but is this what your idea of fair representation looks like?


Reick’s Take on Redistricting — 10 Comments

  1. Since the CONSERVATIVES on the US Supreme Court said in 2019 that political gerrymandering does not present a cognizable federal judicial issue, this is what you get.

    It is going on all over the country now, with the majority of these being in Republican controlled states who are doing exactly the same thing.

    All’s fair in love, war, and political gerrymandering now.


  2. Indeed Sir.

    One of the perks of living in Texas, is seeing Democrat votes go directly in the trash bin when cast.

  3. Nice speech Steve.

    So what are you going to do about it?

    Write another letter saying it’s unfair what they did?

    The republican party needs a leader with backbone and determination.

    Time for you to retire.

  4. Tom – just curious…

    What do you think Reick or other Republicans should do?

    Be specific please.

  5. But Reick reminds me of Droopy and that makes me smile.

    I’m guessing Tom is correct though. MGM’s Cartoon Dept. retired ole Droopy in 1958.

  6. And what would SCOTUS do?

    What would be their remedy, Science?

    Do you want SCOTUS to draw the districts?

    That’s not their job.

    Do you want them to just reject the map and tell the legislature who just drew a bad map to draw a new map?

    You can see the troubled logic there.

    Do you want them to devise some new plan, like an independent commission, for all states? They are not legislators.

    Everybody knows gerrymandering is bad.

    You keep ripping on SCOTUS, so what do you want them to do?

    Do you want them to say it’s a federal issue so that the federal government, which is partisan, can make a one size fits all plan for each state?

    There are major problems with all of these ideas.

    I know of at least two ways to fix gerrymandering and two ways to bring about such change.


  7. SCOTUS will not do anything given the current make up.

    So that is off the table.

    State legislatures or state courts would have to establish independent commissions.

    This is not going to happen unless you have a state in which the two chambers are split between the parties, and only one state has that atm.

    Since State Supreme Court seats are also based on districts, the same gerrymandering will be applied to them to keep the majority party in the legislture in power.

    A judge who is elected due to a gerrymandered district is not going to invalidate gerrymandered districts.

    So get used to the idea that districts no longer represent geographic areas or commities of interest and are just vehicles to ensure control by one party or the other.

    Just another nail in the coffin of democracy.

  8. Reick, it’s said you are an actual atheist.

    If true you can’t pray.

    People like you Reick deserve what they get.

    So you suck on the whisky bottle and fulminate against clouds,yet you want open borders and Afghan derelicts.

    People like you suck.

  9. Cuke, what’s the evidence of Reick’s ‘open borders’ attitude?

    I’m not disputing, and hate Reick, I just wanna throw it in doof-GOPers’ glazed over faces every once in a while.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *